912 replies to this topic

[PoorDecisions]

DaZur, on 27 May 2015 - 10:15 PM, said:

You might want to take your own advice... Your inference to my clueless and ignorance was equally well received.

The difference is that I actually offered more substance to my post than a simple personal insult. If you're going to insult me, fine, but do me the favor of adding something worth reading to your post, please.

Quote

I'm not sure why I'm entertaining this but off the top of my head I could name at least a half dozen online games that do not even allow multiple accounts to play through the same router access point.

...and your point is? How is that relevant to this discussion at all?

Quote

In terms of legal responsibility and a wide variety of nefarious internet based offenses... It's a rare instance for the auditing agency to go any deeper than the external facing IP unless they are looking for possession of copyrighted materials, i.e. music, videos, leaked code etc...

None of that matters. It's not difficult and there's nothing illegal about including LAN addresses in TCP/IP packet headers or the body of the packet or across any other sort of network address translation. What are you even talking about?

Edited by I Make Poor Decisions, 27 May 2015 - 10:49 PM.

[Sarlic]

I Make Poor Decisions, on 27 May 2015 - 10:43 PM, said:

...and your point is? How is that relevant to this discussion at all?



None of that matters. It's not difficult and there's nothing illegal about including LAN addresses in TCP/IP packet headers or the body of the packet. What are you even talking about?

Problem is that this have been going on since gaming history.

"It was my brother who did this! He installed a hack on my computer!11!!"
"Yeah sorry i just wanted to test the hack out! See if it worked! It was only one time, sorry, sorry"

That's the issue right there. Nobody believe it anymore untill completely verified. Then again: a slim chance to get unbanned just because somebody used a hack on YOUR computer. You are in control of what happens on your computer, you and you alone should get notice what programs may be installed or not.

There's no more excuse of the above situations. I can imagine when it's verified (hard to proove as well) then it sucks to be you to end up banned by the actions of somebody else.

Therefore: PGI did the right thing.

Edited by Sarlic, 27 May 2015 - 10:47 PM.

[Jman5]

I Make Poor Decisions, on 27 May 2015 - 09:37 PM, said:

How do you know? Just exactly, how do you know what hacks Bhael's daughter was using?

The pile of assumptions you're making is taller than my Atlas.

I know because this is a niche game. There is only one hack out there for this game and it's a pay-hack.

Look, I've been playing this game a long time and I recognize several of the people who were on that list. A couple of them I used to play with and I know are legitimately good guys. It doesn't change the fact that they made a bad decision and started using that hack. Again, this isn't the kind of program some little kid could just google and download off the internet on a whim. It's a pay-hack with a subscription fee.

Edited by Jman5, 27 May 2015 - 10:47 PM.

[DaZur]

I Make Poor Decisions, on 27 May 2015 - 10:43 PM, said:

...and your point is? How is that relevant to this discussion at all?

None of that matters. It's not difficult and there's nothing illegal about including LAN addresses in TCP/IP packet headers or the body of the packet. What are you even talking about?

The point is PGI is not legally obligated to narrow down the offending PC and the implied user over breaking the ToS. It's industry standard to ban the IP...

[YueFei]

DaZur, on 27 May 2015 - 10:50 PM, said:

The point is PGI is not legally obligated to narrow down the offending PC and the implied user over breaking the ToS. It's industry standard to ban the IP...

Ban all accounts which logged in from a particular IP? Just to carry out a thought experiment (not to speculate or theorize on what may have happened in these particular cases of MWO bans):

If I LAN party with several buddies at a friend's house, we all login to MWO, and one guy uses a cheat on his account, and then we all go home afterwards.... if you ban all accounts which logged in from a particular IP, we'd all get banned?

Given that PGI says they have video evidence, I'm inclined to think they have finer targeting for bans than that. Otherwise, such a policy seems like potential for a lot of collateral damage.

[operatorZ]

I Make Poor Decisions, on 27 May 2015 - 10:43 PM, said:

The difference is that I actually offered more substance to my post than a simple personal insult. If you're going to insult me, fine, but do me the favor of adding something worth reading to your post, please.



...and your point is? How is that relevant to this discussion at all?



None of that matters. It's not difficult and there's nothing illegal about including LAN addresses in TCP/IP packet headers or the body of the packet or across any other sort of network address translation. What are you even talking about?

No, what are you even talking about...? So we are supposed to believe your word or your friends word over PGI's because of why? honestly why? You want evidence from PGI but expect us to take your word or your friends for gospel? Do you not see the hypocrisy of that position? If he didn't cheat ....oh well thems the breaks folks....if he did ......good riddance. But you trying to defend him here is just making you look bad. That's just the truth.

[PoorDecisions]

Jman5, on 27 May 2015 - 10:47 PM, said:

I know because this is a niche game. There is only one hack out there for this game and it's a pay-hack.

Look, I've been playing this game a long time and I recognize several of the people who were on that list. A couple of them I used to play with and I know are legitimately good guys. It doesn't change the fact that they made a bad decision and started using that hack. Again, this isn't the kind of program some little kid could just google and download off the internet on a whim. It's a pay-hack with a subscription fee.

This is a DirectX game. Every single game for DirectX has the same hacks available to it because of the fundamental flaws built into DirectX. It takes more than a script kiddie to write them, but it doesn't take much more than a basic understanding in programming to script-kiddie your way to a working hack each time a new game comes out that uses DirectX.

Just because you're only familiar with one single exploit doesn't mean that another doesn't exist.

So again, how do you know what exploit was being used? Did PGI tell you?

DaZur, on 27 May 2015 - 10:50 PM, said:

The point is PGI is not legally obligated to narrow down the offending PC and the implied user over breaking the ToS. It's industry standard to ban the IP...

You're right. Abusing the community is well within their rights. It's an extremely poor business decision, but you're absolutely right that it's within their rights to do with their game what they like.

[operatorZ]

I Make Poor Decisions, on 27 May 2015 - 11:02 PM, said:

This is a DirectX game. Every single game for DirectX has the same hacks available to it because of the fundamental flaws built into DirectX. It takes more than a script kiddie to write them, but it doesn't take much more than a basic understanding in programming to script-kiddie your way to a working hack each time a new game comes out that uses DirectX.

Just because you're only familiar with one single exploit doesn't mean that another doesn't exist.

So again, how do you know what exploit was being used? Did PGI tell you?

Wow, guess you know a lot about cheating....

[PoorDecisions]

operatorZ, on 27 May 2015 - 11:00 PM, said:

No, what are you even talking about...? So we are supposed to believe your word or your friends word over PGI's because of why? honestly why? You want evidence from PGI but expect us to take your word or your friends for gospel? Do you not see the hypocrisy of that position? If he didn't cheat ....oh well thems the breaks folks....if he did ......good riddance. But you trying to defend him here is just making you look bad. That's just the truth.

Oh stop. I'm not bidding anyone believe me over anyone else. Hell, I'm not claiming that I believe Bhael over PGI or PGI over Bhael. I'm here asking for proof so that I CAN make an educated decision. THAT is the truth, whether you want to spin it and troll the forums with that spin or not.

operatorZ, on 27 May 2015 - 11:04 PM, said:

Wow, guess you know a lot about cheating....

Not a lot, but certainly a hell of a lot more than you do even though you seem to act like you know everything. It doesn't take more than an afternoon of reading to break the surface in educating one's self. I like your insinuation, too. Stay classy.

Edited by I Make Poor Decisions, 27 May 2015 - 11:10 PM.

[Nightshade24]

I saw one of my friends there on the ban list, I do not even know why or how. He seems quite a happy player, not the best person I ever seen who can carry teams, but not that bad either... so I do not think he used performance cheats.

I kinda wounder what happened with him for him to be on that list.

[DaZur]

YueFei, on 27 May 2015 - 10:56 PM, said:

Ban all accounts which logged in from a particular IP? Just to carry out a thought experiment (not to speculate or theorize on what may have happened in these particular cases of MWO bans):

If I LAN party with several buddies at a friend's house, we all login to MWO, and one guy uses a cheat on his account, and then we all go home afterwards.... if you ban all accounts which logged in from a particular IP, we'd all get banned?

Given that PGI says they have video evidence, I'm inclined to think they have finer targeting for bans than that. Otherwise, such a policy seems like potential for a lot of collateral damage.

Actually... Your friend who hosted the LAN party would likely be the banned individual. That said, as I mentioned in my original post on this topic, PGI has utilized several proofing methods to qualify the veracity of the bans. The silly discussion of the IP address came out of that post.

[Iskareot]

******* douche bags... I played in some pugs with those twits. I tell ya.. I don't want to hear **** when I call someone a baddie anymore. Seeing people cheat pretty much just means those kids need to get slapped.

I like losing to skill not cheating...

[operatorZ]

I Make Poor Decisions, on 27 May 2015 - 11:06 PM, said:

Oh stop. I'm not bidding anyone believe me over anyone else. Hell, I'm not claiming that I believe Bhael over PGI or PGI over Bhael. I'm here asking for proof so that I CAN make an educated decision. THAT is the truth, whether you want to spin it and troll the forums with that spin or not.



Not a lot, but it doesn't take more than an afternoon of reading to break the surface. I like your insinuation, too. Stay classy.

Guess only you can truly know the legitimacy of your own actions...sorry that me and others have attempted to tell you how you actually come off....if that's not "classy" ....to bad..Internet hurts sometimes

[PoorDecisions]

operatorZ, on 27 May 2015 - 11:08 PM, said:

Guess only you can truly know the legitimacy of your own actions...sorry that me and others have attempted to tell you how you actually come off....if that's not "classy" ....to bad..Internet hurts sometimes

Same to you.

[DaZur]

I Make Poor Decisions, on 27 May 2015 - 11:03 PM, said:

You're right. Abusing the community is well within their rights. It's an extremely poor business decision, but you're absolutely right that it's within their rights to do with their game what they like.

Let's cut the bull crap... Whether you believe it or agree with it, PGI was able to identify at the very least your friends IP as a source of a Hack hosted PC. Your friend claims it was his kid, well guess what... As that child's legal guardian and I'm assuming the home owner he is ultimately responsible for the fallout of this discovery.

On top of that, the forgoing inference is PGI has other sources to further narrow down the offending account. I understand your demanding proof and your welcome to stamp your feet and feign indignation all night long... That said, PGI is not obligated to placate that demand for any number of reasons, not the least of which is the reality is that revealing the means of validating would likely expose the means and open doors to defeating it in the future.

Again... PGI is doing nothing out of the normal. IP bans are an industry standard... period.

[YueFei]

DaZur, on 27 May 2015 - 11:07 PM, said:

Actually... Your friend who hosted the LAN party would likely be the banned individual. That said, as I mentioned in my original post on this topic, PGI has utilized several proofing methods to qualify the veracity of the bans. The silly discussion of the IP address came out of that post.

That would be my assumption as well, that a ban would target only the account of the person using the hack.

But I am also curious to see the videos for myself, if only for my own amusement. I don't have a dog in this fight, really. I don't really know any of the banned individuals, I don't have a beef with any of them so I don't feel the desire to gloat over them being banned.

Have you ever seen TheWarOwl's "Overwatch" videos? These are where people submit demos for review of players that they suspect of cheating. Kind've entertaining in its own way even though I don't even play CS:GO (my buddy used to play competitively). Sometimes people submit a "suspect" for review. And when you watch it, you can clearly tell the guy isn't cheating, it's just that his opponents are completely awful, and when they get killed by him, the only way they can figure he beat them is that he must be cheating. Even though sometimes the suspect himself is not a very strong player. Like this particular video:

Edited by YueFei, 27 May 2015 - 11:25 PM.

[operatorZ]

DaZur, on 27 May 2015 - 11:20 PM, said:

On top of that, the forgoing inference is PGI has other sources to further narrow down the offending account. I understand your demanding proof and your welcome to stamp your feet and feign indignation all night long... That said, PGI is not obligated to placate that demand for any number of reasons, not the least of which is the reality is that revealing the means of validating would likely expose the means and open doors to defeating it in the future.

His request for proof seems to be more understandable through the lens of trying to get information than indignation.

[PoorDecisions]

DaZur, on 27 May 2015 - 11:20 PM, said:

Let's cut the bull crap... Whether you believe it or agree with it, PGI was able to identify at the very least your friends IP as a source of a Hack hosted PC. Your friend claims it was his kid, well guess what... As that child's legal guardian and I'm assuming the home owner he is ultimately responsible for the fallout of this discovery.

On top of that, the forgoing inference is PGI has other sources to further narrow down the offending account. I understand your demanding proof and your welcome to stamp your feet and feign indignation all night long... That said, PGI is not obligated to placate that demand for any number of reasons, not the least of which is the reality is that revealing the means of validating would likely expose the means and open doors to defeating it in the future.

Again... PGI is doing nothing out of the normal. IP bans are an industry standard... period.

And I'm asking to see the proof that Russ claimed was a video of Bhael cheating. I'm also discussing how rational or irrational it is to ban someone for something they didn't do. Why are you acting such the PGI fanboy here? Why are you white knighting for them when you're not involved and have nothing to gain? You've said your peace.

[Pirate King Redjack Ryan]

I Make Poor Decisions, on 27 May 2015 - 07:38 PM, said:

This is from Bhael Fire:



Russ told Bhael that Russ had personally seen the video of Bhael cheating, which is an outright lie.

Haha, it wasn't me it was my brother/sister/aunt/child on my computer, LOL oldest excuse in the internet. Guess he should take better care of his computer.
Besides Russ' comment I saw was about having seen vid, not as you stated. Which could actually mean anything.

[DaZur]

I Make Poor Decisions, on 27 May 2015 - 11:26 PM, said:

And I'm asking to see the proof that Russ claimed was a video of Bhael cheating. I'm also discussing how rational or irrational it is to ban someone for something they didn't do. Why are you acting such the PGI fanboy here? Why are you white knighting for them when you're not involved and have nothing to gain? You've said your peace.

You're right I said my peace...I would have been good with that. You pulled me in beyond my original post through questioning my intelligence.

That said, quite honestly I'm defending the process and intent. It could be MW:O or it could be Star Citizen or Hello Kitty... Doesn't matter.

You're welcome to think otherwise.