DayZ Standalone Confirmed

[griffinz 2816]

so why arent other games riddled with hacks?

Because the community hasn't tried hard enough/care enough to hack them Edited August 8, 2012 by Griff

[John (DayZ) 62]

I'm a little disappointed, as both of these questioned are answered in the OP, before you even asked them

I'm not quite disappointed - more startled, in fact - that you don't seem to know what you've actually written, friend.

The game will be released in an Alpha build for a low price point

Rocket is project lead for DayZ at Bohemia Interactive.

DayZ is set to follow the Minecraft pricing and development model.

There will be continued support for DayZMOD alongside DayZ game.

I suppose Rocket being slated as "project lead" could very loosely be construed as an answer to my first question. My second question asks why DayZ, the mod, will still be functional.

A bit of reading comprehension, 'eh?

[iceman28001 36]

Because the community hasn't tried hard enough/care enough to hack them

Wow, really. Nice to see that kind of excuse. " tried hard enough" Because it is so hard for this game. Good laugh, other games aren't as bad, because it is a bit harder + easier to get caught.

Anyways, anyone heard if it will dedicated servers hosted by BI? Or same format as it is now, because that just doesn't work....

Next, was about the hacking... but I see the attitude towards that. I hope they spend the $ investing in a real anti-hack/script setup.

[tsandrey 379]

What exactly is the Minecraft model? First cheap, then the price raises?

[terrvik 2409]

What exactly is the Minecraft model? First cheap, then the price raises?

You buy the game in an unfinished state at a lower price and it updates and gets more "finished" over time. At one point it will be finished and sold for a higher price. Just like Minecraft!

[griffinz 2816]

I suppose Rocket being slated as "project lead" could very loosely be construed as an answer to my first question. My second question asks why DayZ, the mod, will still be functional.

A bit of reading comprehension, 'eh?

Sorry John, I stand corrected.

Because some people will continue to play DayZ mod version, I suppose?

It's getting late here, I guess it's time for bed

Edited August 8, 2012 by Griff

[iceman28001 36]

What exactly is the Minecraft model? First cheap, then the price raises?

Yes. Minecraft went from like 9$ in alpha >15$ in beta >28$ or whatever now.

[Menny 116]

What exactly is the Minecraft model? First cheap, then the price raises?

Released in Alpha state for a small fee and as the game progresses, the price will be raised up until it hits it's final state.

[madballster@gmail.com 23]

so why arent other games riddled with hacks?

Cause they aren't built as mods but as standalone games?

[griffinz 2816]

Wow, really. Nice to see that kind of excuse. " tried hard enough" Because it is so hard for this game. Good laugh, other games aren't as bad, because it is a bit harder + easier to get caught.

yes, it is easy to hack, somehow I don't think the Razor1911 team dedicated themselves to cracking DayZ.

I'm saying this game didn't come packaged with hacks. It wasn't until more people played this game, did hackers become a problem.

[Shuny 7]

It's not the game that's riddled with hacks, it's the community.

No, the game is only riddled with hacks because the ARMA servers trusts the client too much, Every developer knows that you must NEVER trust the client. If it's not fixed in the ArmA 3 engine DayZ standalone will also be hack-fest.

[scharf19 0]

Haha you are a good man Griff! Keep up the good work guys!

[mdevch 12]

nah! not all.. we take it really seriously with our server and reacts super fast when cheaters are on. never kicked one to make room for admins.

[terrvik 2409]

No, the game is only riddled with hacks because the ARMA servers trusts the client too much, Every developer knows that you must NEVER trust the client. If it's not fixed in the ArmA 3 engine DayZ standalone will also be hack-fest.

There was no hacker problem before. Then the community got bigger. 1+1 equals 2.

[vesmo 21]

No, the game is only riddled with hacks because the ARMA servers trusts the client too much, Every developer knows that you must NEVER trust the client. If it's not fixed in the ArmA 3 engine DayZ standalone will also be hack-fest.

It was already stated the standalone DayZ will be BASED ON the ArmA 3 engine, meaning rocket can develop it pretty much any way he wants to. So stop making stupid accusations of a game and engine we haven't seen the slightest of sights yet -.-

[griffinz 2816]

For my 999th post, and my last before bed, I'll just request if you guys can stay on topic and don't sling poo at each other

(I've told my moderators to be trigger-happy with the warn-hammer)

[jwiechers 92]

No, the game is only riddled with hacks because the ARMA servers trusts the client too much, Every developer knows that you must NEVER trust the client. If it's not fixed in the ArmA 3 engine DayZ standalone will also be hack-fest.

Speaking in absolutes is always bad, but in this case, it's downright funny. For a start, most developers realize that you have to trust the client, however grudgingly, because otherwise you'll have issues that make playing over the internet difficult to impossible. There is a very good reason why most games use client-side hit detection methods instead of server side methods, however insecure that is, there are also good reasons for doing a lot of the other work on client instead of on server -- the server is substantially limited in how much computing resources it can dedicate, the client typically has power to spare.

The way ARMA2 handles Client-Server interaction is too trusting for something like DayZ and not optimized for PvP, but your absolute "every developer knows" is just silly given real world constraints and simple empirical data on how most games do it. We know it's not nice that we have to trust the client and in an ideal world, you'd use something like OnLive to eliminate everything but pixel-based aimbots (which were, by the way, the first aimbots), but we're not in an ideal world.

[butter_milch 66]

Could you guys please confirm which engine the game will be using? I'm 100% sure it will be the ArmA 3 engine but some people are still debating this so a bunch of words (in comprehensible order if possible) from the devs would be nice :)

[Shuny 7]

There was no hacker problem before. Then the community got bigger. 1+1 equals 2.

Surely the community getting bigger had an effect on the popularity of the hacks. But the Arma 2 engine allowed these cheats way before DayZ was out. Thus, the new community only revealed an existing issue.

It was already stated the standalone DayZ will be BASED ON the ArmA 3 engine, meaning rocket can develop it pretty much any way he wants to. So stop making stupid accusations of a game and engine we haven't seen the slightest of sights yet -.-

You don't know how to read.

[Neek (DayZ) 53]

Awww the thread de railed before i could post :(

Can't wait for this!

[Gua 16]

[Jarnis 43]

Speaking in absolutes is always bad, but in this case, it's downright funny. For a start, most developers realize that you have to trust the client, however grudgingly, because otherwise you'll have issues that make playing over the internet difficult to impossible. There is a very good reason why most games use client-side hit detection methods instead of server side methods, however insecure that is, there are also good reasons for doing a lot of the other work on client instead of on server -- the server is substantially limited in how much computing resources it can dedicate, the client typically has power to spare.

The way ARMA2 handles Client-Server interaction is too trusting for something like DayZ and not optimized for PvP, but your absolute "every developer knows" is just silly given real world constraints and simple empirical data on how most games do it. We know it's not nice that we have to trust the client and in an ideal world, you'd use something like OnLive to eliminate everything but pixel-based aimbots (which were, by the way, the first aimbots), but we're not in an ideal world.

Client-Server stuff should go with "Trust, but Verify". Server side sanity checks are very important part of any remotely secure online game. As long as the time-sensitive stuff is client side (looking smooth and responsive) and works in normal situations as if by magic, it doesn't matter if in the case of hacking or major network faults, the intially visible reaction is "reverted" and not accepted by the server.

Naturally there is a problem of performance - you could program a full "server side version of client simulation" and constantly verify that client is doing only stuff that is kosher but that would seriously hamper the number of clients you can handle per server - so you pick the battles and simplify things on the server side... and most evil hacks in modern games live in that gray area - exploiting the client while dodging server side checks.

(Current DayZ mod alpha is getting hacked to bits because there are no server side checks and it would appear that BattleEye can be neutered if the number of hacks is anything to go by...)

[crazedawg 1]

Really great news :)

Hope it will be using arma 3 engine :D

[Shuny 7]

Speaking in absolutes is always bad, but in this case, it's downright funny. For a start, most developers realize that you have to trust the client, however grudgingly, because otherwise you'll have issues that make playing over the internet difficult to impossible. There is a very good reason why most games use client-side hit detection methods instead of server side methods, however insecure that is, there are also good reasons for doing a lot of the other work on client instead of on server -- the server is substantially limited in how much computing resources it can dedicate, the client typically has power to spare.

The way ARMA2 handles Client-Server interaction is too trusting for something like DayZ and not optimized for PvP, but your absolute "every developer knows" is just silly given real world constraints and simple empirical data on how most games do it. We know it's not nice that we have to trust the client and in an ideal world, you'd use something like OnLive to eliminate everything but pixel-based aimbots (which were, by the way, the first aimbots), but we're not in an ideal world.

You're right, it is not a good thing to talk in absolute. But in this case, it is not about trusting the client a bit to improve the performance, it is about trusting the client so much you accept everything it asks for. You want to teleport every player into water ? Yup, no problem. You want a package full of weapons ? Sure, take it.

Basically, today, every player is an admin on any server and can do anything on the game. This is the first time ever I've seen this.

And I'd love a list of the game using only clients informations for hit detection. AFAIK most FPS games uses server-side detection, like Counter Strike, Unreal Tournament, etc ...

Last thing, don't tell people OnLive is the only solution against cheats, because it is not true, and you probably know it. See World of Tanks for an example: It doesn't require fiber connection internet and has almost never been hacked (except for one tiny graphical hack, which has since been fixed) because most of the event are handled server-side.

So yes, you're right on one point: You just can't handle everything on the server. But Arma is trusting the client WAY too much.

Edited August 8, 2012 by Shuny

[mdevch 12]

come one guys.. no game can be hackproof, there is always! ALWAYS! a way to hack a game, when a server responds..

Tell me one Game, that is not hacked.. Just one? There is no one!

BF3, BF2, COD, every COD!, CSS, every game with many players has hacks which will be sold by some stupid asses..

And be bought from more stupid asses..

The more players are playing and the more are flaming for getting killed, the more fun has the hackers to kill you!

Would everyone just shut up and don't claim all the time, mamama i got killed - i'm so poor, my life is over, all my weapons are gone...

Pussy acting, that's what hackers and cheaters attracts and is fun for them. So stop complaining, you make it just worse.

So YEAH - It is the communities fault and i agree 100% to dayz staff.

And no, there is no anti-cheat tool which works fine. No one. Punkbuster is crap, also the one from CS.

If dayz comes out of the same pricelevel like minecraft, i will do the same with minecraft.. Buy it 5 or more times!