Olorinus, I realize most people dont give a frack about windower. As long as people come in stamping their feet about the EULA and breaking it is super bad as the basis of their argument against cheating, then I will bring up windower because it breaks it too. The EULA (should be called CYOA) is not some supreme law of the land that SE frets about if broken. Its their to cover SEs *** if they **** you off, wrongfully ban you, or whatever. You can't come back all huffy and sue/bother them if something happens because you clicked the accept button on their terms. There are lots of valid arguments about cheating, but this blanket idea that breaking the eula is the reason its bad is weak. If there was a stoplight at the end of a deadend street that never turned green and I lived on that street, law be damned I'm going to work. If I can't alt tab eula be damned I'm going to my **** site! There are times something may be technically rule breaking, but not bad. If there's a gunman at the pool I better walk away because the sign says no running. This obsession with the letter exactness of the eula is absurd.
There is not a team of guys at se banging their heads against a wall trying to figure out how to track and ban windower users. I'd bet money if you asked a few devs off the record if they even care that people are modding their game via windower they wouldn't give 2 sh*ts. The EULA just makes sure there is a way out Scot free if se pissed you off to much. They aren't spending dev dollars to combat windower. No game company uses the EULA as their constitution. Its thereto 'reserve the right' to do controversial things, mass ban rmt, and cover their *** I the delete your sh*t for any reason.
Edited, Jul 5th 2012 4:46pm by Banalaty
·Theme
- Forums
- Final Fantasy XI
- General Discussion
- Nyzul Uncharted: nice gear, cheater!
Nyzul Uncharted: nice gear, cheater!Follow
Ok, yeah though, EULA aside - are people trying to argue that modding lamp dats to foil the intentions of the developers (as maddening as we can all agree they are) and seeing through walls and flee hacking isn't cheating? It seems like a textbook case of it to me (modifying the game to give yourself an advantage others don't have)...
I guess I just want someone on the pro-hack side of the argument to acknowledge that there is a good chance that if folks continue voiding the intentions of the developers in this event that the result is probably going to be events with even worse design.
It's sort of hard to argue NNI is poorly designed and needs to be changed and nothing should ever be designed like that again if thousands of people have all the gear from it. So I worry, and I think my worry is justified - that these actions will harm everyone.
Otherwise, I wouldn't give a crap. It's just where it has the potential to affect me that I get my panties in a bunch.
I guess I just want someone on the pro-hack side of the argument to acknowledge that there is a good chance that if folks continue voiding the intentions of the developers in this event that the result is probably going to be events with even worse design.
It's sort of hard to argue NNI is poorly designed and needs to be changed and nothing should ever be designed like that again if thousands of people have all the gear from it. So I worry, and I think my worry is justified - that these actions will harm everyone.
Otherwise, I wouldn't give a crap. It's just where it has the potential to affect me that I get my panties in a bunch.
Olorinus wrote:
Ok, yeah though, EULA aside - are people trying to argue that modding lamp dats to foil the intentions of the developers (as maddening as we can all agree they are) and seeing through walls and flee hacking isn't cheating? It seems like a textbook case of it to me (modifying the game to give yourself an advantage others don't have)...
Philemon on Valefor
Gjallarhorn 4/17/08
Daurdabla 5/9/11
Carnwenhan 5/4/12
Ryunohige 10/29/12
Gjallarhorn 4/17/08
Daurdabla 5/9/11
Carnwenhan 5/4/12
Ryunohige 10/29/12
detlef wrote:
Olorinus wrote:
Ok, yeah though, EULA aside - are people trying to argue that modding lamp dats to foil the intentions of the developers (as maddening as we can all agree they are) and seeing through walls and flee hacking isn't cheating? It seems like a textbook case of it to me (modifying the game to give yourself an advantage others don't have)...
I am not sure about this either - I dont think anyone who is using this method came out and said "this isnt cheating."
Quote:
I guess I just want someone on the pro-hack side of the argument to acknowledge that there is a good chance that if folks continue voiding the intentions of the developers in this event that the result is probably going to be events with even worse design.
For the record, I dont use these cheats - I heard NNI was so abysmal I have avoided it completely. That being said, I really dont care if people use these cheats; its not harming me in any way, and I dont think its even harming me in the abstract way by SE thinking everything is peechy because several people have full sets of armor. I dont recall SE ever turning back droprate criticism with stats like "well, X% of people have the item, so the event is easy enough." That has simply never happened to my knowledge, so its highly, highly doubtful they will do that with this. Hell, after the salvage bans it was obvious people were willing to cheat (possibly because Salvage was just too fruitless): the madness of getting drops from salvage was never really addressed until that gear was pretty much useless.
Want to know how SE really feels about hacks? Right now as I type this there are 50+ /anon fish botters in the Glacier on Valefor. How long have fishbots been around, 2004?
Edited, Jul 5th 2012 5:15pm by ManifestOfKujata
ManifestOfKujata wrote:
detlef wrote:
Olorinus wrote:
Ok, yeah though, EULA aside - are people trying to argue that modding lamp dats to foil the intentions of the developers (as maddening as we can all agree they are) and seeing through walls and flee hacking isn't cheating? It seems like a textbook case of it to me (modifying the game to give yourself an advantage others don't have)...
I am not sure about this either - I dont think anyone who is using this method came out and said "this isnt cheating."
It is cheating. That has never been a point of contention. The problem is that some anti cheaters are saying its bad BECAUSE its cheating. If that is the REASON its bad its faulty because things like windower before windowed mode is equally a bad BECAUSE its cheating which is preposterous. The fact that its technically illegal doesn't make something evil. Law/rules dont decide morality in and of themselves. If I write a rule that if more than 1 person are in my house they must dual to the death and the victor must yell, IN THE END, THERE CAN BE ONLY 1!!!! the rule means jack sh*t to change the actions right/wrong/moralityness.
which brings up the next aspect. If you dont give a sh*t about windower but do car about flee hacking because it 'gives a user an advantage over another' then its hypocritical to be against flee hacks but pro windower. Both give advantages you shouldn't have. You can't pick and choose the cheats you like to be ok but the cheats you dont are bad because they are cheats. If the definition of cheating is how you measure good and bad, you can't exclude the cheats you like. You need a different reason its bad that only applies to the 'bad' ones.
To the final point about future content being worse because everyone has 15/15. The fact that people are successful in an event doesn't mean the event is ok. It is not a barometer of good/bad/fun/not fun. The idea that players are successfully completing content there for next round will be harder implies that SE is trying to make impossible content that no one can win. "Well ****. They beat the last dungeon fast. Better make the next one 3x as hard!" that idea only applies if you are actively trying to 'beat' the players. That has no bearing on fun content development. I think that idea is a little far oueven for se.
Edited, Jul 5th 2012 5:17pm by Banalaty
which brings up the next aspect. If you dont give a sh*t about windower but do car about flee hacking because it 'gives a user an advantage over another' then its hypocritical to be against flee hacks but pro windower. Both give advantages you shouldn't have. You can't pick and choose the cheats you like to be ok but the cheats you dont are bad because they are cheats. If the definition of cheating is how you measure good and bad, you can't exclude the cheats you like. You need a different reason its bad that only applies to the 'bad' ones.
To the final point about future content being worse because everyone has 15/15. The fact that people are successful in an event doesn't mean the event is ok. It is not a barometer of good/bad/fun/not fun. The idea that players are successfully completing content there for next round will be harder implies that SE is trying to make impossible content that no one can win. "Well ****. They beat the last dungeon fast. Better make the next one 3x as hard!" that idea only applies if you are actively trying to 'beat' the players. That has no bearing on fun content development. I think that idea is a little far oueven for se.
Edited, Jul 5th 2012 5:17pm by Banalaty
Olorinus wrote:
Ok, yeah though, EULA aside - are people trying to argue that modding lamp dats to foil the intentions of the developers (as maddening as we can all agree they are) and seeing through walls and flee hacking isn't cheating? It seems like a textbook case of it to me (modifying the game to give yourself an advantage others don't have)...
To my knowledge, no one is arguing this.
They are just explaining their reasons for doing so.
Olorinus wrote:
I guess I just want someone on the pro-hack side of the argument to acknowledge that there is a good chance that if folks continue voiding the intentions of the developers in this event that the result is probably going to be events with even worse design.
It's sort of hard to argue NNI is poorly designed and needs to be changed and nothing should ever be designed like that again if thousands of people have all the gear from it. So I worry, and I think my worry is justified - that these actions will harm everyone.
You are right to worry those things but somehow SE eventually started designing better events than server wide, 24-72 hour pops, probably because they couldn't do anything worse than that. Those were events for years 1.5 to 8.5 of the game life that had "folks continue voiding the intentions of the developers" (e.g., cheating).
Carbuncle
Banalaty wrote:
There is not a team of guys at se banging their heads against a wall trying to figure out how to track and ban windower users. I'd bet money if you asked a few devs off the record if they even care that people are modding their game via windower they wouldn't give 2 sh*ts. The EULA just makes sure there is a way out Scot free if se pissed you off to much. They aren't spending dev dollars to combat windower. No game company uses the EULA as their constitution. Its thereto 'reserve the right' to do controversial things, mass ban rmt, and cover their *** I the delete your sh*t for any reason.
Exactly what I was trying to convey. SE has the EULA to enforce their status-quo of what they deem "appropriate actions" in the game. The windower is a program that I am sure most GMs don't consider "cheating" but I am sure they will say it is violation of the EULA. If I were to compare it to a sport, I would rate the plain-jane windower about as exploitable as coach having a written play book instead of having it all inside of his head.
If a team had mario raccoon tails to fly the way to the touchdown line (because they think it is too hard to do it normally)... that would be "cheating" (funny to see but cheating). I think SE is smart enough to know which parts of the EULA to enforce and which to not. It's always a hard call, but a line has to be drawn in the sand sometimes because if you don't, people won't just cross the line, they will destroy it.
To be honest I think the windower is of no harm. The EULA says it is wrong. I'd expect SE to enforce their laws that they made when it comes to their intellectual property. But what I think doesn't really matter in the scope of things. It is their game. I just wish to warn people that they can be banned for using Nyzul hacks (and who knows maybe the windower?). People have stated that everyone agrees it violates the EULA to cheat, but honestly, some people don't. They don't read it when they sign it (or maybe they don't understand it). Players have been saying it is ok to cheat inside of FFXI and there are no consequences so they should just follow the herd. I don't want them tricked into doing something that they will be most likely banned for and not know why. Remember some MMOs allow 3rd party content and they might think the same way about FFXI and break the rule to the fullest extent.
Now that I think of it Prrsha, werent you the guy turning people in to GMs if they shouted to sell a spot in a FC party?
ManifestOfKujata wrote:
Now that I think of it Prrsha, werent you the guy turning people in to GMs if they shouted to sell a spot in a FC party?
Yes and no. It is more complex then that. I asked a GM if it was wrong to sell spots in parties and he said, yes. You can be slapped with a temp ban for it. I PMed a total of 3 people on Phoenix who were shouting and warned them and what the GM said. I didn't turn anyone into a GM, I just gave them a heads up. The 3 people by the way were people whom I have known for a long time in the game (but not on personal level). I didn't want them to get banned for shouts, so I warned them against it.
Olorinus wrote:
I guess I just want someone on the pro-hack side of the argument to acknowledge that there is a good chance that if folks continue voiding the intentions of the developers in this event that the result is probably going to be events with even worse design.
A good case in point is fishing. Due to bot cheats the playerbase has suffered when it comes to selling their fish. NPC buy price was lowered and a fatigue system was added. Also rusty caps when synthed are plain caps not padded caps. They gil reduced from synthing them was reduced ten fold.
Edited, Jul 5th 2012 5:33pm by Prrsha
Absolutely. I am not advocating that people cheat because they allow windower (very unofficially). Only that demonizing people that break the Eula is silly, and people that dont like flee hackers need to organize the arguments why, else they spout the its cheating so its wrong! line and make themselves hypocrites (windower) or base their morality attacks based on arbitrary rules, ( a company rule book doesn't determine morality. Insert Hitler, slavery references because they had laws that were NOT morally sound)
unless I'm mistaken I have never told anyone they 'should' cheat. Only defended cheaters from illogical attacks. As fior the fishing argument, they did the same to npc prices of other farmed items which were done completely legally. Bst blood, bird blood and others. No one was not farming or cheating and that got nerfed too. SE has a history of jacking things up even when there's no tis/eula issues.
Edited, Jul 5th 2012 5:38pm by Banalaty
unless I'm mistaken I have never told anyone they 'should' cheat. Only defended cheaters from illogical attacks. As fior the fishing argument, they did the same to npc prices of other farmed items which were done completely legally. Bst blood, bird blood and others. No one was not farming or cheating and that got nerfed too. SE has a history of jacking things up even when there's no tis/eula issues.
Edited, Jul 5th 2012 5:38pm by Banalaty
Banalaty wrote:
Absolutely. I am not advocating that people cheat because they allow windower (very unofficially). Only that demonizing people that break the Eula is silly, and people that dont like flee hackers need to organize the arguments why, else they spout the its cheating so its wrong! line and make themselves hypocrites (windower) or base their morality attacks based on arbitrary rules, ( a company rule book doesn't determine morality. Insert Hitler, slavery references because they had laws that were NOT morally sound)
Please don't mention Hitler. The comparison is way off. I doubt anyone SIGNED an agreement to be killed without being decieved.
This is not a world war or we are debating but a EULA that a game company has created saying not to alter their property.
Banalaty wrote:
unless I'm mistaken I have never told anyone they 'should' cheat. Only defended cheaters from illogical attacks. As fior the fishing argument, they did the same to npc prices of other farmed items which were done completely legally. Bst blood, bird blood and others. No one was not farming or cheating and that got nerfed too. SE has a history of jacking things up even when there's no tis/eula issues.
I'd assume the blood issue was an oversight of SE. It was generating too much gil that they probably thought was messing with the economy.
Edited, Jul 5th 2012 5:43pm by Prrsha
Prrsha wrote:
If I were to compare it to a sport, I would rate the plain-jane windower about as exploitable as coach having a written play book instead of having it all inside of his head.
George Carlin wrote:
I think it’s the duty of the comedian to find out where the line is drawn and cross it deliberately.
#315Prrsha,
Posted: Jul 05 2012 at 3:45 PM, Rating: Sub-Default, (Expand Post) Maybe it fell on his head too. XD
Prrsha wrote:
ManifestOfKujata wrote:
Now that I think of it Prrsha, werent you the guy turning people in to GMs if they shouted to sell a spot in a FC party?
Yes and no. It is more complex then that. I asked a GM if it was wrong to sell spots in parties and he said, yes. You can be slapped with a temp ban for it. I PMed a total of 3 people on Phoenix who were shouting and warned them and what the GM said. I didn't turn anyone into a GM, I just gave them a heads up. The 3 people by the way were people whom I have known for a long time in the game (but not on personal level). I didn't want them to get banned for shouts, so I warned them against it.
Really? Thats odd, because you told us something completely different a few months ago:
First mention:
Prrsha wrote:
Oh, yes. I do own up to reporting people SELLING FC per hour for gil. According to the GMs I have spoken with, this is bannable. It's bannable in the same way as you can claim a NM and SELL the claim for GIL. As for FC parties for free? Nah, they don't care. Nor do they seem to care about those buy FCs.
I don't intend to know their logic in this, only that they do ban people that shout "FC in xxx for xxx gil for 7 hrs."
It's a good sign to see people offering others help to accomplish a similar goal or even help another. It's crosses the line when people SELL leveling parties to the desprate.
If you don't believe me, read the post you linked to.
To sum it up again. You SELL spots in jeuno via shouts you get banned. You OFFER spots in jeuno via shouts you don't.
On one occasion I had a player come back to me in a /tell a few days later saying he got a temp ban and was asked to please desist by a GM.
second mention:
Prrsha wrote:
Like I said, maybe, maybe not. TBH there is always a point where a flame fest starts in Port Jeuno over the people who charge for leveling. I don't pay for leveling. I never have... however the GMs do ban on the spot for it. If I do report someone for the whole "pay me xxx for xxx hrs of lvling" gig, I warn them 1st that SE is cracking down. If they stop I move on. If it becomes a crazy circus of shouts even after they are warned, yes I do report the offenders to the STFU.
The STFU asks for the day, location of shouts, and the person in question. Once reported it's up to them to choose their course of action. I've even been thanked for doing so. With all of this talk of what FFXI is or what it should be... I dunno... isn't this issue clear by their actions?
And scroll a bit up to my post a little above the first one I linked to:
Prrsha wrote:
"I just report them and they appear in Gooul"
So is lying in your EULA?
EDIT: I pointed out how you were dishonest in that other thread as well. Seriously, how can someone SO for following the rules pull dishonesty out of his backside so freely?
After rereading some of that thread...I stand by my **** comment I made on the last page, even if I got sh*t for it. Damn dude.
Edited, Jul 5th 2012 6:02pm by ManifestOfKujata
Banalaty wrote:
which brings up the next aspect. If you dont give a sh*t about windower but do car about flee hacking because it 'gives a user an advantage over another' then its hypocritical to be against flee hacks but pro windower. Both give advantages you shouldn't have. You can't pick and choose the cheats you like to be ok but the cheats you dont are bad because they are cheats. If the definition of cheating is how you measure good and bad, you can't exclude the cheats you like. You need a different reason its bad that only applies to the 'bad' ones.
Nice excluded middle there.
Its fine if you don't see a difference, but I do. What else can I say? All jobs in the game and all players have macros. Not all jobs have any sort of non-item induced flee. None have perma flee. So half of it is a matter of degree. I don't have problems with people using better macros than me. Heck there are tons of people on vanilla with better macros than me.
I don't really give a fig about the marginal improvements some players will have over me because they have better macros. Why would I?
However. If I'm running to claim an NM and someone flee hacks and grabs it first, well, gee, yeah, of course I'm going to be against that. It impacts me.
Why would I be against someone in my party having particularly good macros? Why would I care if someone I'm watching kill an NM while I wait for my turn can kill slightly better or faster? That has no negative impact on me or other players.
Your argument is like saying you can't be okay with PVR if you're against downloading TV. They are similar, but different, and agree or disagree, I think it is a little over the top to call people hypocrites for not being completely black and white.
OK let me try a slightly different approach. There are basically 3 ways to look at the rule breaking.
________________
Edit: I say 'you, yours' etc a lot. Im not directing the entire post at 1 specific person, but to the general ideas various people have mentioned, so its kinda a universal 'you, yours, mine' etc. If the line applies to you, then im talking to you. If it doesnt, im probably talking about something someone else said.
_________________________________
Option A: Everything that breaks the exact letter of the law should be enforced and people should live to the exact standards they are under. This is the "Windowers and everything should be banned" position. This is simply not realistic in any way shape or form. This is like doling out tickets to the parents of every kid that rides a bike on the sidewalk. (Its illegal to ride a bike on the sidewalk. Dunno if its national law or state, but its true where i live). This is a little rediculous. Everyone breaks the law to SOME degree. Everyone breaks the rules to SOME degree. Someone has retracted their move in checkers after they removed their hand from the piece. Someone has gone gone 61 in a 60. Someone has used windower. Living to the EXACT letter of every rule is, quite frankly, unrealistic and never enforced. If you are of this position, all i can say is GL to you, but me and the rest of the world arent going along with it. You may be 'technically' correct but no one gives a sh*t if your the guy flipping tables because someone retracted their move in checkers after taking their hand off the piece. Cops are TOLD not to pull over every kid on a bike on the sidewalk and ticket their parents for it. The law is there to prevent cyclists from running over wheelchairs on a 3-4ft sidewalk. Not to make kids ride in the street with traffic. Its simply unreasonable. Cops are TOLD not to enforce this to the letter. Just like no one at SE is just revin up to ban all those windower guys. That stance is simply to extreme for a livable world.
Option B: Well they dont pull me over for goin 61 in a 60 so i can go 150mph in a school zone! Same THANG! Welcome to anarchy. Just because SOME rules arent enforced doesnt mean you can break them all. Duh. NASA bots are bad mmkay.
Now that we see that the obious extremes are stupid, whats left? Option C: Rules are there, but enfoced in a 'reasonable' way. Welcome to the gray area. Well windower is harmless and fine. Nasa bots are bad. What about spellcast? Its just a step up from extended macros? What about those cure bot programs? Thats just a step up from spellcast. Gradations in every aspect. What if you just flee hack 12.5% speed AND you already have wlegs? Its just a convenience. What if you do 12.5% but you left them in your mog? I mean really gonna enforce that? Well if thats not enfocred what about flee hack 12.5% and no wlegs? Well nin can get 25% naturally anyway! Well waht about, what about, what about.
If you are in option A or B, quite frankly your being absurd. 100% by the book is unlivable. Total anarchy kills games. We exist somewhere in between. What happens when the enforcement agency doesnt live 100% by the book? THey make exceptions, like not ticketing a kids riding on the sidewalks parents. You start to see the word 'reasonable' tossed around. It becomes an unspoken pact between the enforcers and the enforcees. This is what we have in all aspects of the world from games to law. So who decides this? And now were back to a post a few pages ago taht discussed the agreement between SE and the players (not the EULA or TOS. But an unspoken agreement about what is 'reasonably allowed' like windower for example). The thing is, no single person has any more right to draw a line in the sand 3 feet from the by the book category and claim they are 'more right' than a player that draws the line 4 feet from the by the book category.
sh*t is gray. @#%^ing gray. Group 1 says the line for 'unreasonable hacking' is 3 feet from the line. Group 2 says, now, this event is far to unreasonable so we shall make an exception because its 'unreasonable'.
You have no more right to say im unreasonable than I do to you. Unreasonable is an opinion. To rule this game without opinion is to fall into either: All cheats are bad and should be banned. Ticket the parents of every kid on a trike on the sidewalk! Or, @#%^ it! CHEAT ALL THE THINGS! Drag race through school zones at 330PM!!! If you are in one of those categories, your unreasonable. If your not, then we can quibble endlessly about what IS 'reasonable' because its a @#%^ing opinion. You have no right to tell me what i think is reasonable let alone judge me for it. What possible argument makes so that your idea of reasonable is 'more right' than mine? Is it what the general community thinks? Times change and so do opinions. This event has changed peoples mind because the event itself is so unreasonable to the general community.
This sh*t is NOT black and white. If you treat it as such, your being unreasonable. Living 100% by the book is simply not realistic, or even feasible in most cases. If you are not claiming that ALL minor infractions should cease and be banned then you are in the same group as the cheaters. Fighting over gray area and 'degrees' of cheating trying to determine a consensus among many varied interest of what 'reasonable' is. There is no debate that a 5yo on a trike on the sidewalk is breaking the rules in my state. Its crystal clear just like windower is crystal clear cheating. Just like flee hacking is cheating. But its UNREASONABLE to enforce because those kids are safer there than riding in traffic. No one says cheaters arent cheating, they are saying that it is REASONABLE to do so in this circumstance.
@#%^ing. Gray. Area. Get off the 'you broke the rulez!' harping. We already know we are. But we are talking about a realistic and reasonable application of the rules which is an opinion and yours holds no more sway than mine. Opinions are valid so long as they can be backed up by some argument. We say the event is so unreasonable, that it requires an addendum to deal with this sh*t. You say i disagree that it is, in fact, not ''too unreasonable" to warrent a special treatment. (unless you are in the by the letter crowd, in which case i will promptly ignore you because its an unlivable lifestyle) Great! Can we call this a day now?
Edited, Jul 5th 2012 7:03pm by Banalaty
________________
Edit: I say 'you, yours' etc a lot. Im not directing the entire post at 1 specific person, but to the general ideas various people have mentioned, so its kinda a universal 'you, yours, mine' etc. If the line applies to you, then im talking to you. If it doesnt, im probably talking about something someone else said.
_________________________________
Option A: Everything that breaks the exact letter of the law should be enforced and people should live to the exact standards they are under. This is the "Windowers and everything should be banned" position. This is simply not realistic in any way shape or form. This is like doling out tickets to the parents of every kid that rides a bike on the sidewalk. (Its illegal to ride a bike on the sidewalk. Dunno if its national law or state, but its true where i live). This is a little rediculous. Everyone breaks the law to SOME degree. Everyone breaks the rules to SOME degree. Someone has retracted their move in checkers after they removed their hand from the piece. Someone has gone gone 61 in a 60. Someone has used windower. Living to the EXACT letter of every rule is, quite frankly, unrealistic and never enforced. If you are of this position, all i can say is GL to you, but me and the rest of the world arent going along with it. You may be 'technically' correct but no one gives a sh*t if your the guy flipping tables because someone retracted their move in checkers after taking their hand off the piece. Cops are TOLD not to pull over every kid on a bike on the sidewalk and ticket their parents for it. The law is there to prevent cyclists from running over wheelchairs on a 3-4ft sidewalk. Not to make kids ride in the street with traffic. Its simply unreasonable. Cops are TOLD not to enforce this to the letter. Just like no one at SE is just revin up to ban all those windower guys. That stance is simply to extreme for a livable world.
Option B: Well they dont pull me over for goin 61 in a 60 so i can go 150mph in a school zone! Same THANG! Welcome to anarchy. Just because SOME rules arent enforced doesnt mean you can break them all. Duh. NASA bots are bad mmkay.
Now that we see that the obious extremes are stupid, whats left? Option C: Rules are there, but enfoced in a 'reasonable' way. Welcome to the gray area. Well windower is harmless and fine. Nasa bots are bad. What about spellcast? Its just a step up from extended macros? What about those cure bot programs? Thats just a step up from spellcast. Gradations in every aspect. What if you just flee hack 12.5% speed AND you already have wlegs? Its just a convenience. What if you do 12.5% but you left them in your mog? I mean really gonna enforce that? Well if thats not enfocred what about flee hack 12.5% and no wlegs? Well nin can get 25% naturally anyway! Well waht about, what about, what about.
If you are in option A or B, quite frankly your being absurd. 100% by the book is unlivable. Total anarchy kills games. We exist somewhere in between. What happens when the enforcement agency doesnt live 100% by the book? THey make exceptions, like not ticketing a kids riding on the sidewalks parents. You start to see the word 'reasonable' tossed around. It becomes an unspoken pact between the enforcers and the enforcees. This is what we have in all aspects of the world from games to law. So who decides this? And now were back to a post a few pages ago taht discussed the agreement between SE and the players (not the EULA or TOS. But an unspoken agreement about what is 'reasonably allowed' like windower for example). The thing is, no single person has any more right to draw a line in the sand 3 feet from the by the book category and claim they are 'more right' than a player that draws the line 4 feet from the by the book category.
sh*t is gray. @#%^ing gray. Group 1 says the line for 'unreasonable hacking' is 3 feet from the line. Group 2 says, now, this event is far to unreasonable so we shall make an exception because its 'unreasonable'.
You have no more right to say im unreasonable than I do to you. Unreasonable is an opinion. To rule this game without opinion is to fall into either: All cheats are bad and should be banned. Ticket the parents of every kid on a trike on the sidewalk! Or, @#%^ it! CHEAT ALL THE THINGS! Drag race through school zones at 330PM!!! If you are in one of those categories, your unreasonable. If your not, then we can quibble endlessly about what IS 'reasonable' because its a @#%^ing opinion. You have no right to tell me what i think is reasonable let alone judge me for it. What possible argument makes so that your idea of reasonable is 'more right' than mine? Is it what the general community thinks? Times change and so do opinions. This event has changed peoples mind because the event itself is so unreasonable to the general community.
This sh*t is NOT black and white. If you treat it as such, your being unreasonable. Living 100% by the book is simply not realistic, or even feasible in most cases. If you are not claiming that ALL minor infractions should cease and be banned then you are in the same group as the cheaters. Fighting over gray area and 'degrees' of cheating trying to determine a consensus among many varied interest of what 'reasonable' is. There is no debate that a 5yo on a trike on the sidewalk is breaking the rules in my state. Its crystal clear just like windower is crystal clear cheating. Just like flee hacking is cheating. But its UNREASONABLE to enforce because those kids are safer there than riding in traffic. No one says cheaters arent cheating, they are saying that it is REASONABLE to do so in this circumstance.
@#%^ing. Gray. Area. Get off the 'you broke the rulez!' harping. We already know we are. But we are talking about a realistic and reasonable application of the rules which is an opinion and yours holds no more sway than mine. Opinions are valid so long as they can be backed up by some argument. We say the event is so unreasonable, that it requires an addendum to deal with this sh*t. You say i disagree that it is, in fact, not ''too unreasonable" to warrent a special treatment. (unless you are in the by the letter crowd, in which case i will promptly ignore you because its an unlivable lifestyle) Great! Can we call this a day now?
Edited, Jul 5th 2012 7:03pm by Banalaty
Prrsha wrote:
Banalaty wrote:
There is not a team of guys at se banging their heads against a wall trying to figure out how to track and ban windower users. I'd bet money if you asked a few devs off the record if they even care that people are modding their game via windower they wouldn't give 2 sh*ts. The EULA just makes sure there is a way out Scot free if se pissed you off to much. They aren't spending dev dollars to combat windower. No game company uses the EULA as their constitution. Its thereto 'reserve the right' to do controversial things, mass ban rmt, and cover their *** I the delete your sh*t for any reason.
Exactly what I was trying to convey. SE has the EULA to enforce their status-quo of what they deem "appropriate actions" in the game. The windower is a program that I am sure most GMs don't consider "cheating" but I am sure they will say it is violation of the EULA. If I were to compare it to a sport, I would rate the plain-jane windower about as exploitable as coach having a written play book instead of having it all inside of his head.
If a team had mario raccoon tails to fly the way to the touchdown line (because they think it is too hard to do it normally)... that would be "cheating" (funny to see but cheating). I think SE is smart enough to know which parts of the EULA to enforce and which to not. It's always a hard call, but a line has to be drawn in the sand sometimes because if you don't, people won't just cross the line, they will destroy it.
To be honest I think the windower is of no harm. The EULA says it is wrong. I'd expect SE to enforce their laws that they made when it comes to their intellectual property. But what I think doesn't really matter in the scope of things. It is their game. I just wish to warn people that they can be banned for using Nyzul hacks (and who knows maybe the windower?). People have stated that everyone agrees it violates the EULA to cheat, but honestly, some people don't. They don't read it when they sign it (or maybe they don't understand it). Players have been saying it is ok to cheat inside of FFXI and there are no consequences so they should just follow the herd. I don't want them tricked into doing something that they will be most likely banned for and not know why. Remember some MMOs allow 3rd party content and they might think the same way about FFXI and break the rule to the fullest extent.
ManifestOfKujata wrote:
Prrsha wrote:
ManifestOfKujata wrote:
Now that I think of it Prrsha, werent you the guy turning people in to GMs if they shouted to sell a spot in a FC party?
Yes and no. It is more complex then that. I asked a GM if it was wrong to sell spots in parties and he said, yes. You can be slapped with a temp ban for it. I PMed a total of 3 people on Phoenix who were shouting and warned them and what the GM said. I didn't turn anyone into a GM, I just gave them a heads up. The 3 people by the way were people whom I have known for a long time in the game (but not on personal level). I didn't want them to get banned for shouts, so I warned them against it.
Really? Thats odd, because you told us something completely different a few months ago:
First mention:
Prrsha wrote:
Oh, yes. I do own up to reporting people SELLING FC per hour for gil. According to the GMs I have spoken with, this is bannable. It's bannable in the same way as you can claim a NM and SELL the claim for GIL. As for FC parties for free? Nah, they don't care. Nor do they seem to care about those buy FCs.
I don't intend to know their logic in this, only that they do ban people that shout "FC in xxx for xxx gil for 7 hrs."
It's a good sign to see people offering others help to accomplish a similar goal or even help another. It's crosses the line when people SELL leveling parties to the desprate.
If you don't believe me, read the post you linked to.
To sum it up again. You SELL spots in jeuno via shouts you get banned. You OFFER spots in jeuno via shouts you don't.
On one occasion I had a player come back to me in a /tell a few days later saying he got a temp ban and was asked to please desist by a GM.
second mention:
Prrsha wrote:
Like I said, maybe, maybe not. TBH there is always a point where a flame fest starts in Port Jeuno over the people who charge for leveling. I don't pay for leveling. I never have... however the GMs do ban on the spot for it. If I do report someone for the whole "pay me xxx for xxx hrs of lvling" gig, I warn them 1st that SE is cracking down. If they stop I move on. If it becomes a crazy circus of shouts even after they are warned, yes I do report the offenders to the STFU.
The STFU asks for the day, location of shouts, and the person in question. Once reported it's up to them to choose their course of action. I've even been thanked for doing so. With all of this talk of what FFXI is or what it should be... I dunno... isn't this issue clear by their actions?
And scroll a bit up to my post a little above the first one I linked to:
Prrsha wrote:
"I just report them and they appear in Gooul"
So is lying in your EULA?
EDIT: I pointed out how you were dishonest in that other thread as well. Seriously, how can someone SO for following the rules pull dishonesty out of his backside so freely?
After rereading some of that thread...I stand by my **** comment I made on the last page, even if I got sh*t for it. Damn dude.
I'll clarify then: I spoke to a GM about paid FCs. He said it was bannable. When his attention was brought to it by my question people disappeared with a temp ban. Later those people came back and told me about it. Once I saw that, I warned others who were shouting about FCs for cash about what the GMs are doing. I spoke to 3 people regarding this and warned them about people going poof. These events occured in the course of 2 days. After that I went soloing with friend and just plain stayed away from Jeuno for a few days. I never contacted a GM later. Did my GM call get those people temp banned? Yeah, indirectly. The whole reason why I asked the GM in the first place was to find out if it was ok or not.
Probably the best solution if anyone is confused at what things are ok or not to do in FFXI is to ask a GM. It's the best way to clear up a grey area. When in doubt ask the ref.
Banalaty wrote:
OK let me try a slightly different approach. There are basically 3 ways to look at the rule breaking.
If you are in option A or B, quite frankly your being absurd. 100% by the book is unlivable. Total anarchy kills games. We exist somewhere in between. What happens when the enforcement agency doesnt live 100% by the book? THey make exceptions, like not ticketing a kids riding on the sidewalks parents. You start to see the word 'reasonable' tossed around. It becomes an unspoken pact between the enforcers and the enforcees. This is what we have in all aspects of the world from games to law. So who decides this? And now were back to a post a few pages ago taht discussed the agreement between SE and the players (not the EULA or TOS. But an unspoken agreement about what is 'reasonably allowed' like windower for example). The thing is, no single person has any more right to draw a line in the sand 3 feet from the by the book category and claim they are 'more right' than a player that draws the line 4 feet from the by the book category.
sh*t is gray. @#%^ing gray. Group 1 says the line for 'unreasonable hacking' is 3 feet from the line. Group 2 says, now, this event is far to unreasonable so we shall make an exception because its 'unreasonable'.
You have no more right to say im unreasonable than I do to you. Unreasonable is an opinion. To rule this game without opinion is to fall into either: All cheats are bad and should be banned. Ticket the parents of every kid on a trike on the sidewalk! Or, @#%^ it! CHEAT ALL THE THINGS! Drag race through school zones at 330PM!!! If you are in one of those categories, your unreasonable. If your not, then we can quibble endlessly about what IS 'reasonable' because its a @#%^ing opinion. .
If you are in option A or B, quite frankly your being absurd. 100% by the book is unlivable. Total anarchy kills games. We exist somewhere in between. What happens when the enforcement agency doesnt live 100% by the book? THey make exceptions, like not ticketing a kids riding on the sidewalks parents. You start to see the word 'reasonable' tossed around. It becomes an unspoken pact between the enforcers and the enforcees. This is what we have in all aspects of the world from games to law. So who decides this? And now were back to a post a few pages ago taht discussed the agreement between SE and the players (not the EULA or TOS. But an unspoken agreement about what is 'reasonably allowed' like windower for example). The thing is, no single person has any more right to draw a line in the sand 3 feet from the by the book category and claim they are 'more right' than a player that draws the line 4 feet from the by the book category.
sh*t is gray. @#%^ing gray. Group 1 says the line for 'unreasonable hacking' is 3 feet from the line. Group 2 says, now, this event is far to unreasonable so we shall make an exception because its 'unreasonable'.
You have no more right to say im unreasonable than I do to you. Unreasonable is an opinion. To rule this game without opinion is to fall into either: All cheats are bad and should be banned. Ticket the parents of every kid on a trike on the sidewalk! Or, @#%^ it! CHEAT ALL THE THINGS! Drag race through school zones at 330PM!!! If you are in one of those categories, your unreasonable. If your not, then we can quibble endlessly about what IS 'reasonable' because its a @#%^ing opinion. .
I agree 100% to what you said, however I tend to (and I assume many others) believe that what is going on in Nyzul is like the person driving 330 mph.
Banalaty wrote:
You have no right to tell me what i think is reasonable let alone judge me for it. What possible argument makes so that your idea of reasonable is 'more right' than mine? Is it what the general community thinks? Times change and so do opinions. This event has changed peoples mind because the event itself is so unreasonable to the general community.
In a debate people are free to their own opinion. When people express opinions which are counter to another's, it's that in itself judgemental?
As for the entire community changing their mind over cheating due to Nyzul... that's not the case. Some people find the event reasonable in their above posts. I really don't think all of these hacks and mods appeared overnight when Nyzul was altered. They were in place long ago and people cried foul (or supported) them then. Don't use the excuse that you were "forced" to cheat (although there was someone complaining about being bullied for refusing to cheat) because of Nyzul. The area is an optional one and the gear is optional too.
If you want the area or event changed, speak up. So far I bet SE has read this thread, seen complaints, seen people admiting to using 3rd party tools in game. Keeping this discussion going only helps everyone's case really... It forces a huge neon infront of their face saying there are problems with Nyzul. Your energy is better spent changing their minds instead of altering their game to get what you want. If you cheat there is a risk of losing your character. Speaking up is a safer, better approach plus it doesn't divide the community so...
Edited, Jul 5th 2012 9:53pm by Prrsha
Let me try to sort this out: you are for black-and-white definitions when it comes to following the EULA; but when it comes to someone calling you out on lying, suddenly its no longer in the world of black-and-white, its "....I'll clarify...", as to suggest its not a yes-or-no, its an explanation.
There is no clarification needed here: you said you never turned anyone in for selling FC parties, but there was a screenshot of you discussing how you did just that; furthermore, you said "I just report them and they appear in Gooul." You admitting this not only implies that you turned people in to GMs but that you reveled in doing so. There is no "clarification": according to you, you told people to stop selling FC spots, they didnt do as you instructed, then - according to you - you mentioned it to a GM, you obviously gave specific names (unless its a VERY big coincidence that the people that were temp banned just happened to talk to you about it afterwards which is highly doubtful), then - according to you - they ended up in jail. That is a VERY VERY VERY far cry from your initial claim of "I didn't turn anyone into a GM". You certainly DID turn specific people into a GM and then tried to lie about it in the post above.
Just as a side note - you never considered selling spots in a FC party, so the ONLY reason you would have to contact a GM about the issue is to turn people in to the authorities. Why else would you care to even waste a GMs time over this? Normal people - if they question a practice but dont engage in that practice themselves - dont call a GM to simply ask about it, they have an angle and that angle is to put a stop to the issue.
And just so there is no confusion, the statement "Oh, yes. I do own up to reporting people SELLING FC per hour for gil." means you reported specific people for selling FC spots. There is absolutely no "let me clarify..." here.
Sorry, I just cant take it when people blatantly lie like that - and, in my mind, this instance catapults you into the realm of a sociopath. Is sociopath a strong label? Lets explore. you said this:
I just wish to warn people that they can be banned for using Nyzul hacks (and who knows maybe the windower?)...I don't want them tricked into doing something that they will be most likely banned for and not know why.
But then you go ahead and do this:
"I just report them and they appear in Gooul"
You are trying to give this impression that you hold yourself to a higher standard (and you hold other people to this high standard), and that you truly care about people and dont want to see them banned - you care, so you warn them. But in reality, you are the AGENT of people being banned. You really go out of your way to be an @#%^ by acting on a level most level-headded people would never consider, and then you are willing to be fully dishonest about going out of your way to be an @#%^ WHILE ALSO trying to play the part of White Knight.
This is why I cant take any of your posts seriously; the sociopathic dishonesty just really sours me to the whole experience. Sorry, but this is why I cant trust your judgement on when using hacks crosses the line. In fact, I would put money on the fact that you recorded everyone's name in this thread that admitted to using any 3rd party software and are in the process of shipping this info off to the STF.
Edited, Jul 6th 2012 1:31pm by ManifestOfKujata
There is no clarification needed here: you said you never turned anyone in for selling FC parties, but there was a screenshot of you discussing how you did just that; furthermore, you said "I just report them and they appear in Gooul." You admitting this not only implies that you turned people in to GMs but that you reveled in doing so. There is no "clarification": according to you, you told people to stop selling FC spots, they didnt do as you instructed, then - according to you - you mentioned it to a GM, you obviously gave specific names (unless its a VERY big coincidence that the people that were temp banned just happened to talk to you about it afterwards which is highly doubtful), then - according to you - they ended up in jail. That is a VERY VERY VERY far cry from your initial claim of "I didn't turn anyone into a GM". You certainly DID turn specific people into a GM and then tried to lie about it in the post above.
Just as a side note - you never considered selling spots in a FC party, so the ONLY reason you would have to contact a GM about the issue is to turn people in to the authorities. Why else would you care to even waste a GMs time over this? Normal people - if they question a practice but dont engage in that practice themselves - dont call a GM to simply ask about it, they have an angle and that angle is to put a stop to the issue.
And just so there is no confusion, the statement "Oh, yes. I do own up to reporting people SELLING FC per hour for gil." means you reported specific people for selling FC spots. There is absolutely no "let me clarify..." here.
Sorry, I just cant take it when people blatantly lie like that - and, in my mind, this instance catapults you into the realm of a sociopath. Is sociopath a strong label? Lets explore. you said this:
Prrsha wrote:
I just wish to warn people that they can be banned for using Nyzul hacks (and who knows maybe the windower?)...I don't want them tricked into doing something that they will be most likely banned for and not know why.
But then you go ahead and do this:
Prrsha wrote:
"I just report them and they appear in Gooul"
You are trying to give this impression that you hold yourself to a higher standard (and you hold other people to this high standard), and that you truly care about people and dont want to see them banned - you care, so you warn them. But in reality, you are the AGENT of people being banned. You really go out of your way to be an @#%^ by acting on a level most level-headded people would never consider, and then you are willing to be fully dishonest about going out of your way to be an @#%^ WHILE ALSO trying to play the part of White Knight.
This is why I cant take any of your posts seriously; the sociopathic dishonesty just really sours me to the whole experience. Sorry, but this is why I cant trust your judgement on when using hacks crosses the line. In fact, I would put money on the fact that you recorded everyone's name in this thread that admitted to using any 3rd party software and are in the process of shipping this info off to the STF.
Edited, Jul 6th 2012 1:31pm by ManifestOfKujata
Thanks Manifest, I was wondering where I remembered this Prrsha poster from.
Carbuncle
GMing a person for selling an in game service for in game money? You must be so cool.
http://us.battle.net/wow/en/character/stormrage/Yoichinoyumi/advanced
http://www.opponent-guild.com/
http://www.opponent-guild.com/
If nothing else, Prrsha is a good demonstration of how cheating and degrees of cheating are fairly subjective concepts.
Fact: there is an afterlife, and anyone who cheated in FFXI will go to Mordion Hel when they die.
Aliekber
RDM BLU SCH DRG PLD BLM NIN WHM
Linkshell: CrimsonMercenaries Server: Carbamesh
Post in /K/ where the orbital laser system is now online.
RDM BLU SCH DRG PLD BLM NIN WHM
Linkshell: CrimsonMercenaries Server: Carbamesh
Sandinmygum the Stupendous wrote:
Human (?) females look ugly.
Relevant:
http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v387/gangstakago/WoW/20090928.jpg
http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v387/gangstakago/WoW/20090928.jpg
Philemon on Valefor
Gjallarhorn 4/17/08
Daurdabla 5/9/11
Carnwenhan 5/4/12
Ryunohige 10/29/12
Gjallarhorn 4/17/08
Daurdabla 5/9/11
Carnwenhan 5/4/12
Ryunohige 10/29/12
Reiterpallasch wrote:
GMing a person for selling an in game service for in game money? You must be so cool.
It wasn't even against the EULA! (Then neither was what was happening in Salvage...)
Carbuncle
Recent Visitors: 297
All times are in CST
Anonymous Guests (297)
- Forums
- Final Fantasy XI
- General Discussion
- Nyzul Uncharted: nice gear, cheater!
© 2024 Fanbyte LLC