Punkbuster? ohh no - Page 4

Conq · 2012-03-08, 02:43 PM

Damn, I hate threads like these. They remind me what a horrible game PS2 is like to become due to hackers and I like to pretend otherwise. At least beta should be fun, for a little while.

As far a punkbuster goes, it's crap but so are the alternatives. No FPS is hack-proof and MMOFPS are even more vulnerable. I just hope PS2 can fair better than APB.

Coreldan · 2012-03-08, 02:47 PM

Actually, APB got the situation fairly well under control nowadays. There has been a huge improvement over the early times.

I very rarely run into any obvious cheaters nowadays.

SniperSteve · 2012-03-08, 03:09 PM

Originally Posted by arclegger

You know what helps find cheaters? a kill cam *runs away and hides while maniacally laughing*

ROFL Run, but you can't hide if there are kill-cams. :P

(And are you one of those evil people who likes kill-cams? Bad Higby!)

Markn · 2012-03-08, 03:24 PM

I'm confident they wont let hackers ruin what could otherwise be a great game.

The problem is f2p and download meaning you ban the account they just make a new one. What you can do that will get 90% of them is ban IP and mac address of their modems/routers (you send this info every time you log in not just your IP). DO NOT allow connection through proxys and I know some people will complain, but this is the #1 way to stop the real hackers who exploit your game.

You can never stop hacking, but you can slow it down and make it have less of an impact on your game and that is the key.

He's right btw a kill cam will show most hackers or a kill cam that switches you to your killers screen until you spawn will basically bust any hackers.

Tasorin · 2012-03-08, 04:16 PM

Higgles stated several times that "We are working on ways to detect, catch, and deal with the problems a FPS faces." If that "We" means were going to install punkbuster and call it a day, then it will be about a week and half and people will be freaking out about all the cheaters since its a F2P title.

I choose to put my faith in Higgles that "We" means that SOE is working on an in-house black box and the means to ban beyond just an account. Since in a F2P it is easy to mask your IP, make plenty of dummy accounts, and reap the lolz of making as many peoples life as miserable as possible before your hack gets you banned.

If cheating is really prevalent and SOE doesn't do much about it then the title is going to suffer heavily.

Tatwi · 2012-03-08, 06:14 PM

I wonder if multi-boxing (playing many toons on multiple accounts through only 1 keyboard and mouse, by use of 3rd party software and/or special hardware) will be considered cheating in PS2?

It's condoned in most subscription based MMOs (WoW included) for obvious reasons ($money$), even though it ruins PvP when one guy can blow up everyone else with his 10 toons that cast the same spell on the same target at exactly the same time. As a healer in WoW I have often said, "Healer, not miracle worker. Take less damage or spread it out over more than 2 seconds...", because there are only so many spells one can land in 2 seconds. Translating that to the multi-boxer in PvP, whomever they are targeting simply can't avoid that much instant damage nor can it be healed. And translating that into PS2, a multi-boxer makes no investment into the game, but can 1 shot people.

With that in mind, I think multi-boxing in PS2 should be considered hacking/cheating.

On a different note, "lag switches" (aka discobox) really kill PvP in WoW and Blizzard can't seem to do anything about them so I hope anyone using one in PS2 is simply... disco'd!

NEWSKIS · 2012-03-08, 06:29 PM

Punkbuster only catches the dumbass hackers and kicks/bans people who DONT hack. The last thing from BF3 was hackers using an exploit in Punkbuster to ban random people who dont hack. Do we really want that added to PS2?

Gortha · 2012-03-09, 04:00 AM

Originally Posted by arclegger

You know what helps find cheaters? a kill cam *runs away and hides while maniacally laughing*

Only the CoD like Kill cam which show you the aiming and kill shot of the player.

But there are better ways to hunt cheaters...

The best is enough GameMasters to spectate reported players for some time...

Canaris · 2012-03-09, 04:07 AM

Originally Posted by ArmedZealot

It think punkbuster combined with a player run report/judgement system ala League of Legends that forwards a ban request to a GM for final review would be sufficient. Combine that with server side sanity checks would be sufficient.

Indeed the game will need to have an active and regulated GM support, letting rampant cheating go on for to long will drive people away in droves and once they leave with a bad experience trying to win them back is next to impossible. Even with promising them all sorts.

I have plenty of games emailing me about all the clever things they'll give me if I come back and the almost instantly followed by me thinking "You had your chance" before deleting it.

Being proactive and open with the community would be the best choice.

Traak · 2012-03-09, 06:42 AM

Cure? Money. Hire the cheaters to write anti-cheat coding. The US gov't does this all the time.

DaSwede · 2012-03-09, 07:04 AM

This is so easy to fix if you build it into the architecture of the messaging and server validation of the client.

I deal with this kind of stuff on a daily basis in real time financial trading systems.

Game Development just hasn't come as far. Hopefully Higby and co thought of this when building ForgeLight.

Sent from my Galaxy Nexus using Tapatalk

WarrantOfficer · 2012-03-09, 08:58 AM

Originally Posted by DaSwede

This is so easy to fix if you build it into the architecture of the messaging and server validation of the client.

I deal with this kind of stuff on a daily basis in real time financial trading systems.

Game Development just hasn't come as far. Hopefully Higby and co thought of this when building ForgeLight.

Sent from my Galaxy Nexus using Tapatalk

I'm fairly sure that this would only really affect hackers that physically modify the abilities of a player entity, such as when they introduce a packet which adds an object to the map, however, hackers that use aim-bots and other 'client side' hacks would be immune to this means of detection.

DaSwede · 2012-03-09, 10:46 AM

Originally Posted by WarrantOfficer

I'm fairly sure that this would only really affect hackers that physically modify the abilities of a player entity, such as when they introduce a packet which adds an object to the map, however, hackers that use aim-bots and other 'client side' hacks would be immune to this means of detection.

Only if you don't include internal dll fingerprints which have to be verified against the server on connection and periodically during the sessions lifetime.
The verification of the dll's would be over an encrypted channel so decoding the packets would be extremely difficult.

By not only checking it at startup you will ensure that if someone injects a DLL you will catch it.

Xaine · 2012-03-09, 11:15 AM

I don't care what they use, as long as it works.

DaSwede · 2012-03-09, 11:29 AM

Originally Posted by Xaine

I don't care what they use, as long as it works.

I agree!

All I want to do is to play on equal terms