FYI: user posts a video of a cheater who clearly admits it, laughing about FD soft hand, and FD take immediate action
- Thread starter rizal72
- Start date
This is quite a naive statement Zac, the people who cheat in online games simply can't be educated because the sole purpose of cheating is where they get their enjoyment. Its seeing the reaction from the players they disrupt that gives them their kicks and without that there is no reason to continue. Its like trying to make me enjoy coffee by asking me to stop drinking it, its illogical.
After nearly 10 years of hosting and administration of multiple FPS games I can tell you with certainty that the only way to deal with the is banning them. Anything else beit a slap on the wrist or an attempt to "educate" them is simply adding to their enjoyment and perpetuating the problem.
Given that those people who employ hacks are actually paying for them, installing them and injecting them into the game - how do FD expect 'education' to be effective? If this was some accidental exploit these people had happened upon, ok - fair enough - educate. If they are paying money for a hack it's a clear cut case of a pre-meditated action intended to disrupt normal gameplay and a breach of the licensing agreement - don't ban them - deactivate their account...simples!
FD when you finally do get around to banning him permanently, as he will surely find cheat ways to get out of his imposed shadow ban universe, to ensure he cannot return under another name and email address, please ban him by IP address. I know he can use obfuscation software to appear as if he is a different IP address, but of all that software I have tested in the past, for a security company, it causes massive lag and makes it pretty hard to use in fast action games. As ED uses P2P the lag should be horrendous.
EULA, shmeula.
That's bulls. I can't believe people have already been brainwashed to believe that.
EULAS are some lawyer's wet dream phantasies written down, but they should not exist. They intend to take every right from customers while granting - nothing. In fact, you're breaking almost every EULA with almost every use of any product in most situations.
What would you do if you bought a car and the manufacturer came up with the idea that you may not change the colour? Or that you may not use it anymore when it has dents, as this might damage the company's image? This has already been tried with e.g. tyres (you may mount only specific tyres in certain countries, in the name of "safety", but rather in the name of profit, as often the alternatives are actually safer.
Back on topic:
If it was his first offense, 1 week is appropriate.
Next offense, shadowban him for 4 weeks.
Next time, half a year.
Next time a year.
I doubt you need to go beyond that.
Why is shadowbanning sufficient?
Because it disables him to affect other players. That was the goal and it is achieved by that measure. There's no need of going further. If you find a reason, feel free to post it.
Thanks for what is essentially your opinion on the subject. Now, in the real world, an EULA is a contract that is supposed to be respected by both parts. Regardless of how much its content is unfair to the customer (and yes, they can be quite unfair). Now, if that contract is not respected by either part, it is up to the other to act accordingly. FD chosing to show themselves quite comprehensive with cheaters is their choice. They do not strictly follow their EULA. If anything, it proves that they are nothing like, say, Microsoft.
But in fact, that gesture of good will is only perceived as weakness, both from normal players and cheaters, and by acting like that they also tend to make people believe that indeed EULAs are merely "some lawyer's wet dream phantasies written down" that should not exist.
ED EULA is not unfair IMHO, quite short to read and very clear too.
.
Wrong.
He was already crowing about having another account. As he was already using external software to modify the game, that must also be at work on his other account, so he can go straight back to his old tactics and nothing has happened to him. His punishment is non-existent. If you actually want him not to affect other players, you would have to shadowban his IP address, not just that account. If he retains the ability to play on another account on his own PC (Or possibly on ANY PC) he has the possible ability to side-step the punishment and make it null and void. Even if he can't afford to immediately buy another copy of the game, he already has one, so all he needs to do is play in standard open, or standard solo for that matter, for a WHOLE WEEK and he can go back to using his external software to go troll newbs as they won't know that their weapons SHOULD be affecting him in whatever ship he has.
.
Therefore, you delete his account. As he already has another one, that is possibly no biggie to him either. But at least he has then contributed to FD's coffers some money which could be utilised to make the game a) less prone to these sorts of cheats, or b) better all-round for all of us. And every time he is detected using external software to modify the game, you do it again. The cheaters will either get bored and move onto the next easy target, or will help fund the rest of the game that was promised and the rest of us enjoy. Either way, the 'legal' playerbase that FD SHOULD be focussing on get to see an improvement.
I like your thinking. +1
Last edited:
That EULA thing aside, you're right about the main thing.
It's NOT about the punishment, or for us to have our need for "vengeance" fulfilled (that's mere pitchfork mob stuff), it's about removing the cheater's effect on other players and the game.
And for that, shadowban is a sufficient tool....if applied rigorously.
There's also a good chance, some of these players will leave the game altogether because of a lengthy shadowban. Many of them have no genuine interest in the game itself, and removing their ability
to maliciously affect others basically removes their enjoyment.
Last edited:
IP banning is waste of time when 90% of customers are on dynamic IP's anyway. A quick reboot of a modem and you have a new, completely different one.
All End User License Agreements are contracts, and use is agreement. As for you proclaiming Frontier Developments EULA to be a "very clear" read, you're mistaken. You think you're reading English, when in fact you're reading legalese, and if you're not a member of a law-society, you're not qualified to interpret the actual meaning of the words they use.
As an aside, Blacks has recently published it's tenth-dictionary, and that fact demonstrates the deception practiced by all law-societies. *Why would anyone need a different meaning for every word if they weren't being deceptive? (*rhetorical question)
Anywho, we all have Shakespeare to thank for such non-sense.
Last edited:
Please allow me to point out a reasoning error. When a gamer cheats, his interests (i.e. getting appropriate feedback and a chance to modify his behaviour) have to be weighed against other players' interests (i.e. not to have their enjoyment spoilt by cheating behaviour, and also not to learn undesirable behaviour by seeing it rewarded or at least not challenged). I would argue that the rule-abiding players' interests outweigh those of the cheater. The needs of the many etc., but also the just should be protected from the unjust.
-
Moreover arguably a cheater only learns if he gets immediate, accurate and clear feedback. A shadow ban for at least a month with a clear explanation why is the least you should do. I favour an account ban as Glen Ross proposes. It should hurt. No pain, no lesson learnt. If you lose the cheater as a customer, then no harm done; again, the interests of the game as a commercial venture align with those of the rule-abiding players. Nobody will buy and play a game that is full of cheats. Cheaters are bad for business. You want to weed them out ASAP.
Last edited:
Yes, that's what I said.
As an author and an artist, I'm quite used to that kind of read (and thanks to my company lawyer, to some extent their redaction as well). Not the exact same form, granted. Mines are substantially longer
So I must insist, I don't find their EULA to be out of this world.
As an author and an artist, I'm quite used to that kind of read (and thanks to my company lawyer, to some extent their redaction as well). Not the exact same form, granted. Mines are substantially longer
So I must insist, I don't find their EULA to be out of this world.
I get it, some of us are more educated than others, but my statement still stands. Your retention of counsel, nor your insistence qualify you to interpret legalese, only membership does.
<./thumbs in ears, fingers wiggling, tongue sticking out.>
Last edited:
Ok. And you would say the same if it'd be
your personal company to ban customers who paid your product? Honestly...
BTW, I think those cheaters are kids and losers, so I don't think they would start a class action against FD for them being banned. But it still is a delicate matter.
TBH I don't think it's delicate at all. One isn't at risk of taking liberties with the cheater's rights. The company has a responsibility to maintain the integrity of the game, and being anything less than absolutely effective, one is taking liberties with all the other paying customers' rights. I think provable cheating by way of hacking should get an instant permanent ban. It doesn't happen, can't happen, by accident, so there is no need for a soft touch, and anything less sends something other than a zero tolerance message.
OP here: after reading all the nice and clever comments of this thread (surely some lawyers too here...) I've definitely changed my mind:
burn'em all!
No, really, this particular cheater is a recurring one, and on multiple accounts too, so the only punishment is banning him. Then if he wants to buy another copy of the game, good. If catched cheating again, banned again. That's all.
Classic, ROFL