Quote:
Originally Posted by Jugdriver
Why would someone need proof to ask for or have VAC enabled? The Idea of VAC is (hopefully) to maintain the integrity of the game, isn’t that a good enough reason in and of itself, why would one need to prove anything?
JD
AKA_MattE
|
Exactly, its about the integrity of the game.
CWMV you strike me as someone who is keen to explore the boundaries but in a fair way. Infortunately not everyone is like that.
The simple fact is that if you leave the door open to responsible modders you leave it open to hackers too. It only takes one idiot hacker to wreck an entire evening for everyone else. Its bad enough with the PrtScrn'ers.
Guys like kwiatek did some excellent work on the IL-2 '46 FMs but they aren't all like that. As for the devs not having time to vet and formally incorporate community work, I would not be expecting them to incorporate
additional aircraft, only things like improved FMs for existing aircraft or other issues with objects etc., i.e. things assist in the correction of existing problems and takes some of the load off their shoulders so that
we get the benefit more quickly. They certainly aren't going to formally incorporate anything that represents their bread and butter for tomorrow.
Combat Simulators are not like Flight Simulator where it doesn't really matter what kind of UFO you like to build and fly for your pleasure. It's a
competitive game. People play on-line to pit their skills and like any other game or sport, it needs a level playing field. If a server wants to offer LooneyUberVille (and I can see that could be fun for experimenters and those not interested in historical environments) then they can turn the verification process off.