Will guild wars have hackers like diablo did since its a no pay game? - Page 4 - Guild Wars Forums

IceD'Bear · Apr 05, 2005, 11:25 PM // 23:25

Players acting as servers would only open the doors to hacks.

GW server/client architecture based on the principle that the servers sends to the client only the data that it necessarily needs and nothing more. So it doesn't send you what skills other players have, not how much energy they have and nothing at all about players (and mobs and item and...) that are beyond radar range.

Furthermore, all calculations are done on the server. When you use a skill on an opponent the client just tells the server "I'm using this skill on that player" and the server responds "ok, you were able to cast that spell and did so much damage". The same goes for other actions like moving or attacking, so speedhacks and the like are not possible (this is also the main cause for the warping, because sometimes the server and the client don't agree on your position and then the server puts you back into the right spot).

Freyas · Apr 06, 2005, 01:47 AM // 01:47

Zfactor- one other thing to consider about botting differences between GW and D2 is that GW is not designed to play solo. The characters that can solo Riverside Province when controlled by a skilled human player are very few- and that's just where you can begin to start getting good item drops. Most bots don't play at the same level as a skilled human, or anywhere remotely close. D2 had problems with botting because once you got a character to a certain level with good equipment and such, a bot could wipe things out quite easily without ever having risks- and they were made to farm relatively easy areas(pindleskin, mephisto- not Baal, Pits, etc). In GW, most areas where you have a chance at getting decent drops are difficult to get to, and the areas are difficult enough for a full group of players.

The things I can possibly see being botted is low-level areas for gold and salvage materials, and possibly minor runes- the difficulty of the first few missions for a solo level 20 character wouldn't be outside of the ability of a bot. This could be a slight problem due to devaluation of the value of hides, cloth, iron, wood, and gold, but it's not going to be game-breaking. Before you can tell me you'll have a bot farm for high-level weapons, find me some place that you can get high-level weapons by soloing, without having a very difficult time doing it with human thought behind the actions...

Xellos · Apr 06, 2005, 03:21 AM // 03:21

Quote:

Originally Posted by Gaile Gray

You're right, Xellos, there probably have been few if any games that were not hacked or exploited. But you know, the hacking or exploiting attempt isn't really the problem. The problem is how the company deals with the situations after they arise. Do they have solid technology that allows them to trace the possible exploit and slam it shut? Do they have thorough protection against the predictable cheats, and a team dedicated to predicting the unpredictable cheats?

People will try to hack a game, and they might even succeed in the short term. But a team with an active and watchful team can make sure that when problems arise, they're quickly resolved before they impact upon the game in a major sense.

When I was following a certain popular title a few years ago, there was a desparate need for a patch, to close exploits and put an end to cheating and hacks. The economy was delicate, and it imploded, in part because the dev team delayed taking the matter in hand and waited 18 months to make a half-baked attempt to solve the multitude of major problems. By that time, the damage was irreversible.

I believe that Guild Wars will not be like that. Clilent/server tech will provide protection that cannot be given in a peer-to-peer game. And with our streaming technology, when a bug, glitch, or yes, a cheat arises, we can mend it quickly, maybe in 18 hours rather than 18 months.

I really think that there is a matter of well-placed faith here.

Exactly, I'm not trying to take anything away from Anet. Streaming technology theoritically can do anything. But streaming is a very messy matter. What makes streaming special? Is it the fact that you can instantly change the game? Then how come we need to exit for builds? Is it so that we can input a bunch of bone dragons into town? Then how come games like WoW can do that too?

The point being, while it is a matter of well-placed faith, it's also up to the company or the developers to show that their the real deal. It would be awesome, for the final BWE, to do something (I have no idea of the streaming technologies' capabilities), that would ensure everyone's safety. Just like a demo. If your saying that the past BWE's have shown streaming technology, then it's by far a weak presentation, since there are clearly many people who still are doubtful. Until you make that big bang and show us what your special technology can do that other games can't do, it's just a name for some of us.

It'd also be nice, if someone /bugged you, that you fix it immediately, and if possible "stream" it, then without exiting the game, PM the guy and say "hey try it again, I think we fixed it". You realize how big of an impact that would make provided that your streaming technology even works that well?

Faith is most likely the game here. But for me, I don't believe until I see. So far in all the BWEs, nothing was truely special. Congo dance, dragons, gwen burninating, it shows nothing special that other MMORPGs can't do (though they may do it differently, presentation matters). A game like WoW, which is supposedly using a weaker engine, weaker technology then GW, can perform nearly everything GW can do so far. Instancing, persistant servers, random ugly things popping up outta nowhere. Where's Guild Wars thunder?

Instancing is another issue with Guild Wars, and although it's very nice, it didn't live up to the hype, at least for me. All that advertising about being able to change the world, yet not a single brick from the guild hall can break or the vine bridges fall or nothing. But that's a different issue.

Conclusion is, that Guild Wars is by far in most of our minds, the best game that has ever come out so far in todays standards. But the key word is todays standards. Personally, when I first got interest in this, all the hype basically told me this will do what starcraft did, and take games to a new standard. So far, it hasn't shown that, nor am I sure it can. But don't take this offensively, the game is by far the best there is in 2005 and probably for the next couple of years to come, at least PVP wise.

Zfactor · Apr 06, 2005, 03:25 AM // 03:25

Quote:

Originally Posted by Freyas

The things I can possibly see being botted is low-level areas for gold and salvage materials, and possibly minor runes- the difficulty of the first few missions for a solo level 20 character wouldn't be outside of the ability of a bot. This could be a slight problem due to devaluation of the value of hides, cloth, iron, wood, and gold, but it's not going to be game-breaking. Before you can tell me you'll have a bot farm for high-level weapons, find me some place that you can get high-level weapons by soloing, without having a very difficult time doing it with human thought behind the actions...

Well like I said I have not played GW yet, but I am just tossing things out into the mix about how bots work and how they are much smarter than a lot of people seem to think. Also I hope they never figure out how to break casting delays, then bots would probably have no problem in the areas.

Xellos · Apr 06, 2005, 03:27 AM // 03:27

Actually, from the trend bots are going at, it's absolutely possible for people to bot in this game. Just that it would be very minor. Not script kiddies, or whatever. But the real genius that does it themself. It would be too much effort to waste it by sharing with other people, but it would definately be possible for some one.

Pharalon · Apr 06, 2005, 03:44 AM // 03:44

Quote:

Originally Posted by Freyas

The things I can possibly see being botted is low-level areas for gold and salvage materials, and possibly minor runes- the difficulty of the first few missions for a solo level 20 character wouldn't be outside of the ability of a bot.

This is true, and it's a very hard thing to stop. There's just not much you can do in the way of stopping even the simplest lvl20 bot steamrolling the critters in an area designed for lvl 3s. The only real solution I can see is to link drops to cLvl, the same way xp is. If you're more than 5 levels above a monster, it won't drop anything. As you've pointed out, missions are designed in such a way that, without a signifigant lvl advantage, when going solo, you're not going to get very far with a human at the controls, let alone a bot.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Freyas

Before you can tell me you'll have a bot farm for high-level weapons, find me some place that you can get high-level weapons by soloing, without having a very difficult time doing it with human thought behind the actions...

First Zealot in Riverside, and most of the lone groups of justicars along the way. The second two Zealots are generally too hard for a bot to navigate to, but the first Zealot is probably doable, albeit not with 100% success rate. I'm not exactly sure what base items that Zealot can/can't drop, but he's lvl24, so he can drop superior runes and perfect weapon mods, on a fairly regular basis. Dropping some more Archers/Priests/Sycophants in with the roaming Justicar groups along the way would make that almost impossible though. Groups like that are a nightmare for a solo player, and pretty much impossible for a bot to deal with.

Xellos · Apr 06, 2005, 04:22 AM // 04:22

Goooo Riverside farming. It already is done by players, why not bots?

Perishiko ReLLiK · Apr 06, 2005, 05:16 AM // 05:16

Quote:

Originally Posted by Xellos

Goooo Riverside farming. It already is done by players, why not bots?

Aww, ive been too involved with the wonderfull pvp, and not needing good items to care about farming : (

Xellos · Apr 06, 2005, 05:17 AM // 05:17

There are some specific builds that requires farming like it or not. And for extreme competitive playing, farming is still a must. But for casual players though, no not really.

Epinephrine · Apr 06, 2005, 02:25 PM // 14:25

I am not as worried about bots as I am about PvP hacks. Botting is somewhat preventable anyway, and the economy and item dependence is much less than other RPGs, in addition to the fact that the low and attainable level cap makes grinding rather pointless.

The competitive online games (CS, DoD etc...) all have varieties of aimbot, wall hack and so on developed. What wories me is that people will develop tools that display what everyone is currently casting, highlight those you have selected as being worth countering or automatically targetting and countering spells (imagine as a mesmer if before combat you said "automatically counter the following spells") and so on. It depends partly on how much information is sent to the clients - many games send way more info than the player needs, allowing them to write hacks that display the players that aren't yet visible, lock in on them, display their names and health and so on, possibly their gear and such. Because the client is told "he is in plate mail of the whale" and then draws the armour on to match the inventory description you end up with a game that is easily hacked. I don't know how GW is handling this stuff, but broadcasting what a player actually has in order to prompt the client side to draw it seems foolish, as does sending the player all the opponen'ts moves and letting it decide whether something is visible or not. Same thing occurred with the maphack - since it sent the entire map when you loaded in the info was there for the taking - since GW doesn't have random layouts this isn't a concern, but there is a real question of what information a player needs to know, and limiting what is presented to them to what they should know, not allowing the client to know everything and edit the information for presentation to the player.

jdwoody · Apr 06, 2005, 02:39 PM // 14:39

Quote:

not allowing the client to know everything and edit the information for presentation to the player.

that would be awsome except for the fact each of the clients can be running at a different resolution, the server would need to track that to figure out how exactly to generate a seperate world view for each of the clients. So instead of the server generating the world view and sending it to 16 people, it generates the world view, customizes to the view display of each of the 16 people and sends that out. So they need a server that runs 20x faster just to break even.

I say change the way the state of the world looks to clients very often. They have full control over the server and clients, isolate/randomize the code that sends/receives those packets so that any sniffer would be obsolete by the time it could actually be distributed.

IceD'Bear · Apr 06, 2005, 03:22 PM // 15:22

Quote:

Originally Posted by Epinephrine

not allowing the client to know everything and edit the information for presentation to the player.

Please read what I wrote a few post higher

The client knows only what it realy has to know, nothing more.

Cult_Of_One · Apr 06, 2005, 04:59 PM // 16:59

IMO, there are bound to be hacks of some sorts floating around. i want to know how they're going to affect my playing experience. I can't see where PvE would be a problem at all but PvP could be a disaster just like it is on Diablo. I can only hope hacks are detected quickly and irradicated even quicker.

Metallica · Apr 06, 2005, 05:08 PM // 17:08

i still don't know what will keep them wanting to keep the hacks away, its just like diablo after the expack was released they wont get money anymore from this game since its not pay to play the can't afford to keep hacks away, i dunno that just seems to be the way of the world. Even though they are a gaming company they are here to make money.

Lansing Kai Don · Apr 06, 2005, 05:26 PM // 17:26

1. Zfactor and IcedBear:Sheesh, I said it was theoretically possible to implement, not that they should. And I WOULD, if I designed a game... but that game would be free too

. If you want to cry over your bandwidth, then you don't have to play the game (I would make it painfully obvious on how the game works). And what are you talking about opening to hacks? There is literally zero difference (besides origination of data transfer) between hosting on your computer than a server's if done right.

2. TO summarize why I don't think botting would ruin the GW economy is by thinking it through.

Someone bots, someone gets tremendous amounts of gold and this someone has the following two options:
A) Buy better stuff that everyone else can buy eventually (and after hard work where it makes it so much better when you get it), just a lil sooner.
B) Give the gold away freely to everyone this someone sees

A--> Person has slight advantage (not major due to design of GW there are really no uber weapons) over other players till the game balances out and everyone has their specific builds made.
B--> Everyone has more gold, so ANet raises the prices of everything accordingly and/or lowers gold drop amounts.

Someone bots, someone gets tremendous amount or rare items and this someone has the same two options keep for advantage or give away, and they follow the same rules. Let's face it, bots would be EXTREMELY powerful in the opening days of GW as everyone is rushing to lvl 20. After that, this game that goes off of skill, will probably not have super-duper-uber-rare items that are one in a million. In essence, you will be able to get the item after hard work... no since in crying over someone else taking the easy way out. I don't care if people use bots, but I seriously doubt it would ruin the game. Sorry for anyone who disagrees with me, I hate bots and what they stand for (laziness and an uncaring feeling towards the game and its developers).

Lansing Kai Don

P.S. Just as a side project, I'm thinking of ways to prevent ppl from using bots (not for GW, but for any program in general). I.e. I'm going to try and develop a third-party software that will prevent users to be able to use bots on the program with it installed on. Any ideas, besides the random number generator, I'm looking for something less intrusive. Right now I'm working on a way of isolating the program itself, where it's not possible for a third party program to communicate with the victim program (in short it will act like a firewall does for your network connection).

IceD'Bear · Apr 06, 2005, 05:26 PM // 17:26

Quote:

Originally Posted by Metallica

i still don't know what will keep them wanting to keep the hacks away, its just like diablo after the expack was released they wont get money anymore from this game since its not pay to play the can't afford to keep hacks away, i dunno that just seems to be the way of the world. Even though they are a gaming company they are here to make money.

And they won't make much money if they don't prevent hacks. Do you really think they're aiming for just one expansion?

Loviatar · Apr 06, 2005, 05:53 PM // 17:53

Quote:

Originally Posted by IceD'Bear

And they won't make much money if they don't prevent hacks. Do you really think they're aiming for just one expansion?

every reference on the GW site is plural chapters to maintain cash flow
also stated is intent to add between chapters as well

QUOTE
there are no hidden fees. You will not have to pay for the streaming updates that will take place on a regular basis, nor for additional content that we will provide between the chapters of Guild Wars.
QUOTE

Sausaletus Rex · Apr 07, 2005, 05:45 AM // 05:45

Quote:

Originally Posted by Gaile Gray

I'll be honest -- I find your post depressing, for it seems to reek of fatalism, as if to say they are present and cannot be stopped. I disagree. As long as there are bright and motivated testers, players, fans, and students of the game who disagree with such practices, there will be people working against such things.

What you would term fatalism, I would term realism. After all, for a team of bright and motivated people to have something to work against there must also be a team nearly as equal and motivated creating that thing against which they strive, wouldn't there? Bots happen. Hacks happen. Yes, they're horrible, yes they shouldn't happen but neither should speeding and I think you'll find that as much as some of us would rather it not happen and as much evidence has been mounted against it being a good idea (Speeding is directly related to increases in traffic accidents, fatalities, the resulting impact on the health care system, as well as being highly inefficient and wasteful in terms of the energy and gasoline spent to achieve such speeds - gas mileage and therefore energy consumption is much lower when cars stick to the posted speed limits) that keeping everyone and anyone from speeding, ever is an unrealistic if not impossible goal.

As long as there's any sort of disparity between the items and wealth between one player and another then people will resort to shortcuts to those items and to that wealth. And some of those people will resort to running farming bots. As long as there's competitive play people will try to gain whatever advantage they can. And some of those people will resort to cheats, scripts, hacks, and bots. It's a given unless you'd like to redesign the game to be devoid of any progression, any accumulation, any discovery, and any diversity - you don't need an aimbot in chess, after all, but that's not the game we're going to play. As you've said, the real isue is what happens with those who cheat, hack, and bot. And, if you ask me, I thought my post was rather optimistic about the steps taken by GW and ANet in the past.

Broadly speaking, there are two ways I can see of dealing with such a problem. Firstly, there's the demand side. As I stated earlier, as long as there's a desire for the things such nefarious practices can give us there'll always be those who want to partake in them. As long as people have something to take a shortcut for, human nature being what it is, some of them will take it. This is addressed by elminating, shifting, or quenching that desire and here, the game has done quite well. There aren't many levels to grind through, there aren't ridiculously overpowered weapons, gold is rare but not impossible to get, skills are easy to find, there's instancing so resources aren't finite, and on and on and on. The game's been designed from the bottom up to do away with alot of the reasons and causes behind such things. The architechture alone eliminates most blatant problems. But nothing's perfect, there are still cracks and holes for botters and hackers to slip into, it's just a matter of them gaining an advantage versus them tipping things into chaos.

Then, there's the supply side. Where there's demand there's supply. Where there's supply there's demand. Botters wouldn't bot if there weren't people to use bots but without people to use bots there wouldn't be any botters. To tackle the supply side what's needed is to eliminate as much of the presence and impact of such activities as possible. If attacking demand is treatment then attacking the supply is policing. Gaps in the code need to be patched, hackers need to be identified, accounts need to be closed, and all the rest. Here we're in unknown territory. ANet has made nice statements and grandiose claims about what they intend to do but the game's not released so we just don't know how they'll act or even if they'll act to staunch the bleeding when it will inevitably occur.

The closest example that comes to mind is again what occured during the Top 5 ladder competition. There a few guilds used an exploit - creating and challenging "dummy" guilds - to increase their guild rating until they were in the running for the alpha spots. This was identified and dealt with in short order and those guilds that used such techniques weren't the ones that eventually won. However, it's not exactly the most encouraging of moves on ANet's part as it's argueable whether those guilds were merely exploiting the existing conditions in the game or actively abusing something unfairly. There's a difference between slipping over the speed limit because you're not paying attention to the accelerator and blazing down the highway at 100mph while doing a handstand on the steering wheel, of course, it's largely one of degrees but it's an important one to draw. There were no warnings, no rules, no EULA posted, no code of conduct that those entering the competition had to abide by, the object was simply to get to the top of the ladder and remain there until the BWE ended. Those guilds did so not by using anything from outside of the game but by utilizing a loop hole in the system. After the fact, they and the rest of us were informed that such behavior was, in fact, an abuse in ANet's eyes - and since they're the ones with their fingers on the power button, theirs are the only eyes that really matter in such a decision - and that it went against the intended spirit of the contest.

Now, such an action on ANet's part was most likely the proper one. They'd intended to hold a contest to find guilds that could be competitive and, by and large, under the revised rules, were successful. But, it was an arbitrary and retroactive decision. Why toss out those guilds and let a guild that exploited item or skill disparity in? What's fair and what's not, especially when there were not guiding principles stated for the contest? Not the best foundation for a system of justice or punishment. So, enforcing the sorts of rules that will make botters and hackers' jobs much more difficult can be done but to be done well it's going to take a lot of time, effort, and communication on ANet's part. They'll need to make clear what is and what isn't acceptable from the start - they'll need an EULA, documentation, warnings, and all the rest. They'll need to police things to make sure that what's unacceptable isn't allowed - whether that's coders working to refine things or "GMs" to report abuses. And they'll need to do so while still allowing the vast majority of us who are, essentially "law-abiding" to go about our daily gaming and have a fun time of it. It's a tall order. But, it's one that, from the sounds of it, the developers are prepared and willing to accept. That's a good sign but we just don't know how things will play out.

In short, eliminating botting, hacking and other forms of cheating is impossible. It's limiting them - either limiting their impact or their use - that's the way to deal with them. There are encouraging signs and discouraging signs but the developers are human and the system they've made had been built by human hands. There will be flaws, there will be successes, and it would take a better person than I to say for sure what will happen in the future. The possibility for failure exists, though, but by acknowledging it exists it can be guarded against. It's when we blindfold ourselves, when we tell ourselves that all is right and all is well, that all will be right and all will be well and nothing could ever possibly go wrong, that we run into the lamp-post.

Manderlock · Apr 08, 2005, 08:51 PM // 20:51

lol nowadays rex i think that realism and fatalism are interchangable. i know that anet will have some trouble with hackers, but i belive that they will be "on the ball" so to speak. you gotta have faith and know that these guys will be working there arses off.

Xellos · Apr 08, 2005, 10:04 PM // 22:04

That's giving credit before it's due. They should earn their faith.

Apr 06, 2005, 01:47 AM // 01:47	#62
Freyas Champion of the Absurd Join Date: Jan 2005 Guild: Spirits of War Profession: Mo/W	Zfactor- one other thing to consider about botting differences between GW and D2 is that GW is not designed to play solo. The characters that can solo Riverside Province when controlled by a skilled human player are very few- and that's just where you can begin to start getting good item drops. Most bots don't play at the same level as a skilled human, or anywhere remotely close. D2 had problems with botting because once you got a character to a certain level with good equipment and such, a bot could wipe things out quite easily without ever having risks- and they were made to farm relatively easy areas(pindleskin, mephisto- not Baal, Pits, etc). In GW, most areas where you have a chance at getting decent drops are difficult to get to, and the areas are difficult enough for a full group of players. The things I can possibly see being botted is low-level areas for gold and salvage materials, and possibly minor runes- the difficulty of the first few missions for a solo level 20 character wouldn't be outside of the ability of a bot. This could be a slight problem due to devaluation of the value of hides, cloth, iron, wood, and gold, but it's not going to be game-breaking. Before you can tell me you'll have a bot farm for high-level weapons, find me some place that you can get high-level weapons by soloing, without having a very difficult time doing it with human thought behind the actions... __________________ Freyas- Spirits of War ~The best lack all conviction, while the worst are full of passionate intensity

Apr 05, 2005, 11:25 PM // 23:25	#61
IceD'Bear Krytan Explorer Join Date: Feb 2005 Guild: Awoken Myth [MYTH] Profession: Mo/	Players acting as servers would only open the doors to hacks. GW server/client architecture based on the principle that the servers sends to the client only the data that it necessarily needs and nothing more. So it doesn't send you what skills other players have, not how much energy they have and nothing at all about players (and mobs and item and...) that are beyond radar range. Furthermore, all calculations are done on the server. When you use a skill on an opponent the client just tells the server "I'm using this skill on that player" and the server responds "ok, you were able to cast that spell and did so much damage". The same goes for other actions like moving or attacking, so speedhacks and the like are not possible (this is also the main cause for the warping, because sometimes the server and the client don't agree on your position and then the server puts you back into the right spot).

Apr 06, 2005, 03:27 AM // 03:27	#65
Xellos Jungle Guide Join Date: Mar 2005 Location: No Idea	Actually, from the trend bots are going at, it's absolutely possible for people to bot in this game. Just that it would be very minor. Not script kiddies, or whatever. But the real genius that does it themself. It would be too much effort to waste it by sharing with other people, but it would definately be possible for some one.

Apr 06, 2005, 04:22 AM // 04:22	#67
Xellos Jungle Guide Join Date: Mar 2005 Location: No Idea	Goooo Riverside farming. It already is done by players, why not bots?

Apr 06, 2005, 05:17 AM // 05:17	#69
Xellos Jungle Guide Join Date: Mar 2005 Location: No Idea	There are some specific builds that requires farming like it or not. And for extreme competitive playing, farming is still a must. But for casual players though, no not really.

Apr 06, 2005, 02:25 PM // 14:25	#70
Epinephrine Master of Beasts Join Date: Mar 2005 Location: Ottawa, Canada Guild: Servants of Fortuna [SoF]	I am not as worried about bots as I am about PvP hacks. Botting is somewhat preventable anyway, and the economy and item dependence is much less than other RPGs, in addition to the fact that the low and attainable level cap makes grinding rather pointless. The competitive online games (CS, DoD etc...) all have varieties of aimbot, wall hack and so on developed. What wories me is that people will develop tools that display what everyone is currently casting, highlight those you have selected as being worth countering or automatically targetting and countering spells (imagine as a mesmer if before combat you said "automatically counter the following spells") and so on. It depends partly on how much information is sent to the clients - many games send way more info than the player needs, allowing them to write hacks that display the players that aren't yet visible, lock in on them, display their names and health and so on, possibly their gear and such. Because the client is told "he is in plate mail of the whale" and then draws the armour on to match the inventory description you end up with a game that is easily hacked. I don't know how GW is handling this stuff, but broadcasting what a player actually has in order to prompt the client side to draw it seems foolish, as does sending the player all the opponen'ts moves and letting it decide whether something is visible or not. Same thing occurred with the maphack - since it sent the entire map when you loaded in the info was there for the taking - since GW doesn't have random layouts this isn't a concern, but there is a real question of what information a player needs to know, and limiting what is presented to them to what they should know, not allowing the client to know everything and edit the information for presentation to the player.

Apr 06, 2005, 04:59 PM // 16:59	#73
Cult_Of_One Ascalonian Squire Join Date: Mar 2005	IMO, there are bound to be hacks of some sorts floating around. i want to know how they're going to affect my playing experience. I can't see where PvE would be a problem at all but PvP could be a disaster just like it is on Diablo. I can only hope hacks are detected quickly and irradicated even quicker.

Apr 06, 2005, 05:08 PM // 17:08	#74
Metallica Ascalonian Squire Join Date: Apr 2005 Location: Ohio/Arkansas(college)	i still don't know what will keep them wanting to keep the hacks away, its just like diablo after the expack was released they wont get money anymore from this game since its not pay to play the can't afford to keep hacks away, i dunno that just seems to be the way of the world. Even though they are a gaming company they are here to make money.

Apr 06, 2005, 05:26 PM // 17:26	#75
Lansing Kai Don Banned Join Date: Mar 2005 Location: Kansas	1. Zfactor and IcedBear:Sheesh, I said it was theoretically possible to implement, not that they should. And I WOULD, if I designed a game... but that game would be free too . If you want to cry over your bandwidth, then you don't have to play the game (I would make it painfully obvious on how the game works). And what are you talking about opening to hacks? There is literally zero difference (besides origination of data transfer) between hosting on your computer than a server's if done right. 2. TO summarize why I don't think botting would ruin the GW economy is by thinking it through. Someone bots, someone gets tremendous amounts of gold and this someone has the following two options: A) Buy better stuff that everyone else can buy eventually (and after hard work where it makes it so much better when you get it), just a lil sooner. B) Give the gold away freely to everyone this someone sees A--> Person has slight advantage (not major due to design of GW there are really no uber weapons) over other players till the game balances out and everyone has their specific builds made. B--> Everyone has more gold, so ANet raises the prices of everything accordingly and/or lowers gold drop amounts. Someone bots, someone gets tremendous amount or rare items and this someone has the same two options keep for advantage or give away, and they follow the same rules. Let's face it, bots would be EXTREMELY powerful in the opening days of GW as everyone is rushing to lvl 20. After that, this game that goes off of skill, will probably not have super-duper-uber-rare items that are one in a million. In essence, you will be able to get the item after hard work... no since in crying over someone else taking the easy way out. I don't care if people use bots, but I seriously doubt it would ruin the game. Sorry for anyone who disagrees with me, I hate bots and what they stand for (laziness and an uncaring feeling towards the game and its developers). Lansing Kai Don P.S. Just as a side project, I'm thinking of ways to prevent ppl from using bots (not for GW, but for any program in general). I.e. I'm going to try and develop a third-party software that will prevent users to be able to use bots on the program with it installed on. Any ideas, besides the random number generator, I'm looking for something less intrusive. Right now I'm working on a way of isolating the program itself, where it's not possible for a third party program to communicate with the victim program (in short it will act like a firewall does for your network connection).

Apr 08, 2005, 08:51 PM // 20:51	#79
Manderlock Wilds Pathfinder Join Date: Apr 2005 Location: TX Guild: Crimson ScS Profession: W/N	lol nowadays rex i think that realism and fatalism are interchangable. i know that anet will have some trouble with hackers, but i belive that they will be "on the ball" so to speak. you gotta have faith and know that these guys will be working there arses off.

Apr 08, 2005, 10:04 PM // 22:04	#80
Xellos Jungle Guide Join Date: Mar 2005 Location: No Idea	That's giving credit before it's due. They should earn their faith.