In this repository you'll find the fully reversed source code for GTA III (master branch) and GTA VC (miami branch).
It has been tested and works on Windows, Linux and FreeBSD, on x86, amd64, arm and arm64.
Rendering is handled either by original RenderWare (D3D8) or the reimplementation librw (D3D9, OpenGL 2.1 or above, OpenGL ES 2.0 or above).
Audio is done with MSS (using dlls from original GTA) or OpenAL.
The project has also been ported to the Nintendo Switch, Playstation Vita and Nintendo Wii U.
We cannot build for PS2 or Xbox yet. If you're interested in doing so, get in touch with us.
This is illegal. It contains assets that it shouldn't and iirc some parts are decompiled code rather than RE code. I wouldn't be surprised if it gets a takedown by Rockstar fairly soon. Edit :...
This is illegal. It contains assets that it shouldn't and iirc some parts are decompiled code rather than RE code. I wouldn't be surprised if it gets a takedown by Rockstar fairly soon.
Edit : This is likely not true, see my own reply below
I thought it contained illegal assets based on this comment however It seems it's not true? Or atleast, I didn't find those files. As for the decompiled code, I saw a comment on the same issue but...
I thought it contained illegal assets based on this comment however It seems it's not true? Or atleast, I didn't find those files.
As for the decompiled code, I saw a comment on the same issue but it seems I missed the response by the developer.
I also misread the README where it says :
Extract the downloaded zip over your GTA 3 directory and run re3. The zip includes the gamefiles and in case of OpenAL the required dlls.
Digging into it a bit myself, it appears the person who made that comment way back in Nov 2020, and by extension you, may be correct. At that time, at least one of the assets (a CFG file) in...
It seems it's not true? Or atleast, I didn't find those files.
Digging into it a bit myself, it appears the person who made that comment way back in Nov 2020, and by extension you, may be correct. At that time, at least one of the assets (a CFG file) in /gamefiles/data actually does appear to have been ripped directly from the original game and not strictly speaking "reverse engineered" from scratch.
It is a plaintext CFG file, but whether it was plaintext in the original game as well, I don't know. And whether or not that should negate the rest of their supposed reverse engineering work... ÂŻ\_(ă)_/ÂŻ
But also worth noting is that the scm files in that same directory were committed at the exact same time by the same contributor too, so their origin might also be somewhat questionable as well. Although what function they serve, I also don't know.
cc: @bloup, @petrichor (since you both asked for evidence), and @deimos (since I don't think the original comment is noise tag worthy given the fact there does appear to be something, however minor, to the accusation).
Probably. However, if any of those files fell under copyright and were even accidentally uploaded to this publicly downloadable project, that is still copyright infringement AFAIK. And if that is...
Probably. However, if any of those files fell under copyright and were even accidentally uploaded to this publicly downloadable project, that is still copyright infringement AFAIK. And if that is the case, leaving those files in there for all this time isn't a good look for them, IMO.
Regarding the configuration files, if they are required to build the software, they are decidedly a part of the "corresponding source" mentioned in Section 1 of the GPLv3:
The âCorresponding Sourceâ for a work in object code form means all the source code needed to generate, install, and (for an executable work) run the object code and to modify the work, including scripts to control those activities
Or "complete source" in Section 3 in the GPLv2:
For an executable work, complete source code means all the source code for all modules it contains, plus any associated interface definition files, plus the scripts used to control compilation and installation of the executable.
As long as your software can be built and used without the configuration data itself, the configuration data doesn't belong to the complete/corresponding source. The configuration template files probably do though, but that's no issue I assume.
So it looks like whether the GTA CFG file is considered part of the copyrighted material would probably depend entirely on the license of the original game, and possibly the function of the CFG file as well (if the Rockstar license is written similarly to the GPL).
I would be highly surprised if that were the case. I don't expect any specific nomenclature of the gpl applies. That said, I expect that rockstar uses the same license for all the data associated...
if the Rockstar license is written similarly to the GPL
I would be highly surprised if that were the case. I don't expect any specific nomenclature of the gpl applies.
That said, I expect that rockstar uses the same license for all the data associated with the game (except perhaps music they licensed from third parties); the pertinent question, then, is not if the config files are necessary to build the software, but if they represent a sufficiently creative act to be copyrightable. Which seems unlikely, but in such cases it's nevertheless perhaps better to be safe than sorry.
There are no explicit statements one way or the other, but the lack of a mention on how to legally acquire the assets gives the impression that they're distributing those.
There are no explicit statements one way or the other, but the lack of a mention on how to legally acquire the assets gives the impression that they're distributing those.
Eurogamer has an interview with the project leader with quite a bit more info: How a small group of GTA fanatics reverse-engineered GTA 3 and Vice City without (so far) getting shut down
The repo has apparently been taken down with a DMCA.
I wonder if it's because of things similar to what @cfabbro showed to exist to have existed in the project or if it's something else đ¤
This is illegal. It contains assets that it shouldn't and iirc some parts are decompiled code rather than RE code. I wouldn't be surprised if it gets a takedown by Rockstar fairly soon.
Edit : This is likely not true, see my own reply below
What assets does it include that it shouldnât?
I thought it contained illegal assets based on this comment however It seems it's not true? Or atleast, I didn't find those files.
As for the decompiled code, I saw a comment on the same issue but it seems I missed the response by the developer.
I also misread the README where it says :
However, the lack of a license is still very odd.
Digging into it a bit myself, it appears the person who made that comment way back in Nov 2020, and by extension you, may be correct. At that time, at least one of the assets (a CFG file) in /gamefiles/data actually does appear to have been ripped directly from the original game and not strictly speaking "reverse engineered" from scratch.
E.g. https://github.com/GTAmodding/re3/blob/fad0a9507d4a4eb63fc5a658c2886fe07f7dadee/gamefiles/data/PARTICLE.CFG
Both are Rockstar programmers, BTW. See: Alexander Roger, Andrzej Madajczyk
And that file still exists in the latest version:
https://github.com/GTAmodding/re3/blob/master/gamefiles/data/PARTICLE.CFG
It is a plaintext CFG file, but whether it was plaintext in the original game as well, I don't know. And whether or not that should negate the rest of their supposed reverse engineering work... ÂŻ\_(ă)_/ÂŻ
But also worth noting is that the scm files in that same directory were committed at the exact same time by the same contributor too, so their origin might also be somewhat questionable as well. Although what function they serve, I also don't know.
cc: @bloup, @petrichor (since you both asked for evidence), and @deimos (since I don't think the original comment is noise tag worthy given the fact there does appear to be something, however minor, to the accusation).
This doesn't really seem like a showstopper to me, just them needing to keep a tidier workspace.
Probably. However, if any of those files fell under copyright and were even accidentally uploaded to this publicly downloadable project, that is still copyright infringement AFAIK. And if that is the case, leaving those files in there for all this time isn't a good look for them, IMO.
p.s. Since I was curious if CFG files could even be copyrighted:
https://opensource.stackexchange.com/questions/5049/licensing-of-configuration-files-that-are-technically-code
So it looks like whether the GTA CFG file is considered part of the copyrighted material would probably depend entirely on the license of the original game, and possibly the function of the CFG file as well (if the Rockstar license is written similarly to the GPL).
I would be highly surprised if that were the case. I don't expect any specific nomenclature of the gpl applies.
That said, I expect that rockstar uses the same license for all the data associated with the game (except perhaps music they licensed from third parties); the pertinent question, then, is not if the config files are necessary to build the software, but if they represent a sufficiently creative act to be copyrightable. Which seems unlikely, but in such cases it's nevertheless perhaps better to be safe than sorry.
Lack of a license is odd. A zero-clause BSD would probably fit the project pretty well.
Could you back this statement up with some evidence or examples?
See my reply above, I messed up quite a few things. I must've been pretty tired.
There are no explicit statements one way or the other, but the lack of a mention on how to legally acquire the assets gives the impression that they're distributing those.
The readme says
Okay my bad then. I did read but missed that.
Eurogamer has an interview with the project leader with quite a bit more info: How a small group of GTA fanatics reverse-engineered GTA 3 and Vice City without (so far) getting shut down