BBSooner wrote: »

Assuming this isn't purely a troll thread and either a thorough case of devil's advocate or a sincere standpoint, the point you should eventually come to is that different people expect/receive different things from their entertainment.

Some people want enforced equal footing regardless of the metaphysical notion of "well, who really won" (which is an odd thing to ponder anyway coming from somebody who claims they are unconcerned with "winning"). They place value in the equal struggle, as I'm sure equal value is placed on the notion that basketball games will be played with the same amount of people on each side instead of 2v20. This mindset is perfectly fine, as it's simply a preference.

Other people want to play games with no set parameters, which is also absolutely fine as long as their preference does not impede the desires of the creators and the players . Developers make that decision during the life of the game - which preference they choose to support and which rulee they expect their players to follow.

It just so happens that ZOS decided to not allow extraordinary circumstances for a controlled environment. That is why they are bad - not because of the metaphysical and not because "people need their mindset altered". The suggestion for people to alter their mindset is at best stifling and at worst an attack on the individual identity.

So, we come to the conclusion that different people want different things. That includes developers - who are in no way responsible for providing a positive experience for every mindset. So, it just so happens, The game developed by these developers is unfriendly to cheating - which within the context of these rules makes cheating "bad".

OK agree different people expect/receive different things

"enforced equal footing" = what? The ultimate in enforced equal footing is one of two extremes either cookie cutter rules that specify everything (think halo) or a blanket policy that everything is OK (thus everyone has equal access and can use whatever means they find best/viable). These two extremes are the ultimate in equal footing, anything else introduces variables which may create bias in one form or another.

Agreed it needs to not impede the desires of he Dev or other players and Dev make the decision on the final accepted rules...but you must admit a developer who wishes to be successful needs to consider the desires of their customers (this is where the problem of this pervasive anti-cheat mentality creates problems and why we should talk about concepts like this so that people can understand how the system could be improved...maybe just maybe by having this talk it is like a pebble falling into a lake....the ripples extend out and masses gain new perspective...then maybe 10 years from now we can have a better option).

Agreed zos' decision is why they are bad in this game....I'm talking about the genera in general not this gamr. Here zos will do what zos decides and we are free to play by their rules or go somewhere else. This is largely influenced by the mentality of the genera community and what is best for zos' wallet. The company cannot be blamed for designing a product to sell and that complies with their player base's expectations. Its still good to realize and understand the gears behind the scenes though.

I truly appreciate your well thought out response as I think these are the conversations worth having, to explore various views and mindsets and achieve new understanding hopefully we all gain some insight.

Varicite wrote: »

Faugaun wrote: »

But what about an everything is OK policy hurts the competitiveness? How is it unfair if one player bots or uses a glitch under the premise that everyone is allowed to use the same means? Your arguing that we should make a rule that all fencing competition should be conducted left (or right, pick your poison) handed ...nevermind that not all people have the same dominant hand... The only way to have a truly competitive atmosphere is to allow all methods (both hands in fencing).

There is no more competition when everything is acceptable.

Your example doesn't work, because what would happen is something like this:

You try to hold a fencing competition. 1 guy shows up w/ an epee, 3 players show up w/ automatic weapons, another drives up in a tank, and the last just nukes the whole darn place before the competition can even begin.

That's what it's like when there aren't rules. It's no longer about the spirit of competition or player skill or any of that. It just becomes about who can outdo the other w/ better programs / bots / DDoS attacks / etc.

So why not only have the rules for the competitive portion using cookie cutter templates with cookie cutter gear which rotates over time.. .allow everyone else to play how they want, this promotes more fair competition and more openness. You can have your "everyone at xyz CP" brackets and many other fair systems where all participants are on equal footing plus with templates...then a player doesn't have to level up through all that undesirable content....unless of course they want to see the other parts of the game.

AlnilamE wrote: »

No, I think they are arguing that we should make a rule that you can't use guns in a fencing competition.

But maybe I'm misreading...

Seriously, an MMO is a shared space and there needs to be some consideration of other players.

Consideration should go both directions not just the way you or I or john q. Desire.

Faugaun wrote: »

sk8ingeckoub17_ESO wrote: »

Faugaun wrote: »

Varicite wrote: »

Well, if you're waiting for millions of players worldwide to suddenly be cool w/ losing to cheaters, I hope you have a lot of patience.

I, for one, am not ever going to be okay w/ people cheating to win, because it's unfair and dishonorable. I'm sure there are plenty out there like me.

So you're going to be waiting a while.

But if it were no longer considered cheating...just another way of playing if you choose to...because the blanket answer was if the system can do it then it is working as designed...if the Dev do not approve of a certain use then the answer is until a block is coded in then it is allowed (with the exception of account hacking or other similar activities which should not be allowed). Thus players are free to do whatever the system allows and know with confidence that it is authorized because they are able to do the action.

If its not cheating then they cannot cheat to win...do you really have an issue with a completly open and level playing field?

....yeah I'm not holding my breath on chamge, just pointing out a flaw in the logic of the system. It is truly the anti-cheat mentality which causes the problem of cheaters.

It isnt the anti cheat that causes the problem of cheaters. You are using the false dichotemy of blaming the victim for the crime or problem. The reason cheating exists is we are overly competitive by nature and will use any advantage we can to win. And thus in some cheating becomes the norm.

Wanting a truly competitive and fair atmosphere is not a problem and focusing some resources on keeping things fair is what helps keep a game vibrant and playable.

You use examples like minecraft and non ladder based star craft for cheating that doesnt ruin things while ignoring examples that are actually comparable. Outside of ladders star craft cheats or meh because its not competitive. Minecraft was built to be built. Every single new server and room has different rules and terms...

There has yet to be a actual mmo that hasnt had bugs and cheats that started to deteriorate the game till the were fixed. You may be one unique soul that prefers to blame the victims for having policing of policies but you thankfully are one in a million...

But what about an everything is OK policy hurts the competitiveness? How is it unfair if one player bots or uses a glitch under the premise that everyone is allowed to use the same means? Your arguing that we should make a rule that all fencing competition should be conducted left (or right, pick your poison) handed ...nevermind that not all people have the same dominant hand... The only way to have a truly competitive atmosphere is to allow all methods (both hands in fencing). You keep saying non-ladder based StarCraft and Minecraft....how much of any given mmo is actually ladder based? If you want more strict rules for the ladder portions by all means (heck put in a character creator where you can create a max level character with standardized ladder gear) ...I think that's a great idea it puts everyone I'm equal gear and equal skill to actively compete....why care what people do or do not do outside of said ladders?

Look i get that you would rather have people playing to cheat rather then the game. Dont delude yourself otherwise but the moment any game becomes more about who can use the most exploits my sub goes elsewhere and based on the start of this game most people are in the same boat. You can do as you wwish, even make a game that allows exploits aand cheating but for the games longevity i truly believe cracking down on exploits and cheating is better for the games economy, community, gameplay, atmosphere, and overall health.

There is no example i know of where allowing cheating and exploitation to flourish has made a game flourish or a success but i have seen plenty mmos and games that took to long to fix exploits and hacks flounder and fall...

"enforced equal footing" = what? The ultimate in enforced equal footing is one of two extremes either cookie cutter rules that specify everything (think halo) or a blanket policy that everything is OK (thus everyone has equal access and can use whatever means they find best/viable). These two extremes are the ultimate in equal footing, anything else introduces variabes which may create bias in one form or another.

No, enforced equal footing only comes with rules. Without rules there is no way to know who is playing using what . This knowledge is the entire basis for why rules are in place.

Agreed it needs to not impede the desires of he Dev or other players and Dev make the decision on the final accepted rules...but you must admit a developer who wishes to be successful needs to consider the desires of their customers (this is where the problem of this pervasive anti-cheat mentality creates problems and why we should talk about concepts like this so that people can understand how the system could be improved...maybe just maybe by having this talk it is like a pebble falling into a lake....the ripples extend out and masses gain new perspective...then maybe 10 years from now we can have a better option).

I would say the developers know their audience based on the response to this thread thus far, and the audiences reaction to the early days where botting was prevalent. This would be a valuable conversation if there weren't already games available that open themselves up to everything from botting to letting players create servers with individual rulesets. This just happens to be a game where the developers choose to react negatively to such things. Based on that reaction, cheating in this manner is "bad" within the context of the developer and target audiences desires.

You can't teach ethics to the unethical.

Why do MMO players not like cheaters? Because NOBODY likes cheaters. Because BEING a cheater is a HUGE character flaw. And if you'll cheat in one "meaningless" area of your life, it's a pretty safe bet you'll cheat in other, more important, areas as well. They've done experiments that prove that even animals don't like cheaters.
https://youtube.com/watch?v=YbAhPqsLHmo#t=93

Faugaun wrote: »

WraithAzraiel wrote: »

Faugaun wrote: »

I

Really who are cheaters cheating? You? Or themselves?

So someone please explain to me why this is such a big deal what other people do when it has no impact on your playing experience?

That's like asking why husbands/wives/boyfriends/girlfriends frown upon cheating.

I don't get that one either...except they are jealous types ...its not a problem with the act its a problem with self and lack of confidence. Many people are afraid that if their spouse cheats then they will leave (or they feel as though they are not enough). This jealousy and lack of self confidence and lack of trusting your partner to actually love you is a much bigger issue than whatever the people do...

Being paranoid isn't the same as being wrong

par·a·noi·a
ˌperəˈnoiə/
noun
noun: paranoia
a mental condition characterized by delusions of persecution, unwarranted jealousy, or exaggerated self-importance, typically elaborated into an organized system. It may be an aspect of chronic personality disorder, of drug abuse, or of a serious condition such as schizophrenia in which the person loses touch with reality.
synonyms: persecution complex, delusions, obsession, psychosis
"her husband had concocted a cruel scheme to inflict her with paranoia"
suspicion and mistrust of people or their actions without evidence or justification.
"the global paranoia about hackers and viruses"

Faugaun wrote: »

Again if you need a phone app to spy on someone you have way bigger problems...how about having a sit down conversation....and actually you know talking about your concerns?

I failed to see the part where the definition of the word Paranoia proved my statement incorrect. I'm not arguing the point of the existence of underlying issues, but when enough red flags go up, it's natural to want to investigate. Some people investigate differently. Some like the direct approach of confrontation. Some are troubled, or damaged individuals that have invade the other's privacy.

But again, and I'll say it a different way to better illustrate my point. "You're only considered paranoid IF you're proven wrong."

WraithAzraiel wrote: »

Faugaun wrote: »

WraithAzraiel wrote: »

Faugaun wrote: »

I

Really who are cheaters cheating? You? Or themselves?

So someone please explain to me why this is such a big deal what other people do when it has no impact on your playing experience?

That's like asking why husbands/wives/boyfriends/girlfriends frown upon cheating.

I don't get that one either...except they are jealous types ...its not a problem with the act its a problem with self and lack of confidence. Many people are afraid that if their spouse cheats then they will leave (or they feel as though they are not enough). This jealousy and lack of self confidence and lack of trusting your partner to actually love you is a much bigger issue than whatever the people do...

Being paranoid isn't the same as being wrong

par·a·noi·a
ˌperəˈnoiə/
noun
noun: paranoia
a mental condition characterized by delusions of persecution, unwarranted jealousy, or exaggerated self-importance, typically elaborated into an organized system. It may be an aspect of chronic personality disorder, of drug abuse, or of a serious condition such as schizophrenia in which the person loses touch with reality.
synonyms: persecution complex, delusions, obsession, psychosis
"her husband had concocted a cruel scheme to inflict her with paranoia"
suspicion and mistrust of people or their actions without evidence or justification.
"the global paranoia about hackers and viruses"

Faugaun wrote: »

Again if you need a phone app to spy on someone you have way bigger problems...how about having a sit down conversation....and actually you know talking about your concerns?

I failed to see the part where the definition of the word Paranoia proved my statement incorrect. I'm not arguing the point of the existence of underlying issues, but when enough red flags go up, it's natural to want to investigate. Some people investigate differently. Some like the direct approach of confrontation. Some are troubled, or damaged individuals that have invade the other's privacy.

But again, and I'll say it a different way to better illustrate my point. "You're only considered paranoid IF you're proven wrong."

And regardless whether right or wrong if you're resorting to snooping you have problems much larger than your significant other cheating on you (or not, the case doesn't really matter). At that point the issue is more with yourself than with them and it would be hard to blame them for anything they did or did not do.

Faugaun wrote: »

I've bolded my point, the only reason it is a problem is because we choose/allow it to be a problem...if we stopped worrying about it so much then it would be a non issue and people could choose or not choose to participate in parts on the system that they find desirable or undesirable.
...

So because you individually do not worry about the impact cheaters have on the game, you feel no one should worry; and, people should choose not to participate in parts of the game they find desirable to play in order to make room for cheaters instead.

OK so is there a standard definition to cheating or would you accept that the developer defines the term? My personal opinion is that the Dev defines cheating through the terms of service. But many devs make this decision based on what I'm terming the player bases cheating mentality. From a dev perspective it makes perfect sense to set the rules within what your community considers appropriate. Though how does the player community at large develop their cheating mentality? What are the underlying variables that go into this?

I think we can all agree that violating the rules put forth by the Dev is cheating and not OK. However how should a Dev define cheating?

Is it anyaction which gives a player an unfair advantage? What constitutes am unfair advantage? For instance if I can program a script to conduct a sequence of keystrokes so that a) it always has perfect timing, b) I only have to push one button to do it.

Perhaps I want to do this to prevent a repetitive stress injury....or perhaps I am just lazy...suppose this script is also posted on the games official forums for anyone to read and do themselves if they so choose.

Is this an unfair advantage? My gut says if anyone has access to it and can also do so then it is not an unfair advantage. So does this need a rule to prohibit the behavior? But suppose a new person comes along and doesn't know that they too can do this...but no one tells him how and its not in the intro tutorial? Is that an unfair advantage? He still had access to the information the same place as everyone else...but he was ignorant about this option....he writes a complaint to the Dev who makes a rule now prohibiting the action....now obviously since the tos now prohibit said action it shouldn't be done....but was creating the rule really justified and with reason? I don't know maybe some community opinion on this could help clarify....

In any case this newly created rule has now set a precedent (right or wrong it has set a precedent) the community latches on to this principle now as "scripting is cheating" this mentality continues to be carried from game to game....other events for similar rules, some justified others maybe not so much. In any case these rules continue to accumulate over times (let's say 20 years for muds, mucks, MMOs, etc)...now we have a mmo community with a general consensus of what is cheating....but really it is the result of some legitimate and some stupid precedents and a decent amount of time.

This is the cheating mentality....and it, like a snowball rolling down a hill, perpetuates itself growing bigger and bigger and more restrictive as time passes, slowly eating away at player freedom....further advancing the idea of what is cheating...further creating more and more restrictions on the player....and there is not really any mechanism within the system to go the other direction....expect one day things will become so restrictive someone will wake up and say...you know things could be a lot more fun without all these rules....but how does that person convince the community of this?

I'm not saying that time was a decade ago, or today, or a century from now...just that as a system this is what is occuring and that we should be aware it is occurring and limiting us....before we complain about people doing something unfair...this all constitutes the cheating mentality...

In your example of a keyboard allowing that functionality but it not being built into the game...if anyone can buy that keyboard (I'm gonna make the broad assumption that devs are aware these products exist) and devs do not do anything to prevent such keyboards from doing this function....then how is this an unfair advantage as opposed to a player preference?

(BTW I'm pretty sure you can get software and reprogram any keyboard to rebind the keys to single or multiple sequential commands...even with time delays...maybe someone else can confirm/deny?)

Provided this is the case it could be interpreted as the devs expressly permitting the behavior...and everyone having equal access to the functionality ...if they want...not even a price gate in this instance ...to me this seems to be player preference....under your definition it might be considered cheating because the capability wasn't put on a silver platter front and center.

Faugaun wrote: »

...
I think we can all agree that violating the rules put forth by the Dev is cheating and not OK. However how should a Dev define cheating?

Is it anyaction which gives a player an unfair advantage? What constitutes am unfair advantage? For instance if I can program a script to conduct a sequence of keystrokes so that a) it always has perfect timing, b) I only have to push one button to do it.

Perhaps I want to do this to prevent a repetitive stress injury....or perhaps I am just lazy...suppose this script is also posted on the games official forums for anyone to read and do themselves if they so choose.
...

Speaking now not as a player of ESO, but as an individual who is involved with managing forums for another gaming company, can perhaps give you a bit of an insight into some of these scenarios based on the company policies I was required to learn.

Any action which gives a player an unfair advantage by doing something that is not intended by gameplay design is considered cheating and is a bannable offense.

A company has to decide these things on a case-by-case scenario; sometimes they consider community feedback on the situations, other times they simply decide what they feel is best for the game.

The company I am involved with has a more hardline policy against macros and botting than ZOS seems to.
Macros are bannable unless the individual has a valid reason (ie: disability or health issues) to run them.
Laziness is not a disability, and the parallel that could probably be made would be parking in disabled parking without valid need or license just because it makes for a shorter walk.
It is entirely possible that there are people who have lied about being disabled in order to use macros to cheat, but do not worry about those being indications of character flaws.