232 replies to this topic

[Chemie]

Mystere, on 10 May 2015 - 07:15 AM, said:

Hold a second! Isn't that the restricted-access tool (forgot what it's called) supplied by PGI for observing matches? The isometric view was the clear giveaway. I am assuming the commentator was given access to it (that blue Mech/damage indicator to the left is part of the tool). As such, I still do not see where the player was cheating.

The fact the tool exists means someone could be running on a computer beside them or many other ways to exploit. How do we trust players who are the special ones given the tool? How do we know how many have this magic PGI tool? How do we know about other similar out of the wild tools?

Edited by Chemie, 10 May 2015 - 07:43 AM.

[ArchAngelWC]

Pariah Devalis, on 10 May 2015 - 06:31 AM, said:

I am going to assume this was prompted by the article about what ArenaNet security chief Chris Cleary did to a hacker in their game.

ArenaNet gets away with "name and shame" by following a set playbook. They have their User Agreement that dictates what is and is not acceptable in their game, and they have a list of actions that correspond to said breaches in the user agreement. They stick to those rules, with the only flexibility being that some offenses can be appealed whereas more serious infractions - like hacking or botting - are permanent bans.

Further, they do not generally go out of their way to name and shame, instead they have a forum subsection where users can ask to know why they were banned or to otherwise appeal their case. What ends up happening is that the offender names and shames themselves.

Examples:

• https://forum-en.gui...rst#post4970778
  
• https://forum-en.gui...e/3#post4993875
  
• https://forum-en.gui...rst#post5030872

or how about this gem?

• https://forum-en.gui...rst#post4522153 (with a followup here: https://forum-en.gui...rst#post4522542 )

And many, many more posts. Some of which are actually pretty damned hilarious.



Following such a system does four things:

• It allows individuals who feel they were wrongfully banned/suspended to defend themselves
  
• It allows PGI's moderation team to demonstrate that they are on the case and dealing with negative members of the community.
  
• It is almost always a blast to read through and tends to make the community like the developer more since the response can be no BS, slap em in the face, here are the facts you piece of scum, sort of events.
  
• Due to the public nature of it, it puts pressure on others who might have been willing to cheat, exploit, bot, or be intentionally toxic in the community as now they know if they get caught they stand a good chance of public ridicule.

I think as long as the initial conditions are met, I am all for it. Set ground rules are required. Set repercussions for violations are required. After that, the devs get to blow off steam, be human, gain popularity, and deal with troublemakers all in one fell swoop.




"But what about the personal shame of being named?"

Don't want the time? Don't do the crime. Seriously. Why should any developer or community pander to individuals who can be documented offenders? If the individual is bad for the game and bad for the community, the community owes the individual no niceties. Whatsoever.

I love any idea that involves identifying cheaters so I can mock them...and then return to playing a game confident that there is 1 less cheater in it..tho GW2 is horrid...like ESO without graphics...which is still pretty bad

Edited by ArchAngelWC, 10 May 2015 - 07:50 AM.

[Mystere]

Chemie, on 10 May 2015 - 07:42 AM, said:

The fact the tool exists means someone could be running on a computer beside them or many other ways to exploit. How do we trust players who are the special ones given the tool? How do we know how many have this magic PGI tool? How do we know about other similar out of the wild tools?

That's not proof of actual alleged cheating, and this thread is now teeming with false accusations in the absence of actual proof and merely based on "XXX could not have possibly killed me!" accounts.

I think this thread now needs to go the way of the dodo bird ...

[Karen Supreme]

Mystere, on 10 May 2015 - 07:12 AM, said:

Ahem! It is not possible to manipulate damage numbers as they are calculated on the server.

But this happened.
Why?

And during the following drop he managed to do 4 (or 5) head shot. How's that?

And he manages to twist his arm-unlocked dire' torso with super speed too.... how??

With more than 7000 drops, I assure you I can see if something feels...."wrong"...

[Wintersdark]

I want a shadowcat, on 10 May 2015 - 07:57 AM, said:

But this happened.
Why?

And during the following drop he managed to do 4 (or 5) head shot. How's that?

And he manages to twist his arm-unlocked dire' torso with super speed too.... how??

With more than 7000 drops, I assure you I can see if something feels...."wrong"...

Much more likely: You're wrong.

Dire's can unlock their arms, then exploit arm lock to twitch their torso fast. This has been an issue with arm lock since it's inception.

As to head shots?

I'm not an amazing shot, but I had a 5 headshot match in my Heavy Metal back in the day. The funny part was I wasn't always aiming for their heads. It just happened that way, 2 lucky head shots, 1 aimed for (and awesome hit) against an Atlas, and 2 people who overheated. What seems enormously unlikely in a single match is ultimately probable over enough matches. If your hitting for enough damage to oneshot someone, it's just a matter of hitting them in the head intentionally or not.

This is always the problem with people who think something "feels wrong": They assume that what happens in a match is normal, and that what they see is all there is to see. Worse, it'll be someone spectating, then assuming that what they see while spectating is what the player sees, which is entirely wrong. Cursor movement is much twitchier while spectating, particularly when there's some lag, and HSR can play some funny games WRT what shots hit and miss relative to where the firing player's reticle appeared to be.

[ThisMachineKillsFascists]

I want a shadowcat, on 10 May 2015 - 07:57 AM, said:

But this happened.
Why?

And during the following drop he managed to do 4 (or 5) head shot. How's that?

And he manages to twist his arm-unlocked dire' torso with super speed too.... how??

With more than 7000 drops, I assure you I can see if something feels...."wrong"...

I once got headshotted together with my 3 other buddy in row. It was a gauss headshot 3 times in row within 1 minute. That was most likely an aimbot hack

[Wintersdark]

I watched Pariah Devalis do this once. He was up on top of the citadel in River City, and some twit at the upper spawn base kept peeking out of cover, trying to fire at guys in the lower city. ** (Edit: Wut? The initials P and D get censored? This forum is crazy) would headshot him, then he'd move back into cover. Evenly openly mock him, tell him to peek out of cover again.

This repeated until he died. Hilarious.

Still doesn't mean hacks, just being a good shot, a bit of luck, and a predictable target.

I'm not saying these things don't happen, but it's long been my experience that people see someone pull off a crazy awesome shot and OMG IT HAD TO BE HACKS. It's the classic "They can't be that good because I couldn't do that!" despite the fact that luck may have indeed been highly involved, and what happened may even have been entirely unintentional.

Edited by Wintersdark, 10 May 2015 - 08:34 AM.

[Karen Supreme]

Wintersdark, on 10 May 2015 - 08:22 AM, said:

Much more likely: You're wrong.

Dire's can unlock their arms, then exploit arm lock to twitch their torso fast. This has been an issue with arm lock since it's inception.

As to head shots?

I'm not an amazing shot, but I had a 5 headshot match in my Heavy Metal back in the day. The funny part was I wasn't always aiming for their heads. It just happened that way, 2 lucky head shots, 1 aimed for (and awesome hit) against an Atlas, and 2 people who overheated. What seems enormously unlikely in a single match is ultimately probable over enough matches. If your hitting for enough damage to oneshot someone, it's just a matter of hitting them in the head intentionally or not.

This is always the problem with people who think something "feels wrong": They assume that what happens in a match is normal, and that what they see is all there is to see. Worse, it'll be someone spectating, then assuming that what they see while spectating is what the player sees, which is entirely wrong. Cursor movement is much twitchier while spectating, particularly when there's some lag, and HSR can play some funny games WRT what shots hit and miss relative to where the firing player's reticle appeared to be.

Ok, I'll tell you plain and simple: this player is a well know cheater. It's not "something strange" that happened in 2 matches. This happens very frequently when we meet him and I and my team meet him quite frequently in group que.
It's not the lucky match you had: when he wants the head shot, he does it.

Despite this, he is still around.
Why?

I am sure that PGI knows very well this player "abilities".... so I can only suspect why he hasn't been banned yet.

Edited by I want a shadowcat, 10 May 2015 - 08:36 AM.

[Spr1ggan]

Novakaine, on 09 May 2015 - 07:28 PM, said:

Well after being in law enforcement for over 28 years, I will say this.
Yes MWO is relaxation.
There is a simple reason why criminals names and deeds are made public.
For the good of the community and to be a lesson to the rest of us.
Play Nice.

Apart from the UK where they hide the names and identities of child molesters. Use taxpayers money to give them a new identity. Then let them out with cut sentences for good behaviour.

[Wintersdark]

I want a shadowcat, on 10 May 2015 - 08:35 AM, said:

Ok, I'll tell you plain and simple: this player is a well know cheater. It's not "something strange" that happened in 2 matches. This happens very frequently when we meet him and I and my team meet him quite frequently in group que.
It's not the lucky match you had: when he wants the head shot, he does it.

Despite this, he is still around.
Why?

I am sure that PGI knows very well this player "abilities".... so I can only suspect why he hasn't been banned yet.

Are you aware of how utterly ridiculous this sounds? You're implying that PGI just Really Likes Some Player, and allows them to cheat without repercussion? That's moronic. If you're sure he's cheating, report him. vMods have been banned in the past, after all.

You imply above he's a volunteer mod. PGI isn't going to ignore someone cheating because they're a volunteer mod, because ultimately volunteer mods are nobodies. They're not PGI's priviledged lackies.

[Bishop Steiner]

R Razor, on 10 May 2015 - 06:26 AM, said:

As it stands now, the appearance PGI gives is that if you're a paying player (or one that brings something to the table such as advertisement by being one of the top players) you're given more latitude in your actions and words than your average player.

I'm curious about this.

It appears that the only reason it appears this way, is a small core of forum and reddit commenters who keep shouting it is so from the rooftops.

Seems very odd considering the number of times I have drawn forum bans, considering I am probably (for better or worse) in the top 1% of spenders in this game. Now I can't comment on game bans, as I don't cheat, or post racist comments, etc in game. Which is what I have usually seen to the "poor innocent" parties do when they get banned.

[Mystere]

Wintersdark, on 10 May 2015 - 08:39 AM, said:

Are you aware of how utterly ridiculous this sounds? You're implying that PGI just Really Likes Some Player, and allows them to cheat without repercussion? That's moronic. If you're sure he's cheating, report him. vMods have been banned in the past, after all.

You imply above he's a volunteer mod. PGI isn't going to ignore someone cheating because they're a volunteer mod, because ultimately volunteer mods are nobodies. They're not PGI's priviledged lackies.

I think it's pointless to argue with him because it looks like his gigantic ego is in the way.

Edited by Mystere, 10 May 2015 - 09:13 AM.

[Pariah Devalis]

ArchAngelWC, on 10 May 2015 - 07:50 AM, said:

I love any idea that involves identifying cheaters so I can mock them...and then return to playing a game confident that there is 1 less cheater in it..tho GW2 is horrid...like ESO without graphics...which is still pretty bad

Hey, horrid for you maybe. Still one of the most populated western MMOs with a playerbase that enjoys it for what it is. Live and let live. I for one cannot wait for the upcoming expansion.

Wintersdark, on 10 May 2015 - 08:33 AM, said:

I watched Pariah Devalis do this once. He was up on top of the citadel in River City, and some twit at the upper spawn base kept peeking out of cover, trying to fire at guys in the lower city. ** (Edit: Wut? The initials P and D get censored? This forum is crazy) would headshot him, then he'd move back into cover. Evenly openly mock him, tell him to peek out of cover again.

This repeated until he died. Hilarious.

Damn, now you are going to make me want to dig through my youtube collection to rewatch that. Also, apparently my IGN initials are a curse word. Who knew?

Edit: Found it!

Spoiler

@2:50

Edited by Pariah Devalis, 10 May 2015 - 09:33 AM.

[Raggedyman]

XX Sulla XX, on 09 May 2015 - 12:48 PM, said:

Well since a certain high profile competitive player was banned yesterday its got me thinking. It is best for the banned players and game for people to know why. When PGI does not say why they are banned most people assume cheating. If them or their friends say it was for being a jerk in email or trolling etc many people will assume they are covering up for their friend.

Also for PGI I think it would be good for the community to know why PGI is banning people. Also would be good for the community to know if PGI are finding and banning cheaters.

Main reasons not to

1 - it can cause arguments if someone popular is banned, as lots of their chums (for either honest or cynical reasons) will go "Show us the proof or it's a fix!". PGI can't show the proof, because the proof is the detection system and if you show that to people it helps the cheaters get around it by about one metric-****-ton. You also get people quitting in disgust at perfectly valid busts, which impacts your bottom line.
2 - it can cause complaints if someone unknown is banned,.because people go "oooh, so you banned asd123iop but what about (insert name here? Why do you let them go free?"
3 - It can cause problems on the forums as people argue 1 & 2, resulting in forum bans. You also get a massive increase in name and shame because "the forum rules are X but PGI broke them and so can I because I'm doing it for good reasons"
4 - you can get a million and one "why you say I cheat, I never did that!!" posts from the banned person. Occasionally they go "I SEW U FOR DEFARMATION!!" and do a whole bunch of annoying legalese yelling. That takes up time and fuels 1, 2, and 3.
5 - You can get an outcry of 'bwahahaha, I got away with it' from people trying to act tough. Suddenly 150 banned isn't an impressive improvement in the removal of cheating, it's only 10% of those cheating and PGI are doing nothing to stop it because some guy that can't tell a macro from Swiss cheese just claimed to have a billion bots running all the time!!!". You also get loons that go 'oooh, I want to be on that list' or that jack other peoples accounts to then get them added to the list.

Basically I totally get why you want to know and why you have identified the potential positive elements from doing what you described, but it often causes a lot of knock on problems that take up a lot of staff time (most likely when they are already dealing with a ton of email complaints about the bans as it is) which has to be found somewhere (your big three are customer support, cheat detection, and development time). Some games do it, but generally it's more effective and efficient to just have people disappear so it's why a lot just ship out the cheating swine.

Edited by Raggedyman, 11 May 2015 - 09:49 PM.

[Mystere]

Raggedyman, on 10 May 2015 - 09:36 AM, said:

Main reasons not to ...

Well, I have a 6th reason: If someone falsely accused, banned, and subsequently named and shamed happens to have deep pockets, may the heavens help you and PGI.

Edited by Mystere, 10 May 2015 - 09:44 AM.

[Milocinia]

At the end of the day, some companies choose to name and shame banned players, some don't.

While it's nice to see if players I suspected end up on the ban list, it's not essential. If I see anything dodgy I report it and leave it at that.

Just because there isn't a name and shame policy at PGI doesn't mean they're not actively banning. At least I hope they are anyway. Some of my favourite games over the years have been completely ruined by cheaters

[Raggedyman]

Mystere, on 10 May 2015 - 09:44 AM, said:

Well, I have a 6th reason: If someone falsely accused, banned, and subsequently named and shamed happens to have deep pockets, may the heavens help you and PGI.

That's covered by 4.
No one with the money needed to ninja PGI with a lawyer would do so as: 1) T&Cs are pretty tight, 2) they would have to prove they didn't break the rules, 3) they would have to prove it caused them harm (remember, its not your real name 99.99999% of the time), 4) the damages would be small, the lawyer would be expensive, 5) it's new grounds so would be a trial case, so find a lawyer wanting to spend a lot of time on a maybe and then pay them all of it upfront.
Basically it is theoretically possible for someone to do it, but it would be cheaper and more time efficient to just invest in the company directly and go "btw, please unban my account"
Yes, even if it's their parent who is rich. They may do daft things with their cash but they normally aren't that mental or that willing to blow $x0,000 on their kid when the sprog can just make a new account.

[R Razor]

Bishop Steiner, on 10 May 2015 - 09:09 AM, said:

I'm curious about this.

It appears that the only reason it appears this way, is a small core of forum and reddit commenters who keep shouting it is so from the rooftops.

Seems very odd considering the number of times I have drawn forum bans, considering I am probably (for better or worse) in the top 1% of spenders in this game. Now I can't comment on game bans, as I don't cheat, or post racist comments, etc in game. Which is what I have usually seen to the "poor innocent" parties do when they get banned.

You may very well be the exception that proves the rule, I couldn't say for sure. But there are players (high profile if you will) that, both in game as well as on these forums, habitually violate the rules that are still around after years of doing so. Then there are other players that vanish after one or two violations of those same rules. Of course this is all perception based, maybe those that vanished just quit voluntarily.

[Bishop Steiner]

R Razor, on 10 May 2015 - 10:09 AM, said:

You may very well be the exception that proves the rule, I couldn't say for sure. But there are players (high profile if you will) that, both in game as well as on these forums, habitually violate the rules that are still around after years of doing so. Then there are other players that vanish after one or two violations of those same rules. Of course this is all perception based, maybe those that vanished just quit voluntarily.

Or broke the rules a lot more than we realized, or had an attitude when approached about breaking the rules? I think the only reason I never got perma banned on the forums is I only ever gave the Mods grief over it one time.

[Mystere]

Raggedyman, on 10 May 2015 - 09:54 AM, said:

That's covered by 4.
No one with the money needed to ninja PGI with a lawyer would do so as: 1) T&Cs are pretty tight, 2) they would have to prove they didn't break the rules, 3) they would have to prove it caused them harm (remember, its not your real name 99.99999% of the time), 4) the damages would be small, the lawyer would be expensive, 5) it's new grounds so would be a trial case, so find a lawyer wanting to spend a lot of time on a maybe and then pay them all of it upfront.
Basically it is theoretically possible for someone to do it, but it would be cheaper and more time efficient to just invest in the company directly and go "btw, please unban my account"
Yes, even if it's their parent who is rich. They may do daft things with their cash but they normally aren't that mental or that willing to blow $x0,000 on their kid when the sprog can just make a new account.

Well, #4 is just about yelling threats.

What I'm talking about is someone actually taking things to the next level. I've seen pissed of people with deep pockets (or who own law firms) sue small companies and people just to tie them in legal fees and with the expected settlement being the cost of legal fees.

Don't ask me how I know, though.