Very well said and in my not-so-humble opinion, you are very much correct.
It's so easy to say that the "company" or the "programmers" should be able to "do something about this". The reality of the situation is that any time you have a complex bit of code, there is always going to be a way to get around it. The more complex it is, the easier it is to circumvent. If you try to make it simple, the users will complain that it's too easy even though they then overlook that it is much harder to cheat. If you become too intrusive, the cheaters can be taken care of but the users again complain; saying things like "invasion of privacy! I bought this software and I should be able to do as I wish!". It's a no-win situation when seen that way. If you please 51% of the users then you are doing just fine! I recently complained a bit loudly and I was very much humbled with a very simple solution by a very patient man. Even though it was not because of "3rd party plug-ins". I will not make that mistake again soon. Now for the flame bait! If an admin can't be bothered to watch for the cheating fscks in the first place, then they probably should not be running a server! Link Frazer wrote:
First, as the OP on this thread, I would like to explain my intent in drawing attention to this: simply to raise awareness and to have some idea what to encourage our game admins to watch for during play. I am sure that those who want such hacks as these have no difficulty finding them. Oh and also...as was suggested in an earlier response - I don't think (last time I checked) that I am some kind of list troll. :o) Second, I wonder to what extent Valve - or for that matter any online game developer - can truly provide a defense against this crap. The problem is that game state is continuously transmitted to the client and all rendering is under the control of the client. While VAC can, to some extent, ensure that the client executable is not tampered with, unfortunately, short of some very intrusive and, frankly, unwelcome measures, its unlikely that a complete defense is possible. Perhaps something of a Bayesian or statistical application which is not examining executables - but is watching and measuring the behaviour of players to determine what is suspect and what is not. (e.g. 20 headshots within 5 minutes and never killed) Then, perhaps, some kind of selectable level of tolerance, to be applied by server admins - much as spam tolerance levels are set today. In any event, I just wanted to shine a light on it - because, in the absence of a technical solution, knowledge and vigilance, on the part of the admin community is the first and most effective line of defense. I certainly had no intention of promoting this stuff, nor do I agree that discussing it is useless. The more people understand how they work - the more likely it will be detected and dealt with. Frazer _______________________________________________ To unsubscribe, edit your list preferences, or view the list archives, please visit: http://list.valvesoftware.com/mailman/listinfo/hlds
_______________________________________________ To unsubscribe, edit your list preferences, or view the list archives, please visit: http://list.valvesoftware.com/mailman/listinfo/hlds
