[bf1942] How could DICE agree to this??

Dave Snodgrass dave at setupahost.net
Wed Feb 16 15:10:04 EST 2005

James Gurney wrote:

> Well there goes the idea of rational debate. I don't agree with your 
> idea, so I'm "whining". Alrighty then. If you can't talk rationally 
> about this, I won't be replying to any further mails from you on this 
> subject.

fine. s/whining/being defeatist and pessimistic/ - Its not that im upset 
that you dont agree with me - like i said, im just throwing options out 
there (not necessarily good ones) that maybe some people would be 
willing to live with, in hopes that they may understand that EA might 
not be doing this exclusively for fiscal reasons. Im sure you understand 
how hard it would be to track and legitimaize every public server on the 
internet - and with this in mind, realize there are a number of dorks 
out there who would spend all day trying to figure out how to spoof data 
to EA. If you could make a system of punishment severe enough to catch 
the spoofers (ie. server must have legit key/hash issued from ea or 
dice), people wont bother, and EA might see this as a viable alternative.

> I do have a better suggestion: The game should not be crippled in the 
> first place. That's the only acceptable solutions 

> If you start allowing companies to control how you use the software 
> that you *paid for*, it will only get worse as time goes on. What's 
> next? You need to have a credit card registered just to play on your 
> own machine? How about you need to be thumbprint authenticated to make 
> sure you're not letting someone else borrow your copy of the game? 
> Your rights as a consumer are being slowly eroded, and if you sit back 
> and let it happen, you'll only have yourself to blame when it reaches 
> the point of craziness.

You arent buying software. You are licensing its use. However, i do 
agree. This problem is trivial to solve - hell valve does it.

> I applaud your desire to resolve this issue, but I don't think your 
> idea is going about it the right way.

I'd rather have something than nothing. Im sure this is a security 
issue, that they just cant solve before launch. If we could even have 
the option of a way of authenticating and legitimizing a server, id not 
be happy about provinding a CC or cdkey or something...

The more i think about it though - Why cant ea/dice have a server admin 
web page. People who want to register a ranking server enter their 
cdkey, and the ip of the server. (The form would obviously allow 
registering of a number of servers) but like those bf1942 stats sites, 
arent recognized until there has been X amount of uptime with a minimum 
of Y users over Z timeframe. Once these criteria have been met, the rank 
stat collection server then bases an encryption key based on your cdkey 
that you entered in your cfg file (or hash thats made from your key on 
the afforementioned webpage), as well as that EA web page - This 
encryption key (dice can hold the private master hash) then allows stats 
packets to be authorized and parsed - While making it much harder for 
hackers to send faked data...

> James
> On 2/16/2005 10:12 AM, Dave Snodgrass wrote:
>> hahaha ok!
>> Random company? This is EA. Are you suggesting EA has had poor credit 
>> card history? you do note i did say 'cd-key' as an alternative. Maybe 
>> you can suggest something instead of whining?
>> James Gurney wrote:
>>> On 2/16/2005 9:52 AM, Dave Snodgrass wrote:
>>>> You didnt read my suggestion. It wasnt for all of those 100 players 
>>>> - It was for the 1 server owner. He/she/you could tie that server's 
>>>> ID to your CC or to your cdkey.
>>> Yes, I did read your suggestion. As a server owner/administrator, 
>>> I'm not prepared to give my CC to every random company that wants to 
>>> do something like this, and I'd be surprised if many others were. I 
>>> don't trust EA with that information, frankly.
>>> James
> !DSPAM:4213906a194481606420926!

More information about the Bf1942 mailing list