Slashdot Mirror


SOCOM Online Cheats Ruin Experience

Thanks to an anonymous reader for pointing to a GamePro report discussing GameShark cheat provider Fire International's touting of itself as "the first source of cheats for PS2 online title SOCOM: U.S. Navy SEALs, effectively encouraging gamers to ruin online gameplay for fair SOCOM players." According to Fire's European press release, the cheat "..enables unlimited ammunition and now boasts cheat codes for no recoil, rapid fire, unlimited grenades and a code which allows the player to steal their opponent's ammunition!" This brings to Europe a problem that is already rampant in the States, but which Sony claim they will fix for November's SOCOM 2, which should "..solve these issues and also feature the ability to ban cheaters from online play."

15 of 68 comments (clear)

  1. I am Baffled as to why People Even Bother by Mike+Mentalist · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Why do these people even bother cheating online? They pay for the PS2, pay for the network adapter, pay for the game... and then ruin it all by going and spending more money on a cheat device.

    It's just so self defeating as well - when everyone cheats, people stop playing. This means no more games for the cheaters to join. They destroyed PSO on the Dreamcast, and they STILL haven't learned their lesson yet...?

    --
    I put my books on Amazon, Smashwords, Demonoid, ISOHunt and Pirate Bay. Search for 'Michael Cargill'
    1. Re:I am Baffled as to why People Even Bother by lightspawn · · Score: 2, Interesting

      They destroyed PSO on the Dreamcast, and they STILL haven't learned their lesson yet...?

      You're funny.

      SEGA's in trouble. They had a non-viable financial model for PSO (buy the game, get unlimited free online play). Every hour a player is online is expense without profit.

      The solution?

      Let's just say exploits played right into SEGA's hand (hey, buy version 2 and pay for online access! we mean, buy the gamecube version and pay for online access!).

      Does SOCOM require a monthly fee? If not, you've got your killer.

  2. Punkbuster? by Estaga · · Score: 2, Informative

    Not being a gamer myself but playing around with Wolfenstein Enemy Territory, I noticed a think called punkbuster, a countermeasure against online cheating? Maybe more games should support this (yeahyeah its PC only now).

    http://www.evenbalance.com/index.php?page=info.p hp

    1. Re:Punkbuster? by revmoo · · Score: 3, Insightful

      The problem is, that cheats come out daily that aren't detected by PB and it's ilk.

      I admin a rather busy Counterstrike server, and rather than use anti-cheat technologies, the admins simply watch people play. It's not foolproof, but it is certainly more effective than anti-cheat mechanisms.

      In time, spotting cheaters becomes second nature. Does the person track through walls, seeming to know where an enemy will come out? Do they normally shoot automatically after every corner, or did they just happen to do it on the one with a terrorist hiding behind the crate? Are their movements smooth, or erratic?

      I think one of the problems that consoles have, is that there aren't many admins. People can't set up their own server, it is all dependant on the company that released the game to police, and that is a patently Bad Idea(tm).

      Humans are the most effective anti-cheat mechanism.

      --
      I would expect such blatant racism on Fark, but on Slashdot? Mods please ban this asshole.
  3. Maybe the XBox Online model is the way to go... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Insightful

    So maybe Microsoft is right. Controling and centralizing the online infrastrucutre can limit abuses like this.

    1. Re:Maybe the XBox Online model is the way to go... by Mike+Mentalist · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Really, MS haven't got all that much control over the games - as they don't host any servers to play on. All the 'servers' you see are in actual fact people hosting games on their consoles.

      Although each person has a unique Gamertag that identifies their account, there isn't a foolproof way for MS to boot people who act like dicks. I certainly haven't heard of any cases of people being banned from Xbox Live.

      I don't think that there has been a cheat device released for the Xbox yet, and that is the only reason why you don't find cheats online (beyond game glitches, that is).

      Many people had found various shortcuts in MotoGP, and were allways using them to get stupidly good laptimes to put them at the top of the score table.

      --
      I put my books on Amazon, Smashwords, Demonoid, ISOHunt and Pirate Bay. Search for 'Michael Cargill'
  4. Socom has become nearly unplayable by sn0 · · Score: 4, Interesting

    I have been playing Socom online since day 1. I love the game, but it has become nearly unplayable because of the excessive cheating. The only wayto get a fair game is to play in locked rooms with people that you know. Sony claims that this problem ahs been fixed for Socom 2, but I'll believe it when I see it. I suppose it's tough to complain when Sony doesnt charge for it's online games (yet), but I would be more than willing to pay a monthly fee as long as the game was cheater free.

    --
    My cats breath smells like cat food.
  5. Cheats = Testing Codes by lastpub · · Score: 2, Interesting

    My understanding is that these "cheats", especially on a console, are testing codes... why would these be left accessible or even in the game on release? I can understand leaving them in for single player games, it really doesn't matter that much, but does this not seem like a horrible oversight for the developer of a competitive online multiplayer game to leave these in?

    --
    My vocabulary is so huge it's enormous. if only I could think of a word bigger than enormous, like huge.
    1. Re:Cheats = Testing Codes by evil-osm · · Score: 2, Informative

      The cheats were not actually left in the game, rather they are done with a third party hacking/cheating utility called Xploder.

      --


      E.

      Never rub another man's rhubarb - The Joker
  6. On cheating... by Suicide · · Score: 2, Interesting

    I don't really understand why it is still allowed to happen.

    Modified models let you see someone through a wall. Ok, why was a player behind a wall's position even transfered to said client? Hack removes gun recoil, why is the client software what determines if the bullets suffer from recoil? Unlimited ammo, why does the server trust the client to keep track of ammo? And so on...

    Yeah, yeah. I know. It takes processing power to keep that sort of stuff on the server. So what. I paid for a game, with the expectation of fair play with other people. If they can't deliver that to the players, then perhaps they shouldn't be pushing the game out. Why aren't these companies held accountable for the mistakes they release?

    1. Re:On cheating... by TheRoachMan · · Score: 3, Insightful

      The amount of processor power needed to do all these things server-side is nothing. The amount of bandwith consumed by it is what matters.

      Netcode (the code that is a compromise between some stuff client-side, some stuff server-side, and blending it together in a seemless and smooth play experience) is tricky stuff. If you let clients decide if their bullet was a hit or not, you can let people cheat by just sending out packets with the right data that tells the server "I hit that guy in the head! Really!"

      Letting the server decide for every bullet (hit or miss) requires the knowledge of every player's exact current position. Impossible with latency above 0. So prediction is needed. But prediction can make for sluggish play. So it's really hard to balance.

      This rant to just show you that it's almost impossible to write perfect, non-hackable, fair, smooth netcode. No matter how high the predicted sales figures are, or how much money you can spend on making the game. From what you want, every multiplayer game is a mistake, every company can be held accountable.

  7. integrity check by dh003i · · Score: 2, Insightful

    The solution is to do an md5sum ofthe binary for the game. Players should be allowed to ban non-standard md5-sums from joining.

  8. The real problem with cheats by August_zero · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Of course the real trouble with cheats, is that after the game has been "violated" the game in general is less fun to play online even without an actual cheater present.

    Why?

    Because as soon as many people are certain it is possible to cheat, they will begin accusing every single person that can beat them of cheating. It's like the camping thing. I used to play Unreal Champ on X-box live, I liked doing base defense, and I got accused of "camping" all the time. What the hell do you expect? I am defending a base, of course I am going to stay inside or near it.

    See the problem isn't that its possible to cheat, the problem is that many many gamers are spoiled little brats that can't stand competition. If I win they will accuse me of cheating, or if they can cheat they will do so in order to beat me. In either scenario nobody is happy; even the passive observers on the server have to put up with the name calling and asinine behavior. I don't think this sort of problem will ever go away until someone designs a way of preemptively detecting assholes and kicking them off the server before they ruin the game.

    --
    On Wall Street they say "buy low, sell high" On the pad we say, "buy high, sell high" Isn't that somehow better?
  9. And here... by Gehenna_Gehenna · · Score: 2, Funny
    I just thought I sucked.

    What a relief.

    --

  10. Sony's game plan... by mcp33p4n75 · · Score: 2, Funny

    1. Purposely allow cheats to remain in SOCOM
    2. Hundreds of thousands of people play SOCOM
    3. Gameshark makers discover cheats
    4. Rampant cheating destroys gaming experience
    5. Sony announces cheats will be fixed in SOCOM 2
    6. Profit!