Talk:Wallhacking

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Famicom style controller This article is within the scope of WikiProject Video games. For more information, visit the project page, where you can join the project and/or contribute to the discussion.
Start This article has been rated as start-Class on the assessment scale.
VG To-do:

Contents

[edit] Cheat sites

What is the rationale for linking to all those cheat/hack sites?--Atlantima 19:42, 2 June 2006 (UTC)

This is an article about wallhacks, and those sites provide more information about them -- more than could possibly be contained in a single Wikipedia article. Pretty much the same as the reason behind any other article having external links. The sites linked in this article are at least "clean" ones (in fact, Game-Deception doesn't even host binaries for the most part) so that anyone trying to find out more won't have to google through reams of trojan-infested cheat sites. Deaf-mute 06:51, 3 June 2006 (UTC)

[edit] History

I'm pretty sure that wallhacks existed in quake before counter strike.

I have rewritten the origin section to provide a more complete histroy, but I don't know anything about pre-Half-Life wallhacks except that some of them used modified map data. Where there any OpenGL wallhacks for GLQuake/Quakeworld? Deaf-mute 12:00, 2 April 2006 (UTC)

I've edited this page too. Although PB very rarely raises a violation for wallhack, PB assists in two ways. Wallhack is of the multi-hack family which is detected by PB, also the the biggest combat to visual cheats are PB screenshots. --Goggage 10:03, 13 April 2006 (UTC)

As I understand it, PB is pretty much just a signature scanner at this point. It doesn't detect different hack methods such as wallhacks, it just has a list of signatures of known (usually public) cheats that it scans for, much like an antivirus. VAC is similar in this respect.Deaf-mute 08:19, 14 April 2006 (UTC)
PB can differentiate between certain hooks or hacks in to the game, are you suggesting we differentiate or not? --Goggage 07:31, 18 August 2006 (UTC)
Sorry, I wasn't too clear on this. What I meant was that most vendor-provided anti-cheat software like PB and VAC doesn't contain heuristic detection to (reliably) pick out wallhacks based on how they work. Instead, the anticheat flags (and maybe bans) you for having a known cheat program loaded while you play -- it doesn't matter what that program actually does as long as the anti-cheat maintainers consider it "illegal". This is in contrast to anti-cheat programs like Cheating-Death and some of the league-provided AC, which actually detect the act of wallhacking by checking what's going on inside the game. Therefore, I think we can say that PB detects "cheats" rather than detects "wallhacking" because the same wallhack code in one cheat may be detected whereas it could go undetected in another cheat, simply because one of the cheats is in PB's "illegal" list and the other isn't. I'm not saying it's a bad thing for PB to work this way -- it's better for vendors because there are less false positives. Deaf-mute 18:27, 31 August 2006 (UTC)

[edit] POV

This article seems a bit POV-oriented in some sections. For those of us who haven't played the games in question, there are parts that (subtly) make it seem like the use of these cheats is condemned by the writers themselves, rather than by the game's community.

[edit] Coloured skins

I removed the text "In addition to being visible through solid objects, the player models are also brightly coloured". This is a page about Wallhacking, coloured skin models or 'Chameleon Skins' are a separate cheat all together, although they can be combined with a wallhack as part of a multi-hack, the submitter is suggesting that chameleon skins are an integral part of wallhacking, but they are not. --Goggage 07:35, 18 August 2006 (UTC)

I see. That was my image, I've never used them, just grabbed some frames from a video I downloaded. I assumed they were part of it, as from the lower image, players with normal skins would be nearly as diffircult to see as if you weren't cheating. Also in the rest of the vid, you can see the colours change depending whether or not you have line-of-sight, so idiots don't try and shoot at things behend walls etc.
Ah well, someone has needlessly replaced the image with a less illustrative one anyway. Viva WP!

[edit] No Clip

No clip is not part of wallhack, wallhack is when you can either see your enemy through walls because of the cheat redrawing them, or because the walls are changed to be transparent. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Dexahecimal (talk • contribs) 01:27, 18 April 2007 (UTC).

[edit] Fair use rationale for Image:Csswallhacking.jpg

Image:Csswallhacking.jpg is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If there is other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images uploaded after 4 May, 2006, and lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.

BetacommandBot 05:07, 16 September 2007 (UTC)