232 replies to this topic

[Johnny Z]

meteorol, on 10 May 2015 - 04:18 AM, said:

There have been players at pro level cheating in MUCH bigger events and leagues than a tiny 1on1 mwo tournament.
If someone was not able to "git gud" and cheated his way to the top, he can't simply stop using cheats in tournaments, because he otherwise wouldn't be able to compete. I guess people trust into their abilites of remaining unnoticed, especially when using wallhacks.

If you cheated all your way to where you at, you can't stay there without using cheats.

This reply above is very insightfull.


We dont know who or what or when so its all chat about the game and cheats in theory. So dont be offended if anyone got banned and is reading all this.

I suppose the biggest down side to games naming cheaters is the possibilty of greifing and trolling.

Edited by Johnny Z, 10 May 2015 - 04:34 AM.

[R Razor]

Egomane, on 10 May 2015 - 02:18 AM, said:

It wouldn't brake laws. No one said that. It will only break the rules PGI has setup for themself.
Can they change it? Of course they can!
Is there a logical reason to do it? ...

Here's a logical reason for ya..........It would help build some trust with your player base......something PGI is lacking in a significant way at the moment. If for no other reason than that, it would be worth doing.

[Scout Derek]

You know what I think of this topic and the unfortunate event that happened?

One

Big

Steaming

Pile

Of

********

[ThisMachineKillsFascists]

Sarlic, on 10 May 2015 - 05:11 AM, said:

Like you have a nice attitude as well. You have been calling names when i saw you in the game.

I suspect you are a troll anyway. Not sure who's troll, but you are one.

I was calling out onl your name when you got poorly killed with your sooo proud atlas. EVery 5th day you have to tell us on the forum how awesome your atlas k is and how good you are in it

[R Razor]

AlexEss, on 10 May 2015 - 04:13 AM, said:

3: It only serves as a data gathering tool for cheat creators if their "customers" are told exactly what got them caught.

All that needs to be said is that player "X" was banned for (insert reason here). No details need to be provided, just a basic statement, cheating, VOIP harassment, or whatever they did. It would actually give hard evidence that PGI is making an effort to police their game and create an environment where people can play, and win or lose on their own merit.

[Scout Derek]

ThisMachineKillsFascists, on 10 May 2015 - 05:20 AM, said:

I was calling out onl your name when you got poorly killed with your sooo proud atlas. EVery 5th day you have to tell us on the forum how awesome your atlas k is and how good you are in it

I remember one of those matches, river city. And it does happen.

Machine don't be the bad guy here by going off-topic, please, you're becoming part of this so called k-town then if you do,

[Sarlic]

ThisMachineKillsFascists, on 10 May 2015 - 05:20 AM, said:

I was calling out onl your name when you got poorly killed with your sooo proud atlas. EVery 5th day you have to tell us on the forum how awesome your atlas k is and how good you are in it

I am not going to comment on this bait comment.

Fact is that you have been calling names and much as showing unsportive behaviour.

Edited by Sarlic, 10 May 2015 - 05:39 AM.

[Macster16]

Scout Derek, on 10 May 2015 - 05:18 AM, said:

You know what I think of this topic and the unfortunate event that happened?

One

Big

Steaming

Pile

Of

********

Pretty much....

Edited by Macster16, 10 May 2015 - 05:28 AM.

[Scout Derek]

Macster16, on 10 May 2015 - 05:27 AM, said:

Pretty much....

You missed a snippet:

ONLY IN

[Egomane]

R Razor, on 10 May 2015 - 05:17 AM, said:

Here's a logical reason for ya..........It would help build some trust with your player base......something PGI is lacking in a significant way at the moment. If for no other reason than that, it would be worth doing.

It would build trust that their own rules don't apply to them?
Hey, if PGI can, why can't I?

It would build trust that they are publicly shaming players of their game?
Did those players really do what is claimed they did, or did a Dev throw a hissy fit?

It would not build trust. It would create a rift.

Those players who don't trust PGI now, wouldn't trust those informations as well, without added proof. Even then they would probably try see if the proof was faked in some way or find other excuses to not believe in it.

[990Dreams]

Never noticed anyone getting banned. Clearly not very important.

[R Razor]

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.

Some of the "Volunteer Moderators" that they've employed in the past do nothing to dispel that perception, in fact some encourage it through their own words and deeds.

If PGI has what they believe is a strong enough case to ban someone that has invested money in their product (causing that individual to lose that investment) then they should have no qualms about posting the names and a general reason as to what that individual was banned. Now, if PGI is concerned that they employe people with low levels of integrity, whether as paid employees or volunteer moderators, I could understand their reticence but it's my understanding that PGI doesn't make mistakes like that.

[Pariah Devalis]

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.

Edited by Pariah Devalis, 10 May 2015 - 06:37 AM.

[Johnny Z]

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.

Some of the "Volunteer Moderators" that they've employed in the past do nothing to dispel that perception, in fact some encourage it through their own words and deeds.

If PGI has what they believe is a strong enough case to ban someone that has invested money in their product (causing that individual to lose that investment) then they should have no qualms about posting the names and a general reason as to what that individual was banned. Now, if PGI is concerned that they employe people with low levels of integrity, whether as paid employees or volunteer moderators, I could understand their reticence but it's my understanding that PGI doesn't make mistakes like that.

As a regular player and on these forums since closed beta I havnt seen this game make one mistake when it comes to mods or anything like that.

I heard there was some big thing on another forum or venue but never seen or heard any mistakes myself. So your reply is a bit over the top.

Again the naming and all that is way above regular players heads because players dont have to deal with the fallout of that decision. Idle comments on the situation is all this is.

[Johnny Z]

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

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.

Calling out cheaters by online games is common. More than a few do it and some make a huge deal about it as recently seen on game spot where a players account deletion was shown in full detail, just as an example.

Yet again this is something for the games makers to think about really because they do have to deal with the situation.

Ok maybe the recent video of character deletion is what your on about also.

Edited by Johnny Z, 10 May 2015 - 06:39 AM.

[R Razor]

Johnny Z, on 10 May 2015 - 06:32 AM, said:

As a regular player and on these forums since closed beta I havnt seen this game make one mistake when it comes to mods or anything like that.

I heard there was some big thing on another forum or venue but never seen or heard any mistakes myself. So your reply is a bit over the top.

Again the naming and all that is way above regular players heads because players dont have to deal with the fallout of that decision. Idle comments on the situation is all this is.

If you're seriously interested, do a search on a couple of volunteer mods names, and see some of the replies they have made to people in threads, it will open your eyes.

Personally I don't think I've ever been unfairly targeted by any PGI employee or moderator, but I'm not nearly naive enough to think it doesn't happen, especially taking the above mentioned comments into consideration.

As I said, if PGI believes they have enough valid evidence to enact a ban then they should have no reason to keep a minimal amount of information from the player base. It would show that they do actively police their game and encourage better behavior overall and discourage efforts at cheating.

[Johnny Z]

R Razor, on 10 May 2015 - 06:37 AM, said:

If you're seriously interested, do a search on a couple of volunteer mods names, and see some of the replies they have made to people in threads, it will open your eyes.

Personally I don't think I've ever been unfairly targeted by any PGI employee or moderator, but I'm not nearly naive enough to think it doesn't happen, especially taking the above mentioned comments into consideration.

As I said, if PGI believes they have enough valid evidence to enact a ban then they should have no reason to keep a minimal amount of information from the player base. It would show that they do actively police their game and encourage better behavior overall and discourage efforts at cheating.

No offense I couldnt be bothered. I dont take word games seriously at all. Off hand I am for the name and shame for players running cheat programs but I also realize its a deeper issue. More than mere words really since people feelings could be hurt or what ever. If it wasnt for that all the games would be listing cheaters. Some do because of chronic cheating problems if they like it or not.

Edited by Johnny Z, 10 May 2015 - 06:52 AM.

[Water Bear]

The reason they don't in this case is because if they say why they banned "a player" for cheating in a high profile tournament, everyone will know who they are talking about since only one person fits that description at the moment.

Also, if my experience in the Starcraft 2 community tell me anything, they probably were banned for cheating.

[Mystere]

I want a shadowcat, on 10 May 2015 - 12:10 AM, said:

Being this thread about cheating, I'll tell you a story.

I was in alpine, long range, a gaus dire piloted by a well know player managed to core me....with one single shot; I had damg to my back armor too.
At more than 1300 metres.
Good stuff.
I think that gauss damage should decrease after 660m+module...so.....
But, you know, it's the same player who manage to do 4-5 head shot in the same match, so he must be a very very good player :/

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

[Mystere]

I want a shadowcat, on 09 May 2015 - 10:45 PM, said:

I think that it's pretty clear from min 14:40 and on.
Modarete couldn't know enemy was there.
Pure cheating stuff.

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.

Edited by Mystere, 10 May 2015 - 07:21 AM.