PlanetCrap 6.0!
Front Page (ATOM) • Submission Bin (2) • ArchivesUsersLoginCreate Account
You are currently not logged in.
T O P I C
The aim of the game
October 2nd 2000, 08:51 CEST by andy

Depending on your perspective, so-called "aim bots" -- game mods that automatically aim at opponents -- are either going to kill competitive online gaming, or they're going to force developers to improve security. This issue, and many others for you to get your gritted teeth into, are discussed in an interview on Barrysworld, talking to the author of a Q3A aim bot.



What's unusual, and possibly even refreshing, is that the guy who wrote the aimbot seems remarkably free of the high-and-mighty attitude you normally get from hackers. Although he does make comments about "false security" and his hacker-ethic desire to break it, he also explains that his driving force is a dislike for Q3A and the community that follows it. For example:

I would love to see Q3A mainstream die, as I think that they are responsible that Q2 isn't being played anymore. I do NOT want to destroy mods like Q3F or other "underground" mods because they do not represent the average Q3 player. I've been playing alot of Action Quake in Q2 times which makes me feel that way.

He also says this about the changing attitude of Id Software:

I very much dislike ID's Q3A licence policy these days - I never thought ID would refer to law to protect their "intellectual property"... I always thought they were cool guys... well it's capitalism everywhere these days I suppose... :/

It's an interesting read. Just don't assume I agree or disagree with it. :-)

C O M M E N T S
Home » Topic: The aim of the game

|«« - Previous Page - Next Page - »»|
#1 by "lustygoat"
2000-10-02 08:57:16
lustygoat@yahoo.com http://www.fbi.gov
1st
#2 by "Chris Johnson"
2000-10-02 09:09:58
<quote>I would love to see Q3A mainstream die, as I think that they are responsible that Q2 isn't being played anymore. I do NOT want to destroy mods like Q3F or other "underground" mods because they do not represent the average Q3 player. I've been playing alot of Action Quake in Q2 times which makes me feel that way.
</quote>

Sorry, but this quote realy strikes me as holier-than-thou and egocentric to the extreme.  Not to mention not particularly well developerd, but I digress.

I dunno, but maybe the reason Q2 isn't being played anymore has to do with the fact that most players find it to be a better game?  I mean, I'm sorry if you don't like the fact that more people, both purists and mod-plyers are playing Q3A than Q2, but that's life.  The majority of folk are gonna move on to the newest thing, the bigger better deal.  Maybe some poeple need to learn to live with that?  

And what exactly is an "underground mod" anyways?  I'd have to say the fact that the "* Fortress *" type mods have been made for just about any remotely successful FPS by now would make it one of the least-underground mods on the planet.  In fact I'd say it's pretty fucking mainstream.

But, oops.  That undermines this guy's uber-l33t hacker superiority, so I better just retract that.

As far as disliking id's license policy:well a) I'd bet a lot of it is Activision's license policy, and b) too goddamn bad.  Id's a company.  Period.  They have to protect their product like anyone else, or they're not gonna have much product or company left.  The fact that you can still mod the shit out of their games (and any other FPS games that are good enough to have the source released *snicker*) isn't good enough?  You have to be able to monkey around with their copyrights?  Sorry, no.  You have more than enough freedom with their games without needing to rape their trademarks, their property, and their ability to continue to be a viable business.

I'm sorry, but the article itself reads like a thinly veiled (if veiled at all) excuse for being a prick that ruins the experience for most others.
#3 by "BarneyQue"
2000-10-02 09:28:31
barneyque@hotmail.com
What he said, plus I felt that the interviewer was leading him around to much. Suppling too many ideas.<I><B></B></I><I></I><I></I>
#4 by "lustygoat"
2000-10-02 09:38:23
lustygoat@yahoo.com http://www.fbi.gov
<b>#2</b> "Chris Johnson" wrote...
<QUOTE>I'm sorry, but the article itself reads like a thinly veiled (if veiled at all) excuse for being a prick that ruins the experience for most others. </QUOTE>

No need to be sorry, you're totally correct.

But what good does that do us? It's not like a planet-crap keelhauling is going to make this guy suddenly de-release his little cheat, nor will it make others refrain from doing the same. I don't think anyone would argue people like this are doing a good thing. The problem is, what do you do about them?

(Sorry about the 1st thing, I saw a topic with no responses and some kind of mesozoic back-brain instict took over.)
#5 by "Jason Schroder"
2000-10-02 09:46:36
jasonsch@australiamail.com
How could anyone actually be <b>FOR</b> these lame ass things? Sure, it would make for an interesting challenge to create something like that, but he seems to have some misguided reasons for publicly using and releasing it.

<QUOTE>
Well, it`s true that I am a rather bad Q3A player, but that wasn`t the motivation for making the bot - as I said, I usually don`t use the bot to raise my score but attack Q3 itself and to have fun when people get mad at me :p).
</QUOTE>

Isn't that a little contradictory? He wasn't having fun cause he sucked, so he started cheating and was having fun pissing people off. Maybe that wasn't his motivation to initially create the thing, but I'm sure it partly motivated him to continue using and developing it.

And he blames the death of Quake2 on Quake3? Wtf? If anything killed Action Quake2 or Quake2 in general, it would be counter-strike - which probably butchered a lot of communities based around online games. I watched the Australian AQ2 community slowly die out, while the counter-strike community rose up out of nothing.

This guy is just a self-appointed Anarchist (ass), who seems to be trying to lash out at Quake3 for not being the game he expected (one that he's good at).
#6 by "PiRaMidA"
2000-10-02 09:48:28
piramida@agsm.net http://www.agsm.net
Post <b>#4</b> by lustygoat:
<QUOTE><i>I don't think anyone would argue people like this are doing a good thing. The problem is, what do you do about them?
</i></QUOTE>

About that particular guy - doh, put him in jail ;)

He did a clearly illegal thing (I highly doubt id legally permits reverse-engineering of their game), and had been stupid enough to go brag about it on IRC/web. Bah. Many people dislike Q3, but "kill Q3 mainstream"? Is this guy some type of islam fanatic terrorist who blows up airplanes to prove their religion? Same attitude...<I><B></B></I><I></I><I></I>
#7 by "Keenan"
2000-10-02 10:11:25
abc123moo@yahoo.com http://www.newgrounds.com
this is gay<I><B></B></I><I></I><I></I>
#8 by "My Cock In Your ARSE"
2000-10-02 10:12:19
sheriffbakanay@hotmail.com http://Fuck off, dumb cunts
I hear the guy wants to destroy id, so he can go out with KAK, as he thinks she is very fuckable.


That's right gay losers, accept my total intellectual and penile superiority of your small minds and even smaller gay cocks.

Your outrage is just a cry for someone to come and fuck you in your loose arse's.
#9 by "RahvinTaka"
2000-10-02 11:02:34
donaldp@mad.scientist.com
<b>#6</b> "PiRaMidA" wrote...
<QUOTE>He did a clearly illegal thing (I highly doubt id legally permits reverse-engineering of their game), and had been stupid enough to go brag about it on IRC/web. Bah.</QUOTE>

It's not illegal in most countries/states. Those token statements they pu in licenses have never been shown to hold (at least in US and Australia) - thou with that set of laws in US maybe it will become illegal - not now thou. <I><B></B></I><I></I><I></I>
#10 by "Mr.White"
2000-10-02 11:27:56
well, it was fun playing Q3, now it's ruined maybe I should go play Q2......... nah


this guy is one of the lamest nut-jobs I've ever seen, cheaters should be shot
#11 by "Flamethrower"
2000-10-02 12:04:17
flamethrower@barryswold.com http://www.PORTALofEVIL.com
This guy needs to stop gulping the cough syrup and take a hard kick to the head instead.

Barrysworld should be ashamed of themselves for giving profile and publicity to a cunting fucking cheater.

Actually, I don't like the way PlanetCrap has been used to promote this lump-of-shit cheating prick either.


We're setting new lows here ladies and gentlemen, we're setting new lows.


Blue has the right policy on these idiots: DO NOT PROMOTE THEM.
#12 by "Darren Coleman"
2000-10-02 12:12:23
durzel@barrysworld.com
Hi, I'm the person that interviewed him :)

I hope it didn't come across in my column that I was sympathetic to him writing an aimbot, I'm not in the slightest.  As I said in the precursor to the interview, I personally dislike Q3A quite a lot which somewhat taints my view of what he's done.  On the one hand I would personally like to see the game shrivel up and die (and Quake 2 takes its place) but on the other, more rational hand I can see not only is this view selfish, but it's never gonna happen.

The questions I put to him genuinely weren't "leading" (or weren't intended to be), I recognised from speaking to him that unlike your "usual cheat" he was actually capable of stringing more than 2 words together to form a sentence.  Besides which I thought it would be an interesting read for everyone concerned.
#13 by "Andy"
2000-10-02 12:20:25
andy@nospam.planetcrap.com http://www.meejahor.com/
<b>#12</b>, Darren Coleman:
<QUOTE>
The questions I put to him genuinely weren't "leading" (or weren't intended to be)
</QUOTE>
Don't worry, people here always say questions are leading.
<QUOTE>
Besides which I thought it would be an interesting read for everyone concerned.
</QUOTE>
It was a very good interview. Good subject, good questions, and well put together.
#14 by "Shinji"
2000-10-02 12:28:04
shinji@gameloft.co.uk http://www.gameloft.co.uk
Durzel :-

Good article; I think a lot of people are annoyed that you didn't openly condemn him, but all in all you managed to stay neutral, which is an interviewers job after all :)

Clearly the guy is a complete tosspot (as is anyone who believes Quake is that important, tbh). I think any rational person can realise that from reading his responses; he's an angry kiddie who has listened to too much slipknot :)

It's a shame that Q3 gets cracked like this, although, it'll be interesting to see if id manage to tighten up the security in the next release to work around the aimbot. To be honest, the mainstay of my dismay at this particular knob end managing to write a Q3 aimbot is that Q3 <i>is</i> so well protected... if there are people out there with enough free time to go about cracking that, clearly CounterStrike hasn't a hope in hell of being cheat-free for a long, long time to come. :(<I><B></B></I><I></I><I></I>
#15 by "Darren Coleman"
2000-10-02 12:41:33
durzel@barrysworld.com
From speaking to him I don't think he intends to upgrade it to later versions - if he was your usual "lame aimbot c0d3r" I dont doubt he would devote his whole life to making sure it was upgraded (like Zbot was for Quake 2).

<quote>To be honest, the mainstay of my dismay at this particular knob end managing to write a Q3 aimbot is that Q3 is so well protected... if there are people out there with enough free time to go about cracking that, clearly CounterStrike hasn't a hope in hell of being cheat-free for a long, long time to come.</quote>

I do agree strongly with his views on "security through obscurity" and how ultimately it fails completely.  The fact that it is possible to circumvent whatever protections ID have in place in Q3A proves conclusively that their encryption isn't up to the task.

It's the same reason why Apache is so successful, everyone can get ahold of the software so can identify exploits very early on (and create patches).  It is the very reason why Apache is so stable.

Releasing a game - especially a competitive game such as Quake III Arena - and saying "we've got this new funky proprietary network packet encryption and CD-key checking system under the hood" is like waving a red flag in front of a bull.

That doesn't of course make it ethical what this cheat-writers do (just to reiterate my conviction that I <b>don't</b> 'agree' with cheat writers)
#16 by "BloodKnight"
2000-10-02 13:12:55
bloodknight@somethingawful.com
<b>Jason Schroder</b> (#5):
<QUOTE>it would be counter-strike - which probably butchered a lot of communities based
around online games. </QUOTE>

Don't forget to blame it on Valve if "buying" CS.  I wonder how the TFC driving shit is going to be if the CS isn't so good <I><B></B></I><I></I><I></I>
#17 by "BloodKnight"
2000-10-02 13:14:31
bloodknight@somethingawful.com
<b>Flamethrower</b> (#11):
<QUOTE>Actually, I don't like the way PlanetCrap has been used to promote this
lump-of-shit cheating prick either. </QUOTE>

I am quite glad that PC did this.  I didn't know about it and I love knowing how pathetic the gaming community is.  PC is like a newspaper that only prints out the shit of society<I><B></B></I><I></I><I></I>
#18 by "BloodKnight"
2000-10-02 13:15:34
bloodknight@somethingawful.com
Ack Typo!<I><B></B></I><I></I><I></I>
#19 by "godZero"
2000-10-02 13:18:18
godzero@gmx.de
I hate Q3 myself, but I hate what this guy did even more. I would be happy if Q3 died (along with Q2, BTW...Q1 is still king), but not because of fuckin' cheaters.

He said it was a challenge and fun disassembling Q3 code and altering it. Why didn't he keep it for himself then? Why go public? That says all about his intentions IMHO. Fucker!!!
#20 by "Whisp"
2000-10-02 13:30:08
whisp_@hotmail.com
Personally, I'm glad it happened this way.  If it can be done, someone was going to do.  Having the author be real public with it forces some sort of response from id.  If he had kept it quiet, it might have been available for quite a while without anyone really knowing.

I still don't understand why everyone hates q3 so much.  Sure, it wasn't what it could have been, but it's still a really solid game.  Why do so many people want it to be something else?  

"Q3 sucks play UT/Q2/QW/etc, or help me mod them to be identical."

-Whisp
#21 by "Ozymandis"
2000-10-02 13:41:02
rcrisl1@gl.umbc.edu http://none
Has any of the id people said how they plan to deal with this security bug?  Cheating in an online-oriented game pretty much has been proven to kill the community (Shogo even, LOL).<I><B></B></I><I></I><I></I>
#22 by "Eyegore"
2000-10-02 13:59:22
eyegore@cfl.rr.com
I just want to commend Darkseid for always claiming the first post from the morons who post "1st".  It would be nice if all the topic posters would do the same.
#23 by ""
2000-10-02 14:22:09
<i>Thinking...</i>
#24 by "Frain"
2000-10-02 14:26:21
frain@bigfoot.com
FYI, there's a Half-Life aimbot out there that's completly client-side; it waits for a particular color to show up on the screen and shoots at it. I think that this kind of aimbot is probably undetectable because it doesn't change the game in any way, it just takes control of the mouse when he sees the color (with which the enemies are skinned of course). That's the problem with client side cheating: If there's security through obscurity, write an aimbot like this one, if the game's completely open-source, rewrite it. I'd say it's pretty much inevitable (sp?), but I'd be glad if somebody would tell me that it isn't :)

Frain<I><B></B></I><I></I><I></I>
#25 by "Darren Coleman"
2000-10-02 14:26:38
durzel@barrysworld.com
Personally, I'm glad it happened this way. If it can be done, someone was going to do. Having the author be real public with it forces some sort of response from id.


Agreed.

Andy hit the nail on the head for me.  I can appreciate that for many people as soon as they hear the word "cheat" and their favourite game, they immediately lose all sense of reason and objectivity in a blind rage.  

I don't make a habit of interviewing people that have deliberately set about to destroy a game, in fact to date this has been (as I recall) the first interview I have ever conducted properly (I did promise to interview Zoid once and forgot to email the questions - theres professionalism for you).

The primary reason I decided to go ahead and interview nopcode (and bear in mind it wasn't a Q&A session, I sent him some questions and he sent the answers back to me - there was no discourse between us during this process) was largely down to the fact that, as Andy eloquently put it, <i>"the guy who wrote [it] seems remarkably free of the high-and-mighty attitude you normally get from hackers"</i>

Typically those that set about to ruin other peoples fun do so out of a pure desire to be better than them, or to ruin it "just because they can".  This chap had a different reason, and while it is no more justifyable than the lame excuses the various CS pak-hackers and suchlike put forth - it was "refreshing" (for want of a better word).  This has, to my knowledge, been the first instance where someone has set about to try and destroy a game simply because they believe it destroyed another.

That said, I fear many of the excellent views posted on this thread already will be lost among the tirade of "Burn HIM!!" flames that have already threatened to overshadow the "point" of the interview.
#26 by "RahvinTaka"
2000-10-02 14:29:19
donaldp@mad.scientist.com
<b>#14</b> "Shinji" wrote...
<QUOTE>It's a shame that Q3 gets cracked like this, although, it'll be interesting to see if id manage to tighten up the security in the next release to work around the aimbot. To be honest, the mainstay of my dismay at this particular knob end managing to write a Q3 aimbot is that Q3 <I>is</I> so well protected... if there are people out there with enough free time to go about cracking that, clearly CounterStrike hasn't a hope in hell of being cheat-free for a long, long time to come. :(</QUOTE>

If you note he never cracked it as such but just worked around it. ie id locked up q3a networking fairly tight (thou still easy enough to decipher in under 8 hours) but they left other doors wide open. Still I believe they did the best in way of protection but it is wrong way to go. No matter how tight you close it there will still be holes and thus it is better to go to models like tribes which allow everyone to "cheat"
<I><B></B></I><I></I><I></I>
#27 by "Dethstryk"
2000-10-02 14:29:40
dethstryk@damagegaming.com http://www.damagegaming.com/
People who write aimbots, etc. for first-person shooters? Really, do they even deserve even *that* much time thinking about it? These guys are no-lifes who have nothing else to do, and plus, it's obvious that coding bots like this has some kind of penis envy thing to go along with it.


--
Dethstryk
#28 by "Darren Coleman"
2000-10-02 14:30:22
durzel@barrysworld.com
I really need to stop using [ubb] so much..
#29 by "Eyegore"
2000-10-02 14:32:18
eyegore@cfl.rr.com
I hate bots.  If I see a bot is on a server with me, I call him a botfag (Q2 speak) and find another server immediately.  That's all you can do.

On the other hand, I see the value of bots and their proliferation.  The people who use them will still always be botfags, but they actually do us all a service by highlighting the problem.  If 1 in 10,000 people used bots, the problem would likely never be fixed because the trouble they caused would be insignificant except to a very few unlucky people.  On the other hand if 1 in 3 people were using bots the game would be virually unplayable, or at least unenjoyable to everyone and would demand that the problem is fixed immediately, and it would be, at least until the next version.  So that's it.  Bots suck.  Keep em coming.
#30 by "RahvinTaka"
2000-10-02 14:35:51
donaldp@mad.scientist.com
<b>#15</b> "Darren Coleman" wrote...
<QUOTE><quote>To be honest, the mainstay of my dismay at this particular knob end managing to write a Q3 aimbot is that Q3 is so well protected... if there are people out there with enough free time to go about cracking that, clearly CounterStrike hasn't a hope in hell of being cheat-free for a long, long time to come.</quote>

I do agree strongly with his views on "security through obscurity" and how ultimately it fails completely. The fact that it is possible to circumvent whatever protections ID have in place in Q3A proves conclusively that their encryption isn't up to the task.

It's the same reason why Apache is so successful, everyone can get ahold of the software so can identify exploits very early on (and create patches). It is the very reason why Apache is so stable. </QUOTE>

Naah that is not why Apache is stable. There has been a lot of debate on effectiveness of OS software and security and it is generally agreed that security is generally worse in opensource products - at least at the start. It is not a deliberate attempt to block security hole that makes them successful but more a dedication to quality software and low overhead (thus fast response times) for getting out patches.

<QUOTE>Releasing a game - especially a competitive game such as Quake III Arena - and saying "we've got this new funky proprietary network packet encryption and CD-key checking system under the hood" is like waving a red flag in front of a bull. </QUOTE>

yep and it is very very stupid especially with the weakness of their protection scheme.<I><B></B></I><I></I><I></I>
#31 by "RahvinTaka"
2000-10-02 14:42:48
donaldp@mad.scientist.com
<b>#20</b> "Whisp" wrote...
<QUOTE>I still don't understand why everyone hates q3 so much. Sure, it wasn't what it could have been, but it's still a really solid game. Why do so many people want it to be something else?

"Q3 sucks play UT/Q2/QW/etc, or help me mod them to be identical."
</QUOTE>

Well there is a very large similarity in certain types of games. UT and QW are very similar in gameplay and generally appeal to same type of people. Strangely enough they have proved to be most widely popular in community (Judging popularity by growth rather than numbers). Q3A has a lot of the feel of original doom crossed with qw but because of complex map architectures it is not so grokable for newbies and even experienced people even.
<I><B></B></I><I></I><I></I>
#32 by "BarneyQue"
2000-10-02 15:01:22
barneyque@hotmail.com
<b>#13</b> "Andy" wrote...
<QUOTE><B><A href="spy-internal:Load/160#12">#12</A></B>, Darren Coleman:

<quote>
The questions I put to him genuinely weren't "leading" (or weren't intended to be)
</quote>
Don't worry, people here always say questions are leading.

<quote>
Besides which I thought it would be an interesting read for everyone concerned.
</quote>
It was a very good interview. Good subject, good questions, and well put together.

</QUOTE>

Three things.  

1. Bet you can't find an example to back that up.
2. If you do manage to pull one out, it's not by me.
3. I agree where he said it would be an interesting read.
<I><B></B></I><I></I><I></I>
#33 by "Flamethrower"
2000-10-02 16:37:08
flamethrower@barryswold.com http://www.PORTALofEVIL.com
COLEMAN 25

<QUOTE>Andy hit the nail on the head for me. I can appreciate that for many people as soon as they hear the word "cheat" and their favourite game, they immediately lose all sense of reason and objectivity in a blind rage. </QUOTE>


Of course. Of course it is. It's OUR fault for being angry at the cheaters, and, worse, the people who give the cheats the tools.

How utterly stupid of us not to realise that already.

Silly us.

So some dolts spends 30 quid, 45 bucks, 80 million roubles, whatever, on an online game. And then goes online to play their online game online.

Then they find out it's not worth playing because someone wrote a cheat bot for the game and all the kiddies are using and abusing it.

And OF COURSE it's the PLAYERS who are in the wrong for getting angry AT the CHEATERS.

I see clearly now how I had it all wrong. We all did. You're right. Cheaters and bot-authors should not rise our anger up, we should not be passiate beasts, men, we should all be lukewarm low-testosterone limpdick weeds and scratch our hairy chins and nod a lot and say things like "He has a point".

Darren, dare I say this. You seem like a nice, bright, hearty chap - but fuck you.

You interviewed a cunt whose life is so small and shallow (TINYLIFE.COM) they spend their days doing <b>nothing but try to ruin other peoples days/games</b> and you, you, YOU GAVE HIM AIRTIME. How underground of you. How edgy and dangerous you are. How Punk. You interviewed a bot author. Congratulations, you must be hip or something. You probably have a skateboard now, and a walkman, and some Prodigy remixes, and blue hair.

You justify your interview because it wasn't the traditional pseudoHacker <b>lie</b> of 'because I can' or 'because it was there' (when that is true the true hacker doesn't reveal what they did or boast about it). His arguament is a far more insdious, anti-gaming, and entirely hateful - he doesn't like Q3 so he intends to try and destroy it.

And you gave him airtime you DICK.

Oh, and to others who try to say you were interviewing this person - not true. You started your column off with commentary. That makes you a commentator. You saw fit to comment that you hate Q3A but you didn't see fit to ask the OBVIOUS questions. Like

"A lot of people bought & enjoy Quake 3. id deliberately tried to make it as-accessile to the public as they could, and to a certain extent they succeeded. Then you come along, decide that these people have no RIGHT to the cheat-free game they paid for, you break the licence to illegally reverse-engineer a cheat-bot, and release it with the intent of harming these people's fun. Why the hell would someone want to so something so low, so hateful, so nasty, something so utterly outright sad?"</i>

The trouble is half way through your 'interview' your subject would stop responding, wouldn't he?

Which is why you gave nice, friendly, non-confrontational questions and despite your anti-Q3 rant at the start, you offered no further commentary on the shit-for-human you spoke to.

May I say again, after halving clamly reflected on this, spent time thinking about this, having read your interview (among many other BW posts) and I can honestly say this objectively: Entirely fuck you, Darren.

Pimp the cheaters, you bad boy you, but my fist up your arse for your trouble.


And a wrist-thick fuck-you, Andy, for posting this topic.


PLANETCRAP - the industry-read forum you become famous at for helping ruin gaming fun.
#34 by "Andy"
2000-10-02 17:01:31
andy@nospam.planetcrap.com http://www.meejahor.com/
<b>#33</b>, Flamethrower:
<QUOTE>
Of course. Of course it is. It's OUR fault for being angry at the cheaters, and, worse, the people who give the cheats the tools.
</QUOTE>
In a slightly petty but I-do-have-a-point tone of voice, let me say: This from the man who once posted a list of links to software cracks.

If I remember correctly, you justified that by saying that you were just supplying links, and nobody had to actually <i>use</i> them. But this is different, of course. This is something <i>you</i> disapprove of.
<QUOTE>
And a wrist-thick fuck-you, Andy, for posting this topic.

PLANETCRAP - the industry-read forum you become famous at for helping ruin gaming fun.
</QUOTE>
Oh look, another person suddenly hates me/PlanetCrap after something didn't work out how he wanted.

"Hi, I love PlanetCrap and I'd like you to post this topic please."
"Sorry, no."
"I hate PlanetCrap! Andy's a liar! Andy's evil!"

"Hi, I love PlanetCrap and I'd like to help you with hosting and advertising."
"Sorry, no."
"I hate PlanetCrap! Andy's a liar! Andy's evil!"

"Hi, I love PlanetCrap and I'd like to post topics."
"Sorry, no."
"I hate PlanetCrap! Andy's a liar! Andy's evil!"
#35 by "Blood"
2000-10-02 17:06:18
blood@gamescon.com
Jason Schroder wrote,
"...he seems to have some misguided reasons for publicly using and releasing it."

And what would be a "guided" reason?
#36 by "Shinji"
2000-10-02 17:11:59
shinji@gameloft.co.uk http://www.gameloft.co.uk
#34 - Andy - In all fairness, poking a hole in Flamethrowers hypocrisy doesn't actually detract from the fact that he's right. His argument does occupy the moral high ground here; we tend to think of gaming in a fashion which is much too insular, after all. Previous comment on this thread has tended to be from the point of view of the hardcore gamer who KNOWS about cheating etc., whereas #33 is more valid in that it takes into account the guy who just goes out, buys a game for fun, brings it home and discovers that it's a waste of money, thanks to the work of one small-minded git who sat down and wrote cheats for it.

As to the comments in #33 slagging off Durzel and PlanetCrap for posting about this... for christs sake, not talking about it doesn't make it go away, and doesn't make it stop existing. And yes, Durzel had to be a little more pleasant in his interview than perhaps he should have been, just in order to keep the guy talking. C'est la vie. You'll note that Barrysworld's front page link to the article is a lot less sympathetic :)

(Christ, I can't believe I'm defending Bazza's coverage of something here! :P )

<I><B></B></I><I></I><I></I>
#37 by "AshRain"
2000-10-02 17:14:31
ash_rain@hotmail
I think you are bashing the wrong person here.

Yes it's ethical not right to make a cheat like that. But just the creation of a aimbot is NOT what ruins a game. It's the people who actually are going to USE it. Those people are the true losers in this.

I still don't understand why anyone would cheat. To win? Someone who feels good cause he wins because of a cheat is a lower lifeform in my opinion. Much, much lower.
#38 by "Andy"
2000-10-02 17:23:42
andy@nospam.planetcrap.com http://www.meejahor.com/
<b>#36</b>, Shinji:

Agreed on all points. :-)

I do actually understand Flamey's viewpoint, and in different circumstances I would (and have done) feel the same way. But on this occasion, I think he's taking the "<i>this is how Flamey is programmed to react</i>" approach without putting a whole lot of rational thought into it.

--

There's a weird sort of irony here: Reading that interview earlier made me think a bit about Q2 and I remembered how much I used to love playing CTF, so I'm going to be re-installing it later today and giving it another go. So in a very roundabout way, the aimbot coder has got what he wanted, just not for the reason he intended.

I wonder why nobody from Id Software has chipped into this thread yet? They <i>are</i> still the same community-minded Id we know and love, <i><b>aren't they</b></i>?
#39 by "BloodKnight"
2000-10-02 17:25:59
bloodknight@somethingawful.com
<b>AshRain</b> (#37):
<QUOTE>I still don't understand why anyone would cheat. To win? Someone who feels good
cause he wins because of a cheat is a lower lifeform in my opinion. Much, much
lower.
</QUOTE>

Ask the developers since Nintendo on why they put their own cheat codes in the game
<I><B></B></I><I></I><I></I>
#40 by "BloodKnight"
2000-10-02 17:29:17
bloodknight@somethingawful.com
<b>Whisp</b> (#20):
<QUOTE>I still don't understand why everyone hates q3 so much. Sure, it wasn't what it
could have been, but it's still a really solid game. Why do so many people want
it to be something else? </QUOTE>

- Shit weapons, rocket does only a few inches of splash damage and the weapons are all useless when
it comes to killing someone

- The physics smell like shit.  Rocket jump and you can't move around at all.  Railgun anyone?  
NOT to compare but at least in UT you can move around quite freely in the air

- Levels are boring hallways and filled with jump pads.  Whoopie more chances to get railed

- 100 ping or lower to score a frag

Only reason why Q3A is still on my computer is CQA and other mods in my computer.  And no, not those shitty ass TF mod.
Target Quake anyone?
 <I><B></B></I><I></I><I></I>
#41 by "Mr_Vert"
2000-10-02 17:29:20
comsr99@hotmail.com
Bah!

We all know good and well that Counter-Strike is whooping both Q3A, UT, and Q2.

It's not the fact that Q3A has a weird l33t skillz feeling to it, but rather that the players want more realism towards the game. They want one shot in the head to mean instant death and they want to suffer because of it. They want realistic weapons and they want a game that doesn't involve unrealistic monkey jumping skills.

I'll take realism over tourney style anyday.

This argument is moot.
#42 by "PainKilleR-[CE]"
2000-10-02 17:32:34
painkiller@planetfortress.com http://www.planetfortress.com/tftech/
Before I read through the rest of the thread or read the article, does anyone else think a better story would've been something about the CS bot creator? I mean the guy that created that bot did it because someone on a message board goaded him into doing it by saying it couldn't be done. The Q3A bot is simply a matter of someone doing it because they didn't like the Q3A game/community. In other words, the Q3A bot would've come out regardless, but the CS bot may not have if people hadn't asked for it.

-PainKilleR-[CE]
#43 by "Shinji"
2000-10-02 17:37:14
shinji@gameloft.co.uk http://www.gameloft.co.uk
#39 - <b>BloodKnight</b> -
<quote>Ask the developers since Nintendo on why they put their own cheat codes in the game
</quote>

A single player game is different, in fairness. Cheats there exist so that poor players can still progress and see the whole game; or so that a journalist can finish it in time to meet a review deadline! Multiplayer cheats give you an advantage over other humans, which is unfair and unsporting; show me a company which has intentionally built multiplayer cheats into their game!<I><B></B></I><I></I><I></I>
#44 by "BloodKnight"
2000-10-02 17:40:40
bloodknight@somethingawful.com
Vampire the Masquerade

I could make my character have all the disciplines (spells in english) with a simple command<I><B></B></I><I></I><I></I>
#45 by "BloodKnight"
2000-10-02 17:41:14
bloodknight@somethingawful.com
<b>Mr_Vert</b> (#41):
<QUOTE>We all know good and well that Counter-Strike is whooping both Q3A, UT, and Q2. </QUOTE>

ACK nooo not again
CS nightmares from the LAN party last week

<I><B></B></I><I></I><I></I>
#46 by "Shinji"
2000-10-02 17:44:27
shinji@gameloft.co.uk http://www.gameloft.co.uk
Ok fair enough, you found one. I couldn't play Vampire for more than about 10 minutes without wanting to wrap myself in sackcloth and yak dung and go to live in a monastery in Tibet for a year, so I never got as far as investigating its online play.

Point still stands, single player cheats and multiplayer cheats are different; Vampire is the exception which proves the rule.<I><B></B></I><I></I><I></I>
#47 by "Woo-Fu"
2000-10-02 17:51:09
random1@speakeasy.org
You see many people saying "q2 rocks, forget q3" just like you saw "quakeworld/netquake rocks, forget q2", that will never change.  Personally, I agree, quake3 is marioworld meets fps AND they neutered the rocketlauncher and grenadelauncher.  Basically, from my point of view, they took the rail/rocket imbalance of q2 ( which heavily favors lpbs - yes, i am one ) and made it even worse by reducing the splash of the rl.  The level design in q3 also greatly favors the rail over the rl.  This could be fixed with some good level design though.  I just got bored with 'point and click' railwars, no variety whatsoever.  It was kind of fun to challenge the rail-weenies to try to frag me with *ANY* other weapon and watch them fail.

On cheating/hacking/game_security, for any engine/mod with a sizeable userbase, it'll be a fulltime job securing it.  I think we should see something like md5 encryption of models/skins/maps based on WonID and some private key at a master server, that would seem to make it much harder to make a vanilla crack that would work for everybody.  CRC is SO easy to compromise.  Counterstrike is hosed with the hl aimbot... they're desparately in need of a q3-style "pure" mode to prevent using that bot with custom skins.  I run a cs server and it is a fulltime job banning cheaters... fortunately, I've a group of 'locals' who're trustworthy for the most part, so I can ban nobodies en masse and not worry about it.

The problem with increased security is going to be increased overhead -- client, server, and bandwidth.  Let it be an option, the benchmarkers can turn it all of to generate benchmarks with no real world value, while those who value on honest game can run servers that utilize the protection and require it from clients.

Wallhacks, lambert, voodoo models, cheat_proxy, hl aimbot... I get sick just thinking about it.

-sigh-sigh-sigh-roll eyes
#48 by "PiRaMidA"
2000-10-02 17:52:49
piramida@agsm.net http://www.agsm.net/
<b>#38</b> by Andy:
<QUOTE><B>I wonder why nobody from Id Software has chipped into this thread yet? They <I>are</I> still the same community-minded Id we know and love, <I><B>aren't they</B></I>?
</QUOTE>

What would they say? What would you say if someone hacked into your site and posted bestiality pictures instead of articles?

They don't need to explain much about this subject; it's all pretty clear and their position on this interview is predictable.

That guy is a young moron; he does want to bring back the Q2 scene as he imagined it by trying to damage playing experience for that same people he played with before. I think that interview was better suited for SA's awfull link of the day, with all that "I hate it and I want it dead" statements.

I don't think that posting this topic on PC was a bad decision though; and even the interview itself - even if it gave him publicity he wished for it still (thank god) did not provide download links and your average cheating moron would still be not able to figure out where to get the bot.<I><B></B></I><I></I><I></I>
#49 by "kitrack"
2000-10-02 17:56:14
jbholdridgeii@vt.edu
On 10/02/2000 at 15:25, BloodKnight had <i>something</i> to say:
<quote>
Ask the developers since Nintendo on why they put their own cheat codes in the game
</quote>
IIRC (It's been a long time) the reason cheats are in games is usually (in the beginning) to help with the debugging.  After all, if a level is too hard for the person debugging it, the company can't afford to wait while the person ups his/her skills.  Again, IIRC, some aren't removed due to the complexity of the code.
I remember reading this a <i>long time ago</i>, but unfortunately, I don't remember where (I'd link if I could)<I><B></B></I><I></I><I></I>
#50 by "^mortis^"
2000-10-02 18:01:00
mortis@goddamnindependent.com http://www.goddamnindependent.com
so, when TF2 comes out and takes all the CS crowd with it, is someone going to write cheats/hacks to screw that up too?  Did the original TF for Q2 crowd do that when TFClassic came out??

geez louise...WAHHHH!


^M^
C O M M E N T S
Home » Topic: The aim of the game

|«« - Previous Page - Next Page - »»|
P O S T   A   C O M M E N T

You need to be logged in to post a comment here. If you don't have an account yet, you can create one here. Registration is free.
C R A P T A G S
Simple formatting: [b]bold[/b], [i]italic[/i], [u]underline[/u]
Web Links: [url=www.mans.de]Cool Site[/url], [url]www.mans.de[/url]
Email Links: [email=some@email.com]Email me[/email], [email]some@email.com[/email]
Simple formatting: Quoted text: [quote]Yadda yadda[/quote]
Front Page (ATOM) • Submission Bin (2) • ArchivesUsersLoginCreate Account
You are currently not logged in.
There are currently 0 people browsing this site. [Details]