Killzone 3 leaked
Killzone 3 has been leaked online in both 3D and non-3D forms for hacked PlayStation 3s.
We haven't downloaded the leaked version to check for ourselves, obviously, but the 41.5GB download is reportedly genuine and even includes Killzone 3's 3D mode. A 'half-fat' version is available to download without 3D support too, apparently.
Killzone 3 is the second triple A title to be leaked online far ahead of release this week, with the PC version of Crysis 2 getting leaked only a few days ago.
The leaked version of Killzone 3 will only operate on hacked PlayStation 3s, but apparently represents the full, final version of the game.
Sony is currently engaged with a lawsuit with PlayStation 3 cracker George 'Geohot' Hotz, who was ordered by a US court to turn his hard drives over to Sony for inspection recently. Hotz has defended himself fiercely, fearing that the lawsuit against him will set dangerous legal precedents if successful.
Let us know your thoughts in the forums - but be sure to check Bit-Gamer's policy on discussion of piracy first.
Previous Article
37 Comments
Discuss in the forums ReplyUnfortunately I don't own a PS3 so I can't download the leaked Killzone. Thanks for notifying me though.
Haha :) This leak means the end of console gaming doesn't it? All of the console developers will ditch consoles and head over to PC game development.
What if something like this happens with a PC title? Surely this couldn't happen...
</sarcasm> (Still hoping the sarcasm tag becomes part of the HTML5 standard)
Never heard of it before. In my days of the ZX-81 & Spectrum nobody ever tape-to-taped their friends games.
And in the days of the Amiga nobody ever copied discs, or swapped them with their European "Public Domain" buddies.
And in the early days of PC gaming, nobody allowed their games to be installed on friends computers - it just wasn't done.
Seriously...
This isn't anything new, it's been going on for (quite literally) decades. There will always be a battle between the publishers and thieves.
And what has this tri-decade of theft done to the industry? Not stopped it being a bigger money machine than the entire Hollywood movie industry - that's what. Some do well out of it, others get burned.
Okay everyone - move along - move along - nothing new to see here.
Bit-tech is a news site, I would expect to read news like this here and I'm grateful to Bit-tech for providing it.
if it were CryTek, they'd probably do what they do best, cry about it.
wait, they are already doing it.
i'll get my coat.
That's fine by me, I'm quite enjoying the Java ME programming we're doing at uni.
Making a remake/re-imagination of Road Rash for coursework, :D
Don't have a modified PS3, no use to me.
Although, it does illustrate what I've been saying since.. Actually, since forever. Piracy is present everywhere, the PC platform just gets broadcast more frequently, typically as an excuse for a long time PC Dev to switch to consoles as primary platforms.
Post-launch piracy is in reckless abundance for all platforms - As one might expect - But the higher percentage of legitimate sales in a much higher market penetration favours the consoles over high end PC's.
All these "Oh, lol, consoles are insecure" jabs are utterly baseless, and sadly representative of the PC gamers as the developers see us : Petty children not interested in anything that doesn't benefit us and us alone.
Piracy is an issue whichever platform you choose, but from a developers standpoint, the console is the safer bet purely because of the work involved modifying a console to run the pirated code.
A PC doesn't give a monkies, and in some instances, the game doesn't even need installing (The pre-launch leak of DoW II from.. err... I'm not going to mention the groups name, but that wasn't in need of an install).
Low penetration vs. statistically higher piracy levels? It's not a sound business decision to develop for Pc and then port to consoles (For certain systems are innumerable flaws going in that direction (Although the XNA stuff does make PC -> 360 slightly better but by no means perfect)).
Cheaper to go console to pc, port wise, and in that scenario, they likely weigh the potential sales made on PC vs the cost to make the port work to our (PC gamers) exacting standards.
I don't get it?? :s But i loled anyway :D
I suspect it's a reference to a tenuous suggestion of links to Somalian Pirates based on PC game leaking. I think the Somalian Pirates suggestion was a joke, but hey.
Made me chuckle!
I'd hardly call it a leak.
Horrah for the voice of reason within these comments, I honestly wonder how many of them comments came from Sony employees or RIAA funded agencies.
How dare you discuss this like a mature adult!! Adopt an attitude of smug bemusement and perverse gratification!
ADOPT IT NOW.
How could they possibly break the oh-so-secure mechanisms making console gaming far less piracy-prone? Years and years of marketing hype about console games being impossible to pirate (kinda reminds me of "no virus for [enter OS]" coming from the *NIX/Linux community) and I-don't-want-to-know how much money spent on those plus the resulting law suits. What for in the end? Exactly.
And please don't tell me this is an isolated case in the world of consoles. We all know there have been leaks and there will be leaks all the time. The news about this (and the Crysis leak) is that it now hits AAA titles.
Come at me bro.
Right. so lets debate! :D
First of all, console piracy is far less incidental then you might think. Just do a google torrent search for xbox games, and you'll see that the problem is so big that if it were a zit on somebody's backside, they'd be forbidden by law to wear leggings.
Now, going a bit deeper into your full post, i'd like to point out that you are contradicting yourself. the second half of your post deals with the economics of the situation, which we as consumers should understand and respect. Yet when we adopt the same ideals (capitalism) you suddenly despise it as people doing only what is best for them and them alone.
Yes, clearly, it is better if there is no piracy at all, and everyone pays for their products.
But also, Crysis (yes, let's go there) is a much better game on PC, yet it seems Crytek should get a full pass for watering down part 2 to make it fit on a console for economic (i.e. purely selfish) reasons.
So which is it? Should we all just do what's best for ourselves, or should we all do what's better in th bigger picture? You cannot expect a generation so trained in individualism and selfimportance to do what's best for everyone else at their own cost, while at the same time the opposite values are being valued in business. right or wrong doesn't come into it, it's just not going to happen.
However, ALL of that is a moo point. What REALLY pisses me off is that people seem to be considering the console vs PC debate as... well, as a VERSUS debate. It isn't, it just isn't. It's like train vs. airplane. They are different things, both of them best suited for their own niche. Developers always seem to go for the safe bet (both), or developing for console and then releasing on PC too as added bonus. Crysis was one of the very few games that was ultimately focused and honed for PC, and I much admired the game and Crytek for it.
We really need to get over ourselves, and stop muddying the piracy vs DRM debate (that's already murky enough) with the completely nonsensical console vs PC debate.
Dammit, I was expecting something to do with cows and all I got was the Rickster.
Well I'll say if people preferred to fly everywhere and companies weren't making planes anymore to focus on making trains (only releasing a broken copy of a train with wings every once in a while) because they were more profitable and less likely to be hijacked, most probably wouldn't like that either.
It's not devs making both, it's them choosing one OR the other, and then if they feel like it porting it to the other platforms. It's that "or" that makes it a versus debate since it's almost always an "or". You have manufacturers making planes OR trains and then maybe making a shotty derivative of the other, not "and" with both built from scratch on their own merits being equally fantastic.
Since it seems most teams can only do one thing and do it (arguably) well, until that changes it will always be a versus debate.