Page 2 of 2
Posted: Sat Oct 22, 2005 5:30 am
* Post self-editted *
Posted: Sat Oct 22, 2005 6:18 am
sorry guys, but it is no secret there is a process patcher used with fleet operations. i pointed out several times (in the forums) - i think there was even a discussion in the past about that. and btw. i am not very good in process patching thats why i am still looking for somebody with skill doing that. take a look at the last few lines at our team page
We are looking for people with one or more of the following skills to join our team
* Win32 Executable modifying
* Process modifying in run-time - "Memory hacking"
thats there since the site started. it's no secret we are using a process patcher. it would not have required an disassembler to tell that.
Posted: Sat Oct 22, 2005 7:12 am
.....and just as DOCa Cola has explained this, if I see anyone, and I do mean ANYONE attempting to play "side picking", or attempting to cause ANY kind of flame war then temporary bannings will be in order. I also expect management to remain neutral no matter your feelings on this.
I do hope I've made my own position completely clear.
Elrond. Don't kick yourself in the balls (so to speak), about your post. Anyone can make a mistake.
Posted: Sat Oct 22, 2005 9:48 am
Posted: Sat Oct 22, 2005 10:57 am
Read and Understood. Still ripping my hair out though for my prior idiocy.
Posted: Sat Oct 22, 2005 4:44 pm
Elrond I'm gonna say this for your own good..
Posted: Sat Oct 22, 2005 5:35 pm
This will sound stupid, but what were they modding, why, and what difference does it make? The "evidence" is all numbers, words, and symbols to me, and I, for one, have trouble with things like that.
(For example = .LVL files)
Posted: Sat Oct 22, 2005 6:43 pm
dont u ppl go mess things up for ppl. i understand if u want to go and tell them u wont host their stuff but leave them alone. warn them if u want but dont do anything cause we got to watch each other's backs if we want to survive.
Posted: Sat Oct 22, 2005 6:59 pm
Now I'm confused, which is not necessarily a new state for me. Since I rarely play A2 and have not much to go on other than what others have said. I think that the staff can handle this without any of the members help and rightly so. I don't know if anything is amiss. Most certainly I remain neutral on this situation and advise others to do likewise until all the facts are in.
Posted: Sat Oct 22, 2005 7:44 pm
Jeeze, get over it! So FleetOps has some stuff that "Breachs" the EULA. It is not illeagle unless they use it to gain profit, then Activision would sue them, but since it is free (You only need armada 2 CD) it is like a Total conversion mod. Would you sue a Total conversion dev team?
Personally, I am a Fleet Ops supporter, and I think bashing the dev team without solid proof is wrong.
What I mean is that you found out that something is wrong with fleet ops. But you forgot to cover your backs, and as DOCaCola pointed out, a position was open for someone who can edit an .exe. If it was going to be such a thorn in your warp core, then why didn't anyone complain for 1-3 years when it WAS out?
Posted: Sat Oct 22, 2005 9:17 pm
May I suggest we not focus on this. Since DC did point out that this was public knowledge (on the FO forums), I think we should just drop it. Personally, I do not want to report anything to A&M at this moment. I have something in the works that I hope to get A&M's attention with, but this would only serve to hurt the chances.
Posted: Sat Oct 22, 2005 10:23 pm
I just thought I would say that I plan to stay 100% neutral in this matter. I have complete trust in the Admins of this site to do what is right. What ever that may be. This is the only post I will make in this thread. Good luck admins and I already would like to show my full support for what ever you decide to do. Even if that is nothing at all. Anyways, I feel like I am going to start babbling....so I shall be quite now.
Posted: Sun Oct 23, 2005 1:39 am
Well my own personal stance is that whilst theres always going to be doubt, I would say, if I had the utilities and necessary programming knowledge, (and I am probably going to raise an eyebrow or two with this next bit), I would strip the EXE right down to its bare coding. Its been almost 6 years since A1 was released and almost 4 years since A2's been released and Activision are well known to withhold the source code for their released games, no matter how old they are (point in case being Dark Reign with is almost 9 years old now). Now Armada 1 and 2 are almost impossible to get hold of unless your willing to pay much higher than its original price. Look how many times its been suggested to petition both Activision and Mad Doc to release the source code to either game with a negative response.
Its also no secret that a hell of alot of people use an EXE which removes the cd check simply for fear of damaging an original disc. It took me nearly 3 months to track down a new original copy of A1 about a year ago, and now I'm overly cautious with my cds that I would otherwise use many, many times. A point in case here is that Atari, had the sense to release a patch for UT2004 that actually removes the cd check (although its still necessary to use an authentic key). Its a shame more dev teams didn't do this, and whilst I don't much care for pirating original software, there are times when games go out of print, that should allow their release as abandonware.
As far as I'm concerned if Flops do, do something which might be frowned upon, then I say good luck to them. Besides. Who's to say that if people give them breathing space they might not share their findings at a later time??
Argue this point all you want people, but the bottom line is. This community has fallen apart because of the amount of bickering and finger pointing we've been doing, and everyone is guilty of it (even if they don't post their thoughts). Anyway, thats my 5 cents (seeing as I yacked on for longer than the 2 cent amount).
Quick edit. This situation has been sorted out and as such this thread is locked and unstickied