To GGG: Why I think your OBT intentions are detrimental to the game's future
|
Being rewarded for being a persistent offender, not aware of any nation or people that reward that.
Good luck OP but no, simply no. Perhaps it's my inherited play fair since I'm a brit, but even if you can't seriously don't ever expect to be rewarded for it. Here's an idea try and hack the IRS then tell 'em you were trying to help, I'll post Bubba some lube so it don't sting quite so much for you whilst you are re-considering your concept. Those who beat their swords into ploughshares, will plough for those who have not.
| |
|
Ok, so I read the whole thing. It's still all wrong.
First of all, Sun Tzu is not applicable here. Sun Tzu's logic was written about and only applies to warfare, that is to say a situation where you have two clearly opposing parties who are focused on *fighting* each other. I would sincerely hope that most players here are not here to *fight* GGG. I rather like the Kiwis. So setting aside that OP likes using expressions like "it has been proven" without actually presenting this hypothetical proof of whatever he is talking about. I especially likes how OP keeps on saying "there are many ways to accomplish this" and then never presents any of these 'many ways' that there supposedly are. The whole idea that 'the game allows me to cheat, thus it should be allowed' is moronic to say the least. It is like saying that because my neighbor has windows that can be broken by throwing a brick through them and a TV that can be removed from his house, I should then be allowed to break his window with a brick and steal his TV. It's stupid, and it doesn't make sense. OP writes a lot of text but it's all empty, empty words. Everything in the OP was wrong, and most of it was stupid too. Closed beta member since: March 19, 2012
| |
" This is the premise and it's incorrect. There's no need to ban people for exploiting if they find an exploit and report it. Disclosure is always encouraged and it's always the right thing to do. Failing that, there's also no reason to ban people if the exploit is a game design problem (read: GGG's problem) and are doing it manually. It would be much more preferable if people would be honest and make a thread explaining that players could, say, dupe items by doing some complex vendor thing, but it will eventually be found and probably involve a rollback if it too seriously wrecks the economy. This also expects large design errors to be made on GGG's part. In the end though, I would not expect to see anyone banned for doing this manually. There's a third category of "exploits" which really have nothing to do with the game and attack it on a more fundamental software level. This is the denial of service stuff, the automated bots (including using the same exploit I previously described in an automated fashion), password cracking, etc. These are provably not preventable, but they are detectable and it should go without saying that they're bannable. They are no longer playing the game and are instead abusing it. tl;dr if you can do it in the game and without using outside software, it's almost impossible to be banned for exploits
disclaimer
I can't speak for GGG directly. They reserve the right to ban at their will and for any reason.
| |
|
Thanks for everyone for replying, regardless of your opinion. :) As I said early on, I don't expect everyone to read or understand the entire post. This will be another long reply, but I'll reply to everyone who took the time to voice their concern about what I'm advocating; as it's the least I can do. As expected, there are a lot of misconceptions about what I'm getting at and a lot of people who really don't understand motives.
First, I'll give a tl;dr for everyone who can't be bothered to read the OP or this post the point of this thread: "GGG, I want you to apply your CBT policy to OBT." Yeap, that's all I'm really asking for. What's happened though is, a lot of people took my reasoning for it in directions so far off topic, that it's actually made the thread a lot more interesting than I intended. Second, a lot of people are having trouble understanding me as a person (understandable, this is what happens on the internet). While I was writing some replies out, I came up with a fundamental question that will essentially let you know if there's anyway anything I've said would be valid to you and your views: "The keep this short and sweet, I'm against the former and for the latter. Perhaps now, people can understand a few things I've said better. Third, before I get into individual replies, just a few meta-issues:
Spoiler
* You are free to judge however you want, it's your right. I'm not going to judge you for what you say in response, I appreciate all views. Just understand this, I care. If I didn't, I'd not have made that 8 hour long post, or this equally as time consuming post, or any of the few other posts I have on this site, other sites about what I've done, and can do. If I didn't believe in this game, trust me, I'd not be a Gold supporter or spend my time here. There are more ways to support the game than just monetary means, and I believe GGG appreciates them. * My post was specifically for OBT, which even though is considered a "soft launch", is still OBT. Things in the game will change, as Chris has said. I think a lot of people didn't understand this vital point. What GGG is doing for CBT is great, I applaud them, but stopping it for OBT, I feel is a mistake. To put simply, too much has changed over the years to get anyone serious about this game from investing the time and effort into breaking the game. There's not enough CBT'ers to do this. This will change at OBT, as a lot of people didn't even want to spend $10 to support the game and get into CBT. Once it becomes free though, this will change. If people still don't want to "dedicate" to the game after OBT due to changes that might or might not happen, then GGG has a viable strategy at hand they can see if they can work with. * To all the people who think I just want a "license to hack", come on now, don't be silly ;). If that's what I was really after, I'd just talk to Chris, directly. Why would I bother everyone else here that can't do anything about it anyways? Seriously though, it's a F2P game. Everyone will have a free ride, and there's nothing more you could ask. There are going to be "dumb cheaters" and "creative cheaters". The former will use their mains and lose their accounts one way or another. The latter will launder any ill-gotten gains and never put their mains at risk. It's not rocket science. I don't want GGG to waste all their time with the "dumb cheaters" and base stuff on them (which your typical anti-cheat and detection will do). I want them to focus on the "creative" cheaters, the ones that really do make a difference. No, I'm not after money either for my efforts (regardless of how you might interpret posts I've made), although GGG_Drew has a nice ring to it (in my dreams, ofc) :) * On banning "as a punishment", if you honestly think banning in a F2P game solves anything, then there's nothing I can say to convince you otherwise. What I will say though is, there are some pretty creative ways to go about punishing people that are doing things you don't want, and further dissuading people in ways banning doesn't. I have refrained from talking about these things on purpose. GGG has already done such a thing during CBT, without banning. Once again, I did not say I wanted Path of Exile to be a "punishment free game". I explicitly said, for OBT, they should aim to get everyone's best to fully understand the situation and come up with ways to base the future of the game design on. If you base the future of the game solely on what's been done in CBT, you are making a mistake, in my opinion. * In no way, shape, or form, did I ever say GGG should give us client code, server code, or not to implement anti-cheat or server sided logic to detect "exploits". I meant exactly what I said, during OBT "if you can do it, you can do it" (unless GGG fixes it). There are a lot of unknowns going into OBT that have already been expressed, especially how many people are going to be interested in the game. The only thing I am advocating for in this regards, is a continuation of CBT policy for OBT, which I think can work. Consider this, a lot of games don't take the approach GGG did for CBT, and will ban you if you mess around with stuff, regardless. How can you possibly fix things that are going to be taken advantage of if everyone (but the people who are going to do it anyways) is too scared to try? * I mentioned this is another post somewhere, but there are 3 segments to the spectrum of gamers that you have to understand. On the far left are people that will always play the game as intended, no matter what. On the far right, are people that are going to cheat and play the game as unintended, no matter what. What matters the most though, is everyone else in the middle. The people who might or might not consider moving towards one side of the spectrum based on risk/reward, morality, or peer pressure. For OBT, I want as many of these middle ground people to move far right sooner, rather than later. In doing so, GGG should be provided with enough information such that, for the future past OBT, they have enough in place to continually convince the next middle ground group of people to stay left through game design changes, rather than "security". A lot of people won't admit it, but most people, given the opportunity to situationally cheat and get away with it risk free, will do so, it's just human nature. * On the issue of "rewards", "not being banned" is an example of a reward, as contradictory as it might sound to things I've said on my position for "banning as a punishment". Rewards are necessary for people to put aside any misplaced morality and really do what is needed to help the game improve for the long run. It's a classic "does the end justify the means" type of scenario. Are you willing to make some scarifies during OBT so that you can position yourself to being able to handle everything that comes after OBT? That's up to GGG, but as I said in my OP, get this stuff out of the way sooner, rather than later. * A lot of people have claimed to be a programmer or have some special know how about things it seems, but how many of you have actually made hacks for this game or come up with legitimate ways to get an advantage doing things that would be not allowed at OBT? How many people here are actually reverse engineers, and have taken apart this game to understand how the various systems in place work? I believe maybe a few are, but not that many honestly. I can't tell you a single person on the forum whose posts I've read and thought, wow, this person is just like me. That is why I want a special section for this stuff. You never quite know anything about someone until they open up about it. In order for that to happen though, there needs to be incentive and no fear of being looked down upon by the community. Now for individual replies. I didn't quote the original response because it'd made it so much harder to read and follow. What people can do is just find responses in the thread then match names if they are so inclined. Page 1:
Spoiler
Wisdom
Spoiler
This is the attitude I want to change. If you honestly think you posses ideas that a hacker/cheater/call them what you want could not come up with on their own, not telling anyone isn't going to help. The reality of it all is quite simple. No one here is special, not even me. Anything I can do, there are 1000's of others that can do faster, better, and more efficient. Whether they are willing to take their time to do it for no gain, is another issue though. What's important to the game though, is having people aware of "what could be done", to help influence game design decisions for the future. That is not to say, you can't think of something before I can, but in the end, if it can be done, it'll eventually be discovered and taken advantage of, assuming it's not already accounted for in the first place. To keep it from being an issue in the first place, you need people that are willing to think outside the box, min/max, and have the willingness to communicate their ideas. Furthermore, to prevent it from being an issue later on, you need to get it taken care of right away. There is no reason to wait and cross the bridge of "when someone has done it"; you should assume "someone has already done it, you just don't know about it yet". I said very specific things about what I've done for that very reason. A lot of people might not have any idea of what can or can't be done in this game. I've been vocal about it because it's my responsibility as CBT tester, not because I feel I'm some ego-maniacal god who is better than everyone else (yes, some people do think that about me, until they actually get to know me, I have many funny stories about this). The example of what you described, isn't a hack. It's an "assist tool". Since it automates the process of casting a spell on a player, it's more or less a "pvp bot", just not something that does everything for you. In terms of competitive play, yes, people who want an edge and to cheat would do something like that. However, it's not as simple as you might think it is, due to how PoE currently works. This is not a 'tab target" type of game, like most MMOs. However, where you misunderstand my point is as follows: Path of Exile isn't about PvP. Yes, it has a PvP system in the works. Yes, there might be plans down the line to turn it into something better than it currently is. But as it stands, there is no incentive to cheat to win in PvP. People could still do it (getting away with it is another issue, ofc), if that's what makes them feel good at the end of the day, but the point is, in the grand scheme of things, they have no advantage by having that advantage. There's no reward for it other than personal gratification in having to use cheats to win. I myself don't believe in taking pleasure from having to beat someone from using cheats, but you can't deny there are others that do. The point is though, how do you keep PvP from becoming cheat to win? The most obvious answer is anti-cheat, but we all know that doesn't always work as intended. Yes, you can stop a lot of people who don't have the skills to get around it from just using things, but typically money overcomes that. As I said, it only takes one person to foil everything you could have done. What's more important though is, if there's never an inventive to cheat in PvP because it's purely for "fun", do they have to worry about the small % of people that want to risk their accounts to try and win nothing? Not really. The final take way is simple, keep PvP as something for fun, and keep all incentives for cheating out of it in the first place. This is always easier said than done, but there's nothing wrong with it. This solution is game design oriented and in line with what I hope to see. You cannot, I repeat, cannot, extrapolate what I am suggesting to other games or genres. That makes absolutely no sense. If this game was a counter strike clone, would I have made such a post in the first place? Of course not, as it'd be total non-sense and not help with anything. It might be a sad case of "this is why we can't have nice things", but in the end, as long as people can have fun, and not have to worry about people who are trying to do all they can to get an meaningless advantage, then I think GGG is doing the right thing. What I don't want to see though is, GGG "trying" to keep the game cheat free by whatever anti-cheat they use, then have people complain about how they aren't doing a good enough job because people are cheating to win, and not getting caught. I don't want to see them go down that path, as so many other games have. It should be kept a non-issue. The only thing I didn't really touch on is cut-throat, which will have serious implications in any case with what we are talking about. I don't have answers for this really, not enough opportunity to really understand it. There should be concerns about this, but at this stage, with the game desyncs and such, it's something we will have to wait and see on. satarc
Spoiler
In the meta-issues I address a lot of what you have said. I'm not asking PoE to be a "wild west" for cheaters, hackers, exploiters. That'd be terrible. No one is going to bother doing anything in the game if that were the case. What I'm saying though is, for OBT, if you try and band-aid the "cheating" problem, it's going to come back and bite you down the line, especially since it's a F2P game. As for the rest of your post, we'll, you're certainly entitled to your own opinion, but I think if you knew a little bit more about me, you'd have a different opinion and understand that I'm not trying to justify anything other than why I believe the OBT policy isn't going to help the future of the game. It's all perspective though, so to each their own. Thanks for the reply nonetheless. Porkeh, S_SienZ, Wisdom
Spoiler
No where did I say anything about this is easy! I've been around doing this stuff since 2006, but still learn new things time to time. There's a lot of other people out there better at this stuff and more knowledgeable than I am. What I do know though is, certain advantages can be taken out of a game if they exist. The trick is though, to get people to reveal these things for you. This cannot be done at full efficiency with the OBT policy, imo. It is those things that we should care about. The fact someone can go out of their way to come up with the most mundane way to get an advantage isn't something we should worry about. It's out of our control and GGGs. What matters is though, fully understanding what's currently possible, and accepting the fact some things just can't be done, so don't get caught up on all the little things that are out of your control. Where my position on the matter is radically different than everyone elses, it seems, is rather than trying to keep raising the bar for people who want to get an advantage, why not just prop everyone else up (when applicable)? I was very intentional with my examples. It requires a lot of thought as to why certain mechanics exist in the first place. Things we take for granted, and just assume that's the way it should be. All I'm saying is, when you are in control, as GGG is, it doesn't have to be that way. Omnivore61, Porkeh, Wisdom
Spoiler
Wisdom, you have really misinterpreted my OP if you think my solution is to "remove" anything. My solution is quite the opposite, equal access for all. Bear with me for a moment, I know some people might find it aggravating, but hear me out. We are talking about a matter of extremes. Let's say the policy is you cannot modify texture files in the game. Fine. However, let's say people are doing so to get what they perceive is an advantage. For example, "pink mobs", it's when you use some bright colored texture, such as magenta, in place of regular textures to be able to visually identify threats faster or to make certain pixel bots much easier. The issue is, how can you enforce this? Once again, anti-cheat comes to mind, but it's typically something by passable. In other games, screenshots are used. This too, can be bypassed. The end be all question is simple though: it it acceptable to you for a game to be unable to stop people from getting an advantage over those who do what is intended? If you are content with a yes answer, with no exceptions, then we just have fundamentally different views, so that's all there is to it really. Page 2:
Spoiler
Omnivore61
Spoiler
I replied to most of this in the meta-issues. I don't quite see how you made the connection of me wanting "monetary" rewards for everyone, but that's not what I said or meant. I gave one such idea of a reward, in the same fashion the demigods exists. Others in the forum have too, as I believe someone requested some codebreaker title before. Likewise, there's always microtransaction incentives that could be given. While this is not "cash", it would certainly not bankrupt them or represent any lost revenue really, as they create it arbitrarily. Finally as I mentioned earlier in this post, "not being banned" is a reward, even though, I fell it's one of those stone age punishments that doesn't really do anything in F2P games. If this game was P2P, then obviously, I'd feel otherwise. As for the second reply, it's not about me really. While I would like to think I'm someone important, I'm just another guy, another cog in the wheel that doesn't really mean anything. If nothing results from this thread, which is always a possibility, no one will remember or care about this. I'm fully aware of that, and I'm fine with it. It's the way things are. I do, however like your example. This is exactly what I want for the community for OBT, rewards aside as I think you are too fixated on money in your arguments. This is the ultimate responsibility, if you believe in what you are doing, and you have faith in your work, why not? When the stakes are high, you're going to get everyone's best, and you better be sure, your best, is indeed your best. What you are failing to realize though is, while GGG has said that this is the last intended character wipe, they always have the upper hand in terms of 'starting from a clean slate' at any point. Once you come to accept that fact, the power they ultimately hold, what I'm suggesting shouldn't sound so crazy anymore. ;) Crossflip
Spoiler
See the meta-issues. I'm not saying the game should be this way at all. I'm simply saying, OBT should have the same policy as CBT. Contrary to what you have said, I've been a part of games that have had pretty good designs, there's only been say 2-3 real exploits over 7-8 years, most of which resulted from new functionality being added to the game (different coders). The point is though, how can you find the problems in a game, if the only people looking are the people who'd not share it with anyone else anyways? ransagy
Spoiler
Your post exemplifies exactly why I feel the way I do about OBT. When you base important game mechanics around very specific assumptions, and those things end up being things people can work around, and what results is not taken into account by the original design, you have a flaw in your design. Online game design 101. The golden rule is to never trust the client. Yet, a lot of games break this rule and as a result, are utterly broken as soon as someone discovers this. I'm sure PoE was designed with this in mind, but in any case, any mechanics designed otherwise, are indeed flawed. I'm not saying it's GGG's "fault" in a negative way, but I'm saying it's their "responsibility" that it turned out this way. It's one of the lessons you learn as a game developer, especially in an online environment. Remember that GGG is learning a lot of things from this all. Don't take what I'm saying as a knock against them! flab
Spoiler
Hey, it's your opinion, but you are acting as if everything in life exists in a state of original intent and was never modified due to customer feedback, or other circumstances coming up. That's simply not true. You are aware that the current zooming feature was added after the fact, right? You know that we just got a trade chat, because the community wanted it, right? GGG has been very clear that they will listen to us and do the best they can to work their design and intentions along with ours. If you don't believe in them, that's fine, but I do. Most game companies don't, so I can understand the reluctance to accept it, but like i said, GGG has made it a point they are doing their best. As a result, I'm providing my feedback to them, because they do really want it. Whether they act on it is another question, but the willingfullness to less is good enough for me. Page 3
Spoiler
f3rret
Spoiler
I do try to impress; I don't believe in being mediocre. :) I looked that stuff up too, I don't have it memorized. There's a difference between EULA and law. I don't need to draw that line, because it's implicitly drawn. Furthermore, that's more malicious intent, which I did say they should draw the line at. Not that it'd matter though, if someone is capable of doing that, then they will do it, the consequences of doing it are irrelevant to them. This isn't about people being able to run free and do whatever they want in a sense. This is simply CBT rules applied to OBT, that is all. ptt_frmr
Spoiler
I don't think I'm making any mistaken assumptions. I know what you are saying though, not everyone will be as forthcoming. I just think everyone else isn't understanding the way things really work. Let's say I (not me, but a generic person) come up with a way to dupe an item that's not currently detected. I can choose to maximize this opportunity, or I can choose to sit on it, hoping to capitalize it in the future. Each of with has its pros/cons. Alternatively, I can be a good samaritan and report it to the devs so it (hopefully) gets fixed. Believe it or not, there are games that don't take these things seriously. Most people here are so fixated on this type of person, and what they can or can't do, that they are missing the bigger issue at hand. That is, a dupe is possible, and there was no way to detect it. I don't care about the person that finds a dupe and exploits it. I care about the fact it was possible, undetected, and it took however long it did to discover it. That's what is important to me. Luckily though, a lot of people can't keep a secret. A lot of people like talking about things. Not everyone is so discrete when they stumble upon something that could be big that they don't go overboard and make it pretty obvious something is wrong. My perspective is, let these people do the hard work and expose themselves. For the people that would choose better, have an incentive system in place such that, if they do find something, there's a reason to report it (personal gain) which is done for the betterment of the game. If no such system is in place, you are right, everything is done for personal gain at the expense of the game, which was my point. I'm not claiming to be an oracle or trying to say this is 100% fool proof. What I am saying is, there's nothing you can do to discourage someone from doing something they are intent on doing, regardless of what is done. To counter that, you encourage more people to do it, so that if there is a problem, it's more likely to be found, although not guaranteed. BearCares
Spoiler
Thanks for the laugh. :) Omnivore61
Spoiler
You're making my point for me, don't you see? You understand this. I understand this. Does GGG understand this? I don't know. However, you are saying they should throw time and money down the drain trying to address an unsolvable problem whereas I'm saying, take that time and money, and put it into places where it's going to be more rewarding to the majority, rather than something meant to try and reign in the minority. There is a solution to this though, but that'd be getting off-topic, so I'll be brief: look up OnLive. 99% of online game problems are solved with that architecture, but then you run into massive technical issues, which could be solved, if there was enough money to do it. whrsmycoffee
Spoiler
Perspective. That's the only thing that separates a "hack" from a "feature". Path of Exile supports Alt+F4 to escape sticky situations. This is a "feature" of the game. In most other games, this would be a "hack" and is not allowed. In Mincraft, it's called combat logging, for example. Does that mean PoE is catering to hackers now with such functionality a part of the game? No. It's called "map hack" because it's not currently a feature of the game. If it were, it's called a "radar" or in some games, just the "minimap". Pure perspective. jiussa
Spoiler
Meta-issues should address most of this. Your examples are pretty wacky and out of context though. Is it possible to inflict physical harm to someone through Path of Exile? No. If it were, would anyone play it? pretty sure that's also a No. It's not about not having rules though. It's about not having rules in place that are specifically meant to mask very important issues that have an impact on the life of a game. You can't extrapolate this into the real world, because it just doesn't make sense then. So many people are confused by this though. I'm not saying if there's a speed limit of 55 mph, that it shouldn't exist and should be removed. That's just stupid, but a lot of people are assuming that's what I'm talking about. What I'm talking about, doesn't even make sense in most real world contexts, so there's no point in trying to rationalize what I'm saying in them, but I'm definitely not saying what most people are assuming. What I'm getting at though is, if you setup very specific rules, and are basing everything on them, and you aren't prepared to handle the cases when those rules aren't followed, you are doing yourself a major disservice. People are always going to push the limits no matter what, but the perceived "punishments" for doing so in a F2P game such as this, just don't make sense to me at this point. Omnivore61
Spoiler
I don't think you understand the rules and regulations of CBT. :) I know you see me as the bad guy here, whereas in reality, I'm the "not so bad guy", trying to help the game become better. Trust me on this one. Page 4
Spoiler
flab
Spoiler
I can't really say much to change your mind, but rest assured, if what you think is true was actually true, this thread wouldn't exist and you'd be off cruising the rest of the forums. It'd make no sense at all. If you believe in even half of what I've said, you should understand this is not a matter of me being invested into anything except the game's future. For the rest of your post though, your position of wanting "isolated cases" is 100% legitimate and respectable, but ultimately a pipe dream. I'm on the other side, knowing full well, there's not going to be "isolated cases" of stuff in this game, no matter what is done or what "deterrences" are in place simply due to the nature of being a F2P game. Tell me one legitimate reason why someone intent on doing something against the rules won't do it? They lose their account? Make another one. They lose their character? Level another one. They lose their currencies? Launder it before the fact. The point I'm trying to make is quite simple: the rules in place, aren't going to make things harder or easier on anyone but the people who play the game as intended. Yes, that's my opinion. Yes, I might be wrong, but it's still my opinion. Omnivore61
Spoiler
Wow, you are quite active! I agree with what you are saying here. I feel that GGG is on the fence about some things, and could use a few nudges to keep things favorably transparent. I don't believe in censorship. I value knowledge that is able to be spread and known freely. I feel that, if you feel threatened by knowledge or your users knowing something you are trying to hide, you have a serious problem that needs to be fixed. antelopesalad
Spoiler
I'm glad you "get it". :) I don't know if you agree with me or not, but this is basically what I hope GGG realizes. It's when people are being "stupid" that they are caught. The real threat lies with the people who are as I described earlier, "creative". I have some really good solutions for the "stupid" people that doesn't involve banning though. I'll pass these on to Chris, as maybe they might be able to spare some time and resources into checking it out. ;) Omnivore61
Spoiler
You are wrong here. I'll give you an example of why. Look up neural networks (in context of computing). In order for these to work, you have to 'train' them with enough relevant data. My case is ensuring GGG obtains enough "relevant data" for the future, in accordance to what antelopesalad just posted. I'm not making a direct correlation to what GGG is doing is 100% comparable to a NN. What I am saying is, if GGG comes out with their own custom solution, and it's 0day defeated, they are in a psoition of having to tell everyone, sorry, but we're going to need a lot more time to solve this problem, all the while everyone runs amuck. I'm saying, why put yourself in that position in the first place, when you can slowly phase in things without having to tell people, and just let people know, regardless of what is being done, they are ensuring the game design is solid to guard against most of that as possible before trying to roll out a security solution? In other words, at the start, it's all part of the plan for a better future. Rather than basing the future on a plan that is doomed from the start? Exmorda
Spoiler
Yes! Thank you for coming out and saying it! I'm pretty sure you are the only one. While I didn't say 100% on nugi, I'd say maybe 75%, he was pretty tired, I do believe 100% on zold. I'm being 100% serious right now (I'm always 100% serious, but I know people don't always get the intentions of what I say). Think about this, if you were some "middle ground" gamer in accordance to my 3 segment spectrum mentioned in meta-issues, could you not see the argument someone could make to convince them to to go for an advantage "outside of the rules"? "Yeap, look at that nugiyen guy, he worked his ass off for a week, then due to the way the game is intended to be played, came up empty handed. Tough luck for him. And that Zoldyck guy? Oh yea, it's all part of the game that you can die while loading due to your summons aggroing stuff you can't even react to. Totally fair. But you go ahead and play that way and risk going home empty handed and proud of the fact you gave it your all and played legit." Please. It's more going to be like: "(counting currency) It's a shame I had to cheat a little to make it though. (still counting currency) Maybe next time I can try not having an advantage and play by the rules (finishing counting currency). Nah." Let me be perfectly clear. I have the utmost respect for everyone who plays this game on a competitive level, especially legit. I was watching the 1 week race streams most of the time I could. It was amazing. The fact so many people got so high playing exactly as intended is great news for the game. However, this all goes back to the original premise in this thread. Assuming it can't be fixed, which I believe is a reasonable and fair assumption to be made, is it fair to continue to let the minority prosper while the majority doesn't? Are some of these things so important that there can be no compromise for the betterment of the game (in some people's eyes? A lot of this is based on the assumption of what's going to happen in OBT, not on what has happened in CBT. This is based on having been around F2P games for a long time, and having seen a lot of companies try and fail to handle the issue at hand. All I'm saying is, you know, you can avoid the problem all together if you do X, Y, and possibly Z. That is all. Page 5:
Spoiler
Omnivore61
Spoiler
No gold existing in the game will turn away a lot of people, which is good. In a game like this, "casual botters" will aim to profit off of others' desires for much needed currency. However, what's the point in investing into botting, if there are far easier ways to generate 100% legit currency, without having to resort to using ant 3rd party tools? I mentioned this in my multibox post, but the way the game is designed, it's just a matter of trading time. Elynole
Spoiler
So you do understand the merits of people trying to hack and exploit the game? You are saying, it's cool alpha members are doing it because it can help the game, but it's 'ok' because it's alpha and it's allowed. You understand that the same thing goes on for us Beta testers as well, right? What I am doing now is "ok", because it's in accordance to what GGG wants for this time during CBT. Are you going to think less of GGG if they decide its in the best interest of the game, that this current CBT policy carries over to OBT as well? I really hope you understand that, everything I am advocating for, is in context of what GGG has currently setup. All I'm saying is, extend this phase of trying to make the game better in relation to cheating for a portion of OBT rather than ending it here in CBT. Other than that, I don't think you are off in what you are saying really, I don't disagree. I just think my reasoning for why OBT should get some of the same treatment CBT currently does, is making you and a lot of others think this is what I want for the entirely of the game, which it's most definitely not. iamacyborg
Spoiler
d2jsp and other sites of course. Look at D3. Never. Again. Omnivore61
Spoiler
I hope you have shared with GGG, that's all. Fixing everything I brought up is quite simple though and there are many solutions to choose from. Some are more creative than others, but it's not outside the realm of something they can do. Or, perhaps it's better if they didn't do anything at all, it's their call. There's thinkers, and there's doers. Without a doer, a thinker is useless. The opposite is not necessarily true. The best synergy is when you can have both, working together, or a doer that can think (of if you prefer the converse). If you think something could be done for the game, how does that exactly help GGG? Welcome to the world of "what if". However, if you can do something for the game, and demonstrate the viability of it, it's worth a whole hell of a lot more to them (not monetary value, mind you). It's not my goal to change your mind, but I want to point out to you, actions speak more loudly than words. I don't quite feel you understand this in context of what I'm advocating in this thread. Omnivore61
Spoiler
" " Mhhhmmmmmm... ;) Elynole
Spoiler
Only in reply to the last sentence of your post: why should we keep chopping off the top of a weed, so it keeps growing back, instead of digging up its roots? I'm for the latter, not the former. DoneDirtCheap
Spoiler
At least it wasn't a ramen noodle brick wall of text! tzaro
Spoiler
Spot on. If you can do anything good with the client, you are doing it wrong. A lot of people who don't understand this naturally will argue against it. Not all "advantages" are equal. Page 6
Spoiler
Flavious
Spoiler
Your idea is flawed. The status quo of CBT testing and such is that all of this is "currently allowed". Come OBT, this will change. I'm trying to have otherwise done. f3rret
Spoiler
Do you not know of the "war on bots". It is a war. Look at WoW, runescape, and countless other games. I don't think you quite understand the issue at hand, but that's ok. It has nothing to do with people wanting to fight GGG. It doesn't matter who is behind the helm, the people botting don't care, it's all the same to them. As for the rest of the reply, all I can say is this: if you don't understand online gaming, then there is no way you can understand my post. Sorry to disappoint you, but it has an intended audience. Thanks for reading though. If you really want something explained, just ask! I don't bite. The only places I've not given specific alternatives, are places where I explicitly said I wasn't, and that's for the same reason GGG doesn't talk about how they are going to handle server side stuff. I don't believe in that concept, but they do, so unless they pretty much say, we have no interest in doing this, I'm not going to talk about it. It has nothing to do with me not having solutions or ideas. If you haven't figured out by now, I have a lot. ;) pneuma
Spoiler
I don't quite follow your reply. I understand what you are saying, and know those things, but this topic is quite different. To put in a nutshell, all I'm saying is I think GGG should honeypot the crap out of OBT. In order for that to be done though, they need certain CBT policies in place, which would contradict their current position for OBT in regards to "using outside software". Phew! That was long, but maybe it helps clear some things up. Obviously I've said my piece and will move on, as now it's out there and there's other tl;dr posts for me to make about this game, but if it matters to you, and you still don't understand something I've said, but you want to, just PM me. I'll try to check in time to time. No Omnivore, you may not take that time to ask me for my hacks >:| (j/k, I think you are alright). Last edited by drew_benton on Jan 6, 2013, 4:47:06 AM
|
|
"It's still technically beta, but there is one critical difference between CBT and OBT: there are no more wipes. Any economic damage that exploiters/botters/hackers do wont disappear once the game officially releases. If there was a wipe between OBT and release, I wouldn't have a problem with a lot of your punishment philosophy. "Banning isn't a true solution, since it is reactive rather than preventative. I think maybe that's your point here, but there is no way to completely prevent bots. Banning bots that are high level and fully equipped will certainly harm botting operations and drive some botters away from the game. "I do report things that could be used by hackers/cheaters. "Call it what you want, but it's something that can give a player an advantage. There are incentives to use something like it in cut-throat, and possibly even in arena pvp. Some people like to place bets on pvp matches, it wasn't uncommon in D2. I think a lot of people would like to see an official way to place bets on pvp matches, but according to you it should never be implemented because the game design would provide incentive to cheat. "Taking incentives away from anything that could give a cheater/hacker an advantage is a terrible solution. The same type of tool I suggested could be used to make a pve player more efficient. Would your solution be to remove all incentives from pve? After a while, you're no longer left with a game. "While it may seem counter intuitive, adding features can actually remove elements of the game. Adding tab targeting removes the need for mouse dexterity. Adding a built in botting API removes the need to even play the game. If you add too many things, there isn't even much of a game left. I realize that my examples may be a bit extreme, but they are meant to highlight the fundamental problem I have with your game design philosophy. "We do have fundamentally different views, because my answer is yes. Can you name a single complex video game that does what you suggest? | |
" Jesus friggen christ you're pretentious. So you have looked up some Sun Tzu quotes, how about you also try figuring out the philosophy behind those quotes. A metaphorical "war on bots" is not the same as a real war, to make it really simple so you can understand it, in the kind of war Sun Tzu intended his logic to be applied to PEOPLE DIE. People do not die in a "war on bots". You don't seem to be able to grasp the concept that there should not, nor should there be any incentives to, try to "one-up" GGG by creating exploits. Now yes, sure there should be testing done, and exploits should be looked for, but that sorta thing belongs in Alpha Testing or more restricted in-house sort of testing. What we are testing in the Open (and also the closed) Beta is the game as a whole, not specifically the engine. What we are looking for is game-stoppers (i.e huge crash bugs and the like) and issues with the game in general, that is to say the gameplay experience, the skills and the passive tree as well as the general experience of the game and the service as a whole (website, microtransactions, etc). So if you have found bugs and designed hacks, by all means send descriptions thereof to GGG and tell them how to fix your specific implementation of the hack, but do not expect not to be banned if it gets determined that you willfully, maliciously and repeatedly broke the rules of the game and most certainly do not expect some sort of reward. Now exactly how do I "not understand online gaming"? Because I expect you to actually present this "proof" that you say exists to back up your claims. Here let me tell you a story: the existence of proof to support a given line of argumentation is useless if you do not present it. Try learning science one day, try actually learning the philosophy you seem to try to use to win an argument. Like said I say "there exists proof that man did not go to the moon" (there doesn't), and then went on make a crazy long post about how this applied to something else, if I do not present my "proof", then my whole argument is invalid because I force my readers to just assume my word is good and I actually found proof. So please if you think there is proof to support your claims that you should be considered a special, revered person because you found ways to cheat at an online game, do post it, I'm interested in seeing it. Furthermore, what you do say in your original post is that in some cases you are simply "adding functionality" to the game with your hacks, this might be true, but it is still cheating. Take Tour de France for an example, it is possible for a rider to take EPO or injections of his own red blood cells to increase his own stamina. One could even argue that in the case of blood doping he is not even using an external substance to artificially raise his own hematocrit values, thus he should be allowed to do this. World Cycling Organisation still considers both EPO and blood doping cheating, however. What you seem unable to grasp is that the fun and challenge in this (and all other) games comes from the constraints imposed on the player by the arbitrary rules. You have to learn to prosper and succeed within those constraints or simply not play the game. If you are winning by circumventing those rules (as in your example with the two ladder deaths) you are not playing the game, you are cheating. There, I still think your entire line of reasoning is wrong and stupid, but I decided to play your game. So please teach me the ways of your people and make me part of your "intended audience". Closed beta member since: March 19, 2012
| |
|
If any hack is used or any 3rd party programs is used to mess with the game files you should be banned immediately. I don't understand you logic you want GGG to reward you for hacking and cheating?. There will always be hack and cheats but one thing to keep them in check is to ban everyone who does it. Yea you might not get them all but you get most of them.
Last edited by Burmeister99 on Jan 6, 2013, 11:39:06 AM
|
|
|
Hacking in this game should not be given a free pass. Simple as that. If you want to hack to be able to provide GGG with valuable information you should probably contact them privately.
Last edited by Zenocide on Jan 6, 2013, 1:11:04 PM
| |
|
Wow.. thats one scarry wall of text.Usualy i have patience to read entire posts.. bt this one is too much ;P
I have runes, potions and total disregard of public safety.
| |
|
f3rret, if your opinions were fully put into effect, the result could be potentially disastrous.
" No, you're the one who's pretentious. Merriam-Webster definition 1b, to be precise. (Mr. Benton is merely garrulous.) I am a soldier in the United States Army. I've deployed. I've been shot at. And I think "war" is a perfectly fine figure of speech to use. When it comes to dealing with bots, you either have a conflict over resources with real consequences on people's lives (a war) or you put up no resistance (an invasion then a surrender). I'd like to agree with you that no one would die, but the ugly truth is that some people with serious gaming addictions do get suicidal over things like this. Pathetic, truly. " Unless the GGG staff has more CEH certifications (or similar qualifications) than I'd imagine, they really don't have the expertise to be doing this in-house. So from their perspective, their options are: * Accept help from the PoE beta testing community, which would mean something similar to OP's original suggestion (with modifications) * Hire specific individual(s) with a hacking background to the GGG staff to come in-person for in-house penetration testing (perhaps on a volunteer basis to save money) * Essentially do nothing. I think your suggestion leans far more towards #3. Simply shrugging off the problem by saying "GGG can do it in-house" reveals far more of a hatred for all hackers, regardless of ethics or intent, than it does taking the problem seriously and trying to find a real, comprehensive solution. I'd believe you were more genuine in your desire to help if, reaffirming your belief that the general beta-test population should not be allowed to attempt to hack PoE, instead drew_benton should try being a part of the in-house solution (even if he does seem to quote Sun Tzu too often). " How do you expect people to actually test for holes in security if there is no hope of reward and a fear of reprisal? Granted, penetration testing should ALWAYS be done with EXPLICIT permission of the client, so drew_benton posting this here is by no means enough to get him exemption from the rules; as things stand now, he should expect a ban if he exploits the game. However, we should be encouraging interested people like drew to apply for that permission and recommend that GGG give their permission. You told drew "no;" you should have told him "not yet." " Well I don't think he should be revered; thanking him is more appropriate. Letting us know about some of the currently available hacks helps the situation. An admonishment for exploiting without obtaining permission first might also be in order, but you seem totally blind to the principle behind that. " Wow. You couldn't have used an analogy more favorable for my viewpoint. See, the WCO did make efforts to test for blood doping. And they did catch people... pretty much everyone, eventually. Of course Lance Armstrong being disgraced is a big news story, but if you look into it virtually everyone in all of those races has, at one time or another, been suspended for blood doping. In one Tour de France, if you disqualified everyone who had been caught blood doping at one time or another, first through seventh place would have been DQ'd! Given the benefits of blood doping, the WCO did not have strict enough enforcement to properly disincentivize their players from using it. Given the benefits of botting, a very strict, comprehensive security plan needs to be in place to properly disincentivize botters from botting. This includes active testing by white-hats trying to discover exploits so they can report them to developers. When Stephen Colbert was killed by HYDRA's Project Insight in 2014, the comedy world lost a hero. Since his life model decoy isn't up to the task, please do not mistake my performance as political discussion. I'm just doing what Steve would have wanted. Last edited by ScrotieMcB on Jan 6, 2013, 2:30:51 PM
|
|
