What Constitutes as Cheating

MCabal, mate, that in itself is a paradox, lol. An "avid PvP player" will buy anything that can give him an edge in the game.
I'm just teasing, ok? ;)
Hardware is not mentioned in the EULA. ;) Apropos, I don't play any games that assume having a 21:9 monitor is an unfair competitive advantage.
 
Hardware is not mentioned in the EULA. ;) Apropos, I don't play any games that assume having a 21:9 monitor is an unfair competitive advantage.
Just out of curiosity. Lets say you were to buy a game that had advertised 2 DLC's at launch. You buy the game as well as its 2 DLC's, and you enjoyed all of it. Then due to the game's success the Devs decide to release a 3rd DLC. In that DLC is a weapon/vehicle/equipment/etc that is really really good, but you refuse to buy the DLC because when you bought the game they said there would only be 2 DLC's.


Would you still try and sue the company like you are doing in your hypothetical problem?
 
How complex can the macro be then? Can one be where it basically flies the ship from A to B without any other input than the initial command? It's a macro, and it's nothing we couldn't do otherwise.

So the requirement is to be at my desk? One can start the bot, be at the desk watching netflix, and would fulfil your requirement of being at the desk and making the decision to execute the macro.
A "do x, wait y seconds, then do z" script, no matter how complex, will still require manual intervention in the event that you get interdicted or something that interrupts its flow. If you wrote your script to react, say by menulogging the instant an interdiction is written to the journal, then that would probably be over the line. But a simple "execute this series of instructions when I say go" is nothing that you couldn't do otherwise.
 
Sorry Stuart, I didn't say anything about being banned for cheating. You put those words in my mouth.
I see the following hypothetical scenario as problematic: Before buying the game I do my due diligence and read the EULA. After I see that the licensor has firm stance on automating and cheating, I decide to buy the game. But after some time I discover that the licensor not only tolerates, but also endorses automation software. Being an avid PvP player, I feel disadvantaged by not using it and I refuse to buy it, since it was a hidden cost that was nowhere stated and it influenced my buying decision.
I ask FD for a complete reimbursement of my expenses, they refuse and I take them to court, because they didn't comply with their own EULA.
Personally I think I have big chances to win.
I didn't put any words in your mouth, I made a comment about a funny court scenario. I would have used "you", instead of "someone"/"their", if I was referring to you.

Thanks for the laugh with your own court scenario too: "i bought your £10 game, now I'm gonna pay £70 small claims court fee to get that back!"

Good news btw: KICS voice control software is free, so it isn't a hidden cost ;)
 
Last edited:
I didn't put any words in your mouth, I made a comment about a funny court scenario. I would have used "you", instead of "someone"/"their", if I was referring to you.

Thanks for the laugh with your own court scenario too: "i bought your £10 game, now I'm gonna pay £70 small claims court fee to get that back!"

Good news btw: KICS voice control software is free, so it isn't a hidden cost ;)
Voice Attack still isn't. ;) But even if it'd be free, I'd still be in violation of 3. (c) of EULA, which prohibits use of automation software, among other things.
I'm not trying to play some devil's advocate here. As someone who loves this game, I'd like to have a clear list of circumstances that are considered a breach of contract and what will happen if that occurs.
Right now all I have is a conflicting set of EULA paragraphs, statements of support and marketing staff and FD's own practices that set some strange legal precedents, as Morbad correctly noticed. All that is very confusing and most problems in human relationships arise from unclear expectations and agreements.
 
I didn't put any words in your mouth, I made a comment about a funny court scenario. I would have used "you", instead of "someone"/"their", if I was referring to you.

Thanks for the laugh with your own court scenario too: "i bought your £10 game, now I'm gonna pay £70 small claims court fee to get that back!"

Good news btw: KICS voice control software is free, so it isn't a hidden cost ;)
FIY, a small claims fee is not £70. It depends on the amount you are claiming: https://www.gov.uk/make-court-claim-for-money/court-fees

And also
You may be able to claim the fees back if you win the case.
 
I'd love to see that: someone taking a game company to court for "unfair Terms of Service" after they've been banned for cheating. The Magistrates will just laugh in their face.🤣
The premise is correct, however the problem is not one of the games company (any games company) it is one of the games company having a legal team and the finance to beat the little guys (players) into submission. A class action suit would be an entirely different story, but for that to happen, you need a lot of players with the same complaint.

I'm pretty sure if you can prove a company sold a product/service and then terminated that service on the premise of 'cheating' with nothing to back it up, the courts might think differently.

The bottom line is that EULAs do favour the games company and your average players cannot compete in the legal stakes or financing there-of.

As an aside, if VA is legal. Then it raises the question; Is automating VA legal?
 
Hardware is not mentioned in the EULA. ;) Apropos, I don't play any games that assume having a 21:9 monitor is an unfair competitive advantage.
Actually, that's quite an interesting side topic of the current one.. If hardware is not mentioned and there-fore not covered, is building a piece of hardware to monitor and then action certain events via say VA, legal? I'm kinda handy with Arduino :)
 
Actually, that's quite an interesting side topic of the current one.. If hardware is not mentioned and there-fore not covered, is building a piece of hardware to monitor and then action certain events via say VA, legal? I'm kinda handy with Arduino :)
Wwwwwellllll... The EULA actually says that we are not permitted to:
(e) use any robot, spider, scraper, or other automated or manual means to access the Game...
In other words, we're not permitted to play the game. :ROFLMAO:
 
A lot of this is pretty much nonsensical interweb-lawyerin'. The post was pretty clear, it's the Anti-Cheat Dept, FD, that decides if something is cheating. The use of VA, is not going to be the golden ticket for those that are botting, or using one of those other cheating methods.
Oh Really?

You need to keep up. The first suggestion would be to read the entire thread. It discusses cheating and whether automation software breaches the EULA and whether it's use can be considered cheating.

It also discusses, that the EULA states that no automation software may be used, yet the automation software, Voice Attack, is integral to the playability and use of Elite Dangerous. In fact, you actually require to use VA to use voice packs.

While I don't claim to be a Lawyer, it seems quite clear to me, that an EULA that states no automation in a piece of software that requires automation software, is simply, garbage.

Now I do, understand where you are coming from. Voice Attack is a voice activated, process automator and, in your limited knowledge, could never be used to create a 'bot'. And therein, lies your downfall. You have no concept of what a developer like me can do with Voice Attack. Voice attack can be operated via voice or actions (any action from a HiD device), manual or electronic. That bit is very important. I can make voice attack search for processes, send keystrokes to those processes, and I can do it, by spoken phrase, pressing a key, or having something else (a piece of software or an electronic interface) cause that key code to be sent to the Windows HiD interface.

While Voice Attack is not the 'Golden Ticket' as you say, it is however an accepted tool to use with Elite Dangerous. How I decide to use it is nobody's business. Which brings us to your assertion that 'FD will decide if something is cheating'. And that is another downfall. FD can only determine something if they have knowledge of it. This goes for all games companies, not just Frontier of course.

I think where you and others are getting lost is in the difference between people who inject values to create god ships and the people who automate. Injecting values is easily traceable while automation is not. The problem for Voice Attack is that someone like me with some C# code, could automate most of Elite Dangerous. And if Voice Attack is a valid tool to use if not necessary, I am breaking no rules.

In closing, I re-iterate, I do not condone cheating. The problem is, no-one seems able to define clearly, what constitutes cheating. Automation is bad, but supported by FD, but the EULA says it's not. Which, what, who, where, is correct? And, before Frontier decide if something is cheating, they need to see or know about it first.

My only interesting in this topic is as a developer of add-ons. I find the mis-use and lack of understanding of what is available, what can be done, and how it is untraceable, to be quite disturbing.

o7
 
A lot of this is pretty much nonsensical interweb-lawyerin'. The post was pretty clear, it's the Anti-Cheat Dept, FD, that decides if something is cheating. The use of VA, is not going to be the golden ticket for those that are botting, or using one of those other cheating methods.
This is all that really needs to be said.
 
A lot of this is pretty much nonsensical interweb-lawyerin'. The post was pretty clear, it's the Anti-Cheat Dept, FD, that decides if something is cheating. The use of VA, is not going to be the golden ticket for those that are botting, or using one of those other cheating methods.
Yep, very succinctly put.
 
Top Bottom