232 replies to this topic

[Milocinia]

Hmmm just watched the footage in question of this player who's been banned and my opinion is this person is clearly wallhacking. I don't buy the story about them being banned for an abusive email.

As for the subject of forum bans, I've had them myself. Forum privileges and game access are 2 separate sides of the coin and aren't related to each other. When I was banned from the forum I wasn't carrying a banned tag saying as such.

[Wintersdark]

Kyocera, on 10 May 2015 - 11:44 AM, said:

Hmmm just watched the footage in question of this player who's been banned and my opinion is this person is clearly wallhacking. I don't buy the story about them being banned for an abusive email.

It certainly does look that way, though TBH it's not damning evidence in and of itself. The "aimbotting" videos are stupid, though. Footage of people playing from a spectator view is useless with regards to cursor movement, aim, etc. The footage re: wallhacking is definitely worthy of further investigation w/ anticheat tools, however.

Quote

As for the subject of forum bans, I've had them myself. Forum privileges and game access are 2 separate sides of the coin and aren't related to each other. When I was banned from the forum I wasn't carrying a banned tag saying as such.

I would be unsurprised to find out the "Banned" tag is independant of both forum and game bans, and can be applied or not by discretion. So, a player could be banned as a "time out" and not labeled as such, or banned with the label to make a (discrete) point.

Edited by Wintersdark, 10 May 2015 - 12:05 PM.

[Wintersdark]

Pariah Devalis, on 10 May 2015 - 09:17 AM, said:

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.



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

Hah! Awesome, exactly this.

Just because someone headshots you repeatedly, or multiple other players, is in no way indicative that they are aimbotting. Sometimes, they're just good, lucky, or some combination of them. Those circumstances will coincide much more often with good players - after all, headshotting someone is just a matter of clicking on the right pixels. The longer someone plays, the more likely matches like that becomes, both from experience, skill, and simple probability.

It's why, when someone gets headshot and immediately spouts off that the player who did it is hacking, I put them in the "pathetic, sore loser" basket. I can't stand people who are such sore losers they'll try to diminish someone's accomplishment just because they lost to them.

Edited by Wintersdark, 10 May 2015 - 12:10 PM.

[DaFrog]

Mystere, on 10 May 2015 - 10:45 AM, said:

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.

That is illegal in Canada. If you sue someone jsut to cover them in legal expenses, you willbe dismissed in court and are opening yourself to being countersued.

[Mystere]

DaFrog, on 10 May 2015 - 12:19 PM, said:

That is illegal in Canada. If you sue someone jsut to cover them in legal expenses, you willbe dismissed in court and are opening yourself to being countersued.

Canada yes. But not in some other places I know of. You just don't mess around with the 1% in some places. They'll eat you for sport if they can.

Edited by Mystere, 10 May 2015 - 12:30 PM.

[Water Bear]

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.

I'm not going to lie, I'm much more curious about why you drew forum bans than I am about the actual discussion in this thread.

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.

From what little I know of law (due to having a lawyer in the family), you would probably have to show damages in excess of some number, let's just make up $500. Otherwise, you actually can have a case thrown out of court due to wasting the court's time, I believe. For example, no judge (or Lawyer) is going to waste time on a case with a payout of $1000. And the law might not even recognize such a case as being more than superficial.

[Bishop Steiner]

DaFrog, on 10 May 2015 - 12:19 PM, said:

That is illegal in Canada. If you sue someone jsut to cover them in legal expenses, you willbe dismissed in court and are opening yourself to being countersued.

si I base my lawsuit in the USA. Protection Circumvented.

Water Bear, on 10 May 2015 - 12:39 PM, said:

I'm not going to lie, I'm much more curious about why you drew forum bans than I am about the actual discussion in this thread.

Nothing exciting. Was less than respectful to certain people arguing certain points. Just the usual suspects who haunt reddit and the SC forums, and are mostly banned (again) from here. They get pissy, get their buddies to group report you, etc.

I probably should not have been as assertive as I was anyhow, which is why I never gave the Mods grief over it, but it is what it is.

Can't really discuss it because of EULA. Probably said more than I should already.

Edited by Bishop Steiner, 10 May 2015 - 01:05 PM.

[Raggedyman]

Mystere, on 10 May 2015 - 10:45 AM, said:

Well, #4 is just about yelling threats.

Yup, because thats all they are.

On the grounds of never once hearing of any ban name and shame ever going to pre-trial/ the serving of papers, let alone trial, I'm happy to commit to it never having been taken to any level other than threatening to sew (sic) as an attempt to scare an unban out of customer support. However i accept that it could be be attempted, it would just be legally incredibly difficult to win and would involve the 1%er having gone mental.
As said: cheaper and quicker to buy the company. Plus you can then personally fire the person who banned the account.

Edited by Raggedyman, 10 May 2015 - 01:26 PM.

[DaFrog]

Mystere, on 10 May 2015 - 12:26 PM, said:

Canada yes. But not in some other places I know of. You just don't mess around with the 1% in some places. They'll eat you for sport if they can.

PGI is a Canadian company, so I fail to see how someone else could take them to court inanother country, even in a class actino law suit. Now, one of PGI's mother companies though...

[DaFrog]

Thank you for finally banning someone cheating. It's about time some people get caught.

[Lindonius]

DaFrog, on 10 May 2015 - 01:43 PM, said:

PGI is a Canadian company, so I fail to see how someone else could take them to court inanother country, even in a class actino law suit. Now, one of PGI's mother companies though...

Before they rebranded themselves as PGI they got taken to court in New York by Nintendo for their failure to make a fishing game that met Nintendo's quality control standards.

http://law.justia.co...1797/409228/38/

So it's not only possible, it's already happened.

Edited by Lindonius, 10 May 2015 - 03:28 PM.

[Mechwarrior Buddah]

that is all

Lindonius, on 10 May 2015 - 03:27 PM, said:

Before they rebranded themselves as PGI they got taken to court in New York by Nintendo for their failure to make a fishing game that met Nintendo's quality control standards.

http://law.justia.co...1797/409228/38/

So it's not only possible, it's already happened.

and Bass Pro Shops

and they failed nintendo quality standard 4 times reportedly

Wintersdark, on 09 May 2015 - 12:51 PM, said:

Huh? I never assume it's because they were cheating, and I always assume it's because they were an *******, either in chat or whatever else. It's amazing how many people are totally unable to behave themselves with some measure of civility.

So Villz is banned? Cause thats the first name that comes to mind when I think "being an ******* in chat"

[bad arcade kitty]

DaFrog, on 10 May 2015 - 01:43 PM, said:

PGI is a Canadian company, so I fail to see how someone else could take them to court inanother country, even in a class actino law suit. Now, one of PGI's mother companies though...

well, they can ignore american (i mean usa) court since they don't abide american laws but it would mean for them very serious problems with american customers

Edited by bad arcade kitty, 10 May 2015 - 05:56 PM.

[Pariah Devalis]

DaFrog, on 10 May 2015 - 01:43 PM, said:

PGI is a Canadian company, so I fail to see how someone else could take them to court inanother country, even in a class actino law suit. Now, one of PGI's mother companies though...

bad arcade kitty, on 10 May 2015 - 05:56 PM, said:

well, they can ignore american (i mean usa) court since they don't abide american laws but it would mean for them very serious problems with american customers

Just because they are in Canada does not protect them from lawsuits. However, what it does do is involve trying to get a lawyer who is willing to deal with the added complexities involved in suing a company that exists in another country, which means the amount of money one would need to sink in finding a lawyer that, not only is willing to take the case, is also aware of the way the law works internationally probably makes any sort of litigation way, way, way more trouble than it is worth.

Of course, again, if set rules are made (in the user agreement), clear consequences are followed, and there is an ability to appeal the cases (unless unarguable evidence is collected by the game company), than I would find it hard to believe that any lawyer would take the case, nor any court would defend the "victim." Regardless of international borders.

Edited by Pariah Devalis, 10 May 2015 - 06:18 PM.

[Mechwarrior Buddah]

Pariah Devalis, on 10 May 2015 - 06:17 PM, said:

Just because they are in Canada does not protect them from lawsuits. However, what it does do is involve trying to get a lawyer who is willing to deal with the added complexities involved in suing a company that exists in another country, which means the amount of money one would need to sink in finding a lawyer that, not only is willing to take the case, is also aware of the way the law works internationally probably makes any sort of litigation way, way, way more trouble than it is worth.

Of course, again, if set rules are made (in the user agreement), clear consequences are followed, and there is an ability to appeal the cases (unless unarguable evidence is collected by the game company), than I would find it hard to believe that any lawyer would take the case, nor any court would defend the "victim." Regardless of international borders.

hence why theyre usually termed "lawlsuits" when youre talking about suing a video game company

[Mechwarrior Buddah]

as to the topic of the thread tho; I liked the way they did it in Warhammer. There was a system message as to how this person was eviscerated (or some other horrible way to die) for stealing the kingdom's gold (IE goldbuying/selling)

[Lindonius]

Actually if you read that case file it's not PGI being sued. It's PGI trying to sue nintendo for not getting paid for their unfinished broken game.

I guess after they lost this case they figured is was easier dealing with nostalgic rabid fans of a much loved IP, and went the crowd funding route. Because superfans will still pay you for making a buggy unfinished game.......

However, professional game companies will not.

Edited by Lindonius, 10 May 2015 - 06:59 PM.

[Wintersdark]

Mechwarrior Buddah, on 10 May 2015 - 05:37 PM, said:

So Villz is banned? Cause thats the first name that comes to mind when I think "being an ******* in chat"

lawl

You know well what I meant. Villz is an ******* in chat, but there are types of *******. He knows how to skirt the lines, and avoid "stuff you get flat out banned for", at least most of the time.

It does matter, though, what sort of things your saying, and also who you say it too.

[Raggedyman]

Lindonius, on 10 May 2015 - 03:27 PM, said:

Before they rebranded themselves as PGI they got taken to court in New York by Nintendo for their failure to make a fishing game that met Nintendo's quality control standards.

http://law.justia.co...1797/409228/38/

So it's not only possible, it's already happened.

Does anyone have a copy of the contract? Because if it says "to be governed by Location X laws" then that makes things incredibly simpler for taking someone to court in Location X.

[Anjian]

To answer the OP, they don't have to, and it depends on their company policy. EULAs have evolved and legal battle hardened in over three decades to cover such eventualities with all software companies, games or otherwise.