Dont play COD4 / MW1 online

zaphod79 · **Joined:** 16th Apr, 2008 **Posts:** 14517

I spent some time earlier this week going back and playing a few games of COD6 , and Zombies on COD5 then popped in COD4.

Since I was late to the series I've hardly played any of it in multiplayer so started off a match to find I was in a hacked room.

The initial game the only indication that something was wrong was the spam all over the map (looked a bit like this)

I came out , and tried another map - this one started off with the enemy firing a never ending stream of grenades from their guns (killcam showed just a stream of them - not someone with perks - another hacked game) - so I tried another ... and another .... and every single game that started was hacked or modded in some way so I it up and played something else.

*Normally* Microsoft are good at policing what goes on in these games and I thought it just might have been a one off - but looking online at both Microsofts and Infinity Wards forums I found this has been going on for a while and worse than that I was lucky that my game wasnt screwed up so badly I couldn't play again.

"De-Ranking" its called , since the people who are running the mods can put in any changes they like they can also change the value of points you get for a kill and some clever person found out , if you change this number to the minimum the value will hold (something like -700000) then you lose all the ranks you have gained , are less then level 1 , and so cant join any matches - effectively killing the game - And since the data for this is online you cant even wipe it off your machine and start again - your basically stuck until someone at Infinity ward can reset your details (from what i've seen they used to do this fairly regularly and quickly but have given up on it and there are people saying they have been trying for weeks with no answer)

Infinity Wards forum on it is just filled with people complaining that they have given up on the game and the hackers are making it unplayable

http://www.infinityward.com/forum/viewforum.php?f=8

And its the exact same for Microsoft

http://forums.xbox.com/xbox_forums/xbox ... f/773.aspx

Here's not a bad article about it

http://www.planetxbox360.com/article_14 ... gacy_Title

Quote:

CoD4 Hacked: Modding Tarnishes a Legacy Title
by Zach Pint

Tweet

Last April, Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 2 was compromised when a hacker corrupted the game causing Xbox Live to send out "potential phishing attempts." That problem received immediate attention from Microsoft and Infinity Ward, and the issue has since been resolved. So why is it that Call of Duty 4: Modern Warfare has been experiencing hacking problems on Xbox Live since February 2011, but nothing has been done about it?

Here are the facts: Since February 2011, hackers and modders have been infiltrating public matches over Xbox Live. There are numerous types of hacks used which cause the following in-game experiences: The de-ranking of players in the same match as the hackers, the automatic Level 55 10th prestige ranking of players in the same match (for a price), unlimited ammunition, invincibility, walking through walls, seeing through walls, spawning on top of buildings, spawning out of the map, super speed, and probably others of which I am not yet aware. These hackers have ruined the excellent experience Call of Duty 4 used to offer and needless to say, it is a true shame.

In order to get a better idea of Call of Duty 4's current situation, I sat down and played 50 unique matches on Xbox Live. Of the 50 matches, a total of 33 were hacked. That means there is approximately a 66% chance of playing with a hacker who has modded the game to their preference. I found that every game type (Team Deathmatch, Headquarters, Cage Match, etc.) could be hacked as well. In the modded matches I played, I encountered over 40 different hackers. These numbers are as staggering and completely unacceptable.

Many of you may be wondering why this is such a big deal. Call of Duty 4 was released in 2007 and is now 3 1/2 years old, so who cares if the game has been hacked? The game may be over 3 years old, but that hasn't stopped the Xbox Live community from making it the 8th most played game on Xbox Live. The first Modern Warfare still consistently places in the Top 10 on Xbox Live Activity, so it should not matter how old the game is, as gamers still come back to play it every week. I surveyed 100 gamers who continue to play Call of Duty 4, and not surprisingly based on the statistics above, each gamer had played in a session that had been modded.

In many cases, the hackers actually advertise the fact that they are hacking the game. In the majority of hacks, colorful text appears at the top-left portion of the screen, displaying the hacker’s gamertag, and the website that taught him how to do it. This is an obvious violation of the Xbox Live Terms of Use and Conditions, and they are boasting about it. We contacted Activision and Infinity Ward about the rise in hackers playing through Xbox Live.

Activision’s official statement is:

“The developers of the game (Infinity Ward), are aware of this issue and are currently looking into it. We advise caution whenever engaging in online interactions, as this content is neither rated nor completely moderated. We recommend that you keep your account information private, and that you do not accept invites from anyone that you do not know. If you find yourself in a lobby/match that appears to be hacked/modded, then we suggest you leave that match/lobby immediately and join another match. We hope to have this issue resolved as soon as possible. Thank you for your patience.”

Infinity Ward’s official statement is:

“We are looking at how we can further improve the situation on legacy titles such as Call of Duty 4. The first such move will be to update the playlists for Call of Duty 4 to allow access to all game modes regardless of rank.”

Infinity Ward called Modern Warfare a “legacy title” and rightly so. It’s a benchmark in the genre of first-person shooters, and a staple for the Xbox Live community. The online game is broken right now, and we really hope Infinity Ward, Activision and Microsoft work to fix it, restoring the game to its former glory.

The big problem here is you have no idea that this is 'broken' - could buy the game / multiplayer maps / other stuff only to find your locked out (right now Tesco are doing an offer - pre-order MW3 and get MW1 for £10) and if your locked out the game theres very little you can do about it.

I guess unless they do go back and patch it the answer at the moment is *not* to play MW1 online :-(

WTB · **Joined:** 27th Mar, 2008 **Posts:** 14497

And this is one of the main reasons I gave up playing the CoD games prior to BLOPS (although give it a few more months and that'll likely be the same). The final straw was the rock glitch in one of the MW2 map packs which would let you get inside a rock on a certain map and be invisible and unkillable. I think they've fixed it now but it took them nearly a year to patch it. It would've been a piss easy five minute job fix as well. They were 100% aware of the problem because there were literally 100s of threads on the forums complaining about it, along with loads of million-views YouTube videos calling on IW to fix it.

They have no interest whatsoever in supporting their community after launch, instead focusing immediately on the next iteration to milk as much money as possible. It doesn't surprise me at all that the older games are like the Wild West at this stage.

It's baffling that they get away with it really. I don't understand it. I still buy them every year, too. Maybe we're fucking hypnotised or something.

Hearthly · **Joined:** 11th May, 2008 **Posts:** 13386

At least you don't have to put up with this kind of shit when you game on consoles.

Wait, hang on.

(And I'm genuinely not being facetious/flippant here, as this is where the lack of dedicated servers run by respected clans and vigilant admins really can hurt. P2P is such a fucking catastrophically abominable model for online games hosting, and they charge you more for the privilege too! Incredible, TBH.)

Doctor Glyndwr · **Joined:** 30th Mar, 2008 **Posts:** 32624

Dammit, just a few seconds too late for the "in before AE post knocking console gaming and praising PC gaming" post I was planning.

Hearthly · **Joined:** 11th May, 2008 **Posts:** 13386

Doctor Glyndwr wrote:

Dammit, just a few seconds too late for the "in before AE post knocking console gaming and praising PC gaming" post I was planning.

I actually have my own personal batphone in place for just this sort of occasion.

Satsuma · **Joined:** 20th Apr, 2008 **Posts:** 14416

This does sound like an unacceptable situation if over half of the games are destroyed by hackers. It just demonstrates publishers unwilling to throw any money at existing games correcting bugs or hacks where no money is being made. It's nothing new though so I'm surprised that there's anyone surprised.

Bit surprised that WTB stopped playing MW2 because of one bug in one part of one map on the DLC. I'm sure he was just being silly though cause his disquiet about MW2 is well documented elsewhere in here somewhere. :kiss:

Hearthly · **Joined:** 11th May, 2008 **Posts:** 13386

Ian Fairies wrote:

This does sound like an unacceptable situation if over half of the games are destroyed by hackers. It just demonstrates publishers unwilling to throw any money at existing games correcting bugs or hacks where no money is being made.

Which is where an active community with the power to run their own servers*, mod the games, introduce stuff like Punkbuster etc means that you can still play the likes of Counterstrike Source on servers where you can be 100% sure that no fucker will be hacking anything.

* (Clan servers in particular, where the clan pays for and runs their own server, so they've got a vested interest in keeping it empty of twats and griefers and hackers, and giving everyone a decent run at the game. A lot of clans will actively balance teams with their own clan members, to keep games fair and flowing properly.)

WTB · **Joined:** 27th Mar, 2008 **Posts:** 14497

Ian Fairies wrote:

This does sound like an unacceptable situation if over half of the games are destroyed by hackers. It just demonstrates publishers unwilling to throw any money at existing games correcting bugs or hacks where no money is being made. It's nothing new though so I'm surprised that there's anyone surprised.

Bit surprised that WTB stopped playing MW2 because of one bug in one part of one map on the DLC. I'm sure he was just being silly though cause his disquiet about MW2 is well documented elsewhere in here somewhere. :kiss:

Yeah I have a vendetta against MW2!

No seriously I like the CoD games. The singleplayer campaigns are bobbins and I still prefer Battlefield, but I do enjoy pwning noobs in CoD as much as the next guy. Unfortunately, MW2 was ruined for me after I waited months for them to fix that glitch. And all of the other bollocks such as 10th prestige hacks and colourful usernames, and 'hacked lobbies' full of cheating dickhead 12 year olds. It just got annoying and nothing was done about it so I stopped playing. I'm not surprised it's only getting worse based on IW's complete lack of 'giving a shit'.

I do also despise the killstreaks in MW2 because they totally ruin the whole dynamic of the game. Fortunately they've learnt from their mistakes with regard to 'nukes' for MW3. Not holding out for any change with regards to their despicable lack of support though. Although, this new paid for malarky might help them buck their ideas up. If people are paying a monthly fee for whatever it is they're going to give us, surely they're obliged to keep these twats from ruining the game.

WTB · **Joined:** 27th Mar, 2008 **Posts:** 14497

AtrocityExhibition wrote:

Ian Fairies wrote:

This does sound like an unacceptable situation if over half of the games are destroyed by hackers. It just demonstrates publishers unwilling to throw any money at existing games correcting bugs or hacks where no money is being made.

Which is where an active community with the power to run their own servers*, mod the games, introduce stuff like Punkbuster etc means that you can still play the likes of Counterstrike Source on servers where you can be 100% sure that no fucker will be hacking anything.

* (Clan servers in particular, where the clan pays for and runs their own server, so they've got a vested interest in keeping it empty of twats and griefers and hackers, and giving everyone a decent run at the game. A lot of clans will actively balance teams with their own clan members, to keep games fair and flowing properly.)

It's not really anything to do with p2p and everything to do with the developers completely neglecting to support their games beyond a couple of map packs. A similar thing happened to Halo 3. Difference was, Bungie patched it and now it doesn't happen anymore. IW have just left their games to rot.

Hearthly · **Joined:** 11th May, 2008 **Posts:** 13386

WTB wrote:

It's not really anything to do with p2p and everything to do with the developers completely neglecting to support their games beyond a couple of map packs. A similar thing happened to Halo 3. Difference was, Bungie patched it and now it doesn't happen anymore. IW have just left their games to rot.

Well P2P is inherently vulnerable by definition of how it works, but beyond that, the gaming community itself invests in and actively supports games on the PC, even really fucking ancient ones, you can still get a good game of Quake 2 these days if you have a mind to.

The consoles are absolutely left to the mercy of the likes of Cuntivision, where profit is the only motive, so they're ALWAYS going to fuck their 'legacy' (three years lol) games off.

That's why it's always a good idea to have people who love games actively involved with keeping things running and playable for the gaming community at large.

Doctor Glyndwr · **Joined:** 30th Mar, 2008 **Posts:** 32624

AtrocityExhibition wrote:

Well P2P is inherently vulnerable by definition of how it works,

Rubbish. Consoles have a huge advantage because they only allow the running of signed binaries, ruling out a fuck ton of dedicated PC server problems at a stroke. Are you seriously claiming that PC dedicated servers are less
hackable than a console using digital signing? This problem is rooted in MS doing a poor job policing their platform for hacked clients and not any inherent PC bs console differentiation.

Malc · **Posted:** Sun Jun 19, 2011 0:35

I'm with AE here, "trusted" servers from known clans/providers are much better than any random p2p offering.

Yes there will be some servers that are just as hacked (or even just using non standard settings) but you quickly learn which ones they are and avoid them.

Back when I was playing Q3 and UT (and to a lesser extent Star Trek Elite Forces) I had a good 30-40 servers across the UK and Europe (and some on the East coast of America too) that I trusted and where I either knew the admin code, or could pop into a quakenet irc channel and find someone who knew the admin code to sort out any problems.

If you want to just play some pickup game in a p2p game (and I'm not just taking about consoles here) then you have very little control over where you are playing.

Malc

Doctor Glyndwr · **Joined:** 30th Mar, 2008 **Posts:** 32624

But a random PC server has more chance of being exploited than a random console server.

(CoD4 for 360 is unusual in that it's widely hacked, compared to my PC gaming days on various FPSs when I had a terrible success rate with servers. Or do you disagree?)

WTB · **Joined:** 27th Mar, 2008 **Posts:** 14497

Let's face it, they both have their problems, but as Rich says, people with their modded Xboxes have found a way to exploit the p2p system. I'm sure next time around it'll be a little more difficult. And, again, blame also lies with the developers for not making the necessary fixes. Bungie proved that this stuff can be prevented with their patch just last year.

Also, just to make it clear, I'm pretty experienced with the PC side of things - I was an admin on Jolt's public Counter-Strike servers for nearly five years. We ran all of the anti-cheat mechanisms available, but nothing can prevent someone using a day0 aimbot bar manually banning them until the anti-cheat software is updated.

I personally think the main advantage with dedicated servers is the eradication of lag. Exploitation is fairly prominent in both - but arguably more so on PC due to its open platform nature.

Plus, the older CoD games are an exception. Bar the now fixed Halo 3 I've never seen hacking and cheating anywhere else*. CoD has the combined problems of being immensely popular and a complete lack of continued developer support, with no mechanism for gamers to add the support themselves.

*Not saying it doesn't happen, just that I haven't seen it, and therefore it can't be that huge of a problem - compared to PC FPSes, of which I don't think I can name a single one out of the dozens I've played over the years that haven't suffered from cheating shites quite prominently.

Mr Dave · **Posted:** Sun Jun 19, 2011 1:02

The cynic in me wonders whether CoD4 is left like this to encourage movement to newer releasses of CoD.

I'd be quite surprised if there weren't quite a few bannings from MS.Just not enough to make enough of a diffference at the moment.

WTB · **Joined:** 27th Mar, 2008 **Posts:** 14497

But as ever, we have to start the PC v consoles debate. The ironic thing is that I know for a fact most of the people who wind up defending the consoles on here are avid PC gamers as well as console gamers. I know Rich likes to keep a well-specced machine, as do I, so why would it be in our interests to hark on about the consoles as if they're 'best'?

I enjoy the merits of both platforms, but I'm not happy to sit and watch bollocks get spouted about how shit the consoles apparently are. What we need to accept is that none of us are out to lay into the PC, but it seems the people who play mainly on the PC are constantly hell-bent on telling we 'console gamers' how silly we are for playing on rubbish primitive machines.

Malc · **Posted:** Sun Jun 19, 2011 1:07

Doctor Glyndwr wrote:

But a random PC server has more chance of being exploited than a random console server.

(CoD4 for 360 is unusual in that it's widely hacked, compared to my PC gaming days on various FPSs when I had a terrible success rate with servers. Or do you disagree?)

I agree with that, but you eliminate that randomness by using "trusted" servers, the jolt servers that WTb mentioned, the BW servers before that, any of the Clanbase servers and whoever owns them in the states these days. Many of the top clans also have their own banks of servers which are often public or bookable via a web page for more organised play.

I guess you can have a similar argument about playing only your friends on p2p, but if you want to play a public game, a "known" server is your best bet.

Malc

Malc · **Posted:** Sun Jun 19, 2011 1:14

WTB wrote:

But as ever, we have to start the PC v consoles debate. The ironic thing is that I know for a fact most of the people who wind up defending the consoles on here are avid PC gamers as well as console gamers. I know Rich likes to keep a well-specced machine, as do I, so why would it be in our interests to hark on about the consoles as if they're 'best'?

I enjoy the merits of both platforms, but I'm not happy to sit and watch bollocks get spouted about how shit the consoles apparently are. What we need to accept is that none of us are out to lay into the PC, but it seems the people who play mainly on the PC are constantly hell-bent on telling we 'console gamers' how silly we are for playing on rubbish primitive machines.

I think they are suited for different things, but I can't play FPS games on consoles, I get frustrated by the lack of precision (or at last my perceied lack of precision) of the controller. My kids love them, they're just not for me.

I've not played an RTS on a console, but that's another one I imagine I wouldn't like, however almost any other game is potentially just as good on a console or pc. You're always going to have the argument over ease of access of a console v upgrade and customisabilty of a pc, but if I had the money I would definitly have both. As I don't, Xbox it is for me for now.

Malc

Malc · **Posted:** Sun Jun 19, 2011 1:21

Back to the p2p/server thing.

Oooh analogy time!

If you wanted to chat with someone via posting messages to the internet, would you fire of messages to random people trying to share your thoughts of with them, or would you pick a few trusted web sites where you know you can get in contact with the admin team if something goes wrong?

Malc

GovernmentYard · **Joined:** 30th Mar, 2008 **Posts:** 5318

I'd do both. Twitter and Beex, innit?

Sometimes one is more what I'm after than the other.

Hearthly · **Joined:** 11th May, 2008 **Posts:** 13386

Doctor Glyndwr wrote:

Rubbish. Consoles have a huge advantage because they only allow the running of signed binaries, ruling out a fuck ton of dedicated PC server problems at a stroke. Are you seriously claiming that PC dedicated servers are less
hackable than a console using digital signing? This problem is rooted in MS doing a poor job policing their platform for hacked clients and not any inherent PC bs console differentiation.

But if the platform or even the specific game is compromised then signed binaries are as much use as a tuna fish douche. (As happened with the PS3 hack as well as the problems on the 360.)

When I say P2P is inherently vulnerable I mean that, by definition, and because you're not all connecting to a dedicated server, one of the machines 'in the game' has to be explicitly trusted as the server, which is why the hackers have been able to de-rank the people they're playing with as well as do all the usual hacking bullshit.

Correct me if I'm wrong, but whilst PC games have been targeted consistently by hackers over the years, the one thing they've never managed to do is 'damage' the other clients connected to the server, because there's a dedicated server standing between all the clients in that game. So whilst the hacker might have his aimbot and weapon hacks and all that shit on his client, the server is still going to tell that client to fuck right off if it tries to modify anything on any of the other clients.

Hearthly · **Joined:** 11th May, 2008 **Posts:** 13386

Doctor Glyndwr wrote:

But a random PC server has more chance of being exploited than a random console server.

(CoD4 for 360 is unusual in that it's widely hacked, compared to my PC gaming days on various FPSs when I had a terrible success rate with servers. Or do you disagree?)

The one thing you don't have to worry about on PC is playing on random servers with random people, as you'll very quickly start to get a list of your favourite servers to play on, where you know game etiquette will be adhered to, the server will be protected as well as it possibly can be, and there'll almost always be a human admin or two online to kick the tossers should they have some kind of Zero Day exploit going on or suchlike.

Even if you get 4 or 5 BEEXers together in the lobby of a multiplayer game on the 360, it's still going to chuck you into a game with a random bunch of potential arseholes to make up the game, some or all of whom may be hacking/glitching to their hearts' content or just being dickheads.

Malc has already covered this anyway.

Hearthly · **Joined:** 11th May, 2008 **Posts:** 13386

WTB wrote:

I enjoy the merits of both platforms, but I'm not happy to sit and watch bollocks get spouted about how shit the consoles apparently are. What we need to accept is that none of us are out to lay into the PC, but it seems the people who play mainly on the PC are constantly hell-bent on telling we 'console gamers' how silly we are for playing on rubbish primitive machines.

XBox Live is a paid for service is it not.

You're paying for the console, you're paying for the games, you're paying again for the right to play those games online, you're paying again just to get the maps that should have shipped with the games at launch, and Twattovision have made it quite clear they'll be having you pay monthly subs for specific games on top of that just as soon as they think they can get away with it. (Make no mistake, MW Elite is the tip of a very large iceberg.)

For all that cash you get games running with crap graphics at sub-HD resolutions and shit framerates on a dodgy P2P framework that's laggy, unreliable and has been hacked, along with stunningly awful VOIP that'd make a Commodore 64 voice synthesiser blush and a spacky controller that means FPS games need assisted aiming. If you got an early 360 chances are it's blown up (more than once), if you've gone down the PS3 route you've had all your personal details stolen (and it might have blown up too).

You need to have the right disc in the drive to play games, having a load of discs scattered around a console is so quaint, nice and retro, but it's necessary because digital distribution on the consoles is:

a) Extremely limited
b) Majestically expensive (I paid £2.49 for DiRT2 in the Steam christmas sale, BC2 was on there for under a fiver in the same sale.)

If you want to use your profile on a different console you have to migrate it off, apparently you can carry it around on a USB stick, but that still looks shit compared to having Steam installed on as many PCs as you like, and installing your games on as many PCs as you want to, and simply using a single cached sign-on at every machine to get access to your stuff.

And then at the end of all that expense and hassle, you get de-ranked in a game on a 'secure platform' by some random Ritalin-junkie American teenager screaming 'FUCKING FAG' at you. Wonderful.

So yes, frankly, to me that's both silly and primitive.

Doctor Glyndwr · **Joined:** 30th Mar, 2008 **Posts:** 32624

AtrocityExhibition wrote:

Correct me if I'm wrong, but whilst PC games have been targeted consistently by hackers over the years, the one thing they've never managed to do is 'damage' the other clients connected to the server, because there's a dedicated server standing between all the clients in that game. So whilst the hacker might have his aimbot and weapon hacks and all that shit on his client, the server is still going to tell that client to fuck right off if it tries to modify anything on any of the other clients.

You're wrong because nothing is being modified on other clients. Go back and read the hack description again. It's all about tainting the stats server with invalid data.

CoD4 stats are on a dedicated central server or they wouldn't persist from game to game. The fact people have managed to use a compromised 'server' to submit crap to the stats service that it accepts and stores just means the stats service is bunk. The fact that crap data in the stats service makes games unjoinable in the future is down to the client trusting the crap in the stats server. Both issues are rooted in sloppy programming from Infinity Ward. Neither problem has anything to do with the peer-to-peer or dedicated server styles of game hosting.

Similar things happened to the UT2k4 stats server, if I recall correctly, during the game's long open beta. They didn't render the game unjoinable (which is particularly egregiously shit) but they did have people manipulating their stats. The entire stats database was reset multiple times because of this.

If we wanted to really go for it, FPSs with "auto download maps and resource" option (like Unreal Tournament) could be used as an infection vector for trojans that really could modify other player's clients. Consoles are immune to this sort of attack because they won't let any binaries onto the system from non-signed sources.

PC gaming is not the anathema for all ills you keep portraying it as. It has its shortcomings, same as everything else.

Mr Dave wrote:

The cynic in me wonders whether CoD4 is left like this to encourage movement to newer releases of CoD.

I could see it being a low priority for Activision, particularly because most of the coders who worked on in will have left during the Infinity Ward purge -- you know how horrible it is to do complex bug patches against unfamiliar codebases. But Microsoft? Every one of those compromised clients is using a piracy-enabled hacked 360. I'm surprised they are so lackadaisical about it.

ApplePieOfDestiny · **Joined:** 17th Dec, 2008 **Posts:** 8293

Microsoft probably do care, but are waiting for a point where dealing with it will have the greatest public effect. Like the day MW3 launches.

Hearthly · **Joined:** 11th May, 2008 **Posts:** 13386

Doctor Glyndwr wrote:

You're wrong because nothing is being modified on other clients. Go back and read the hack description again. It's all about tainting the stats server with invalid data.

CoD4 stats are on a dedicated central server or they wouldn't persist from game to game. The fact people have managed to use a compromised 'server' to submit crap to the stats service that it accepts and stores just means the stats service is bunk. The fact that crap data in the stats service makes games unjoinable in the future is down to the client trusting the crap in the stats server. Both issues are rooted in sloppy programming from Infinity Ward. Neither problem has anything to do with the peer-to-peer or dedicated server styles of game hosting.

Similar things happened to the UT2k4 stats server, if I recall correctly, during the game's long open beta. They didn't render the game unjoinable (which is particularly egregiously shit) but they did have people manipulating their stats. The entire stats database was reset multiple times because of this.

If we wanted to really go for it, FPSs with "auto download maps and resource" option (like Unreal Tournament) could be used as an infection vector for trojans that really could modify other player's clients. Consoles are immune to this sort of attack because they won't let any binaries onto the system from non-signed sources.

Fair enough, but the fundamental problem remains one of the blurring of lines between clients and server, whereby the main central server trusts a 'server' from each of the games to feed it information. I don't see how a similar situation could exist with a dedicated server unless one of the clients actively hacks the server itself. (And I readily concede this isn't PC specific, there's no reason they couldn't use dedicated servers for console games, it's just they prefer the cheap-ass 'solution' of P2P and having the game experience be dependent on someone's home ADSL connection and a kid somewhere not rage-quitting at some point leaving everyone looking at a 'host migration' screen.)

What you're describing with Unreal Tournament isn't the same thing, as people can simply choose not to allow servers to send them maps and suchlike (certainly you could always choose not to have Counter Strike servers send you anything). It's not much different to clicking on 'YES' when a website asks you to install a naked Britney Spears screensaver.

I can't comment specifically on UT2K4 as I never played it, although there's a clue in the name as to how far back you're going there......

As I understand it CoD4/MW1 aren't the only games that have been hacked, WTB makes reference to a Halo issue that was fixed by Bungie although I'm unaware of the details on that one.

devilman · **Posted:** Sun Jun 19, 2011 11:10

Wouldn't this kind of cheating be pretty easy to detect if they wanted to? Are they just ignoring the problem? (Sorry, I've only skimmed over the thread and never played COD online). If they could detect it, wouldn't they just start banning consoles and gamertags? Plus if they're compromising someone else's server, wouldn't that class as hacking and therefore be a criminal activity? Or does no-one particularly care because it's 'just a game'?

Umm.. that's probably enough questions.

Derek The Halls · **Joined:** 31st Mar, 2008 **Posts:** 3742

Really this topic title is good advice generally. Even if they do patch this problem.

Hearthly · **Joined:** 11th May, 2008 **Posts:** 13386

devilman wrote:

Wouldn't this kind of cheating be pretty easy to detect if they wanted to? Are they just ignoring the problem? (Sorry, I've only skimmed over the thread and never played COD online). If they could detect it, wouldn't they just start banning consoles and gamertags? Plus if they're compromising someone else's server, wouldn't that class as hacking and therefore be a criminal activity? Or does no-one particularly care because it's 'just a game'?

Umm.. that's probably enough questions.

It's all about money at the end of the day.

Console games have a very short lifecycle in terms of their ability to generate cash. After the initial sales flurry and then a round or two of DLC, that's it.

Console owners don't help themselves by being such pre-owned fans, so even though millions of copies of the likes of CoD4/MW1 may be 'sold' in Year 2 or 3 of release, the vast majority of those will be pre-owned, so the publishers and developers don't see a penny of the revenue.

As such, the publishers simply look to get a new release out in the franchise every 12-18 months, and the old stuff can just get fucked, especially given the resource (i.e. cash) they may potentially have to chuck at the problem to get it fixed.

PC games have a much longer shelf life because we have mature and reliable digital distribution platforms, so games can be sold cheaply as they get older, but the publisher still sees a nice cut of the revenue, the pre-owned market effectively doesn't exist on the PC, and yet we still have bucketloads of really cheap games to choose from. (Just take a look at Steam or GoG any day of the week, there's always a sale on, and Steam's christmas sales are epic.)

On top of that, the 'PC games ecosystem' if you will is far more controlled and owned by the players themselves, who have an interest that goes beyond the commercial and into genuine interest and appreciation for the games available, which is why you can still play Quake 2 and Counterstrike Source online, on good dedicated servers, without any hassle at all.

WTB · **Joined:** 27th Mar, 2008 **Posts:** 14497

Stop harking on about shite that we all already know. We all have fucking PCs and use them for gaming regularly. Go look in the Frozen Synapse thread for a clue of just how big the choir is you're preaching to. The difference between us and you, though, is we don't have a pant-busting hard-on over how shit the consoles apparently are. Because we're not 14 years old and we can happily, calmly enjoy the merits of both avenues without having to pin our flag to one or the other. It's getting boring now. You turn every single thread you post in into this shite. Seriously, look in the Frozen Synapse thread, make a note of the people posting in it, and never talk to them about PCs again. They already know everything you have to say.

Hearthly · **Joined:** 11th May, 2008 **Posts:** 13386

WTB wrote:

You turn every single thread you post in into this shite.

That's blatantly and provably not true, please retract your lie.

WTB · **Joined:** 27th Mar, 2008 **Posts:** 14497

I'll qualify it: every thread vaguely related to gaming.

People on this forum are generally quite standoff-ish towards you, AE, and I've been careful to give you a fair shout, but you haven't half ground me down!

Doctor Glyndwr · **Joined:** 30th Mar, 2008 **Posts:** 32624

WTB wrote:

We all have fucking PCs and use them for gaming regularly. Go look in the Frozen Synapse thread...

Speak for yourself spodboy, I play Frozen Synapse on my Mac because I'm just better than you are.

WTB · **Joined:** 27th Mar, 2008 **Posts:** 14497

Sod! You do have a decent PC, though, don't you? Or have you gotten rid?

Doctor Glyndwr · **Joined:** 30th Mar, 2008 **Posts:** 32624

WTB wrote:

You do have a decent PC, though, don't you?

I still do, yeah. I tried to play FS against Grim... on it but I think it was having server problems and wouldn't let me log in so I went back to the Mac. I plugged it back in this week to reinstall my Windows Home Server (which self destructed on Monday), but that was the first time I've turned it on in months. Since my third powerline adaptor died it's had no permanent Internet connection. I need to find the PSU for my wireless bridge.

Hearthly · **Joined:** 11th May, 2008 **Posts:** 13386

WTB wrote:

I'll qualify it: every thread vaguely related to gaming.

Blimey, people expressing opinions about videogames on a set of videogame forums. The mind boggles.

Anyway, you're wrong again, I've just had a quick look through all the threads I've posted to (user control panel > show posts) and what's actually happened during the three years plus I've been posting here is I've gradually swayed back to PC gaming from the 360, as the 360 has started to properly creak under the strain of running modern games and really start to show its age.

Indeed, who said this in an early 2009 PC gaming thread? (Hint, it was me.)

Quote:

Beyond that there's not a great deal that the consoles don't do as well or better these days.

Trooper · **Joined:** 4th Mar, 2010 **Posts:** 22391

Doctor Glyndwr wrote:

WTB wrote:

You do have a decent PC, though, don't you?

I still do, yeah. I tried to play FS against Grim... on it but I think it was having server problems and wouldn't let me log in so I went back to the Mac. I plugged it back in this week to reinstall my Windows Home Server (which self destructed on Monday), but that was the first time I've turned it on in months. Since my third powerline adaptor died it's had no permanent Internet connection. I need to find the PSU for my wireless bridge.

Same here, I have multiple Windows machines kicking around the place, one of them is even an i7 processor uberduber thing, yet I never use it. I just use the iMac for PC gaming (Portal 2, Civ 5, WoW, Frozen Synapse etc...) Everything else I just buy on console.

I'm vaguely tempted to upgrade the graphics card on the Windows box for Battlefield 3, but to be honest I just can't be arsed with all the faff that comes along with Windows gaming these days.

WTB · **Joined:** 27th Mar, 2008 **Posts:** 14497

Ah right, so a sentence in 2009(!) gives you free reign to play the same record throughout 2010 and 2011 so far? I can think of several instances this week where you've derailed a thread with the same old PC v consoles spiel.

Hearthly · **Joined:** 11th May, 2008 **Posts:** 13386

WTB wrote:

Ah right, so a sentence in 2009(!) gives you free reign to play the same record throughout 2010 and 2011 so far?

Well that's the point I'm making, it's not some kind of irresistible and irrational urge I have to point out that the PC is the superior games platform, a couple of years ago I was saying the consoles were pretty much on an even keel, a couple of years before that my 360 was hardly ever turned off. (I've still got a launch Xenos chipset 360 with the 20GB hard drive, I was a fairly early adopter. And I hate the 360 so much I then went and bought a Jasper HDMI 360 when they came out. ME HATE THE 360 SO MUCH LOLZ.)

This is the thing, times change, and the whole world now needs to realise that the PC is the games platform for the intelligent and discerning chap. (Or chapess.)

Quote:

I can think of several instances this week where you've derailed a thread with the same old PC v consoles spiel.

No you can't.

Well, you might think you can, but they don't actually exist.

If you're thinking of the DNF thread then I covered my comments in the thread itself.

This thread I would guess we are probably into derail category, but that's your fault for getting all strident and shouty.

Hearthly · **Joined:** 11th May, 2008 **Posts:** 13386

Trooper wrote:

I'm vaguely tempted to upgrade the graphics card on the Windows box for Battlefield 3, but to be honest I just can't be arsed with all the faff that comes along with Windows gaming these days.

All the faff of pressing the 'INSTALL GAME' button on Steam you mean?

ApplePieOfDestiny · **Joined:** 17th Dec, 2008 **Posts:** 8293

To be fair, WTB, no-one can mention CoD or MW at any point without you reponding with a 7 paragraph diatribe as to why it's so shit, battlefield is so much better etc etc.

The subject of this thread is such that the game or platform in question is absolutely incidental.

Trooper · **Joined:** 4th Mar, 2010 **Posts:** 22391

AtrocityExhibition wrote:

Trooper wrote:

I'm vaguely tempted to upgrade the graphics card on the Windows box for Battlefield 3, but to be honest I just can't be arsed with all the faff that comes along with Windows gaming these days.

All the faff of pressing the 'INSTALL GAME' button on Steam you mean?

All the faff of booting up the windows box, dragging out the G15 keyboard and mouse, buying new graphics card, installing the graphics card, downloading the newest drivers, installing the drivers, downloading the game from steam, waiting, starting the game, working out what settings are best for my config, restarting the game, changing the settings, restarting the game, playing the game, spending the whole game wondering if there is another option I should be using to give me better performance...

Meh, faff.

Like I said, I do play PC games on the Mac (I even gave a list of them), but I just can't be arsed with Windows anymore.

WTB · **Joined:** 27th Mar, 2008 **Posts:** 14497

Eh? My comments about CoD vs Battlefield were in the 'CoD or Battlefield' thread and entirely relevant! Plus, as I've said before, I like CoD, I just prefer Battlefield. Suggesting I always bang on about it just because of something I said earlier this week is entirely different to suggesting AE always bangs on about how great PCs are. He does.

I'll clarify again for posterity - I like the CoD games and I buy them every year. But, I got very sick of MW2 for various reasons.

Check the BLOPS thread to see me heaping praise on it if you want. I don't know where this 'Jonny hates CoD' meme came from - probably my whinging about MW2, but that was for a number of specific reasons and not 'I hate CoD'.

Hearthly · **Joined:** 11th May, 2008 **Posts:** 13386

WTB wrote:

I'll clarify again for posterity - I like the CoD games and I buy them every year. But, I got very sick of MW2 for various reasons.

Stop derailing the derailment, dammit!

You ruin every single thread on the forum with this shit, after specifically asking people to start new threads about anything that popped into their head, just so you could bang on about your Battlefield obsession even more.

EDIT - It's obvious I'm being facetious here I hope, but just in case, that's all it is

Hearthly · **Joined:** 11th May, 2008 **Posts:** 13386

Trooper wrote:

All the faff of booting up the windows box, dragging out the G15 keyboard and mouse, buying new graphics card, installing the graphics card, downloading the newest drivers, installing the drivers, downloading the game from steam, waiting, starting the game, working out what settings are best for my config, restarting the game, changing the settings, restarting the game, playing the game, spending the whole game wondering if there is another option I should be using to give me better performance...

Meh, faff.

Like I said, I do play PC games on the Mac (I even gave a list of them), but I just can't be arsed with Windows anymore.

Well then you're a bit behind the curve in all honesty.

The keyboard + mouse and physically installing the new graphics card I'll grant you, but beyond that Windows just does everything itself (even traditionally fiddly things like graphics card drivers, simply turn your PC on with the new graphics card in, and I promise you it'll do the rest itself). As for the game settings, pretty much all games these days come with several preset schemes, or just press the 'auto-detect' button which nearly all games have too, and it'll do the whole lot for you in about 15 seconds.

If you've already got an i7 based PC, just stick a £117 graphics card in it - http://www.overclockers.co.uk/showprodu ... ubcat=1711 - set BF3 to Ultra, and enjoy.

As for downloading the game from Steam and 'waiting', surely this is better than having to go to a shop to buy a disc, or mail order the game off the internet? All big-name games on Steam come with a preload option, so on launch day the game is sat there ready to go (and you don't need to have a disc in the drive!).

Trooper · **Joined:** 4th Mar, 2010 **Posts:** 22391

AtrocityExhibition wrote:

Well then you're a bit behind the curve in all honesty.

If you've already got an i7 based PC, just stick a £117 graphics card in it - http://www.overclockers.co.uk/showprodu ... ubcat=1711 - set BF3 to Ultra, and enjoy.

Oh indeed. Add to that, I'd also need to buy a nice dongle to allow my iMac to run as a monitor for my PC, rather than using the Dell monitor it is currently connected up to, and buy a new mouse as my current one is a bit shit, and reinstall Windows 7, as my current Windows machine blue screens after a random amount of time when first switched on...

See, faff!

Doctor Glyndwr · **Joined:** 30th Mar, 2008 **Posts:** 32624

I'd suspect the gaming PC is a good deal louder too. Mine certainly is. I hate fan noise.

Cras · **Joined:** 30th Mar, 2008 **Posts:** 49244

Doctor Glyndwr wrote:

I plugged it back in this week to reinstall my Windows Home Server (which self destructed on Monday)

Huh. Mine blew up last week too. Still, meant I could redo it from scratch with all the 'ooh, I wish I'd set stuff up like this' things I've thought of since I've had it.

Doctor Glyndwr · **Joined:** 30th Mar, 2008 **Posts:** 32624

Craster wrote:

Huh. Mine blew up last week too.

Huh. Did yours just stop responding to the outside world and keep blinking the health light blue until you did a complete OS reinstall? This happend on Monday. Dodgy Windows update maybe?

sinister agent · **Joined:** 30th Mar, 2008 **Posts:** 7046

WTB wrote:

But as ever, we have to start the PC v consoles debate. The ironic thing is that I know for a fact most of the people who wind up defending the consoles on here are avid PC gamers as well as console gamers. I know Rich likes to keep a well-specced machine, as do I, so why would it be in our interests to hark on about the consoles as if they're 'best'?

I enjoy the merits of both platforms, but I'm not happy to sit and watch bollocks get spouted about how shit the consoles apparently are. What we need to accept is that none of us are out to lay into the PC, but it seems the people who play mainly on the PC are constantly hell-bent on telling we 'console gamers' how silly we are for playing on rubbish primitive machines.

I never touched a console (apart from at friends' houses) until 2007. I just didn't fancy them - it wasn't necessary to loathe them or think you're somehow better than people who use them, or that giving the slightest shit either way makes you anything other than a marketing tool.

Be Excellent To Each Other

Dont play COD4 / MW1 online
On Xbox

Who is online

Be Excellent To Each Other

Dont play COD4 / MW1 online On Xbox

Who is online

Dont play COD4 / MW1 online
On Xbox