Multi-Boxing. Finally. The facts.

"

mrmisterwaa wrote:

If you want to bot a game, how about you just play progressquest and watch your character progress with absolutely no input from you? -_-

"

cryptc wrote:

"

mrmisterwaa wrote:

If you want to bot a game, how about you just play progressquest and watch your character progress with absolutely no input from you? -_-

And then multibox the sh*t out of it :P

"

Alienchild wrote:

Now there must be a logical reason why so many companies that clearly do not allow automation, allow multi-boxing. The answer to that is that multi-boxing is NOT AUTOMATION. It relies on either software or hardware or a bit of both to REPLICATE key strokes and mouse movements.

This is not automation, this is replication and is allowed. The simple fact is that if it was not, then multi-boxing would not be possible or nearly impossible.

"

Chris via Gamespot livestream wrote:

Our current stance on multiboxing is that you're welcome to run multiple clients on the same machine, but you should be playing each one; and if you're using tools to proxy your input between them and stuff like that, then that's an unfair advantage. So if it's exactly the same as walking between 6 computers and you move the mouse on each one and control the characters, that's no problem at all. But as soon as you're running cheaty programs to make it so you're effectively running one guy with the power of 6, then that's a problem.

"

AintCare wrote:

"

Alienchild wrote:

TL;DR; Know what you are arguing about before arguing about it!


I see endless arguing on these forums about multi-boxing. As the saying goes, I see a lot of heat but very little light.

People are all arguing pretty much about the Emperor's new clothes (i.e. a problem that doesn't exist). At best they haven't even agreed what multi-boxing is exactly, yet prepared to attack it/defend it ad nauseum.

Since I have followed almost every thread about this subject I will try at least to add some clarity, then maybe you can decide exactly what you are arguing about.

1. Definition of Multi-boxing:

From Wikipedia.

I stopped reading after that, Wiki is NOT source- I can go there and edit it myself, wtf is that suppose to prove... multiboxing is cheating and p2w (better computer).. do I care- NO, people cheat everywhere, so why is this any different... deal with it

"

Alienchild wrote:

I stopped reading after that, Wiki is NOT source- I can go there and edit it myself, wtf is that suppose to prove... multiboxing is cheating and p2w (better computer).. do I care- NO, people cheat everywhere, so why is this any different... deal with it

"

AintCare wrote:

TL;DR; Know what you are arguing about before arguing about it!

"

monkuar wrote:

Whoever bumped this thread, shame on you.

"

BRavich wrote:

"

Alienchild wrote:

I stopped reading after that, Wiki is NOT source- I can go there and edit it myself, wtf is that suppose to prove... multiboxing is cheating and p2w (better computer).. do I care- NO, people cheat everywhere, so why is this any different... deal with it

Wiki has proven its reliability in plenty of studies on sources. Once again:

"

AintCare wrote:

TL;DR; Know what you are arguing about before arguing about it!

"

Zalm wrote:

I think that FFA loot will only scare away D3 players...which off the top of my head is the only game with inctanced loot. Now I am probably wrong, but that to my knowledge is the only game with personal loot no matter what.

"

"Our current stance on multiboxing is that you're welcome to run multiple clients on the same machine, but you should be playing each one; and if you're using tools to proxy your input between them and stuff like that, then that's an unfair advantage. So if it's exactly the same as walking between 6 computers and you move the mouse on each one and control the characters, that's no problem at all. But as soon as you're running cheaty programs to make it so you're effectively running one guy with the power of 6, then that's a problem.