The negativity is just annoying honestly on all fronts whether here or in the comments of the Kickstarter. We're getting the game and the rest is just extra at this point. If they shot for 2 million then they clearly had a vision for that ahead of time. No clue why people are complaining. I'm ecstatic we are even getting it.

Too many negative post on this version.

the only problem with the 80min version was it was mdf/mds. When burnt as a cdi, Disc 1 and Disc 3 work VERY well. All youd have to do is apply the disc 2 fix to your 80 min version and then convert it to cdi like the rest were for MUCH better dreamcast laser reads.

I HOPE YOU DECIDE TO DO THAT SOMEDAY!!

That said, EXCELLENT job! Yet again,thank you so much for this Kogami!

Shenmue is what it is. Let's not be afraid of putting it out there and letting it live or die on its own merits. To in any way hope that remasters aren't released in case they discourage people from buying Shenmue 3 would be to overlook the whole point of reviving the series in the first place. We've come this far because we have faith in this franchise and believe it should be enjoyed by more people. Now's not the time to blink.

Appart from immigration policies, what were the reason people voted to leave ?? I just can't find the economic logic.

1. Being able to arrange our own trade deals

The 3 biggest economies aren't in the EU and we can now make our own trade deals with them that suit us and not ones set up by someone else that suit over 20 countries giving us a worse deal then we could get on our own. Switzerland have free trade with the rest of the EU but don't have to play along with the laws the EU forces on it's members. Countries like Germany have already said they're hoping for a free trade agreement with us as it would hurt more then just ourselves if we get tariffs put in place against us. We are the biggest buyer of German cars in the world so they won't be happy if the EU get funny and get in the way. If we can get the same deal as Switzerland then trade will be the same as before and we save tons of money on our membership fee.

2. The amount of money we put into the EU

People act like if we left the EU we would get literally no trade or deals from other EU countries whatsoever which is just stupid. Sure there is a big chance we may get less from Europe but I think that the numbers will work out better for us in the end with more in the bank. There is a chance we may be getting a little less money from Europe but we won't be sending a big fat cheque to them every week making the total we have in the end higher.

3. No more EU forcing laws on us

Coming from a fisherman town I've noticed the EU effect a lot of businesses. I know fisherman that have had to throw 3/4 of the fish they catch back into the sea even though it's dead because of stupid EU laws. People act like we're going to loose tons of rights that the EU gave us but the majority of people who make the laws wanted to stay in the EU so it's only them who can take them away which if they love them so much they won't. Sadly the EU is made up of tons of different countries that are very different so at times certain rules they enforce on everyone don't work for everyone leading to frustration.

4. Riku Rosey Bonus

This will lead to Scotland leaving. Without Scotland we won't have a Labour government anytime soon.

Overall though this whole thing has been handled disgustingly and most have only looked at the extreme right and left wing who have overshadowed the whole thing without hearing out the actual issues. It has been nothing but a mudslinging fight from both sides. Being a leave voter I've been accused of being racist about 10 times in the last week alone by extreme lefties just because I was voting leave without hearing my reasons why. Sure I want our immigration issue dealt with but there is a difference between closed and controlled borders.

All I've heard for months now is extreme people from the right saying they want all foreigners out. From the left I've just heard people screaming racist the moment someone has an opinion different from their own and not actually hearing them out. Sadly this is what politics is now with people just thinking the other sides are idiots and taking cheap shots on Facebook/Twitter and not actually discussing the issues. If I went on Facebook and actually tried to discuss politics with the people calling Boris Johnson and Nigel Farage an idiot most of them couldn't hold a conversation but they'll happily share some shitty photo that validates what they think.

People seem to think there has to be a good and bad side. The reality is that most people vote the way they do because they think it's the best direction and more people need to understand that the other side isn't always Hitler 2.0 but just someone with some different ideas then yourself who still just wants the best.

You guys are a buncha dopes for voting to leave the EU. [-X

I'd love to see how happy America would be if they was in a similar thing to the EU with their neighbors...

Didn't they state somewhere that the licencing issues had to do with (parts of) the engine they used? The company which they licenced (parts of) it from doesn't exist anymore and it's some kind of legal clusterfuck, figuring out who owns what now? So the problem isn't stuff that's in the game, but the game itself?

Edit:
Here:


http://i.imgur.com/oiSesQI.jpg

Edit:

Source: Rights Issues Hampering Shenmue Re-Release
by Tristan Oliver December 28, 2015

It may be one of the most successfully crowdfunded projects of all time. It may be far and away the industry’s surprise announcement of the year. But one of the most crucial elements of Shenmue III‘s future success may be introducing a new generation to the original franchise in the first place. Though it sounds as simple as re-releasing the original titles to current consoles–and indeed there has been and outpouring of support from the Shenmue community to do just that–a reliable source has told TSSZ it’s not that easy.

Our source indicates Sega has interest in re-releasing the original Shenmue to current platforms–and has wanted to for years, not just recently with Shenmue III’s Kickstarter success as a catalyst–but there are several hurdles to overcome. One of them involves rights issues with brands used in-game, like Timex and, in Japan, Coca-Cola. Those rights have to be re-negotiated. If they can’t be, the brands have to be purged from the title, and given how vast Shenmue is as a game, that is a “heavy” task, our source says. Still, it is something Sega is pursuing.

Even if that obstacle is overcome, there’s the matter of the game engine. Our source says that while the bulk of the core Shenmue engine was developed in-house by AM2, there are pieces of it licensed through a third party that Sega does not own outright. The trouble, our source indicates, is that the company in question–the name of which we do not know–has gone out of business since Shenmue‘s original release. Sega is attempting to track down who owns the technology. While we do not know how much of it was used in combination with AM2’s in-house work, not getting those rights means some additional coding will be necessary for any re-release to occur.

And what about Shenmue III? When it appeared as part of Sony’s E3 keynote this year, it was widely assumed Sony would offer a level of assistance to series creator Yu Suzuki and Ys Net, be it financial or otherwise. But our source tells us Sony’s agreement with Ys Net almost entirely involved that stage announcement. It does not appear Sony is financially supporting Shenmue III otherwise, and in fact our source says Sony had a similar marketing agreement with Sega on Yakuza 5‘s Western release where Sony only assisted with marketing. The good news is that, conceivably, there’s nothing stopping Shenmue III from being on platforms past the PC and Playstation 4 for that reason. The bad news is that, with a crowdsourced budget currently hovering under $6.5 million, the game’s success really is on the backs of its supporters. You can still contribute through its official website via PayPal.

We should note we’ve attempted to reach out to those connected to the Shenmue III project for comment on these matters, unsuccessfully. If you can help us, please tip us through email or Twitter.

There would probably be a better case at portraying the game as racist rather than homophobic
http://i.imgur.com/CNSpoqj.jpg

Although if anyone feels the game is either I personally would think that they're just looking for reasons to be offended.
Precisely. They're actively seeking to be angry/offended because they want something to be upset about so they can blame everything/everyone but themselves as the cause of their problems, so they look here, there, and everywhere for the sweet nectar that is something to be offended about, and when they can't find something 'solid' they start to cherry-pick, misrepresent, and create their own interpretations based on their own warped views (all of which can be refuted effortlessly because they neither hold water nor contain any evidence), all while using the argument of 'well, of course you wouldn't understand!' as their defence. It's utterly laughable, sad, and pathetic.

That's why people like Anita Sarkeesian are laughed at by the logical and educated, and praised by the lunatics.

I always imagined it was an aged leaf from the tree at Man Mo Temple, but there's a strong possibility it isn't at all. III will probably shed some light on things.

"It's just been revoked."

I voted for Trump and am happy he won.

Hopefully dead.

I've written a short blog commentary that compares some of items that Ryo encounters as he wanders through the Yokosuka suburbs with how they actually look in real life.

As you can see from the preview images below, they modeled them really closely!

The blog commentary is here:
http://www.phantomriverstone.com/2017/02/rotary-phones-milk-deliveries-shenmue.html

http://i.imgur.com/PVpT7jB.jpg

http://i.imgur.com/3wUqhqz.jpg

http://i.imgur.com/igNiA5e.jpg

That's my last post ever on this site. Goodbye.

https://media1.tenor.com/images/33ac1d3d429cda1835eca2992d0f9c88/tenor.gif

Digitalduck provided a great reference and that anonymous guy just stormed out after being provided evidence countering his argument...well...good riddance I suppose?

:D

They absolutely, factually (not a matter of opinion) do NOT have a legal right to do so. It's a myth that you have the legal right to download a copy of a game you own. You do have a legal entitlement to CREATE your own backup copy of software you've purchased. You do NOT have the legal entitlement to download someone else's, or to distribute your own, online. That is called piracy, and is illegal. You can argue the moral right. You cannot argue the legal right. As stated though, I won't debate it beyond this point. We'll have to agree to disagree.

This is false. Rather than go into detail and risk more back and forth, I'll leave a copy of the EU and US laws on the subject, with relevant paragraphs:

(13) The exclusive rights of the author to prevent the unauthorised reproduction of his work should be subject to a limited exception in the case of a computer program to allow the reproduction technically necessary for the use of that program by the lawful acquirer. This means that the acts of loading and running necessary for the use of a copy of a program which has been lawfully acquired, and the act of correction of its errors, may not be prohibited by contract. In the absence of specific contractual provisions, including when a copy of the program has been sold, any other act necessary for the use of the copy of a program may be performed in accordance with its intended purpose by a lawful acquirer of that copy.

(14) A person having a right to use a computer program should not be prevented from performing acts necessary to observe, study or test the functioning of the program, provided that those acts do not infringe the copyright in the program.

(15) The unauthorised reproduction, translation, adaptation or transformation of the form of the code in which a copy of a computer program has been made available constitutes an infringement of the exclusive rights of the author. Nevertheless, circumstances may exist when such a reproduction of the code and translation of its form are indispensable to obtain the necessary information to achieve the interoperability of an independently created program with other programs. It has therefore to be considered that, in these limited circumstances only, performance of the acts of reproduction and translation by or on behalf of a person having a right to use a copy of the program is legitimate and compatible with fair practice and must therefore be deemed not to require the authorisation of the rightholder. An objective of this exception is to make it possible to connect all components of a computer system, including those of different manufacturers, so that they can work together. Such an exception to the author's exclusive rights may not be used in a way which prejudices the legitimate interests of the rightholder or which conflicts with a normal exploitation of the program.

(a)Violations Regarding Circumvention of Technological Measures.—
(1)
(A) No person shall circumvent a technological measure that effectively controls access to a work protected under this title. The prohibition contained in the preceding sentence shall take effect at the end of the 2-year period beginning on the date of the enactment of this chapter.
(B) The prohibition contained in subparagraph (A) shall not apply to persons who are users of a copyrighted work which is in a particular class of works, if such persons are, or are likely to be in the succeeding 3-year period, adversely affected by virtue of such prohibition in their ability to make noninfringing uses of that particular class of works under this title, as determined under subparagraph (C).
(C) During the 2-year period described in subparagraph (A), and during each succeeding 3-year period, the Librarian of Congress, upon the recommendation of the Register of Copyrights, who shall consult with the Assistant Secretary for Communications and Information of the Department of Commerce and report and comment on his or her views in making such recommendation, shall make the determination in a rulemaking proceeding for purposes of subparagraph (B) of whether persons who are users of a copyrighted work are, or are likely to be in the succeeding 3-year period, adversely affected by the prohibition under subparagraph (A) in their ability to make noninfringing uses under this title of a particular class of copyrighted works. In conducting such rulemaking, the Librarian shall examine—
(i) the availability for use of copyrighted works;
(ii) the availability for use of works for nonprofit archival, preservation, and educational purposes;
(iii) the impact that the prohibition on the circumvention of technological measures applied to copyrighted works has on criticism, comment, news reporting, teaching, scholarship, or research;
(iv) the effect of circumvention of technological measures on the market for or value of copyrighted works; and
(v) such other factors as the Librarian considers appropriate.

...

(f)Reverse Engineering.—
(1) Notwithstanding the provisions of subsection (a)(1)(A), a person who has lawfully obtained the right to use a copy of a computer program may circumvent a technological measure that effectively controls access to a particular portion of that program for the sole purpose of identifying and analyzing those elements of the program that are necessary to achieve interoperability of an independently created computer program with other programs, and that have not previously been readily available to the person engaging in the circumvention, to the extent any such acts of identification and analysis do not constitute infringement under this title.
(2) Notwithstanding the provisions of subsections (a)(2) and (b), a person may develop and employ technological means to circumvent a technological measure, or to circumvent protection afforded by a technological measure, in order to enable the identification and analysis under paragraph (1), or for the purpose of enabling interoperability of an independently created computer program with other programs, if such means are necessary to achieve such interoperability, to the extent that doing so does not constitute infringement under this title.
(3) The information acquired through the acts permitted under paragraph (1), and the means permitted under paragraph (2), may be made available to others if the person referred to in paragraph (1) or (2), as the case may be, provides such information or means solely for the purpose of enabling interoperability of an independently created computer program with other programs, and to the extent that doing so does not constitute infringement under this title or violate applicable law other than this section.
(4) For purposes of this subsection, the term “interoperability” means the ability of computer programs to exchange information, and of such programs mutually to use the information which has been exchanged.

Article 4

Restricted acts

1. Subject to the provisions of Articles 5 and 6, the exclusive rights of the rightholder within the meaning of Article 2 shall include the right to do or to authorise:

(a) the permanent or temporary reproduction of a computer program by any means and in any form, in part or in whole; in so far as loading, displaying, running, transmission or storage of the computer program necessitate such reproduction, such acts shall be subject to authorisation by the rightholder;

(b) the translation, adaptation, arrangement and any other alteration of a computer program and the reproduction of the results thereof, without prejudice to the rights of the person who alters the program;

(c) any form of distribution to the public, including the rental, of the original computer program or of copies thereof.

2. The first sale in the Community of a copy of a program by the rightholder or with his consent shall exhaust the distribution right within the Community of that copy, with the exception of the right to control further rental of the program or a copy thereof.

Article 5

Exceptions to the restricted acts

1. In the absence of specific contractual provisions, the acts referred to in points (a) and (b) of Article 4(1) shall not require authorisation by the rightholder where they are necessary for the use of the computer program by the lawful acquirer in accordance with its intended purpose, including for error correction.

2. The making of a back-up copy by a person having a right to use the computer program may not be prevented by contract in so far as it is necessary for that use.

3. The person having a right to use a copy of a computer program shall be entitled, without the authorisation of the rightholder, to observe, study or test the functioning of the program in order to determine the ideas and principles which underlie any element of the program if he does so while performing any of the acts of loading, displaying, running, transmitting or storing the program which he is entitled to do.

TL;DR: if DRM hinders the performance of the program, it is legal in both US and EU law to either a) reverse-engineer and modify the program to remove the DRM, or b) obtain a modified copy of the program, provided that the purpose of the modification is to allow the functioning of the program on a system for which it is intended.

In fact, these laws are specifically in place because of intrusive DRM - they originally came about when SEGA tried to prevent homebrew games from running on their systems by requiring a "SEGA" string in the ROM at the right place to run, then tried to sue anyone who made homebrew games for copyright infringement (because they had "SEGA" in their code).

It's still illegal to distribute copyrighted code, of course.

If the Dojo has lost one thoughtful poster who chimed in on multiple Shenmue-related topics, and gained one DRM crusader who's just copy-pasting cherry-picked bits of legal code, then we're worse for it today.

Yeah, no. That's not what I did at all.

I explained that intrusive DRM does cause worse performance (especially on computers that struggle in the first place). I explained that I don't advocate for piracy, but do advocate for people fixing the games they've purchased.

I was falsely told that this was illegal, so I posted the relevant information to show otherwise. This is not cherry-picking; I linked the entire directives for all to see, and I didn't think the part about nonprofits being exempt was relevant, but if you want I can paste that too.

In response to facts, said poster dismissed my post with a lazy and already disproven ad hominem (I explicitly condemned piracy, yet somehow I'm an advocate?), much like you did with your "DRM crusader" line. If this is your definition of a "thoughtful poster" then we're clearly using different dictionaries.

All I'm saying is after purchasing the game I'll get rid of the DRM so the overhead is removed and the game runs better, and that I'm well within my moral and legal rights to do so. That's it.

I don't see how this sentiment is so horrible that it merits name-calling and leaving the forum. If there is a problem with this attitude, please, argue against it.