Should Investigations into cheating not be performed PRIOR to banning?

AliasRed

This way only the guilty are rightly punished, rather than players who are not guilty (as has happened in the past) being deprived of their accounts for extended periods of time due to over zealous application of "everyone is guilty until proven innocent".

Having to say "sorry we accidentally banned accounts that we shouldn't of" again is a terrible look for zenimax. Have they learned no lessons from the last time this happened?

sarahthes

No. There are valid reasons to ban first and then reverse any accidental extras, depending on the type of exploit.

SerafinaWaterstar

sarahthes wrote: »

No. There are valid reasons to ban first and then reverse any accidental extras, depending on the type of exploit.

I disagree. Especially if it takes time to unban all those “accidental extras”.

It is an awful way to treat customers, and does nothing but spread bad feelings & mistrust.

If this is that serious that it necessitates banning, then they should have done their investigations before pressing that button, to make sure only those involved affected.

Carcamongus

Well, because of my background I tend to favor due process and that entails punishing only after an investigation that results in enough evidence of guilt. While there could be valid reasons to ban first, ask questions later, this is extremely unfair and causes severe problems for those wrongfully accused. Get rid of the exploit, find out who made use of it and then punish. It's better to leave some bad players alone for a while until an investigation is over than to unfairly hurt innocent ones. And the proper term is "hurt", for imagine what it feels like to be accused of cheating when you did no such thing and banned from the game into which you invested so much money and time.

SaffronCitrusflower

As far as I know, ZOS has never reversed themselves on any ban for anything. So absolutely, we want them to be sure a ban is warranted for certain PRIOR to the ban.

Finedaible

If they want to run the studio on a skeleton crew, then they will have a skeleton clientele. Automated bans have a price, but I figure ZoS considers most Elder Scrolls fans to be expendable given their tendency to shoot first and let the client ask questions later.

sarahthes

SaffronCitrusflower wrote: »

As far as I know, ZOS has never reversed themselves on any ban for anything. So absolutely, we want them to be sure a ban is warranted for certain PRIOR to the ban.

They have reversed plenty of bans.

In the past when banning gold sellers/bot accounts, they have reversed bans from people who purchased from the bot accounts when it was found they were accidentally involved. The way they ban in some cases is to run a macro that bans everyone associated with the activity, so that the proceeds of the exploit can't simply be transferred to another account (and to catch any cases where the proceeds were deliberately transferred).

In cases where there were excess currency generated (rumor mill says that's what happened today, but who knows if it's actually true), the ban is likely to remove the excess currency from people who did it accidentally, before they spend it. If rumor is correct, then again temporarily banning and removing the excess from everyone who benefitted would be correct, as would be unbanning anyone for whom it was obviously accidental or incidental to their normal gameplay pattern.

SerafinaWaterstar

In cases where there were excess currency generated (rumor mill says that's what happened today, but who knows if it's actually true), the ban is likely to remove the excess currency from people who did it accidentally, before they spend it. If rumor is correct, then again temporarily banning and removing the excess from everyone who benefitted would be correct, as would be unbanning anyone for whom it was obviously accidental or incidental to their normal gameplay pattern.

Again, I disagree. It would be ‘correct’ to first identify those who massively benefitted - which should be obvious - and then ban them if necessary.

If there were those who accidentally triggered this glitch without realising, there is no need to ban, just remove the excess.

Going for this broad approach, which then bans people who do not deserve it or are innocent of the exploit, is incredibly bad pr and shows contempt for paying customers, and leaves s very bad taste in the mouth.

If I can lose access to my account <without actually cheating/exploiting> after playing for many years & spending quite a bit of money, it does not make me feel I can trust this company & makes me wary about spending more money with them.

I love this game; just don’t feel it loves me.

kargen27

SerafinaWaterstar wrote: »

sarahthes wrote: »

No. There are valid reasons to ban first and then reverse any accidental extras, depending on the type of exploit.

I disagree. Especially if it takes time to unban all those “accidental extras”.

It is an awful way to treat customers, and does nothing but spread bad feelings & mistrust.

If this is that serious that it necessitates banning, then they should have done their investigations before pressing that button, to make sure only those involved affected.

You are assuming there were no prior investigations.

CrashTest

SerafinaWaterstar wrote: »

If I can lose access to my account <without actually cheating/exploiting> after playing for many years & spending quite a bit of money, it does not make me feel I can trust this company & makes me wary about spending more money with them.

fr I don't even know if I should login now because I might get flagged as an exploiter and lose my account.

wilykcat

I hope getting banned isn't contagious 😁.

Jamie_Aubrey

Ban accounts
People need to buy another
ZOS gets money
ZOS gets to boast about the "millions" of people playing

Ragnarok0130

AliasRed wrote: »

This way only the guilty are rightly punished, rather than players who are not guilty (as has happened in the past) being deprived of their accounts for extended periods of time due to over zealous application of "everyone is guilty until proven innocent".

Having to say "sorry we accidentally banned accounts that we shouldn't of" again is a terrible look for zenimax. Have they learned no lessons from the last time this happened?

Ideally yes, however if it's an exploit or cheat that has a severely negative effect to the integrity of the game such as the ole infinite dragon knight standard bug or to ZoS' bottom line if it's associated with the crown store I can see why ZoS would issue temporary bans, triage the problem, and then patch in order to minimize damage done via an exploit and then evaluate if the bans are removed or maintained.

From an affected player perspective it would be maddening but at this point we don't even know what the issue is.

sarahthes

SerafinaWaterstar wrote: »

In cases where there were excess currency generated (rumor mill says that's what happened today, but who knows if it's actually true), the ban is likely to remove the excess currency from people who did it accidentally, before they spend it. If rumor is correct, then again temporarily banning and removing the excess from everyone who benefitted would be correct, as would be unbanning anyone for whom it was obviously accidental or incidental to their normal gameplay pattern.

Again, I disagree. It would be ‘correct’ to first identify those who massively benefitted - which should be obvious - and then ban them if necessary.

If there were those who accidentally triggered this glitch without realising, there is no need to ban, just remove the excess.

Going for this broad approach, which then bans people who do not deserve it or are innocent of the exploit, is incredibly bad pr and shows contempt for paying customers, and leaves s very bad taste in the mouth.

If I can lose access to my account <without actually cheating/exploiting> after playing for many years & spending quite a bit of money, it does not make me feel I can trust this company & makes me wary about spending more money with them.

I love this game; just don’t feel it loves me.

I'm saying that if the rumors are true, everyone who was banned accidentally triggered the exploit and their account needs to be checked, and any unearned extra currency or items removed before their account is unfrozen.

I don't know if the rumors are true. But if they are, the response isn't disproportionate. Imagine if you used that currency to purchase something, not realizing you had more than you should, and then they rolled it back later and took away a mount or something. Think you'd be more mad about that than a couple days inconvenience.

Elsonso

AliasRed wrote: »

This way only the guilty are rightly punished, rather than players who are not guilty (as has happened in the past) being deprived of their accounts for extended periods of time due to over zealous application of "everyone is guilty until proven innocent".

They definitely appear to have a "ban them all, sort it out on appeal" process in place.

Can't say that I am a fan of that sort of thinking. It exhibits poor respect for the players by creating an environment where the studio is feared. Players are never sure if they are going to do something seemingly innocent or mundane that will suddenly get them placed on the Ban du Jour list.

Carcamongus

sarahthes wrote: »

SerafinaWaterstar wrote: »

In cases where there were excess currency generated (rumor mill says that's what happened today, but who knows if it's actually true), the ban is likely to remove the excess currency from people who did it accidentally, before they spend it. If rumor is correct, then again temporarily banning and removing the excess from everyone who benefitted would be correct, as would be unbanning anyone for whom it was obviously accidental or incidental to their normal gameplay pattern.

Again, I disagree. It would be ‘correct’ to first identify those who massively benefitted - which should be obvious - and then ban them if necessary.

If there were those who accidentally triggered this glitch without realising, there is no need to ban, just remove the excess.

Going for this broad approach, which then bans people who do not deserve it or are innocent of the exploit, is incredibly bad pr and shows contempt for paying customers, and leaves s very bad taste in the mouth.

If I can lose access to my account <without actually cheating/exploiting> after playing for many years & spending quite a bit of money, it does not make me feel I can trust this company & makes me wary about spending more money with them.

I love this game; just don’t feel it loves me.

I'm saying that if the rumors are true, everyone who was banned accidentally triggered the exploit and their account needs to be checked, and any unearned extra currency or items removed before their account is unfrozen.

I don't know if the rumors are true. But if they are, the response isn't disproportionate. Imagine if you used that currency to purchase something, not realizing you had more than you should, and then they rolled it back later and took away a mount or something. Think you'd be more mad about that than a couple days inconvenience.

If, for the sake of argument, the rumor is true, the point stil stands that banning someone who did not violate the ToS is unfair. Ultimately, the exploits are flaws in the game's design and why should innocent players be penalized for them? Investigate first, pinpoint the malicious actors and punish them. Besides, I doubt being told your purchase must be invalidated is more infuriating than being falsely accused and unfairly prevented from using a product for which you paid.

p00tx

kargen27 wrote: »

SerafinaWaterstar wrote: »

sarahthes wrote: »

No. There are valid reasons to ban first and then reverse any accidental extras, depending on the type of exploit.

I disagree. Especially if it takes time to unban all those “accidental extras”.

It is an awful way to treat customers, and does nothing but spread bad feelings & mistrust.

If this is that serious that it necessitates banning, then they should have done their investigations before pressing that button, to make sure only those involved affected.

You are assuming there were no prior investigations.

You're assuming there were.

#freeZanshii

Elsonso

Carcamongus wrote: »

If, for the sake of argument, the rumor is true, the point stil stands that banning someone who did not violate the ToS is unfair. Ultimately, the exploits are flaws in the game's design and why should innocent players be penalized for them? Investigate first, pinpoint the malicious actors and punish them. Besides, I doubt being told your purchase must be invalidated is more infuriating than being falsely accused and unfairly prevented from using a product for which you paid.

I don't really agree with this line of thinking. The whole "all is fair if the game allows it" rings hollow. Few other things work like that. People should know better. They probably do.

TruthSeeker

kargen27 wrote: »

SerafinaWaterstar wrote: »

sarahthes wrote: »

No. There are valid reasons to ban first and then reverse any accidental extras, depending on the type of exploit.

I disagree. Especially if it takes time to unban all those “accidental extras”.

It is an awful way to treat customers, and does nothing but spread bad feelings & mistrust.

If this is that serious that it necessitates banning, then they should have done their investigations before pressing that button, to make sure only those involved affected.

You are assuming there were no prior investigations.

There cannot have been adequate prior investigations because I have not exploited anything.

I don't see how this can concern the recent annoying Reapers March endeavors failure problem because I immediately reported how frustrating it was via the in-game help option and I have been banned!

Carcamongus

Elsonso wrote: »

Carcamongus wrote: »

If, for the sake of argument, the rumor is true, the point stil stands that banning someone who did not violate the ToS is unfair. Ultimately, the exploits are flaws in the game's design and why should innocent players be penalized for them? Investigate first, pinpoint the malicious actors and punish them. Besides, I doubt being told your purchase must be invalidated is more infuriating than being falsely accused and unfairly prevented from using a product for which you paid.

I don't really agree with this line of thinking. The whole "all is fair if the game allows it" rings hollow. Few other things work like that. People should know better. They probably do.

Nowhere did I state all was fair if the game allowed it. Using exploits is against ToS and I'm not saying that shouldn't be enforced. What I'm saying is innocent people, which I mean to be people who did not use any exploits, shouldn't be punished for something they did not do. The company is penalizing people who did nothing wrong for a flaw in its product before it has even finished its investigation.

kargen27

p00tx wrote: »

kargen27 wrote: »

SerafinaWaterstar wrote: »

sarahthes wrote: »

No. There are valid reasons to ban first and then reverse any accidental extras, depending on the type of exploit.

I disagree. Especially if it takes time to unban all those “accidental extras”.

It is an awful way to treat customers, and does nothing but spread bad feelings & mistrust.

If this is that serious that it necessitates banning, then they should have done their investigations before pressing that button, to make sure only those involved affected.

You are assuming there were no prior investigations.

You're assuming there were.

#freeZanshii

I'm not assuming anything as I have no information at all on which to make an assumption. Just like everybody else in the thread.

Elsonso

Carcamongus wrote: »

Elsonso wrote: »

Carcamongus wrote: »

If, for the sake of argument, the rumor is true, the point stil stands that banning someone who did not violate the ToS is unfair. Ultimately, the exploits are flaws in the game's design and why should innocent players be penalized for them? Investigate first, pinpoint the malicious actors and punish them. Besides, I doubt being told your purchase must be invalidated is more infuriating than being falsely accused and unfairly prevented from using a product for which you paid.

I don't really agree with this line of thinking. The whole "all is fair if the game allows it" rings hollow. Few other things work like that. People should know better. They probably do.

Nowhere did I state all was fair if the game allowed it. Using exploits is against ToS and I'm not saying that shouldn't be enforced. What I'm saying is innocent people, which I mean to be people who did not use any exploits, shouldn't be punished for something they did not do. The company is penalizing people who did nothing wrong for a flaw in its product before it has even finished its investigation.

I never assume that the people "did nothing wrong" in cases like these. They obviously did _something_ that can be viewed as wrong or they would not be in the position they are in. Did they do it intentionally and should ZOS ban them before determining that? I see that as the question posed in this thread. I don't think the answer is simple because each situation is potentially different.

Past ban waves have revealed that they have a clip level on the exploit and cheating bans. There is a certain amount of repetition that is allowed before a ban happens. I assume that this is determined based on what the exploit is, and how easily an oblivious player can come across it. For example, an exploit that has to follow a process to work should have a lower clip level than something that anyone can do just by accident. I further assume they are smart enough to figure this out and apply the proper conditions before banning anyone.

Another thing that needs to be considered is that if this is related to "merchandise" or "currency" that they may need to clean up accounts that used the exploit, even if it was below the clip level. This apparently requires the account be locked until they are done. I should expect ZOS to say that, eventually, but am never surprised when they don't.

SerafinaWaterstar

What I'm saying is innocent people, which I mean to be people who did not use any exploits, shouldn't be punished for something they did not do. The company is penalizing people who did nothing wrong for a flaw in its product before it has even finished its investigation.

^^this^^

Jierdanit

I really don't understand how anyone can be okay with players getting banned for something they didn't do.

Just imagine how you would feel if you randomly got banned from a game that you had spent lots of money and time on without an actual reason.
That is more than a "slight inconvenience".
That completely destroys any trust you could have in a company like that.

In a situation where it is possible to make sure that someone was using an exploit or cheat no one should ever be banned before that is completely sure.

Also to everyone stop reporting people simply because you don't understand how they're doing something (within reason ofc).
A lot of people are going to know more about the game than you, not everything is an exploit or cheat.

CameraBeardThePirate

In situations like this, it is far easier to ban first and reverse false positives.

Banning is sometimes done in batches automatically. This is because bot accounts can be set up automatically and banning them by hand would be fighting an uphill battle after a sleet storm. It is an unfortunate necessity when dealing with online accounts of any medium.

preevious

Indeed, banning first and investigating after is the best way to handle this.

Investigating takes time, and with time, the problem worsen and gets more difficult to clean up.
It's not fun for those who will suffer a temporary unwaranted ban, though. There should be compensation, for them.

It's a bit like the very real "preemptive incarceration". Most country have them, and it can be usefull if the suspect is considered dangerous.

Elsonso

Jierdanit wrote: »

I really don't understand how anyone can be okay with players getting banned for something they didn't do.

I am fairly sure not many people are "okay" with that.

How do we know whether someone did it or not, though? They said they didn't do it? In the current situation, we don't even know what they are banning people for. Even if we did know, is it enough that they deny doing it?

If someone is banned, the best course of action for a positive outcome is to not run to social media and tell everyone.

Sarannah

In my opinion in case of an exploit ZOS should stop(hotfix) the exploit and item/currency-lock the possibly 'exploiting' accounts for the duration of the investigation, before issueing a ban of any kind. This way the exploit can't spread to other accounts and players can't transfer exploited gains to other accounts, while at the same time protecting innocent players and allowing them to still play the game.

Players pay for this game and there are MANY daily things(endeavours/login rewards/tickets/ESO+/etc), which would make it suck to even be banned for a single day by accident for any honest player. As those players would miss out on quite a few in-game things, by no fault of their own.

That said, any cheaters should be perma banned.

PS: This is also another reason why the "with a guildmate" and "with a groupmember" should never be a requirement for anything. As the players you would engage with, could be gone in an instant, for any reason.

SerafinaWaterstar

It's a bit like the very real "preemptive incarceration". Most country have them, and it can be usefull if the suspect is considered dangerous.

Not sure where you live, but in my country you can’t just lock someone up on the off-chance they might have done something wrong. We have due process and are innocent until proven guilty. We haven’t quite got to Minority Report territory yet.

zaria

CameraBeardThePirate wrote: »

In situations like this, it is far easier to ban first and reverse false positives.

Banning is sometimes done in batches automatically. This is because bot accounts can be set up automatically and banning them by hand would be fighting an uphill battle after a sleet storm. It is an unfortunate necessity when dealing with online accounts of any medium.

Bot account should be pretty easy to sort out as they would be new so any old account would be eliminated.
As I understand this has to do with an in game currency. Assuming its seals of endeavor.
Say one of them give endeavors but rater than lock it reset and this is use weapon poison on 15 enemies.
I say you could play for some time before noticing something is up, at least if you don't get an clear message getting the seals. But some who never uses weapon weapon poison now uses it while farming public dungeons you know he exploiting.

Or it could be tel-var, people earning thousands of tel-var outside of IC so ban them

Elsonso

zaria wrote: »

As I understand this has to do with an in game currency. Assuming its seals of endeavor.

We actually don't know what they are banning for. There are multiple theories out there, and at least two of them seem plausible to me. One of them might be correct. None of them could be correct. Maybe ZOS will tell us. I hope they do, because I am more than a little curious, now.

This is why it is too early to say they are banning innocent people.