It just lets all “would-be” hackers know that there are hacks out there. And work great enough that you have to put out a statement.
A real zero tolerance policy would have it in the ToS (Which you are supposed to read and no one does.) and not warn them about hackers on the front page.
Thoughts?
if you play an online FPS and don’t know hacks exist, you need buy some land from me, it’s waterfront, sort of
I’m not saying that they weren’t aware of it. I am saying that the people who were too lazy (Hard to imagine a lazy skid, I know.) to find them initially now know they are prevalent and easy to get.
Games in beta often don’t have hacks publicly available right off the bat. This is a blanket statement that “Yes! There are hacks!”
it’s a UE3 game, hacks have existed for years, most of the ones used now are old, pretty sure even xignpoop will be able to catch them by release, false positives worry me more, people are getting banned for programs that have a legit use, unfortunately same programs can be used to cheat in ways (won’t go into that here) so they get banned. I figure about 75+% of the people complaining about using “legit” programs are using those programs to “enhance” their game
I did notice that there was a rather noticeable increase in hackers after the statement was released. Like you said, most of the easy hacks exist and are already detected. Publicly stating your policy verifies to people that there are indeed undetected hacks. Otherwise there would be no reason to post it.
I understand that programs like cheat engine get insta-banned even just for running.
There are legit uses for programmers I hire. Non hacking purposes. Mostly memory reading. I am not saying false positives aren’t an issue.
I personally do not agree with a 0 tolerance policy. They have never worked anywhere ever. Hackers expect to be banned. Legit people do get banned in the process.
Especially because if a program like dxtory is detected (which is the case on another Nexon owned game, Combat Arms) people get banned unfairly. I can’t record combat arms vids anymore because of them banning dxtory. They even banned fraps for a solid month.
However since they have employed the policy I find it faulty to announce it. That’s not 0 tolerance if you announce it. Announcing it in and of itself is a warning. It has only made the problem worse in the hacker population by letting would-be hackers know that there is a big enough source of hacks that it is now a problem for the game. Not all hackers OPK in base. Slight aimbotting or smart chamming is also a problem.
It’s the same thing that Nexon did with hackshield “updates” on Combat Arms. You don’t announce when your anticheat updates. That’s stupid. People will stop using hacks and wait for it to be undetected again. Which is guaranteed to happen. Like you said, it is a UE3 game.
tl;dr I agree with you but I am talking about another problem altogether.
I see their announcement as a highly positive thing.
The issue of letting people know hacks exist is irrelevant as you will encounter hackers in the game… so everyone knows there are hacks for this game.
Making the announcement I think is more for the player base and letting them know that SD takes the hacking issue seriously. I think it will keep more players around when they know SD is taking the issue seriously.
Regarding the complaints/worries that innocent people might get banned … I think that’s a lot of hysteria for nothing. If you’re going 80/3 AND video suggests you are cheating… we’ll, you probably are 
There might be .00001% of the player base who are so good that they basically look like a hacker but aren’t. Odds are those players are advanced enough in fps to also being to address the issue with SD and not get banned.
I think the people worrying are people who have modified their game to kingdom come but who aren’t using any official hacks (ie. aimbots, wallhacks, etc.). This may sound unsympathetic, but if you have to modify a game that much just to play it, maybe you shouldn’t be playing it (either your PC is too bad for it, or you find the standard game play settings lacking). Which doesn’t mean you should be banned, I’m just saying it’s not completely unreasonable for a game developer to expect people to be using the basic game setup (or modifications the are available within the game settings). If you go outside the game parameters to make changes, that’s on you if it leads to a false positive (at least in my opinion it is).
That’s kind of a stupid thing to say
You could apply that to lot of different scenarios and still get the same response of “well no shit sherlock”.
They’re just reassuring people that they are working to fix the issue, because some people seem to think everyone who’s got a 3:1 or 2:1 KD is a hacker.
[quote=“joekerr;19478”]
I think the people worrying are people who have modified their game to kingdom come but who aren’t using any official hacks (ie. aimbots, wallhacks, etc.). This may sound unsympathetic, but if you have to modify a game that much just to play it, maybe you shouldn’t be playing it (either your PC is too bad for it, or you find the standard game play settings lacking). Which doesn’t mean you should be banned, I’m just saying it’s not completely unreasonable for a game developer to expect people to be using the basic game setup (or modifications the are available within the game settings). If you go outside the game parameters to make changes, that’s on you if it leads to a false positive (at least in my opinion it is). [/quote]
Absolutely wrong
First of all a hack is something that gives the player perfect aim, the ability to see through walls, macros that are based on things like “fire when my crosshair is on their head”, etc. Basically it’s made to make up for shortcomings of the player, not the game.
Trying to get the game to run reasonably well through and FPS config, that’s just a mod, that’s not a hack. It’s to make up for optimization issues on the dev side, not saying SD is in the wrong but not everyone can upgrade their shit. It’s not the same thing, hacks are used for people who want to win by any means unneccessary, even if it’s unlegitamely. Configs like the ones we’ve seen here, are used by people, who just wanna play the damn game but can’t.
Saying they should just upgrade their PC is pretty ignorant, you don’t know their situation, maybe they’re on backup computer or a laptop, maybe they can’t afford to build a new PC since they don’t make enough money to pay for it. Believe it or not minimum wage is pretty common, especially in the united states.
@joekerr As you seem to know, can you tell me the specs of a machine, I could run this game on at some smooth 150 fps minimum, without having to use this ugly oneframethreadlag? Thx in advance.
[quote=“majesticClue;19480”]
Saying they should just upgrade their PC is pretty ignorant, you don’t know their situation, maybe they’re on backup computer or a laptop, maybe they can’t afford to build a new PC since they don’t make enough money to pay for it. Believe it or not minimum wage is pretty common, especially in the united states.[/quote]
You’re getting all bent out of shape over nothing.
You’re assuming all that and you are wrong in those assumptions.
I’m just saying that if you have to go so far in your modifications that it triggers the anti cheat detection, then can you blame the developer? If you’ve got 3rd party programs running over the game, are you really surprised that you get a false positive?
There’s a reason games have a minimum PC requirement. If you don’t meet those requirements and have to start modding the game to get it to work, the simple reality is that you shouldn’t be too upset (or surprised) if you somehow get trapped (erroneously) in an anti cheat system.
Like I say, you think I’m being mean, I’m just stating a fact.
To me it’s sort of unreasonable to get mad at a game developer because your PC doesn’t run their game and you have to do things to the game that they did not intend people to do.
There has not been a single instance where people have had to modify their game to that extent, and if Xign really does trigger a ban because you altered two ini files that are meant to be modified by the user, then that is an issue with the system itself.
Modifying ini files like the game Engine or hud UI has been around FOREVER. And the reason people do it is simple, they may not have the money nor the time to upgrade their PC, they have other stuff to worry about.
In this case, yea, we can blame the developer, because ffs even VAC doesn’t do that. And VAC isn’t exactly great at catching hackers either, the reality is that true hackers will find a way around it. Then after a few weeks, they find out their stuff doesn’t work and now they are banned.
Not allowing someone to just get the game to run normally is basically forcing them to spend money, there’s no way you can make that seem like anything else other than greed or unfairness.
[quote=“majesticClue;19501”][quote=“joekerr;19497”]
I’m just saying that if you have to go so far in your modifications that it triggers the anti cheat detection, then can you blame the developer? If you’ve got 3rd party programs running over the game, are you really surprised that you get a false positive?
There’s a reason games have a minimum PC requirement. If you don’t meet those requirements and have to start modding the game to get it to work, the simple reality is that you shouldn’t be too upset (or surprised) if you somehow get trapped (erroneously) in an anti cheat system.
[/quote]
There has not been a single instance where people have had to modify their game to that extent, and if Xign really does trigger a ban because you altered two ini files that are meant to be modified by the user, then that is an issue with the system itself.
Modifying ini files like the game Engine or hud UI has been around FOREVER. And the reason people do it is simple, they may not have the money nor the time to upgrade their PC, they have other stuff to worry about.
In this case, yea, we can blame the developer, because ffs even VAC doesn’t do that. And VAC isn’t exactly great at catching hackers either, the reality is that true hackers will find a way around it. Then after a few weeks, they find out their stuff doesn’t work and now they are banned.
Not allowing someone to just get the game to run normally is basically forcing them to spend money, there’s no way you can make that seem like anything else other than greed or unfairness.
[/quote]
You say that like Splash Damage will make a buck off of increasing the minimum specs for the game. They don’t. Any money that players need to spend on upgrading their PC takes AWAY from potential revenue they could make with the game.
And it isn’t unfair either. Any Dev would love to let EVERY player play their game, but they also have standard. Some players refuse to play games with lower graphics then they are used to. This means to capture the best market they need both good graphics and the option to allow settings to be decreased. Sometimes this isn’t possible or is potentially gamebreaking, so they need to limit it.
If you turn down your settings low enough it is possible to break the game and gain an unfair advantage. That is why they put/are putting config minimums in place.
Simply put, it would be unfair to NOT have minimum config requirements.
There no problem, i trust the Dirty Bomb’s guys to ban cheaters.
99% of cheaters lie and say they don’t hack, i’ve see it on some obvious hackers in Battlefield Heroes.
[quote=“subtleDoll;19505”]There no problem, i trust the Dirty Bomb’s guys to ban cheaters.
99% of cheaters lie and say they don’t hack, i’ve see it on some obvious hackers in Battlefield Heroes.[/quote]
Now this is the truth of the matter.
“Oh I have a 20.0 kdr but I’m using a really bad system and I have to alter all my configs and files to get the game to run, I’m not cheating its just a false positive”.
I mean, give me a break. It’s one or the other. Either your PC sucks, in which case how are you going 80/3… or your PC doesn’t suck, in which case why are you modding everything and triggering the cheat detection.
Sure, false positive can and do occur, but people act like it’s every other gamer getting caught in a false positive, when in reality it’s maybe 1 in a 1,000. Just that the other 999 hackers all claim they were caught in a false positive when they werent.
To be blunt, I said greedy or unfairness, unfairness meaning that they put these as the system minimum requirements
MINIMUM:
OS: Windows XP, Vista or 7
Processor: 2.33 GHz Dual Core
Memory: 3 GB RAM
Graphics: 512MB - GeForce 7800GTX or better
DirectX: Version 9.0
And this, is my current PC
OS: Windows 7 Ultimate N 64 bit
Processor: 2.5 ghz, Q9300 Core 2 Duo
Memory: 6 gb of ram, DDR2 667
Graphics: GTX 750 Ti
Direct X: Version 10
It’s an old computer yes, but here’s the reality, when you set the spec requirements you set an expectation that if you meet those minimums you should be able to play the game without any trouble.
I can’t get a consistent 60 frames per second, I get stuttering and the game will drop in performance the more explosions or gun fire there is on screen. I can’t even win certain fights sometimes because the stutter is so bad my mouse will be delayed. That’s not a hardware issue on my side, if I meet the requirements THEY posted. That is a DEVELOPER issue since they posted those specs without understanding how the hardware should work.
And I wouldn’t be shocked if it wasn’t just me who has these sort of issues either, that is why fps configs are out to begin with, and why people should not be given a hard time because their computer can’t run the game. This is the only solution they have since the devs misjudged how the game would run on people’s systems.
I don’t understand this logic. So what you’re saying is they don’t have the right to put a game out in the form they so choose? That if they don’t release their game how YOU want it, such that it performs as YOU want it on YOUR PC that they are in the wrong?
From my perspective they are free to put out the game in whatever form they desire.
Now, if they were to put out the game such that it ran on low end PC’s, collected money from said players, then RAISED the requirements… that would be as you are describing, forcing players to go out and get new PCs after taking their money.
But I honestly don’t know in what reasonable sense they somehow are obligated to release the game in any form other than whatever they so desire.
[quote=“joekerr;19510”]
Now this is the truth of the matter.
“Oh I have a 20.0 kdr but I’m using a really bad system and I have to alter all my configs and files to get the game to run, I’m not cheating its just a false positive”.
I mean, give me a break. It’s one or the other. Either your PC sucks, in which case how are you going 80/3… or your PC doesn’t suck, in which case why are you modding everything and triggering the cheat detection.
Sure, false positive can and do occur, but people act like it’s every other gamer getting caught in a false positive, when in reality it’s maybe 1 in a 1,000. Just that the other 999 hackers all claim they were caught in a false positive when they werent. [/quote]
[quote=“joekerr;19513”]
I don’t understand this logic. So what you’re saying is they don’t have the right to put a game out in the form they so choose? That if they don’t release their game how YOU want it, such that it performs as YOU want it on YOUR PC that they are in the wrong?
From my perspective they are free to put out the game in whatever form they desire.
Now, if they were to put out the game such that it ran on low end PC’s, collected money from said players, then RAISED the requirements… that would be as you are describing, forcing players to go out and get new PCs after taking their money.
But I honestly don’t know in what reasonable sense they somehow are obligated to release the game in any form other than whatever they so desire. [/quote]
And I can tell from these 2 posts you literally have no clue what you are talking about
It’s literally all graphics settings, and changing how much of your computer the game is allowed to control.
It is entirely possible for someone to flat out lie to you about their hacks, and give you some bullshit excuse that they are just playing with an fps config. It’s called scape goat, nobody is going to flat out say they hack. They’ll lie, and try to get you to think it’s something else.
As I said in a previous post, if the devs set the requriements, and a computer that meets them still can’t run it, without any modifications outside the basic low settings that the dev allows you to mess with. Then YES, people have the right to be upset, absolutely. The game is at that point not optimized, and if it is, then you literally messed up the requirements. And that is ridiculous, this game is running on Unreal 3/UDK, which has been around for well over 5 years, any PC within that time span should at least manage low settings with no trouble.
It’s not unreasonable. It’s a beta. That’s what you do in beta. Give devs feedback.
[quote=“joekerr;19513”]
But I honestly don’t know in what reasonable sense they somehow are obligated to release the game in any form other than whatever they so desire. [/quote]
Nexon and splash damage are not obligated to do anything, you are right. However if they want to reach as wide an audience as possible they are going to have to make it so that it runs on as many systems as possible. My i7 with 16 gigs of ram and a gtx 750 can hardly play the game at 80 frames. That’s a big frickin problem.
There is the low lag config file on the forums. If splash damage was really so against you using different config files wouldn’t you think they would of deleted the thread? Or made a public announcement that config files are considered third party tools? Odd. I wonder if I made a thread with a link to hacks, would it be deleted?
http://forums.dirtybomb.nexon.net/discussion/1026/tweaking-dirty-bomb-config