|
|
 |
| [Jan 30, 2012, 11:35 am ET] - Share - Viewing Comments |
The Battlelog forums have a follow-up on recent indications that Battlefield 3 players were being unfairly banned from playing by PunkBuster. Word is: "Together with the 3rd party service providers we have taken steps to remove the faulty bans, and improve the protection against future fake bans. We have determined that the root cause resulting in the server bans is not directly related to Battlefield 3, but rather related to select 3rd party services which server owners can use in conjunction with PunkBuster to protect their servers" (thanks BF3 Blog). Further, Eurogamer notes that DICE is now looking to hire an "Anti-Cheat Administrator" to further their efforts at maintaining a fair playing field.
Post Comment
Enter the details of the comment
you'd like to post in the boxes below and click the button at
the bottom of the form.
 |
| 63. |
Re: Battlefield 3 Bans Follow-up |
Feb 12, 2012, 13:24 |
Sepharo |
|
|
Paranoid Jack wrote on Feb 12, 2012, 10:08:
Look BF3 Hacks Galore > Nope No Hacks or Cheaters Here
Not sure why I am wasting my time but here goes... one last time. We are not on dial up anymore and latency can't help you explain away all the hacks that are out there. So glad you supposedly never see them. You can wear blinders all you like it matters not to me. Oh, and your breakdown made me LMAO, thanks.
"I just got done playing a few hours of CS, some guys were incredibly hard to hit while others were easy. It's not because they were hackers, they were terrible. It's because they don't set their rates right, their pings appear normal but they skip all over the fucking place."
This sounds like a short parody of my parody does it not? Well that is what you called it, right. Hmmm, because they don't set their rates right? Do you mean they may be altering something to make themselves harder to hit but they are still just normal? I'm sorry to you they are terrible players? Which mean you are so much better? You just gave a classic example of a hack or cheat that is not detectable and you yourself even said they were possibly doing it but that doesn't make them hackers? Hackers are cheaters, cheaters are hackers. If you alter the rate at which your packets are being sent to the server so that it makes you hard to hit you are HACKING. If you altered the game in ANY way to give yourself an advantage over people playing the game normally you are HACKING. Some might call it glitching or exploiting but it's all the same to me... you are cheating. And I am not saying you are but again you seem to be going way beyond trying to prove to us that there aren't hacks that are hard to detect... yet, you just gave us an example of one. Thanks for painting yourself into a corner. I promise you I will not come back with a response since you clearly see things in a different light. Sooner or later those rose colored glasses will come off or break. Take it easy kid... 
What makes my statement and yours different is that I'm claiming, the game was behaving strangely but I know it's related to the clients of those players and the way they have their cl_cmdrate, cl_updaterate, and rate set. It's not a goal of theirs to set those incorrectly to impart them an advantage as another side effect will be that they themselves can't hit shit also in CS those are supposed to be configured, servers tell you what to set yours to upon entry (66tick 100tick etc.). Whereas you would look at the same people and claim they're hacking. Obviously those things aren't the same in BF3 but analogous issues can cause similar behavior.
you seem to be going way beyond trying to prove to us that there aren't hacks that are hard to detect YOU HAVE A READING COMPREHENSION PROBLEM. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| [I'm not trolling I'm just] tossing stuff like that in there only to get your panties all bunched up. -TrollinThundr |
|
|
|
|
| |
|
|
.. ..
Copyright © 1996-2013 Stephen Heaslip. All rights reserved.
All trademarks are properties of their respective owners.
Twitter 
