What I'd like to see fixed

Fix the  ability to hack the game on PS3. I see more and more hackers at all levels. One shotting bosses, using spells that are way OP and don't exist, god-modes, 
Heck, even one last week had an invisible lower torso and he seemed to have a semi flying ability.  Hackers ruin the game for everyone.

Ring of Fog + Thorns Legs or Arty's Legs will cause them to be invisible, was it that?

But yeah, I agree, I rather there be some anti-hack in place.

It'll never work on PC, as someone will work out how to memory inject after the check, but at least on console it should be possible.

It's server based this time, it wouldn't be hard to do a simple stat check (do your stats + starting class add up to your level) and a spell count + damage check (on NG with 9 casts of WotG? Ban Hammer. +15 Crystal GS? BAN HAMMER).
Or just deny them online play.

I don't have a problem with people hacking, I have a problem with people hacking online in other peoples games.

StiffNipples wrote:Ring of Fog + Thorns Legs or Arty's Legs will cause them to be invisible, was it that?


It's server based this time, it wouldn't be hard to do a simple stat check (do your stats + starting class add up to your level) and a spell count + damage check (on NG with 9 casts of WotG? Ban Hammer. +15 Crystal GS? BAN HAMMER).
Or just deny them online play.

I don't have a problem with people hacking, I have a problem with people hacking
online in other peoples games.

 could be the ROF. And leggings for that un.  Did not know that legs could be invisible.. His top half wasn't if memory serves, though. 

Bah, on all hacking. Hacking to win is just plain cheating and cheaters never win.

Yeah, they need to stop treating Souls like a sandbox game. This isn't Saints Row, hackers really should go elsewhere. It completely defeats the purpose and challenge of playing the game to begin with. StiffNipples said it best, I don't have a problem with hackers who just want to solo experiment with cut content and stuff, they don't affect me. I have a problem with them in my game, gtfo. The game could use some GM's may be, or firewall/hack-police of some kind.

anti-hack is impossible. If you know how to hack, there'd be ways around an anti-hack program. Everything has a back door. But it would be nice.

Odinbear wrote:Bah, on all hacking. Hacking to win is just plain cheating and cheaters never win.

There is a difference between a guy invading you with hacked infinite health, and someone doing this

It'll never work on PC, as someone will work out how to memory inject after the check, but at least on console it should be possible. 

Don't give them this way out.  Don't give them excuses.  Other games consistently and effectively police hacking.  From failed in that respect.  Why accept it?

anti-hack is impossible. If you know how to hack, there'd be ways around an anti-hack program. Everything has a back door. But it would be nice.

Again, more nonsense.  Don't spread urban myth jokes around.  While it's true that you can't 100% block experienced hackers, you absolutely can implement anti-hacks and easily wall off all the 12 year olds and older scum who use pre-made hack programs in online play...especially if you just change the detection a little each time and perma-ban people who are caught.

Compare CoD Black Ops to say MW1 or MW2.  No servers are used on any of the three.  Two of these games have severe hacking problems.  One of them still doesn't have very many hackers (you could go a week+ of in-game time and not encounter a single one).  Why?  Because in one case, hackers regularly got banned, based on some combination of reports (built in by the game designers!) and monitoring statistics. 

65000 hp gone?  Account-banned from the program.  Impossible damage dealt?  Cya.  "Ancient Pulse" or any other spell effect going outside it's range?  No more online Souls for you!

Yes, one of the Call of Duty developers is actually objectively better than From at something.  This is roughly the ONLY thing From should copy from that franchise, and while they're at it they can *stop* copying the incompetent travesty that is their lag compensation, which is easily From's and many other dev's biggest disgrace in game design.

You don't really need to stop hacking, just issue bans and be done with it. The message will get through.

I wouldn't say ban them permanently. Assuming the game has a good net and can automatically register if someone did something that isn't possible in normal gameplay, then use something like a "3 strikes" method. Start with a warning message or a week ban. For most, that would be enough to scare them into stopping.

That'd probably be a more level-headed approach.

You'd have to ban them right away. Giving them 3 strikes you're out doesn't work because the quicker you ban them the quicker his/her hack gets off the net. The longer they stay on, the more people get the hack and we have the same problem again. Besides, if they hack DkS2, they probably already used a hack from DkS1. So, there's strike 1 and 2

Reporting people is tricky. I was fighting someone who I thought was fair, but he started to do some funky stuff (CMW and Sunlight Blade at level 50 with decent hp/stamina). I was able to identify him as a hacker because I play the game all the damn time, but what about new players? They might see you fast roll in a giant's torso with CMW falchion and call you a hacker because that's "impossible." If you discover something that makes you god like (old RoF) and not a lot of people have found out about it yet then watch out because you'll get reported up the butt.

I think with servers it would seem more feasible to make a stat check and spell count check.

Also, lloyd's talismans, or whatever they'll be called in DkSII, should block estus AND things like lifegems.

andre that sounds like the guy who said I was a hacker for using a lightening halberd LOL
Used gold resin but apparently there's no such thing lolol
FROM is going to have to figure out a way to check these things out. Maybe hire a few gamers to play the game looking for the reported hackers.

Yeah, yeah, no technology is foolproof it was designed to obey us. I get that. But these aren't pentagon level hackers obviously, because they spend their time trolling Dark Souls instead of hooking up with Anonymous. Most do use pre-made hacking programs, I know a few irl on Xbox who routinely mod games this way. These people can be easily halted to online play, because they lack the ability to manually update and modify their software without getting it elsewhere. 

And no mercy. Ban them, ban them all, no refund, no warning, no forgiveness. Cold-blooded rejection. We don't want them on Dark Souls anymore, they had their chance to enjoy it the right way. That chance in gone. 

GM's disguised as your average player would do better than subjective reporting, especially when you might not be able to 'prove' they were hacking or you're just a noob who doesn't know the game yet to say what's what. At any rate, Meln's right. You can't ask 100% of anything so I don't expect that, but From can most definitely make hackers very few and far between. All these programming experts and you're telling me none can stop the most diabolical 12yo hacker this side the mississippi? Bullcrap.

twigsterxd wrote:anti-hack is impossible. If you know how to hack, there'd be ways around an anti-hack program. Everything has a back door. But it would be nice.

Maybe not.  Someone else brought up a point about server based online.  Some CHECKS could be made for Hacks prior to letting you online. Hacked your game= DENIED.

How goes twigsterxd?  

SirArchmage wrote:

Odinbear wrote:Bah, on all hacking. Hacking to win is just plain cheating and cheaters never win.

There is a difference between a guy invading you with hacked infinite health, and someone doing this

So being invaded by a guy wearing a fur Santa suit with infinite health is ok?   

Lol.  Like I said, hacking should be eliminated at all costs.  We don't need no stinking hackers.

Stopping hacking is impossible, just to say, console or PC there is no way to block everybody, if could do that so its impossible to hack why have they not done it on other games. I always play on PC and hacking is just a thing you have to deal with rather then QQing your way to hating the game just because of some people using something that was not in the game anyway. Hacking does not make dark souls a bad game and hacking does not make pvp in dark souls bad, its just those few people and if you hate hacking then leave their world or log out to reset and stop complaining and qqing about a few people you dont have to fight them you can always leave or dashboard or w/e you do on console.

Here's wut I'd like to see. PSN giving us more than 50 blocked user space lol
Can't block them all.

Odinbear wrote:

SirArchmage wrote:

Odinbear wrote:Bah, on all hacking. Hacking to win is just plain cheating and cheaters never win.

There is a difference between a guy invading you with hacked infinite health, and someone doing this

So being invaded by a guy wearing a fur Santa suit with infinite health is ok?   

Lol.  Like I said, hacking should be eliminated at all costs.  We don't need no stinking hackers.

I feel like the point of what I was saying wasn't clear enough.

There are two types of hackers.

There is the hacker that everyone loves to hate. The person that brings advantages to themselves in online games so that they can ruin it for everyone else. Wall-hacks, infinite health, flying, infinite items or ammo. Things like that. They ruin online gameplay and are the reason for nearly every anti-hacking measure that games put out today. These are the bad ones.

Then there is the guy that hacks himself in a Santa suit. Or changes the texture of the Sunlight Shield to an American flag. The people that hack in cut content from a game so that other people can see them and the people that really just want some one item to be a different color. Implying that there is a similarity between the two is ridiculous. I think it would be interesting if Dark Souls for PC had mod support, so that it would be easier to do things like what I just stated above. Doubt it will happen, and it is a bit off-topic, but nonetheless, wish it would happen.

Do tell me if I misinterpreted you. I am about half-awake and surprised I formulated a response like this as it is.

Stopping hacking is impossible, just to say, console or PC there is no way to block everybody, if could do that so its impossible to hack why have they not done it on other games.

Provide me a list of hackers in SC II who last more than a month or so.  Doesn't happen, hackers in ranked get caught because they use servers.  Same with say League of Legends; where's the hacking since it's "impossible"?

How about call of duty black ops, why is the hack rate on that game even now 10-20x or more lower than Dark Souls, while other old CoD games are worse than Dark Souls?

Claiming it's impossible is making a proven inaccurate statement, and on top of it giving developers a pass for objectively shoddy quality control.  Please don't do that.

And no mercy. Ban them, ban them all, no refund, no warning, no forgiveness. Cold-blooded rejection. We don't want them on Dark Souls anymore, they had their chance to enjoy it the right way. That chance in gone. 

+1.  This *is* the level-headed approach.  The kinds of hacks we're talking about are not accidental things.  You don't just finger-slip that hacked file onto a thumb drive, then it accidentally finds its way into the console.  No, people who are doing the infinite health/ancient pulse/whatever hacks have made a deliberate effort to expressly violate the terms of service.

If they want a second chance at online, they can buy another console.

Provide me a list of hackers in SC II who last more than a month or so.  Doesn't happen, hackers in ranked get caught because they use servers.  Same with say League of Legends; where's the hacking since it's "impossible"?

How about call of duty black ops, why is the hack rate on that game even now 10-20x or more lower than Dark Souls, while other old CoD games are worse than Dark Souls?

Claiming it's impossible is making a proven inaccurate statement, and on top of it giving developers a pass for objectively shoddy quality control.  Please don't do that.

Imagine how much that costs, plus Blizzard have their own DRM to stop hackers because you NEED an account to start online, LoL you NEED an account and has its own DRM, CoD still has hackers everywhere because activision dont give a **** about their games after release. If you want HUGE DRM on dark souls 2 and needing an account with personal information all over it then by all means, but i know alot of people that dont want that.

Imagine how much that costs, plus Blizzard have their own DRM to stop hackers because you NEED an account to start online, LoL you NEED an account and has its own DRM, CoD still has hackers everywhere because activision dont give a **** about their games after release.

Hack rate in CoD varies by game.  Compare MW2 to Blops 1, and you see the vast differences that even a cursory effort (in this case by Treyarch, a company I don't even like overall) against hacks can make.  Does it stop 100% of all hacks in blops?  Nope.  Does it make it so that it's possible to play the game online for over a week and not encounter any overt cases of hacking?  Yes, it does, and it's a tremendous contrast with the IW games before it.  This is not a server based game.

Consoles *are* accounts.  You already have that in place (including DRM, which is increasingly typical), and we've had that in place for many years now.

I'm not letting myths that stopping the majority of hackers is impossible spread easily.  If you don't want to put a lot of expense in, then the small % of people who can actually *create* the hacks can still hack.  If you *do* put in a small amount of effort (a tiny % of a game's development cost), then the vast majority of hackers are console banned or scared straight.  Little built-in data checks (changed occasionally with a patch) to pick up on obvious hack behavior is all you'd need to cut out 90+% of the trash.  You don't need Blizzard's warden or whatever it's called, although certainly it shows the quality of an organization to make sure its game experience stays a good one.

This is the same trash issue as people thinking "lag compensation" with client side detection PLUS fake latency (delays added to absolutely everyone to "smooth" gameplay) are required in online games.  No, these things are not required.  They're a stupid gimmick to give weak players freebies.  Back in 2001, with far worse internet than you can cheaply acquire now, it was possible to get better connections consistently, simply because a person could select which host to join, and were able to physically see the ping.  Because old games didn't bother with network tampering, the host tended to have a tenth of a second advantage on everyone (sometimes less though), while everyone else would be within 1/20th of a second of each other or so typically...no instances of firing 6 shots and having nothing happen, a supposed "advancement" still used by trash dev teams in 2013.

The reason these hackers are so prevalent is because even the most barebones, basic efforts to stop them aren't made.  Yes, a good amount of this blame lies with the consoles themselves, but not all of it.  Devs carry a large amount of this burden too, including From.  You think From couldn't do a tiny little patch that sends some data to them about, say, HP values, spells, and equipment stats?  How much would it REALLY cost to throw that on there in a patch, only mentioning the removal of a glitch, and then perma-banning every single proven hacker that plays?  They were perfectly willing to patch out the kiln glitch and punish people who did it to some extent...but can't handle even the most basic of anti-tampering attempts?

Defending them for making no effort at all is ludicrous lol.

TheMeInTeam wrote:

Imagine how much that costs, plus Blizzard have their own DRM to stop hackers because you NEED an account to start online, LoL you NEED an account and has its own DRM, CoD still has hackers everywhere because activision dont give a **** about their games after release.

Hack rate in CoD varies by game.  Compare MW2 to Blops 1, and you see the vast differences that even a cursory effort (in this case by Treyarch, a company I don't even like overall) against hacks can make.  Does it stop 100% of all hacks in blops?  Nope.  Does it make it so that it's possible to play the game online for over a week and not encounter any overt cases of hacking?  Yes, it does, and it's a tremendous contrast with the IW games before it.  This is not a server based game.

Consoles *are* accounts.  You already have that in place (including DRM, which is increasingly typical), and we've had that in place for many years now.

I'm not letting myths that stopping the majority of hackers is impossible spread easily.  If you don't want to put a lot of expense in, then the small % of people who can actually *create* the hacks can still hack.  If you *do* put in a small amount of effort (a tiny % of a game's development cost), then the vast majority of hackers are console banned or scared straight.  Little built-in data checks (changed occasionally with a patch) to pick up on obvious hack behavior is all you'd need to cut out 90+% of the trash.  You don't need Blizzard's warden or whatever it's called, although certainly it shows the quality of an organization to make sure its game experience stays a good one.

This is the same trash issue as people thinking "lag compensation" with client side detection PLUS fake latency (delays added to absolutely everyone to "smooth" gameplay) are required in online games.  No, these things are not required.  They're a stupid gimmick to give weak players freebies.  Back in 2001, with far worse internet than you can cheaply acquire now, it was possible to get better connections consistently, simply because a person could select which host to join, and were able to physically see the ping.  Because old games didn't bother with network tampering, the host tended to have a tenth of a second advantage on everyone (sometimes less though), while everyone else would be within 1/20th of a second of each other or so typically...no instances of firing 6 shots and having nothing happen, a supposed "advancement" still used by trash dev teams in 2013.

The reason these hackers are so prevalent is because even the most barebones, basic efforts to stop them aren't made.  Yes, a good amount of this blame lies with the consoles themselves, but not all of it.  Devs carry a large amount of this burden too, including From.  You think From couldn't do a tiny little patch that sends some data to them about, say, HP values, spells, and equipment stats?  How much would it REALLY cost to throw that on there in a patch, only mentioning the removal of a glitch, and then perma-banning every single proven hacker that plays?

Defending them for making no effort at all is ludicrous lol.

Do you think From Software really care about how many hackers are currently in Darksouls or will be in Darksouls 2 to cut money off making a really good game (which i would prefer they spend their money on) to putting money to stop hacking in pvp which is completely optional to the game experience anyway? No. Probably not. And if im honest I couldn't care less about the console version (or anything to do with COD), because I will not be playing it. But permenantly banning an Xbox account or a PSN account becuase they hacked to get 30 Divine blessings on 1 game, to be absurdly over the top, it would literally lose them money in the long run so why would they even bother. For dark souls (and demon souls) to even have PVP in the first place is a huge surprise to me.

I would personally like for From Software to put all they can into making the game good, functional and enjoyable and to not put a lump of money to away to attempt to stop hacking on something that's completely optional. I'm not defending hacking, I just know from the knowledge I have in computer science and game development that its very very close to impossible to stop people looking at the code of your game, Console or not.

I also believe that hacking is not really a big deal, at least my experience when I played it on Xbox when it first released there was no hacking what so ever, And now recently i bought it for PC again and in 100 hours im yet to see a hacker. Dark souls was released 2 years ago so people have had time to sit down and create hacks, it does not matter how much DRM and 'Anti-hacking' software they put into the game people will get into it.

You know what else I'd like to see fixed? What is it? Please tell us as we're all dying to hear what you have to say. Spell animations in pvp. Soul spear itself doesn't lag, it just has a laggy animation. To an invader it might look like the SS went far away and missed completely, but it actually is tracing you and about to one shot you. I'd just like to see what I'm actually dodging instead of rolling blindly.

SirArchmage wrote:

Odinbear wrote:Bah, on all hacking. Hacking to win is just plain cheating and cheaters never win.

There is a difference between a guy invading you with hacked infinite health, and someone doing this

That guy isn't hacking to win. He's hacking for aesthetics. Hacking for looks is fine. It's why we don't get mad at Dark Souls videos of people using a big head hack.