Game is already losing people due to hackers.

[HunterUK 10]

" They will do it, with 500 players testing the game or 10.000 players, it doesnt really matter.

What matters is the "real" testers, thoose who provide feedback on the actual game content at this time, and not thoose who complain about stuff we dont even have yet."

Well the Alpha version should'nt have been sold yet on line, it should of been kept to the testers who bohemia trust, it is bad publicity and I have always said this Arma 3 in what ever state its in should have not been released with an Anti-cheat. Yes you can have an Anti -cheat running when in alpha or beta running because the coders can work with the Anti - cheat personnel to do what ever is Necessary to protect there work and the publics who have purchased there game and servers from hackers, script kiddies etc to a certain extent that they can play ther game with out these sort of intrusions. If this was to be carried out then There would'nt be some much bad publicity about this game and the general concensus would be the public here would be more understanding towards all concerned in this early game development.

[byrgesen 1]

" They will do it, with 500 players testing the game or 10.000 players, it doesnt really matter.

What matters is the "real" testers, thoose who provide feedback on the actual game content at this time, and not thoose who complain about stuff we dont even have yet."

Well the Alpha version should'nt have been sold yet on line, it should of been kept to the testers who bohemia trust, it is bad publicity and I have always said this Arma 3 in what ever state its in should have not been released with an Anti-cheat. Yes you can have an Anti -cheat running when in alpha or beta running because the coders can work with the Anti - cheat personnel to do what ever is Necessary to protect there work and the publics who have purchased there game and servers from hackers, script kiddies etc to a certain extent that they can play ther game with out these sort of intrusions. If this was to be carried out then There would'nt be some much bad publicity about this game and the general concensus would be the public here would be more understanding towards all concerned in this early game development.

I see your point mate, but the fact is they released it and it has no AC, so we have to adapt to it if we want to be a part of it.

We can sit here and talk about "how its was suppose to be" or "we need this and that" all day, but it doesnt realy change anything :)

We got what we got and its now up to us to make the best of it, or leave it alone till it hits a more "preferable" state.

[Beagle 684]

The drop is for sure also about novelty has worn off...in the same time the player count for ArmA II has risen again.

[WalkerDown 1]

You did NOT buy an alpha...

Yes i did, i did not pre-ordered anything i bought A EARLY ACCESS STEAM PRODUCT that evolves eventually into the final retail game... the current alpha is not a "present", it is what i've payed for (together with the promise of having the finished product of course). I invite you to read about the "early access" Steam program.

You bought a finished product and got early acces to the development builds. Many of the people who bought the game, did so because its cheaper now, then it will be in a year, NOT because they wanted to buy an Alpha or test the development builds.

Many ppl that have bought it wouldn't care much about the price: they bought it because it was advertised on the Steam homepage, and because it was PLAYABLE, you wouldn't had the 10% of the current buyers if it was only a pre-order without the playable alpha.

So the whole "i purchaced a product" is kinda invalid at this point, because you have payed for the final product and not the testing fases.

Again, i invite you to go to read what's the Steam early access.

You can wait a year and then play the final game and THEN complain about you spending money, but at this point you have bought the final product, so you cant complain about "your right as a costumer" untill it actually gets released.

You can however, try to help BI make it a better game by giving constructive critism and posting proper bug reports.

I can criticize anything i want to... i'm not asking to have my money back, i accepted certain rules (set by steam early access..), but if the product sucks i says: it sucks. Atm i don't see much progress on certain areas that IN MY OPINION should be fixed.

Returning to the hacker/cheaters affair: i would like to see the anti-cheat applied asap, because i want to check what progress has been made. We have so many cheaters aboard in arma2, that i won't wait the last day to discover that we'll have the same number of idiots in ArmA3 as well... when it's "too late": cheaters and hackers are the MAIN problem in ArmA2, and i believe it should be the first problem to be addressed... TODAY, not "tomorrow".

[byrgesen 1]

Im done.

Walkerdown, you keep "sneaking" around all the questions people ask you and answer what you feel like answering, we arent getting anywhere here.

Its nice you share your oppinion, but do try to be realistic and try to back up your previous statements, insted of focussing on one single paragraph and repeating yourself over and over.

Early Access Steam info even says: "Developers have varying approaches", so Steam doesnt set the rules, BI does.

Again, you didnt buy an Alpha, you bought the final product and at the same time you got the chance of being a part of the development, through the Steam Early Access program.

Just gonna leave this quote here from the steam page:

When you buy an Early Access game, you should consider what the game is like to play right now. Look at the screenshots and videos to see what the game looks like in its current state. There are a lot of ways a game can go as it develops over time, so if you aren't excited to play the game in its current state, then hold off and wait until the next update--it shouldn't be far off.

Cya around.

[WalkerDown 1]

You actually quoted it for me:

When you buy an Early Access game...

...that's exactly what i did, i BOUGHT an Early Access game. :)

[lbm 1]

Again, it won't "reduce" anything. Signature check is supposed to kick ppl with modified pbo's, and do you think that someone that has enough brain to understand what's a pbo and to modify the contents of it for its own "hacking" purpose, wouldn't be capable of typing "pbo hider" on google? C'mon ppl!

Signature checks not used? It's because actually IT IS KICKING THE LEGIT PLAYERS ... most of the servers admin have disabled it because it's kicking out 30% of the userbase with the "signature check timeout" message, and it means that your server will be left empty in a short time (coz ppl will be bored of trying to join over and over again). I left it active on my servers, but it doesn't change anything, cheaters and mass-killers everywhere... nor that i care atm, i left the servers running there waiting for better times, if there will be.

Well, maybe I just haven't played enough yet but my experience so far is that signature checks actually do reduce the amount of cheating. For example a few days ago I went from one server with no signature checks to another and so did at least one of the cheaters from the previous server and he was kicked right away, along with other people who had modified files. As for people who timed out I'd say there where 2 - 3 of them that I noticed during the time I was connected but that's far from 30% of the user base.

Now, I don't know if the signature checks have improved, if my experience is out of the ordinary, or if those particular cheaters where more lazy then the rest, but too me at least it seemed that the checks where actually doing some good.

[TSAndrey 1]

cheaters and hackers are the MAIN problem in ArmA2, and i believe it should be the first problem to be addressed... TODAY, not "tomorrow".

No, they're not. They are only a problem in DayZ servers (not even a big problem there), because Arma was just not made for DayZ. I have yet to see a cheater in other Arma 2 mods/missions

[Beagle 684]

No, they're not. They are only a problem in DayZ servers (not even a big problem there), because Arma was just not made for DayZ. I have yet to see a cheater in other Arma 2 mods/missions

I've seen cheaters on well known ArmA II CO public servers but they usually have a short life and no unlimited supply of Player IDs

[HunterUK 10]

No, they're not. They are only a problem in DayZ servers (not even a big problem there), because Arma was just not made for DayZ. I have yet to see a cheater in other Arma 2 mods/missions

This should be put into a Arma 2 part of the forum and not here.

But to be truthfu since battleye has not been able to be updated there is still a large amount of hackers in the Arma 2 servers still around and causing havoc as per usual. Battle should be able be updated even with the Bec system as well , so there is a double layer of protection.

[TSAndrey 1]

This should be put into a Arma 2 part of the forum and not here.

But to be truthfu since battleye has not been able to be updated there is still a large amount of hackers in the Arma 2 servers still around and causing havoc as per usual. Battle should be able be updated even with the Bec system as well , so there is a double layer of protection.

BE updates pretty fast, the number of hackers has nothing to do with BE

[HunterUK 10]

BE updates pretty fast, the number of hackers has nothing to do with BE

Both BE and Bec do's have something to do with prevention measures against hackers and cheaters, they both collate the information that is needed to take the necessary action to either Kick warn or ban ?

Edited April 12, 2013 by HunterUK
added a word

[Ezcoo 47]

Both BE and Bec do's have something to do with prevention measures against hackers and cheaters, they both collate the information that is needed to take the necessary action to either Kick warn or ban ?

I'm not sure if I understood this or not, but BEC stands for "BattlEye Extented Controls". It's not an anti-cheat itself, it's kind of huge (and great) addon made on BattlEye itself. BEC wouldn't work if you disabled BE on your servers, because it works via the BE.

@TSAndrey, the other than DayZ mod servers are suffering from the script kiddies just like they DayZ ones do. Wasteland, Domi, Life, every open server in general. Not as much as before, but still remarkably lot. For example, I even got attacked by a script kiddie and then saved by another, "nice" script kiddie on Wasteland once...

[AndrewsRG 22]

Because it's an Alpha we're playing signed only on public and private all other times. We've had a few bad experiences but by using ACRE you rule out like 90% of the bad guys.

[HunterUK 10]

Because it's an Alpha we're playing signed only on public and private all other times. We've had a few bad experiences but by using ACRE you rule out like 90% of the bad guys.

Nice one :)

[Mirudes 1]

I'm not sure if I understood this or not, but BEC stands for "BattlEye Extented Controls". It's not an anti-cheat itself, it's kind of huge (and great) addon made on BattlEye itself. BEC wouldn't work if you disabled BE on your servers, because it works via the BE.

I like it that you start to ask the right questions!

Have you ever asked ONCE, if it makes any sense, if you can turn off BattlEye (or any other tool) in multiplayer?

Why is there this possibility at all?

BattlEye has to be mandatory for MP.

Only the optional integration of whether one can start BE or not, has led to this mess.

[Harzach 2517]

I like it that you start to ask the right questions!

Have you ever asked ONCE, if it makes any sense, if you can turn off BattlEye (or any other tool) in multiplayer?

Why is there this possibility at all?

BattlEye has to be mandatory for MP.

Only the optional integration of whether one can start BE or not, has led to this mess.

Why would I enable BE on my passworded private server?

[Lightninguk 0]

we have over 30+ players on our game nights ,and had lots of fun like most players say join a team, Only way to play arma3

[Mirudes 1]

Why would I enable BE on my passworded private server?

BattlEye in the game Options with buttons?

If you haven't it recognized yet: In ArmA2 you have 3 options whether to start ArmA2 with or without BattlEye. I can not even imagine a example for the 3rd case.

[ ] With BattlEye

[x] Without BattlEye

[ ] Let me cheat the hell out of the game.

Lol, probably this looks normal for you - but not for me.

It is not usefull to have a option with a interface for this, because it is the first step for script-kiddies and cheaters. These option have to be hidden.

Passworded servers?

What makes you think that a passworded server gives you more security?

This one leading wishful thinking is absolutely wrong - when you assume, that playing (or testing) on closed servers is more secure than on open servers. Thats just a illusion. The people becomes not trustworthy, because they are playing on a closed server.

To say that you would know 30 foreign people and trust them, just because you share a password with them, disqualified yourself.

They will try to steal your ArmA2/3-License here and there.

The actual status of the ArmA3Alpha is: No matter if the server is locked or not, you actually play without any protection. Your argument is invalid.

When you talk about 30 persons on a closed server, how many of them cheat by themself? You will have the same percentage of cheaters on non-public servers than on public servers. From my own experience I can tell that around 5 out of 30 are cheaters. Perhaps even more (and heavier) on closed servers. By chances you are the only one who is not cheating. If these closed servers are such a great thing, how comes that in ArmA2 the servers often runs without signature-check, and even BattlEye is also deactivated on these closed servers? And are there really 30 players, all with the same license key?

Most of the closed servers using 3rd party server software for ArmA, that is in fact a cheating console. When you run alphatests on it, you will reporting bugs that are compatible with cheats and cheating consoles.

I can assure you that all cheats were tested on closed servers, before they hit the internet.

In fact, some servers are testbeds and non-public for this reason.

[Harzach 2517]

Mirudes, my server is clan-only. I'm really not concerned about anyone going rogue.

[PureHate 10]

1. If servers would be properly configed (signature check on), this sort of thing wouldn't happen

2. there is no game released, it is an alpha.

. . . wow.

How many other games in existence do you know of that have the amount of hacking issues that arma2/3 does? You shouldn't have to "properly configure a server" to prevent most of the hacking issues from occurring. The problem here is that BIS is using the same crappy client/server code that arma 2 had. Dealing with the hacking issue should have been the top priority from my point of view.

The fact that largely the same types of scripting goes on in the new arma is one of the reasons why this game will never be able to compete for larger FPS titles.

---------- Post added at 06:23 ---------- Previous post was at 06:20 ----------

Mirudes, my server is clan-only. I'm really not concerned about anyone going rogue.

That's great dude, but this is a crappy response on how to get around hacking issues. Lock down your server and only let people you know into it? How is that any way to run a server/game?

[Harzach 2517]

How many other games in existence do you know of that have the amount of hacking issues that arma2/3 does?

Name one other game that allows you to do what Arma does. Just because no one is spawning para-cows in BF3 doesn't mean there are no script babies.

You shouldn't have to "properly configure a server"

Comedy gold.

That's great dude, but this is a crappy response on how to get around hacking issues. Lock down your server and only let people you know into it? How is that any way to run a server/game?

Well, dude, when it's a private server for clan use only, it's the only way. I bear no obligation to open my server to anyone.

[TSAndrey 1]

. . . wow.

How many other games in existence do you know of that have the amount of hacking issues that arma2/3 does?

Other games don't have the same amount of cheating, because they don't have a full supported script language and modding ;) Yes, a part of it is BIS's fault, but Arma's modding is one of it's best features.

You shouldn't have to "properly configure a server" to prevent most of the hacking issues from occurring.

Yes, you should. Server admins decide what's supposed to be legit in their server missions. This is not COD or BF, in which server admins only choose what maps/modes their server will run. In Arma the admin has to control everything in his server

The problem here is that BIS is using the same crappy client/server code that arma 2 had. Dealing with the hacking issue should have been the top priority from my point of view.

The fact that largely the same types of scripting goes on in the new arma is one of the reasons why this game will never be able to compete for larger FPS titles.

Arma is not supposed to be a competitive FPS. I think you should start playing Battlefield, as that's obviously what you are looking for

[Mattar_Tharkari 10]

. . . wow.

How many other games in existence do you know of that have the amount of hacking issues that arma2/3 does? You shouldn't have to "properly configure a server" to prevent most of the hacking issues from occurring. The problem here is that BIS is using the same crappy client/server code that arma 2 had. Dealing with the hacking issue should have been the top priority from my point of view.

The fact that largely the same types of scripting goes on in the new arma is one of the reasons why this game will never be able to compete for larger FPS titles.

The scripting / mission making / server management etc are a large part of what draws people to Arma. It's the lego of gaming. If A3 was released with just a few MP maps and a standard 10 person ingame server I for one wouldn't continue with it.

As for hacking and cheating - not noticed anything significant till this recent episode? I play on a wide range of servers and haven't had a bad experience at all. Arma 2 was the same for me - 1 or 2 hackers here and there but mostly good fun and it's great to learn a bit of scripting and map making.

As for running a server it's simple - follow the guide:

http://forums.bistudio.com/showthread.php?147537-Tutorial-How-to-run-ArmA3-server-on-a-dedicated-server

[Leg 10]

The thing that annoys me is that they think they are spreading a message about the game being broken when the game allows you to mod it without restrictions anyway.

Edited April 27, 2013 by Leg