+- The Lurker Lounge Forums (https://www.lurkerlounge.com/forums)
+-- Forum: The Lurker Lounge (https://www.lurkerlounge.com/forums/forum-4.html)
+--- Forum: The Lounge (https://www.lurkerlounge.com/forums/forum-12.html)
+--- Thread: I Have to Laugh (/thread-11256.html)
I Have to Laugh - Occhidiangela - 05-28-2003
The US Army created a video game/recruiting tool that used a popular game engine to make a free FPS. Of course, the LEET HAKZORZ and friends made a few little helpers for themselves . . .
I wonder if the guys who budgeted for this game allocated Operations and Maintenance funds for long term cheat detection and removal. They seem to have some admins on payroll. Let's hope they did not go to Blizz to learn any 'commercial best practices' in that regard. Seeing as how Starcraft was used at the Air Force Academy to do some illustration on the Principles of War, I shudder . . .
Make cheats, not war
The US Army's foray into violent PC games has been hailed a success. But, says David McCandless, it didn't allow for one thing - cheaters
Thursday May 22, 2003 The Guardian
Christopher has been killed in action many times: 305 to be exact. But his most recent death was the last straw. Defending an Alaskan pipeline from terrorist attack, he and his nine-man squad came under fire from a sniper who picked them off, one by one, in just under a minute. "We were lying on the ground, prone, in thick fog," he says. "There's no way he should have been able to shoot us, let alone see us. He must've been cheating."
Christopher, 24, is an avid player of America's Army, a violent online PC game created by the US Army to give the video-gaming generation a realistic taste of modern warfare. The soldier-simulator is free to download for any gamers interested in exploring "the adventures and opportunities" of a military career. Players handle realistic weapons, train as "advanced marksmen" snipers, rescue prisoners of war and engage in fire fights with enemies of freedom in virtual swamps, valleys and blasted villages all around the world.
Christopher plays for around two hours a day. In three months of playing, he has notched up 437 kills. He has also earned 30 honour points for internalising noble army traits such as teamwork, courage and integrity - and, of course, blowing the hell out of terrorists with his M203 grenade launching rifle.
The game has been a massive success. In the year since its launch, more than 1 million players have played more than 100m missions. Glowing reviews adorn the video games press. Expansion packs are planned. It has been a successful and innovative experiment by the world's "premier land force".
However, Christopher, like many others, is unhappy and frustrated. He is on the verge of giving up the game he loves for good. "There's almost no point in playing any more," he says. "Cheaters are ruining the game."
Online gaming is suffering from an epidemic of cheating. America's Army is just the latest in a long line of major titles - Quake III, Diablo II, Warcraft III and Battlefield 1942 - to be infested by dishonest players using "hacks", little programs that secrete themselves like parasites in the host game, and powerfully and invisibly enhance the player's ability.
"Evilhack", the main cheat for America's Army, for example, is freely available on the web. It makes all hostiles bright red, while computer-controlled "aimbots" ensure the player's gun never misses its targets. The undetectable program will even throw your M67 frag grenade for you if you accidentally hold it too long.
For the hundreds of thousands of gamers like Christopher who consider these games to be a sport - a test of mouse-marksmanship, reflexes and cunning - the rise of cheats has been devastating.
"It's akin to being burgled and having your most treasured possessions stolen," says veteran player Rob Miles.
Gaming communities, once celebrations of skill, have descended into bitching and ill-feeling. Paranoia reigns. Players no longer know whether their opponents are genuine or cheats. Games are ill-tempered. Accusations fly faster than bullets. Online leagues have folded. Players are deserting games in droves.
"Nobody trusts nobody," says Christopher. "If you play honestly and well, you run the risk of being accused of cheating and kicked out of the game." He has decided to quit for a while. "Until they do something about cheating, there's just no point playing any more."
Others feel the same. Angry soldiers have flooded America's Army forums demanding action. "For this not to be addressed is a slap in the face to all of us who are busting our humps to get honour points," said "Sloppy", one poster.
The army has been quick to respond and has pledged to engage the enemy. After all, using an aimbot is not among their stated values. Undercover operatives, or "admins", disguised as normal players have been deployed on all 140 official servers to hunt out cheaters.
"Players who act up, violate the rules of military contact and land warfare are banned from the game," says their spokesman, Paul Boyce Jnr.
An external security company, Even Balance, has been hired to deploy Punkbuster, its state-of-the-art, anti-cheat technology, to protect its players. Like a virus-checker, Punkbuster scans players' computers for illegal hacks. Those who are caught face lifetime bans. Its creator, Tony Ray, is a passionate anti-cheat crusader with a single message: "Cheating destroys." He has no truck with cheaters, or "punks" as he calls them. For him, they are the same as criminals.
"The worst cheaters are the evil people who are only happy when they cause ruin for others - like the punks who commit crimes under cover of darkness, from knocking over mailboxes to setting fires. It is far easier to break the work of another than to build something that enhances the lives of others in a positive way."
The only thing he hates more than a cheater is a cheater-coder (or "hax0r" as they are known in gaming patois). Hax0rs are almost universally maligned. Most are young kids, around 12 to 14 years old, although some are as young as nine. Ruinously bright, they hunger for the pure intellectual buzz they get from hacking a protection system. They know they are bringing online gaming to its knees, but don't seem to care.
"I'm famous," says Joolz, a well-known cheat coder from the south of England. By day, he's a corporate software engineer, by night the famed creator of Joolz Cheatz, arch-hack for the most popular action game on the net, Half-Life: CounterStrike. Of an evening, Joolz likes nothing better than taking on the "gits" who create anti-cheats. He loves the challenge. "I've used my skills to beat the game," he says.
He's clearly proud of his work. His cheats are lovingly created, almost hilariously multi-featured. One version allows you to simultaneously cheat, play your favourite MP3s, and run chat software - all from within the game.
"One of my favourite creations is called Lookaim. If you've got your back to someone and they look at you, it spins you round and shoots them. You looking at me? Bang! Not any more you're not!"
Joolz's hack is popular. Well over 50,000 people have downloaded it. He gets fanmail. It's given him a name and a Wild West notoriety. When Joolz walks into certain online chatrooms, a reverent quiet falls.
Perversely, though, he has a low opinion of those who use his cheats. "I've sat there for hours on end, writing the thing. They've just downloaded it from a website."
(Occhi note: why does he not set up a paypal account and charge for it?)
He's even built hidden backdoor features into his cheats to allow him to spot when other people are using his code and disable it. "I don't like being beaten by people using my cheat," he says. He secretly gathers information from his users. "Did you know most cheaters come from France?"
Honest gamers despair over remorseless hackers like Joolz. Threats of physical violence abound. Many have petitioned the publishers of their favourite games to do something - anything - about the problem. However, unlike the ideologically motivated US Army, commercial publishers seem reluctant to deploy expensive anti-cheat software, especially for older games nearing the end of their shelf lives.
As Punkbuster's Tony Ray says: "One vice-president of a top publisher told me that they believe it is in their best interests to let the cheating destroy a game so the players will get mad and move on to their next title."
Those companies who do take on the cheater-kiddies suffer the consequences. Two years ago, Valve, the creators of Half-Life: CounterStrike, vowed to protect their million or so players from cheaters. Today, they are still fighting a losing battle against prolific hackers like Joolz. "What takes me five hours to code takes them two weeks to counteract," he laughs.
Many gamers have given up on the authorities and decided to take matters into their own hands. Rob Miles, for example, has set up Cheat-police.com, a 7,000-strong constabulary of players who make citizens' arrests of cheaters, naming and shaming them online.
"I feel I have a highly developed sense of right and wrong," he explains. "Although most cheaters laugh at us and what we do, there appears to be emerging a grudging respect from their memberships."
Another player police force, United Admins, has established itself as a sort of gaming CIA, coordinating anti-cheat activity across the globe. For the sake of the community, they preach conciliation with cheaters, not punishment. Their anti-cheat software, Cheating Death, which copies many of its techniques from the cheats themselves, is proving highly effective.
The US army has all this to look forward to. By releasing America's Army, they may have been drawn into a battle they have no chance of winning, since there is one thing the cheaters and the anti-cheaters agree on. "Games will be cheat-free the same day society is crime-free," says Punkbuster's Tony Ray. "As long as bad people think they can get away with doing bad things, they will try and some will succeed."
Joolz agrees. Cheating will never be stamped out. He accepts he is partly to blame, but remains unapologetic. "I don't see cheating as wholly right. But why do people cheat at anything? Whether it's athletics or any sort of sport, they cheat because they can."
Army Game
www.cheat-police.com
www.counter-strike.net
www.unitedadmins.com
I Have to Laugh - --Pete - 05-28-2003
Hi,
We'll never have cheat free games now. The military will develop (or contract for the development) all the cheat busting software and make it all classified. Companies like Buzzard who try to use it (as if Buzzard would :) ) will be arrested en masse and locked away forever for breaching national security. People will silk screen the code onto their T shirts and walk around proudly proclaiming "this T shirt is a weapon". The carrying of any form of electronic, optical, magneto, or even paper storage media will be banned from all flights (international because you might be trying to smuggle secrets out of the country and national because you might hijack the plane to smuggle secrets out of the country). This will add so much time at the security check points that people will stop flying, it being faster to drive, bike, walk, or even take a train. The lack of air transport will cause the economy to collapse and this quadrant of the universe will fall into a depression. Public works overseen by Vogons will be attempted in a TVA like effort, but given the Vogon character, they will fail and this will become the intergalactic landfill.
Or maybe not.
BTW, what's the materiel cost of a small joint NATO exercise? ;)
--Pete
I Have to Laugh - Kasreyn - 05-28-2003
Quote:Occhi note: why does he not set up a paypal account and charge for it?)
BAD idea, if they do that then they can get nailed for copyright infringement. Maybe cheating at a game isn't a crime, but copyright infringement IS. It would give game companies a way to actually nail the writers of hack programs, which is why you never see this happening.
Quote:As Punkbuster's Tony Ray says: "One vice-president of a top publisher told me that they believe it is in their best interests to let the cheating destroy a game so the players will get mad and move on to their next title."
I remember a time when I was convinced this was Blizzard's reasoning for allowing cheating to ruin D1 online. Now I think it's mostly just due to laziness and ignorance. But still, I wouldn't be surprised if this motive were hanging around in the rear of their minds.
I wont even waste my time moaning over the use of the term "hacker" to describe useless amoral cretins like "Joolz". I know that's a fight I can't win. What's more annoying is the description of "hacks" as meaning "cheat programs", when there are many non-game-related hacks in this world. The Guardian should know better.
-Kasreyn
I Have to Laugh - ithil - 05-28-2003
> BAD idea, if they do that then they can get nailed for copyright infringement.
They can't be. This article does a good job of indirectly explaining why. It does violate the EULA, however (heh).
I Have to Laugh - Occhidiangela - 05-29-2003
Quote:BTW, what's the materiel cost of a small joint NATO exercise?
By joint, I assume you mean air, sea, and land lasting 3-5 days. My last recollection is that the cost, and by that I refer only to fuel and travel costs associated, would be in the arena of 8-15 million dollars, but the trouble with that figure is how costs are declared, and what is 'cost offered' and cost applied to NATO funding lines. Small to me would be between a bn and brigade level op from two or three nations, less than 10 ships, and at most three aircraft squadrons.
I am sorry, but the answer is sadly too complex in accounting for me to give any straighter answer than I did, and most of my finance experience was on the infrastructure side, not the operations side.
FWIW: Some 100 million dollars of NATO infrastructure money was spent in Bosnia, a non NATO nation, in 1995-1997. I find that little tid bit most interesting, considering some of the paltry sums I was after for funds to dredge the shipping channel in Rota, Spain . . .
I Have to Laugh - Drasca - 05-30-2003
But you might want to consider carrying a towel with you, and have ear-plugs in case there's some Vogon Poetry being read in the next Presidential inaugural speech.
I Have to Laugh - Feryar - 06-01-2003
Is there really such a thing as a small joint NATO exercise?
I've only been in one of the "Joint Winter" exercises in Norway, and you
guys sure shipped a lot of people over :)
I don't know if all exercises are that big, though.
I Have to Laugh - Occhidiangela - 06-02-2003
On the one hand we have the cheaters, and the cheat makers, but what has interested me ever since I knew this game would come out was:
Who is playing it, and are these the same guys who would do this stuff 'In Real Life.'
Are the guys who are playing this game anything like the following:
As described by an "imbedded reporter": (See why I put that term in quotes at the end.)
"Your typical young American in the helicopter and infantry combat units that I covered look like this. On average, he's 19.6 years old -- about six months older than his grandfather who served in World War II or Korea. He isn't old enough to buy a beer, and if he were home we would call him a "boy." But because he's at war, we call him a soldier or a Marine. He was a high school athlete who also worked part-time and, unlike many of his peers, he's never drawn an unemployment check and never wants to.
A few times a week, he writes to his sweetheart back home and hopes that when the mailbag arrives he'll get a letter from her -- and his mom -- though he'd never admit to the latter. If he gets a care package from home with disposable razors, shaving cream, toothpaste, beef jerky, toilet paper and baby wipes, he'll share them with his squad and be a hero for a day. He has a short haircut and tight muscles, wears a 3 pound Kevlar helmet and an 18 pound flak jacket to work, and can march all day in 100-degree heat with a 50 pound pack on his back. He knows how to use every weapon in his unit and can fieldstrip and re-assemble his personal weapon in less than a minute -- in the dark.
He's gone weeks without bathing but cleans his weapon before he sleeps.
His company "Gunny" or Sergeant First Class has been in combat before -- but this is the first time he and his lieutenant have been shot at. Under fire, he obeys orders instantly, but if asked will always have an opinion on how to do something better. Often, he'll be right.
He's been taught chemistry, physics and ballistics, and can navigate with a map and compass -- but prefers the GPS he bought at the Base Exchange. He's remarkably self-sufficient. He prepares his own meals, washes and mends his own clothes, digs his own foxhole and latrine, and keeps his feet dry and his canteens full. The kid who wouldn't share a candy bar with his brother will now offer his last drop of water to a wounded comrade, give his only ration to a hungry child and split his ammo with a mate in a firefight.
He's been trained to use his body as a weapon and his weapon like it was part of his body.
And he can use either to save a life -- or take one. He's already had more responsibility and seen more suffering and death than his civilian contemporaries will see in their lifetimes. The fellow who used to stay in the sack 'til noon now exists on three to four hours of sleep a day -- and when he comes home, he'll be on average 12 pounds lighter than when he left.
He's learned a whole new vernacular of military shorthand -- words like "CONUS," "H-hour," "Zulu time," "SNAFU" and "FUBAR." They mean nothing to civilians, and he doesn't care.
He knows grown men don't cry, but he has wept unashamed in public over a fallen friend because he knows heroes aren't defined just by the way they die -- but how they live.
He can now take profanity to the level of a new art form -- but carries a Bible in his rucksack and is unafraid to be seen reading from it. He's proud to be serving his country, reveres his commander in chief -- and knows that he is respected in return. While he is modest about his own courage and military prowess, he's absolutely certain that his is the toughest unit in the U.S. Armed Forces.
When he gets home, he won't talk much about the horror of war, but he will want more fresh milk, salads and homemade cookies than you ever thought possible. This fall, when he goes to a ballgame, he'll resent those who fail to stand in silence when they play our national anthem. He's enough to drive the liberals nuts. And somewhere this year, we need to find another 180,000 just like him who will volunteer to serve.
The Grain of Salt:
The author of the piece is Oliver North, who is hardly an 'embedded reporter' the way most others were, and who is a bit biased in his views regarding the Marines, the Army, and any number of other subjects that are liberally sprinkled throughout this piece, and earlier in the piece he mentioned why he was describing those in the combat arms: hence, he did not paint a picture of the women over there who also had the chance to get shot at. The bit about revering the Commander in Chief, would not have been added to the descriptions of Marines and Soldiers in Somalia in 1993, but the rest would have been just as true, and maybe he overestimates that element in this case as well.
I Have to Laugh - --Pete - 06-02-2003
Hi,
Not too far off, but not too right either.
Other than the technology that has changed a lot in the last four decades, the things I kind of disagree with:
reveres his commander in chief
Nope. That dude puts his pants on one leg at a time like everyone else. He gets the respect of position and office as long as he isn't disgracing both. It's the Army of the United States, not the Army of the President (although some in the late '60s and early '70s didn't seem to know this). There are a fair number of good people in the chain, there are also some fools and scoundrels, and that goes right to the top.
He's enough to drive the liberals nuts.
He's seen the price of war. If the conservatives want to fight and can't give him a good reason, he's going to be more "liberal" than any of those damned draft dodgers ever were.
Oh, and "when he comes home, he'll be on average 12 pounds lighter than when he left." Make that 40, and I started out at 175 and 6 foot even.
--Pete
I Have to Laugh - Occhidiangela - 06-03-2003
You and your peers and yourself were the folks whose service and sacrifice was behind the dropping of the voting and drinking ages to 18 from 21.
Seems the drinking age ran back up to 21 in most states after the Baby Boomers all dried up and realized that their kids would get drunk in college too, just like they did. :P However, they left the voting age at 18 even with the removal of the draft. (Hmmmm with 'selective service registration still required for men at 18, maybe we should let all men who register buy beer again with their 'draft card' as proof of ID. What a concept! Drinking and voting go hand in hand, right? I bet Budweiser would lobby for this one . . . )
In any case, that was the state of play when I hit 18, and I got to learn while in 'college' just what my limits insofar as intoxicants were. I consider that an important part of my own education. Without you guys, I'd have had to wait until there was less room for error, or gotten a fake ID.
Thanks, even though millions of brain cells died due to my freedom to soak my being in beer. Learning was achieved, one hangover at a time.
PS: The tone may be light, but the thanks is sincere on more than one level.
Oh, and about liberal veterans who have no time for conservatives, no kidding, they are all over the place, even down here in Texas. I particularly enjoyed one afternoon in front of a C Span show featuring Veterans against the Iraq war. Rather than a lot of empty noise, sound bytes and BS, the presentation they made, the speakers they had, the questions they raised, and the points they made were excellent, and provided me with food for a great deal of thought.
I wish more folks would have presented their views as intelligently. (Fox News, are you listening?) It would have changed the tenor of the public debate for the better, by orders of magnitude, though I wonder at whether or not that could have changed policy.
I Have to Laugh - Zaek, The Outcast - 06-03-2003
Drasca,May 30 2003, 05:03 AM Wrote:But you might want to consider carrying a towel with you, and have ear-plugs in case there's some Vogon Poetry being read in the next Presidential inaugural speech.Exactly
I Have to Laugh - --Pete - 06-03-2003
Hi,
The presidents of Budweiser, Coors, Miller and Guinness were having lunch together. The president of Budweiser ordered a Bud, that of Miller a Black Label, and the president of Coors a silver bullet. The president of Guinness ordered an iced tea. The waiter said, "Wouldn't you rather have a beer?" and the Guinness guy answered, "Well, of course. But seeing as no one else was having one . . ."
--Pete
I Have to Laugh - Nicodemus Phaulkon - 06-03-2003
Now you have the Canadian variant. ;)
*edit: Crap! *shoves another "n" into the title**
I Have to Laugh - Grumpy - 06-03-2003
Errr....Molson is not such a tastey beer...
I always assumed the Molson Golden was to Canada what Heineken is to Holand....and that there are actually better beers up there that are not consumed in mass in the US, was I wrong? Is Molson really the pinnacle of Canadien beer?
I Have to Laugh - Nicodemus Phaulkon - 06-03-2003
But Molson is by far the most recognizable name for the purposes of a joke. Although I suppose Labatt's could be used as well. ;)
Personally I'll opt for either a Sleeman's, Kokanee or one of the Big Rock Brewery's (Calgary, AB) options.
If you're interested: Canadian Beer Index.
I Have to Laugh - Occhidiangela - 06-04-2003
So that critical information, such as teh Canadian Beer Index, can be spread far and wide.
Thanks, Nico, that one's a keeper! :D
I Have to Laugh - A.PLH - 06-09-2003
molson is by far the worst beer i have ever had. i would drink coors or bud before i would touch it.
I Have to Laugh - WarBlade - 06-09-2003
:huh: Yeah, beer information is pretty critical information. One of my cousins recounted an episode of him and 4 other kiwis who were in Europe a couple of years back lamenting the absence of good beer at a decent price. He claimed to be getting a little tired of the beer conversation somewhere in it's fifth hour. :huh:
I must say website beer reviews are a little odd though eh? I mean, how does a reviewer get his hands on all the best beer to give them all a decent taste and will he even remember what the first was like after a few dozen. In light of that, I'll leave the news and reviews to you guys.
Have a kiwi website link. This one's on the house. :P
I Have to Laugh - channel1 - 06-11-2003
molson is by far the worst beer i have ever had. i would drink coors or bud before i would touch it.
I find Molson GOLDEN to be sickeningly sweet. A taste that I'd rather not acquire.
Molson CANADIAN is okay, as a mass-market beer, no worse than Labatt's Blue.
Upper Canada Lager was the best widely available beer, here. Not quite as good, since Sleeman bought them out. It's still pretty good, though. The only North American mass-market beer that conforms to the Bavarian Purity Act, it contains only water, barley and hops. It will also spoil (go skunky) pretty quick if it is not kept cold.
-rcv-