Punkbuster? ohh no - Page 17

Otleaz · 2012-06-24, 10:45 AM

Originally Posted by Trafalgar

You assume that everyone that is actually good is a hacker*? I find your lack of faith disturbing.

* = term is incorrect

Like I said, it is better than admiring a cheater for his "skills".

Kran De Loy · 2012-06-24, 10:55 AM

Originally Posted by Otleaz

Like I said, it is better than admiring a cheater for his "skills".

Er.. no actually it isn't.

You're basically taking it as a Glass Half Empty point of view, while at the same time denouncing the Glass Half Full point of view. However either way it's half a glass of fucking water and it being + or - doesn't fucking change that the player in question is just good enough to make you think he's hacking but not so good for you to be sure.

It's only when lots of people are ridiculously good at it is when it ruins the game.

Otleaz · 2012-06-24, 11:07 AM

Originally Posted by Kran De Loy

Er.. no actually it isn't.

You're basically taking it as a Glass Half Empty point of view, while at the same time denouncing the Glass Half Full point of view. However either way it's half a glass of fucking water and it being + or - doesn't fucking change that the player in question is just good enough to make you think he's hacking but not so good for you to be sure.

Not really. That analogy only involves one party, which is the one looking at the glass. In this case, there are two parties, which is the person looking at the player, and the player himself.

If the hacker gets told he is good, he gets a sort of sick satisfaction out of it. If a hacker is told that stats don't matter since anyone could be a hacker, he does not get the same amount of satisfaction.

Trafalgar · 2012-06-24, 11:20 AM

I would more expect actual 'hackers' to 'lol' at you when you call them 'hackers', and then 'lol' even more when you call 50% of the other players 'hackers' too, and for anyone who isn't a 'hacker' to get angry at you for accusing them of cheating for simply being good at the game. (You said: "In an FPS if you see an above average player, chances are he is one of those discreet hackers" and "Even if he isn't, it is better to call a good player a hacker than to call a hacker a good player")

(Imagining myself in their shoes, that is how I expect I would react)

If you hear a lot of people accusing you of cheating/hacking and you aren't, you're disinclined to keep playing the game.

Otleaz · 2012-06-24, 11:31 AM

I would never directly call someone a hacker... That is just stupid since you have no proof.

It is much better to tell them stats are worthless in this game because anyone could be a hacker. Indirectly call them a hacker, in other words.

Trafalgar · 2012-06-24, 11:39 AM

So you intend to go around telling people that there is no reason to try to improve their skills, battle tactics, and having scouts to spot enemies, because anyone could be a hacker - and what, you assume that tactics and skill cannot top aimbotting, wallhacking, and esp? (despite spotting giving an esp-like effect to other players)

I'd like to see an aimbotter try to survive a max crash. I don't think it would go well for him. Or having his hideout filled with half a dozen tossed grenades.

Kran De Loy · 2012-06-24, 12:00 PM

In my analogy I tried to imply that the player in question was the half glass of water.

To try and make my point again, if it's a good player or a person using cheats the actual effect they have on the game overall is meaningless as long as 1) they are indistinguishable from eachother and 2) there are not dozens and dozens of them all over the place.

So in such situations, they are what they are and they are and how you view them is subjective to the viewer.

Anyway, the problem is still that such cheaters detract from the experience of the people around them in such ways that piss people off. A good player or someone indistinguishable from a good player is not going to drive other players out of a game. People that use blatant cheats are what does that.

And when it comes to those types, it's just gonna have to believe in SOE.

Having said all of that. I will trust that SOE will have ways to stop as much of it as they possibley can and I will trust that it will be enough. And as only one person out of (hopefully) millions that will enjoy Planetside 2 I know that I have almost no impact on the decisions that SOE makes in regards to it's business model. However, Punkbuster is terrible and should not be allowed to be relied on by anyone.

Otleaz · 2012-06-24, 12:05 PM

Originally Posted by Trafalgar

So you intend to go around telling people that there is no reason to try to improve their skills, battle tactics, and having scouts to spot enemies, because anyone could be a hacker - and what, you assume that tactics and skill cannot top aimbotting, wallhacking, and esp? (despite spotting giving an esp-like effect to other players)

I'd like to see an aimbotter try to survive a max crash. I don't think it would go well for him. Or having his hideout filled with half a dozen tossed grenades.

I was mostly talking about individual skill, which is usually what stats display. You could always throw a dozen maxes at someone and they wouldn't have enough bullets to kill them all.

noxious · 2012-06-24, 01:09 PM

Originally Posted by Trafalgar

I would more expect actual 'hackers' to 'lol' at you when you call them 'hackers', and then 'lol' even more when you call 50% of the other players 'hackers' too, and for anyone who isn't a 'hacker' to get angry at you for accusing them of cheating for simply being good at the game. (You said: "In an FPS if you see an above average player, chances are he is one of those discreet hackers" and "Even if he isn't, it is better to call a good player a hacker than to call a hacker a good player")

(Imagining myself in their shoes, that is how I expect I would react)

If you hear a lot of people accusing you of cheating/hacking and you aren't, you're disinclined to keep playing the game.

You're making odd assumptions about other people and their motivations. Calling someone [that isn't cheating] a cheater is, counter-intuitively, a form of validation; the accused is so skilled that the accuser cannot believe it.

Pardon the anecdotal evidence, but I have, especially when I was younger, been falsely accused of cheating frequently, and it has only ever served to add fuel to the fire. It never made me want to stop playing. On the contrary, it would make me start trying even harder (especially when fighting the accuser). Among all legitimately skilled players that I've known (confirmation bias, eh?), a cheat accusation has always been a badge of honor.

Originally Posted by Kran De Loy

In my analogy I tried to imply that the player in question was the half glass of water.

To try and make my point again, if it's a good player or a person using cheats the actual effect they have on the game overall is meaningless as long as 1) they are indistinguishable from eachother and 2) there are not dozens and dozens of them all over the place.

So in such situations, they are what they are and they are and how you view them is subjective to the viewer.

Anyway, the problem is still that such cheaters detract from the experience of the people around them in such ways that piss people off. A good player or someone indistinguishable from a good player is not going to drive other players out of a game. People that use blatant cheats are what does that.

Cheaters that pretend to be legitimate still drive away players. Most people like to do well when they play a game. When we're on a roll and the bad guys can't seem to do anything to stop us, we don't want to quit because we're having so much fun. Winning is fun.

On the contrary, when we're not doing well, we tend to not have as much fun. When we're having really bad luck, we often have little or no fun. It can even become frustrating or angering (see: the rage quit). Losing is not fun.

Cheaters that masquerade as legitimate players artificially raise the skill ceiling and discourage legitimate and less skilled players from playing as much (or at all) because the legitimate/less skilled end up losing more often that they would otherwise.

Trafalgar · 2012-06-24, 01:11 PM

Originally Posted by noxious

Losing is not fun.

Losing Is Fun.

noxious · 2012-06-24, 01:40 PM

Originally Posted by Trafalgar

Losing Is Fun.

This statement defies both common sense and extant empirical research. Care to elaborate?

Kran De Loy · 2012-06-24, 01:57 PM

Yar, I agree with you there.

It's what happens when dozens and dozens of cheaters go unchecked and in a game that normal players unable to keep up become frustrated and quit.

I was merely arguing that the actual distinction between one cheater and a good player, if they are equal in all ways and indistinguishable of each other, has no effect by themselves. While people using obvious wall hacks and what not WILL cause an immediate loss of enthusiasm in the regular player base.

Aside from that I was also stating that PunkBuster is a pile of rotting dog shit. If SOE is somehow capable of implementing PB without compromising itself and their client's experience then it will be, in imo, a miracle.

Kran De Loy · 2012-06-24, 01:59 PM

Originally Posted by noxious

This statement defies both common sense and extant empirical research. Care to elaborate?

In planetside even losing is 'fun' when it's on large enough of a scale.

'fun' being that magical place where you end up telling your friends about it over lunch and it somehow warps into some epic journey of self discovery, hardships and promises of brutal revenge.

megamold · 2012-06-24, 03:25 PM

Originally Posted by Otleaz

No reason? How about making the game funner for everybody by using the single-most effective way of stopping hackers from making duplicate accounts?

how does giving out personal information and dropping a large part of the userbase make the game more fun exactly?

oh hackers?
you mean those guys that can generate creditcards for just this purpose? those guys that actually like being challenged?
all i see this doing is taking hackers that would normally cheat ingame go for the option of hacking the server/website/database.
you know the database, the one that will have you creditcard number in it?

you would really have SOE take the easy route and drop a large part of the playerbase instead of putting in some effort into actually doing something?
in any case, i know they wont do this since they know full well that doing this is no good for a community and even more so to a community that requires large numbers of people.

if there is 1 company that is gonna put alot of effort into stopping hackers, its gonna be sony.
the last thing they want is another psn drama.
who knows they might have a good solution in the works, and not just a plan to take the lazy way out.

GhettoPrince · 2012-06-24, 03:53 PM

Yeah, I know why 16v16 matches in a console game need an automated anti hacker system, but were going to have 2000 people on each continent, 6000 people on each server (at prime time). Why can't they just have CSR's on every server? Or failing that, a CSR center with CSR's who can just log in quickly to check things out when people file hacking tickets?