Severity of Punishments
Comments
-
For comparison: with the duke rose exploit the servers were shut down, there was a rollback, a large amount of coin was removed, and plenty of people who abused it were banned.
Sure they didn't fix the damage completely nor get all the offenders banned... but at least it was much more productive and sent a more positive message. Meanwhile here theres plenty of people that obviously glitched it and have made it known, yet even during the time they were doing the one week temp ban a good portion of them were skipped over.... and then the reversion of the ban? IMO they should have either made it legal entirely (nobody would be able to legitimately say anything about it about it at all and the only QQ would come from those who truly were lazy/undergeared/had no friends/etc, or they should have enforced their especially on those who were most obvious.
At the very least, even if they didn't do either, they could adjust how they deal with the rules so that things like INI edits wouldn't be illegal or punished so harshly in comparision to things that actually do make a difference.0 -
Ois - Lost City wrote: »You really don't seem to understand what I'm saying...
I don't have anything against the players who abused it. They did so feeling fairly confident that nothing would happen to them...and they were right.
I have something against the way PW handled the whole damn thing. Saying it's bannable and not banning people. Allowing it to go on for months. Removing the exp from goons without fixing the damage that it already caused.
The whole thing needed to be all or nothing. You're banned or you're not. If they did not allow glitching then people needed to be banned. That's all there is to it. If they weren't going to ban people then they needed to change their standing so that honest players could also benefit from it.
Instead PW said it was against the rules and you'd be banned. PW did not change their mind on the rules. PW did not follow through with the bans. PW removed the ability to glitch once everyone who was glitching got their fill.
If you can't see why players are frustrated...I don't think I can explain it more clearly.
I wrote something after that post in reply to kossy that you quoted.
So what they said it was bannable? Bannable means, "we CAN ban!" If they said, "You will most definately be banned!", then okay. You have something to feel frustrated about. Just because something is bannable - doesnt mean people HAVE to be banned.
It's like complaining to the local cops that they havent ticketed EVERYONE that has ever spit on the sidewalk, when they have assumed no obligation to do so, just because its a ticketable offence.
Saying something is bannable, just like saying something is ticketable, does not equal EVERYONE MUST BE BANNED! EVERYONE MUST BE TICKETED! Its simply a posted deterent to engaging in the behavior.0 -
See:Brillance - Raging Tide wrote: »If they said, "You will most definately be banned!", then okay. You have something to feel frustrated about.
Also:frankieraye wrote: »Glitching this boss in FC is definitely a violation of the ToS, as it would be considered "exploiting a glitch". Any players found to be taking part in this activity will be subject to account suspension.
Also, China is aware of the issue and the devs are currently working to fix it.
Oh andfrankieraye wrote: »Hey all, FC Glitch update here:
The devs are still working on a fix and we will release it as soon as we can.
Also, we're making a policy change - Any player found to be using in-game chat to find or organize an FC glitch group will have his account suspended. This of course includes World Chat.
If you spot someone doing this, please submit a ticket here:
http://support.perfectworld.com/
Thank you.frankieraye wrote: »If they took part in glitching the mob, then they violated the ToS and should face consequences for doing so.
Anything else I really need to add?0 -
It's not so much that they didn't get banned over it as it's that PWI wasn't enforcing its own ToS, did a sloppy job, and that now people who are performing infractions that are either minor in comparison or flat out shouldn't even be considered as such are receiving bans that are so much more severe.
That combined with the fact that the fix has essentially made it so that if you don't solo runs or do it with a set core group of friends you'll almost never do the full instance (and even if you do the nerf has basically screwed those who do it legit compared to those who didn't beforehand) and you start to see why so many people here are annoyed and tend to bring it up as an example so often.
Well, alegedly the ini thingy is just a matter of sending in a ticket to get unbanned, so that's really not a big deal. Although I agree e-mails should be sent out informing a player of that, lol.
I can honestly see why PWI doesnt want people playing around in their files. I mean ini, and then what? What else can I manipulate in my files?
But, if other servers are free to do it, all should be free to do it. In the end, if you want EG eyes, just roll a EG char, and wala - you have EG eyes. But, I dont see it being fair for certain groups of players to do, and others be banned for it.
(Nice segway back on topic, btw.)0 -
-
Brillance - Raging Tide wrote: »I wrote something after that post in reply to kossy that you quoted.
So what they said it was bannable? Bannable means, "we CAN ban!" If they said, "You will most definately be banned!", then okay. You have something to feel frustrated about. Just because something is bannable - doesnt mean people HAVE to be banned.
It's like complaining to the local cops that they havent ticketed EVERYONE that has ever spit on the sidewalk, when they have assumed no obligation to do so, just because its a ticketable offence.
Saying something is bannable, just like saying something is ticketable, does not equal EVERYONE MUST BE BANNED! EVERYONE MUST BE TICKETED! Its simply a posted deterent to engaging in the behavior.
Every game has a ToS. You agree to these Terms of Service when you play and agree to follow rules or be penalized.
What would be the point of rules if there was no penalty? So by your comparison...would you feel the same way if I broke into your house and killed your entire family but when the cops arrived on scene and I had a bloody knife in hand the cops said, "Oh well can't catch 'em all."?0 -
Brillance - Raging Tide wrote: »Well, alegedly the ini thingy is just a matter of sending in a ticket to get unbanned, so that's really not a big deal. Although I agree e-mails should be sent out informing a player of that, lol.
I can honestly see why PWI doesnt want people playing around in their files. I mean ini, and then what? What else can I manipulate in my files?
But, if other servers are free to do it, all should be free to do it. In the end, if you want EG eyes, just roll a EG char, and wala - you have EG eyes. But, I dont see it being fair for certain groups of players to do, and others be banned for it.
(Nice segway back on topic, btw.)
If it were that simple, it probably wouldn't be so bad. However part of the problem is they don't have it like that. There's even been a large amount of people that don't even get a warning e-mail.
You bring up limits that arise from the slope of allowing INI edits but at the same time. However this is getting absurd to the point that giving a perfectly legal INI file to someone else is considered a bannable INI edit. What's will be the next step from there? Adding a reference image for character creation? Opening a screenshot in photoshop and editing the contents? Posting a screenshot itself? That slope goes both ways, but the fact that this is something only the North American PWI servers have a rule against AND the severity of the punishment set it apart to a degree that makes people wonder where the sense in it is.
Really?Brillance - Raging Tide wrote: »Nope. What does the word 'subject' mean? sounds rather subjective to me. Again, you CAN be banned. Doesnt mean you HAVE to banned.
"Anyone caught littering is subject to arrest." - can be arrested.
Care to tell me where the subjective is in:
That's not a, possible, a subjective, or a maybe. It's a certified, "If you are caught this WILL happen no ifs ands or buts".frankieraye wrote: »Any player found to be using in-game chat to find or organize an FC glitch group will have his account suspended. This of course includes World Chat.0 -
Ois - Lost City wrote: »Every game has a ToS. You agree to these Terms of Service when you play and agree to follow rules or be penalized.
What would be the point of rules if there was no penalty? So by your comparison...would you feel the same way if I broke into your house and killed your entire family but when the cops arrived on scene and I had a bloody knife in hand the cops said, "Oh well can't catch 'em all."?
Should I be arrested for my gum wrapper blowing out of my hand in a strong wind?
Yes, there should be a posted penalty for littering, but that doesnt mean it should be enforcred equally.
My gum wrapper blowing from my hand is not the same as me pulling up with a dump truck load of garbage and ententionally dumping its rotting contents from the nearby slaughterhouse on the street. It's subjective. Fair is fair in context.0 -
I defer to,Brillance - Raging Tide wrote: »Should I be arrested for my gum wrapper blowing out of my hand in a strong wind?
Yes, there should be a posted penalty for littering, but that doesnt mean it should be enforcred equally.
My gum wrapper blowing from my hand is not the same as me pulling up with a dump truck load of garbage and ententionally dumping its rotting contents from the nearby slaughterhouse on the street. It's subjective. Fair is fair in context.
There's a difference between something being out of your control... and doing something in a way that nobody would really consider doing if it weren't for a way to abuse it... which happens to be against a rule.frankieraye wrote: »If they took part in glitching the mob, then they violated the ToS and should face consequences for doing so.
A guy walking through a metal detector and having it go off because he forgot a pin he uses to hold his belt up shouldn't be arrested. A guy who walks through a metal detector and has it go off because he's carrying fifteen different pistols and full ammunition while in a weapons free zone and having no license to own a gun muchless carry a concealed weapon? Yeah that guy should be arrested.
As you yourself said, fair is fair in context and even if you want to try and twist the meaning of the posts that aren't specific... there are posts that explicitly say that abusing the glitch = ban. The fact that said ban didn't happen and got revoked for something that actually has a real effect compared to what happens for something only not allowed on PWI (oh wait what if I INI edit my EU character, save the INI there, and recreate it here? I TECHNICALLY DIDN'T PERFORM THE EDIT ON THE ONLY FRIGGIN PLACE IT'S ILLEGAL) is incredibly ridiculous, subjective or not.0 -
Brillance - Raging Tide wrote: »Should I be arrested for my gum wrapper blowing out of my hand in a strong wind?
Yes, there should be a posted penalty for littering, but that doesnt mean it should be enforcred equally.
My gum wrapper blowing from my hand is not the same as me pulling up with a dump truck load of garbage and ententionally dumping its rotting contents from the nearby slaughterhouse on the street. It's subjective. Fair is fair in context.
Read what kossy wrote.0 -
If it were that simple, it probably wouldn't be so bad. However part of the problem is they don't have it like that. There's even been a large amount of people that don't even get a warning e-mail.
You bring up limits that arise from the slope of allowing INI edits but at the same time. However this is getting absurd to the point that giving a perfectly legal INI file to someone else is considered a bannable INI edit. What's will be the next step from there? Adding a reference image for character creation? Opening a screenshot in photoshop and editing the contents? Posting a screenshot itself? That slope goes both ways, but the fact that this is something only the North American PWI servers have a rule against AND the severity of the punishment set it apart to a degree that makes people wonder where the sense in it is.
Really?
Care to tell me where the subjective is in:
That's not a, possible, a subjective, or a maybe. It's a certified, "If you are caught this WILL happen no ifs ands or buts".
Its not there now, but it was there 7 minutes earlier.
ini is bannable. Okay, and a thread that told you how to ini edit was closed. Wouldn't that flag that people might already have gone beyond the simple ini edit?
Idk what would be special about North America in regard to this as far as a game mechanic goes, unless the newer Euro servers have something in place the other servers dont to prevent a player from venturing further with the edits.0 -
frankieraye wrote: ». . .About the bans, the way that we announced it was that those banned were the "worst offenders", and when it turned out that there were actually players who were worse than these and hadn't been caught, . . .
lol, how do you even know about them, if they weren't caught?
(Sorry, couldn't help it. b:chuckle)
I realize it was a disasterous incident, and there's not much you
can do to fix it now. Unfortunately, it did pretty much kill my
enthusiasm for the game. After playing for almost 3 years to get
to lvl 102 the old-fashioned way, I got to #2 in my class on LC server & #9
on ALL servers when the glitch hit, and within a couple weeks, I was off the rankings
list altogether. A shame, the whole incident.0 -
For comparison: with the duke rose exploit the servers were shut down, there was a rollback, a large amount of coin was removed, and plenty of people who abused it were banned.
Sure they didn't fix the damage completely nor get all the offenders banned... but at least it was much more productive and sent a more positive message. Meanwhile here theres plenty of people that obviously glitched it and have made it known, yet even during the time they were doing the one week temp ban a good portion of them were skipped over.... and then the reversion of the ban? IMO they should have either made it legal entirely (nobody would be able to legitimately say anything about it about it at all and the only QQ would come from those who truly were lazy/undergeared/had no friends/etc, or they should have enforced their especially on those who were most obvious.
At the very least, even if they didn't do either, they could adjust how they deal with the rules so that things like INI edits wouldn't be illegal or punished so harshly in comparision to things that actually do make a difference.
Exactly they can roll back all 105 to 90 as a punishment strip them off their current spirit and exp also gear ? no ?0 -
Labells - Dreamweaver wrote: »The QQers on the Forums & the portion of the players always looking for an easy way to level have unfortunately left the GM's no alternative but to completely inforce the ToS, if they let 1 aspect of ToS non compliance slide (such as customisation that has no impact to game play) they are tying their own hands with other ToS infringements (that may significantly impact game play) they therefore have clearly decided to start enforcing a zero tolerance policy towards all infringements on ToS. So basically blame an element of the player base not the GM's it's the players that have left the GM's no choice
It is a sad day that the GM's are now forced to be completely unbending but they are only actively inforcing what was always there. b:sad
lol, of course the GMs have a choice. We're not talking the Treaty of Versailles here or
anything. Seriously, they can do anything they want to do. And before anyone brings in
the concept of "fairness", how "fair" is the current unbending stance being perceived.0 -
Arsla - Dreamweaver wrote: »Exactly they can roll back all 105 to 90 as a punishment strip them off their current spirit and exp also gear ? no ?
They could even introduce a new World Boss (cant be killed though) that comes ingame and slices them all up in the center of Archosaur for everyone's amusement. Would be thrilling, and help bring players back into the game! b:victory0 -
Bottom line is as I said. PW did not enforce their rules. PW did not keep their word. PW rewarded glitchers. PW did not compensate honest players. PW did not fix damage but fixed the glitch (or reason to glitch)...thus making things even worse.0
-
Ois - Lost City wrote: »Bottom line is as I said. PW did not enforce their rules. PW did not keep their word. PW rewarded glitchers. PW did not compensate honest players. PW did not fix damage but fixed the glitch (or reason to glitch)...thus making things even worse.
I have to admit, by the time I hit 95 I had wished those dragoons were still there, but fortunately they did compensate with the Morai quests - which for time invested give much more XP.
A rollback would be disasterous for this game. Just buck up and go level.
You cant say that when the glitch was there you didnt have Dirty Harry in the back of your mind saying, "You feeling lucky, punk?"
Some answered yes. Some were just innocent squad members lucky they got a squad at all in those screenies too. And Im sure Frankie is right - the one's that benefited the most never had a screenie taken of them. They ran with their friends and kept their mouths shut, while others who never glitched at all said they did, just so they would seem cool.
Im never lucky, so when asked, I always said,"no Harry, I dont feel lucky."0 -
Brillance - Raging Tide wrote: »ini is bannable. Okay, and a thread that told you how to ini edit was closed. Wouldn't that flag that people might already have gone beyond the simple ini edit?
Considering that this is PWI and full of stupid ****, BS decisions, and a general defiance of all logic and common sense? No. lol.
Besides, how many of the files that this game has that have any real effect can be opened and altered effectively by someone with a brand new windows install using notepad? There's a pretty big difference between altering an INI file and a .pck file, which Bubbles has already mentioned.
And no, there is absolutely nothing in place stopping a person from doing what I said. Won't prevent them from getting banned for it even though technically they didn't break that rule here. Considering that leaked Barb preset that they had flip-flopped on until finally realizing how stupid it was to make use of it illegal, that should be a clue about the rest of it.0 -
Bottom Line:
PWE can't make everyone happy.
For Frankie, just do whatever things you think is the best for PWE and ignore all the QQ-comments from wannabe-professional-businessman-iknowitall-truegamer-etc-etc watever.
I'm sure you have the brain to think whatever risk that may come with your decision and you will choose the best option with minimal consequences.
b:victory[SIGPIC][/SIGPIC]
I'm on Heavens Tear!0 -
Bottom Line:
PWE can't make everyone happy.
For Frankie, just do whatever things you think is the best for PWE and ignore all the QQ-comments from wannabe-professional-businessman-iknowitall-truegamer-etc-etc watever.
I'm sure you have the brain to think whatever risk that may come with your decision and you will choose the best option with minimal consequences.
b:victory
According to frankie's own statements it's best to ban them...and we're going to...but now we're not.0 -
Ois - Lost City wrote: »According to frankie's own statements it's best to ban them...and we're going to...but now we're not.
Well, ya! Wtf, ban the few that still actively play the game? And, over a glitch?? Wow, that's pretty harsh. Any ban is pretty harsh when you face less and less to actually play with each day.0 -
That is straight from frankie...my opinion was not put in my last post at all.
Point is PW flipflopped and killed the game. So many people left over that one issue...so many that if they had just banned everyone who glitched we'd probably have a similarly sized playerbase at the moment.0 -
Ois - Lost City wrote: »That is straight from frankie...my opinion was not put in my last post at all.
Point is PW flipflopped and killed the game. So many people left over that one issue...so many that if they had just banned everyone who glitched we'd probably have a similarly sized playerbase at the moment.
Its my opinion that any players that still actively play the game should be left alone for the time being. But I see you are stuck on more people being banned. You are entitled to that.
If people did leave over it, then they wont be coming back over more people being banned - they have that kind of self-absorbed thick-headed stubborness about them.
Why lose more now? It wont make you 105. It wont get more people back on the servers. It wont benefit anyone.
Societies have things like amnesty and clemency built into them for a reason.0 -
Brillance - Raging Tide wrote: »Its my opinion that any players that still actively play the game should be left alone for the time being. But I see you are stuck on more people being banned. You are entitled to that.
If people did leave over it, then they wont be coming back over more people being banned - they have that kind of self-absorbed thick-headed stubborness about them.
Why lose more now? It wont make you 105. It wont get more people back on the servers. It wont benefit anyone.
Societies have things like amnesty and clemency built into them for a reason.
Seriously have you even read what I've typed?Ois - Lost City wrote: »You really don't seem to understand what I'm saying...
I don't have anything against the players who abused it. They did so feeling fairly confident that nothing would happen to them...and they were right.
I have something against the way PW handled the whole damn thing. Saying it's bannable and not banning people. Allowing it to go on for months. Removing the exp from goons without fixing the damage that it already caused.
The whole thing needed to be all or nothing. You're banned or you're not. If they did not allow glitching then people needed to be banned. That's all there is to it. If they weren't going to ban people then they needed to change their standing so that honest players could also benefit from it.
Instead PW said it was against the rules and you'd be banned. PW did not change their mind on the rules. PW did not follow through with the bans. PW removed the ability to glitch once everyone who was glitching got their fill.
If you can't see why players are frustrated...I don't think I can explain it more clearly.
I'm saying it needs to be addressed all or nothing. Ban them or don't. Make glitching against the rules or allow glitching. If glitching is not bannable then they need to bring it back.
Saying something is against the rules but you're going to allow it but you're going to get banned but maybe not...that's not cool.0 -
Ois - Lost City wrote: »Seriously have you even read what I've typed?
Yes, Im sorry by wanting what's best for PWI as a whole, it appears to you that I have not. *shrugs*
I'm saying it needs to be addressed all or nothing. Ban them or don't. Make glitching against the rules or allow glitching. If glitching is not bannable then they need to bring it back.
Saying something is against the rules but you're going to allow it but you're going to get banned but maybe not...that's not cool.
Okay, so you want a change in the rules that says "YOU will definately be banned for...blah blah blah...
That's up to PWI, but okay. Change the rules to all or nothing...cause Ois says its "all or nothing".
I personally like it better that some consideration is put into each individuals case, but you are entiltled to your opinion to make punishments more harsh - more totalitarian.0 -
In order to avoid being unfair to (X) number of players, PWI made the decision to be
unfair to (X+100,000) number of players. SHEESH! Heads should have rolled after
that decision, lol.0 -
Brillance - Raging Tide wrote: »Okay, so you want a change in the rules that says "YOU will definately be banned for...blah blah blah...
That's up to PWI, but okay. Change the rules to all or nothing...cause Ois says its "all or nothing".
I personally like it better that some consideration is put into each individuals case, but you are entiltled to your opinion to make punishments more harsh - more totalitarian.
Okay let me dumb it down for you.
Perfect world needs to choose one of the below:
Allow glitching + glitching = not ban
Don't allow glitching + glitching = ban0 -
Brillance - Raging Tide wrote: »Okay, so you want a change in the rules that says "YOU will definately be banned for...blah blah blah...
That's up to PWI, but okay. Change the rules to all or nothing...cause Ois says its "all or nothing".
I personally like it better that some consideration is put into each individuals case, but you are entiltled to your opinion to make punishments more harsh - more totalitarian.
OMG . . . b:laughb:laugh
Ois--I feel for ya, bro, u dictator you! b:laughb:laughb:laugh0 -
I'm trying to stay calm and explain. b:chuckle0
-
Ois - Lost City wrote: »I'm trying to stay calm and explain. b:chuckle
I know exactly how you feel . . . I'm currently negotiating with my wall about moving
10 feet north. I think I've finally explained it in terms it can understand . . . .(keeping
fingers crossed)0
Categories
- All Categories
- 181.9K PWI
- 699 Official Announcements
- 2 Rules of Conduct
- 264 Cabbage Patch Notes
- 61K General Discussion
- 1.5K Quality Corner
- 11.1K Suggestion Box
- 77.4K Archosaur City
- 3.5K Cash Shop Huddle
- 14.3K Server Symposium
- 18.1K Dungeons & Tactics
- 2K The Crafting Nook
- 4.9K Guild Banter
- 6.6K The Trading Post
- 28K Class Discussion
- 1.9K Arigora Colosseum
- 78 TW & Cross Server Battles
- 337 Nation Wars
- 8.2K Off-Topic Discussion
- 3.7K The Fanatics Forum
- 207 Screenshots and Videos
- 22.8K Support Desk