Changes to Anti-Hack Policies – Zero Tolerance

(JBRAA) #41

.

(Nail) #42

reminds me of a similar dismissive phrase “I’m sorry you feel that way”

(Lumi) #43

I kinda understand the devs defensive position on this though, as there are always those actual cheaters trying to use the “I’m using a third party program that only does this and that and shouldn’t be flagged”. To try and force the devs hands into something more permissive.

It’s always a double edge sword. Either use something that will let all non cheating programs through but will fail to diagnose most of cheap hacks or have something that works reasonably well but pisses off a few people that think they need some extra overlay while playing.

I say, kuddos to actually try and stop cheaters!

(JBRAA) #44

.

(MissMurder) #45

Actively looking into solutions and improvements. We have people dedicated to this.

(Lumi) #46

Of course the support for a game in beta will not be as important as for a game that just has been released. Dirty bomb barely hit 1000 players during its highest peak time, so the community is still small. You can’t expect them to have a support team bigger than 2 or 3 people right now.

Even big publishers fail at support, that has nothing to do with the rest. For instance I’m still waiting for a solution on a problem I have with a Ubisoft game and I contacted support in January!

(Tomme) #47

I will probably get hate for this but why does everyone praise VAC so much? It does not have a great track record in non-Valve games and even then only recently in Valve games.

Please take into account how much control the developers have over the anti-cheat software; VAC might have a very long procedure of developer submitted solutions over other anti-cheats for all we know.

I am no way saying Xigncode is superior bit there is many factors at play which need to be taken into account.

(Lumi) #48

[quote=“Tomme;19957”][quote=“Lots of people”]
We need VAC!
[/quote]

I will probably get hate for this but why does everyone praise VAC so much? It does not have a great track record in non-Valve games and even then only recently in Valve games.

Please take into account how much control the developers have over the anti-cheat software; VAC might have a very long procedure of developer submitted solutions over other anti-cheats for all we know.

I am no way saying Xigncode is superior bit there is many factors at play which need to be taken into account.
[/quote]

I agree with you. Especially when the way VAC works is that they let the system detect cheats and then bans cheaters in waves after a while of letting the know cheat and cheaters run loose. I’d rather have a system like xign that immediately blocks known hacks than VAC that lets cheaters enjoy their cheat…

(Mustang) #49

I’m pretty sure you’re not naive enough to not have considered the negative connotations of this all or nothing balls to the wall blazing approach combined with a jovial attitude towards such a serious issue, to me it just smack of contempt towards your playerbase.

Everytime I’ve raised the issue the response has always been along the lines of “that’s not supported”, “preventing cheaters is more important than supporting legitimate players”, “sorry for your loss”, etc. This is a terrible approach, the Internet may never forget, but don’t give them(/us) every reason not to.

Remember when every website had a captcha to prevent spambots? Terrible UX, guess what, the web community evolved to tackle the problem in silent, invisible and unobtrusive ways to their customers. To me this is a perfect comparison to anti-cheat, yet somehow you’re stuck in the technology of 10 years ago. Players are used to integrated technologies and stuff just working with other stuff, and rather than just allowing them to get on with it you make them hit a brickwall and label them a cheater.

  • By you/you’re I’m referring to the publishers/developers as a whole, no personal hate for you MissMurder.
(Lumi) #50

[quote=“Mustang;20112”]

Remember when every website had a captcha to prevent spambots? Terrible UX, guess what, the web community evolved to tackle the problem in silent, invisible and unobtrusive ways to their customers. To me this is a perfect comparison to anti-cheat, yet somehow you’re stuck in the technology of 10 years ago. Players are used to integrated technologies and stuff just working with other stuff, and rather than just allowing them to get on with it you make them hit a brickwall and label them a cheater.

  • By you/you’re I’m referring to the publishers/developers as a whole, no personal hate for you MissMurder.[/quote]

You’re oversimplifying how an anti-cheat works. It’s much more complex than a captcha system. Also, if you want an anti-cheat program that works preventively you’re bound to get false positives. Only a program working to block known cheats can effectively allow the passage of all non cheats programs, but such a program is always behind and you get a game full of cheaters.

Again I believe that if you can’t play the game as is, then you shouldn’t be playing it. Tough life. Also, what you may not consider a cheat, could very well be an unfair advantage. Keeping the game in a vanilla state for everyone ensures overall balance and fairness for all.

(Nail) #51

@Lumi you’re missing the point, xignpoop is kicking people for things totally unrelated to cheats and missing hundreds of well known hacks that get advertised in the servers

(Lumi) #52

@Nail No I’m not. I don’t think that people should get upset if they get flagged for using a chat overlay, or anything else non cheat related. A game and anti cheat system developped for windows needs to be very broad spectrum and total compatibility is impossible and somtimes not desirable. As allowing certain harmless programs to be used, opens entry ways for easy to program cheats to not be flagged.

And in the end, if you are using something that gets flagged then stop using it, that’s it. You shouldn’t get upset by it. Sounds like someone who buys a sofa and then realizes it doesn’t fit in his living room and then requests from the manufacturer to built it so that it fits in his/her living room! Doesn’t make sense! Either expand your living room or buy another product. Same applies to this, either change your environment to be able to play, or play something else.

There are over 1000 players playing this during peak hours and not even a handfull of players complaining about false positives. IT just like in engineering can’t afford to spend ressources to achieve 100% efficiency (unless it’s a life and death situation). So anything close to it is how it’s going to be. Again tough life for the few concerned, but it shouldn’t be too hard to adapt.

Now regarding the known cheats that go rampant, from what I’ve managed to snoop around, seems like some at least use a hacked xign build making them undetected because the very program used to detect them is not being used as it has been highjacked by another one and tricks the game servers into believing the player is still using xign.

Same type of hacks exist for VAC based games. Nowadays CoD MW2 is full of that one hack that bypasses VAC and its bans, by creating its own forced host closed loop server that still manages to integrate legit players.

If the servers have no way to verify the integrity of xign, then by using a modified version of it, those cheaters are getting away with it, but this is not a xign problem anymore, this is a level above.

(genuineScion) #53

If anyone can’t play a game without running another program in conjunction with it, and that program gets blocked, they should stop playing said game and allow the developers to lose them as a consumer - that doesn’t mean they’re really owed anything. If anyone is actually against perma-banning cheaters, they probably cheat.

In the case of dirty bomb, I don’t believe the game is lacking any functionality that third-party software needs to fix, so disallowing any program from interacting with it (bar antivirus software) is entirely reasonable and won’t ruin the general gameplay experience anywhere near as much as a lax approach to cheaters would.

Mustang seems to be running some sort of aimless smear campaign, I don’t get it.

(Mustang) #54

Not sure who or what I am smearing, but the aim of my “campaign” is to have an anti-cheat solution that detects and thus subsequently punishes cheaters without impacting on non-cheaters.

When it was first added everyone (SD, Nexon, players) acknowledged that the current anti-cheat solution was less than ideal and that it was just a quick stop-gap whilst they looked into implementing something better.

Over a year later we’re still stuck with the same anti-cheat and it’s still punishing regular players.

(Nail) #55

xignpoop is garbage, everyone on the planet agrees, except a couple nice Korean folks who need it to feed their families

(MissMurder) #56

We’re still looking into other alternatives for Xigncode. Hope to have an update sooner rather than later.

(Lumi) #57

[quote=“Mustang;20639”]Not sure who or what I am smearing, but the aim of my “campaign” is to have an anti-cheat solution that detects and thus subsequently punishes cheaters without impacting on non-cheaters.

[/quote]

So you want a miracle program. Anyone in mind? Any game out there with such a solution already?

Start being realistic about what you want and realize that if your problem would be a common one this forum would be crowed with people complaining about the same thing. Alas, the handful of people encountering an issue are not making that many waves…

(Mustang) #58

I’ve mentioned what I’d do in a few other threads, but I can repeat it here for sure.

Essentially my thoughts are that it’s either very hard/expensive to have a decent but still non-intrusive clientside anti-cheat, so why waste the resources on that when most likely it will just be hacked/emulated and therefore be nullified anyway. I’d like to see efforts focused on a non-clientside detection suite, something along the lines of Battlefield’s FairFight and/or CS:GO’s Overwatch.

Sure you can throw in an existing non-intrusive clientside one for good measure, I’ve seen a few people suggesting VAC, and I certainly haven’t ever had any problems with it, unlike XIGNCODE (and PunkBuster), so wouldn’t object to this.

(subtleDoll) #59

So many hackers in this game ! You should put xigncode in the trash and use a true hack detection ! WTF I’ve just see an aura LV1 with hack. True hack detection, think about it !

(Chirs) #60

Just wondering how config tweaks are viewed by SD, where there are some that get flagged as cheating? Are there any settings to avoid? Thanks.