How do I display timestamps in my chat windows?

Discussion in 'The Veterans' Lounge' started by moogs, Feb 1, 2017.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. MrMajestykx Augur

    SERIOUSLY?

    regardless of what I think of EITHER right now, YOUR PROGRAM is used WITHIN the game. Game parse is RUN OUTSIDE THE game, ie the game does not need to be on ie standalone ie it reads data in a notepad text , not NEEDING THE game to function, it is not PART of the game, its no functioning INSIDE the game , its NOT INJECTED into the game.. you feeling me yet?? AGAIN regardless of what anyone here thinks of either, to compare them as same is like a special kind of stupid, and if you write code as you say you, you cant possibly be that obtuse?
    Corwyhn Lionheart likes this.
  2. GoldenFrog Augur

    He can't. So obviously I think it's time to stop feeding the troll.
  3. Cicelee Augur

    I just want a program to automatically summon mod rods during raids. Having to hit one hot key 38 times on a five minute event hurts my index finger...
    IblisTheMage likes this.
  4. MagePower New Member

    If this dude has spent the last 12months working on his Timestamp injection eq addon, then that is just further proof that this Madame Mystique is using < macro quest > the cheating program. The videos of her using the cheating program are 9months old.

    TBH - If you search through the videos, you'll see that Madame is only an Alt. She has a raiding main with Silent Minority. Both should be banned.
    Bigstomp and Xanathol like this.
  5. ProgRambo New Member

    Sorry I couldn't resist to make a point and use some wordplay on the complication of it all.

    Technically I could have just set a couple hw breakpoints on the process and added timestamps that way without loading the engine dll at all, but something tells me you would find some objection to that approach as well.
    And while we are on this topic, reading a logfile 1 second after fput writes to it or 1 second before is just semantics, no one foresaw that eq would still be played 17 years after launch, it's time to modernize the rules and not think of "injecting" or loading a addon dll as something automatically wrong.

    Many other games has addons already, and for some of them its library files loaded into memory where they add features.

    Don't get so hung up on the method here, EQ itself uses the LoadLibrary API to load eqmain.dll for example.

    One line of code could load a addon from the Addons directory as well, and then there would be no use for a launcher for it at all.

    I would actually prefer if EQ loaded the addons, and it might very well come to that down the line, but for now this is the reasonable option since I don't know how much red tape we need to cut through to get this system officially approved.

    The method of loading the addons in beta (cause we are in beta still) is totally irrelevant in this case cause 99% of all the people who read this thread wouldn't understand the tech behind the approach I took anyway.

    But go ahead, get hung up on that detail if it makes you feel superior or like you have the moral/legal highground. I don't dispute that you do, technically you ARE probably right. I very well know what the eula says, but I see it as guidelines not THE law and I am hoping for an exception in this case since my software is great and harms absolutely no one.

    Best Regards
    ProgRambo Creator of EQAddons
    Nandary Griefs likes this.
  6. Elvenphox Lorekeeper

    I have no clue why people are having issue with a legitimate feature request. Rather than shame the author for creating a valuable addon and calling for bans because it technically violates the EULA, why not congratulate him and ask DBG to officially approve the addon? It's a useful feature that doesn't meaningfully impact the game.

    DBG, I support this feature request and would like you to either A) implement it, B) officially recognize and endorse this addon, or most preferably C) update your EULA to allow for certain types of addons.
    Nandary Griefs, moogs and ProgRambo like this.
  7. NameAlreadyInUse #CactusGate

    Just want to clarify that I am not involved in the development of any addons. I also do not use M Q 2 or eqaddons. But I believe they are fine.

    EDIT: That's my moral judgement, not a recommendation.
    Nandary Griefs likes this.
  8. IblisTheMage Augur

    In the old days, people who made mods where heroes. Working for free, trying their best to make the games more fun, and getting a little bit of street credit.

    I think you guys are being a bit harsh on the dude. i don't believe that his addon project will fly, but instead of demotivating him, why not applaude that he wants to code for the community, and include him on GamParse and GINA? Or consider if there is some way of adding the timestamps in the log file only, so that no code tampering is necesary? (I am guessing that it is because og GamParse that people want timestamps).

    It is funny that Madame Mystique got busted, but be a gentleman, and let her shame over the indiscretion be punishment enough. She actually contributed to the community with her videos. I am pretty sure she is quite stressed out about it, and she is a human being like the rest of us geeks and nerds.

    Diplomacy and giraf-language (my kids learn about giraf-language and wolf-language, not sure what the wolves did to deserve that) will help us build and grow the community. We need it, as we need more people that volunteer to work on lore, info-sites, wikies, and legal 3rd party helpers like Gina and Gamparse, or helping videos, like the enchanter videos.
    Nandary Griefs and ProgRambo like this.
  9. Reht The Dude abides...

    Because he came into this thread and sanctimoniously called people stupid when no one was dog piling on him up to that point AND well, because this is a gaming board and this what happens - for better or worse. This thread was focused on someone who was perceived as cheating in an example used by someone to request a feature, a feature that not one single person in this thread has argued against from what i have seen. The addon technically goes against the EULA (which he even agrees to in this thread and warns against the possibility of getting ban for using it in the QA). Now he has said he has the best of intentions and has or will reach out to DBG for approval, that's fine and dandy; the road to hell is paved with good intentions. However until that happens, his addon violates the EULA and could subsequently get people banned by its use. As it stands, advocating its use is dangerous to the playerbase. I hope he somehow manages to work this out with DBG although i doubt it will happen.

    I know the guy who wrote GINA and if there was a chance his program or even GamParse could get people banned by a change in the EULA or policy by DBG i would do two things: 1) argue against it with DBG and hope for a reversal and 2) i would encourage people not to use it until #1 is resolved.
    Corwyhn Lionheart likes this.
  10. moogs Augur

    This thread was not started to discuss the use, merits, or dangers of third party software. We have had plenty of those recently. It has run its course and it is ready to be locked. Thanks for participating. Please use the Daybreak issue tracker to continue to push for support of the feature we all would like in some form.
    Nandary Griefs likes this.
  11. Brohg Augur

    well now I'm curious about this. Is there a running public reference?
  12. IblisTheMage Augur

    Not disagreeing with you on any points. Just talking about moving forward.
  13. Bigstomp Augur


    If your program adjusts EQ in any way (injecting itself into dlls or loading dlls) then it's a injecting code and is a hack. Simple.

    An allowed one is up to daybreak to decide. But it is a hack.
    Slippry, Xanathol and MrMajestykx like this.
  14. ProgRambo New Member

    Alright I'm getting tired of having to defend a practice for adding features to EQ that is well established since day 2 of the EQ release.
    Why do you get so hung up on the injection method?
    Let's look at some EQ addon history and try to learn from it shall we?

    Here I'll list a few programs (read addons) that has been very successful despite their method of interacting with the game:

    1. EQW - In the earliest days of EQ it could only be played in full screen, this program injected and modified the client so that you could play in windowed mode. No one was ever banned for using it. It later became a built in feature in the client itself.

    2. EQPlayNice - Again, in the early days of EQ the client used up all the cpu time it could possibly acquire, this program injected itself into the main loop and added a few lines of code to Sleep awhile to yield processing power to other processes as well. Today that feature is part of the client as well. Despite hundreds of thousands of users over the years, no one has ever been banned for using this addon.

    3. WinEQ and WinEQ2, Again, both inject into the game and add window handling functionality as well as a login and accounts handler for automatic profiles and logins. Do I really have to say that hundreds of thousands of players have successfully been running these over the years and you guessed it... No bans.

    4. The big one, I admit, this is more questionable than the previous examples but nevertheless, absolutely fine to use despite the fact that it INJECTS several dll files into the eqgame address space, which program could I be talking about? That's right... IS Boxer...

    Now please, can we get back to simple logic here, all of the above are using injection as well as calling in game functions or hooking into the EQ API, they are all ok to use, but now I come along and add a measly timestamp using the exact same methods and I'm suddenly the biggest villain?
    A huge threat? I'm taking the approach of seeking dbg approval and trying to do what's right and I get crap for it?

    It's just weird...

    Not gonna post again in this thread, just wanted to leave it at that, you guys do what you want, my project will succeed in some form or another just like the ones that came before me that used the exact same API and method for interaction with the game has.

    Best Regards
    ProgRambo Creator of EQAddons
    Nandary Griefs likes this.
  15. Smokezz The Bane Crew


    Holy hell man. Get a CLUE. NONE of the above inject a god damn thing. Only the one YOU use does. Just let it go, quit trying to defend it. It's not going to work here.
  16. MrMajestykx Augur

    you sir are defending yourself against your own stupidity honestly, to compare your creation which injects itself into the game to programs that run stand alone without the game or do NOT inject themselves INTO the game, regardless of what I think of your creation, is seriously remiss of common thought. Again if you are truly of the belief that they are the same then I must reiterate....
    [IMG]
    Axxius likes this.
  17. ProgRambo New Member

    I need to get a CLUE?

    LOL this is just too funny, I present REAL FACTS, and I have to put up with uneducated LIES? I mean please, use VALID arguments, you are embarrassing yourself right now.

    I said I wasn't gonna reply anymore but this is just to stupid to let it stand, you have absolutely NO idea what you are talking about, I reverse engineer and code for a living, I could do this for all the programs I have mentioned, but I took the time to prove it to you by just loading wineq2 and eqplaynice. Here you go, some free education:[IMG]

    I beg the community, please for the love of everything, please, someone reasonable, come to my defense here.
    The programs I mentioned do ALL inject and work exactly as I have described them, can someone that has knowledge about these things please step in and corroborate this fact.
    Nandary Griefs likes this.
  18. Kravn Augur

    there is a difference between running EQ in a separate memory space to change how it interacts with other applications on your PC, aka encapsulation (like EQplaynice) and changing the data being communicated between the client and server (your stuff, as well as other HACK software that your code is stripped from)
  19. ProgRambo New Member

    You have absolutely no idea what you are talking about, none whatsoever.
    This is getting so ridiculous.

    FACT: I don't change any data being communicated between the client and the server.
    FACT: I insert a timestamp before chat text and its client side only...

    And do you even know what "Encapsualtion" is?

    FACT: EQPlayNice place a detour on a function in the main game loop. its not running in "separate" memory. IT IS running inside of eq's memory.

    I don't know why I bother...

    FACT: There is 0 difference between what my timestamp addon is doing versus what IS Boxer, EQPlayNice, and WinEQ/2 is doing aside, they are all based on the EXACT same API you refer to as "stripped from", I didn't have to "strip" anything from anyone, I used an existing open source public API (the EXACT same API IS Boxer, WinEQ2 and EQPlayNice are using btw...)

    FACT: You could easily modify eqplaynice to insert a timestamp in front of chat, with a minor modification to it, 5 lines of code or so, would that make it acceptable to you then?

    You can think of my timestamp addon as eqplaynice with the addition of a timestamp and removal of a Sleep(0);. they would look and work exactly the same. EXACLTY.
    Nandary Griefs likes this.
  20. NameAlreadyInUse #CactusGate

    And yet, DBG has absolutely banned us from using virtual machines, which is nothing but encapsulation.

    The crazy thing is how all of you are so quick to judge somebody else when you aren't even in the position of a) a victim or b) an expert on the subject or c) the judge/jury/executioner (that's DBG). Since just about anything that isn't included in Windows technically violates DBG's rules, it is really epic to hear each person justify their personal use of software that violates the rules while judging everybody else. You all sound silly.

    @ProgRambo, I think you have made a great case for your argument, and I think you can only hurt yourself by interacting too much with the "rabble".
    Nandary Griefs and ProgRambo like this.
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.