|
On July 27 2012 06:31 Fragile51 wrote:Show nested quote +On July 27 2012 06:24 SuperSloth wrote:
Whats the big deal with hackers anyway? You play em, they beat you one game and you get on with your life. If it effects tourneys then people need to start being more strict on hackers and never let them compete in a tourney again. Because if you let them run rampant every single game on ladder you play will be a hacker. It endangers the validity of Sc2 as an esport.
I hope you realize that threads like these endangers the validity of StarCraft more than anything. It's just sad to see the amount of "hate" Blizzard is getting, especially from a supposedly mature community such as Teamliquid.net. I'd expect to see this kind of prejudgemental behaviour on Reddit or on minor community sites but this is rediculous, thread after thread and they won't stop because if you think about it for just five minutes, you'll come to realize that there's no way Blizzard will ever cater to everyone.
|
But I love my BW rines, tanks and vultures..
|
Can say with confidence that this will in no way cut down on the amount of hackers. There might have been the odd 0.001% of players who use altered models in the MPQ to make stealthed units easier to see etc, but this has zero effect on maphacks or drophacks. There is absolutely no reason for anyone to support this change, and we really need Blizzard to know that. We never caused any harm with our mods, yet we seem to be a bigger target to them than the real hackers.
Of course, we can't say for sure that this is final until 1.5 is out, but if it's what it looks like, then this is pretty pathetic and all the time Existor, Pzea and myself have spent giving back to this community with our mods will have been completely wasted. The only benefit I can think of coming out of this for us is the Repair.exe being more efficient, but 99% of the time, people who use the Repair.exe are people who installed mods incorrectly.
|
On July 27 2012 06:29 Tom Cruise wrote:Show nested quote +On July 26 2012 19:40 NeMeSiS3 wrote:
Blizzard... Making a habit of shitting on the community one year at a time Didn't comments like these used to be banned? I rly hope a mod cleans this thread up soon.
I'm sorry, this forum is still about having opinions right? Each year had a significant shit on from Blizzard the biggest ones, "no lan because of hacks" which actually didn't ban out because modded lans and people illegally downloading the game did happen and no name change. 2011 updates on the outdated bnet 0.2 never came, we have to pay for features that were in Brood War in HoTS and then finally 2012 this. (oh and Diablo 3). I could be alone on this, but I'm getting rather tired of having to pay for old features... If starcraft 2 wasn't the best designed RTS game (outside of BW) than it would have been thrashed so hard for being such a poorly designed UI that it may have completely flopped entirely...
I suppose after playing Blizzard products since it's beginning it may frustrate me more than the average person to see how heavily it has declined in recent years.
|
Couldn't the community just make a list of files for Blizzard to include in some kind of exception list during the check?
|
Russian Federation484 Posts
On July 27 2012 07:02 Torpedo.Vegas wrote:
Couldn't the community just make a list of files for Blizzard to include in some kind of exception list during the check?
Then what's the point of the check?
|
On July 27 2012 07:01 NeMeSiS3 wrote:Show nested quote +On July 27 2012 06:29 Tom Cruise wrote:On July 26 2012 19:40 NeMeSiS3 wrote:
Blizzard... Making a habit of shitting on the community one year at a time Didn't comments like these used to be banned? I rly hope a mod cleans this thread up soon. I'm sorry, this forum is still about having opinions right? Each year had a significant shit on from Blizzard the biggest ones, "no lan because of hacks" which actually didn't ban out because modded lans and people illegally downloading the game did happen and no name change. 2011 updates on the outdated bnet 0.2 never came, we have to pay for features that were in Brood War in HoTS and then finally 2012 this. (oh and Diablo 3). I could be alone on this, but I'm getting rather tired of having to pay for old features... If starcraft 2 wasn't the best designed RTS game (outside of BW) than it would have been thrashed so hard for being such a poorly designed UI that it may have completely flopped entirely... I suppose after playing Blizzard products since it's beginning it may frustrate me more than the average person to see how heavily it has declined in recent years.
Those would be good arguments if they weren't false.
|
Russian Federation484 Posts
On July 27 2012 07:08 Roxor9999 wrote:
Those would be good arguments if they weren't false.
Quality post and factual check.
|
On July 27 2012 07:11 chuDr3t4 wrote:Show nested quote +On July 27 2012 07:08 Roxor9999 wrote:
Those would be good arguments if they weren't false. Quality post and factual check.
No lan certainly reduced piracy and allows them to be in control so that that kespa shit will never happen again and all the features in hots will also be in wol.
Happy now?
|
On July 27 2012 07:08 Roxor9999 wrote:Show nested quote +On July 27 2012 07:01 NeMeSiS3 wrote:On July 27 2012 06:29 Tom Cruise wrote:On July 26 2012 19:40 NeMeSiS3 wrote:
Blizzard... Making a habit of shitting on the community one year at a time Didn't comments like these used to be banned? I rly hope a mod cleans this thread up soon. I'm sorry, this forum is still about having opinions right? Each year had a significant shit on from Blizzard the biggest ones, "no lan because of hacks" which actually didn't ban out because modded lans and people illegally downloading the game did happen and no name change. 2011 updates on the outdated bnet 0.2 never came, we have to pay for features that were in Brood War in HoTS and then finally 2012 this. (oh and Diablo 3). I could be alone on this, but I'm getting rather tired of having to pay for old features... If starcraft 2 wasn't the best designed RTS game (outside of BW) than it would have been thrashed so hard for being such a poorly designed UI that it may have completely flopped entirely... I suppose after playing Blizzard products since it's beginning it may frustrate me more than the average person to see how heavily it has declined in recent years. Those would be good arguments if they weren't false.
Which parts are false? The UI is extremely poorly designed, the interface is behind a decade old game. They removed cross server play and watchable replays because "they didn't think people would care" and hell, they almost didn't bring in chat channels... There are lan mods and people have downloaded and palyed the game illegally. I'm missing what part I said that was false.
|
|
|
I will be very sad If I can't play with BW sounds  , especially my overmind.
|
|
|
Can't say this really bothers me. I might even support it. Modding SC2's always been sketchy territory, as in existing harmless mods are probably officially not allowed yet Blizzard's chosen to ignore them rather than create controversy. If there's going to be modding I'd rather it be officially supported, or they could just implement some stuff themselves if it makes sense.
|
I will quit playing this game and not buy HoTS if can no longer use Stronger Team Colors. The Zerg versus Zerg matchup is simply impossible without it.
|
On July 27 2012 08:37 Cire wrote:
I will quit playing this game and not buy HoTS if can no longer use Stronger Team Colors. The Zerg versus Zerg matchup is simply impossible without it.
bye
User was warned for this post
|
On July 27 2012 07:06 chuDr3t4 wrote:Show nested quote +On July 27 2012 07:02 Torpedo.Vegas wrote:
Couldn't the community just make a list of files for Blizzard to include in some kind of exception list during the check? Then what's the point of the check?
It was a shot in the dark. But if the check is to monitor for malicous alteration to the game and maintain its stability, allowing for official exceptions to benign community support mods could be a partial solution. I would like a more openly moddable game yet with has few malicous programs and hacks as possible, but this is just a work around to throw out there.
|
On July 27 2012 09:28 Torpedo.Vegas wrote:Show nested quote +On July 27 2012 07:06 chuDr3t4 wrote:On July 27 2012 07:02 Torpedo.Vegas wrote:
Couldn't the community just make a list of files for Blizzard to include in some kind of exception list during the check? Then what's the point of the check? It was a shot in the dark. But if the check is to monitor for malicous alteration to the game and maintain its stability, allowing for official exceptions to benign community support mods could be a partial solution. I would like a more openly moddable game yet with has few malicous programs and hacks as possible, but this is just a work around to throw out there.
and again, no hacker in their right mind would put a finger on an always-online game's files. there is already a measure in place against that: warden.
|
Does Diablo 3 have hacks running in order to abuse the Real Money Auction house? If this is true, we would likely be getting a similar system as that game.
|
Blazinghand
United States25553 Posts
On July 27 2012 12:28 rotegirte wrote:Show nested quote +On July 27 2012 09:28 Torpedo.Vegas wrote:On July 27 2012 07:06 chuDr3t4 wrote:On July 27 2012 07:02 Torpedo.Vegas wrote:
Couldn't the community just make a list of files for Blizzard to include in some kind of exception list during the check? Then what's the point of the check? It was a shot in the dark. But if the check is to monitor for malicous alteration to the game and maintain its stability, allowing for official exceptions to benign community support mods could be a partial solution. I would like a more openly moddable game yet with has few malicous programs and hacks as possible, but this is just a work around to throw out there. and again, no hacker in their right mind would put a finger on an always-online game's files. there is already a measure in place against that: warden.
I've said it once and I'll say it again: Even now, the modern production and army tab hacks don't dick around with the MPQs (which is pointless, difficult to do in the first place, and likely to arouse suspicion from warden)-- instead, they read the physical memory (RAM) to see what's written there, and display that stuff as an overlay. I can't possibly imagine how a hack could be better or more efficient by reading the MPQ files or writing to them... any hack that does anything useful interacts with the physical memory.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
