Comments on: The Walls Have Eyes, But Are Missing Form And Function http://brokentoys.org/2006/11/05/the-walls-have-eyes-but-are-missing-form-and-function/ Random Comments About Games and Tractors Mon, 15 Mar 2010 03:56:56 -0700 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.9.1 hourly 1 By: Oliver kfsone Smith http://brokentoys.org/2006/11/05/the-walls-have-eyes-but-are-missing-form-and-function/comment-page-1/#comment-5013 Oliver kfsone Smith Mon, 13 Nov 2006 08:55:29 +0000 http://brokentoys.org/2006/11/05/the-walls-have-eyes-but-are-missing-form-and-function/#comment-5013 We really oughta have a security session at next years AGC. Some of the most interesting conversations I've had at the last few have been with other guys who have to deal with the stuff regularly; of course we're always all paranoid of saying anything that might somehow wind up being mentioned carelessly in the wrong place and blam that achillies heel we're praying will never get noticed will be out there... :) We really oughta have a security session at next years AGC. Some of the most interesting conversations I’ve had at the last few have been with other guys who have to deal with the stuff regularly; of course we’re always all paranoid of saying anything that might somehow wind up being mentioned carelessly in the wrong place and blam that achillies heel we’re praying will never get noticed will be out there… :)

]]> By: Oliver kfsone Smith http://brokentoys.org/2006/11/05/the-walls-have-eyes-but-are-missing-form-and-function/comment-page-1/#comment-4984 Oliver kfsone Smith Mon, 13 Nov 2006 08:52:26 +0000 http://brokentoys.org/2006/11/05/the-walls-have-eyes-but-are-missing-form-and-function/#comment-4984 Cheap servers? The particular piece of work that Blizzard decided to offload comes with a lot of overhead that you wouldn't otherwise need the servers to carry. It's like comparing the overhead of taking an extra sandwich into space on the shuttle vs the cost of launching a sandwich into space on its own.<br> <br> It might account for less than 1% of the cpu load of each client playing the game, its not going to use *less* on the server, its going to use more.<br> <br> That could easily mean an extra CPU per 100 players, and I'm guessing that <i>enabling</i> it on the servers could easily make it an extra CPU per 25-50 online players.<br> <br> That might seem cheap to you, but the real expense is in operating costs - the increased power and facilities costs would be huge. Cheap servers? The particular piece of work that Blizzard decided to offload comes with a lot of overhead that you wouldn’t otherwise need the servers to carry. It’s like comparing the overhead of taking an extra sandwich into space on the shuttle vs the cost of launching a sandwich into space on its own.

It might account for less than 1% of the cpu load of each client playing the game, its not going to use *less* on the server, its going to use more.

That could easily mean an extra CPU per 100 players, and I’m guessing that enabling it on the servers could easily make it an extra CPU per 25-50 online players.

That might seem cheap to you, but the real expense is in operating costs – the increased power and facilities costs would be huge.

]]> By: What Would Matt Do » WoW guild banned, server security questioned. http://brokentoys.org/2006/11/05/the-walls-have-eyes-but-are-missing-form-and-function/comment-page-1/#comment-5012 What Would Matt Do » WoW guild banned, server security questioned. Wed, 08 Nov 2006 17:06:54 +0000 http://brokentoys.org/2006/11/05/the-walls-have-eyes-but-are-missing-form-and-function/#comment-5012 [...] I was reading broken toys as I do to keep up on my Lum stalking and came across his commentary on client side hacks in WoW about the Guild that was banned. Hah. See, the whole “everything must be server side! the client is in the hands of the enemy!” gestalt is true. But the other side of that coin is that the more processing you can shuffle off onto the client, the less melting down into ash the servers get. [...] [...] I was reading broken toys as I do to keep up on my Lum stalking and came across his commentary on client side hacks in WoW about the Guild that was banned. Hah. See, the whole “everything must be server side! the client is in the hands of the enemy!” gestalt is true. But the other side of that coin is that the more processing you can shuffle off onto the client, the less melting down into ash the servers get. [...]

]]> By: Apache http://brokentoys.org/2006/11/05/the-walls-have-eyes-but-are-missing-form-and-function/comment-page-1/#comment-5011 Apache Wed, 08 Nov 2006 00:08:31 +0000 http://brokentoys.org/2006/11/05/the-walls-have-eyes-but-are-missing-form-and-function/#comment-5011 Most of them got banned in DAoC too for radar, which makes it x2 funny. :) Most of them got banned in DAoC too for radar, which makes it x2 funny. :)

]]> By: Trusted Worlds » Breastplate of Sad Exploitation http://brokentoys.org/2006/11/05/the-walls-have-eyes-but-are-missing-form-and-function/comment-page-1/#comment-5010 Trusted Worlds » Breastplate of Sad Exploitation Tue, 07 Nov 2006 10:20:47 +0000 http://brokentoys.org/2006/11/05/the-walls-have-eyes-but-are-missing-form-and-function/#comment-5010 [...] Nice conversation on Broken Toys about the banning of the Overrated guild in WoW. More of a redux than anything, but given my blog title, I just can’t stop talking about it [...] [...] Nice conversation on Broken Toys about the banning of the Overrated guild in WoW. More of a redux than anything, but given my blog title, I just can’t stop talking about it [...]

]]> By: Naladini http://brokentoys.org/2006/11/05/the-walls-have-eyes-but-are-missing-form-and-function/comment-page-1/#comment-5009 Naladini Tue, 07 Nov 2006 04:18:24 +0000 http://brokentoys.org/2006/11/05/the-walls-have-eyes-but-are-missing-form-and-function/#comment-5009 The items: http://lucy.allakhazam.com/itemlist.html?searchtext=exploitation<br> <br> The reality: Once a game architecture has been built and deployed (and played for a few years), it becomes more difficult to go back and make radical changes to it. Having developers with a solid understanding of the weak points of the game engine is fairly important quality.<br> <br> I'd agree that having trophies of shame isn't the best course of action, but in all honesty, this could also be considered an easter egg. The items: http://lucy.allakhazam.com/itemlist.html?searchtext=exploitation

The reality: Once a game architecture has been built and deployed (and played for a few years), it becomes more difficult to go back and make radical changes to it. Having developers with a solid understanding of the weak points of the game engine is fairly important quality.

I’d agree that having trophies of shame isn’t the best course of action, but in all honesty, this could also be considered an easter egg.

]]> By: Apache http://brokentoys.org/2006/11/05/the-walls-have-eyes-but-are-missing-form-and-function/comment-page-1/#comment-5008 Apache Tue, 07 Nov 2006 00:52:03 +0000 http://brokentoys.org/2006/11/05/the-walls-have-eyes-but-are-missing-form-and-function/#comment-5008 The keeps / towers in DAoC have this problem somewhat, although you don't need to hack to get past them. The keeps / towers in DAoC have this problem somewhat, although you don’t need to hack to get past them.

]]> By: IanB http://brokentoys.org/2006/11/05/the-walls-have-eyes-but-are-missing-form-and-function/comment-page-1/#comment-5007 IanB Tue, 07 Nov 2006 00:48:21 +0000 http://brokentoys.org/2006/11/05/the-walls-have-eyes-but-are-missing-form-and-function/#comment-5007 I normally tend towards allowing stuff to be on the client, but things like *where your walls are* really needs to be server-side. I normally tend towards allowing stuff to be on the client, but things like *where your walls are* really needs to be server-side.

]]> By: Amber http://brokentoys.org/2006/11/05/the-walls-have-eyes-but-are-missing-form-and-function/comment-page-1/#comment-5006 Amber Mon, 06 Nov 2006 22:48:03 +0000 http://brokentoys.org/2006/11/05/the-walls-have-eyes-but-are-missing-form-and-function/#comment-5006 Apache said<br> <blockquote>anyhow, that was clever of SOE I though.</blockquote><br> <br> Clever that SOE averted the exploit, but they lose points for rewarding the exploiter. Players will seek to experience content. Even rewarding them with a useless trophy is still a reward.<br> <br> On topic: It sounds like the client is too trustworthy, but the exploiters were caught and banned. So the question is, is it okay to trust the client in cases where you can retroactively catch the bad guys and punish them? This seems to be the tact Blizzard has taken.<br> <br> I also wonder if there were any members of the raid who refused to apply the hack, and were spared the ban. Is the server logging robust enough to see who went down and who logged or left? Apache said

anyhow, that was clever of SOE I though.

Clever that SOE averted the exploit, but they lose points for rewarding the exploiter. Players will seek to experience content. Even rewarding them with a useless trophy is still a reward.

On topic: It sounds like the client is too trustworthy, but the exploiters were caught and banned. So the question is, is it okay to trust the client in cases where you can retroactively catch the bad guys and punish them? This seems to be the tact Blizzard has taken.

I also wonder if there were any members of the raid who refused to apply the hack, and were spared the ban. Is the server logging robust enough to see who went down and who logged or left?

]]> By: Apache http://brokentoys.org/2006/11/05/the-walls-have-eyes-but-are-missing-form-and-function/comment-page-1/#comment-5005 Apache Mon, 06 Nov 2006 21:53:14 +0000 http://brokentoys.org/2006/11/05/the-walls-have-eyes-but-are-missing-form-and-function/#comment-5005 ^^<br> <br> text got cut off :P<br> <br> anyhow, that was clever of SOE I though. ^^

text got cut off :P

anyhow, that was clever of SOE I though.

]]>