Shard Chats = cheating

1235Next

Replies

  • Wrotton wrote: »
    But that would only leave the whales, krakens, dolphins, and other spenders, thus most of their money being made and if 10000 people who rarely spend quit the game, it doesnt hurt their sales.

    There's a tipping point. I witnessed the same sort of thing in WoW a while back. Rampant cheating that got overlooked until huge swathes of the PVP community began quitting. Then they cracked down super hard.

    I mean... no game wants to ban paying players. They probably look at all other alternatives first. But when a tipping point is reached, they're sorta forced to act.

    In this game, the tipping point would be if huge droves of the occasional $9.99 marquee crowd left. There are probably a thousand of those types of players for every uber whale. And there's also the Brand to consider. Damage to a game's brand is hard to measure and leaves much longer lasting damage. No developer wants their game to be widely known as a haven of rampant cheaters/wintraders/exploiters/etc. If honest players get the impression they have to "cheat" to get ahead, they'll find another game.
  • BubbaFett
    3311 posts Member
    Jedi_of_Oz wrote: »
    BubbaFett wrote: »
    Contribute UGC or organize or participate in any activity, group or guild that is inappropriate, abusive, harassing, profane, threatening, hateful, offensive, vulgar, obscene, sexually explicit, defamatory, infringing, invades another's privacy, or is otherwise reasonably objectionable.

    An aggrieved party would need to prove that the content of a 'shard chat' is “inappropriate, abusive, harassing, profane, threatening, hateful, offensive, vulgar, obscene, sexually explicit, defamatory, infringing, invades another's privacy, or is otherwise reasonably objectionable.” These actions potentially infringe on criminal and/or civil rights grounds. To heap in gentlemen's agreements between certain parties are not the same context. Additionally, your definition of objectionable may not meet another person's definition of objectionable - or more importantly, the legal definition of it.

    Mr. Legal Eagle has drawn up this condition as a catchall; but Mr. Finance Manager knows that if players were banned en masse and went back to Google Play and/or iTunes claiming refunds, this game would die within weeks.
    BubbaFett wrote: »
    I would say the fact that you are organizing and participating in an activity that colludes to make the playing field less than level is objectionable......

    “Engage in any other activity that significantly disturbs the peaceful, fair and respectful gaming environment of an EA Service”

    If a third party carriage service were used that was not governed by or enforceable by EA, they have no ability to act. On the other hand, were using this very forum and/or in-game chat as the carriage service to conduct any 'objectionable' actions, you might have a case. Otherwise, the accused could just as easily say that their attacks are driven by the horoscope they read in the newspaper that day or that some deity to spoke them in a vision directing them to act in a certain way.

    My interpretation of 'Fair and respectful gaming' refers to the use of hacks, cheat codes, intercepting and adjusting communications from the device to the server to unfairly gain an advantage in the game.
    BubbaFett wrote: »
    I would say that your shard chat groups significantly make it unfair for those that are not in it, and would also say they are disrespectful to other gamers not included in your little chat group.....

    Speaking about the chats I participate in, there is every attempt made to include players, not exclude them. This involves attempting to make direct communications with players either in game, or using third-party platforms where necessary. When direct communications are not possible, I/we attempt to make contact through their guildmates or other associates. It's not easy with players that don't speak English or have in games names using non-English alphabet characters, but we've made it happen. Google Translator is used on occasion to establish understanding where there are language barriers. I've had so many positive comments from these new players thanking us that we've made the effort to involve them in the chat. These chats are generally supportive environments where players share social and family experiences and where players provide assistance to each other regarding the make-up of rosters or provide advice regarding gameplay.

    I'm sorry that your experience has not been so positive. Humans are generally social creatures that experience positive outcomes from sharing companionship. This extends to gaming. I've experienced this myself in the shard chats that you decry.

    It is also unfortunate that not all people are wired this way and narcissism and ego drive negative behaviours towards those around them.

    That's a lot of spewing, gargling and hypothesizing just to get around cheating....maybe something you need to think about.....
  • BubbaFett wrote: »
    Jedi_of_Oz wrote: »
    BubbaFett wrote: »
    Contribute UGC or organize or participate in any activity, group or guild that is inappropriate, abusive, harassing, profane, threatening, hateful, offensive, vulgar, obscene, sexually explicit, defamatory, infringing, invades another's privacy, or is otherwise reasonably objectionable.

    An aggrieved party would need to prove that the content of a 'shard chat' is “inappropriate, abusive, harassing, profane, threatening, hateful, offensive, vulgar, obscene, sexually explicit, defamatory, infringing, invades another's privacy, or is otherwise reasonably objectionable.” These actions potentially infringe on criminal and/or civil rights grounds. To heap in gentlemen's agreements between certain parties are not the same context. Additionally, your definition of objectionable may not meet another person's definition of objectionable - or more importantly, the legal definition of it.

    Mr. Legal Eagle has drawn up this condition as a catchall; but Mr. Finance Manager knows that if players were banned en masse and went back to Google Play and/or iTunes claiming refunds, this game would die within weeks.
    BubbaFett wrote: »
    I would say the fact that you are organizing and participating in an activity that colludes to make the playing field less than level is objectionable......

    “Engage in any other activity that significantly disturbs the peaceful, fair and respectful gaming environment of an EA Service”

    If a third party carriage service were used that was not governed by or enforceable by EA, they have no ability to act. On the other hand, were using this very forum and/or in-game chat as the carriage service to conduct any 'objectionable' actions, you might have a case. Otherwise, the accused could just as easily say that their attacks are driven by the horoscope they read in the newspaper that day or that some deity to spoke them in a vision directing them to act in a certain way.

    My interpretation of 'Fair and respectful gaming' refers to the use of hacks, cheat codes, intercepting and adjusting communications from the device to the server to unfairly gain an advantage in the game.
    BubbaFett wrote: »
    I would say that your shard chat groups significantly make it unfair for those that are not in it, and would also say they are disrespectful to other gamers not included in your little chat group.....

    Speaking about the chats I participate in, there is every attempt made to include players, not exclude them. This involves attempting to make direct communications with players either in game, or using third-party platforms where necessary. When direct communications are not possible, I/we attempt to make contact through their guildmates or other associates. It's not easy with players that don't speak English or have in games names using non-English alphabet characters, but we've made it happen. Google Translator is used on occasion to establish understanding where there are language barriers. I've had so many positive comments from these new players thanking us that we've made the effort to involve them in the chat. These chats are generally supportive environments where players share social and family experiences and where players provide assistance to each other regarding the make-up of rosters or provide advice regarding gameplay.

    I'm sorry that your experience has not been so positive. Humans are generally social creatures that experience positive outcomes from sharing companionship. This extends to gaming. I've experienced this myself in the shard chats that you decry.

    It is also unfortunate that not all people are wired this way and narcissism and ego drive negative behaviours towards those around them.

    That's a lot of spewing, gargling and hypothesizing just to get around cheating....maybe something you need to think about.....

    Let's agree to disagree. I'll sleep straight in bed at night.

    Hey, I wonder if being branded a cheat by you several times in this forum constitutes as, " inappropriate, abusive, harassing, profane, threatening, hateful, offensive, vulgar, obscene, sexually explicit, defamatory, infringing, invades another's privacy, or is otherwise reasonably objectionable".

    "....maybe something you need to think about....."
  • Considering that we're able to use the official forums to organise and recruit for these shard chats (which is how I found mine) I don't see how there can be any question of them being considered cheating. Even under what can only be called creative interpretation of the ToS
  • BubbaFett
    3311 posts Member
    Jedi_of_Oz wrote: »
    BubbaFett wrote: »
    Jedi_of_Oz wrote: »
    BubbaFett wrote: »
    Contribute UGC or organize or participate in any activity, group or guild that is inappropriate, abusive, harassing, profane, threatening, hateful, offensive, vulgar, obscene, sexually explicit, defamatory, infringing, invades another's privacy, or is otherwise reasonably objectionable.

    An aggrieved party would need to prove that the content of a 'shard chat' is “inappropriate, abusive, harassing, profane, threatening, hateful, offensive, vulgar, obscene, sexually explicit, defamatory, infringing, invades another's privacy, or is otherwise reasonably objectionable.” These actions potentially infringe on criminal and/or civil rights grounds. To heap in gentlemen's agreements between certain parties are not the same context. Additionally, your definition of objectionable may not meet another person's definition of objectionable - or more importantly, the legal definition of it.

    Mr. Legal Eagle has drawn up this condition as a catchall; but Mr. Finance Manager knows that if players were banned en masse and went back to Google Play and/or iTunes claiming refunds, this game would die within weeks.
    BubbaFett wrote: »
    I would say the fact that you are organizing and participating in an activity that colludes to make the playing field less than level is objectionable......

    “Engage in any other activity that significantly disturbs the peaceful, fair and respectful gaming environment of an EA Service”

    If a third party carriage service were used that was not governed by or enforceable by EA, they have no ability to act. On the other hand, were using this very forum and/or in-game chat as the carriage service to conduct any 'objectionable' actions, you might have a case. Otherwise, the accused could just as easily say that their attacks are driven by the horoscope they read in the newspaper that day or that some deity to spoke them in a vision directing them to act in a certain way.

    My interpretation of 'Fair and respectful gaming' refers to the use of hacks, cheat codes, intercepting and adjusting communications from the device to the server to unfairly gain an advantage in the game.
    BubbaFett wrote: »
    I would say that your shard chat groups significantly make it unfair for those that are not in it, and would also say they are disrespectful to other gamers not included in your little chat group.....

    Speaking about the chats I participate in, there is every attempt made to include players, not exclude them. This involves attempting to make direct communications with players either in game, or using third-party platforms where necessary. When direct communications are not possible, I/we attempt to make contact through their guildmates or other associates. It's not easy with players that don't speak English or have in games names using non-English alphabet characters, but we've made it happen. Google Translator is used on occasion to establish understanding where there are language barriers. I've had so many positive comments from these new players thanking us that we've made the effort to involve them in the chat. These chats are generally supportive environments where players share social and family experiences and where players provide assistance to each other regarding the make-up of rosters or provide advice regarding gameplay.

    I'm sorry that your experience has not been so positive. Humans are generally social creatures that experience positive outcomes from sharing companionship. This extends to gaming. I've experienced this myself in the shard chats that you decry.

    It is also unfortunate that not all people are wired this way and narcissism and ego drive negative behaviours towards those around them.

    That's a lot of spewing, gargling and hypothesizing just to get around cheating....maybe something you need to think about.....

    Let's agree to disagree. I'll sleep straight in bed at night.

    Hey, I wonder if being branded a cheat by you several times in this forum constitutes as, " inappropriate, abusive, harassing, profane, threatening, hateful, offensive, vulgar, obscene, sexually explicit, defamatory, infringing, invades another's privacy, or is otherwise reasonably objectionable".

    "....maybe something you need to think about....."
    [/quo
    Considering that we're able to use the official forums to organise and recruit for these shard chats (which is how I found mine) I don't see how there can be any question of them being considered cheating. Even under what can only be called creative interpretation of the ToS

    Are you a member of the Boston stranglers by any chance?
  • EA_Cian
    971 posts EA Staff (retired)
    This discussion here has become unproductive and devolved into some namecalling and baiting. I've closed the thread as a result.
This discussion has been closed.