I'm new here, so maybe I don't have much say in this. I bought WA when it came out, played it until I finished the missions, then over time occasionally reinstalled it. Recently was one of those times aswell, and I've been readdicted to this for some time now. :D

Now I hate to drag this, but prepare for a rather lengthy post... ;)

This game is splendid, and it could get so much better if it saw further development. It is simply the best 2D Worms game for PC, and that's a fact. Being 2D also makes it a slightly different style from the 3D Worms games that I personally don't think they will ever match.

Key problem here ofcourse is that Team 17 is not willing to do any further development, and Deadcode seems to have dissappeared. I'm sure they're all good guys, and Deadcode could just be on vacation, or had a lack of interest... you can't have a bad reason when you're doing something for free. :)

What I'm trying to get at here is not just having Team 17 give Worms away, but rather see if we could convince them to put it in some middle ground that'd do us both (Team 17 and the community) good. I think I read somewhere on these forums that Team 17 doesn't want to or is not capable of releasing Worms for free anyways. (There were outside artists/developers involved or somesuch?)

So what I'd consider a really good approach to this (and what I'm suggesting) is a "ID's Quake"-like or "Bungie's Marathon"-like open-source approach: release the engine code, keep the art, music, sounds effects, etc. for sale through the usual channels.
Team 17 keeps pretty much everything: their remaining profit, their copyrights and they probably won't break any contracts, while the community can get all freaky with the engine. There won't be a free Worms, you'd still need a legally bought copy of the content to run on the engine.

Now that is my humble opinion. I'm wondering what you guys think about this aswell, make suggestions, try to support them as good as you can from different perspectives. I'd also like to know what any previous contact with Team 17 has resulted in so far. (Whether they have already indicated what is and what is not possible, for example.)

P.S.: If you came this far, thanks for reading. Hope I touched atleast some new ground worthy of discussion instead of just dragging on the "W:A 4.0 Beta Update" thread.

*best post ever*

I totally agree.

Unfortunately some of the code was written by external coders who T17 are no longer in contact with... so they can't simply release the code, on legal reasons. As I understand it, anyway.

However, rest assured that things are happening...

Thanks for the quick replies. :)

I suppose that's a stopper. But looking through these forums, I think there are enough people here willing to help trying to get in contact with the remaining developers to see if we can get to an agreement. (Including me.)

There's a list of people in the readme.rtf. Maybe we can try start from there, get a list of people already aware of our efforts and see who's left?

Also, I'd like to know, what things are currently happening?

If at all possible I'd like to get involved somehow. I'm not very reliable, but I consider myself skilled in several languages, compiled and interpreted. As far as programming goes, I figure the only problem for me would be Windows APIs: I'm familiar with some basic lowlevel win32 stuff, but I've never touched DirectX or done much game programming whatsoever.

If at all possible I'd like to get involved somehow. I'm not very reliable, but I consider myself skilled in several languages, compiled and interpreted. As far as programming goes, I figure the only problem for me would be Windows APIs: I'm familiar with some basic lowlevel win32 stuff, but I've never touched DirectX or done much game programming whatsoever.

Just play around with your skills. Post your results here. We are looking forward to it. There is no need to program Worms 9. I made a program which backups the user folder of W:A. Sooo useless. But it was fun. And i had some downloads, i think.

release the engine code

Bad idea.

Within a few months, the Internet will be full of cheat versions of W:A, equipped with such useful features like aimbots, roping macros, ability to kick anyone in the middle of a game, etc. Not to mention all the half-assed mods that'll spawn like mutated flora/fauna after a nuclear explosion. Something like that will greatly split, shatter and dissipate the already fragile W:A community. To make it clear: we do not want forks of WA, which is inevitable with all large open-source projects. Also, W:A still has some undisclosed security vulnerabilities, and while they will be found and fixed over time, in the chaos many people will get to suffer. Even today, a few hours before I wrote this post, a person was spamming #AnythingGoes on WormNET and was entering people's games, getting themselves kicked and crashing the players' games in the process.

How about:

Team17 entrusts Deadcode with the W:A source code, and allows him to find a limited number of experienced programmers, which would sign a non-disclosure agreement, to work on the game together; right now, I know of only of one candidate. This will ensure that the game is in the right hands, and no one will get hurt in the process.

P.S. I talked to Deadcode today. He said he'll be back soon.

Bad idea.

Within a few months, the Internet will be full of cheat versions of W:A, equipped with such useful features like aimbots, roping macros, ability to kick anyone in the middle of a game, etc. Not to mention all the half-assed mods that'll spawn like mutated flora/fauna after a nuclear explosion.

We have this **** already.

We do. But the masses don't, thankfully - these things aren't lying around randomly on the WWW. And the things existing today closest to what can be called mods are nothing compared to the potential of an idiot with the source code in hand. The Fiddler is nothing compared to what can be done by randomly hacking the source.

It's good to hear Deadcode is coming back. Right now he's pretty much all we have, but I'm already impressed with the progress he's made as just one man. :)

As for the cheating, that's ofcourse a valid point. I can't really tell this for sure until I know how Worms works under the hood, I don't even know how much is happening client-side.

Depending on this, it could be very hard or relatively easy to prevent atleast cheating as far as networking goes. Ofcourse that still leaves the problem of aimbots and macros.

But to be honest, doesn't silkworm already provide some shady functionality? I'm not sure if the later versions of silkworm still have it, but the readme clearly states that atleast at some point silkworm had an aimbot. And the protection implemented to prevent it from going online is not at all strong enough.

While I do think you exaggerated the point a bit, it probably will be more of a problem than it currently is. And we won't ever be able to solve it all, but that holds just as much for a closed source game.

(If it goes really bad, we could also take a more social approach, like a karma system.)

As for the forks comment, I don't think forks are worth worrying about. A fork doesn't always have to be bad, and can be seen as en experimental branch instead (gaim-vv, for example). I can't think of any projects that really had serious issues with forks. Maybe you can give an example?

I'm also not sure what is so bad about mods? I'd sure like to see schemes turn into mods that can enforce game rules themselves. (For example, disable weapons until someone has picked up a crate in Shopper.)

A very good point you make is the vulnerabilities in Worms right now. I've seen this crasher bug a couple of times, and it's nasty. If the source went out like this, we could be in for a couple of weeks of dissarray until it got fixed.

Maybe we could start out by expanding to a group of developers like you suggest, we'll have to see what Deadcode thinks about that. But it'd definitly be an improvement already. And when the cheating/exploit situation has improved a bit we might reconsider.

We do. But the masses don't, thankfully - these things aren't lying around randomly on the WWW. And the things existing today closest to what can be called mods are nothing compared to the potential of an idiot with the source code in hand. The Fiddler is nothing compared to what can be done by randomly hacking the source.

I saw a game of yours the other day on wormnet.

"Windy_Rope_Race"

It was passworded so those invinited probably already knew what they where going to experience. Was there any need to tease the rest of us mortals?

Also i think that labeling as idiot someone who makes worms cheats that enhance the chance of winning is not politicaly correct around these forums.

G-Lite,

The network protocol is pretty solid regarding cheating. In his time, DC has exploited security holes in the network protocol to do pretty much anything with the game's engine - moving worms with the mouse, freezing time, shooting 50 zooks in the same turn, etc. He has plugged most of these holes in his updates, though.

Worms is a game for which powerful cheats can be written as client-side enhancements. There is a low factor of randomness in the game's physics, therefore it's possible to predict the exact trajectory of a grenade before it is shot (including bounces), or to write an algorithm that will find the sequence of keys to rope from point A to point B (not necessarily in minimum time), and to send those keys to W:A's message queue.

Silkworm is no more compatible with the latest versions of W:A, and its aimbot simply uses the CPU 5's BnG logic (and thus is a bit flawed). I am not sure if DC has specifically added some anti-silkworm protection (other than fixing network protocol issues), but I haven't heard of anyone successfully modifying the cheat versions of Silkworm to work with the latest W:A. Either way, Silkworm is no more a threat at the moment.

W:A has a good reputation that there is very little cheating in the game. Compare the situation with the one for GunBound - no matter how much those koreans try to patch up their protection, people still find countless ways to circumvent GameGuard, and modify network packets to get heaps of gold, or run aimbots with the game. The worst cheats right now are the generic ones that apply to most other games - keyboard macros and speed hacks.

Regarding forks:

Forks usually spawn when the developers have no plans to introduce a feature, or aren't doing a well-enough job at it. Now, we all know that DC hasn't had time to work on W:A lately, however this isn't yet the reason to release the source to the public. Almost all features the good effects of it out-weighted the bad side effects have been accepted and planned for future updates.

Now, the main problem with forks is that they split the community. This isn't really an issue for most applications, however is a different story with games. Also, network intercompatibility will be a great issue - either each fork will have its own server, or WormNET will get a bit chaotic. This is also the same reason The Fiddler blocks itself from WormNET.

Let's overview this then:

Open-source model

Advantages:

Big developer base means faster development of new features
Open-source engine allows people to create similar games on the same engine (not necessarily Worms-related) (this is an advantage towards the open-source scene, not for the Worms community)


Disadvantages:

Cheating will become a very serious issue
Mods will split the community
No control over the features implemented means that there will appear buggy and, mainly unbalanced mods (which will ruin the Worms atmosphere), which could degrade the overall experience (not really an issue, which can be countered by the "don't like, don't play" idea)


Shared source model

Advantages:

Centralized control allows a single community
A single version of W:A allows to maintain the game balanced


Disadvantages:

Slower development than open-source model
No client-side customisability (not really an issue)


There is a solution to cheating in open-source games, though. That would be a closed source security module. However, with today's cracking technologies, it takes ten times more effort to create a protection system than it would take a cracker to circumvent it. Thus, core developers would have to spend time on security rather than game features.

IMHO, the disadvantages of the open-source model seriously outweight its advantages. Either way, I truly doubt Team17 would release their source code (parts of which they could even use to this day) to the public. Team17 isn't iD, after all.

Here's an example of an open-source game which was somewhat spoiled by forks:

NetHack, probably the most famous rogue-like game, appeared a long time ago, and was open source since the very beginning. Its probably famous mod is Slash'Em (Super-Lotsa-Added-Stuff-Hack with Extended Magic). Slash'Em introduced such cool dungeon features like toilets, introduced tiled graphics (which are despised by many long-time rogue-like players because they go against the base ideas of roguelike games), etc. A counterpart of NetHack is ADOM (Ancient Domains of Mystery). This game is commonly recognized as the best and most balanced roguelike out there. While NetHack/Slash'Em have a plethora of fun features, they have near to no plot. ADOM, on the other hand, is closed source, and written entirely by one man (ADOM fans agree that this is a colossal effort). The plot and the entire universe is based on the player's actions, and thus, there are different quests and endings available for good and evil characters. Furthermore, ADOM hosts a great deal of secrets, including secret "ultra" endings, which were slowly discovered by the community.

Here's a quote from ADOM's ReadMe where the author explains why he is not releasing the source code:


III.E. What about the sources for the game?
===========================================

ADOM's sources are not yet available. My original plan was to release
the sources once ADOM 1.0.0 is finished and I could consider the game to
be even remotely complete.

In the past a couple of folks were very insensitive about my notions
regarding ADOM variants and argued "If the game is available without
costs I can do with the sources whatever I like". Those folks are...
well... socially retarded would be too nice as a description. Let's just
assume that those people really made me wonder about what I'm doing here.
They really should try to create something in the scope of ADOM only once
in their lives and then they might understand. Anyways, those folks
annoyed the hell out of me and I've decided that I'm not going to
release the sources for ADOM.

This will have a good and a bad effect. The good effect is that ADOM
will remain the most challenging and mysterious of all roguelike games,
simply because you just can't take a look into the sources and find
all the secrets right away once a new version is released. The bad
effect (for some people) is that they can't toy around with the sources,
create variants, etc. I can live very well with that and this it will
happen.

I saw a game of yours the other day on wormnet.

"Windy_Rope_Race"

It was passworded so those invinited probably already knew what they where going to experience. Was there any need to tease the rest of us mortals?

Also i think that labeling as idiot someone who makes worms cheats that enhance the chance of winning is not politicaly correct around these forums.

Hello Yakuza,

Please stop making false accusations.

The game I created was simply to demonstrate an experimental WormKit module to Bonz and Ed Webb. The module itself is simply a proof-of-concept demonstration, which shows that it is possible to synchronously modify the properties of objects while the game is running, thus achieving real time Fiddler-like effects during online play, whithout having each player pre-configure his extension module the same way as the other players.

The module itself isn't a secret; you can download it, including partial source code, from http://maplecenter.net/wormsfiles/ . It is not for public release, since it is only a proof-of-concept demo, and has very limited functionality.

Also, I had no intention to tease anyone. Typing in the topic of the game allows other invited players to locate the game easier. Also, the game was passworded for two simple reasons:
1) Anyone who didn't have the module would desynchronize as soon as the game would start
2) Like I mentioned in the post above, there was an evil-doer which entered people's games and insulted everyone, and when the host tried to kick him their game would crash.

Also, please re-read my post and you will see that I didn't call anyone an idiot. Nevertheless, I will disagree with your statement. If you think that cheating is morally correct, I will publicly state that you are morally incorrect. Cheating has never been a healthy practice, and cheaters are never respected. Seeing that you have taken side with cheating, I doubt anyone will have a lot of respect for you based on your statement - except for, perhaps, other cheaters.

i was just talking about these forums. I'm not in favour of cheating.

But there was a time when someone relased a program wich let a few individuals to cheat in league games aswell as a bunch of others who did in random public games.

thats why i merely commenting that condemning cheating wouldn't be politically correct in these forums.

I guess I should really use the quote function this time, much less of a hassle. :)

The network protocol is pretty solid regarding cheating. In his time, DC has exploited security holes in the network protocol to do pretty much anything with the game's engine - moving worms with the mouse, freezing time, shooting 50 zooks in the same turn, etc. He has plugged most of these holes in his updates, though.
That's great, I'm glad he spent time fixing that already.

Worms is a game for which powerful cheats can be written as client-side enhancements. There is a low factor of randomness in the game's physics, therefore it's possible to predict the exact trajectory of a grenade before it is shot (including bounces), or to write an algorithm that will find the sequence of keys to rope from point A to point B (not necessarily in minimum time), and to send those keys to W:A's message queue.
I only skimmed over the code, but you're well on your way with that with wkMagic, as far as I can tell. (I'm not sure if we should really discuss any of these opportunities here and do half to work for others.)

Silkworm is no more compatible with the latest versions of W:A, and its aimbot simply uses the CPU 5's BnG logic (and thus is a bit flawed). I am not sure if DC has specifically added some anti-silkworm protection (other than fixing network protocol issues), but I haven't heard of anyone successfully modifying the cheat versions of Silkworm to work with the latest W:A. Either way, Silkworm is no more a threat at the moment.
Hosts still emulate old versions of W:A. And since silkworm is client-side, I don't see how this could not be a threat.
I'm not sure about the CPU's logic, but while a CPU 5 is reasonably easy to beat, it is still deadly accurate. That accuracy in the hands of a human... ;)

W:A has a good reputation that there is very little cheating in the game. Compare the situation with the one for GunBound - no matter how much those koreans try to patch up their protection, people still find countless ways to circumvent GameGuard, and modify network packets to get heaps of gold, or run aimbots with the game. The worst cheats right now are the generic ones that apply to most other games - keyboard macros and speed hacks.
Gunbound is a lot larger. I think Unreal still suffers from aimbots aswell. These things could very well happen to us, so I'm not sure what your point there is.
I wasn't there for it, but the league wasn't taken down for nothing either. (I think that's comparable to gold-situation for GunBound? But doesn't GunBound host the games on their own servers aswell?)

Regarding forks:

Forks usually spawn when the developers have no plans to introduce a feature, or aren't doing a well-enough job at it. Now, we all know that DC hasn't had time to work on W:A lately, however this isn't yet the reason to release the source to the public. Almost all features the good effects of it out-weighted the bad side effects have been accepted and planned for future updates.

Forks spawn when there's a major disagreement, or in some cases when a project has been abandoned and new developers interested in resuming development can't get access to the project.

When you want to implement a new feature a 'main' developer doesn't plan on implementing, you can simply branch a project. If it's not too controversial it won't be fork-worthy, and could very well end up in the main project tree.

Now, the main problem with forks is that they split the community. This isn't really an issue for most applications, however is a different story with games. Also, network intercompatibility will be a great issue - either each fork will have its own server, or WormNET will get a bit chaotic. This is also the same reason The Fiddler blocks itself from WormNET.
That's true. In most cases a majority will flock to one side, but I can imagine that's not a chance anyone is willing to take. The chances of a fork happening at all are still very small though.

Let's overview this then:

Open-source model

Advantages:

Big developer base means faster development of new features
Open-source engine allows people to create similar games on the same engine (not necessarily Worms-related) (this is an advantage towards the open-source scene, not for the Worms community)


Disadvantages:

Cheating will become a very serious issue
Mods will split the community
No control over the features implemented means that there will appear buggy and, mainly unbalanced mods (which will ruin the Worms atmosphere), which could degrade the overall experience (not really an issue, which can be countered by the "don't like, don't play" idea)


I'm still not sure about the whole cheating thing. It will definitly require some more attention, but there's no way of telling how serious it will be eventually.
Mods are not necessarily forks, unless you're considering total conversions. (Which is pretty much a separate game on the same engine for an open-source game.)
You will still have stable releases. And a mod/branch won't land until it's stable.


Shared source model

Advantages:

Centralized control allows a single community
A single version of W:A allows to maintain the game balanced


Disadvantages:

Slower development than open-source model
No client-side customisability (not really an issue)

With all the tweaking tools floating around, I'd say client-side customisability is an issue. People obviously want to fiddle with this.

(Anything I missed here I silently agree with. ;))

There is a solution to cheating in open-source games, though. That would be a closed source security model. However, with today's cracking technologies, it takes ten times more effort to create a protection system than it would take a cracker to circumvent it. Thus, core developers would have to spend time on security rather than game features.
This is what we have now, if I understand correctly.

IMHO, the disadvantages of the open-source model seriously outweight its advantages. Either way, I truly doubt Team17 would release their source code (parts of which they could even use to this day) to the public. Team17 isn't iD, after all.
They only seem to reuse it for handheld platforms. I doubt we'll see another Worms 2D game for PC. If it's really a problem, they could amend the license to forbid porting to consoles or handheld platforms.

Here's an example of an open-source game which was somewhat spoiled by forks:

[..huge snip ;)..]
I'm not sure how the nethack/slash'em situation has spoiled anything. The strength in those games is that their dungeons are generated and thus new everytime. I can't imagine anyone looking at the code to see what would happen in the far depths of a dungeon they haven't reached yet. And there are no real secrets like ADOM in either.

I think this situation is comparable to a total conversion. Imagine creating a realism mod for W:A, or a realtime mod, it'd end up being a separate game aswell. I don't think this really splits up the community. We are here because we like W:A as it is. If someone does decide to do it, hey cool, we can try it out. But we won't ditch W:A over it.

As for all the secrets ADOM has, hacks to unlock W:A features are all over now aswell (full wormage, etc.).

I only skimmed over the code, but you're well on your way with that with wkMagic, as far as I can tell. (I'm not sure if we should really discuss any of these opportunities here and do half to work for others.)

That's exactly the reason I didn't release the source code for the other units, which control access to W:A's memory and hold the data structures. I have a policy of not releasing anything to the community if the community can hurt itself with it.

Hosts still emulate old versions of W:A. And since silkworm is client-side, I don't see how this could not be a threat.

AFAIK the latest cheat version of Silkworm, 3.5, is only compatible with W:A 3.0.0.0, which itself isn't compatible with the latest versions of W:A.

Gunbound is a lot larger. I think Unreal still suffers from aimbots aswell. These things could very well happen to us, so I'm not sure what your point there is.
I wasn't there for it, but the league wasn't taken down for nothing either. (I think that's comparable to gold-situation for GunBound? But doesn't GunBound host the games on their own servers aswell?)

Well, yes, but that was another kind of cheating - faking ranks. In Gunbound, the game connection is peer-to-peer (the players connect to each other, as opposed to all players connecting to the GB server), and after the game, the program sends the amound of gold won by all parties.

That's true. In most cases a majority will flock to one side, but I can imagine that's not a chance anyone is willing to take. The chances of a fork happening at all are still very small though.

Maybe.

Anyway. I rethought all this fork/branch scenario.

I've been thinking about this, I'm not sure there are enough programmers capable enough to do something serious on their own. I mean, a high-quality, mainstream-compatible if applicable, stable variant.

I've been around here for almost an year, and the only programmers I've seen that showed a glimpse of deep knowledge and programming experience didn't have an active interest in developing W:A, or left as quickly as they came. Of course, if the game becomes open-source, because of the sudden change of events a lot of people would become interested in Worms again. Also, it would be possible to lower the standards required to get ahold of the source in the shared source model. Not sure if that would be for the better or worse (the experienced coders could get slowed down by the less experienced ones).

With all the tweaking tools floating around, I'd say client-side customisability is an issue.
Depends on what do you mean. I meant the front-end. I don't see how is it of such great importance what colour is your front-end background or how many clicks do you need to get on WormNET...

This is what we have now, if I understand correctly.
Module. I meant external closed-source security module, not model.
I think some Quake branches have one.

They only seem to reuse it for handheld platforms. I doubt we'll see another Worms 2D game for PC. If it's really a problem, they could amend the license to forbid porting to consoles or handheld platforms.

How about a source code license that prevents people from using the source for anything but personal experiments and trying to improve the mainstream W:A? If someone privately develops a mod/spin-off and it's good enough, Team17 could allow further public development of it.

I heard Team17 doesn't really like spin-offs of their games.

This thread needs a word from someone with some authority.

I'm not sure how the nethack/slash'em situation has spoiled anything. The strength in those games is that their dungeons are generated and thus new everytime. I can't imagine anyone looking at the code to see what would happen in the far depths of a dungeon they haven't reached yet. And there are no real secrets like ADOM in either.

That's why there aren't many secrets - you can't hide them very well.
And source-diving is pretty common on r.g.r.nethack.

I think this situation is comparable to a total conversion. Imagine creating a realism mod for W:A, or a realtime mod, it'd end up being a separate game aswell. I don't think this really splits up the community. We are here because we like W:A as it is. If someone does decide to do it, hey cool, we can try it out. But we won't ditch W:A over it.

Yes. I agree. But that requires people that know what are they doing.
I'm wondering how many good coders are out there that are interested on working on W:A-related projects, aside for the ones that already are/did.

As for all the secrets ADOM has, which is entirely my fault I might add (I assume you stumbled upon my AdomBot),hacks to unlock W:A features are all over now aswell (full wormage, etc.).That's by far not as evil in a multiplayer game than in a singleplayer game. Now, if you would compare AdomBot's automation features and a roping bot for W:A...

Ugh. My head's a mess, I'm not totally sure I fully agree with everything of what I said above.

Pic on topic. Smile! (http://img166.imageshack.us/img166/7796/1149608460176ah7.jpg)

First of all, welcome, G-Lite. You are a healthy addition to these forums, with your intelligent level-headedness.

Secondly, I've just finished reading the thread [Edit: except Vladimir's new post!], have much to say, but unfortunately, must go for lunch then get back to work.

Hi Lex, thanks for welcoming.
I'm going to comment on CyberShdw again:

That's exactly the reason I didn't release the source code for the other units, which control access to W:A's memory and hold the data structures. I have a policy of not releasing anything to the community if the community can hurt itself with it.
Okay, that's cool. I imagine a fair deal of work went into that (unless you had access to the source).

AFAIK the latest cheat version of Silkworm, 3.5, is only compatible with W:A 3.0.0.0, which itself isn't compatible with the latest versions of W:A.
I occasionally get in a game online where it says it's emulating version 1/2/3. And the latest stable official patch is still 3.0. I've never tried myself, I guess.

Well, yes, but that was another kind of cheating - faking ranks. In Gunbound, the game connection is peer-to-peer (the players connect to each other, as opposed to all players connecting to the GB server), and after the game, the program sends the amound of gold won by all parties.
My point was that both gold and ranks are reported to a central server. But I can't argue with the rest.

Anyway. I rethought all this fork/branch scenario.

I've been thinking about this, I'm not sure there are enough programmers capable enough to do something serious on their own. I mean, a high-quality, mainstream-compatible if applicable, stable variant.

I've been around here for almost an year, and the only programmers I've seen that showed a glimpse of deep knowledge and programming experience didn't have an active interest in developing W:A, or left as quickly as they came. Of course, if the game becomes open-source, because of the sudden change of events a lot of people would become interested in Worms again. Also, it would be possible to lower the standards required to get ahold of the source in the shared source model. Not sure if that would be for the better or worse (the experienced coders could get slowed down by the less experienced ones).
Lowering the standards too much wouldn't make it much different from open-source. :)
I imagine if a shared source model is put in place, potential contributors would still have to prove they're trustworthy somehow. Just an NDA doesn't do that. You can sign an NDA, build a cheat, and still not break the agreement.

As I mentioned before, I'd like to contribute. But I'm reluctant towards promising anything as I have a history of being unreliable and suddenly dissappearing from a project. ;)
I'll see if I can build anything useful on Wormkit.

Depends on what do you mean. I meant the front-end. I don't see how is it of such great importance what colour is your front-end background or how many clicks do you need to get on WormNET...
Fair enough.

Module. I meant external closed-source security module, not model.
I think some Quake branches have one.
Punkbuster-like? I think that's what Enemy Territory does. It's open-source, but there's punkbuster enabled binaries and servers that require punkbuster enabled clients.

I think all solutions so far cost some though. Unless you want to build something yourself, but as you mentioned, that's far too much work.

How about a source code license that prevents people from using the source for anything but personal experiments and trying to improve the mainstream W:A? If someone privately develops a mod/spin-off and it's good enough, Team17 could allow further public development of it.

I heard Team17 doesn't really like spin-offs of their games.

This thread needs a word from someone with some authority.
I'd love to see Team 17 employee or even Deadcode jump into this thread.

That solution might work, I think Sun got some fire for doing it with Solaris though, iirc.

It wouldn't help cheating at all, ofcourse.

That's why there aren't many secrets - you can't hide them very well.
And source-diving is pretty common on r.g.r.nethack.

Ah okay, I had no idea. :)

Yes. I agree. But that requires people that know what are they doing.
I'm wondering how many good coders are out there that are interested on working on W:A-related projects, aside for the ones that already are/did.

I wouldn't ever quickly boast myself as good, especially when it comes to Windows programming. But I know the languages, and basic stuff of how Windows works, I'm a quick study and know where to look for the rest. So I guess here's one. :)

which is entirely my fault I might add (I assume you stumbled upon my AdomBot), That's by far not as evil in a multiplayer game than in a singleplayer game. Now, if you would compare AdomBot's automation features and a roping bot for W:A...
No, I haven't seen AdomBot. I only really looked at Adom's homepage, to be honest. :B

Ugh. My head's a mess, I'm not totally sure I fully agree with everything of what I said above.

Hehe, things can get quite complicated, and we haven't even touched legal grounds here.

I hope something comes out of this atleast. :)

Okay, that's cool. I imagine a fair deal of work went into that (unless you had access to the source).Yes, it took me a few weeks to figure how stuff works. No, I didn't (and still don't) have the source. Only DC and the original developers do, at the moment.
I occasionally get in a game online where it says it's emulating version 1/2/3. And the latest stable official patch is still 3.0. I've never tried myself, I guess.Whaaaat? Impossible. But you were right about 3.0: v3.6.26.1 introduced emulation of v3.0. But, I've been told that the security hole that allowed Silkworm to run has been plugged. Not sure if client-side hacks still work, though. I do know there's a /nosilk command in the non-cheat Silkworm, so it's just as easy to disable it remotely...

Lowering the standards too much wouldn't make it much different from open-source. :)
I imagine if a shared source model is put in place, potential contributors would still have to prove they're trustworthy somehow. Just an NDA doesn't do that. You can sign an NDA, build a cheat, and still not break the agreement.

Yes. But then only you can use it. If you leak it, eventually someone will report it to the right people, and a lawsuit might be started.

Punkbuster-like? I think that's what Enemy Territory does. It's open-source, but there's punkbuster enabled binaries and servers that require punkbuster enabled clients.

I think all solutions so far cost some though. Unless you want to build something yourself, but as you mentioned, that's far too much work.Yes, exactly.

As I mentioned before, I'd like to contribute. But I'm reluctant towards promising anything as I have a history of being unreliable and suddenly dissappearing from a project. ;)
I'll see if I can build anything useful on Wormkit.Great! What languages are you good at?

I can help with anything Wormkit-related.

If you're looking for ideas, here's something (http://forum.team17.co.uk/showthread.php?t=29088) I wanted to do but never got at doing it. You should remember the time and current WAgame file, so when the file is closed, copy it over to a folder. This can be done by checking the newest file in the games folder and periodically trying to open the file with full permissions to see when W:A has closed it, or by hooking CreateFileA and CloseHandle with madCodeHook; checking for the hotkeys can be done by monitoring global keys GetKeyState or by subclassing W:A's DDraw window.

Great! What languages are you good at?

I can help with anything Wormkit-related.

If you're looking for ideas, here's something (http://forum.team17.co.uk/showthread.php?t=29088) I wanted to do but never got at doing it. You should remember the time and current WAgame file, so when the file is closed, copy it over to a folder. This can be done by checking the newest file in the games folder and periodically trying to open the file with full permissions to see when W:A has closed it, or by hooking CreateFileA and CloseHandle with madCodeHook; checking for the hotkeys can be done by monitoring global keys GetKeyState or by subclassing W:A's DDraw window.

I'm decent with Pascal/Delphi, but also know C and C++ as far as compiled languages go. It looks like Wormkit just loads a DLL, so either should work.

I could give that a shot. But the times would have to be compensated for lag. The best way would be to grab the ingame time.

Also, network intercompatibility will be a great issue - either each fork will have its own server, or WormNET will get a bit chaotic. This is also the same reason The Fiddler blocks itself from WormNET.

So, would it be a problem if I told everyone how to use the Fiddler on wormnet?

How about a source code license that prevents people from using the source for anything but personal experiments and trying to improve the mainstream W:A? If someone privately develops a mod/spin-off and it's good enough, Team17 could allow further public development of it.

I don't think that could work. Licenses that restrict use are VERY shaky. The most it could do for sure is prevent you from distributing modified source code, which wouldn't have any real effect as you could distribute patches instead.

So, would it be a problem if I told everyone how to use the Fiddler on wormnet?

At the moment, The Fiddler is far too cubersome to install and maintain for most users for online Fiddler games to become too regular to be a problem. People using The Fiddler would have to agree beforehand about the game. So, with The Fiddler as it is now, it wouldn't create much of a problem today.

I don't think that could work. Licenses that restrict use are VERY shaky. The most it could do for sure is prevent you from distributing modified source code, which wouldn't have any real effect as you could distribute patches instead.

Yes; but, by far not all players are able to apply those patches and recompile the game. Most players don't know what a compiler is.

Ah, and it COULD prevent distribution of the binaries produced by those patches. The legal barrier to using versions of WA produced by modified source would then be the technical ability. This would make me happy, provided I can also redistribute the sources in unmodified form.

It would still open up the possibility of someone automating the whole process with an installer that..just happens to take a long time, a lot of processing, and a lot of downloading.

It definitely wouldn't be worth it while there are still exploitable security problems. A desync (like Fiddler) would be ok, but once the knowledge of security problems is out, they might be exploited without directly using the WA source or a modified build at all.

i just want to enter my 2 cents about a few small things here:

1. Cybershadow u siad u don't release anything that might harm the comunity, but then whats the point of making any program, if in anyway it can hurt the community. Most things in live have a bad and good side, but even if the bad side is greater doesn't mean the good side isn't worth it, only is some cases it does. A program such as the fiddler, which you said we arn't read for i disagree, a program for kicking, i agree is the worst idea i can think of. What i mean to say is you don't get anywhere without taking chances.

2. Cybersahdow, You also said that the source will create cheats and such. Well i don't see a problem there just cause like 5 or 6people on wormnet will cheat doesn't mean the end of wormnet, just don't play those individuals.

And who are you to say that will happen? It's a possibility, a thing which could happen and so on and so forth. But can you prove that the worms community would do that or is that just waht you think?

3. I think the good of realeasing the source and customizable programs which some programs, some i knkow names of, others not so much would have made but never released i think it's just sad that some programers write programs for worms and don't realse them, what coul they do exept for a booting program thats so bad?

4. I really don't feel like typing more but your welcome to write a sentnce or few to tell me how wrong i am.\

Edit: Wouldn't the source make it easier for others to write useful programs?

Ghost;526882']i just want to enter my 2 cents about a few small things here:

1. Cybershadow u siad u don't release anything that might harm the comunity, but then whats the point of making any program, if in anyway it can hurt the community. Most things in live have a bad and good side, but even if the bad side is greater doesn't mean the good side isn't worth it, only is some cases it does. A program such as the fiddler, which you said we arn't read for i disagree, a program for kicking, i agree is the worst idea i can think of. What i mean to say is you don't get anywhere without taking chances.

I obviously meant, if the good side outweights the bad side.
For example, I didn't release the data structures unit, because spreading info like that would just make it much easier for evildoers to write evil cheats. And that's a no-no. If a good coder with good intentions needs it for an useful project, that's no problem :)

Ghost;526882']2. Cybersahdow, You also said that the source will create cheats and such. Well i don't see a problem there just cause like 5 or 6people on wormnet will cheat doesn't mean the end of wormnet, just don't play those individuals.

And who are you to say that will happen? It's a possibility, a thing which could happen and so on and so forth. But can you prove that the worms community would do that or is that just waht you think?

I'd say, 95% of people that could write cheats will write cheats, just for the fun of it (experimenting with the game, etc). Maybe 30% of them will actually use them. And 10% of those would give their cheats to others, which will give them to others and so on and so forth. So, it's enough for one person to write a cheat and give it around to everyone to ruin the game for many others.

Ghost;526882']3. I think the good of realeasing the source and customizable programs which some programs, some i knkow names of, others not so much would have made but never released i think it's just sad that some programers write programs for worms and don't realse them, what coul they do exept for a booting program thats so bad?

I'm not quite following your thoughts here.
Give some specific examples.

Wouldn't want to dampen anyone's spirits, but bear in mind that Team17 probably don't want to get in a position where lawsuits over an old game like WA are possible.

Other than that, do continue with the debate. It's a good read, if nothing more. But I've explained my stance towards most of this already to you, Cyber!

Ghost;526882']
And who are you to say that will happen? It's a possibility, a thing which could happen and so on and so forth. But can you prove that the worms community would do that or is that just waht you think?

It's happened before. Don't make me prove it, though, I probably couldn't. Be bothered, mwahaha.

just 2 things:

1. If cheats were made do u think many people would actually use them?

2. (for cyber) just a question, u cutomized all that wind stuff, very cool (loved it), very good programing anyhoo. would it be possible for u to program a module that enables u to rope kock over direct ip games?

[ufp]Ghost just take a look at fanik on worms 2... he takes advantage of a patch des/snatch made that allows you to kick teams from other games just to P|SS people off... CHEATS ARE BAD ONLINE.

Ghost;526920']1. If cheats were made do u think many people would actually use them?

I'd estimate 30%-70% of people that can use a cheat unpunished, will. And most of them, of course, won't admit it, though some people are proud about cheating.

Ghost;526920']2. (for cyber) just a question, u cutomized all that wind stuff, very cool (loved it), very good programing anyhoo. would it be possible for u to program a module that enables u to rope kock over direct ip games?

Yes. But it's easier to create a WormNET game and others to connect via Direct IP as usual.

I'd estimate 30%-70% of people that can use a cheat unpunished, will. And most of them, of course, won't admit it, though some people are proud about cheating. .

o cmon 30-70 that can't be true. not that many maye, maybe 50....


Yes. But it's easier to create a WormNET game and others to connect via Direct IP as usual.

good idea

I agree with CyberShadow. As an ex-supermod of First Blood, his estimates are definitely not off.

Well, I appear to have found this topic a bit late, so I wont comment on individual posts for now.
1: Team17 wont release an openscource anytime soon because WA is still selling, and an openscource would allow people to put a tweaked game on the WWW for free.
2: What about if T17 removed the online capability from the openscource?
3: Ghost, if only 10% had access to cheats, and only 50% used them, then that's 5% of the community. Considering that I usually play online with 4 or 5 other people, that's about 1 in every 6 matches that someone cheats in. And that wouldn't be fun at all.

1: Team17 wont release an openscource anytime soon because WA is still selling, and an openscource would allow people to put a tweaked game on the WWW for free.
2: What about if T17 removed the online capability from the openscource?
I think the copyright situation is the real reason why this game's source code will never be released.
Third party programmers holding copyrights to bits of the game since the W2 days and a plethora of publishers.

1: Team17 wont release an openscource anytime soon because WA is still selling, and an openscource would allow people to put a tweaked game on the WWW for free.
The original idea was to open-source only the code. All the graphics, sounds, etc. would still be protected by copyright. You'd still need the original CD to play the game or any mod of it (unless they do a complete remake of all resources).
2: What about if T17 removed the online capability from the openscource?
Let's remember that the original point of this is to improve W:A, not to create off-line mods. This kind of goes against the idea's purpose, since online play is one of the main things where W:A needs improvements.

well they couldn't selectivly giev it out to peeps like u, that wouldn't be fair, it's kind of an all or nothing deal.

Edit: BTW, what is a source, i mean i mkno it's the junk of code that is pounded togeather to make the game but can't u just like take that out of files on the cd?

Ghost;527202']well they couldn't selectivly giev it out to peeps like u, that wouldn't be fair, it'
s kind of an all or nothing deal.

I don't see why not. They did that with Deadcode.

Do you think an experienced programmer and an idiot have the same right to get the source code?

Ghost;527202']Edit: BTW, what is a source, i mean i mkno it's the junk of code that is pounded togeather to make the game but can't u just like take that out of files on the cd?

Um...

.........

Here, try reading this: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Source_code

Do you think an experienced programmer and an idiot have the same right to get the source code?

Yes I Do, It's Like Saying You SHoudl Kill All The Stupid People Because Only Stupid Things Could Come From Stupid People But Smart People SHoudl LIve.

it's simple, DC works for them therefore he is part of them.

Ghost;527220']it's simple, DC works for them therefore he is part of them.
Ehrm, no.
He proved himself as a talented programmer with his Silkworm program, which was back then doing what T17 needed.

Ghost;527220']Do you think an experienced programmer and an idiot have the same right to get the source code?

Yes I Do, It's Like Saying You SHoudl Kill All The Stupid People Because Only Stupid Things Could Come From Stupid People But Smart People SHoudl LIve.

it's simple, DC works for them therefore he is part of them.

Okay. First of all, I have to say that your opinions won't matter very much on this topic, from a person that doesn't really know what source code really is, not to mention anything about programming or maintaining such large projects such as W:A.

When it comes to working on a large project, it's all about teamwork. A team is about as strong as its weakest member. In a team of experienced and non-experienced people, the smart guys are slowed down by the newbies, because they have to keep up with their slowness.

Team17 could pick out a team of 10 experienced programmers like Deadcode to develop the game, or they could pick 10 random people from the street and pay them to randomly push buttons on the keyboard, trying to improve W:A. In which of these two cases do you think W:A would have a better future?

Working on W:A is privilege, not a right. Life is a right to every human being, so your analogy isn't very successful.

And, how do you know Deadcode is being paid? Did you ask him? Maybe he's doing it as a hobby? Personally, I'd do it for free just because I could do a great thing for the community.

they could pick 10 random people from the street and pay them to randomly push buttons on the keyboard, trying to improve W:A.
If they let them push buttons long enough (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Infinite_monkey_theorem)... :D
how do you know Deadcode is being paid?
[Enter generic beer running gag about payment in kind here]

Personally, I'd do it for free just because I could do a great thing for the community.

It's this sort of attitude which carries the community. I hope you and the others with the same skill and attitude as you get to work on the project.

Unfortunately, I can't programme. If I could I'd help but since I can't the best I can do is back you.

Good luck!

It's this sort of attitude which carries the community. I hope you and the others with the same skill and attitude as you get to work on the project.

Unfortunately, I can't programme. If I could I'd help but since I can't the best I can do is back you.

Good luck!

same here i'm all for u guyz, i always wanted to help with mods n projects in 1 or 2 games that i reallllllly like but i just don't know how and i tried learning once but that didn't work out.

anyway, cyber i don't need to grasp exactly what the source code is to have input as long as i get the gist thats it's the code of the game. anyhoo i think my analagy is good because we are talking about good vs bad, or in my analogy smart vs stupid. If you were to only relase the source code to already talented programmers who wanted to do good, that wouldn't be fair, how do i kno if u had the source u wouldn't make an aimbot and give it to those specific coders. Inwhich case how is that fair to the non-coders. We are all equal and deserve the benifet of the doubt and not for people to be acused of cheating in the future.

Ghost;527237']anyway, cyber i don't need to grasp exactly what the source code is to have input as long as i get the gist thats it's the code of the game. anyhoo i think my analagy is good because we are talking about good vs bad, or in my analogy smart vs stupid. If you were to only relase the source code to already talented programmers who wanted to do good, that wouldn't be fair, how do i kno if u had the source u wouldn't make an aimbot and give it to those specific coders. Inwhich case how is that fair to the non-coders. We are all equal and deserve the benifet of the doubt and not for people to be acused of cheating in the future.

Simple. The less experienced people are just less likely to do something productive and useful for the community, and are more likely to do things that are bad for the community (e.g. cheats). That's why we have to draw a line, where giving out the source code to certain people would be best for us all, or not.

I understand that you are trying to defend the less skilled people and give them equal rights. However, this isn't about anyone's personal feelings; this is about the future of the entire community. Try to see the big picture.

Power comes with a responsability. Some people don't understand that, and misuse the power. This is what we should avoid.

Just thinking, mabye it wont bring about that much chaos. I mean, Worms4 was actually openscourced for such things as weapons and was playable online (Spadge said you shouldn't though), and the only cheating I've known about was _Kilburn.

Just thinking, mabye it wont bring about that much chaos. I mean, Worms4 was actually openscourced for such things as weapons and was playable online (Spadge said you shouldn't though), and the only cheating I've known about was _Kilburn.

agrred and i don't really think it's fair to give the source to certain community members, i'm all for that give it to a few people but i'm just arguing the otherside because when you think about it in someone elses perspective you see how unfair it is.

Ghost;527316']agrred and i don't really think it's fair to give the source to certain community members, i'm all for that give it to a few people but i'm just arguing the otherside because when you think about it in someone elses perspective you see how unfair it is.
This is EXACTLY what I am talking about!

You are trying to look a things from the selfish perspective of ONE PERSON!

HOW ABOUT we give the right to launch NUCLEAR MISSILES to EVERY PERSON ON EARTH? Because it's SO UNFAIR that only a FEW PEOPLE have the possibility to start a NUCLEAR WAR!!!

Do you think I'd want to get the source because I want it FOR ME, to achieve something PERSONAL?

If someone will feel bad for not getting the source FOR HIMSELF, he should never get the source code in the first place!

We aren't doing this for OURSELVES, but for the entire community! If Team17 will find someone who is much better than us all and would do a much better job than me to improve W:A, I would NEVER feel any remorse for not getting the source code! After all, it's best for us all!

Now, please stop before I completely lose grasp of myself.
Get someone smart to read EVERYTHING that has been discussed above and explain it to you, in SIMPLE ENGLISH.

FFS. Such a great thread ruined.

I think you just saved the thread, Vladimir. :)

Yeah, Ghost. He's right. You ought to just stop posting in this thread unless you have something seriously productive to say. You have been very counter-productive, and everyone here realizes it. [Edit: That is, please don't bother responding to the post before this one, since that would also be counter-productive, considering how clear it is.]

Now, on with the awesome discussion. So, if a Team17 member could come along and ask CyberShadow to give a demonstration of his skill and will, that would be quite nice. Is there any chance of getting in contact with Team17 besides through Davidcode? After all, he didn't have an intermediate coder to go through originally. CyberShadimir, do you think you could email someone from Team17, or does David want you to wait for him to do so on your behalf?

Thanks for the support, Lex.

I've discussed this with Deadcode, and I'd rather not try anything without him. There are still a lot of things I can do in the position I am now.

Are you in direct talks with deadcode? I am greateful for the work he did and hope that it continues:) I don't care about source code, as long as adecent patch is being made somewhere by someone

Though Deadcode doesn't come online much these days, there are a few forum members here who are in contact with him, as has been mentioned by those members not-too-sparsely. He does intend to continue his work on WA and may even want help from some knowledgable, skilled, intelligent, intuitive, good-willed, fun person.

I am all of those but I couldn't tell C++ from a dogs bone haha So i shall skip the job offer

may even want help from some knowledgable, skilled, intelligent, intuitive, good-willed, fun person.
I hope he still remembers his offer for me translating all the new stuff to German. :)

Ghost;527220']Do you think an experienced programmer and an idiot have the same right to get the source code?

Yes I Do, It's Like Saying You SHoudl Kill All The Stupid People Because Only Stupid Things Could Come From Stupid People But Smart People SHoudl LIve.

it's simple, DC works for them therefore he is part of them.

How do I shot code?!

Please, Elliot, though you are funny and silly, don't insert your silliness into this thread, where we are attempting to have productive conversation.

Yes, Bonz, he'll definitely need a good German translator, and I'm sure he hasn't forgotten your excellent work.

So, G-Lite, have you attempted much with making a WormKit module, yet? Perhaps CyberShadow can share some of his interesting network modules with you, and you can build ideas from there. Perhaps you and he should add each other to an instant messenger protocol.

So, G-Lite, have you attempted much with making a WormKit module, yet? Perhaps CyberShadow can share some of his interesting network modules with you, and you can build ideas from there. Perhaps you and he should add each other to an instant messenger protocol.

We're already on MSN. I've been working on the replay idea he linked to before, but I also have a school project running at the same time.

I'll finish this soon hopefully, because I have a fun idea to try afterwards aswell. :)

I think the copyright situation is the real reason why this game's source code will never be released.
Third party programmers holding copyrights to bits of the game since the W2 days and a plethora of publishers.

Can you tell which parts of the code?
And, don´t you guys think that these parts of code could be rewritten, to gain indepedence from the third party programmers? Just to make it easier for Team17 to give away the source code to some guys.

I don't think that there's a problem with letting a limited number of developers to work on the source, as long as the source code license remains unchanged, and any code added becomes Team17 property. Releasing the source publicly is a different issue.

I don't think that there's a problem with letting a limited number of developers to work on the source, as long as the source code license remains unchanged, and any code added becomes Team17 property. Releasing the source publicly is a different issue.

Hmm. Yes, sure. I should think before posting. But back to my question, it is interesting for me to know, which parts of the W:A were coded by external programmers. Don´t ask why. ;)

If I can help in any way, I'd be delighted to.

Of course, i understand that this isn't a community free-for-all and that my services may not be required but the offer is there if you need it. All I can offer is testing, really. I am professionally trained in functionality and localisation, though, should that help at all. I can also draw a bit but I can't imagine any new graphics being implemented. ;) Still, if I can ease the workload for those involved whilst contributing to something so big I'd be more than happy to.

As I said before I have little else to say on the matter, so I may not post again in this thread for fear of diluting the important information. You know you have my support. :)
If you'd like my help just get in touch with me through PM or ICQ. I will also answer any questions anyone asks me directly in this thread.

Good luck! :D

Can you tell which parts of the code?
And, don´t you guys think that these parts of code could be rewritten, to gain indepedence from the third party programmers? Just to make it easier for Team17 to give away the source code to some guys.

I should think that if they knew which parts of the code they didn't have the rights to, they could (if they wanted) release the parts they do have the rights to.