Small concerns regarding no client modification with Battle eye

[MattScott 15242]

Hi all,

 

Just a note to say that we are working with the author of the Advanced Launcher. He has kindly made the code available, and we'll make sure there are no conflicts with BE.

It isn't our intention to take away the tool. We just wanted to make sure it didn't interact negatively with the anti-cheat.

 

Thanks,
Matt

[Tobii 346]

1 minute ago, MattScott said:

Hi all,

 

Just a note to say that we are working with the author of the Advanced Launcher. He has kindly made the code available, and we'll make sure there are no conflicts with BE.

It isn't our intention to take away the tool. We just wanted to make sure it didn't interact negatively with the anti-cheat.

 

Thanks,
Matt

Good to know.

Thanks @USPStyle and @MattScott!

[Caisey 22]

25 minutes ago, MattScott said:

Hi all,

 

Just a note to say that we are working with the author of the Advanced Launcher. He has kindly made the code available, and we'll make sure there are no conflicts with BE.

It isn't our intention to take away the tool. We just wanted to make sure it didn't interact negatively with the anti-cheat.

 

Thanks,
Matt

But it will be gone once the engine upgrade hits right?

[MattScott 15242]

Our intention is to build in support for what it does by the time the new engine upgrade is ready.

[Saxtus 497]

Wouldn't be a better time management to include it's options to the official launcher instead?

[Tobii 346]

4 minutes ago, Saxtus said:

Wouldn't be a better time management to include it's options to the official launcher instead?

Isn't that what he said? They would add the AL features to 3.5?

[Saxtus 497]

I thought he said that they are testing Advanced Launcher against BattleEye.

Maybe I am confused. Matt's beard is confusing. 

[Tobii 346]

8 minutes ago, Saxtus said:

I thought he said that they are testing Advanced Launcher against BattleEye.

Maybe I am confused. Matt's beard is confusing. 

I believe they are doing so to make sure people don't get banned when they release BE.

And then later down the road they'll just add all the features to the game so you don't need AL at all.

[ninetenduh 40]

5 minutes ago, Tobii said:

I believe they are doing so to make sure people don't get banned when they release BE.

And then later down the road they'll just add all the features to the game so you don't need AL at all.

That's how I understood it, it's good I guess, I am not using the AL anymore but hey, good for those that want it.

[Arthurz 5]

So do I need to stop using it now then, and just delete it?

[Saxtus 497]

No no! Wait for Matt's verdict first.

[KyoukiDotExe 231]

39 minutes ago, MattScott said:

Our intention is to build in support for what it does by the time the new engine upgrade is ready.

 

Would be really nice if the options are further extended and explained better; so we can make good decisions on what to use.

 

On the default APBCompat.ini it reads that every texture has a level of detail of 4096 max, but if you lower this value to 1024 you will gain some performance or frametime. And you won't notice a difference in image quality.

[Deathbat 1]

11 hours ago, Obvious Lesbian said:

 

ALRIGHT. WHO WANTS TO SACRIFICE THEIR ACCOUNT TO TEST THIS THEORY FOR ALL OF US?

 

 

I would sacrifice one of my many side accounts that I rarely use 

[Cr0 328]

Im thinking: Since the AL will be made to not cause any trouble with BE, then any manual changes to those config files must be white flagged since that's what the AL does, if not another set of rules are applied on top.

[Tobii 346]

1 minute ago, SilverCrow said:

Im thinking: Since the AL will be made to not cause any trouble with BE, then any manual changes to those config files must be white flagged since that's what the AL does, if not another set of rules are applied on top.

That would most likely be the case.

People are just paranoid since they've been told that they can't change any files, but AL is fine.

 

Seems a bit like a two steps forward, one step back kinda deal.

[Cr0 328]

18 minutes ago, Tobii said:

That would most likely be the case.

People are just paranoid since they've been told that they can't change any files, but AL is fine.

 

Seems a bit like a two steps forward, one step back kinda deal.

Yeah. The way I see it, making manual config edits off limits through BE would require AL to be fully integrated into the APB ingame settings first which would most likely not happen until earliest the 3.5 update (speculating here). EDIT: BUT .. it still means it could be off limits in a not too distant future.

Edited May 29, 2018 by SilverCrow

[CookiePuss 5378]

4 hours ago, Saxtus said:

Matt's beard is GLORIOUS!

ftfy

[Frosi 722]

4 hours ago, MattScott said:

Hi all,

 

Just a note to say that we are working with the author of the Advanced Launcher. He has kindly made the code available, and we'll make sure there are no conflicts with BE.

It isn't our intention to take away the tool. We just wanted to make sure it didn't interact negatively with the anti-cheat.

 

Thanks,
Matt

 

You should honestly consider making Shaders free to use until the engine upgrade is there. Right now simply removing the fog can give you 10-20 extra frames which is just ridiculous and aids as a band-aid for the games pretty bad performance until the engine upgrade is out. I can see why it is a risky thing to permit but it would make sense as it makes the game more enjoyable to play and gives you guys the opportunity for a completely fresh start when it comes to modifying game files after the 3.5 update. (Could also simply encrypt the files)

[Bornstellar 108]

I'm a bit iffy on the Advanced Launcher. It gives players quite the advantage in some cases with minimizing graphics to Play-Doh quality.

 

For example; if you lower your graphics to the lowest setting possible and have 0 stutters then you have an advantage over someone who is running the game vanilla. I wouldn't have a problem with this kind of modification if it were a primarily PVE game but, alas, it isn't. If you have to modify the game's files outside of the bounds included with the game's options or launcher then I think it shouldn't be allowed.

 

But that's just my two cents.

[Similarities 226]

4 minutes ago, Bornstellar said:

I'm a bit iffy on the Advanced Launcher. It gives players quite the advantage in some cases with minimizing graphics to Play-Doh quality.

 

For example; if you lower your graphics to the lowest setting possible and have 0 stutters then you have an advantage over someone who is running the game vanilla. I wouldn't have a problem with this kind of modification if it were a primarily PVE game but, alas, it isn't. If you have to modify the game's files outside of the bounds included with the game's options or launcher then I think it shouldn't be allowed.

 

But that's just my two cents.

By that logic having a better PC than my PC is considered an advantage, having faster RAM, an SSD, a better GPU/CPU is all an advantage, because you stutter less often and get higher FPS than me. I could understand your argument to an extent if the argument were that it made the game look plainer so it's easier to see people or something, but the argument being it makes the game run better than someone else's game is silly at best.

Edited May 29, 2018 by Similarities

[Bornstellar 108]

1 minute ago, Similarities said:

By that logic having a better PC than my PC is considered an advantage, having faster RAM, an SSD, a better GPU/CPU is all an advantage, because you stutter less often and get higher FPS than me. I could understand your argument to an extent if the argument were that it made the game look plainer so it's easier to see people or something, but the argument being it makes the game run better than someone else's game is silly at best.

I see where you're coming from, of course. But, personally, I believe you should use the tools given to you by default instead of modifying the game files with a 3rd party launcher. I played the game for 2 years on the lowest settings when I had a laptop. I didn't look for a launcher to sway the game to my advantage, I just kept playing. Even at max AND low the game lags because of the UI. It doesn't matter what quality you play it; it's the fact that the game was poorly optimized from the get-go. Hopefully LO can optimize the UI and graphics with the upcoming engine upgrades.

[Similarities 226]

Just now, Bornstellar said:

I see where you're coming from, of course. But, personally, I believe you should use the tools given to you by default instead of modifying the game files with a 3rd party launcher. I played the game for 2 years on the lowest settings when I had a laptop. I didn't look for a launcher to sway the game to my advantage, I just kept playing. Even at max AND low the game lags because of the UI. It doesn't matter what quality you play it; it's the fact that the game was poorly optimized from the get-go. Hopefully LO can optimize the UI and graphics with the upcoming engine upgrades.

 

Oh yeah absolutely, I also get where you're coming from, it's just, unfortunately, the argument is a two-sided sword, I do think that requiring casual players to look up and download an external program just to make APB more playable is silly, some people won't search for such a thing or even know of its existence which already puts them at a disadvantage to an extent, when I found out about it, it opened up a world of possibility, it also made my old PC go from 20-30 FPS to 50-60 FPS which was a noticeable increase that otherwise wouldn't have been possible.

 

I do believe we need a better middle ground for the casual players who aren't going to go config modding to make the game run better, but we also need to remember that in the game's current state, with hardware being almost 8 years past the game's release, we're still getting performance issues, and a lot of people can't really get the game to run at a playable state w/o advanced launcher.

[Thial 176]

It would be nice if LO would let us use advanced launcher and no particle configs for now because it will still take a while until we will see the engine upgrade. If you watched the old engine upgrade video featuring the video settings you will know that UE3.5 APB will feature most of the advanced launcher settings by default:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6_105-6eyf8

[Bornstellar 108]

7 minutes ago, Similarities said:

I do believe we need a better middle ground for the casual players who aren't going to go config modding to make the game run better, but we also need to remember that in the game's current state, with hardware being almost 8 years past the game's release, we're still getting performance issues, and a lot of people can't really get the game to run at a playable state w/o advanced launcher.

Oh yeah, I completely understand. It's difficult to please everyone with either decision they make regarding the Advanced Launcher. But that can easily be resolved if they end up fixing the UI and stuttering issues. That really seems to be the only solution to both of our woes.

[coaster45 1]

So should we not use it until we get the BattlEye update?