88 replies to this topic

[Cochise]

I haven't had any problems with punkbuster myself. I think it stops the 'low entry' cheaters, because it just isn't updated often enough to do more.

It is not in the same league at all as any form of DRM, no comparison really.

The only anti-cheat that most people have come across that I know that actually works without making itselfs known is Valve Anti-Cheat but it apparently cannnot detect everything, I don't think anything can. As with anything there is a balance, I hope they have a solution that works, but isn't too cumbesome.

[Ranek Blackstone]

VAC would require the title to be Steamworks though, and that doesn't seem to be the route PGI is taking here.

[Anelor Galor]

GameGuard is bypassed by using sandbox, crashing the service and more. The worst part is that you can avoid it by modding the exe file and bypassing the patcher and from there you can modify every forsaken file in the client. The game I once played got ruined by this worthless technology
Please no GG, cause with GG you have all but a GG

[C0LD]

Punkbuster needs to go die a horrible death. It's one of the worst anti-cheat pieces of garbage out there. I specifically remember when I was banned because my xp-64 directx checksums weren't the same as the 32-bit ones and they wouldn't un-ban me. FFS the company sucks.

[Voyager I]

Cochise, on 24 June 2012 - 08:09 AM, said:

I haven't had any problems with punkbuster myself. I think it stops the 'low entry' cheaters, because it just isn't updated often enough to do more.

It is not in the same league at all as any form of DRM, no comparison really.

The only anti-cheat that most people have come across that I know that actually works without making itselfs known is Valve Anti-Cheat but it apparently cannnot detect everything, I don't think anything can. As with anything there is a balance, I hope they have a solution that works, but isn't too cumbesome.

VAC is a pretty good program, as far as these things though.

With a large scale Anti-Cheat, you have to understand that the goal is not to prevent all cheating, because that isn't realisitically possible. Rather, you want to make cheating hard enough that it's no longer worth the investment for people who would be willing to do so. With VAC and other well-designed AC clients, the cost of cheating is having to repeatedly buy the game. Going by the MWO business model, that would mean losing all of your progress and having to either grind or buy it back. For people who are merely interested in some casual trolling (read; the vast majority of hackers), that's simply not worth it.

There are designer hacks out there that will evade anti-cheats, but the people with the skill to make those things don't do it for free. They're quite exspensive and generally require substantial subscription fees, as the hacks must be regularly updated to keep one step ahead of the anti-cheat clients. This is not a cheaper option, and you won't see these being used by your garden variety aimbotter. These are for people trying to fudge their way through some sort of competitive gaming (see; Counter Strike).


The problem we'll have to deal with is that, being a F2P game, remaking an account could end up being a very small penalty. Depending on how long it takes to get a mech capable of aimbotting a pair of PPCs through someone's windshield, hacking could end up being a very serious problem.

Edited by Voyager I, 24 June 2012 - 09:40 AM.

[Elan Heng]

Phatt, on 23 June 2012 - 08:48 PM, said:

$alute$ and G'day to HJ JoeKano, from =KH=Phatt. it's been a long time since I played against HJ, nearly 10 years I think.

Hi Phatty, I remember blowing your legs off!

I totally agree with my Lance leader Joekano and =KH=Phatt. Hackers are a disease we face that could be easily deterred by server side protections. While this may not give the trolls the affirmation that they desire, it will allow the rest of us to get on with the good gaming.

Incidentally,I hope the Dev are reading this, as the quickest way to loose a loyal following is to allow hacks to go uncontrolled.

[FenixofBria]

Why is this even a discussion?

Everything will be server side, just like World of Tanks.


Also, the Steam fanatics can give it up. Forced to use Steam (on any game) equals a no buy for many, myself included.

Edited by FenixofBria, 26 June 2012 - 06:20 AM.

[Voyager I]

FenixofBria, on 26 June 2012 - 06:16 AM, said:

Why is this even a discussion?

Everything will be server side, just like World of Tanks.

Aimbots can still happen, unless the client literally isn't allowed to interact with the game. Ditto for wallhacks, although clever coding could probably mitigate them to an extent. Particle/Texture hacks are also likely.

Quote

Also, the Steam fanatics can give it up. Forced to use Steam (on any game) equals a no buy for many, myself included.

While I completely understand that Steam is DRM and have no disrespect for the people who will not use it on those grounds, do keep in mind that Valve managed to take proactive steps towards combating piracy (which is a problem for regular PC gamers, since it makes companies reluctant to make games for us) while wrapping it all in a package palatable enough that some people, such as myself, actually prefer Steam as a distribution method simply for the convenience it offers.

...assuming you have very reliable internet access, that is...

Edited by Voyager I, 26 June 2012 - 06:43 AM.

[Freyar]

VAC is only good when you've got active administrators watching matches. Alone, it's not enough. Good, just not designed to be the first line anti-cheat. Even then, it wouldn't be appropriate to use it for MWO, considering it's stand-alone for now. Even with a Steam release (of which I am hopeful for), the game wouldn't be Steamworks based, so VAC would be out of the question.