Multiplayer Major Flaw - This Tag Issue Needs Removed - Locally Modified
- Thread starter mcguirel
- Start date
I think we all understand that, but your technique raises a few additional problems:
* Even if you don't intend to change the files, you will eventually do so by accident. Perhaps you accidentally include a file for which you had a temporary local modification. Perhaps you accidentally include a file which was never sourced from the DLS. Perhaps you simply make a typo or drag the wrong file at some point in the process. And if not you, then somebody else.
* Just because you don't intend to change the files, doesn't mean that other people will be so honest.
Sorry, we don't offer refunds for bans. If anyone is caught abusing the multiplayer system, they will be banned. It's not really any different from what happens if you abuse the forums. We don't tolerate that kind of behaviour.
You may trust it, but you can be very sure that we don't.
kind regards,
chris
*shrugs* I'm just pointing out the risks involved. If you want to go ahead with this anyway, you're welcome to. But don't complain to us if you get banned as a result.
As noted above, I'm not going to stop people talking about this kind of thing. But I'm also not going to let people use that as a defence if they get caught exploiting it. You have been warned, and what happens next is in your own hands. If you don't use multiplayer then this whole thing is moot because the problem under discussion would never affect you, you won't get banned, and you wouldn't care even if you were. If you do use multiplayer then you need to play by the rules.
kind regards,
chris
norfolksouthern37
what's a normal map?
why not? they are in fact locally modified. the only way to guarantee that everyone has the same files is for everyone to get them from the DLS, end of story. there is NO other reliable way. what N3V has done here is the best solution.
you might think so for yourself, but i would never do what you suggested above. such an action could permanently break some assets already in the database, requiring install and re-download of potentially 1000s more assets than you claim to fix. i do not consider it trusted at all.
sorry this happened to you, but it is nobody's problem but your own. if you wish to play multiplayer, the correct course of action is to download the files again. this isnt a bug or unintentional operation of things as evidenced throughout this thread, so i do not understand why you are still talking about it as such.
*shrugs* I just walked in off the street(to get out of the rain) and saw people yelling at each other so thought I'd hoot and holler too. I'm touched that you took the time to write me such a whimsical assembly of words. I enjoyed the length, not to long, not to short. Somewhat informative with a touch of realization that I'm a penguin in Africa.
Yeah, I figured as much. I'm glad that you appreciated my reply, though it was directed at the wider audience moreso than yourself specifically. ;-)
chris
Retro00064
New member
Remember how the Content Dispatcher program in TRS2004 and earlier would display a message before it showed the details of the CDP you were about to install, indicating whether or not the package had been processed by Auran's automated checking process, which the package would have gone through if it had come from the DLS? CDPs that had been downloaded from the DLS must have had some internal flag of some sort switched on that Content Dispatcher would detect, displaying the proper message to end user, while CDPs that came from elsewhere (which are as-generated by Content Dispatcher on the content creator's computer) would not have this internal indication, and Content Dispatcher would display to the end user the warning message used for such cases.
Based on Shane's post, Content Manager does not make this distinction. Would it be impossible to implement this functionality in CM? If not, then perhaps it should be implemented. As described above, CDPs that are downloaded from the DLS would have the proper internal indication that they had been processed by the DLS, while all other CDPs would not, and just like Content Dispatcher did, CM would detect this and mark the asset(s) from the CDP accordingly.
My 2 cents.
Two things I'm trying to puzzle out here;
An EDR takes a long long time, and this is what I consider a GOOD result - the only things the EDR trashed were some built in sessions I never use anyway. Even if it always worked perfectly and left zero defects when it was done, it takes 2 or 3 hours, so how is mcguirel's method easier?
On the flip side, if she wants to do that, what's the harm to others? Only potential I could think of would be the hypothetical supertrain 1000mph engine spec that gets a game out of synch when she has it and nobody else does. In which case it wouldn't take very many games before people figured out having mcguirel join a game screws it up, so kick her out if she tries to join. Multiplayer games have been around since the original DOOM, trolls causing problems have been around since then as well, and the only thing anyone thought was necessary was the ability of the host to kick out anyone who caused problems. I just don't get it.
An EDR takes a long long time, and this is what I consider a GOOD result - the only things the EDR trashed were some built in sessions I never use anyway. Even if it always worked perfectly and left zero defects when it was done, it takes 2 or 3 hours, so how is mcguirel's method easier?
On the flip side, if she wants to do that, what's the harm to others? Only potential I could think of would be the hypothetical supertrain 1000mph engine spec that gets a game out of synch when she has it and nobody else does. In which case it wouldn't take very many games before people figured out having mcguirel join a game screws it up, so kick her out if she tries to join. Multiplayer games have been around since the original DOOM, trolls causing problems have been around since then as well, and the only thing anyone thought was necessary was the ability of the host to kick out anyone who caused problems. I just don't get it.
I suspect that Shane is incorrect here, but I'm happy for someone to point out to me if I'm wrong.
kind regards,
chris
Any mainstream game where cheating has become prevalent generally has to take increasingly significant steps to counter this kind of thing. See also Punkbuster, the WON ID, warden and so on.
We have our own little tricks, but I'm hoping that this kind of thing doesn't escalate because in the end it just means more work for us which could be better spent on improving the game.
chris
For the simple fact that when you find that even thru the course of redownloading perhaps many items you purposely had to delete due to Revertinng failures, this will then show face.
When you have stacked dependencies upon stacked dependencies and you redownload only those KUIDS reported in the Multiplayer Session Config/Route and spend hours upon hours trying to resolve the stacked dependency issues, frustration will set in making Multiplayer Participation Practically Impossible .
I have yet been able to enjoy one time Multiplayer since the purchase as a result of this issue. Sole Purpose for the purchase, and the FCT thereafter to hereby follow the procedures set for with utter failure.
That's what I'm missing, "where cheating has become prevalent", this is competition? How would you "win" a train simulator multiplayer game, with or without cheating? I'm really not trying to be a smartass here, I just don't understand what the point of cheating would be in a train simulator?
Is that a trick question? The point of cheating is to win the game, but Trainz multiplayer is a cooperative game with no scoring, right? Or did I miss a memo? And what is "griefing", guess I gotta google that. Trainz multiplayer has some kind of deathmatch or racing mode?
Okay, looked that up;
Griefing is the act of irritating and angering people in video games through the use of destruction, construction, or social engineering.
I could see how that might be a problem in MMOs (which I've never played) but for Trainz multiplayer what would be the max number in any game? If that's what this is all about, why not eliminate all the restrictions for private games requiring a password?
Griefing is the act of irritating and angering people in video games through the use of destruction, construction, or social engineering.
I could see how that might be a problem in MMOs (which I've never played) but for Trainz multiplayer what would be the max number in any game? If that's what this is all about, why not eliminate all the restrictions for private games requiring a password?
Is it? Trainz Multiplayer is the ability to play a (specially-designed) gameplay session with more than one person. Just as we have singe-player gameplay sessions with different objectives, there can also be multiplayer sessions with different objectives. The only session that we've released so far is not scored, but that doesn't mean that we won't do so in the future and it doesn't mean that other content creators haven't or won't do that.
What do numbers really have to do with anything? It's about personality types, and I guess the more people you have, the more likely you are to run into trouble. But in any other respect, you only need one problem user to cause havok for everybody else.
Because reliably enforcing restrictions in one place and not in another would be difficult, at best, and because we don't really see much in the way of benefits from that. Multiplayer is about playing together, and pushing people to play in private games sort of defeats that.
kind regards,
chris
Okay, I don't see the point of competitive train handling, but if that floats other peoples' boats, why not.
"What do numbers really have to do with anything? It's about personality types, and I guess the more people you have, the more likely you are to run into trouble. But in any other respect, you only need one problem user to cause havok for everybody else."
Answered your own question there, but if there are 3 people and one troll, the host kicks tho troll out or if the troll is the host the other three quit and start their own game without him. For a few friends playing together who all know each other and share the same ideas on train operations it's simply not an issue.
Pushing people to play private games - no, maybe? Question you gotta ask now, if all the "batteries not included lots of complicated assembly required" work was removed from private multiplayer, would you get a sudden flood of people moving from public to private multiplayer? If the majority of Trainz owners do have problems with all the restrictions, that would be a thundering "YES!" If only a small minority share my opinion then it wouldn't have much impact on public games.
Again, make it optional with a disclaimer, let people decide for themselves.
"What do numbers really have to do with anything? It's about personality types, and I guess the more people you have, the more likely you are to run into trouble. But in any other respect, you only need one problem user to cause havok for everybody else."
Answered your own question there, but if there are 3 people and one troll, the host kicks tho troll out or if the troll is the host the other three quit and start their own game without him. For a few friends playing together who all know each other and share the same ideas on train operations it's simply not an issue.
Pushing people to play private games - no, maybe? Question you gotta ask now, if all the "batteries not included lots of complicated assembly required" work was removed from private multiplayer, would you get a sudden flood of people moving from public to private multiplayer? If the majority of Trainz owners do have problems with all the restrictions, that would be a thundering "YES!" If only a small minority share my opinion then it wouldn't have much impact on public games.
Again, make it optional with a disclaimer, let people decide for themselves.
Agreed, except how do you identify who "the troll" is? Unless they're deliberately being obvious, there's no guarantee of anything linking that player and the problems. Your train keeps derailing just when you're about to get somewhere interesting? Why is that the fault of "Player X"?
Agreed.
I don't agree that the lack of hand-installed content makes things particularly difficult as it stands right now. If anything, it makes it simpler for most people. You could perhaps argue that it makes the environment less flexible, but it's certainly easier to just press the button and go rather than try to find all the necessary content yourself.
Again, I don't think that's a reasonable option. It's like smoking; it doesn't just affect you.
chris
Similar threads
