74 replies to this topic

[DraigUK]

<[PGI]Omid> At the outset we took a hard line against cheating - we figure an ounce of prevention is worth a pound of cure
[22:42] <[PGI]Omid> to that end we've adopted a server-authoritative model (as opposed to the client-authoritative model CryEngine uses), which has involved many changes to the net code
[22:42] <[PGI]Omid> What all this means is that regardless of what cheating tools a hacker employs, we can ensure they'll never be able to turn their torso faster than the proper rate, or move/accelerate faster than a legitimate player can
[22:43] <[PGI]Omid> This is pretty huge for a free to play game, and has definitely been one of the more challenging aspects since it didn't come engine-supported
[22:43] <[PGI]Omid> Sorry if that answer as a bit technical

Edited by DraigUK, 11 July 2012 - 01:57 PM.

[Name48928]

Well... yeah. What company is going to take a firm stance for cheating?

I mean, beside Perfect World and their flat refusal to address hacking in Blacklight: Retribution.

(Still, good info on how they've had to tweak the CryEngine. Thanks! )

Edited by MinionJoe, 11 July 2012 - 01:50 PM.

[AlienInvader]

Maybe the interview link should be stickied or something...because my crystal ball foresees 'hack-usation' threads in the future.

[DarkTreader]

That is AWESOME!
Go PGI! Add as much as is necessary to keep '1337 haxx0rz' and script kiddies out of the game.

[Papertarget]

Actually, this confirms to me that the Devs are very invested in the long term success of MW:O. They are putting in a little more investment into this aspect of the game instead of just letting it roll with the original CryEngine model. They didn't NEED to do this, but they chose too. That in and of itself also lets me know they care about the BT Franchise and the BT Universe enough to put in extra effort, and it also tells me that it isn't all about the money.

Thanks for posting this.

[Shazbawt]

We'll see how good their server authoritative logic is

Rotation speed and movement speed are completely different from non gameplay elements which are most likely going to be more crucial than some simple speed or damage hack

Edited by Shazbawt, 11 July 2012 - 01:57 PM.

[IceSerpent]

MinionJoe, on 11 July 2012 - 01:49 PM, said:

Well... yeah. What company is going to take a firm stance for cheating?

EA/Bioware with SWTOR being a prime example?

[Jakebob]

people will still call "hack" when they take a gauss round to the head early in a battle.

[PK Violence]

One reason I always ran a servers in MW4 was to have the ability to kick players that were hacked and/or were causing problems. Will there be some way to kick or report players if needed in MW:O?

[Redend]

its good to hear, but unfortuantely a lot of companies "take a strong stance" but it doesnt always keep up, one of my worst examples was battlefield 2142 in which for teh first year or so of support it was very good, but after this point was a huge influx of hackers, personally which just ruins the game

[Daniel Wraith]

I still think will see an atlas flash across a battle field alpha strike the hell out of someone an zoom away as the hackers get inventive an im sure will see some laggy 10 yo screams hacks at anyone who kills him

Edited by Daniel Wraith, 11 July 2012 - 02:00 PM.

[Shazbawt]

IceSerpent, on 11 July 2012 - 01:57 PM, said:

EA/Bioware with SWTOR being a prime example?

Ur joking right? Bioware couldn't keep up with the exploits and would eventually patch them well after the damage was done. I never got banned for exploiting the hell out of that game.

[OICU812]

Out of the 30+ MMOs I have BETAd in the last 20 years I have yet to see a single one able to 'cure' cheating!

I'm hopeful but we have heard all of this before and history is against them.....

[Name48928]

Shazbawt, on 11 July 2012 - 02:00 PM, said:

Ur joking right? Bioware couldn't keep up with the exploits and would eventually patch them well after the damage was done. I never got banned for exploiting the hell out of that game.

I believe that was IceSerpent's point: EA/Bioware didn't care enough about hackers to bother stopping them. And from what I've read and heard, they need to keep as many people in SWTOR as they can, hackers included.

[Shazbawt]

MinionJoe, on 11 July 2012 - 02:05 PM, said:

I believe that was IceSerpent's point: EA/Bioware didn't care enough about hackers to bother stopping them. And from what I've read and heard, they need to keep as many people in SWTOR as they can, hackers included.

Read his post the other way

[Name48928]

Shazbawt, on 11 July 2012 - 02:07 PM, said:

Read his post the other way

EA/Bioware taking a firm stance for cheating?

Am I failing my reading comprehension roll?

[Eximar]

Now you're misunderstanding that he said he misunderstood. Clear?

[Hexenhammer]

I'm glad to see it will be server side and not client side processing.
Great start.

[kodos der henker]

Interesting.....

First of all I am glad to read that the game is server based (so cheating is much more difficult)
Know that from World of Tanks, "normal" cheating is impossible without hacking the server.

But a server based game needs some "tools" for players with high ping (EU players on NA server) like a serverside crosshair

[Otto Cannon]

It's a smart investment putting time into making the game hack-resistant before launch. There are few things that would stop people playing and paying quicker than servers infested with 14 year old kids using auto-aim hacks.