We got a source code for a pack.bin unpacker however we are still trying to make it work no luck so far.
Credit: Allods Developers Community
the file: https://drive.google.com/open?id=1sx...d7t_gQSimaPoL9
ps: before running the exe you need to change the pack name to ppack.bin the problem seems to happen when stage 2 starts it stops halfway and closes.
Acteros is Architect.
Never trust unknown sources.
It is a very old version of architects unpacker.
Сорок is too scared to release the full, half-working, pack.bin unpacker that he has though.
Good thing that I am not in the allods community anymore. Too much shit going on.
Last edited by Biesmen; 25-09-18 at 08:52 AM.
So much drama and nothing coming out of it smh...Originally Posted by Jaximus
Always appreciated your opinion cause you ALWAYS come in with facts no bullshit unlike a bunch of people here and definitely don't trust unknown sources, but at this point this community has been so dry for years in here compared to the old days any chance to keep it going i'm taking it.
Couldn't give 2 shits about the unpacker to be frank i'm not interested in opening a server or making money i respect those who do but i'm not about that, just want this community to be alive again.
Last edited by Biesmen; 25-09-18 at 08:53 AM.
There is such a theory: if you rewrite the source code in a new C ++ project.Using the existing code of the architect - there is a chance that the program will work more steadily.Since when writing one version of the visual studio and a certain version of the boost was used!We are collecting this project in a visual studio of a different version and with a different version of the boost ...
Sorry for the confused sentence, but I think the thought you caught.
Any luck on that ? I tried with vs2015 didn't work(although not 100% sure)
According to the architect, this source code is written at 80%.And logically can not be considered a worker.Ddenisk's comment on this source code was that only 20% of its working state is actually written.from this it follows that he (the source code) also can not be considered a worker.The architect immediately said that the code is not ready for the final assembly of the instrument.And he proposed jointly to complete this project.
=============ru_translate=============
Со слов архитектора, данный исходный код написан на 80%.И по логике не может считаться рабочим.Комментарий ддениски к данному исходному коду гласил о том что на самом деле написано всего 20% от своего рабочего состояния.из этого следует что он (исходный код) так же не может считаться рабочим.Архитектор сразу сказал что код не готов для окончательной сборки инструмента.И предложил совместно завершить этот проект.
so rip trying to get this to workAccording to the architect, this source code is written at 80%.And logically can not be considered a worker.Ddenisk's comment on this source code was that only 20% of its working state is actually written.from this it follows that he (the source code) also can not be considered a worker.The architect immediately said that the code is not ready for the final assembly of the instrument.And he proposed jointly to complete this project.
Last edited by Jinjer LC; 18-09-18 at 11:35 PM. Reason: back on topic
Even the architect did not use this unpacker and reworked it from scratch; there is little point in it.
=============ru_translate=============
Даже архитектор этим распаковщиком не пользовался и переделывал с нуля, смысла от него мало.
Reply With Quote