No I think you are reading it wrong.
PB is working with developers to get thier products intergrated into the
software. Currently with HL and CS they have to basically do what modders
do, with little help from valve. It is counter productive for them to spend
all this time working on HL and CS if Valve is not even interested in
supporting them internally. It would be in our "gamers and admins" best
interest if valve would help PB intergrate into thier product. Then PB
would get full cooperation to directly address cheats, instead of having to
go through many parties, and sometimes not even get help at all.
I agree fully that they want to grow and provide even better support for us
and the way they are doing it is a big step forward. I havent spoken with
anyone on both sides myself so i cannot say what the actual plans are, all
we know is that if valve does not in a reasonable amount of time address and
prevent the cheats. As for me if Valve doesn't cooperate with PB I will
drop them as far as running a server for HL/CS cause they are not on the
ball in the cheat department.
Hopefully they will really take a close look how valuable the PB team really
is not only in what they do, but what amount of work they can take off of
valves own developers.
-D
----- Original Message -----
From: "Dan" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Wednesday, September 26, 2001 6:15 AM
Subject: Re: PB no more.....
>
> id place bets that pb will carry on.. either under different hands or my
> the same programming (or some of the current development team..) that are
> doing it now..
>
> it would be a cold day in hell if there was no anti cheat software though.
> we would have to resort back to spotting cheaters and banning em :-)
>
> wonder if valve has something in the making anyhow to eliminate cheats?
> perhaps they do because they seem to deny any offers from the pb team
about
> partnership etc.. (not that i know alot about this subject im only
> guessing)
>
> pb is going to have there work cut out for there next release,
>
> =-= CURRENT CS 1.3 CHEATS =-=
> 2*wallhacks
> 1*pb client hack
> 1*opengl aimhack(wallhack) combined
> 1*aimhack loader
> 1*spectator hack for cs 1.3
> 1*(not yet released aimhack) aparantly undetected by pb and supposed to
have
> the most "fesatures" yet
>
> and where do i get all this info? Myg0t associated forums.. god damn that
> clan.. heh.. they really do get annoying..
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Sharon Morgan" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Sent: Wednesday, September 26, 2001 11:06 AM
> Subject: Re: PB no more.....
>
>
> >
> > someone else is bound to take up where they left off anyways.
> > ----- Original Message -----
> > From: "Dan" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> > To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> > Sent: Wednesday, September 26, 2001 10:51 AM
> > Subject: Re: PB no more.....
> >
> >
> > >
> > > hehe. so PB team got sick of doing updates? can't be assed to carry
> on
> > > developing there definition files and everyone heres this and copies
my
> > > example of having a rant at valve.. "blah blah valve you really
suck..
> > blah
> > > blah"
> > >
> > > i have surely seen the error of my ways. ffs valve have had this
game
> > > going since 95.. theyve continued to provide updates and keep the
game
> > > going, i think its hardly valves fault if the punkbuster team decide
to
> > pack
> > > it in..
> > >
> > > (grumble, damn cd keys..)
> > >
> > > rar..
> > >
> > > you guys take things too seriously, sit back relax.. be a troll, this
> > whole
> > > thing will sort it self out, im sure there will be a new punkbuster
> update
> > > out b4 u know it :-D
> > >
> > > "must be positive.."
> > > ----- Original Message -----
> > > From: "Buddha-Pest" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> > > To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> > > Sent: Wednesday, September 26, 2001 10:09 AM
> > > Subject: Re: PB no more.....
> > >
> > >
> > > >
> > > > jesus christ to YOU eric. have you have so little to contribute
> lately
> > > that
> > > > you feel you have to rip apart every post on this list in order to
> stay
> > > > active?
> > > >
> > > > you know what i spent tonight doing while you carefully crafted your
> > > nightly
> > > > quota of a half dozen caustic emails? i sat around with a bunch of
> > > > developers talking about strategies for client side verification.
one
> > of
> > > > these guys works at DirectTV and they have developed some extremely
> > clever
> > > > technologies to fight satellite feed piracy that are very applicable
> to
> > > what
> > > > an anti-cheat program has to do. like constantly uploading code
> > segments
> > > > that by themselves don't do much but at some point in the future
need
> to
> > > get
> > > > executed for a handshake to work. like putting in controlled buffer
> > > > overflows that actually execute code that verifies the legitimacy of
> the
> > > > client. not foolproof but as another poster said earlier, there is
no
> > way
> > > > to prevent getting around the system, but the point is to make it as
> > hard
> > > as
> > > > possible. i'm willing to put in time to come up with an
alternative.
> > > your
> > > > contribute to beatdown ratio on this list is pathetic on the other
> hand.
> > > >
> > > > and yes, to ME it was a rant. you call dropping support for HL so
> > > suddenly
> > > > that even other PB team members didn't know about it until after the
> > fact
> > > a
> > > > measured decision?
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > ----- Original Message -----
> > > > From: "Eric Hall" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> > > > To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> > > > Sent: Monday, September 24, 2001 11:28 PM
> > > > Subject: RE: PB no more.....
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > > we've heard PB's side? oh, you mean the sudden rant on their
news
> > > page?
> > > > > > i'm sorry, but i am still waiting for the explanation from the
PB
> > > > side...
> > > > >
> > > > > Jesus Christ, you call that a rant?! You might want to go back
and
> > read
> > > > it
> > > > > again... There was no ranting involved.
> > > > >
> > > > > > Either:
> > > > > > 1. Tony went to Valve to ask them to finance PB (either by
> outright
> > > > buying
> > > > > > them, or by funding them). Valve said no or didn't respond or
did
> > not
> > > > > > respond IN TIME. Tony threw a fit.
> > > > > > 2. Tony keeps asking for support from Valve (btw, this isn't
> > > "answering
> > > > > > questions" probably more like having a gander at the source or
> > asking
> > > > for
> > > > > > new APIs in the SDK). Valve said no or didn't respond or didn't
> > > respond
> > > > IN
> > > > > > TIME. Tony threw a fit.
> > > > > > 3. Both
> > > > >
> > > > > I'm not sure where you're getting this "threw a fit" nonsense. In
> > every
> > > > > communication from Tony, direct or public, I've found him to be
> > nothing
> > > > but
> > > > > reasonable, if a little head-strong. It's this childish, rather
> > > pointedly
> > > > > poisonous rhetoric like you've got there that really chaps my
hide,
> > > > regardless
> > > > > of how I feel about the situation. Throwing in this "Tony threw a
> > fit"
> > > > stuff
> > > > > and the "rant" news post at http://www.punkbuster.com/news.html is
> > > > completely
> > > > > off-base, unnecessary, and I'd venture to say out-right false. If
> > > you're
> > > > going
> > > > > to discuss an issue rationally, at least be fair about it...
> > > > >
> > > > > Eric (the Deacon remix)
> > > > > http://www.firekite.com
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > >
> > >
> >
> >
>
>
