SienneYviete wrote: »Console players right now.
Console players right now
https://gfycat.com/CompleteFondArkshell
Elder_Martin wrote: »If cheaters spend money, then cheaters get to play. ZOS likes their money.
Yolokin_Swagonborn wrote: »Elder_Martin wrote: »If cheaters spend money, then cheaters get to play. ZOS likes their money.
So this game isn't Pay2Win, its Pay2Cheat? I didn't know there was something worse than P2W but I guess this is it. If this is truly the case then I am really disappointed. Again. ZOS seems to have inconsistent enforcement policies and that can really kill good will between players and the dev team.
SienneYviete wrote: »I have played a hell of a lot of online games and this is the first one ever that has actually given known hackers a second chance like seriously think about that for a second, and to top it off these known hackers are back in game and gloating about SMDH ZOS
Yolokin_Swagonborn wrote: »So this game isn't Pay2Win, its Pay2Cheat? I didn't know there was something worse than P2W but I guess this is it. If this is truly the case then I am really disappointed. Again. ZOS seems to have inconsistent enforcement policies and that can really kill good will between players and the dev team.
Hadan_of_Rift wrote: »So I was very surprised and more than a little pissed off to see this taking place in Cyrodiil zone chat today. @ZOS_GinaBruno @ZOS_JessicaFolsom @Wrobel
Now you could say - Hey anyone could say that in zone. Maybe they where messing around and really didn't cheat. Well I blocked out their name because I don't want to be banned and I know the name and they did cheat and where caught and posted youtube video of them during the unlimited ult debacle.
I guess if you pay your $15 a month ZOS really doesn't care what you do after all.
You just figured that out, haven't you? Welcome to the game!Hadan_of_Rift wrote: »I guess if you pay your $15 a month ZOS really doesn't care what you do after all.
SwaminoNowlino wrote: »
Hadan_of_Rift wrote: »So I was very surprised and more than a little pissed off to see this taking place in Cyrodiil zone chat today. @ZOS_GinaBruno @ZOS_JessicaFolsom @Wrobel
Now you could say - Hey anyone could say that in zone. Maybe they where messing around and really didn't cheat. Well I blocked out their name because I don't want to be banned and I know the name and they did cheat and where caught and posted youtube video of them during the unlimited ult debacle.
I guess if you pay your $15 a month ZOS really doesn't care what you do after all.
SienneYviete wrote: »Console players right now.
Jessica already clarified that permabans do not mean "permanent".andypappb16_ESO wrote: »Heya, don't get me wrong.
I guess its ok to be at least suspicious.
But can someone show me evidence on actually unbanned people or ZOS themselve confirming they did unban? Did someone see those players again unbanned continue exploiting/cheating?
The screenshot in the OP does look too easy to fake, sorry.
I know 43 were perma banned, but what happened after that, so these threads keep coming? Sorry for my cluelessness and thanks for any info.
Please take careful note, this is not talking about cases of wrongful bans, this is "giving second chances" to people who have been permabanned simply after "speaking with them". Nothing is even done to their accounts.ZOS_JessicaFolsom wrote:we may decide to give a player who has been permanently banned a final chance after investigating a situation and speaking with them.
Hadan_of_Rift wrote: »So I was very surprised and more than a little pissed off to see this taking place in Cyrodiil zone chat today. @ZOS_GinaBruno @ZOS_JessicaFolsom @Wrobel
Now you could say - Hey anyone could say that in zone. Maybe they where messing around and really didn't cheat. Well I blocked out their name because I don't want to be banned and I know the name and they did cheat and where caught and posted youtube video of them during the unlimited ult debacle.
I guess if you pay your $15 a month ZOS really doesn't care what you do after all.
mommadani907 wrote: »All I can say is the threads were locked and deleted. As these will be as soon as they are seen. We can't even point you at the proof. Apparently some of the people have been given another chance. I can assure you that it is not about trolls, but real people that were perma banned and are now back in the game. This isn't strictly a PvP issue, other things were impacted. The forums have been lit up for a good portion of the last few days over this. Mostly here, but not only under General. They may open a new thread after the dust has settled, we were informed that it was too heated. You can go to the dev tracker and it is on the top of the list if you want to see the response given.
So I am making a solid attempt to not be so heated, personally.
HoloYoitsu wrote: »Jessica already clarified that permabans do not mean "permanent".andypappb16_ESO wrote: »Heya, don't get me wrong.
I guess its ok to be at least suspicious.
But can someone show me evidence on actually unbanned people or ZOS themselve confirming they did unban? Did someone see those players again unbanned continue exploiting/cheating?
The screenshot in the OP does look too easy to fake, sorry.
I know 43 were perma banned, but what happened after that, so these threads keep coming? Sorry for my cluelessness and thanks for any info.Please take careful note, this is not talking about cases of wrongful bans, this is "giving second chances" to people who have been permabanned simply after "speaking with them". Nothing is even done to their accounts.ZOS_JessicaFolsom wrote:we may decide to give a player who has been permanently banned a final chance after investigating a situation and speaking with them.
And yes, the evidence is players seeing people who were permabanned now in game and gloating about what they did. I don't know what you expect from asking us for the specific evidence on these individuals, since anyone who provides it for you is liable to be banned for "naming and shaming".
DisgracefulMind wrote: »Absolutely disgusting.
I really have no words to describe the anger that myself and many other people feel over this.
andypappb16_ESO wrote: »HoloYoitsu wrote: »Jessica already clarified that permabans do not mean "permanent".andypappb16_ESO wrote: »Heya, don't get me wrong.
I guess its ok to be at least suspicious.
But can someone show me evidence on actually unbanned people or ZOS themselve confirming they did unban? Did someone see those players again unbanned continue exploiting/cheating?
The screenshot in the OP does look too easy to fake, sorry.
I know 43 were perma banned, but what happened after that, so these threads keep coming? Sorry for my cluelessness and thanks for any info.Please take careful note, this is not talking about cases of wrongful bans, this is "giving second chances" to people who have been permabanned simply after "speaking with them". Nothing is even done to their accounts.ZOS_JessicaFolsom wrote:we may decide to give a player who has been permanently banned a final chance after investigating a situation and speaking with them.
And yes, the evidence is players seeing people who were permabanned now in game and gloating about what they did. I don't know what you expect from asking us for the specific evidence on these individuals, since anyone who provides it for you is liable to be banned for "naming and shaming".
With evidence I asked for ZOS confirming WHAT they unbanned people for.
That quote from Jessica does indeed sound like they unban those people yes, but I'm curious what is talked about to lift a ban.
If we really got unbanned players running around, that's awful already and very questionable to say the least, but I'd love to know what allowed them to enter the game again. That's more valuable information to judge on than a dev answer containing almost no info.
If someone talked with a unbanned person and the reason he's back is because he said "I'm sorry i won't do it again", then yes, this is a very disappointing way to deal with cheaters, especially since it's been done since the beginning and those could harm the game too long anyway.
A permaban MUST stay a Permaban.
@mommadani907
Thanks for the more neutral answer ^^