
OpenRCT2 0.3 - tmstieff
https://openrct2.org/downloads/releases/latest
======
lovecg
Does anyone know the legal status of this project? I was pretty excited about
it as it bills itself as a “re-implementation”, but looking at the code like
this for example [1] it seems suspiciously like a straight up
disassembly/reverse engineering of the original. That would explain how
they’re able to keep the logic practically identical.

[1]
[https://github.com/OpenRCT2/OpenRCT2/blob/develop/src/openrc...](https://github.com/OpenRCT2/OpenRCT2/blob/develop/src/openrct2/ride/coaster/WoodenRollerCoaster.cpp)

~~~
iforgotpassword
Same as OpenTTD. Both were disassembled and ported to C(++), which was viable
since the games were written in assembly. So depending on which country you're
in this may or may not be legal.

------
jbj
"Some anti-virus products may falsely report OpenRCT2 being unsafe"

nothing against this software, just pondering over this ... what would prevent
a malicious software to make a similar claim, and if we always trust the
software we download, wouldnt that reduce the amount of reasons to use anti
virus software in the first place?

~~~
mpettitt
I suspect it may relate to the way it accesses other executable file
directories - it scans for the RCT2 data files, which are in another
executables folder structure, so rather than just sticking to the install
folder and the shared documents area, it's looking at other files, which could
reasonably trigger a virus scanner looking for "weird" behaviour.

~~~
codeflo
Virus scanner false positives are slowly becoming my personal hell. From my
experience, they aren’t even remotely anything as sophisticated as you
suggest, but the fact that people believe that antivirus software can actually
do this kind of analysis helps the vendors sell their snake oil. If they would
be triggered by any actual behavior, changing random compiler flags wouldn’t
usually remove the false positive. But you have to do that kind of tinkering,
or users will be scared.

