Dwarden 1125 Posted September 6, 2005 Point of existence of this poll is simple - to know if You (players, admins, fans, haters) want PunkBuster to be in Armed Assault. Please take in mind that cheating is KILLING MP GAMING and purpose of PunkBuster is prevent cheating (of course it's impossible to prevent cheating completely but it's possible keep it under level where it start killing game itself). Just to avoid some 'false' informations, 'myths' and 'rumors' there is short summary of PB: pluses: - fully option-able for both players and server admins (if You don't want use it, You can disable it) - OS platform independent for both client and server (supported platforms are (?NT4?),w2K(w3k), wXP 32/64, Vista32/(64 soon) Linux 32/64 and Mac) - was developed with 56k modem transfers in mind - can be updated independently on game updates to counter cheats - updates to client and server components are independent and automated too  - manual updates via tool PBSETUP to all games installed on computer or network shares, available for Win, Linux and Mac, read more... on this page - no additional cost to customer beyond basic game price they paid in shop - defends not only against game engine based cheats but also against modded drivers and directx/opengl based cheats etc. - server admins can utilize custom variable and files checks beyond PB basic ones - server admins can utilize PB for autokicking based on TK or score (depends on game) - extends existing and adds various admins features thus improves server control - provides remote screenshot feature of player's ingame screen - various levels of bans GUID temporary, GUID permanent, hardware permanent across all PB supported games - secure , PB uses one way hashes and that disallow to collect any privacy sensitive informations about player / server - any PB action done at server is stored in PB server logs - any PB action done at client is stored in PB client logs (option-able) - as bonus there is encrypted UDP based remote control via tool PBUCON, exists for Win, Linux and Mac, read more... on this page - used in 25+ multiplayer games minor minuses: - increases bit CPU usage of both server and client (1-5%) due to generation of one way hashes and anti-cheat scans (classical trade-off for higher security) * * - since system service in PB client 1.5 utilizes multiple cores (offloading workload onto least used one) - need player machine to be run with certain OS Privileges, 99% of systems can easily resolve this by following help entry in PB's FAQ at official website ** ** - since client 1.5 PB use system service which fully remove these needs & PB is now Vista32/64 compatible along w2K, wXP32/64 ..., read more ... on this page major minuses: - increase bit cost of game to produce (but nothing in compare with cost of useless anti-piracy protections) for more informations read please following information sources: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Punkbuster http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Punkbuster_Hardware_Ban official website (with list of supported games and latest versions) : http://www.evenbalance.com/ for more generic anti-cheat discussion visit this thread: http://www.flashpoint1985.com/cgi-bin....t=46505 thanks for taking part in this poll, if You want post Your opinions feel free but please try avoid hateful and whine-full ones ... [this post and poll was approved by moderator] EDIT: updated informations about pluses / minuses to reflect PB development since this was posted ... Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
gandalf the white 0 Posted September 6, 2005 I think it will make modding (unit replacements) very difficult.... so no Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
kegetys 2 Posted September 6, 2005 No. In addition to those cons mentioned, such "high level" anti-cheat systems work like a huge invitation for people to try to break it. Even I would propably be interested into trying to break it simply because of the challenge if it were there :P The game should use its own methods to do it, ones that suit the game better and are also integrated into the game better. A generic system used in such massively popular games as Punkbuster is used now would only mean that there would be many many times more people "working" on breaking the Armed Assault "protection", because when someone would break the protection on one of those popular games it would be broken in Armed Assault at the same time. Though, not that I personally care that much about it anyway, I have never encountered a cheater online in OFP (Propably because I do not play on public servers). Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Balschoiw 0 Posted September 6, 2005 Quote[/b] ]Though, not that I personally care that much about it anyway, I have never encountered a cheater online in OFP (Propably because I do not play on public servers). Same here. I guess I remember one or two incidents while playing at leagues but else...nada. I´m not for Punkbuster and I doubt BIS would implement it anyway. They have done it on their own and I don´t think they will go for something that is not perfectly embedded into their program. Apart from that it´s just a matter of time until Punkbuster opens its "treasure chest". The more games delivered with it the more attackers who want to get rid of it. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Hawkeye 1985 0 Posted September 6, 2005 I voted for No too I know this Programm from Americas Army and not very like it.. the updates needs a lot of time and sometimes i would be kicked without a reason by this programm.. [Off-Topic] Hey Kegetys will you upgrade DXDLL for AA ? [Off-Topic End] Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Acecombat 0 Posted September 6, 2005 I agree with kegs we dont need Punkbuster its already compromised by many people and their knowledge already of the program will make it easy to break it , much better to have a unique custom made for OFP anticheat thingy inside it. [Offtopic] I for one hope we dont need Dxdll for AA otherwise what would be the differences between it and OFP Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
DBR_ONIX 0 Posted September 6, 2005 Voted no, as pointed out, such a widely used thing means more people trying to break it.. If someone cracks it for some other game, the same idea applys to OFP, which isn't good. (Say "This is uncrackable" or similar, and you'll get x[/x] times the ammount of people trying to crack it...) - Ben Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Dwarden 1125 Posted September 6, 2005 I think it will make modding (unit replacements) very difficult.... so no  You seriously don't know how PunkBuster works , it's NOT going to made modding difficult in any way ... please LOOK at the games PB supports , 50% of them have modding communities, mods and it works flawlessly ... please do some research before posting something like this ... Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Dwarden 1125 Posted September 6, 2005 I agree with kegs we dont need Punkbuster its already compromised by many people and their knowledge already of the program will make it easy to break it , much better to have a unique custom made for OFP anticheat thingy inside it.[Offtopic] I for one hope we dont need Dxdll for AA otherwise what would be the differences between it and OFP Â PB itself wasn't compromised in any critical sense ... ... what was compromised are these game engines (read fault of developers of these games) anyway what about theoretical game , i will crack my DirectX and cheat ... how You going to find me or stop me in OFP/OFPR ? correct answer ... You have no chance ... Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Dwarden 1125 Posted September 6, 2005 No. In addition to those cons mentioned, such "high level" anti-cheat systems work like a huge invitation for people to try to break it. Even I would propably be interested into trying to break it simply because of the challenge if it were there :P The game should use its own methods to do it, ones that suit the game better and are also integrated into the game better. A generic system used in such massively popular games as Punkbuster is used now would only mean that there would be many many times more people "working" on breaking the Armed Assault "protection", because when someone would break the protection on one of those popular games it would be broken in Armed Assault at the same time. Though, not that I personally care that much about it anyway, I have never encountered a cheater online in OFP (Propably because I do not play on public servers). Noone prevent developers to implement theirs own AC system ... some games (e.g. BF2) already have own internal AC which results into additional layer to PB ... Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
kegetys 2 Posted September 6, 2005 anyway what about theoretical game , i will crack my DirectX and cheat ... how You going to find me or stop me in OFP/OFPR ?correct answer ... You have no chance ... How about another theoretical game, I will make something like DXDLL or Fwatch for Armed Assault... How is Punkbuster able to know if it is a cheat or not? Correct answer is, it doesn't. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Dwarden 1125 Posted September 6, 2005 anyway what about theoretical game , i will crack my DirectX and cheat ... how You going to find me or stop me in OFP/OFPR ?correct answer ... You have no chance ... How about another theoretical game, I will make something like DXDLL or Fwatch for Armed Assault... How is Punkbuster able to know if it is a cheat or not? Correct answer is, it doesn't. Answer is quite simple ... cooperate with EBI developers Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
scars09 9 Posted September 6, 2005 the america armys players know the answer NOOOOOO Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Dwarden 1125 Posted September 6, 2005 the america armys players know the answer NOOOOOO I will ask You question , which servers You like to play at in America's Army ? with PB or without PB ... we speak about public (not private locked servers ... Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
kegetys 2 Posted September 6, 2005 Answer is quite simple ... cooperate with EBI developers Its already difficult enough to do such things, having to add extra things just for them to be compatible with an anti-cheat method would be too much extra work. Plus, if there is a "back door" in Punkbuster that would allow such mods to be made compatible with it, I seriously doubt that it does a very good job at protecting a game against cheats; What whould be stopping the cheats to use the same back door? Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Dwarden 1125 Posted September 6, 2005 Answer is quite simple ... cooperate with EBI developers Its already difficult enough to do such things, having to add extra things just for them to be compatible with an anti-cheat method would be too much extra work. Plus, if there is a "back door" in Punkbuster that would allow such mods to be made compatible with it, I seriously doubt that it does a very good job at protecting a game against cheats; What whould be stopping the cheats to use the same back door? yes it is questionable ... but hey TeamSpeak Overlay, Ati Tray Tool, Fraps etc works ... of course technically u can flag them as similar to cheat ... but does PB do it ? no ... sure ... DXDLL works like cheat ... and in fact there are same ways working cheats ... and PB already stop them ... anyway ... DXDLL method is not usefull for modern MP gaming (meant as making it "safe")... and You said You like to play on private servers ... then it's simple ... disable PB there and play with Your new DXDLL for ArmAs ... how simple it's OPTIONABLE! Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
finarvas 1 Posted September 6, 2005 No, as said it's much better to leave anti-cheat to the game itself. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Dwarden 1125 Posted September 6, 2005 No, as said it's much better to leave anti-cheat to the game itself. Then it will be first game i'm aware of to be capable reach that goal ... Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest Ti0n3r Posted September 6, 2005 No thanks. I trust BIS more than I trust punkbuster. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
zyklone 1 Posted September 6, 2005 Nope. Punkbuster is a broken concept. You can't verify anything on a computer owned by the cheater. Things have to be server side only. It's not that easy to stop the cheaters. Right now it's so easy to cheat in OFP that only real losers bother to do it. When it's harder to cheat more talented people will make cheats. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Dwarden 1125 Posted September 6, 2005 Nope. Punkbuster is a broken concept. You can't verify anything on a computer owned by the cheater. Things have to be server side only. It's not that easy to stop the cheaters. Right now it's so easy to cheat in OFP that only real losers bother to do it. When it's harder to cheat more talented people will make cheats. I fail to see how You going to check DX crack server side ? How You going to discover player is using cheat allowing him see people with neon textures or see thru buildings .... server side? ... sure that's possible for stuff You can verify and control server side ... but not in this case ... Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
mattxr 9 Posted September 6, 2005 What about the people who are harware banned for reasons of there own and changed the mines about what they did long ago in another game... and now are totaly clean of there actions they would not be able to play MP.. [Not reffering to me] I persoanly hate punkbuster.. i get kicked from games for having my game contrast to bright and so on.. its stupid Im sure BI have there new games based a new in dev anti-cheat system or something simler maybe.. which will be just as good hopefully Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Dwarden 1125 Posted September 6, 2005 What about the people who are harware banned for reasons of there own and changed the mines about what they did long ago in another game... and now are totaly clean of there actions  they would not be able to play MP.. [Not reffering to me]I persoanly hate punkbuster.. i get kicked from games for having my game contrast to bright and so on.. its stupid  Im sure BI have there new games based a new in dev anti-cheat system or something simler maybe.. which will be just as good hopefully Hardware bans are ONLY for these who cracking PB and directly altered PB software operations and are in violation of PB EULA ... And even GUID or HWUID banned they STILL can play ... at servers without PB ... it's optionable ! P.S. what have contrast / brightness kick to do with PunkBuster that's ADMIN made and added CHECK ! Not PB default ! Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
zyklone 1 Posted September 6, 2005 Nope. Punkbuster is a broken concept. You can't verify anything on a computer owned by the cheater. Things have to be server side only. It's not that easy to stop the cheaters. Right now it's so easy to cheat in OFP that only real losers bother to do it. When it's harder to cheat more talented people will make cheats. I fail to see how You going to check DX crack server side ? How You going to discover player is using cheat allowing him see people with neon textures or see thru buildings .... server side? ... sure that's possible for stuff You can verify and control server side ... but not in this case ... A player who can't see another player should not have information about where that player is. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Dwarden 1125 Posted September 6, 2005 Nope. Punkbuster is a broken concept. You can't verify anything on a computer owned by the cheater. Things have to be server side only. It's not that easy to stop the cheaters. Right now it's so easy to cheat in OFP that only real losers bother to do it. When it's harder to cheat more talented people will make cheats. I fail to see how You going to check DX crack server side ? How You going to discover player is using cheat allowing him see people with neon textures or see thru buildings .... server side? ... sure that's possible for stuff You can verify and control server side ... but not in this case ... A player who can't see another player should not have information about where that player is. You still need provide that informatiosn if he fires , moves and generate sound of visual effects to that client too ... yes u can kill many things server side but not all ... Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
