They have no place in this game and should be kicked out and lose their account on first offense. A zero tolerance policy is the only way to fight these scumbags.
But, of course, most of these guys have no idea how to take guidence with sanctions, since they never got used to that during their upbringing, so even if they wanted to follow the rules they're incapable of doing it. Which is good, so we can get rid of them quickly.
I wish it were that easy for developers where money is the bottom line. I haven't played a game where the developer is willing to completely ban players for exploiting a system in a long time. The ripple effect causes noticable revenue loss, which make investors jumpy.
As a short example; Yesterday Arenanet named/shamed a group of PvE elitist Guildwars 2 players ( http://massivelyop.com/2017/07/31/guild-wars-2-names-and-shames-tournament-cheaters/ ) because they cheated by paying 'pro' PvP players $400 each to win a prestiges tournament simply to gain the accolades. They were banned only from participating in future league and tournament play. They still get to play PvP mode with full access to the rest of the game. If you read the comments you can see some of their quotes. They didn't care in the slightest, in fact said it was worth it and would do it again. The ensuing push back from a vocal minority of players for even that was asinine. Had they completely banned the players involved, brigading, smear campaigning and FUD would have been next. They have all the time in the world to do so.
Few young people today are not raised with any code of conduct. They are taught from our presidents on down to our parents that cheating to get ahead is worth the risk of minor punishments handed out for such offenses.
I guessing CIG would never ban a Rear Admiral (or higher status) account for in-game fraud unless it was multiple repeat offenses for the same 'crime'. There is too much at stake from those who would condone such exploits. While there is no investment loss, the backlash from those who feel entitled would be worse than anything DS and his goons could dish up.
Every time Goonsquad/SA/DS post salt on Star Citizen, I spend more money on it. Every time a mentally disturbed former backer or Elite CMDR toxic emo comments, I spend more money on it. Every time they refuse to answer why they spend so much time arguing about a game they don't even like, I spend more money on it. Want to watch the world burn because you can't have your way? You got whats coming to you.
They have no place in this game and should be kicked out and lose their account on first offense. A zero tolerance policy is the only way to fight these scumbags.
But, of course, most of these guys have no idea how to take guidence with sanctions, since they never got used to that during their upbringing, so even if they wanted to follow the rules they're incapable of doing it. Which is good, so we can get rid of them quickly.
... I haven't played a game where the developer is willing to completely ban players for exploiting a system in a long time. ..
I think Valve does that fairly regularly but I am not sure
Please do not respond to me, even if I ask you a question, its rhetorical.
I do not think they should go directly at ban exploiters, it causes that whole drama with refunds where over the player exploiting your game you also need to pay him so he goes away.
There are games with different approaches to this, we'll see what they are willing to take.
They have no place in this game and should be kicked out and lose their account on first offense. A zero tolerance policy is the only way to fight these scumbags.
But, of course, most of these guys have no idea how to take guidence with sanctions, since they never got used to that during their upbringing, so even if they wanted to follow the rules they're incapable of doing it. Which is good, so we can get rid of them quickly.
... I haven't played a game where the developer is willing to completely ban players for exploiting a system in a long time. ..
I think Valve does that fairly regularly but I am not sure
Yeah but look at what's a stake. A cheater is going to use a throw away Steam account because they can just gift the next account if that 'cheating' account gets banned. They got banned, (justice served/happy community) Valve gets the income from another copy of the game sold, everyone wins. With a MMO account not hosted by Steam those dynamics aren't as useful for the cheater. Sure, most any game will allow the cheater to simply start over on a new account, most cheating isn't done in an MMORPG, rather competitive games like FPS, MOBA, RTS etc.
Every time Goonsquad/SA/DS post salt on Star Citizen, I spend more money on it. Every time a mentally disturbed former backer or Elite CMDR toxic emo comments, I spend more money on it. Every time they refuse to answer why they spend so much time arguing about a game they don't even like, I spend more money on it. Want to watch the world burn because you can't have your way? You got whats coming to you.
btw the first iteration of ship locking is indeed 3.0, at first was claimed to be after but is now embed into it, confirmed here. I think after 3.0 is when they'll add the ability to lay permissions and trespassing.
Permissions and trespassing should come at the same time as insurance. Now it doesn't matter if someone takes your ship. But with time delayed insurance some people will be waiting a long time to get their ship if it's been destroyed say 5 or 10 times by pirates or griefers in a day. I bet they suspend insurance after awhile if it comes out in 3.0
"We all do the best we can based on life experience, point of view, and our ability to believe in ourselves." - Naropa "We don't see things as they are, we see them as we are." SR Covey
Permissions and trespassing should come at the same time as insurance. Now it doesn't matter if someone takes your ship. But with time delayed insurance some people will be waiting a long time to get their ship if it's been destroyed say 5 or 10 times by pirates or griefers in a day. I bet they suspend insurance after awhile if it comes out in 3.0
We have been assured that goonswarm or goonrathi in SC will not play a big part in grifing folks. So nothing to worry about.
" Life Liberty and the Pursuit of Those Who Would Threaten It " MAGA
How come the gamestar guys got to play a working v3.0, but it's still not released yet, infact been delayed slightly?
“Nevertheless, the human brain, which survives by hoping from one second to another, will always endeavor to put off the moment of truth. Moist” ― Terry Pratchett, Making Money
Had they completely banned the players involved, brigading, smear campaigning and FUD would have been next. They have all the time in the world to do so.
So what? Those who listen to them are probably the same stuff. Good riddance!
Few young people today are not raised with any code of conduct. They are taught from our presidents on down to our parents that cheating to get ahead is worth the risk of minor punishments handed out for such offenses.
Yes, indeed. They're used to no or minor punishment. Time they learned what real sanctions is about.
I guessing CIG would never ban a Rear Admiral (or higher status) account for in-game fraud unless it was multiple repeat offenses for the same 'crime'.
Oh, I surely hope - and believe - they'd punish everyone equally, independent of backer level.
I do not think they should go directly at ban exploiters, it causes that whole drama with refunds where over the player exploiting your game you also need to pay him so he goes away.
There are games with different approaches to this, we'll see what they are willing to take
Of course, one could vary sanctions too - if that was the policy. For instance -
- Real money to unlock an account again, say upto $100. - Griefers end up in the same instance, alone with other griefers. (already planned) - Slower gameplay. - Reduced game fidelity, colors, resolution, etc. - Only ban game access, not close account. - Ban access to part(s) of the game.
... and many more fun sanctions.
I don't understand why refunds should necessary when a ban is issued.
I think some countries have consumer protection laws which state if service is refused money must be refunded. Those would override EULA, or the company would have to sue the gamer in the courts for compensation.
"We all do the best we can based on life experience, point of view, and our ability to believe in ourselves." - Naropa "We don't see things as they are, we see them as we are." SR Covey
I don't understand why refunds should necessary when a ban is issued.
Because it's possible to play customer protection in your favor, independent if what you're doing is reasonable or justified.
So if I play Overwatch, cheat and get perm-banned, I can make enough of a fuss to force Blizzard to pay me what I spent in the game so I accept the ban.
The issue lies also in the inability of the company to prove your wrongdoing (and legally enforce it), so it's a push > push, but it's a daunting process that almost nobody is willing to go through.
I don't understand why refunds should necessary when a ban is issued.
Because it's possible to play customer protection in your favor, independent if what you're doing is reasonable or justified.
So if I play Overwatch, cheat and get perm-banned, I can make enough of a fuss to force Blizzard to pay me what I spent in the game so I accept the ban.
The issue lies also in the inability of the company to prove your wrongdoing (and legally enforce it), so it's a push > push, but it's a daunting process that almost nobody is willing to go through.
Did any of you play Archeage? Players banned for cheating were refused refunds because at the time of purchase, we all had to digitally sign a waiver of rights of protection. This was a strange and uncomfortable situation because they would only accept credit card purchases. No Paypal, etc. and the waiver explicitly noted ( http://www.trionworlds.com/en/legal/terms-of-use/#_Toc451504960 - under refund policy) exemption from international or foreign laws as a part of purchase agreement. It went on to state an account can be terminated without reason or issuance of an explanation. Trion is the U.S. based publisher, XL Games is the Korean developer.
The funny part was that people who tried to take issue with the waiver and refused to purchase, then later caved, were the ones who ended up being banned. As if they knew they were going to cheat already and expected a refund after doing so.
Every time Goonsquad/SA/DS post salt on Star Citizen, I spend more money on it. Every time a mentally disturbed former backer or Elite CMDR toxic emo comments, I spend more money on it. Every time they refuse to answer why they spend so much time arguing about a game they don't even like, I spend more money on it. Want to watch the world burn because you can't have your way? You got whats coming to you.
Refunding is meant to be an amicable way for dealing with disputes. If a vendor decides to not grant you a refund, you still have the option of charging back with your bank/credit card company and never doing business with the vendor again.
"As far as the forum code of conduct, I would think it's a bit outdated and in need of a refre *CLOSED*"
I don't understand why refunds should necessary when a ban is issued.
So if I play Overwatch, cheat and get perm-banned [...]
The issue lies also in the inability of the company to prove your wrongdoing (and legally enforce it), so it's a push > push, but it's a daunting process that almost nobody is willing to go through.
Well, you assume they'd ban someone innocent. That is something very different than what I've assumed in this discussion. I expect that any ban is backed up with solid proof, not circumstantial evidence or evidence only. So then it's not hard to prove later either.
And I've never played Overwatch so I can't relate to their ban policy.
Nope. Not that one either. Or any other modern game you may mention, for that matter. I came back to gaming and dusted off my joystick because of Star Citizen. I've waited 20 years for a game like SC.
Really nice lightning going on, the improved fog really shows off with the dust in that bit.
Vikingir said: Well, you assume they'd ban someone innocent. That is something very different than what I've assumed in this discussion. I expect that any ban is backed up with solid proof, not circumstantial evidence or evidence only. So then it's not hard to prove later either.
It's one of those quite complex situations as it's not easy to prove, as I think we all know by the false positive bans laid constantly on online games show how it isn't of full reliability, so if you ever bring a dispute to the last consequences it's more likely the company gives in.
Well, now you compare with what other games have done again ... If it's not easy to prove then you don't attempt to push the case at all. I don't know why other games do this and I'm not really interested in hearing their excuses either. Star Citizen doesn't have to be like this. And I don't buy it's difficult to prove - once you have proof.
I think we differ in opinion simply because you don't believe they can gather proof, while I see it as something achievable - if they want to go there. It also depends on what type of bannable offense you have in mind, of course, and if we agree on the seriousness of said offense. So many variables are undefined. But overall, my opinion is there's no technical problem with gathering proof for most bannable behaviors.
I think we differ in opinion simply because you don't believe they can gather proof, while I see it as something achievable - if they want to go there. It also depends on what type of bannable offense you have in mind, of course, and if we agree on the seriousness of said offense. So many variables are undefined. But overall, my opinion is there's no technical problem with gathering proof for most bannable behaviors.
Hey it is achievable, but depends on the cheat, the typical client-sided cheats as aimbots, unless the game has a software specific to track what's running in your PC and such to ensure nothing interferes with the game (usually 3rd party in MMO's), it's the sort of cheating that's tricky to prove. We'll see how this goes.
"Cherish the quiet...before my STORM!" For a $5/5000 in-game credit bonus for backing Star Citizen (MMO) or Squadron 42 (Single Player/Co-op) use my Referral code: STAR-3QDY-SZBG
"Cherish the quiet...before my STORM!" For a $5/5000 in-game credit bonus for backing Star Citizen (MMO) or Squadron 42 (Single Player/Co-op) use my Referral code: STAR-3QDY-SZBG
Comments
As a short example; Yesterday Arenanet named/shamed a group of PvE elitist Guildwars 2 players ( http://massivelyop.com/2017/07/31/guild-wars-2-names-and-shames-tournament-cheaters/ ) because they cheated by paying 'pro' PvP players $400 each to win a prestiges tournament simply to gain the accolades. They were banned only from participating in future league and tournament play. They still get to play PvP mode with full access to the rest of the game. If you read the comments you can see some of their quotes. They didn't care in the slightest, in fact said it was worth it and would do it again. The ensuing push back from a vocal minority of players for even that was asinine. Had they completely banned the players involved, brigading, smear campaigning and FUD would have been next. They have all the time in the world to do so.
Few young people today are not raised with any code of conduct. They are taught from our presidents on down to our parents that cheating to get ahead is worth the risk of minor punishments handed out for such offenses.
I guessing CIG would never ban a Rear Admiral (or higher status) account for in-game fraud unless it was multiple repeat offenses for the same 'crime'. There is too much at stake from those who would condone such exploits. While there is no investment loss, the backlash from those who feel entitled would be worse than anything DS and his goons could dish up.
Please do not respond to me, even if I ask you a question, its rhetorical.
Please do not respond to me
There are games with different approaches to this, we'll see what they are willing to take.
Have fun
Frank 'Spankybus' Mignone
www.spankybus.com
-3d Artist & Compositor
-Writer
-Professional Amature
The PC Gamer Article on Star Citizen, that got hands-on with 3.0: http://imgur.com/a/WBYy8
And the PC Gamer Article on Insurance: http://www.pcgamer.com/how-star-citizens-ship-insurance-works-and-how-players-will-exploit-it/
MAGA
"We all do the best we can based on life experience, point of view, and our ability to believe in ourselves." - Naropa "We don't see things as they are, we see them as we are." SR Covey
MAGA
― Terry Pratchett, Making Money
Have fun
Yes, indeed. They're used to no or minor punishment. Time they learned what real sanctions is about.
Oh, I surely hope - and believe - they'd punish everyone equally, independent of backer level.
- Real money to unlock an account again, say upto $100.
- Griefers end up in the same instance, alone with other griefers. (already planned)
- Slower gameplay.
- Reduced game fidelity, colors, resolution, etc.
- Only ban game access, not close account.
- Ban access to part(s) of the game.
... and many more fun sanctions.
I don't understand why refunds should necessary when a ban is issued.
Viking
"We all do the best we can based on life experience, point of view, and our ability to believe in ourselves." - Naropa "We don't see things as they are, we see them as we are." SR Covey
So if I play Overwatch, cheat and get perm-banned, I can make enough of a fuss to force Blizzard to pay me what I spent in the game so I accept the ban.
The issue lies also in the inability of the company to prove your wrongdoing (and legally enforce it), so it's a push > push, but it's a daunting process that almost nobody is willing to go through.
The funny part was that people who tried to take issue with the waiver and refused to purchase, then later caved, were the ones who ended up being banned. As if they knew they were going to cheat already and expected a refund after doing so.
¯\_(ツ)_/¯
And I've never played Overwatch so I can't relate to their ban policy.
Nope. Not that one either. Or any other modern game you may mention, for that matter. I came back to gaming and dusted off my joystick because of Star Citizen. I've waited 20 years for a game like SC.
Viking
Really nice lightning going on, the improved fog really shows off with the dust in that bit.
It's one of those quite complex situations as it's not easy to prove, as I think we all know by the false positive bans laid constantly on online games show how it isn't of full reliability, so if you ever bring a dispute to the last consequences it's more likely the company gives in.
I think we differ in opinion simply because you don't believe they can gather proof, while I see it as something achievable - if they want to go there. It also depends on what type of bannable offense you have in mind, of course, and if we agree on the seriousness of said offense. So many variables are undefined. But overall, my opinion is there's no technical problem with gathering proof for most bannable behaviors.
Viking
https://robertsspaceindustries.com/comm-link/transmission/16043-Monthly-Studio-Report-July-2017
Viking
"Cherish the quiet...before my STORM!"
For a $5/5000 in-game credit bonus for backing Star Citizen (MMO) or Squadron 42 (Single Player/Co-op) use my Referral code: STAR-3QDY-SZBG
"Cherish the quiet...before my STORM!"
For a $5/5000 in-game credit bonus for backing Star Citizen (MMO) or Squadron 42 (Single Player/Co-op) use my Referral code: STAR-3QDY-SZBG