Author Topic: Tremfusion's opinion concerning sv_pure  (Read 83281 times)

David

  • Spam Killer
  • *
  • Posts: 3543
  • Turrets: +249/-273
Re: Tremfusion's opinion concerning sv_pure
« Reply #90 on: September 14, 2008, 08:07:19 pm »
Again, you haven't addressed my main argument for keeping it.
Any maps not in the MG repo?  Email me or come to irc.freenode.net/#mg.
--
My words are mine and mine alone.  I can't speak for anyone else, and there is no one who can speak for me.  If I ever make a post that gives the opinions or positions of other users or groups, then they will be clearly labeled as such.
I'm disappointed that people's past actions have forced me to state what should be obvious.
I am not a dev.  Nothing I say counts for anything.

Syntac

  • Posts: 841
  • Turrets: +118/-104
    • Syntac's Stuff
Re: Tremfusion's opinion concerning sv_pure
« Reply #91 on: September 14, 2008, 08:34:04 pm »
The way I interpret it, your main argument for keeping it is that even if it's not much good against actual cheating, it still gives you legal grounds to dish out practically unlimited punishment against anyone who violates it (and then they can't say "But I didn't know it was against the rules!"). That's a good reason. But ask yourself this: Is a determined cheater going to be worried about that? If they're good at cheating, they won't give much evidence as to the fact that they're doing it (at least not enough for you to ban them and honestly say "I know they were cheating.").

Anyway, I wasn't saying the pure check should be removed. I was just saying it doesn't provide much of a barrier to anyone who really wants to bypass it. It'll certainly stop any momentarily incompetence-crazed noob from making all the aliens bright red. But if I want an aimbot, I can just download some source, change/remove the pure check code, and use the aimbot with impunity.

Amanieu

  • Posts: 647
  • Turrets: +135/-83
    • Amanieu
Re: Tremfusion's opinion concerning sv_pure
« Reply #92 on: September 14, 2008, 08:39:40 pm »
Server owners get this choice: Enable sv_pure, or disable it. My point (which Posts nicely summarized) is that players will prefer servers on which they can customize their client to be the way they like it, instead of just sticking with the standard stuff everyone has to use.
Quote
< kevlarman> zakk is getting his patches from shady frenchmen on irc
< kevlarman> this can't be a good sign :P

Syntac

  • Posts: 841
  • Turrets: +118/-104
    • Syntac's Stuff
Re: Tremfusion's opinion concerning sv_pure
« Reply #93 on: September 14, 2008, 09:07:06 pm »
Yes, it's the server owner's choice. Maybe you prefer to let people customize their clients. That's fine. But the pure check keeps out the cheaters who don't know C or can't be bothered to hack the source. There are certainly a lot of those.

Remember, servers are for the enjoyment of the players — if even one person cheats, it diminishes everyone's experience. Personally, I prefer that all the players have a good game where no one has any unfair advantages. If they can't have their custom renderer or cool skins, that's too bad; the stock ones are good enough for everyone else.

Stop the majority of cheaters or let the players customize their clients? It's a dilemma, that's for sure.

benmachine

  • Posts: 915
  • Turrets: +99/-76
    • ben's machinery
Re: Tremfusion's opinion concerning sv_pure
« Reply #94 on: September 14, 2008, 09:27:33 pm »
Just a thought:
Soon after I started playing Tremulous I downloaded a pk3 which gave me an options menu in my client startup (ah, simpler times), but also (I did not realise) contained a mildly altered cgame and assets, which the pk3 maker had included to push his own version of alien radar (no, it wasn't Risujin). For months at a time, whenever I visited a certain server I found myself using an alien radar that gave me a significant advantage over my competitors. I of course had no idea why this was happening, I assumed it was a server setting. It was a long time before I realised that not everyone on that server had what I had. Later, I learnt about sv_pure, and checked, and sure enough it was off. For literally months I was cheating without even realising it.
benmachine

Syntac

  • Posts: 841
  • Turrets: +118/-104
    • Syntac's Stuff
Re: Tremfusion's opinion concerning sv_pure
« Reply #95 on: September 14, 2008, 09:33:38 pm »
And another argument for the pure check: It keeps people from accidentally cheating, so they're sure to know what's right and what's left wrong.

UniqPhoeniX

  • Spam Killer
  • *
  • Posts: 1376
  • Turrets: +66/-32
Re: Tremfusion's opinion concerning sv_pure
« Reply #96 on: September 14, 2008, 10:35:01 pm »
What about just giving more choice then sv_pure 1 or 0... If a server wants sv_pure 1 they can use it. But enabling/disabling mini mods by moving files in and out of /base isn't really the best way...

Amanieu

  • Posts: 647
  • Turrets: +135/-83
    • Amanieu
Re: Tremfusion's opinion concerning sv_pure
« Reply #97 on: September 14, 2008, 10:39:06 pm »
Then what do you suggest?
Quote
< kevlarman> zakk is getting his patches from shady frenchmen on irc
< kevlarman> this can't be a good sign :P

UniqPhoeniX

  • Spam Killer
  • *
  • Posts: 1376
  • Turrets: +66/-32
Re: Tremfusion's opinion concerning sv_pure
« Reply #98 on: September 15, 2008, 12:33:12 am »
Then what do you suggest?
Something like what has been described before, but more complex. When you connect to a server, after you download the required pk3s and the chosen optional ones, it tells what it allows to modify, like use custom 2D in HUD, models, model textures/skins, sounds, and optionally only with which .pk3s, like only that 1 sound mod or that funpack (in case a .pk3 has different mods it only loads what is allowed). If a server changes what it allows, you will be notified. The first time you connect you will be able to choose the mods; same interface should also be accessible from in game(with vid_restart when you click Apply changes) and main menu.
There the client can choose from a list of what mods are in base and are not disallowed, so if you have 3 mods for sounds, you can choose which sound mods to use.
You can save the preferences for that server, which you can load for other servers.
For interface: Just a list of what the allowed mods in your base folder change (like "All skins: default/funpack/custom" which would change the values of all skins; then 1 by 1 like marauder skin, rifle sound, jetpack sound), and you can click on the value to toggle it thru all options, or better yet, a drop down list. In case of custom 2D in HUDs it should list all HUDs that use only the allowed files. A small preview of the texture/model/HUD or a button to preview the chosen sound. At start all values would be default, so in case you don't want to spend any time, you can just click Apply or w/e.

This will allow much more and much easier customization, but won't make it easier to get aimbot/wallhack, so that moral protection stays. ::) Also servers can define more easily what they do and what they don't consider cheats.
I bet someone will want to say "why don't you do it?"

Syntac

  • Posts: 841
  • Turrets: +118/-104
    • Syntac's Stuff
Re: Tremfusion's opinion concerning sv_pure
« Reply #99 on: September 15, 2008, 12:53:05 am »
I bet someone will want to say "why don't you do it?"
Of course.

[EDIT] It's hard to do, after all.
« Last Edit: September 15, 2008, 01:01:17 am by Syntac »

UniqPhoeniX

  • Spam Killer
  • *
  • Posts: 1376
  • Turrets: +66/-32
Re: Tremfusion's opinion concerning sv_pure
« Reply #100 on: September 15, 2008, 01:02:01 am »
What do you think, how many times more mods would have been made if we already had that feature since 1.1.0? Currently its either all or nothing, no other choice, and that has probably stopped many from making/releasing a small mod knowing that many will never use it and others will probably only try it once.

Odin

  • Spam Killer
  • *
  • Posts: 1767
  • Turrets: +113/-204
    • My Website
Re: Tremfusion's opinion concerning sv_pure
« Reply #101 on: September 15, 2008, 01:05:26 am »
Quote
nice mods
aka cheats.

Colynn'

  • Posts: 308
  • Turrets: +28/-35
Re: Tremfusion's opinion concerning sv_pure
« Reply #102 on: September 15, 2008, 01:09:00 am »
Life (TremFusion/FunPack/etc) is a mod of death (base), so life is a cheat if I follow your think.
Currently working on: REAL LIFE STUDIES BULLSHIT

frak

  • Posts: 19
  • Turrets: +5/-4
Re: Tremfusion's opinion concerning sv_pure
« Reply #103 on: September 15, 2008, 02:41:42 am »
I like the reasoning behind pure, just dislike the, IMHO, poor execution of preventing it.

your face

  • Community Moderators
  • *
  • Posts: 3843
  • Turrets: +116/-420
Re: Tremfusion's opinion concerning sv_pure
« Reply #104 on: September 15, 2008, 02:55:25 am »
spam spam spam, waste waste waste!

Seffylight

  • Posts: 490
  • Turrets: +40/-26
Re: Tremfusion's opinion concerning sv_pure
« Reply #105 on: September 15, 2008, 03:49:55 am »
Life (TremFusion/FunPack/etc) is a mod of death (base), so life is a cheat if I follow your think.

This is what Scientologists TremFusion users actually believe.
Stop it. Seriously.

Azrael07

  • Posts: 33
  • Turrets: +3/-13
Re: Tremfusion's opinion concerning sv_pure
« Reply #106 on: September 15, 2008, 05:42:44 am »
I'm surprised about a comment :

Quote
You can be fairly certain that sv_pure is here to stay, for a multitude of sane reasons, other than the usual "we are from this group and we have the monopoly on what we think Tremulous should be" type of whining. Therefore, a discussion like this serves no purpose, as most of the people who are discussing it here will make no difference to the (possible) decision wether sv_pure will stay or not, or wether any server will disable it.

I think you're wrong and this post is very usefull, at two side:
- I'm a server administrator. I pay for a server. I'm happy to set, on the server I pay, config my players wants, not simply what I want.
My server is up to have players. Without players, my server will simply die. So, with this thread I see players opinion about sv_pure, and number of players annoyed by sv_pure because using minimods.

- I'm tremfusion developper. We debate, in tremfusion team, about sv_pure. The topic thread wasn't "look at tremfusion and look what good stuff we do and get tremfusion and ignore tremulous it's devil". This thread is "tremfusion opinion" simply because we have ideas, but we would like to know opinion about administrators and players. Tremulous forum isn't the best place to ask opinion and debate ?
There is very good suggestions in this thread, so we will probably take in consideration feedbacks to try to implement a sv_pure version really usefull for admins purpose (protect his server against cheats) and player purpose (be free to use what minimod they want, while it's not cheating)

and number of replies show us people (not only administrators) seems to be happy to give their opinion about sv_pure.

please continue to post your positive feedbacks :)

Odin

  • Spam Killer
  • *
  • Posts: 1767
  • Turrets: +113/-204
    • My Website
Re: Tremfusion's opinion concerning sv_pure
« Reply #107 on: September 15, 2008, 05:47:26 am »
Quote
Tremulous forum isn't the best place to ask opinion and debate ?
No, because this isn't Tremulous we're talking about, but a fork you may have heard of.

Allowing players to run their own mods can be easily done with Lakitu7's semipure code.

Azrael07

  • Posts: 33
  • Turrets: +3/-13
Re: Tremfusion's opinion concerning sv_pure
« Reply #108 on: September 15, 2008, 11:37:54 am »
as I said to rocinante in PM, "fork" tremfusion statut is pretty ambigous.
We talk about this with Benmachine yesterday in our channel, so please let me explain what we said:

- Like MG, we release other binaries and other mods than tremulous 1.1
- Like MG, we keep (and will also keep in future) binary compatibility with all released tremulous versions
- Like MG, we don't wait for official developpers and try to pull tremulous forward
- On the contrary to MG,  we don't make only what official developpers need and we try to implement our own stuff.

"fork" is only a word, in any case, it's the same game, same players, and same community. So, we ask feedback for tremulous community.
If you refuse our commentaries, contributions and debates, so refuse modders constributions and debates too, because a mod isn't tremulous.
« Last Edit: September 15, 2008, 11:39:49 am by Azrael07 »

David

  • Spam Killer
  • *
  • Posts: 3543
  • Turrets: +249/-273
Re: Tremfusion's opinion concerning sv_pure
« Reply #109 on: September 15, 2008, 12:02:16 pm »
Another similarity to MG, you have plans to take over the world.  Just our plans are a (very old and lame) joke, yours seem slightly more real.

Quote from: IRC
22:08 <@Amanieu> http://tremulous.net/forum/index.php?topic=9121.0
22:08 <@Amanieu> YOU HAVE GOT TO BE FUCKING KIDDING ME
22:16 < ianweller> Amanieu: huh?
22:17 <@Amanieu> They are a threat to our dominance
22:17 <@Amanieu> We integrate all their stuff
22:18 <@Amanieu> And then we release 0.0.3
Any maps not in the MG repo?  Email me or come to irc.freenode.net/#mg.
--
My words are mine and mine alone.  I can't speak for anyone else, and there is no one who can speak for me.  If I ever make a post that gives the opinions or positions of other users or groups, then they will be clearly labeled as such.
I'm disappointed that people's past actions have forced me to state what should be obvious.
I am not a dev.  Nothing I say counts for anything.

Azrael07

  • Posts: 33
  • Turrets: +3/-13
Re: Tremfusion's opinion concerning sv_pure
« Reply #110 on: September 15, 2008, 12:27:04 pm »
Amanieu is right, you seems to be a pretty funny guy.

You can toy with quotes, isolated and without any context. I come back to code, it seems very more constructive than trying to talk.

You react like a little frightened child.

I'm open to every discussion about tremulous, tremfusion, forking, and all you want in IRC (pm Azrael07 in freenode), but sorry, I havn't time to play to the better whiner.

« Last Edit: September 15, 2008, 12:29:46 pm by Azrael07 »

Ender

  • Posts: 44
  • Turrets: +12/-16
    • TremFusion
Re: Tremfusion's opinion concerning sv_pure
« Reply #111 on: September 15, 2008, 02:56:39 pm »
I'm glad Azrael showed up to talk about this. I'm also glad Amanieu brought this whole thing up. In various TremFusion discussion channels we've had heated debates about sv_pure, back and forth, where we range along the spectrum of feelings about sv_pure. When it comes down to it though, we would like to know everyone's opinion and feelings about it. It's also interesting to know people's feelings about TremFusion itself. TremFusion plans to maintain compatibility with Tremulous clients and servers - whether or not that constitutes a fork and whether or not that makes us evil and whether or not that means we should get out of the Tremulous forums still appears to be up in the air and subject to personal opinion. I'm working on setting up some forums of our own as it's been suggested that we leave this community. Until we start getting banned, or having some other obvious action taken against us for talking about TremFusion, I plan on still discussing it. But, we'll set up an area where we can talk about TremFusion-specific issues without bothering everyone else. Now back to the discussion at hand.

Reguardless of what Amanieu made the title, sv_pure effects Tremulous players, and I think a discussion on it rightly belongs here. I think, after reading everyone's opinions on it, I've come to the conclusion that the best way to go is leave sv_pure in place as a shield and as a restriction. I've always thought it's better to give server owners more control, as they are the ones bringing actual, monetary assets to the table. I think the issue is not about allowing modders to play on any server they want, but rather on making people aware and giving them a choice. If people had an easier way of telling which servers were sv_pure and which were not, we would probably see more communities built up around the non-sv_pure concept. Currently, you have to understand quite a bit about the game engine to know whether you want sv_pure or not. Also, you have to take the time to pick server, click a few places, wait for information to come back, and scroll through a list of server settings to find out if a server will allow you to play any mod you want or not. All of this makes it very hard to pick a server based on whether or not it will allow your new minimod. I believe that if I create a server browser page that has an icon indicating whether or not a server is pure, we would start to see communities built around non-sv_pure servers. Some people like mods. Some don't. Some people trust modders to not cheat. Others don't. Some servers operators like sv_pure, others don't. I don't think the question shouldn't be about which opinion is more right or wrong, or which should be coded into the game. I think that the game should offer up information and allow others to make a choice. As-is, I think many server owners will see sv_pure as "cheating enabled or disabled". That is fine if that's a personal opinion based around information. It's bad if it's an opinion based around inaccurate information.

Anyways, what this long-winded post is getting at is this: my solution to the sv_pure question is to make information on sv_pure much more prominent, change the name to something a little more educational, and cause servers to advertise in the server browser screen whether or not they allow mods. This way, the decision for server operators is clear, the decision for clients is clear, and everyone can get what they are looking for.

sv_pure = sv_allowUnsanctionedMods

-Ender

Lava Croft

  • Guest
Re: Tremfusion's opinion concerning sv_pure
« Reply #112 on: September 15, 2008, 03:33:09 pm »
Putting the responsibility to not use hacky mini-mods in the hands of the players will result in exactly the situation for which sv_pure 1 is the crude solution.
« Last Edit: September 15, 2008, 03:35:33 pm by Lava Croft »

Amanieu

  • Posts: 647
  • Turrets: +135/-83
    • Amanieu
Re: Tremfusion's opinion concerning sv_pure
« Reply #113 on: September 15, 2008, 03:47:20 pm »
Actually sv_restrict sounds like the best name for sv_pure. It restricts clients to using only a certain set of pk3s.
Quote
< kevlarman> zakk is getting his patches from shady frenchmen on irc
< kevlarman> this can't be a good sign :P

Ender

  • Posts: 44
  • Turrets: +12/-16
    • TremFusion
Re: Tremfusion's opinion concerning sv_pure
« Reply #114 on: September 15, 2008, 05:36:41 pm »
Putting the responsibility to not use hacky mini-mods in the hands of the players will result in exactly the situation for which sv_pure 1 is the crude solution.

Lava, could you explain more?

Actually sv_restrict sounds like the best name for sv_pure. It restricts clients to using only a certain set of pk3s.

I agree. I think this is not so much an issue of whether or not the code should be in there, but about being clear to both users and server owners as to what they are doing when they opt-in for this option. Also, I think it'd be a good idea to change the default setting from sv_pure = 1 to sv_pure = 0. I realize that many people will have different ideas of what I mean by default setting, so to elaborate a bit, I mean that when you release a tremded binary you generally include a sample server configuration. I think the sample should have sv_pure/sv_restrict disabled.

-Ender

Bissig

  • Posts: 1309
  • Turrets: +103/-131
Re: Tremfusion's opinion concerning sv_pure
« Reply #115 on: September 15, 2008, 08:58:25 pm »
Another similarity to MG, you have plans to take over the world.  Just our plans are a (very old and lame) joke, yours seem slightly more real.

--- snip ---


And of course, MG speaks for ALL of the tremulous community.. Wait.. no it doesn't. It's just an elitist clique selfassigned to takeover and direct the development of future tremulous versions and as such trying to be the group that sanctions what is allowed and what not.. and abusing anyone that does have a different opinion or idea where everything is going. (Much like religious groups apparently)
« Last Edit: September 15, 2008, 09:02:23 pm by Bissig »

epsy

  • Posts: 205
  • Turrets: +8/-25
    • Armagetron Advanced!
Re: Tremfusion's opinion concerning sv_pure
« Reply #116 on: September 15, 2008, 09:32:17 pm »
onozonozallmgrnazisonoz
and that's how each time one of them post he has to explicitly say that it's it's own personal opinion and not..this
yes, MG got a lot of influence here, mainly because They do stuff! instead of just complaining all the time, but most of them are quite open so I really don't see the point in whining about this here(oh wait, there's Khasla!)
Warning: All opinions expressed in my posts are mine and mine alone. Any connection to any group I am affiliated with - be it the ArmagetronAd Developers or any other group, is purely coincidental unless otherwise expressly stated. Don't be a dolt when you read my posts, as they *may* require some brainpower and thinking (also purely coincidental). Any opinion in my posts not expressed by me are purely figments of your imagination and will be dealt with accordingly.
SigTemplate by Khasla.

tuple

  • Posts: 833
  • Turrets: +97/-80
Re: Tremfusion's opinion concerning sv_pure
« Reply #117 on: September 15, 2008, 09:36:03 pm »
This is as a player, not moderator.

I believe I made the first suggestion that tremfusion get their own forums.  Based on the statements of members of the tremfusion dev team that they are forking, aim to steal tremulous players (in affect, attempting to damage one free community for the furtherance of your own), intend to break compatibility when tremfusion has a sufficient player base ( as mentioned previously, by "stealing" tremulous players), etc, it does not seem unreasonable that I am bothered by the apparent attempt to damage one community solely to benefit your own.  Personally, I have no real problem with forks if they are reasonable.  But for gods sake, if you intend to stand on your own two feet, then do that.  Attempting to benefit a community by actively damaging another is pretty low, and I've read too many statements that indicate to me that even if tremfusion now intends to maintain compatibility, I don't think I could accept that statement on its face considering there was once and may still be a stated intent to maintain community ties in order to further your own community at the express expense of another...   People will do as they wish and go where they wish, including speaking their mind about your actions.

Now I see one member state you are forking, while another says you are not.  And then an argument on semantics.  I can't say its not, but I certainly can't say I'm not suspicious of the motives of a group who acts in such a manner.  Perhaps if an honest and cohesive answer about the direction of tremfusion could be given it would have some meaning.  Unfortunately, there has been so much damage done in terms of trust that I doubt anything but long term action will rebuild that bridge.

My thoughts about sv_pure are that members of the tremfusion team do not appear to remember the various pk3's that have been added to base by ignorant and/or uncaring  admins that are then downloaded by everyone who connects, and loaded every time they connect to non-pure servers.  People who have a large number of maps/base mods have a hell of a time tracking down which pk3 is causing these issues on non pure servers, particularly when there are multiple base/mod directories and the mod/map causing issues may have the same name as an existing one.  super size tyrants?  Various sound mods?  A server running a mod out of the base directory?  On a non-pure server it would be a no-brainer for a malicious/ignorant admin to create pk3's with a name that puts it in the front of the path list and is filled with bogus and/or messed up models/textures/etc that just happen to be named after all of the textures in ATCS, or whichever.   sv_pure helps to maintain a consistent environment for all players within a server and across servers.  Can it be broken? Sure, but you will have noone to blame but yourself when all sorts of crazy shit starts happening to your tremulous experience and the experience of those who visit your server, and any subsequent non pure server.  If you are a coder and/or knowledgable about these things, it can be relatively simple to locate these problems.  If you don't know how to find your qkey, you will have a hell of a time.  Personally, I would prefer if people didn't have their tremulous installs ruined by visiting a server.

Not to mention that by bypassing pure, a client is actively cheating, or, going against the rules of the server operator.

Anyone remember mappers releasing different versions of a map, but with the same named pk3 file?  unpure servers had a hell of a time with this, pure servers mostly didn't notice.  On unpure servers, you would actually start playing on a map that differed from the map the server used.  Quite confusing to say the least.  How much of a problem this would appear to be would depend on how many and what kind of changes were made to the pk3.

I'll stop there for now.

Frankly, its more important that admins be aware of the kind of a mess that they can cause if they opt out of this option.


And Bissig, get a grip.  There are members of MG who have been involved in some way in tremulous for more than 2 years now.  We've been actively attempted to benefit the tremulous community for quite some time, it was part of our charter and continues to be an important aspect of the group.  That some of us are vocal should be expected.  That members of a group formed to benefit a community should become more deeply involved in that community should not be a surprise.  People don't bother to say shit when MG members disagree with each other, but of course start this tired old crap whenever our individual voices show consensus, or should everyone who disagrees with you shut the hell up just because they happen to have other affiliations?

fingered banana

  • Guest
Re: Tremfusion's opinion concerning sv_pure
« Reply #118 on: September 15, 2008, 10:09:38 pm »
Another similarity to MG, you have plans to take over the world.  Just our plans are a (very old and lame) joke, yours seem slightly more real.

--- snip ---


And of course, MG speaks for ALL of the tremulous community.. Wait.. no it doesn't. It's just an elitist clique selfassigned to takeover and direct the development of future tremulous versions and as such trying to be the group that sanctions what is allowed and what not.. and abusing anyone that does have a different opinion or idea where everything is going. (Much like religious groups apparently)
Why do you hate MG so much? They are building tremulous and it is not a fork, it is the official continuation. So they don't need to take over anything. They are just a guild helping tremulous development and some members form a subgroup of the development team. Anyone can help it too.(but adding random crap is not helping, it must be coordinated)

Syntac

  • Posts: 841
  • Turrets: +118/-104
    • Syntac's Stuff
Re: Tremfusion's opinion concerning sv_pure
« Reply #119 on: September 15, 2008, 10:48:05 pm »
Seriously Bissig, cool it. We don't need to hear your age-old vendetta with MG. They contribute much more than any other guild so far (although I have high hopes for Void). Not to mention the fact that they're developing 1.2.