Haganu

I read it earlier on in @BXNNXD's post. It only makes me wonder more why people are so avid on getting it back into the game. It's probably going to take months before it's setup properly and most likely results in more delays for UE3.5. It's not as easy as just tweak it properly 4Head Not by a long shot.

Every anti cheat used in APB seems to work so well in other games. I wonder how they just refuse to work in APB. Maybe it's the devs being lazy/incompetent/shit/insert your own variation, which would be the easiest thing to say (though I really doubt that). Even for pre-LO G1, which had kinda alright developers but absolutely horrible lead. Maybe the anticheats running just don't work well for APB for various reasons. I'm not against FF returning, but if everyone knows anticheats in APB so well, maybe everyone should've made posts asking for better finetuning of FF, instead of asking for BattlEye? Matt only answered our request by getting BE implemented, and look how it turned out according to everyone complaining here. Right now it would only mean wasted time and effort to go all in on re-implementing FF into APB, and for all we know it might be just another disappointment, seeing how things have been since late 2013.

I don't doubt that Fairfight can work well for a game. It's just with APB's sloppy netcode and low server tick rate that I can't see Fairfight living up to its potential in case of APB. The best you'll get without taking relatively large risks on turning false positives is tracking stats, and that will take a while before it can turn over a ban.

Everyone on the bring back Fairfight bandwagon would be so disappointed if LO would bring it back and it would actually do next to nothing. I actually want to see it happen. Bonus points if they in turn hop on the bring back Punkbuster bandwagon.

Because Fairfight wasn't bypassed continuously? You must be joking.

idk about you but im not diagnosed with cancer I think the poor implementation of things is due to poor lead and no clear planning around roadmaps.

Maybe instead of lobbying for BattlEye, the community should've lobbied for a proper implementation of FairFight in first place then when LO took over. Going back to FairFight and abandoning BattlEye would just be a waste of resources as it is now, and would definitely not be worth it as it is right now. I still remember LilyV3's post about how APB manages to make every anticheat out there look bad, and even now he appears to be correct. If LO would go back to FairFight, there will just be controversy all over the place again. Whether Tiggs had influence on it or not did not change the fact that there was a huge lot of controversy around FairFight, and the people causing/stimulating controversy like that do not change just like that. APB's netcode is really bad, a server side anticheat like FairFight will not be as reliable as people think. If you want a full reliable implementation of FairFight, first the game should make sense network-wise.

APB runs on FairFight Community: FairFight sucks! Give us BattlEye! APB runs on BattlEye Community: BattlEye sucks! Give us FairFight! Stop lobbying for the sake of lobbying. Things are stagnant, have been for years, but at least give Little Orbit a chance before pouring the whine.

It's as if you're talking against a wall. Any and every issue regarding APB ever will always and every time be brought up on the forums by players. It's been like this for years and no matter how much you're stating this, it won't change. It's not good, but it's how things work around here.

We have no idea how the game will perform in UE3.5. And as countless times said before, UE3.5 isn't going to be that magic thing that will make everything plaguing this game vanish. Reconsider your review when it's the right time - when the majority of the shit going down in this game is resolved. But that's common sense for anyone occasionally coming back to a negatively reviewed game to check up on if it got any better.

When a significant amount of people exploit a bug the line between norm and exception starts fading. When the vast majority to everyone exploits a bug, such a thing stops being an exception and becomes the norm. You can't really call it cheating anymore, since you're given a safe choice. You can't ban the majority for exploiting a bug. Why do you think LO isn't banning the people dethreating? I think for a concept like APB, bugs like this are detrimental for its value, but it's up to the devs to do something about it, and it's kinda dumb to call the players that make use of a bug like that to their advantage bad.

There's absolutely no way the community is going to actively work with Little Orbit to make the game attract more players. There's nothing they can do, and even if they could they straight up wouldn't. You can tell people to stop dethreating and those people will blame golds in silver. You can tell golds to play in gold but they will say there's no one to play against then. Neither of those parties are entirely correct - nor are entirely wrong - but they sure as hell put themselves above anything. This sadly caused APB to bleed players for 5 years and counting. In collaboration with Reloaded Productions doing absolutely nothing to combat this. First and foremost: Fix player distribution FFS. After that, a little incentive to have people login could be interesting. Talking about small things like login rewards and small scale events with small amounts of new content for F2P. Collaborations with other games or media could be an interesting thing for the long future. These are a few small ideas that probably missed the whole point of the thread. Eitherway we can't and won't do anything about the lack of new players. It's in Little Orbit's hand.

I appreciate the honesty and self-reflection. This seemed to be lacking massively at the previous devs now that I think about it. Reflecting on the mistakes made helps learning from them, even though you already admit plenty that you're not good at it yet. On the contrary however, you can't be not good at it for too long. The transparency and feedback is there, but at some point results have to pop up. I do think Little Orbit will be able to deliver, so I hope people are patient enough. I'm not without questionmarks, but the way Little Orbit has been sofar is far better than Reloaded has ever been. Since 2013, at least.

So it's a bug after all? lol

I highly doubt APB as it is now will ever be how RTW intended it. Unless Little Orbit somehow manages to live up to the visions David Jones had for this IP, and would manage to revert everytime Reloaded shattered those visions with horrible decisions.

Didn't old G1 try to counter that? At some locations you can't place your car at spots where normally would be mission vehicles. It's so silly to see, your car literally bumps into nothing.

At this point you're just a troll. Be sure to send Techmech and Tiggs a mail with your self-proclaimed expertise, you'd fit perfectly in Reloaded Production's A-team of people that looked for excuses to do nothing.

Pretty sure RTW APB had 100 players in a district. So 50 vs 50.

You should've applied for Reloaded Productions. They also kinda looked for any and every excuse - even blatant lies like "it's technically impossible" - to do nothing. Lol.

cough cough Though, nobody can even tell what you even mean with "final upgrade," but since LO told us they intend to upgrade to Unreal 4 a long while after Unreal 3.5 is pushed to live it's safe to assume for everyone that you meant Unreal 4 with what you said. If everyone is somehow wrong, maybe try to be more explicit in what you're trying to say. Poor communication leads to misinformation. In that sense I can see why Cookie told you to stop spreading misinformation. That aside, it's not a technical issue. With enough testing and QA, changing hitboxes to allow player vulnerability after car glass has been shattered should not be impossible, especially not in Unreal 3.5. Hell, it's already possible in the engine APB currently runs on, considering Reloaded Productions changed crouching hitboxes a good while ago. It requires a lot of work, and will most likely cause a lot of bugs and break things. It wouldn't be a clever decision, but it's not impossible on technical aspect. How it shifts the balance though is going to be a problem, on top of the fact that APB veterans are about as conservative as half the republicans in the American Senate. It's like TheKeanuReeves said, it will generate a lot of negative backlash because "it wouldn't be our potato we all love/hate APB anymore." It would also require immense rebalancing, due to with the current speed cars are limited to.

Devs with proper knowledge of Unreal 3 should be able to implement breaking glass and shoot-through windows into a game without much problem. It's not even a might be. The problem of breaking glass/shoot-through windows, convertibles and even motorcycles have never been and will never be one-on-one tied with engine limitations, especially not in UE3.5. The problem lies within balance itself. Cars don't travel very quickly in the game, and the map isn't built for much higher velocity either. Tech available these days allows for much deeper and more creative ambitions to be realized. It's risible from Fortune Runner to call it Engine Limitations in one way or another. It's a matter of how much you want to change. That would always be the bottleneck for things like that. I think changes like these will get immense negative backlash from the community, "because then it's not APB anymore," even though APB deserves so much more than it is now. Far beyond midtown. Especially considering the tech available these days.

I wouldn't mind if this was possible, and for the people that like car windows as they are, with that the devs could make a mod for cars that fortifies car windows.

There's already a system in place like this. It just doesn't work because people tamper with threat levels too much. That's not the problem though, the problem is that gold threat is way too easily attained. Poor threat level distribution is constantly distributing threats too high for a lot of players. This causes people that get threat too high for the skill level they feel they should be getting to tamper with it deliberately. In result all the systems together, including the system that is supposed slowly lock you into a threat level the more you play is only causing lopsided matchups and distribution of threat levels, which in turn cause even more disturbance. APB's reputation also really doesn't help in this issue since a lot of dethreating players often accuse silver district to be full of cheaters (I wanted to call this a thing for new players, but since old G1 consistently did nothing for 5 years in a row I won't, not at this point). In all honesty, it's been at least 4 years with this mess that people like to call matchmaking. It feels like something incredible has to happen if LO wants to keep people from constantly tampering with threat levels and threat volatility. I also think the overly extensive competitive mindset people have in the game plays part in why this game is such a mess, especially in this field.

There are about 10 threat levels underlying each threat color. It is however way too easy to fluctuate in threat level. Threat volatility is supposed to make you slowly more or less lock into a threat level when playing consistently, but that's what dethreaters don't do so it's not nearly effective enough.

You missed the point by a couple miles. Try again.