Force client to take a screenshot

[krystianoo]

Such a function would be useful to see if a player is using a game-altering modification (such as greenless mod). Like in CS 1.6, where they forced your client to take screenshots, banned you for wallhacks and requested you to post those screenshots in an 'unban appeal'.

[vito1]

It was already been suggested.

[krystianoo]

It was already been suggested.

Where, and why was it not implemented?

[PunkNoodle]

What the fuck? What else after this? I strongly disagree, it's a serious violation of player's privacy.

[Shadow]

I don't see any privacy violation. Your game screen does not usually contain your bank account or stuff like that, plus, stuff like this is sent to the server anyway. As long as this is limited to the game screen, I cannot see why this would prove to be a violation.

[PunkNoodle]

I was thinking about private conversations or PMs but actually there are a lot of servers returning your password in plain text and IP after logging in, why on earth would you be forced to post such stuff in a public forum.

Considering server owners already have access to such stuff and they should know what not to do with it.

[krystianoo]

I was thinking about private conversations or PMs but actually there are a lot of servers returning your password in plain text and IP after logging in, why on earth would you be forced to post such stuff in a public forum.

First of all I don't know of any server returning your password in plain text after logging in. IP, maybe some do that.

Second of all, only the screenshot-taking is forced. You choose whether to upload the screenshot or not. You can modify the screenshot in any way you want, so, for example you can censor the chat if there is something that shouldn't be public. Good luck trying to remove signs of cheats in a screenshot, though.

[vito1]

It was already been suggested.

Where, and why was it not implemented?

http://forum.vc-mp.org/?topic=2761.0

[.]

I see this inspiration coming from Counter-Strike days. I wonder how long before the people that make the hacks also find the location in memory of the function that takes the screenshot and route it to their own which disables their hacks while the screenshot is taken so it appears that the player is clean and then enable the hack again.

I mean seriously. If you were able to make that hack you can definitely make this possible as well.

[krystianoo]

I see this inspiration coming from Counter-Strike days. I wonder how long before the people that make the hacks also find the location in memory of the function that takes the screenshot and route it to their own which disables their hacks while the screenshot is taken so it appears that the player is clean and then enable the hack again.

I mean seriously. If you were able to make that hack you can definitely make this possible as well.

No.

[.]

No.

What no?

[krystianoo]

No.

What no?

Going with your logic, no VCMP anti-cheat should exist in the first place because it's bypassable.

Everything is bypassable. But that doesn't mean you shouldn't try blocking it. 99% of VCMP 'cheaters' are script-kiddies who use the already-ready stuff and have no idea how to accomplish something you've described above and will never know how.

If you were able to make that hack you can definitely make this possible as well.

Changing the value of a memory address is hardly comparable to doing what you've described.

[.]

... script-kiddies who use the already-ready stuff ...

You just answered yourself. Because the guy who makes the hack makes that protection not the guy who uses it.

Everything is bypassable....

Again, you just answered yourself.

...99% of VCMP 'cheaters' ...

If you're in that 99% then you're a noob that doesn't know to use a hack properly and can be caught plain and simply without the screenshot to show you.

Otherwise, that means cheaters are never caught in vcmp and if that's so. How do you know there are cheaters out here? I mean, how have you caught them so far? Because you have to have caught some to think this feature is "necessary", right?


But if this makes everyone happy. Make no mistake. The developers are free to implement it. I have nothing against it. I'm just saying this is a pipe dream that will never actually stop cheating.

[krystianoo]

... script-kiddies who use the already-ready stuff ...

You just answered yourself. Because the guy who makes the hack makes that protection not the guy who uses it.

Everything is bypassable....

Again, you just answered yourself.

...99% of VCMP 'cheaters' ...

If you're in that 99% then you're a noob that doesn't know to use a hack properly and can be caught plain and simply without the screenshot to show you.

Otherwise, that means cheaters are never caught in vcmp and if that's so. How do you know there are cheaters out here? I mean, how have you caught them so far? Because you have to have caught some to request this feature, right?


But if this makes everyone happy. The developers are free to implement it. I have nothing against it. I'm just saying this is a pipe dream that will never actually stop cheating.

A person who doesn't play the game doesn't have an idea what problems I'm talking about.

Good luck somehow replacing generic.txd with bushes / leaves removed into original generic.txd while in-game.

Because the guy who makes the hack makes that protection not the guy who uses it.

But who makes those cheats? Nobody. People use already ready programs. As I said, they change the value of memory addresses using tools. How is that skill? How is that making cheats? To speed cheat, they use Speed Gear or edit a memory address. How is that making cheats?

I'm just saying this is a pipe dream that will never actually stop cheating.

Nothing will. It's about deterrence.

[EK.IceFlake]

they use Speed Gear

Prove speed gear exists.