Those who don't think that addons are cheating would very quickly change their tune if they were playing on console on a cross-platform server with PC players!
As I don't play competitively it doesn't bother me if other players use addons or cheat/exploit (although I play on PC I do neither), I just think that either way they diminish the enjoyment they could get from the game if they played it fully in the way intended rather than looking for short-cuts and quick gains. Each to his own, however, subject to the ToS being fully enforced.
I played for about 3 years on PC without any add-on and I still didn't consider it cheating.
Can we also stop with the idea that add-ons allow you to play the game in unintended ways? Any function or resource available to the add-ons was intentionally put there by ZOS. How is it unintended?
Didn't say it was unintended, said it was unfair advantage for people who don't want to install third party software. There's a lot of people who seem to equate "zos intended it this way" with "it's not cheating/it's fair." I'm taking a very different line and talking about exogenous (obtained outside normal gameplay) sources of player advantage.
I was responding to theI just think that either way they diminish the enjoyment they could get from the game if they played it fully in the way intended rather than looking for short-cuts and quick gains.
Part of the comment I quoted.
But to respond to you directly. What unfair advantage? One, everyone on PC has access to add-ons, it's not like you have to pay money for it. Two, anything you can do with add-ons you can do without.
Those who don't think that addons are cheating would very quickly change their tune if they were playing on console on a cross-platform server with PC players!
As I don't play competitively it doesn't bother me if other players use addons or cheat/exploit (although I play on PC I do neither), I just think that either way they diminish the enjoyment they could get from the game if they played it fully in the way intended rather than looking for short-cuts and quick gains. Each to his own, however, subject to the ToS being fully enforced.
I played for about 3 years on PC without any add-on and I still didn't consider it cheating.
Can we also stop with the idea that add-ons allow you to play the game in unintended ways? Any function or resource available to the add-ons was intentionally put there by ZOS. How is it unintended?
Didn't say it was unintended, said it was unfair advantage for people who don't want to install third party software. There's a lot of people who seem to equate "zos intended it this way" with "it's not cheating/it's fair." I'm taking a very different line and talking about exogenous (obtained outside normal gameplay) sources of player advantage.
I was responding to theI just think that either way they diminish the enjoyment they could get from the game if they played it fully in the way intended rather than looking for short-cuts and quick gains.
Part of the comment I quoted.
But to respond to you directly. What unfair advantage? One, everyone on PC has access to add-ons, it's not like you have to pay money for it. Two, anything you can do with add-ons you can do without.
Ah yeah sorry I took it as a response to me but it wasn't.
This may contradict something I wrote earlier, but I'm not really arguing add-ons should be considered cheating, I just think they seem a lot more like cheating than exploits do. Any Add-on you download isn't actually supported by zos (even though the API is), and they absolutely give advantage over someone who's not running them. That really seems more squirly to me than figuring out a quirk of the base game that you can take advantage of.
Maybe it shows my age, but back in the day when games would get released and then that was the game for all time (no patch once a month changing everything), it was a mark of accomplishment to eek out every little quirk and corner that could be cut through sheer perspicacity and trial and error (assuming it didn't COMPLETELY break the game). Now that kind of in-game hunting for advantage is often considered cheating, but installing a script in the background to override the base UI is considered normal play. It just seems backwards to me.
@idk I wouldn't call it splitting hairs. The difference between them as I defined them is like the difference between not calling up your bank when they make an error in your favor verses hacking into their accounts and cleaning them out. Neither is good but I think that's a huge difference.
I put the key point of your comment in bold. it is your definition and I still stand by it is splitting hairs.
I have no idea why you are using hacking into someone's account as an example to defend your comments. That is something that is illegal beyond the boundaries of Zos.
- You run through a dungeon to the next boss, all the trash whiplashes back/evades.
- You find a way to move outside of the intended path of a trial instance to get to the last boss and able to stand where the boss nor any adds can do any damage to you.
Both are considered exploits. The first is not going to get you banned while you are taking a huge risk with the second option. So yes, you are splitting hairs with your definitions. Most exploits that will get you banned are pretty obvious.
One is passive, the other is active. In one case you are actively hacking the system, in essence creating a bug, just for you, where there wasn't one before. In the other case you are using a bug that you didn't put there - zenimax did - and it's available to everyone. That's a HUGE difference.
Not saying you should have read every single post so not being snarky, but just to avoid typing the same thing over and over in slightly different ways...
Just because ZOS intended it doesn't mean it's fair, and just because they didn't intend it doesn't mean it's unfair.
@idk I wouldn't call it splitting hairs. The difference between them as I defined them is like the difference between not calling up your bank when they make an error in your favor verses hacking into their accounts and cleaning them out. Neither is good but I think that's a huge difference.
I put the key point of your comment in bold. it is your definition and I still stand by it is splitting hairs.
I have no idea why you are using hacking into someone's account as an example to defend your comments. That is something that is illegal beyond the boundaries of Zos.
- You run through a dungeon to the next boss, all the trash whiplashes back/evades.
- You find a way to move outside of the intended path of a trial instance to get to the last boss and able to stand where the boss nor any adds can do any damage to you.
Both are considered exploits. The first is not going to get you banned while you are taking a huge risk with the second option. So yes, you are splitting hairs with your definitions. Most exploits that will get you banned are pretty obvious.
One is passive, the other is active. In one case you are actively hacking the system, in essence creating a bug, just for you, where there wasn't one before. In the other case you are using a bug that you didn't put there - zenimax did - and it's available to everyone. That's a HUGE difference.
That sounds more like an excuse someone comes up with to try to justify their actions when they know what they did was wrong.
The people who went outside of the obvious path were doing something active, that would be obvious to any rational thinker was wrong, but they did not have to hack any code. It was a exploit that was cheating.
Those that used either of the two methods to clear vAS+3 while being in an area safe from the bosses wrath were actively working to exploit the system. It would be obvious to any rational thinker that it was wrong. Same thing.
To demonstrate how wrong you are, addons are blessed by Zos and can only access information Zos permits. That by definition is not anywhere near close to cheating. So it is factually wrong for you to say most addons would fall in the category of cheating.
Your opinion is yours to have regardless of how wrong it is.
Not saying you should have read every single post so not being snarky, but just to avoid typing the same thing over and over in slightly different ways...
Just because ZOS intended it doesn't mean it's fair, and just because they didn't intend it doesn't mean it's unfair.
You *literally* put AddOns under the "Cheating" heading like so "Technically most add-ons would fall under this umbrella".
So yes, your initial post very clearly claims AddOns are cheating ...
I don't think your quoting the right text as what you wrote doesn't seem to respond to it. Also my original post called add-ons a "grey area," which is the opposite of clearly claiming anything. Are you drunk or something?You *literally* put AddOns under the "Cheating" heading like so "Technically most add-ons would fall under this umbrella".Not saying you should have read every single post so not being snarky, but just to avoid typing the same thing over and over in slightly different ways...
Just because ZOS intended it doesn't mean it's fair, and just because they didn't intend it doesn't mean it's unfair.
So yes, your initial post very clearly claims AddOns are cheating ...
I don't think your quoting the right text as what you wrote doesn't seem to respond to it. Also my original post called add-ons a "grey area," which is the opposite of clearly claiming anything. Are you drunk or something?You *literally* put AddOns under the "Cheating" heading like so "Technically most add-ons would fall under this umbrella".Not saying you should have read every single post so not being snarky, but just to avoid typing the same thing over and over in slightly different ways...
Just because ZOS intended it doesn't mean it's fair, and just because they didn't intend it doesn't mean it's unfair.
So yes, your initial post very clearly claims AddOns are cheating ...
Why, would that be cheating too?
@idk I wouldn't call it splitting hairs. The difference between them as I defined them is like the difference between not calling up your bank when they make an error in your favor verses hacking into their accounts and cleaning them out. Neither is good but I think that's a huge difference.
I put the key point of your comment in bold. it is your definition and I still stand by it is splitting hairs.
I have no idea why you are using hacking into someone's account as an example to defend your comments. That is something that is illegal beyond the boundaries of Zos.
- You run through a dungeon to the next boss, all the trash whiplashes back/evades.
- You find a way to move outside of the intended path of a trial instance to get to the last boss and able to stand where the boss nor any adds can do any damage to you.
Both are considered exploits. The first is not going to get you banned while you are taking a huge risk with the second option. So yes, you are splitting hairs with your definitions. Most exploits that will get you banned are pretty obvious.
One is passive, the other is active. In one case you are actively hacking the system, in essence creating a bug, just for you, where there wasn't one before. In the other case you are using a bug that you didn't put there - zenimax did - and it's available to everyone. That's a HUGE difference.
That sounds more like an excuse someone comes up with to try to justify their actions when they know what they did was wrong.
The people who went outside of the obvious path were doing something active, that would be obvious to any rational thinker was wrong, but they did not have to hack any code. It was a exploit that was cheating.
Those that used either of the two methods to clear vAS+3 while being in an area safe from the bosses wrath were actively working to exploit the system. It would be obvious to any rational thinker that it was wrong. Same thing.
To demonstrate how wrong you are, addons are blessed by Zos and can only access information Zos permits. That by definition is not anywhere near close to cheating. So it is factually wrong for you to say most addons would fall in the category of cheating.
Your opinion is yours to have regardless of how wrong it is.
Yeah I don't get why it's so hard to get agreement on these forums.
You really like to split hairs about semantics.
If you walk into the bank and the vault is open and you take the money its exactly the same thing as you breaking into the bank after it was closed.
One just has breaking and entering added to the theft.
If the IRS messes up and sends you more money than you are owed and you keep it it is the same exact thing as you falsifying information to get more money and keeping it, just with additional crime added onto it.
The "laws" distinction is simply adding more crimes onto the first one.
The issue is what you are saying is hacking is not in any way. The only "hacking" in a game is changing the code to alter client data sent to the server or server data after its sent to the client.
So basically what you are saying is that game genie is bad, but wallclipping is good, but both are bad and can be equally "cheating"
You really like to split hairs about semantics.
If you walk into the bank and the vault is open and you take the money its exactly the same thing as you breaking into the bank after it was closed.
One just has breaking and entering added to the theft.
If the IRS messes up and sends you more money than you are owed and you keep it it is the same exact thing as you falsifying information to get more money and keeping it, just with additional crime added onto it.
The "laws" distinction is simply adding more crimes onto the first one.
The issue is what you are saying is hacking is not in any way. The only "hacking" in a game is changing the code to alter client data sent to the server or server data after its sent to the client.
So basically what you are saying is that game genie is bad, but wallclipping is good, but both are bad and can be equally "cheating"
First of all "additional crimes added to it" is kind of a big difference and not splitting hairs. And in the IRS example, afaik keeping the money isn't even technically a crime. They'll make you give the money back if they spot the error but I'm pretty sure you don't get charged for anything. So yeah these behaviors cover a very wide range of badness, and the point of the discussion is to look at them and clarify them a bit.
I think the point of preventing cheating is to keep everybody on equal footing. If wall scaling is something anyone who owns a working copy of the game can do, I don't see the point in banning people for doing it, especially since they're not the ones that put it there.
If an add-on gives an advantage and anyone who downloads the add-on can have it, that doesn't seem too bad but it's a little less ecumenical. And people are scripting up their own things so there's kind of a meta-game of add-on design going on which is sort of expanding the definition of what the game ESO is into other open source software.
On the other hand yeah a game genie (if I understand the analogy) is unequivocal cheating where your altering the game files in explicitly prohibited ways that only you will benefit from.
@idk I wouldn't call it splitting hairs. The difference between them as I defined them is like the difference between not calling up your bank when they make an error in your favor verses hacking into their accounts and cleaning them out. Neither is good but I think that's a huge difference.
I put the key point of your comment in bold. it is your definition and I still stand by it is splitting hairs.
I have no idea why you are using hacking into someone's account as an example to defend your comments. That is something that is illegal beyond the boundaries of Zos.
- You run through a dungeon to the next boss, all the trash whiplashes back/evades.
- You find a way to move outside of the intended path of a trial instance to get to the last boss and able to stand where the boss nor any adds can do any damage to you.
Both are considered exploits. The first is not going to get you banned while you are taking a huge risk with the second option. So yes, you are splitting hairs with your definitions. Most exploits that will get you banned are pretty obvious.
One is passive, the other is active. In one case you are actively hacking the system, in essence creating a bug, just for you, where there wasn't one before. In the other case you are using a bug that you didn't put there - zenimax did - and it's available to everyone. That's a HUGE difference.
That sounds more like an excuse someone comes up with to try to justify their actions when they know what they did was wrong.
The people who went outside of the obvious path were doing something active, that would be obvious to any rational thinker was wrong, but they did not have to hack any code. It was a exploit that was cheating.
Those that used either of the two methods to clear vAS+3 while being in an area safe from the bosses wrath were actively working to exploit the system. It would be obvious to any rational thinker that it was wrong. Same thing.
To demonstrate how wrong you are, addons are blessed by Zos and can only access information Zos permits. That by definition is not anywhere near close to cheating. So it is factually wrong for you to say most addons would fall in the category of cheating.
Your opinion is yours to have regardless of how wrong it is.
Yeah I don't get why it's so hard to get agreement on these forums.
In this case it is because you are very wrong with your definition and interpretation.
The first and most obvious aspect is you claim addons are cheating by somehow saying they manipulate the way ESO code. Addons do not manipulate how ESO operates or the ESO code. The player still needs to do whatever they need to do and the game does what it is programmed to do. Nothing is altered which is what you are suggesting.
For what I'm sure will not be the last time I have to say this, I'm not arguing that add-ons are against the TOS. They obviously aren't. And I like add-ons just fine I use a ton of them-not to mention playing on PC without them is hopelessly hobbling. But if we want to talk about notions of fair play and cheating (independent of whatever legal constraints are enshrined in the TOS), I think add-ons might fit that mold better than exploits, even though everyone accepts add-ons without batting an eye.Further, Zos specifically asked players to build addons and through testing and discussion before the game launched chose what information those addons could access. That discussion continues to this day and the information addons can access has been modified many times since the game launched.
Both of those are reasons, and factual reasons, why the first part of the posted OP of this thread is wrong. It sounds more like you do not like addons so you call it cheating and that is not how the world works.
Again, your equivocating on what zos does with what is fair. Yes the rules today are what they are and zos made them that way. This is a conversation about what the rules should be.Then you somehow try to suggest that knowingly using an exploit that is obviously not intended yet brings a major benefit is somewhat acceptable behavior to use over and over. You seem to state this when Zos has banned players for such action.
Those who don't think that addons are cheating would very quickly change their tune if they were playing on console on a cross-platform server with PC players!
As I don't play competitively it doesn't bother me if other players use addons or cheat/exploit (although I play on PC I do neither), I just think that either way they diminish the enjoyment they could get from the game if they played it fully in the way intended rather than looking for short-cuts and quick gains. Each to his own, however, subject to the ToS being fully enforced.
I played for about 3 years on PC without any add-on and I still didn't consider it cheating.
Can we also stop with the idea that add-ons allow you to play the game in unintended ways? Any function or resource available to the add-ons was intentionally put there by ZOS. How is it unintended?
Didn't say it was unintended, said it was unfair advantage for people who don't want to install third party software. There's a lot of people who seem to equate "zos intended it this way" with "it's not cheating/it's fair." I'm taking a very different line and talking about exogenous (obtained outside normal gameplay) sources of player advantage.
Yes thank you!Androconium wrote: »Consoles are on the same level playing fields as PC players that choose not to use addons.
Console hardware for mainstream gaming products are about enforcement of proprietory systems
Console design is about reducing user-generated problems caused by Windows OS variations.
Oblivion was the first TES game that was designed with console use as a major consideration.
Oblivion release was delayed, as Microsoft were not happy with what Bethesda was offering as a minimum, viable product.
On that basis, you can assume that; both Microsoft and Sony are satisfied that whatever product Bethesda churn out, does in fact meet their contracted standards of playability and reliability.
Exploits are the result of insubstantial testing.
Cheating is the result of deliberate manipulation of software.
Consoles users are better shielded from both these issues, than PC players are.
Androconium wrote: »AFAIK, all addons are tested and approved by a Bethesda entity, before release. Please correct me if I am wrong on this point.
You chose a console hardware platform for whatever benefits you perceive.
You chose a multi-platform gaming product to play on that platform.
You get to live with your choices. Same as everyone else.
Yes thank you!Androconium wrote: »Consoles are on the same level playing fields as PC players that choose not to use addons.
Console hardware for mainstream gaming products are about enforcement of proprietory systems
Console design is about reducing user-generated problems caused by Windows OS variations.
Oblivion was the first TES game that was designed with console use as a major consideration.
Oblivion release was delayed, as Microsoft were not happy with what Bethesda was offering as a minimum, viable product.
On that basis, you can assume that; both Microsoft and Sony are satisfied that whatever product Bethesda churn out, does in fact meet their contracted standards of playability and reliability.
Exploits are the result of insubstantial testing.
Cheating is the result of deliberate manipulation of software.
Consoles users are better shielded from both these issues, than PC players are.Androconium wrote: »AFAIK, all addons are tested and approved by a Bethesda entity, before release. Please correct me if I am wrong on this point.
You chose a console hardware platform for whatever benefits you perceive.
You chose a multi-platform gaming product to play on that platform.
You get to live with your choices. Same as everyone else.
I don't believe so. The TOS state
"
If you create an Add-on, You must include the following disclosure in a Readme or similar .txt file: "This Add-on is not created by, affiliated with or sponsored by ZeniMax Media Inc. or its affiliates. ..."
"
It goes on to say that zeni doesn't provide any customer support for add-ons and add-ons could contain malicious software that they take no responsibility for. Anyone can create an add-on and make it available for download over the web, there's no zenimax approved collection of the afaik.
Lies.
I have this secret player stat modifier addon which gives me 3k extra recovery on everything, 20k more stam and magic and has my char at max resist at all time. It is a really cool addon!
Those who don't think that addons are cheating would very quickly change their tune if they were playing on console on a cross-platform server with PC players!