Developer disable mods!

[T_1]

When they say server side, they mean server-client (client has it, and server has it). In the Ghost Recon context, that would be Sabre Teams, DTD IDF etc.

That's how I'm reading it too

[SOTOMac]

To the |S.O.T.O| Mod Team this will be a small Issue as It seems that Server-Sided Mods will still be Allowed. You'll just have to have what the Server has now ( And nothing additional ) or You'll not be allowed to Join that specific Server.

To Me that means that If You're using something other than what the Server has - Tough Luck...

Right ?

Online you won't be able to activate anything that differs in any respect to the setup being run on the server.

Ghost Recon could do with that.

Amen...

Regards,

[DaSmerg]

Howdy all!

Thanks to Rocky for bringing this topic up as it could possibley have implications for other game producers and titles.

I am a fairly avid player of Battlefield 1942, have been since the early demo's came out. There seem to be quite a few people that have heard of BF1942 but not played it posting here...as well as some confusion about what this v1.4 patch and the end to client side mods will mean.

The amount of modifications that can be done to this game are quite extensive...as this game is quite extensive. There are map mods, skin mods for the players and various vehicles, texture add ons for maps and vehicles, enhanced blood effects and a very popular add on made by a group called Merciless Creations that combines new splash screens, new and modified textures, new and choosable reticules, historically correct flags and enhanced blood effects to name a few things that their add on gathers together.

I do agree, cheating is definately an issue with Battlefield 1942, like any other game. But the kinds of cheats that are seen in BF1942 are few as EA and DICE have done a reasonably good job closing the loopholes in their game so far.

What does "an end to client side mods" specifically mean?

It would mean that any mod that runs exclusively on the client side would be no more. Some of the major mods run client/server similiar to Ghost Recon. Some mods run exclusively on the client side. These purely client side modifications would be ended and would have to be run on the server in order to be "active". You can currently only activate one mod at a time in BF1942...and you don't have to activate it like in GR...if you have it, the game activates it for you when you join a server.

But with an end to client side mods means an end to some of the websites that have been distributing them...imagine a GR.net that only posted downloads of new server side maps only and server side mods only.

All current and under production mods will have to be retooled to work in a server side only environment. There has not been a tremendous amount of mod support for BF1942, it's mostly come from the community.

In fact, the worst part of all this is that it doesn't have to be this way...which is another important thing to remember for other game titles.

Members of the BF1942 community have worked out a solution to allow both a "pure" and "non-pure" gaming environment that can be toggled on and off on the server side.

A pure gaming environment means the stock game, plus officially released maps and patches clients would only be able to connect. This would be important for ladders and leagues nevermind the groups who are worried about cheaters on their server. If your files don't match up, you can't connect to the server.

A non-pure gaming environment means that the stock game plus officially released maps and patches as well as any client side mods could be run.

What this dual system essential means is a choice for us gamers and server operators. If you are that concerned about cheating, run a pure server where pure clients can only connect to. Not so worried and want to allow clients with modified textures and what nots? Run a non-pure server.

The majority of players and mod makers are honest players in Battlefield 1942. Yes we have a few smacktards running around and of course cheating is always going to be an issue, but is it this much of an issue to remove client side modifications all together?

There is a petition that better explains what I have been trying to explain that has been started by the community...this is what it says...

"To: EA/DICE

We request that version 1.4 of Battlefield 1942 include "Mod secure RFA's" so that secure client side mods like Merciless 1942 from www.mercilesscreations.com can still be used.

To quote from Prowlinger:

"There was a solution sent to Dice how to resolve this scenario. This explained the problem, a solution. It involved MOD SECURE RFAs. This allowed each and every modder to compile their own RFA with a security setting. Client side mods can still exist this way! Cheats will not exist this way! Every mod would be secure this way! Dice would only have to release a secure version of their RFA compiler and decompiler for the mod community."

Sincerely,

The Undersigned"

For Battlefield 1942 players...or any other game player concerned about this change in direction...you can sign it BY CLICKING HERE.

[WhiteKnight77]

OK the way I see it, BF1942 is becoming more like GR where as it will be using what we refer to as client sided mods where everyone has to have the mod in order to join (this is like a map, weapon or skin mod not to exclude some mission mods) the server. Missions that are played on a stock map are what we call server sided and is only needed by the host computer. The only difference is what they are called between the two games. In order to play the mission with the new 1.4 patch everyone would have to have the files for it if I read you right.

Now I know that there are some GR cheats that can be run on MP servers without the host having them. Others still have altered files that could be detected by comparing file size and not letting them join. Yes cheating bites, I agree, but don'y take mods away from the communities.

Correct me if I am wrong on how the 1.4 BF patch works.

[DaSmerg]

There are really no "missions" like in GR for BF1942. The co-op game play...well it sucks in BF1942. It's just a bunch of bots running around on both teams and your team has objectives to secure. It gets really complicated in BF1942 because your side's AI likes to take the vehicles and ###### off with them...usually getting them destroyed at that.

The popular gameplay modes in BF1942 are...

Conquest (a bunch of predetermined points that you can capture by standing near for usually about 20 seconds and usally but not always your team can spawn from...each side has an allotment of tickets or points that can be variated...once your team captures a majority or on some maps all of the "flags" as we call it the tickets start counting down...deaths of each team also detract from your teams ticket count...some Conquest servers also use a time limit with the ticket count...there are also uncapturable points on some maps...meaning you can pin a team back into a single spawn area and have at them...our rule on our server is that you can't go into that uncappable base to solely kill but stealing a vehicle and obviously defending yourself is ok...airplane bombings and tank/artillery bombings from a distance is ok as well)

Capture the flag (kinda self explanitory...each team has a flag which the other side can capture and recieves a point for each capture...CTF is usually played to a certain amount of time or pre-determined point total)

Team Death Match (same thing again, each side has an allotment of tickets or points...each death takes away from this point total)

There are all kinds of mods for the BF1942.

Basically imagine in GR if you could change the uniforms of the teams on your side or the client side only. You can have enhanced blood effects. Historically correct flags, uniforms and vehicle skins. Crome skins on airplanes. Different reticules. Different texture packs for maps making them snowy for example. All of these...plus many more...work on the client side...they don't have to be active on the server in order to determine whether or not you can use them.

Then there are the major mods that work client side or on your side and on the server side. That means they have to be active on the server and on your end in order for you to connect. Works just like GR, but like I said, you can only currently activate one mod at a time in BF1942.

The "glowing skins" problem isn't really a problem as BF1942 supports up to 64 players on a server. There is no allotment of "spawns". You get unlimited spawns. Also, one player cannot impact a game that much, most especially in a large game server. In a smaller server with say a dozen people it would be an issue, but the maps for BF are mostly so gigantic that playing with so few people is pretty silly. Also, each teams uniforms and vehicles are natively different looking than each other, there is no real need to make something that looks different look even more different.

The real major cheat right now that I know of is a fog hack that eliminates the fog on maps. So if you are a sniper you have free look or even worse if you are working mobile artillery, anti-aircraft guns, stationary defensive guns and the artillery on the battleships and cruisers you again have no fog or severly reduced fog.

IMHO, as a game player, I like the idea of secure RFA files. I also like the idea of a server that can be set to pure or non-pure. I am not convinced that eliminating client side mods will result in the removal of cheats...I think somebody here said it pretty well that it will make them even harder to detect.

There is also the option of using third party software such as PunkBuster and there is even an initiative in the community to build a cheat detector that scans clients files for known cheat files and hacks.

Any of these are far better solutions.

Also, what kind of trend does this set if EA and DICE are going to do this in the most popular game right now for all other game titles? If it seemingly works, why would other game makers not disable client side mods as well and make all mods strictly server side?

Obviously, this is not going to be a big issue for the non-BF player...but it could have future implications on other game titles.

Edited April 21, 2003 by DaSmerg

[Rocky]

and you don't have to activate it like in GR...if you have it, the game activates it for you when you join a server.

That's how GR works too... you do not activate a mod to join a server running it, aslong as you have the mod installed, thats all that is required to join the server.

Thanks for taking the time to explain the situ with B1942, very interesting.

[WhiteKnight77]

I still say that the hosts game should check for the same files on the clients on joining. Any difference in size or name kicks the person trying to join back out.

I have to admit, I haven't run into anyone that I even suspected of cheating. I guess that is because who I play with (mostly people from here) and we all detest cheaters and we all would most likely rat out the one from here who got caught cheating. I would think it would be rather embarassing for those caught.

Thanks for coming to help us understand more about this potential way of creating games in the future. Please enjoy your visits here and if you need anything just ask.

[MH Puffy]

Thanks for everone explaining this a heck of alot better. I was about to go nuclear. Being a BF player also I just dont want it to mess up the Desert Combat mod. I have never played the merciless mod and refuse to sign the pettition unless it includes Desert Combat.

Hay, I create mods too but, I at least I would show my fellow modders the respect to include their work in a letter like that. How tacky .

As an oldtimer in GR and a Modder, I could care leass about skins and the like I'm just into Weps and Maps. I play co-op in GR. Very little team. I hate cheaters and catch a lot of aimbot and no fog cheaters on other peeps servers. I use replays to get the good ones the others ya dont need to its blatant. GET RID OF THE CHEATERS, but dont take away my gunmods and maps. To heck with the rest of it.

Ill put away my finger now....lol

[Meprolite]

am not convinced that eliminating client side mods will result in the removal of cheats...I think somebody here said it pretty well that it will make them even harder to detect.

Of course it won't result in the removal of cheats. It'll just remove n00b cheaters and make cheats a lot harder to make, and a lot harder to find. As it stands, any fool with an RFA decompiler can create a cheat. By eliminating pure client side modding they'll make a massive dent.

The fact that you've read the Merciless rant leads me to believe that you're a Merciless fan. That's all good and well, but I find it pretty distastful that you're prepared to tolerate RFA based hacks just so you can run textures packs and get uber realistic flags.

As it stands in BF1942 the graphical representation on my screen, your screen, and everybody elses screen can be totally different. Not just in detail, but in composition. How is that a good thing? How does that foster fair play?

In my opinion, it's not right that you're here on a Ghost Recon forum soliciting petition signatures from non-BF1942 players. You've got them believing that the sky is falling when, in reality, the post patch BF1942 mod rules would be no different from the current GR system.

If RSE suddenly announced that you couldn't run Sabre Teams on a server that didn't have Sabre Teams, how many people would be outraged? If the Rumble announced that it was considered cheating to edit textures on the client side, how many people would draw up a petition? If I joined your GR server and announced that I was using screen NV and an edited sniper mask, would you kick me?

EA/DICE aren't introducing a revolutionary system that totally destroys modding. They're just bringing their current system into line with conventional methodology.

@Puffy

Being a BF player also I just dont want it to mess up the Desert Combat mod. I have never played the merciless mod and refuse to sign the pettition unless it includes Desert Combat.

Desert Combat is not effected by the new patch. The only people who're in a huff are the Merciless fans.

[h0002641]

Correct me if I'm wrong...but when I read about features of Merciless Mod, there's the 'new and choosable reticules'...does it mean if someone in the game carries the same weapon as I do in the game, his reticule could close faster than mine and make him more accurate in shooting becoz he has this mod and chose the reticule he likes most?

And...from what I understand...does it mean in BF1942 if someone playing in the same room of mine has a client-sided mod that I don't have, say something that gives a snowy texture, he could have a white and cold North African map while I'm stuck in the hot desert at the same time?

That seems like he's better off, if what he sees is enemies in desert camo running in a snowy plain...

If that's the case, then this patch sounds a sensible one to me. At least we're playing in the same battlefield with the same choice of weapons within a room in GR.

Sorry if my understanding to this game and mod looks stupid, as I have zero experience in BF1942.

[DemonJester]

This is the worse idea I have ever heard of. They think this will actually stop cheaters?? Obviously someone is not doing their homework or understand how cheats work.

I am a member of a clan whom has a public dedicated server running 24/7 we have banned about 10 people for using some type of cheat or another. The only thing this will do in GR would get rid of the noob texture cheats. It will not stop any of the others. Almost all of the cheats that are even slightly sophisticated, use memory hacking as well as modified .dll's or DirectX hacks. How is eliminating client side mods going to solve that problem. In simple terms IT WONT.

I hate cheaters as much as the rest of you but throwing out the whole bushel of apples because of one worm is like playing russian roulette with a fully loaded semi automatic weapon, no matter what in the end you are dead as will the GR community if this occurs.

[extreme+force+]

cheater's ,lol ,,If you aren't good enough to play without calling someone else a cheater ,,don't play online then,,or figure out who is cheating on you and avoid them,,simple,,

[hero2zer0]

I dont think i've ever seen a cheater...is a cheater one who uses bigger screen than mine? is a cheater one who uses 5.1 SB when i use vibra? is a cheater one who has more FPS than my GF4 mx?....u can call them cheaters but when it comes to game-play, none is cheating, simple as that...atleast ive never seen one who has the ability to fly or shoot throw rocks or that kind of cheat...

[DaSmerg]

Actually a better analogy would be that RSE would only allow server side mods and missions to run...unless you didn't plan on connecting to any server online.

I am not particularly a fan of MC...I used the 3.7 add on for a bit. It was very nice, definately artistic and all but not my cup of tea and I never bothered reinstalling it after RtR came out.

I did read Prowlinger's rant and it brought up some very good points...most importantly that a lot of the mod makers for BF1942 gained and gain their experience in various aspects of modding for BF1942 from starting to work on the simple client side mods.

As to me worrying about RFA cheats...I'm not that worried to tell you the truth. In fact, to be perfectly honest, if somebody or group of somebodies is going to utilize a cheat for a game, they are going to do it, no matter what kind of protection is built in. Cheaters will always look for a way to circumvent any built in or add on security in a game to gain an unfair advantage. This system would in no way guarantee a cheat free environment and would serve to alienate a large number of the honest BF1942 community who likes the opportunity to use client side mods...of which there are many beyond just MC...to customize their gaming experience.

In the end, it looks as if this is all a mute point as current unsupported rumour has it that the v1.4 server will have a pure and un-pure setting built in for BF1942 server operators to be able to choose which kind of gaming environment.

[WickedWeasel]

I think its a step in the right direction for developers of games to look into ways of stopping cheating. It also hurts their long term sales of a product if there are not mods being made for their games. For a person like me that does not play many mods, " because most of them are not as good as the standard game" I think its a good thing.

[Meprolite]

Actually a better analogy would be that RSE would only allow server side mods and missions to run...unless you didn't plan on connecting to any server online.

DaSmerg, if I understand you correctly (and I'm not sure that I do), that analogy is completely flawed and deliberately inflammatory.

Desert Combat & Soldier9 are the BF1942 equivalent of Sabre Teams, IDF, SEALS, Gangland, etcetera. The press release clearly states that server-client mods of that sort will not be disabled.

How can you, with a straight face, say that it's the same as reducing Ghost Recon to server side mods only? Please.

Regardless, I'm going to withdraw from this discussion. I've run out of ways to explain this, and I'm starting to get the impression that people are deliberately making a point of not understanding.

[Rocky]

Regardless, I'm going to withdraw from this discussion. I've run out of ways to explain this, and I'm starting to get the impression that people are deliberately making a point of not understanding.

I suspect some of the posters have made the mistake of not reading the previous posts prior to posting.

[OSO]

I don't know what the panic is about. Ghost Recon already operates this way. Console commands are disabled during MP and the server needs the file on the system to run the mod. The client doesn't need every file as in missions.

A client side mod would be like the armpatch in Ravenshield. Where do you see that in Ghost Recon?

Maybe I missed something here with this statement from EA games... Another point is:

Why would Red Storm model their game after BF 1942? They are two completely different animals aimed at completely different audiences. Modding is what has prolonged the life of their game and increased its sales.

[snakebite1967]

well im a longtime gr player and i also play bf42 with the desert combat mod and i must say ive never seen anyone cheating,ofcourse that doesnt mean they werent just that i havent noticed it, tho obviously its enough of a problem for game developers to take this kind of action .

tho i tend to resist anything that hinders my game play i also welcome the chance to play a fair game.

i dont realy see that a game like bf42 is aimed at a diferent audience than gr most of the ppl i regularly play with own gr or ut2003 or even earth and beyond , it gives a diferent pace than GR and allows interaction with vehicles planes and boats sure but theres no powerups or hand held nukes and its basicly a team play game with a huge online following and good mods are as important to its longevity as any other game

the desert combat mod is one of the most complete and stable mods ive ever ran in any game its also fairly accurate at recreating weapons and vehicles theres nothing like being a door gunner in a black hawk defending your team while they carry out a mission, or covering them while they extract, if the price to pay for a fair game is to disable all non server side mods then im all for it

Edited May 4, 2003 by snakebite1967

[Specter]

We definitely need mods. Do you think that GR would have stayed as popular as it is for as long as it has with just the original missions? I dont think so.