|
|
Post by individual on Dec 24, 2009 19:41:12 GMT -5
|
|
adree
True Bro
Posts: 10,140
|
Post by adree on Dec 24, 2009 20:53:44 GMT -5
Apparently you can still start hacked games too because I was just thrown into a Ground War DM where the floor acted like it was ice. I'd be lying if I said it wasn't hilariously fun though.
|
|
|
|
Post by revolution on Dec 24, 2009 20:54:19 GMT -5
wow IW really is lazy, they should have released a beta to avoid this bullshit...
btw dont spread this everywhere, I dont feel like dealing with everyone using 1887s again.
|
|
|
|
Post by R4bbit Juice on Dec 24, 2009 20:55:11 GMT -5
Apparently you can still start hacked games too because I was just thrown into a Ground War DM where the floor acted like it was ice. I'd be lying if I said it wasn't hilariously fun though. I'm guessing you mean everything was speeding x4? revolution: I agree. =P |
|
adree
True Bro
Posts: 10,140
|
Post by adree on Dec 24, 2009 21:23:35 GMT -5
No, the only difference was that you tended to slide whenever you moved and if you had the courage to sprint you'd start jerking around like when you were unfortunate enough to get stuck with a laggy host.
|
|
|
|
Post by individual on Dec 25, 2009 4:59:26 GMT -5
I don't think it's possible for them to stop hacked games, when COD is set up as a peer-to-peer network with a host. If the host's files are tampered with, the game will be modified.
Dedicated servers could address this issue, but on consoles and the new PC matchmaking system, there's nothing that can be done.
In the past, they relied on the fact that most people's files weren't modified. Now, with the new modded Xboxes that can go on Live, and because so much of these mods were spread around when everybody was glitching, there's still going to be some modded games.
|
|
|
|
Post by ice597 on Dec 26, 2009 22:41:28 GMT -5
i wonder if the bling 1887 still has the same accruacy as before.. that'll have to wait till tomorrow.
|
|
|
|
Post by cptmacmillan on Dec 27, 2009 4:40:13 GMT -5
Three days ago I was in a game against a hacker clan that had some no gravity going on. People were flying in the sky and were outside the map. Like the other guy I'd be lying if I said it wasn't great.
|
|
|
|
Post by rocketshiptothemoo on Dec 29, 2009 15:18:54 GMT -5
Infinity Ward is like that parent who is constantly pushing there athletic child to do great things but never gives them praise or let them take a break no matter how well they do. In this case, MW2 is that child.
Your game broke every world entertainment record in sales. Im not sure but something tells me you should look like you give a damn about that Infinity Ward...
|
|
mannon
True Bro
wordy bastard PSN:mannonc Steam:mannonc XB:BADmannon
Posts: 15,371 
|
Post by mannon on Dec 29, 2009 19:07:51 GMT -5
We've already had two patches addressing (though not always entirely fixing) issues raised since launch. I'd say that IW is paying attention. Very probably they rushed the 1887 patch and this just didn't come up in testing because there probably weren't any testers using bling on it. It sure as hell didn't need it before the patch. Of course once you release something to gagillions of gamers then pretty much any possible combination will get noticed right away by someone.
Should they have tested every possible combination of attachments to make sure there wasn't a workaround, probably. But I think it's going a bit far to complain about IW as a developer just because this slipped past them.
Even with the workaround I've seen a lot less people using the terminators, so the patch has actually been fairly effective so far.
|
|
|
|
Post by rocketshiptothemoo on Dec 29, 2009 19:10:25 GMT -5
We've already had two patches addressing (though not always entirely fixing) issues raised since launch. I'd say that IW is paying attention. Very probably they rushed the 1887 patch and this just didn't come up in testing because there probably weren't any testers using bling on it. It sure as hell didn't need it before the patch. Of course once you release something to gagillions of gamers then pretty much any possible combination will get noticed right away by someone. Should they have tested every possible combination of attachments to make sure there wasn't a workaround, probably. But I think it's going a bit far to complain about IW as a developer just because this slipped past them. Even with the workaround I've seen a lot less people using the terminators, so the patch has actually been fairly effective so far. Thats a pretty good point. And your right, people r using the Models MUCH less. We should be less critical of IW |
|
|
|
Post by robesh on Dec 31, 2009 21:08:05 GMT -5
I actually don't mind.
It requires you to use bling to get OP shotguns.
I'm not going to waste my 1st perk on Bling just to get OP Terminators.
SPAS12 is better anyway.
|
|
|
|
Post by ssog on Jan 1, 2010 0:43:43 GMT -5
I actually don't mind. It requires you to use bling to get OP shotguns. I'm not going to waste my 1st perk on Bling just to get OP Terminators. SPAS12 is better anyway. In what world is the Spas12 better than unpatched Akimbo Terminators? The Terminators have more range, do more damage, have a tighter spread, fire faster, and reload quicker. |
|
|
|
Post by ice597 on Jan 2, 2010 18:12:19 GMT -5
just been on a pc hacked game that's been on for 2 days, 18 people domination on rust, unlimited score and time(spawn killing is unbelieveable)
|
|
|
|
Post by individual on Jan 4, 2010 16:59:59 GMT -5
We've already had two patches addressing (though not always entirely fixing) issues raised since launch. I'd say that IW is paying attention. Very probably they rushed the 1887 patch and this just didn't come up in testing because there probably weren't any testers using bling on it. It sure as hell didn't need it before the patch. Of course once you release something to gagillions of gamers then pretty much any possible combination will get noticed right away by someone. Should they have tested every possible combination of attachments to make sure there wasn't a workaround, probably. But I think it's going a bit far to complain about IW as a developer just because this slipped past them. Even with the workaround I've seen a lot less people using the terminators, so the patch has actually been fairly effective so far. That's not really it. They should know that bling weapons have different weapon codes for them, since they programmed the game. We know this and we didn't write the game. Surely, it should be something that's obvious, since it's a big difference from a software design standpoint. Could it be that they hired temporary coders to create a quick-fix while the actual developers were on vacation? |
|
|
|
Post by robesh on Jan 4, 2010 18:01:23 GMT -5
I actually don't mind. It requires you to use bling to get OP shotguns. I'm not going to waste my 1st perk on Bling just to get OP Terminators. SPAS12 is better anyway. In what world is the Spas12 better than unpatched Akimbo Terminators? The Terminators have more range, do more damage, have a tighter spread, fire faster, and reload quicker. I prefer the SPAS because I don't have to waste my first perk to get an effective shotgun, but not OP like the 1887's. Yes, unpatched 1887's were OP. Now, they are a little less OP because you need bling, but otherwise, they are still OP as they were. |
|
mannon
True Bro
wordy bastard PSN:mannonc Steam:mannonc XB:BADmannon
Posts: 15,371
|
Post by mannon on Jan 5, 2010 2:49:28 GMT -5
You really think it's all easy and obvious? It was a rushed patch, more or less just a hack they threw together and did a minimum of testing before it wend out the door. On top of that they released it on PC first because they had to run it through Sony and MS before releasing it on consoles and nobody caught this before it went live. In fact the nerf seemed to have exactly the desired effect when released on PC, so all appeared to be right with it.
We don't even know where they've buried the weapon stats. It's probably in some sort of table which cross references every attachment with every other attachment for every single weapon, and thus it's pretty easy to miss a couple numbers here and there.
Developers don't have time to make the development process it-self idiot proof and polish up all their tools to be intuitive, simple, and easy to use. Often they are hacking things together in text editors and running custom scripts in a shell or console just to get everything going. You don't spend months writing and testing editors if they will only get used once. You do what you have to to make it work then move on to the next highest priority item on the todo list.
Usually the editing tools only get prettified after the game's release if the tools themselves are going to be released to the public.
There are exceptions, of course, particularly with Unreal Engine games, but that's because the Unreal Engine was designed from the ground up to be licensed to developers and the tools are part of the package. The Unreal games themselves only exist, because it's a great way to show off and sell the engine to developers and because it was meant to be direct competition for the Quake Engine.
It's a human error, that's all, not an egregious sin. They'll probably fix it next patch unless they decide that it's not important enough due to less usage.
Oh and no I don't see them using temp coders to build patches... That's just scary. They may well have a different team working on post release work, though. That's often SOP, so the development team can get much needed R&R before starting their next major project while a support team handles patching the remaining bugs. They will have access to all the documentation, be familiar with all the company's software and practices, and probably have had hands on experience with the game before the development team went on vacation. They might not have as many aspects of the code memorized as the development team, but they would be a far cry from a bunch of temps hired in and dumped cold on the game.
|
|
|
|
Post by chyros on Jan 5, 2010 6:51:51 GMT -5
You really think it's all easy and obvious? It was a rushed patch, more or less just a hack they threw together and did a minimum of testing before it wend out the door. On top of that they released it on PC first because they had to run it through Sony and MS before releasing it on consoles and nobody caught this before it went live. In fact the nerf seemed to have exactly the desired effect when released on PC, so all appeared to be right with it. We don't even know where they've buried the weapon stats. It's probably in some sort of table which cross references every attachment with every other attachment for every single weapon, and thus it's pretty easy to miss a couple numbers here and there. Developers don't have time to make the development process it-self idiot proof and polish up all their tools to be intuitive, simple, and easy to use. Often they are hacking things together in text editors and running custom scripts in a shell or console just to get everything going. You don't spend months writing and testing editors if they will only get used once. You do what you have to to make it work then move on to the next highest priority item on the todo list. Usually the editing tools only get prettified after the game's release if the tools themselves are going to be released to the public. There are exceptions, of course, particularly with Unreal Engine games, but that's because the Unreal Engine was designed from the ground up to be licensed to developers and the tools are part of the package. The Unreal games themselves only exist, because it's a great way to show off and sell the engine to developers and because it was meant to be direct competition for the Quake Engine. It's a human error, that's all, not an egregious sin. It is sinful to be this erroneous; moreover, they STILL don't seem have fixed it, while it can't be more than changing one variable to another. If you know the coding, what can be so hard about that? |
|
|
|
Post by dplasters on Jan 5, 2010 8:12:07 GMT -5
they haven't fixed it yet because IW was closed over the holidays. the day the 360 patch came out was essentially their last day on the job for the year. They just came back like monday or something.
|
|
|
|
Post by individual on Jan 5, 2010 8:53:36 GMT -5
You really think it's all easy and obvious? It's obvious, yes -- from a software design standpoint. The weapon code is how a gun (and therefore its stats) are referenced. When writing code, any time the gun is referenced he'd reference the specific code for that weapon, meaning he'd learn to obviously think of each weapon + attachment as a different weapon. Whether it's actually a specific code or a table is irrelevant, since either way every gun would have to be uniquely identified, regardless. If they kept making the mistake of thinking of each weapon as unique instead of each weapon + attachment as unique, then this would create problems for them in testing (assuming they did testing and we're not using the beta right now, lol) and they'd have to go back, see what they did wrong, and see, "Oh, I see... I forgot that 1887 Bling is not the same as a regular 1887". It is also memorable, since it's likely intended for balance, to make Scavenger serve a purpose and not make over-used guns easier to find ammo for. Also, certain attachments have unique effects, like Holo sights reducing recoil, increasing damage on the FAL, increasing sway on the AK47, etc.. So, they did a fair amount of work with unique weapon\attachment differences. Imagine a fruit vendor that sells both uniform and mixed boxes of fruit. If somebody complains "the oranges you're selling are bad", he'd have to be an idiot to only check the boxes which are oranges and only oranges, and not also the mixed fruit boxes including oranges, simply because the box says "Mixed fruit" instead of "Oranges". Because he knows what he put in the boxes. It doesn't matter if he runs an entire grocery store with thousands of different items for sale. It's so obvious. |
|
mannon
True Bro
wordy bastard PSN:mannonc Steam:mannonc XB:BADmannon
Posts: 15,371
|
Post by mannon on Jan 5, 2010 20:31:14 GMT -5
From a practical standpoint it's a needle in a haystack finding all the specific numbers. Every weapon X every weapon statistic X every attachment + 1 (no attachment) X every attachment + 1 again for bling. Even if it's a table it's a big unwieldy one. If it's not a table then it's a huge bit of spaghetti code.
Should they have considered every possible combination before hand, sure. But I don't fault them for missing a couple numbers in a rushed out the door patch. Cut them some friggin slack, this is a game, not a surgical procedure where if you make a mistake someone dies. Human error is just human error and there's nothing egregiously wrong with it. Shit happens.
At any rate if it's so easy make your own games. I think IW has done a lot of really good work here and it's not fair to IW to bitch over a few mistakes and call them crappy developers and idiots. That's just BS. IW may not be a pack of geniuses, but they are a competent developer that has made a very nice game.
|
|
