Condition Zero Interview
by Maarten Goldstein, Nov 02, 2001 6:27am PSTA new interview with Randy Pitchford of Gearbox has surfaced, this time on Intelgamer. The Q&A is about the upcoming single-player Counter-Strike game, Condition Zero. There are questions (and answers) about the AI, the buying system in single player mode, losing members of your squad, personal attributes per character, the amount of maps (more than 20 less than 30), differences in multiplayer between CZ and the original CS, new tech, coop mode, Gooseman's involvement and more.
Intelgamer: Will the levels be bigger than the current CS levels? Approximately, how long will each round last? Randy Pitchford: In the single player game of Condition Zero, there's no such thing as the concept of "rounds". Instead, you'll have a mission and objectives. Objectives can be accomplished as quickly as a few minutes, or they can take awhile depending upon the aggressiveness of the player and the skill of the team. Some objectives have to be accomplished very rapidly before they're irrelevant. There are a large variety of objectives in each environment that challenge various skills the player is developing.
Killing Floor hits a million sales, discounted on Steam
Jam Live Music Arcade announced for PS3, Xbox 360
Metal Gear Online to quietly die this summer
Mad Riders: Techland's ATV racer coming to PC, PSN, XBLA
Notch 'can do' $13 million for Psychonauts 2




Comments
Thread Truncated. Click to see all 2 replies.
First, Valve should state in the next patch that the use of any secondary programs that allow the client to cheat is a direct violation of the EULA and may be punished accordingly. Identify exactly what a program must do in order to be considered "cheating" (see through walls, automatically aim, etc) and make it abundantly clear that any use of these programs, even to "test them out" is a EULA violation.
Next, ValveÂ’s programmers need to do their homework. They should get their hands on every HL cheating program in existence and dissect the code. They have to identify the exact cheat program routines; exactly how it modifies any video drivers. The Half-life executable should be made to be able to detect any illegal variations in any Half-lifeÂ’s resource files. However, the program should not react when it detects a violation, simply log that such a violation has been made. See where I'm going with this?
Valve then releases another patch that implements these detection abilities. However, Valve MUST NOT inform the public that these changes have been made! When the client automatically checks Valve's servers for WON id# authentication, the client should send an extra byte, a Y/N byte, which indicates whether or not a cheat detection has been made on this client.
Exactly two weeks after this patch, Valve then releases a very small update. An update that simply adds the sv_allowcheaters 0/1 server variable. Any WON id# which has sent a violation indication in the last couple weeks is blacklisted, and can only play on servers which have this new variable set to 1. Of course, the default for servers would be 0.
This approach to cheating could be brutally effective. But what do you guys think? Too intrusive?
Thread Truncated. Click to see all 4 replies.
I think Mr. Pirtchford is expecting a little too much here. Given the quality of "testing" in previous CS betas, i'd rather use a PODbot to show me what works and what doesn't than Goose or Cliffe.
Thread Truncated. Click to see all 2 replies.
Thread Truncated. Click to see all 3 replies.
Thread Truncated. Click to see all 2 replies.