Id Software and Activision Wolfenstein Source 146
An enthusiastic Anonymous Coward writes: "Id Software and Activision released the
sources of Return to Castle Wolfenstein. Single-player and multiplayer included. Unbelievable! Another great surprise from Id Software!" Update: 04/14 15:19 GMT by T : Note: don't get your hopes up -- these are the sources for the game code, not the engine.
Here come the hacked, never-miss multiplayers (Score:2, Insightful)
Re:Here come the hacked, never-miss multiplayers (Score:4, Interesting)
Clear enough for correct people - and if think different, maybe the whole GPL/Open Source concept is flawed...
Re:Here come the hacked, never-miss multiplayers (Score:1, Insightful)
No, it shows the 'Open Source' concept is flawed, its a buzzword....
The GPL and Free Software concept would have prevented such an prohibition and would make the source code actually usefull.
Jeroen
Re:Here come the hacked, never-miss multiplayers (Score:1, Flamebait)
Re:Here come the hacked, never-miss multiplayers (Score:2, Insightful)
Re:Here come the hacked, never-miss multiplayers (Score:1)
At least iD is working with the punkbuster people to try and prevent the cheaters.
Re:Here come the hacked, never-miss multiplayers (Score:2, Informative)
This is just the game code; it gives *no* access to networking/engine features beyond what the gameplay code needs; it's also what runs on the server. It cannot be used to make hacked clients at all.
This is just ID's normal release of code to make mods etc. The engine src won't be released for 3 years or so yet!
Re:Here come the hacked, never-miss multiplayers (Score:5, Interesting)
Last time I checked, about 50% of the 1.3 servers in GSArcade claimed to have PB on and running. And the other thing that I've noticed from playing it is the first 2 or so minutes of playing are typically a bit choppy due to the security tests, so it's not very intrusive.
Re:Here come the hacked, never-miss multiplayers (Score:2, Interesting)
It always frustates me how naive people who should rightfully know better are when it comes to cheat prevention. It's great to see an anti-cheat client actually work and kick the occasional cheater off of a server, but it often gives an irrational sense of hope.
Anti-cheat clients are a losing battle by definition. There is no way they can possibly be successful. The more effective one is, the more effort people will put forth to break it.
As long as the client must be trusted on computers that players own (and may therefore hack accordingly), cheating will always be possible.
The software scans key dll and other files in the RCTW folders and other factors to try to determine if any modification has been made to those files, and if so, the client is flagged as a cheater, and typically kicked from the server.
There are dozens of ways around this on any modern OS that has basic process debugging functions. Without even getting creative:
Are there ways to write anti-cheat clients to counter all of these? Probably. But then you open up yet another round of the clever game developers vs. all clever hackers in the world. With each release, the anti-cheat client has to be more clever, more complex, more intertwined, which is only going to make it easier to defeat since there will be so many more points of attack.
If you want to play games without cheating, play on computers that are owned by a trusted third party (like a lan gaming place). Or play with players you trust. Trusting an anti-cheat client on an untrusted computer in front of an untrusted player is hopeless.
Re:Here come the hacked, never-miss multiplayers (Score:4, Interesting)
Meant to include this in the parent post.
A less hopeless attempt at cheat prevention would be to integrate a "web of trust" system into gaming communities.
This is all doable through cryptography, but I'll explain the protocol without the implementation details:
Players take a vow to play cheat free. They get their friends to confirm that they play cheat free. Friends confirm other friends. The web develops. This relationship is published to a well known repository and linked to other webs of trust submitted by other groups based on common participants.
Alice and Bob have never met before, but they can be pretty sure that niether is cheating because Alice trusts Frank, who trusts Trent, who trusts Eve, who trusts Andrew, who trusts Bob. This many levels of displacement is probaby enough to cover the population of the United States.
When you join a server to play, the server checks your position in the web of trust to that of others on the web, and tells you their trustworthiness. By playing against people who are trusted by people you trust you can play with higher confidence. You could set policies to only allow players who meet a certain trust level.
Someone who is actually confirmed to be cheating could damage the trustworthiness of a huge set of players, and would motivate the participants to quickly distance themselves from the cheater or be classified as cheaters themselves.
A lot of the attacks against this model are based on the implementation, but it sounds more promising to me than pursuing ridiculous anti-cheat clients.
Re:Here come the hacked, never-miss multiplayers (Score:1)
Do you know why this would never work? (Score:3)
So basically in a web of trust, I'm fucked. Every lamer out there will mark me as a cheater.
Re:Here come the hacked, never-miss multiplayers (Score:5, Insightful)
At least one pitfall to this system is that it hinges on social interaction between participants.
It basically mandates that logging onto a random server and playing for an hour or so every couple nights isn't "good enough". Now you have to engage in moronic chit-chat with the dozen
retards on the server in order to can gain their trust. No thanks.
I play CounterStrike because the game is fun. The last thing I want to do is be forced to integrate myself into some "clan" of immature jackasses just so people can be sure I'm not cheating.
Re:Here come the hacked, never-miss multiplayers (Score:2)
It basically mandates that logging onto a random server and playing for an hour or so every couple nights isn't "good enough". Now you have to engage in moronic chit-chat with the dozen retards on the server in order to can gain their trust. No thanks.
Not necessarily. The beauty of such a web is that you don't need to know the people you play with, just that you know common people (which if you pick two random people in the US, they probably know each other with a suprisingly small amount of displacement).
It means that you need to know at least someone, but in the worst case you may just play on a server where no one trusts you--which is how much they already trusted you.
The end result is that this is going to be more effective than useless anti-cheat clients, and is really the only hope you've got unless you only plan on playing with people you trust, trust network or otherwise.
Re:Here come the hacked, never-miss multiplayers (Score:1)
And I was upset about PGP being discontinued. Start selling "PGP Gaming Edition". It'd revitalize PGP.
Re:Here come the hacked, never-miss multiplayers (Score:2)
Re:Here come the hacked, never-miss multiplayers (Score:1)
> Alice trusts Frank, who trusts Trent, who trusts Eve, who trusts Andrew,
> who trusts Bob. This many levels of displacement is probably enough
> to cover the population of the United States.
>
If you could get one of Kevin Bacon's friends on-board, it'd be a sure thing.
Re:Here come the hacked, never-miss multiplayers (Score:1)
Re:Here come the hacked, never-miss multiplayers (Score:2, Interesting)
- Program a standalone program to probe your frame buffer, recognise graphic patterns in the image. Automatically move the crosshair to that position using system calls.
- more shit here
The point of all this is that you don't understand the point. I ca think of litterally a million ways of cheating, and punkbuster is not about preventing cheating.
Have you ever heard of antivirus software? Their goal isn't to patch holes in buggy software written by microsoft. Their goal is to detect known exploits, and disable them. With punkbuster, signatures of exploits (mainly aim bots) can be detected, even if they have NOTHING TO DO WITH THE
Everyone knows that anti-cheating is an uphill batter. But did you notice that AV software providers make assloads of money?
Untill game developers start encrypting every packet made by the client, before it is sent off to the network, and on the OS level, the video memory can be locked out, even by the root user, aim bots will exist. and people will use them. Things like PB are the only thing we have to slow this abuse.
If you want to play with non-cheaters, you had better be playing in a league. I can personally guarantee you that most popular public servers has a few people every now and then running aim bots. This applies to CS,Quake3,Wolf, and other popular FPS games.
Re:Here come the hacked, never-miss multiplayers (Score:2)
It's not an uphill battle. It's a losing battle no matter what. It was already lost before it was started.
With punkbuster, signatures of exploits (mainly aim bots) can be detected, even if they have NOTHING TO DO WITH THE .DLL's that the game uses to run. It is not only a client side program that authenticates.
So uh, what stops me from hacking punkbuster so that it sees only what it needs to see?
Untill game developers start encrypting every packet made by the client, before it is sent off to the network, and on the OS level, the video memory can be locked out, even by the root user, aim bots will exist. and people will use them.
I have full control of my machine. I can break any of these mechanisms if I want to. That anti-cheat client developers don't get this fact means that they're naive. Or think they can make assloads of money by running everyone through the mud.
Anti-cheat clients will inconvenience legitimate users (you know, people who didn't install the latest fucking anti-cheat tool of the month) and do nothing to people who want to cheat.
Re:Here come the hacked, never-miss multiplayers (Score:2)
Re:Here come the hacked, never-miss multiplayers (Score:1)
How about the Linux version (Score:1)
Re:How about the Linux version (Score:1)
Here ya go. (Score:1)
Please - only people who dont have a dual boot or wine, lets not
Use wine (Score:4, Funny)
All they have is an EXE file so far.
Windows self-extracting archives tend to run quite well on Wine, the most popular application binary compatibility layer for FreeBSD and GNU/Linux operating systems.
Or try Info-ZIP Unzip on it; <crime violates="DMCA">it sure helps when dealing with Microsoft documentation archives</crime>.
Re:Use wine (Score:1)
Im fairly sure that program will open self extracting
Re:How about the Linux version (Score:1)
Re:How about the Linux version (Score:2, Informative)
The third reich (A RTCW mod) (Score:3, Informative)
Re:The third reich (A RTCW mod) (Score:3, Informative)
Re:The third reich (A RTCW mod) (Score:1)
This is just the *game logic*, not the engine (Score:5, Informative)
Re:This is just the *game logic*, not the engine (Score:2)
(at least, my Q1 cd doesn't have the source on it)
Re:This is just the *game logic*, not the engine (Score:2)
Re:This is just the *game logic*, not the engine (Score:2, Insightful)
It is not easily modifiable on it's own, although there are utilities to convert it back into something like it's original source. ID released the actual QuakeC sourcecode a little later, along with a byte-compiler etc for it.
Re:This is just the *game logic*, not the engine (Score:2)
true, however... (Score:5, Insightful)
ID is definately one of the best software companies and definatey at the top of game companies. They're a business, they make money, & they give back to the community.
so they keep the code for 3+ years, at least they won't go broke and stop having code to give us.
it'd be nice to see other companies doing this !
way to go ID Software, thanks for continued good deeds.
Re:true, however... (Score:2, Redundant)
It's a common sense idea that I wish more companies would follow. Old products do not make the company any significant money (if at all), and releasing them gives the community a big bonus. Of course, most folks will still want the latest and greatest when it does come out. I suppose some companies might consider such an action impacting sales of their current products.
I'm glad that id is willing to take that risk,
I don't like id games, nor do I play them, but I like the idea of a company that doesn't bury obsolote code for no good reason.
Now, if Microsoft would only release the source to Windows 3.1....
Re:true, however... (Score:2)
-motardo
Re:true, however... (Score:2)
Re:true, however... (Score:1)
Re:true, however... (Score:1)
Re:true, however... (Score:2, Informative)
Re:true, however... (Score:2, Interesting)
or www.planetquake.com
i'm just complaining 'bout RIAA, because it'd be nice if you could legally download old NiN or other tracks after the cd's have left the marketplace. what sort of fan wants to spend $30 to replace that old scratched up cd because now it needs to be special ordered in.
ID has a good idea and it'd be nice to see other industries/companies following their lead.
Re:true, however... (Score:1)
Only if you're intending to play the game. If you just want to see how a *really* good coder works, then it's great!
Re:true, however... (Score:1)
for game mods (Score:1, Redundant)
Re:for game mods (Score:1)
Also, though I usually don't care what Slashdot posts, how in the hell is this news? I mean, they always give away the source. News should be things like the LOTR Text Adventure for the Atari 2600 that fits in 4K [atariage.com]. Not "the sun came up this morning."
You know they're just kicking themselves (again) that they can't delete Slashdot stores for fear of ruining people's posts.
Re:for game mods (Score:1)
More uninformed / ambiguous news posting on /. (Score:1, Redundant)
How so? this is _public_ source code, the one you make _mods_ with. It has been standard practice since quake (1) to release this freely and soon after the game has come out. No suprise whatsoever.
Which is very different from id software releasing the _engine_ code to a game (as it has done for doom/quake/quake2), which would have been truely suprising in the case of rtcw
I find it strange... (Score:1, Redundant)
Low Quality (Score:5, Insightful)
"Developers: Id Software and Activision Wolfenstein Source" - English is not my native language, but surely, this is a fairly crappy headline. "Developers: Wolfenstein Source Code Released" or something similar would have been way, way better.
Second, the posting itself is shit, written by an "enthusiastic anonymous coward" who is apparently about 13 years old. Who the hell is reviewing these news items before they hit the front page? Whoever posted this one (hi tim) should have done some creative re-writing, or better yet, picked another submission about the same thing (surely there must have been a couple about something this well-known).
In its current state, I am very glad I'm not paying a cent for
Re:Low Quality (Score:1, Offtopic)
At the point I am posting this, your post currently has 5 replies. Mine is #6.
My belief is that such "mistakes" have historically garnered a lot more activity. Hence it is in Slashdot's best interest to continue making "mistakes" in order to keep activity high. The more posts per article, the theory goes, the more eyeballs viewed the ad(s) at the top, so they can charge more.
It's always about the money. And I agree -- the mistakes are easily catchable (duplicate postings), juvenile (witness 4/1/02), and irritating (the headline for this article is just ambiguous enough to make you want to read the damn thing).
The worst part? Slashdot is addictive; although they're not getting money directly from me in the form of a subscription, they are getting money from me indirectly in the form of page views, which cost the advertisers more; and posts, which probably cost the advertisers more than a page view. So even though I'll most likely never subscribe, my activity is still helping make them money. And if it educates/entertains me in the meantime, well, that's cool.
My point? Don't worry about it. If the quality has gone that far downhill, we'd start seeing .sig lines hawking alternative news discussion sites at the same frequency as we're seeing the "Great Slashdot Blackout" coming up the week of April 21(ish). But Slashdot is
Heroinware [slashdot.org] ; there's plenty of us junkies keeping stats up.
Mirror of source code pack (Score:5, Informative)
I mirror this code to get your advise... (Score:5, Funny)
Re:I mirror this code to get your advise... (Score:5, Funny)
Re:I mirror this code to get your advise... (Score:3, Funny)
Re:I mirror this code to get your advise... (Score:2)
So I take it you only ever install GPG signed source / binary packages? Or if installing unpackaged source review each line yourself?
Re:Mirror of source code pack (Score:1)
even if you get it from a "more legitimate" source, it will still be an
I got my copy from article on Shacknews [shacknews.com] which links to fileshack on this page [shacknews.com].
This isn't the engine code (Score:1)
It's not like id can make their money any other way. Q3A was crap (no, really it was wasn't it, people? CS and UT own it)
Re:This isn't the engine code (Score:1)
I'll give you ownership of UT, but CS is owned by *no game* only equalled
Freakin Anonymous Coward! (Score:1)
ok, (Score:3, Funny)
And I'll just shut up now...
DUH! (Score:4, Informative)
That way the engine licensees can take their time to release their ID Software engine-based games without losing any profit due to all these custom engine modifications people do in their spare time with games like Doom, Quake and Quake2. You can expect Quake3 Arena (and NOT RtCW) engine source some time after ID starts working on a game AFTER Doom3 (their current project) is released.
Re:DUH! (Score:4, Insightful)
Team Fortress Classis was a Half-Life mod, the original TF was a Quake 1 mod.
Re:DUH! (Score:1, Informative)
its not the engine (Score:3, Informative)
-Vic
Advances. (Score:4, Funny)
--saint
oops, already /.'ed (Score:1, Redundant)
-Vic
Fast mirror of the RTCW source code (Score:2, Informative)
engine code vs. game code (Score:1)
QED
Re:engine code vs. game code (Score:2, Interesting)
Re:engine code vs. game code (Score:4, Informative)
Re:engine code vs. game code (Score:1)
Why Would you Release Engone Code ANyways, (Score:1)
The full source will be released.. (Score:1)
-reid
It's 'id' not 'ID' (Score:1)
http://www.idsoftware.com/
http://www.google.c
Suprise? How? (Score:2)
Next SlashDot Story.... (Score:1)
iD is da Bomb. John Carmack, Please Post here to generate traffic.
Not a surprise (Score:1)
The person who posted that newsitem obviously knows nothing about id. I'm surprised his comment made it to the prestigous
Yuioup
Most redundant posting ever (Score:3, Insightful)
Nazi AI (Score:2)
Macs (Score:2)
Game code is in the interesting part (Score:3, Insightful)
Speaking as a professional game player, the game-level code is the interesting part. Graphics engines get pretty boring after you've worked on a couple of them. Go back to a graphics book from 15 years ago, back before PC gaming took off, and that's pretty much how graphics engines still work. Game-level code, though, now that's interesting. There are many more open problems in that area, or at least problems that can be solved in hundreds of ways, as opposed to three or four.
this is useful for wannabe game developers ... (Score:1)