raeat
Banned
Time to post something no one wants to hear ... again.
So, what is the worst exploit in the game? I'll tell you, but it is not what you are expecting.
Metrics padding.
What the hell is metrics padding, you may ask? In games such as this one and many others like this one, much of the success of the game is measured in metrics, which is to say in player attendance, time spent playing, and the like. What, you didn't know these things were meticulously watched by suits who want the product to make money? Now, this in itself is a necessary function of the game/product and tells the suits whether or not a game/product is worth investing in.
So, where is the exploit? It is not something players do. It is something devs do to maintain their job security, and it can take many forms, the most immediately obvious one being the grind. One other thing is declaring player activities to be "exploits" to cover their own asses. They don't tell you the why of it, of course. They will instead tell you of the nightmarishly horrible-evil-bad-rarr this or that group of players did to justify punishing them for finding a way to attain their goals quickly and efficiently. And, of course, a gamer population of 13 year olds and jealous genius-wannabes lap up the rhetoric, demanding that these players be punished, punished, punished. Always about punishing. It's like they have nothing but malice prowling around in their brains.
So, why don't I think "exploits" really aren't exploits, and why do I think it is not players' fault for "exploiting" the "exploits?" Two reasons:
(1) We are here presented with a game that allows us to make choices based on what we think is in the best interests of their character or of the player himself or herself. Doing so is not only not a reason to punish players, it is the selling point of the game. Pretty graphics, and a challenging environment where you have to figure out how to best proceed. Games like this are built to encourage players to figure out how to play most effectively. That's what drives the sales of the game.
(2) I am willing to wager that almost 0% of the player base has a seat at the desks when the programming of the game was underway or may be continuing. Players to be could not do anything about the bugs the devs left in the game, intentionally or not (for that matter, precious few players are mind readers either). How can someone be responsible for bugs that they could not control. Basic ethics.
Personally, I think that people who find errors for the dev team should be rewarded, not punished - and if it takes a demonstration of the bug in action, then so be it. They are doing the work for the dev team the dev team couldn't be bothered to do while programming: tiger teaming.
So, what's the harm in the devs punishing "exploiting" players? The harm is what happens in the minds of the player base. What is a bug? What is deliberate by the devs. Is stacking missions an exploit? Is the latest credit farm an exploit? Is mission board flipping an exploit? If a dev team wants to present neat puzzles to the playerbase, necessitating the puzzle solving mentality, then it is wildly inconsistent to punish players for for finding something with that same mentality that wasn't noticed in the development room.
These bugs/exploits are, and I'll say this straight up front, the developers' fault. Responsibility starts and ends there, and seeking to punish players for not reading their minds or for using a problem solving mentality the devs exploit when playing the game, is absurd.
The concept of an exploit is an exploit used to hide errors and avoid responsibility. And metrics padding is a way to keep the suits from seeing the errors too. It is no guarantee you are offering a good game to pad exploits, it is lie.
So, what is the worst exploit in the game? I'll tell you, but it is not what you are expecting.
Metrics padding.
What the hell is metrics padding, you may ask? In games such as this one and many others like this one, much of the success of the game is measured in metrics, which is to say in player attendance, time spent playing, and the like. What, you didn't know these things were meticulously watched by suits who want the product to make money? Now, this in itself is a necessary function of the game/product and tells the suits whether or not a game/product is worth investing in.
So, where is the exploit? It is not something players do. It is something devs do to maintain their job security, and it can take many forms, the most immediately obvious one being the grind. One other thing is declaring player activities to be "exploits" to cover their own asses. They don't tell you the why of it, of course. They will instead tell you of the nightmarishly horrible-evil-bad-rarr this or that group of players did to justify punishing them for finding a way to attain their goals quickly and efficiently. And, of course, a gamer population of 13 year olds and jealous genius-wannabes lap up the rhetoric, demanding that these players be punished, punished, punished. Always about punishing. It's like they have nothing but malice prowling around in their brains.
So, why don't I think "exploits" really aren't exploits, and why do I think it is not players' fault for "exploiting" the "exploits?" Two reasons:
(1) We are here presented with a game that allows us to make choices based on what we think is in the best interests of their character or of the player himself or herself. Doing so is not only not a reason to punish players, it is the selling point of the game. Pretty graphics, and a challenging environment where you have to figure out how to best proceed. Games like this are built to encourage players to figure out how to play most effectively. That's what drives the sales of the game.
(2) I am willing to wager that almost 0% of the player base has a seat at the desks when the programming of the game was underway or may be continuing. Players to be could not do anything about the bugs the devs left in the game, intentionally or not (for that matter, precious few players are mind readers either). How can someone be responsible for bugs that they could not control. Basic ethics.
Personally, I think that people who find errors for the dev team should be rewarded, not punished - and if it takes a demonstration of the bug in action, then so be it. They are doing the work for the dev team the dev team couldn't be bothered to do while programming: tiger teaming.
So, what's the harm in the devs punishing "exploiting" players? The harm is what happens in the minds of the player base. What is a bug? What is deliberate by the devs. Is stacking missions an exploit? Is the latest credit farm an exploit? Is mission board flipping an exploit? If a dev team wants to present neat puzzles to the playerbase, necessitating the puzzle solving mentality, then it is wildly inconsistent to punish players for for finding something with that same mentality that wasn't noticed in the development room.
These bugs/exploits are, and I'll say this straight up front, the developers' fault. Responsibility starts and ends there, and seeking to punish players for not reading their minds or for using a problem solving mentality the devs exploit when playing the game, is absurd.
The concept of an exploit is an exploit used to hide errors and avoid responsibility. And metrics padding is a way to keep the suits from seeing the errors too. It is no guarantee you are offering a good game to pad exploits, it is lie.
.
