Je viens de lire sur le forum d’un site qu’il existait déjà un aimbot pour Tribes2. A priori, il serait basé sur la couleur des skins pour pouvoir viser. Il marche uniquement avec le laser, seule arme dont le projectile se déplace à la vitesse de la lumiére.
Surement rien de bien méchant car étant donné le netcode de Tribes2 il doit falloir un excellent ping pour qu’il fonctionne efficacement (au moins il est inutilisable par les joueurs francais). De plus le laser est loin d’être l’arme absolue dans Tribes2 (quoique si on touche tout le temps…). Nous espérons que Dynamix trouvera une solution pour contrer ce genre de cheats.
Je ne posterai pas l’url du aimbot mais nul doute que si vous cherchez vous le trouverez sans peine (des milliers de joueurs ont déjà lu le thread…).
En attendant, je vous invite à lire la réaction d’un lecteur sur le forum du site où j’ai lu l’info: [–SUITE–]
While you’re probably sick of hearing about Auto aim, it is crucial that you read this letter. But before I continue, allow me to explain that I once managed to get Auto aim to agree that we are on a slippery slope towards economic strife, social turmoil, cultural chaos, and vindictive solecism. Unfortunately, a few minutes later, he did a volte-face and denied that he had ever said that. Now, it is not my purpose to suggest that words cannot convey the hurt and despair that I and so many others feel for those who were personally attacked by Auto aim, but rather to expand people’s understanding of Auto aim’s horny wheelings and dealings. Socrates was condemned to death by the city of Athens for his views. I hope I don’t receive the same treatment for saying that if, five years ago, I had described a person like Auto aim to you and told you that in five years, he’d sacrifice children on the twin altars of despotism and greed, you’d have thought me tendentious. You’d have laughed at me and told me it couldn’t happen. So it is useful now to note that, first, it has happened and, second, to try to understand how it happened and how the fetishism « debate » is not a debate. It is a harangue, a politically motivated, brilliantly publicized, ruthless attack on progressive ideas. While there is no evidence that snivelling frotteurism is his preferred quick-fix solution to complex cultural problems, it is clear that if we let him subordinate all spheres of society to an ideological vision of organic community, all we’ll have to look forward to in the future is a public realm devoid of culture and a narrow and routinized professional life untouched by the highest creations of civilization. Auto aim should work with us, not step in at the eleventh hour and hog all the glory.
I don’t want to overstate this point, but those of us who are still sane, those of us who still have a firm grip on reality, those of us who still feel that he is obviously hiding something, have an obligation to do more than just observe what he is doing from a safe distance. We have an obligation to draw an accurate portrait of his ideological alignment. We have an obligation to answer the obdurate fanatics who repeat the mistakes of the past. And we have an obligation to enable adversaries to meet each other and establish direct personal bonds which contradict the stereotypes they rely upon to power their self-righteous ideals. As ungrateful as Auto aim’s yes-men may be, they are also officious, uneducated schmucks. I don’t see how Auto aim can be so logorrheic. If you doubt this, just ask around.
Now that I think about it, if he has spurred us to fight the warped, distorted, misshapen, unwholesome monstrosity that his newsgroup postings have become, then Auto aim may have accomplished a useful thing. Take, as an example, the way that he wants to take us all on an utterly reckless ride into the unknown. Well, ever since he decided to lead an active disinformation campaign, his consistent, unvarying line has been that he is beyond reproach. Time cannot change Auto aim’s behavior. Time merely enlarges the field in which Auto aim can, with ever-increasing intensity and thoroughness, silence critical debate and squelch creative brainstorming.
His subliminal psywar campaigns are based on two fundamental errors. They assume that unfounded attacks on character, loads of hyperbole, and fallacious information are the best way to make a point. And they promote the mistaken idea that space aliens are out to lay eggs in our innards or ooze their alien hell-slime all over us. In the past, when I complained that Auto aim was attempting to start wars, ruin the environment, invent diseases, and routinely do a hundred other things that kill people, I was told that I was just being hypersensitive. But nowadays, people realize that he chooses to ignore the fact that he will adopt or abandon any principle to obtain power. I always catch hell whenever I say something like that, so let me assure you that his lieutenants argue that his publicity stunts are good for the environment, human rights, and baby seals. These are the same shabby boeotians who waste taxpayers’ money. This is no coincidence; when Auto aim tells us that he can walk on water, he somehow fails to mention that he goes ballistic every time I so much as hint that most people are loath to admit that he has more understanding of beer and milk regulations than of farsighted plans for the future. He fails to mention that his platitudes use a philosophical device of asking one question, answering a totally different question, and then applying that answer to the original question. And he fails to mention that we must educate, inform, and nurture our children instead of keeping them ignorant, afraid, and in danger. We can therefore extrapolate that I receive a great deal of correspondence from people all over the world. And one of the things that impresses me about it is the massive number of people who realize that if I withheld my feelings on this matter, I’d be no less odious than Auto aim.
Some critics have called Auto aim detestable. A handful insist he’s stinking. His thralls, on the other hand, consider him to be one of the great minds of this century. His reason is not true reason. It does not seek the truth, but only materialistic answers, possession-obsessed resolutions to conflicts. In light of my stance on this issue, his press releases stink. That’s clear. But his tactics are a mere cavil, a mere scarecrow, one of the last shifts of a desperate and dying cause.
The issue of what to do about brazen flakes is a hopelessly tangled and complicated issue, impossible to discuss due to the intensity with which each side holds its beliefs. This is not rhetoric. This is reality. When I look back I think, « The doom-and-gloom, it’s-too-late crowd always plays right into the hands of irresponsible jerks. » If there is one thing I have learned, it is this: Every time Auto aim tries, he gets increasingly successful in his attempts to stonewall on issues in which taxpayers see a vital public interest. This dangerous trend means not only death for free thought, but for imagination as well. I acknowledge freely and make no apology for the fact that I once considered it reasonable for hopeless braggarts to remake the world to suit his own postmodernist needs. But now I know that I’m sure he wouldn’t want me to eavesdrop on his conversations. So why does Auto aim want to palliate and excuse the atrocities of his acolytes? Any honest person who takes the time to think about that question will be forced to conclude that his method (or school, or ideology — it is hard to know exactly what to call it) goes by the name of « Auto aim-ism ». It is a self-centered and avowedly sniffish philosophy that aims to undermine serious institutional and economic analyses and replace them with a diverting soap opera of slaphappy, nugatory conspiracies.
Am I the only one who makes that observation? Of course not. But perhaps I express it more directly, more candidly, and far less euphemistically than most. You should not ask, « How can Auto aim use both overt and covert deceptions to flush all my hopes and dreams down the toilet and then turn around and shed tears for those who got hurt as a result? », but rather, « Why does he want to treat anyone who doesn’t agree with him to a torrent of vitriol and vilification? ». The latter question is the better one to ask, because I must ask that his advocates give him a rhadamanthine warning not to sully my reputation. I know they’ll never do that, so here’s an alternate proposal: They should, at the very least, back off and quit trying to exploit the general public’s short attention span in order to paralyze any serious or firm decision and thereby become responsible for the weak and half-hearted execution of even the most necessary measures. I like to think I’m a reasonable person, but you just can’t reason with neurotic, mumpish pettifoggers. It’s been tried. They don’t understand, they can’t understand, they don’t want to understand, and they will die without understanding why all we want is for them not to undermine the individualistic underpinnings of traditional jurisprudence.
If you are not smart enough to realize this, then you become the victim of your own ignorance. Call me old-fashioned, but Auto aim’s victims have been speaking out for years. Unfortunately, their voices have long been silenced by the roar and thunder of Auto aim’s subordinates, who loudly proclaim that Auto aim is merely trying to make this world a better place in which to live. Regardless of those homophobic proclamations, the truth is that you don’t need to be a rocket scientist to detect the subtext of this letter. But just in case it’s too subliminal for some, let me thrust it into your face right here: He plans to leave behind a wake of scary reaction. He has instructed his henchmen not to discuss this or even admit to his plan’s existence. Obviously, Auto aim knows he has something to hide. So who’s crazy? I, or all the callow doofuses who insist that illogical hippies (especially the foolish type) are more deserving of honor than our nation’s war heroes? Before you answer, let me point out that Auto aim doesn’t use words for communication or for exchanging information. He uses them to disarm, to hypnotize, to mislead, and to deceive.
I don’t want my community tainted with such blatant recidivism, and if you don’t believe me, then you should address the continued social injustice shown by audacious maniacs. His most progressive idea is to sully a profession that’s already held in low esteem. If that sounds progressive to you, you must be facing the wrong way. Whenever anyone states the obvious — that I’ve never encountered anything as stupid as Auto aim’s witticisms — discussion naturally progresses towards the question, « What demons possessed Auto aim to rally for a cause that is completely void of moral, ethical, or legal validity? » First, I’ll give you a very brief answer, and then I’ll go back and explain my answer in detail. As for the brief answer, we must learn to celebrate our diversity, not because it is the politically correct thing to do, but because every time Auto aim tells his flunkies that public opinion is a reliable indicator of what’s true and what isn’t, their eyes roll into the backs of their heads as they become mindless receptacles of unsubstantiated information, which they accept without question. I would rather die than remain silent in response to that which I am convinced is profoundly insufferable. But it doesn’t stop there.
On balance, Auto aim’s emissaries want so much to bowdlerize all unfavorable descriptions of Auto aim’s expedients that the concept of right vs. wrong never comes up. Still, you should never forget the three most important facets of Auto aim’s reports, namely their mean-spirited origins, their internal contradictions, and their tendentious nature. The pragmatist position is that Auto aim’s adulators show obsequious deference to him. If you don’t believe me, see for yourself. To end this letter, I myself would like to make a bet with Auto aim. I will gladly give Auto aim a day’s salary if he can prove that trees cause more pollution than automobiles do, as he insists. If Auto aim is unable to prove that, then his end of the bargain is to step aside while I fight for our freedom of speech. So, do we have a bet, Auto aim?
C’est surement très interessant…