An honest thread about the option for *Offline only, LAN client* and acceptable price for it.
|
Worst part of online games, hacking.
Anything that stops those idiots destroying this game gets my vote. Yeah no, I have no keys left. Sorry to disappoint.
|
|
" Yep, sums it up pretty nicely IMO. Invited to Beta 2012-03-18 / Supporter since 2012-04-08
|
|
" " why have security in the offline client at all?... if there is an offline version people are going to want to make trainers and item editors and make all kinds of changes to it. they will eventually hack threw the security and make the changes they want so why bother? it isn't like you will be using the offline version to connect to the server and with no security in the offline version you don't risk revealing server security. We can't solve problems we can't talk about...
|
|
|
I think you're missing the point, KiaKun.
Most of the game's functions are handled on the server. This is what makes the game more secure than a game that handles similar functions on the client. In order to play the game without connecting to a server, the client would have to handle these functions itself, meaning said client would have to include the server code. It's not about keeping an offline version secure; it's about keeping the online version secure. Giving the server code out in an offline version allows people to hack it and apply those hacks to the online version. Closed Beta/Alpha Tester back after a 10-year hiatus.
First in the credits! |
|
"Wow, that actually explains a lot. Explains why Diablo 2 is hacked way more than most online games, and why Diablo 3 has no single player. |
|
" oh right that actually makes more sense... i was thinking just the security part of the server. @ Silty actually D2 isn't the most hacked game >.< RoM is just one of the games that is more hacked. and i don't think security is why Bliz made D3 online only... they have already been hacked. >.> i think it has more to do with trying to make the game less pirated so more people will buy the 60$ CD. all they really have done is make it so you cant make an ISO of the disk and play off it. We can't solve problems we can't talk about...
|
|
" Even if people memory edit their client locally or write function hooks, how exactly would that interfere with private functions on GGG's server? Unless the POE client does a lot more client-side than it should be doing, such as generating loot drops. If that is the case, then it is only a matter of time before people start hooking game functions, offline client or not. IGN: Guillotine - Shadow - Open Beta
Bawss - 73 Witch - Closed Beta |
|
"That's exactly the point. The game client DOESN'T do those things. And offline version would have to do those things locally, by definition, because you wouldn't be connecting to a remote server that does those things for you. An offline version of the game would need to be able to do all the things the servers do, because you wouldn't be connecting to the servers to get them done. At which point the offline version would mean people had access to (most of) the server code, and could do what they want with it, then apply what they've learned to the online servers. | |
|
I know first hand how much more devastation you can cause by having the server code than if you don't. Without server functionality you are just guessing what might be vulnerable, but if you have the code, it's vastly easier to find message handlers that are buggy in very particular ways, that would never have been found if they didn't have the code.
Running simulations on the offline codebase also allows you to circumvent pattern recognition and account hack flagging. You perfect your method and then execute on the live server. It's all around a bad idea if your game model is centered around multiplayer security. If you have account problems please [url="http://www.pathofexile.com/support"]Email Support[/url]
| |
|
PoE for LAN ++++++1million!
If PoE had LAN, I'd honestly probably play the game quite a lot more. :) Just please, if you make PoE LAN - allow a Drop in and out system. (Like Diablo), where you can go away, level your character, and join back to the same, or even another server. I say this because Sacred didn't allow for the option. :S Another thing I would really appreciate is the quests aren't judged by the host. For example, in Diablo II (At least with me); the quests where governed available if the host had not yet completed them. I found this annoying, especially if I jumped ahead at home, than realized my girlfriend and her brother hadn't completed the quests I've done. Just a thought. :) As for price, I think Torchlight aimed for the $20 mark, but I'll gladly pay $20 - $60 if it was in retail. Not only that, it feels as if I'm supporting GGG more, and they're helping me by handing over a boxed version. :D "If a theory cannot be explained to a child. Then the theory, is probably worthless." - Einstein
|
|

















