Anti-mutator ?

[Red_Fist]

A way to embed a mutator that blocks anyone trying to use a mutator, or some new actor.sure be nice to keep some maps from being bastardized online.Speaking of SP or MH here, not DM

for UT99

[Creavion]

I suppose, you opened this because of ...

@MH and weapons: What I dislike about MH is that it is nearly impossible to add "difficulty" since everybody plays the maps completly different. Lets say you add the flak later into your map, somebody could play the map with NW2, replacing anything with super powerful nukes for example. Gameplay: Actually more or less gone! I dont think anywhere else you can find the usage of weapon mods and mutators that often as like there. As map designer you dont need to hope anybody really plays your map as like you would like to see it.

[JackGriffin]

Yeah it can be done. I even researched how to lock maps from any sort of changes by future editors.

[Feralidragon]

Like said above, it's possible. It's just about checking the mutator list, and remove the mutators from the chain and reconnect the ones which should keep being used.

[JackGriffin]

Do understand if you embark on something like this you get this sort of reply:
http://www.oldunreal.com/cgi-bin/yabb2/ ... 542446/0#0

You may not recognize the names responding to me but they are very active Unreal people and their opinions matter. I got a lot of anger over this and it's why it was eventually never released. The reaction you read there was typical from most everyone that I talked to. If you attempt to lock your map in this way expect the community to condemn it.

[Bloeb]

This is an excerpt from my BTME-mod. Use it as you wish.

Code: Select all

class My_Mutator extends Mutator config(Blaat);

var() string RemoveMutators[32]; // Mutators removed by map-settings
var config string RemoveServerMutators[32]; // Mutators removed by server-settings

function PostBeginPlay()
{
	/* unload unwanted mutators */
	for (M = Level.Game.BaseMutator; M != None; M = M.NextMutator)
	{
		if ((GetItemName(string(M.class)) == GetItemName(string(Self.class))) || M.IsA('Arena') || IsUnwantedMutator(M.Class)) // destroy unwanted mutators
		{
			Previous.NextMutator = M.NextMutator;

			if (M != Self)
			{
				M.Destroy();
				M = None;
			}
		}
		else
		{
			Previous = M;
		}
	}
}


function bool IsUnwantedMutator(coerce string StrClass)
{
	local int Index;

	/* remove mutators according to map-settings */
	for(Index=0; Index<ArrayCount(RemoveMutators); ++Index)
	{
		if(RemoveMutators[Index]!="" && InStr(StrClass,RemoveMutators[Index]) != -1)
			return true;
	}

	/* remove mutators according to server-settings */
	for(Index=0; Index<ArrayCount(RemoveServerMutators); ++Index)
	{
		if(RemoveServerMutators[Index]!="" && InStr(StrClass,RemoveServerMutators[Index]) != -1)
			return true;
	}

	return false;
}

[Creavion]

I remember that thread there, sigh. "DRM". AFAIK Trackmania offers the possibility to protect user tracks with a password if they want to check it out in the track editor. This is so unbelievable DIRTY. Bad guys Nadeo!
This is no DRM to me, just a "noob-stealing-without-permission" protection.

As long a game community has people who think "I can simply take the content from map y by author Z", nothing will ever change. But we have already discussed this over multiply pages.

[JackGriffin]

I'm absolutely with you Crev. Some of your maps have obviously taken many hours of work. The fact that I can just make whatever changes I want without any sort of oversight is plain wrong. I choose to release my work but it's not imperative that everyone has to follow that. If you work your ass off on making insane palm trees then I have no 'right' to rip them simply because you released a map using them. UT permissions are level-based and not all-inclusive.

BTW that mod functioned more along these lines: You would take a list of things (many or few) that you want locked. Things like map name, author, title, even specific actors like brushes, zones, etc. and these would be locked before the map was released. Nothing prevents the author from allowing brushes he chooses to be copied but THAT map cannot be altered in the chosen ways. To me this met the criteria of sharing but allowed for work to be preserved that the authors really wanted to preserve. Oh, and lastly this would have to function as a service and not as a download. Ferali understand the why on this but suffice to say it's as simple as
1) Send me your map
2) List the things you want locked
3) It's returned locked

Was it foolproof? Nope, but it will protect against 99% of the people here. That last percent that would go all the way to figure out the how are not people that would do this anyway.

[Creavion]

And I have no idea how this is supposed to work. What about an example for better understanding?

[JackGriffin]

I'm not going to do it for anyone. I kid you not, you are the *only* person that was openly supportive of the idea and I spoke to a lot of people. Surprisingly the only fence sitter was Anthrax. He didn't condemn it (nor condone it) but did give me great guidance on a couple of things that I was stuck on.

This side project was a huge surprise for me. I never expected this reaction from the mapper community. For so long it's been "I hate having my maps redone" yet when an option pops up for them no one jumps up besides you. In fact I got a couple of stern PM's at OldUnreal concerning my development of a DRM. Seriously, it's not DRM. It's a mapper deciding what not to share. We don't castigate mappers for brush stripping so why was this an issue?

Blech...bad taste in my mouth on this subject.

[AlCapowned]

The entire point of DRM is that it limits what the user can do with the content. Not all DRM is the same, but this does qualify as DRM.

DRM is any technology that inhibits uses of digital content that are not desired or intended by the content provider.

I can see why you would want to stop people from editing maps. I'm sure there are more than enough Kaals out there to worry about.

But preventing people from using mutators in a game that became popular because of its mods is the stupidest idea I've heard in a long time. Nobody (reasonable) expects a map to be balanced around every mod out there. If I want to use something like ChaosUT while playing a certain map, nobody is going to be hurt by that. If it isn't perfectly balanced for the map, so what? It was my choice to use said mutator in the first place.

What's next, stopping people from using skins or models that conflict with a map's atmosphere?

[Red_Fist]

Ok, so if I cut and paste that code, under what class should I make a new subclass?
And how or will it be placeable ?

As for protecting maps, I don't like it one bit.but mainly because things have been open from the original game and for so long.I also think if people where to use the stuff in a map I would consider that a compliment to the original creator.but if people just rip off the whole map, that ain't no good at all.

That is one reason I cannot stand the new unreals, "cooked directory" and then they use windows default folders but I want the files on another drive, and then I can't figure out whats cooked or not cooked, what directory things are in, big pain in the ass.

[Red_Fist]

I suppose, you opened this because of ...

@MH and weapons: What I dislike about MH is that it is nearly impossible to add "difficulty" since everybody plays the maps completly different. Lets say you add the flak later into your map, somebody could play the map with NW2, replacing anything with super powerful nukes for example. Gameplay: Actually more or less gone! I dont think anywhere else you can find the usage of weapon mods and mutators that often as like there. As map designer you dont need to hope anybody really plays your map as like you would like to see it.

Not completely, this has bothered me for a long time, one big one is using low grav or adding that blasted translocator.
(I don't think those can be blocked)
In NO WAY should people be able to get beyond the geometry meant for the map.
It could trigger triggers out of sequence and screw the whole map up, just about anything can go wrong.
Then adding all these weapons and things.

@AlCapowned
I would make two levels, one as it's meant, the other just stock.In UT2004 I could make a weapon that could not be replaced, if so, the WHOLE point of the map gameplay would have been trashed.

[JackGriffin]

But preventing people from using mutators in a game that became popular because of its mods is the stupidest idea I've heard in a long time.

What's next, stopping people from using skins or models that conflict with a map's atmosphere?

You confuse two ideas on this. On one hand you want complete, unfettered freedom to do what you want with anything you please created within the engine. What I'm saying is the opposite, but with the voice of the opposing side used too: If I take the time to create good content that you find is good enough to use then it's wrong that I get no more say on how that content is used and you can alter it without ramifications.

This precise argument has been done ad nauseum across most UEngine forums but the fact remains that it's the main reason we lose so many really good developers. They start out loving the freedoms of the engine then begin to loathe the forced compliance with open sharing. This is why we can all name so many good content creators that picked up stakes and moved on to other games so that they could protect what they make from just being ripped apart.

About the skins...I'll ask you the exact same question you asked me. Why is your right to do what you want with my creation somehow more germane than my right to see it played the way I want it played? You are free to not use it if you disagree with my choices, and in fact you are free to make your own in the style you like.

It's my opinion that if somehow there was a foolproof way to completely lock content there would be a resurgence of development. There would be another ONP for example because the people who left for this reason would come back. Some of the best stuff in UT and 2K4 was never continued because it couldn't be protected.

[AlCapowned]

Your map could change all the settings you want it to, and there would be nothing anyone could do about it. You just shouldn't be surprised when people don't embrace the idea of having to play your maps to your exact specifications. How I play your map (and the game in general) has no effect on you whatsoever, unless you can't stand the thought that somewhere on this earth is a player who doesn't play the same way that you do. How your map controls my settings does affect me, though. If you create content that changes my settings in that way, the last thing I would do is find it good enough to use.

I would like to use the options included with the game, such as keybindings, game speeds, FOV, renders, and yes, mutators. If you see that as a bad thing, you should be mapping for a another game that doesn't give the player those choices.

I'm not saying it's wrong to protect your maps, but there's a difference between protecting your maps and attempting to control how the users play.