Rogue and Tetris ported to . . . . . Diablo II?!?!

lord2800 writes "While Diablo II is nearing the end of it useable life-cycle, it would seem that Diablo II hacking is still alive and well. Diablo II hacking pioneer Syadasti (Mike Gogulski), has recently ported and released both Rogue and Tetris for Diablo II. Since Blizzard has not yet released their upcoming patch, is it left up to the open source programmers to breathe some life into modern games, with a little retro twist. A quote from the author: Finally, an answer to the question "what the hell do I do while my bot is running?" Play Tetris! Grab yours today at from Otaku-Elite. Requires bind.d2h and d2hackit. Self-documenting. (tetris.d2h features an autopilot mode as well, so if you get as tired of playing Tetris as you are of playing Diablo II, well just turn that puppy on and let the computer play for you) Syadasti (Mike Gogulski) is also the Head of Research for the d2jsp Development Team which, among other things, has embedded a Javascript engine within Diablo II to facilitate the creation of AI "bots" which can play the game on their own, "thus freeing the user from the tedium of playing with ... er ... for ... himself," he says."

Comments

It's appropriate

[PenguinLord]

After all Diablo really is just a slick commercial version of rogue/nethack

Golf Hack

[Perdo]

There was a flash based golf game that was the rage several years ago. I got tired of playing so I wrote a macro to play for me. After some script tweaking and 2 days of run time I had the top 10 scores sewn up out of over 3 million users.

The game was pulled by the website hosting it.

Using a bot to play a game is pretty lame.

I was working on a CS bot at the time too. It never saw the light of day after I realized just how lame it was.

Play for fun. Hack AI to provide yourself challenge. Do not hack to play.

Re:Golf Hack

[Rogerborg]

• Using a bot to play a game is pretty lame.

Writing a game that a bot can beat a human at is pretty lame. I spent years hacking a netrek cyborg/bot client, and finally came to the conclusion that I was, by and large, wasting my time. Info features were useful, but as for getting it to fly and aim weapons, it got smacked by clued human players nearly every time, because the mechanics of combat meant that you had to beat the opponent, not beat the game engine. It shocks me just how badly designed most commercial game are in this respect: they give too much info to clients, they trust clients too much, and they allow dreadful behaviour like "Make an immediate turn to point right at opponent X, and fire the railgun. Gib!" Tsk tsk.

Re:Potty break, or Core Wars

[Zathrus]

What if you really have to use the restroom?

So go to the restroom. Oh, you might lose? Yeah... so what? If you're playing on the stratospheric level where there's actually money involved that's one thing. Otherwise does it really matter?

And yes, I play online games. I know that there's other people playing as well and that in team games they're relying on you -- if you can't just quit the game to go AFK, then let them know you're AFK and they'll cover for you.

Ever heard of Core Wars? That was one of the first popular bot vs. bot games

Non sequitor. The OP was not playing a bot-vs-bot game, where the purpose is to write a better program than your adversary. It's a level playing field.

Writing a bot for a human played game may show you have programming skill, but actually using it to defeat other players is just lame. It doesn't prove you have any skill regarding the actual game. It just proves that you can code and are willing to cheat to make you look better.

Using a bot written by someone else to play is even lamer. That just shows you have no skill in any manner.