Official DayZLauncher Thread

[itsatrap]

People just move on the the steam patch if there are no server in dzc the players will more on...

[ReDBaroN]

Did it before and couldn't hack the loss of players who just thought the server was offline for a week.

That's why I asked if dzl could support the old version while players get their heads round it.

Tbh, I'm surprised you just rebutted the idea without considering it. Surely by doing it dzl has a clear chance to mop the whole market up and pretty quickly while dzl is asleep?

[hambeast]

DCMA, you gotta be kidding me.  I posted the link to the source so others could analyze it and it wasn't even the latest build either, was about a week old.

 

Anyone who is interested in decompiling the code please visit the good folks over at telerik, they make a great product called Just Decompile. It is free for non commercial use.  Link here: http://www.telerik.com/products/decompiler.aspx

 

for future reference, any .net assembly or executable can be fully decompiled.  So there is really no point in removing my posts...

[Flosstradamus]

DCMA, you gotta be kidding me.  I posted the link to the source so others could analyze it and it wasn't even the latest build either, was about a week old.

 

Anyone who is interested in decompiling the code please visit the good folks over at telerik, they make a great product called Just Decompile. It is free for non commercial use.  Link here: http://www.telerik.com/products/decompiler.aspx

 

for future reference, any .net assembly or executable can be fully decompiled.  So there is really no point in removing my posts...

But if its copyrighted then there is a point.

[hambeast]

But if its copyrighted then there is a point.

so if he releases the source code in a rar file, is it illegal to unrar it?  That is basically what I was doing with the source code using a decompiler.

[Flosstradamus]

so if he releases the source code in a rar file, is it illegal to unrar it?  That is basically what I was doing with the source code using a decompiler.

Well no its not illegal to unrar it. But the source isn't made available to the public.

[hambeast]

Well no its not illegal to unrar it. But the source isn't made available to the public.

Pretty much is, its just packaged up into an executable/assemblies

[Flosstradamus]

Pretty much is, its just packaged up into an executable/assemblies

http://www.debugmode.com/dcompile/

 

This website states that if the program is copyrighted which it is then you cannot decompile it or you can face legal action. You would need permission from the owner.

[hambeast]

http://www.debugmode.com/dcompile/

 

This website states that if the program is copyrighted which it is then you cannot decompile it or you can face legal action. You would need permission from the owner.

 

Well clearly awol doesn't want me to post the code here so I'll respect his wishes but I still doubt that what I did is any way shape or form illegal.  I am not using his code to release new software, nor am I making a profit off of it.  If he isn't profiting from the code, what is his loss? other than exposure to outsiders looking at his code.

[Flosstradamus]

Well clearly awol doesn't want me to post the code here so I'll respect his wishes but I still doubt that what I did is any way shape or form illegal.  I am not using his code to release new software, nor am I making a profit off of it.  If he isn't profiting from the code, what is his loss? other than exposure to outsiders looking at his code.

I would assume he probably doesn't want others to steal his code and recreate a different program under a different name. Hence why no one has created another launcher like DZC. 1. The source code from DZC isn't publicly available and 2. There is so much backend on DZC that I doubt anyone here has the ability to code it. 

[cen]

Why do you care so much. 99% of the people on here won't have a clue what decompiling the assemblies even means, let alone what to look at once it is to make sure it's safe...

 

There's no point.

 

It would have been better if you would have said, "hey guys I looked through the source code and the launcher is clean."

[hambeast]

 

I would assume he probably doesn't want others to steal his code and recreate a different program under a different name. Hence why no one has created another launcher like DZC. 1. The source code from DZC isn't publicly available and 2. There is so much backend on DZC that I doubt anyone here has the ability to code it. 

 

 

Did you look at it?  c# is very easy to read.  If he cared so much about hiding his code, he wouldn't have used .net in the first place.

 

 

Why do you care so much. 99% of the people on here won't have a clue what decompiling the assemblies even means, let alone what to look at once it is to make sure it's safe...

 

There's no point.

 

It would have been better if you would have said, "hey guys I looked through the source code and the launcher is clean."

 

Which I did, there was no backdoor to my knowledge in the code.  However, I am a tinkerer and curiosity gets the best of me.  If macca had messaged me and requested that I take the source down, I would have.  Look at my tutorial for "how to override almost any script" which I took down by request.

[BetterDeadThanZed]

So yeah, looks good. How about we come back to this one when we actually switch to the steam version.

Right now there is no reason for spreading this to the player base or using it instead of DZC, but there is also no reason to not test the shit out of it now.

 

I would also suggest to keep the talk about "DZC is better or worse" to the other 100 threads about it. Keep that one clean, stay on topic and report feedback, if you have.

 

There are over 1000 servers listed on Dayz Launcher, so there is reason to look at this. If you haven't updated to the version of Arma 2 that the Epoch dev team recommends, then by all means, keep using Dayz Commander (Until the Gamespy servers finally go off line).

 

Domuk, Rather than beating us with a shitty stick and when I say us I mean the admins and players that make up 80% of the epoch community, why don't you include 112555 in dzl so there is a clear choice and all servers are once again listed in one place?

 

Servers running 112555 report to the Gamespy servers. This apparently pulls data from wherever the Steam version is reporting to. I don't think the devs want to be bothered including backwards compatibility for versions that will be obsolete "soon". If you want all servers to be listed in one place again, then all servers need to update.

[Flosstradamus]

 

 

 

 

Did you look at it?  c# is very easy to read.  If he cared so much about hiding his code, he wouldn't have used .net in the first place.

 

 

 

Which I did, there was no backdoor to my knowledge in the code.  However, I am a tinkerer and curiosity gets the best of me.  If macca had messaged me and requested that I take the source down, I would have.  Look at my tutorial for "how to override almost any script" which I took down by request.

 

You could of just used anubis to analyze the exe or virus total. It will tell you what the exe modifies whether it be registry or folders in your system 32.

[domuk]

Well at least its clear that the application is clean and good to go. If anyone has any feedback, requests or ideas then please let us know. Ill add the total virus scan link in also.

[hambeast]

Well at least its clear that the application is clean and good to go. If anyone has any feedback, requests or ideas then please let us know. Ill add the total virus scan link in also.

Yes the application checks out, there are no malicious articles of code included that I could find. (confirmed with latest build as of 2 min ago)

[Razorman]

Then use it....

[hambeast]

Then use it....

 

I don't trust their server listing process so no thanks.  I've already pissed macca off since he put in a DCMA request to Awol.  What makes you think he'd want my server on his list?

 

Also not going to update until gamespy shuts down or until 1.0.5.2

[MGT]

I don't trust their server listing process so no thanks.  I've already pissed macca off since he put in a DCMA request to Awol.  What makes you think he'd want my server on his list?

 

Also not going to update until gamespy shuts down or until 1.0.5.2

 

This.

 

Afaik Gamespy isn't reporting to DZC anymore and only servers in your favs will be displayed

[hambeast]

This.

 

Afaik Gamespy isn't reporting to DZC anymore and only servers in your favs will be displayed

still able to query the server list with DZC.

[MGT]

still able to query the server list with DZC.

 

Strange! I've noticed though in mp it doesn't default to internet on mp menu on < 112555

[hambeast]

Strange! I've noticed though in mp it doesn't default to internet on mp menu on < 112555

time to fire up some fiddler/wireshark.  I have a feeling dotjosh cached the server list on a web server he hosts. 

 

edit: confirmed... DZC Cached all of the servers on his own webserver http://files.dayzcommander.com/releases/dayzservers2.zip

[mgm]

As most of us agree here, DayZ Commander's lack of updates in a reasonable time period hurt the community.

 

If there's any developer out there that's "stepping up" and developing an alternative DayZ Mod launcher to help the community, he better license his work under GPL -or a compatible license- & release the source code accordingly. Anything short of that is just difficult to believe. This is especially true when the "stepping up" action comes from parties selling Epoch benefits online.

[Flosstradamus]

As most of us agree here, DayZ Commander's lack of updates in a reasonable time period hurt the community.

 

If there's any developer out there that's "stepping up" and developing an alternative DayZ Mod launcher to help the community, he better license his work under GPL -or a compatible license- & release the source code accordingly. Anything short of that is just difficult to believe. This is especially true when the "stepping up" action comes from parties selling Epoch benefits online.

Why would he have to license his work under GPL or a compatible license and then release the source code? Dotjosh didn't do any of this and has been the main launcher for years and any launcher that came after DZC blew dicks unlike maca's launcher. It also isn't about selling Epoch Benefits online it also includes people selling arma benefits as well. I really don't want to get banned or my posting priviledges taking away again for speaking my mind but you honestly need to take a step back and look at the situation more clearly. Maca complied with awol and crew to remove the CCG branding so it can be hosted on this site to spread the word since Dotjosh clearly does not give a fuck about the dayz community anymore.

 

@hambeast I seriously doubt Maca would even care that you pissed him off to that point to not include your server on the list. It would be incredibly stupid and really hurt the reputation of his program. Please use some sense. Thanks.

 

Also the reason Maca isn't posting is because he's been banned for awhile now just figured i'd let you guys know that if you didn't.

[mgm]

Why would he have to license his work under GPL or a compatible license and then release the source code? Dotjosh didn't do any of this and has been the main launcher for years and any launcher that came after DZC blew dicks unlike maca's launcher. It also isn't about selling Epoch Benefits online it also includes people selling arma benefits as well. I really don't want to get banned or my posting priviledges taking away again for speaking my mind but you honestly need to take a step back and look at the situation more clearly. Maca complied with awol and crew to remove the CCG branding so it can be hosted on this site to spread the word since Dotjosh clearly does not give a fuck about the dayz community anymore.

<snip>

DayZ Commander is currently in a bad situation, harming the community by continuing to present some not-up-to-date servers to unaware players and we do not want this situation to repeat - correct?

 

If we agree on the goal then we can discuss the WHYs (about my suggestions above):

     If the source is not available, another member of the community will not have the chance to take it up if and when the current developer loses interest or becomes unavailable to maintain the software.

     If the source is available (open source) but without a matching free to modify & redistribute license (GPL compatible), whomever modifies & redistributes the work will be legally in a losing spot.

 

It all comes down to motivation why this work was put out. If it is here to help community what I suggested is the best way to help community. For example:

   It might have been put out to gain player base as milestone #1 (say about a million downloads).

   And then, with its potential automatic update features, it might put back CCG and whatever other affiliated branding/community/company logos.

   Which will then be clearly out of favor of Epoch management but who cares when they have 1 million downloads and (for example) about 300K active users.

 

I am not claiming the above is the hidden/evil master plan. What I am saying is this: If you are indeed putting effort on this and sharing your work for the benefit of community, then do it in a way which will clearly serve the community best; which will not be dependant on

( a ) one single individual's (original developer) future availability (as he might just become unavailable for any reason)

( b ) and his future generiousity (as he might just change his mind to remove branding at n million downloads/active users) and convert this to a commercial product.

 

Otherwise you might claim you are here to help community, and some might think it is just to inject your product into the market which is clearly open in DotJosh's lack of interest/update.

If the licensing is sorted I will be happy to promote this software as I will be convinced it is here to genuinely help the community and fill a big launcher gap we have today.