Allow us to opt out of events

Blood_again

SilverBride wrote: »

I had no choice in whether or not to participate in the crafting event, unlike most other events that I can just ignore. But the crafting event perks were passively there whether we chose to be part of it or not.

A lot of players craft and this particular bug had a high potential of innocent players being brought into question because the return from deconstructing transmuted gear was the same as it had always been.

I want the choice to opt out of these kind of events and not put myself at risk.

Thank you. Your point was clear from your OP.
I want to play safe too, without thinking of each my step like on a mine field. It is natural.

What I'm trying to understand is: how this option would help the safety? And why event-related only?
The same team and probably the same hands would implement and test this option. So you will trust that new option is bug free while the event-related code is not?
Even if it is (I believe it is not). Is it improbable that the new event-related code will just ignore that option? It is the event related code, we aren't trust it, are we?
That will be the moment, when your choice won't save you. That new option just becomes a fake button easily, if we don't trust the event-related code.

For me it would look more like a "security theater". An action or feature that calms players but doesn't fix a real safety problem.
Don't take me wrong. Is is good to calm players. But the problem stays unsolved and will shoot again later.
That's why I vote for solving the problem instead of this.

Blood_again

Elsonso wrote: »

I would not use the option, personally, but it does provide some insulation from event-specific changes. These may be more prone to inadvertent problems than anything else.

That said, the entire game is subject to these problems, at some level. There is no insulation from that, as unintended bugs making their way to Live can happen any time they change the game. An important role for QA is to help make it less likely that these sorts of things will make it to Live.

In this case, from out here in the audience, it would seem that the source of the problem is a general failure right there. Not saying that the fault is with QA. I would never presume that. There are plenty of places where things could have broken down along the way. I never expect to hear where that was, being that I am in the audience.

I believe this option would provide any kind of insulation in players' beliefs only.
One of the mistrust problem is: we can't accept only a part of the system compromised, if we don't have a full information about the system structure. Here we (the audience) have no such information and, I hope, never will.
So if somebody doesn't trust the event related code, they sincerely shouldn't trust the option too. That's why this option makes no sense.

Yep, we don't know and shouldn't know inner details. I can just accept this small impotence, while smiling and waving towards the devs like "Guys, there is a problem. It is serious."

Jaraal

Reginald_leBlem wrote: »

I "opt out" of events by simply not participating.

And yet you could have been banned for simply deconstructing a lot of transmuted gear, without ever actively participating in the event.

I believe the OP was suggesting being able to opt out of the "benefits" of an event. If they could have done that, they could have deconstructed to their hearts content without risking a ban. Or run Normal Maelstrom Arena without worrying if they were going to get sanctioned. And so forth.

spartaxoxo

Jaraal wrote: »

Reginald_leBlem wrote: »

I "opt out" of events by simply not participating.

And yet you could have been banned for simply deconstructing a lot of transmuted gear, without ever actively participating in the event.

The person who claimed that in the other thread later admitted they had reconstructed and then deconstructed new gear.

Jaraal

spartaxoxo wrote: »

Jaraal wrote: »

Reginald_leBlem wrote: »

I "opt out" of events by simply not participating.

And yet you could have been banned for simply deconstructing a lot of transmuted gear, without ever actively participating in the event.

The person who claimed that in the other thread later admitted they had reconstructed and then deconstructed new gear.

So if the OP decided to reconstruct and deconstruct a bunch of gear during the event without meaning to take advantage of the oversight by ZOS, they would be exempt from punishment? How would they be able to prove they had no intent to take advantage of the exploit? However, if the OP had been able to opt out of the event, there would be no issue at all, would there?

spartaxoxo

Jaraal wrote: »

spartaxoxo wrote: »

Jaraal wrote: »

Reginald_leBlem wrote: »

I "opt out" of events by simply not participating.

And yet you could have been banned for simply deconstructing a lot of transmuted gear, without ever actively participating in the event.

The person who claimed that in the other thread later admitted they had reconstructed and then deconstructed new gear.

So if the OP decided to reconstruct and deconstruct a bunch of gear during the event without meaning to take advantage of the oversight by ZOS, they would be exempt from punishment? How would they be able to prove they had no intent to take advantage of the exploit? However, if the OP had been able to opt out of the event, there would be no issue at all, would there?

Yes. According to ZOS people who did just a bit were not banned. These were people who created and destroyed an amount of gear way above the average.

LesserCircle

I want to say that people here don't know how it works, I was banned once for a very unfair reason, I was perma banned but after 2 MONTHS, they found me innocent and I got my account back, I did nothing and suddenly years of progress and purchases were gone, [snip]

[edited for trolling]

Pelanora

sarahthes wrote: »

Pelanora wrote: »

ZOS_Kevin wrote: »

Just wanted to clarify here. We followed up in another thread just a little while ago, but will share here. That response is below.

ZOS_Kevin wrote: »

We do want to offer some clarity around the issue of bans here however. First, we want to note that no bans have actually been given out. Currently, a very small number of accounts are subject to an investigation regarding the transmute crystals issue during the Crafter's Celebration. Those under investigation have been temporarily suspended during the investigation period and have been notified of this. Those impacted will be noticed once the investigation is over and will receive further instruction. Please be patient as we work to conclude the investigation.

Additionally, when we look at actions for exploitation, we don't just say, "person did x, thus they are banned". We look at a multitude of factors to make sure if there is an margin for accidents, we can account for that. We totally understand is someone stumbles into an exploit on accident. But there is a difference between doing something, 3 times without knowing it and doing it 1000 times, for example. @LunaFlora mentioned the endeavor issue and we took the same approach there and outlined it. If you stumbled into in by accident, then we can see that and account for that. Those who took advantage, it was pretty easy to tell. Hopefully this helps in easing some concerns. But we'll make note of this and take it to the team as well.

I don't think you should suspend people without due cause. I think you should investigate thoroughly and then take action. Just natural justice principles.... but that's just me.

If you mess up at work you can find yourself suspended without pay while the investigation takes place. This is more analogous to that situation than to a court of law.

Not in my country, unless it's for suspicion of an actual crime. And it still would be with pay. This is not an actual crime.

Pelanora

ElderOfTamriel wrote: »

colossalvoids wrote: »

ElderOfTamriel wrote: »

ZOS_Kevin wrote: »

Just wanted to clarify here. We followed up in another thread just a little while ago, but will share here. That response is below.

ZOS_Kevin wrote: »

We do want to offer some clarity around the issue of bans here however. First, we want to note that no bans have actually been given out. Currently, a very small number of accounts are subject to an investigation regarding the transmute crystals issue during the Crafter's Celebration. Those under investigation have been temporarily suspended during the investigation period and have been notified of this. Those impacted will be noticed once the investigation is over and will receive further instruction. Please be patient as we work to conclude the investigation.

Additionally, when we look at actions for exploitation, we don't just say, "person did x, thus they are banned". We look at a multitude of factors to make sure if there is an margin for accidents, we can account for that. We totally understand is someone stumbles into an exploit on accident. But there is a difference between doing something, 3 times without knowing it and doing it 1000 times, for example. @LunaFlora mentioned the endeavor issue and we took the same approach there and outlined it. If you stumbled into in by accident, then we can see that and account for that. Those who took advantage, it was pretty easy to tell. Hopefully this helps in easing some concerns. But we'll make note of this and take it to the team as well.

Is it cheating when we exploit the developers' mistakes?

I see that nobody was banned and thats also good imo, it wouldnt be right any other way. its probably more of an ethic question if you use the exploit or not but you cant really punish anyone for doing it i guess.

I'm sorry but maybe you can shed some light on where are people getting the idea that exploiting isn't bannable offense? It's quite common on forum lately it seems so I guess there's some idea originator or precedent outside of ESO.

Lol. Ok, imagine this:

So you go to a grocery store and buy some cornflakes for, what the price tag says, 4.50$. At the checkout you notice "Oh, it charged me for only 2.30$", so you think the price might be entered wrong in their system. Then you think, hmm yeah i could eat a bit more cornflakes in the future and since they are pretty durable you go back in and buy 10 packages more for only 2.30$. I mean i would never do that because its very questionable ethicaly whise. But will you get arrested for it? Ofc not. It was the grocery stores' mistake, maybe not even from a human, probably something corrupted the system, but it definitelly was theirs. Why would they be able to punish you for exploiting it?

The price they offer you at the check out and the price you pay then, is where the contract is made. Not the price on the shelf. Not when you put it in your trolley. At the check out, at the till. If the prices there arent right, that is the shops problem.

If you buy 100 of something at the check out for the price the till asks, that is all legal.

That's just contract law. The contract isnt at the shelf, its at point of payment. Price named, price paid, contract done.

I know you're trying to provide an analogy here, I'm just saying... actually.... you'd be fine if that happened in a store...

I think zos should distinguish between unforseeable effects of a giant game, eg an actual glitch/error, which can be exploited for gain, and the forseable results of a game feature they intentionally introduce, but just without reasonable foresight on their part.

If something offers a gain, then people will do it 1000 times.... hence they run one dungeon for days, 1000 times, to get the random drop, finally, of the item they want. Is that exploiting?

FlopsyPrince

It is nice that @ZOS_Kevin responded here. Hopefully that is now an allowed and encouraged activity.

Better communication would help in a great many areas. It will take a while to overcome the past most likely though, but this is a step in the correct direction!

ElderOfTamriel

Pelanora wrote: »

If something offers a gain, then people will do it 1000 times.... hence they run one dungeon for days, 1000 times, to get the random drop, finally, of the item they want. Is that exploiting?

probably not ^^

Tornaad

SilverBride wrote: »

I would like the option to opt out of events I don't want to participate in. With all the bugs lately from these events and innocent accounts being banned for not realizing these were bugs and not features, I don't want to participate any more.

Please allow us to opt out of events and all their perks. Or make it so we have to complete the event starter quest to take part and receive these perks. I don't feel comfortable participating in these any more.

Honestly, even knowing that there were no bans and that there were just suspensions, does not make it better for me. ESO is the only game I play. I was seriously considering trying to use the cheaper reconstruction fees to make a new build, which would have easily resulted in me creating and deconstructing multiple sets of gear as I figured out what I wanted to do for the build. And knowing that I could potentially lose permanent access to the only game I play, simply because I did not pay attention to the amount of resources I was getting back, does not leave me with any level of confidence. I think for me, if I ever hear about an event like that in the future, I will simply just avoid that activity until it is done.

Mayrael

spartaxoxo wrote: »

Jaraal wrote: »

spartaxoxo wrote: »

Jaraal wrote: »

Reginald_leBlem wrote: »

I "opt out" of events by simply not participating.

And yet you could have been banned for simply deconstructing a lot of transmuted gear, without ever actively participating in the event.

The person who claimed that in the other thread later admitted they had reconstructed and then deconstructed new gear.

So if the OP decided to reconstruct and deconstruct a bunch of gear during the event without meaning to take advantage of the oversight by ZOS, they would be exempt from punishment? How would they be able to prove they had no intent to take advantage of the exploit? However, if the OP had been able to opt out of the event, there would be no issue at all, would there?

Yes. According to ZOS people who did just a bit were not banned. These were people who created and destroyed an amount of gear way above the average.

Exactly. Players tend to whitewash and vilify malicious developers, accusing them of targeting them. What interest would ZOS have in banning innocent people? Building negative PR? Please, let's be serious.

I remember various situations smearing ZOS, such as regarding disappearing materials. As it turns out, these were attempts at extortion or resulted from player abuse. Recently, I had a situation where a significant amount of crafting materials disappeared, only to realize it was my oversight and nothing actually vanished, but was merely a result of a technical solution to a recent change in the way jewelry upgrades work.

In conclusion, it's hard for me to believe in the "innocence" of thousands of victims against the heartless ZOS, which gains nothing from such actions, especially when I don't even know a single player who has been banned for this reason.

Elsonso

Mayrael wrote: »

spartaxoxo wrote: »

Jaraal wrote: »

spartaxoxo wrote: »

Jaraal wrote: »

Reginald_leBlem wrote: »

I "opt out" of events by simply not participating.

And yet you could have been banned for simply deconstructing a lot of transmuted gear, without ever actively participating in the event.

The person who claimed that in the other thread later admitted they had reconstructed and then deconstructed new gear.

So if the OP decided to reconstruct and deconstruct a bunch of gear during the event without meaning to take advantage of the oversight by ZOS, they would be exempt from punishment? How would they be able to prove they had no intent to take advantage of the exploit? However, if the OP had been able to opt out of the event, there would be no issue at all, would there?

Yes. According to ZOS people who did just a bit were not banned. These were people who created and destroyed an amount of gear way above the average.

Exactly. Players tend to whitewash and vilify malicious developers, accusing them of targeting them. What interest would ZOS have in banning innocent people? Building negative PR? Please, let's be serious.

In conclusion, it's hard for me to believe in the "innocence" of thousands of victims against the heartless ZOS, which gains nothing from such actions, especially when I don't even know a single player who has been banned for this reason.

It is not that black and white, which is why I keep circling back to trust issues.

Although, I do agree with the premise that this "ban wave" is less of a wave and more of a "ripple".

uniqpy

Honestly if OP genuinely thought that spamming recons and decons to get free transmutes and nirncrux was a part of the event then i truly have no words. People are salty they were banned for exploiting, something that is obvious to everyone with a brain cell, a bug. And are disingenuously saying they thought that it was a feature. It was obviously a BUG.

ZOS obviously are not banning people who got an extra 100 transmutes for accidentally not noticing this. They will look at logs where people are spamming recons and decons then storing the transmutes in recon'd armor.

Don't get me wrong, ZOS do plenty wrong like selling respec scrolls to new players on the crown store, but this is something that was a clear BUG. Yes they should never had let it go live, but stuff happens.

gamergirldk

the nircrux hack is not new mate, it been in use a long time, the event just made it a op farm hack due to infinite crystals.

SilverBride

uniqpy wrote: »

Honestly if OP genuinely thought that spamming recons and decons to get free transmutes and nirncrux was a part of the event then i truly have no words.

I never claimed anything like that. I didn't even know anything about this until threads started popping up here about players being banned. I had no idea about how many transmutes and mats were being used or returned because I chose not to participate in the event.

My whole point was that players such as myself that chose not to take part in the event could innocently reconstruct a new gear set for their character then deconstruct the old one without even noticing how many mats they were using or receiving back. I don't want to put myself at risk for a bug in an event that I have no interest in participating in.

barney2525

I thought I was opting out of an event when I just decided to go do something else while it was running.

silly me.

SilverBride

barney2525 wrote: »

I thought I was opting out of an event when I just decided to go do something else while it was running.

No one was opted out if the perks of the event were still there for them even if they weren't actively participating.

Kavreiss

SilverBride wrote: »

I would like the option to opt out of events I don't want to participate in. With all the bugs lately from these events and innocent accounts being banned for not realizing these were bugs and not features, I don't want to participate any more.

Please allow us to opt out of events and all their perks. Or make it so we have to complete the event starter quest to take part and receive these perks. I don't feel comfortable participating in these any more.

you know what, i agree with you on that. opting out of events seems like the only way to stay out of their crosshairs. sad really. even if i hadnt done the crafters event, if i had deconned anything for transmutes then i could have been banned. [snip]

[edited for minor trolling]

Kavreiss

banned/ssuspended mean mostly the same thing esp to non native english speakers. even here on the forums when you get an email that says you are suspended when you try to log into the forums it says you are banned. so mostly semantics. if you only deconned for transmutes you could still lose access to your game account. so wrong.

Erickson9610

Still, who's to say that opting out would've actually stopped you from being considered for investigation? You could've participated in the event and then opted out, or opted back in and then participated. Maybe the opt-out feature wasn't working correctly and only the people who opted out are placed under investigation. What if ZOS investigates you regardless of whether you opt in or opt out?

Seems like the feature being requested is immunity to being investigated by ZOS, not an in-game mechanism to refuse participation in an event. What reason is there to refuse participation in an event if you don't receive a penalty for participating or not, but receive rewards for participating? It's only a net gain if you choose to participate.

Kavreiss

Erickson9610 wrote: »

Still, who's to say that opting out would've actually stopped you from being considered for investigation? You could've participated in the event and then opted out, or opted back in and then participated. Maybe the opt-out feature wasn't working correctly and only the people who opted out are placed under investigation. What if ZOS investigates you regardless of whether you opt in or opt out?

Seems like the feature being requested is immunity to being investigated by ZOS, not an in-game mechanism to refuse participation in an event. What reason is there to refuse participation in an event if you don't receive a penalty for participating or not, but receive rewards for participating? It's only a net gain if you choose to participate.

the potential net loss is banned for no good reason.

SilverBride

Erickson9610 wrote: »

You could've participated in the event and then opted out, or opted back in and then participated.

I see it as once the player opts out of the current event they remain opted out for the duration. When the event comes around again the next year they then have the option to participate or opt out again. And so forth.

Erickson9610

SilverBride wrote: »

Erickson9610 wrote: »

You could've participated in the event and then opted out, or opted back in and then participated.

I see it as once the player opts out of the current event they remain opted out for the duration. When the event comes around again the next year they then have the option to participate or opt out again. And so forth.

Would a player have to contact customer support if they accidentally opted out? Imagine all of the threads on the forums complaining that they had accidentally opted out and are now unable to participate in the event.

Jaraal

Erickson9610 wrote: »

Maybe the opt-out feature wasn't working correctly

A valid point. Every change they make is a new opportunity for something to break.

SilverBride

Erickson9610 wrote: »

SilverBride wrote: »

Erickson9610 wrote: »

You could've participated in the event and then opted out, or opted back in and then participated.

I see it as once the player opts out of the current event they remain opted out for the duration. When the event comes around again the next year they then have the option to participate or opt out again. And so forth.

Would a player have to contact customer support if they accidentally opted out? Imagine all of the threads on the forums complaining that they had accidentally opted out and are now unable to participate in the event.

They could have a "are you sure you wish to opt out" and have to agree in all caps to do it. That would prevent "accidents".

Erickson9610

SilverBride wrote: »

Erickson9610 wrote: »

SilverBride wrote: »

Erickson9610 wrote: »

You could've participated in the event and then opted out, or opted back in and then participated.

I see it as once the player opts out of the current event they remain opted out for the duration. When the event comes around again the next year they then have the option to participate or opt out again. And so forth.

Would a player have to contact customer support if they accidentally opted out? Imagine all of the threads on the forums complaining that they had accidentally opted out and are now unable to participate in the event.

They could have a "are you sure you wish to opt out" and have to agree in all caps to do it. That would prevent "accidents".

I can imagine players would eventually regret their decision to opt out. Still, it's probably like deleting an item from their inventory, or deleting a character — once it's gone, it can't be restored. At that point, only customer support can help.

Though, I still don't understand how this feature would make our accounts immune to being investigated. Would we need an opt-out toggle for obtaining currency like Seals of Endeavor, in case there's another bug like that in Reaper's March? Maybe another toggle to disable receiving experience, in case some enemies give more experience than intended?

Events are only one small part of this game; bugs exist outside of them, too. An event opt-out feature isn't enough to protect players from "accidentally" triggering conditions which would prompt an investigation from ZOS.

SilverBride

Erickson9610 wrote: »

Though, I still don't understand how this feature would make our accounts immune to being investigated.

I never said this would make anyone immune to anything. But the crafting event opened up a bigger possibility of an unforseen result being accidentally used by more players because almost everyone crafts.

I wasn't leveling a crafter and I didn't need any of the perks, so why do I have to be subjected to things that I may accidentally use without knowing they are a problem?

spartaxoxo

I don't think it would help much as the last glitch of this nature just involved teleporting to Reaper's March. It wasn't an event or anything but it reset people's endeavors apparently. And they banned everyone until they knew who had abused it and who accidentally stumbled on it. Afterwards, they let innocent players return to the game.