Cheating apology videos VIDEO GAME TOPIC BOOMZILLA KEEP OUT SECRET FORT!



  • Ok so John Smedley is a big-wig at Daybreak Entertainment, the company recently spun-off from Sony Online Entertainment to host games like DC Universe Online, Everquest, Everquest II, etc. One of their games, still in public beta, is called H1Z1, basically a massively-multiplayer version of DayZ. But, you know... probably actually good.

    Anyway, they recently banned a whole shitload of players for cheating. Something like 30,000+. John Smedley went on his Twitter and said he's willing to "pardon" cheaters if they make a public apology video:

    He posted 4 videos, and pardoned 5 people before the cut-off. Here's the ones he posted:

    (I love this guy's big round pink face + huge pillow-y headset look, YouTube star in the making there. It's like you're seeing a let's play by Kirby.)

    (This guy might actually BE a zombie.)

    (No comment, except vertical video sucks-- how did he even do that? I guess he has his phone or camera on one of those gorilla-grip tripods? Or his webcam is literally sideways?)

    (Ah the tasteful classy b/w camwhore look.)



  • Thanks for the trigger warning.



  • There's something iffy about banning people from the only way they can play the game they legitimately bought. If you wanna ban them, give them back their money, I say.



  • @cartman82 said:

    There's something iffy about banning people from the only way they can play the game they legitimately bought. If you wanna ban them, give them back their money, I say.

    MMOs tend to use centralized servers, so it's not a surprise that getting banned from them means your game is now useless.



  • @powerlord said:

    MMOs tend to use centralized servers, so it's not a surprise that getting banned from them means your game is now useless.

    That's the point. If you sell me a game that I can't play, then give me my fucking money back. Putting all the cheaters into one isolated map or world or whatever would be acceptable too. But this business with just cutting me off and running off with my money is just unacceptable, IMO.

    Somebody should sue one of these companies.


  • sockdevs

    MMOs also frequently use paid subscriptions



  • Does H1Z1 cost anything? These are the same guys who did PlanetSide 2 and that's free-to-play.



  • @mott555 said:

    Does H1Z1 cost anything? These are the same guys who did PlanetSide 2 and that's free-to-play.

    Oh right. Then there's the whole issue of what happens with all the in-game DLC shit you bought to support the game. Is that now deleted from their servers? Can you "extract" it somehow, like you can your data from google, or posts from Discourse?

    I guess it would be funny if all the cheaters got a link where they can download all their purchased hats and cosmetic underwear and other crap as 3D models. Just so they can see what they really wasted money on.



  • @cartman82 said:

    There's something iffy about banning people from the only way they can play the game they legitimately bought. If you wanna ban them, give them back their money, I say.

    They knew the rules when they signed up.



  • @mott555 said:

    Does H1Z1 cost anything?

    Yes.



  • I thought my previous post implied that, but apparently @cartman82 needed to be explicitly told that.



  • Rules are unfair and they should be changed.

    Example: until recently, in Serbia you couldn't really return stuff after you buy it. I remember hearing about Yanks just returning stuff they don't like and thinking: "Wow, that's crazy! You buy it, you own it. You knew the deal. It's that simple." But now, new laws are in, and I can just return stuff during the first x days, like anyone else in the world.

    And you know what? I fucking like it.

    That sort of consumer protection rules need to come in for "virtual goods" as well.



  • @cartman82 said:

    And you know what? I fucking like it.

    Until your country's equivalent of Yanks catches on to it, starts returning used stuff en masse and the shops raise the prices to amortize the loss.

    It's a closed system, you know. If some asshat decides to treat the bookstore or the music shop as a rental, they're not gonna take a hit on profits because of it.



  • @Maciejasjmj said:

    Until your country's equivalent of Yanks catches on to it, starts returning used stuff en masse and the shops raise the prices to amortize the loss.

    It's a closed system, you know. If some asshat decides to treat the bookstore or the music shop as a rental, they're not gonna take a hit on profits because of it.

    Sure, that's the bad side.

    But what games are doing is much, much worse than not letting you return. They basically take your money and don't deliver the product. That's wrong.



  • @cartman82 said:

    But now, new laws are in, and I can just return stuff during the first x days, like anyone else in the world.

    That's not a law in the US. (We do have some rare classes of product which have a law-- I think every State has lemon laws for cars, for example.)

    Retailers do it voluntarily. Because they're not dicks.



  • @blakeyrat said:

    Retailers do it voluntarily. Because they're not dicks.

    Then game companies should not be dicks and fix their policies voluntarily, before someone sues them.



  • @cartman82 said:

    Then game companies should not be dicks and fix their policies voluntarily, before someone sues them.

    Yeah I agree. That's one way Origin is VASTLY superior to Steam. Valve doesn't even pretend to give a shit.

    (Although Valve will issue refunds if you manage to get into contact with a support person, which is like managing to climb Everest while in a straightjacket. I once got a refund on some Sonic game that it turned out required Java, but the product page didn't say it required Java.)



  • @cartman82 said:

    That sort of consumer protection rules need to come in for "virtual goods" as well.

    How are you going to return an in-game weapon? An mp3 file?


  • Discourse touched me in a no-no place

    @blakeyrat said:

    (This guy might actually BE a zombie.)

    "I got tired of cheaters so I started cheating". O_o



  • @NedFodder said:

    How are you going to return an in-game weapon? An mp3 file?

    Dunno. Since you bought the "data", some proof of purchase would be enough. Or a 3D model + sound file?

    That's murkier. Banning people from playing the game is much clearer territory.



  • @cartman82 said:

    There's something iffy about banning people from the only way they can play the game they legitimately bought.

    Legitimately bought and then cheated at. You break the rules, you get banned. It's an incentive (even if it's a smallish one) to not cheat.


  • Discourse touched me in a no-no place

    @cartman82 said:

    That sort of consumer protection rules need to come in for "virtual goods" as well.

    You get caught shoplifting from a store, they're probably going to ban you from going back in. Do you think that's wrong, too? That's the closest equivalent I can think of.

    I would suspect they just disable cheaters' accounts, rather than delete them, otherwise forgiveness would be fairly meaningless ("well, we'll let you back in but you'll have to buy everything again"). That would be a case where I'd probably agree the cheater should get their money back. But in general I don't really have a problem with cheaters having to shoulder a financial cost, because it probably functions as a deterrent.



  • You can't "return" an mp3 file. Sure you have proof of purchase, but how can you prove you don't own a copy of it somewhere, that you're not going to ever listen to it again? The vendor has no choice but to say "no refunds".


  • Discourse touched me in a no-no place

    @blakeyrat said:

    (We do have some rare classes of product which have a law-- I think every State has lemon laws for cars, for example.)

    As you might expect, they vary, though, and aren't the same. IIRC Florida's lemon law only applies to actual lemons, and you can't change your mind once you've bought a car and decide to return it, if it's not defective.


  • Discourse touched me in a no-no place

    @NedFodder said:

    You can't "return" an mp3 file. Sure you have proof of purchase, but how can you prove you don't own a copy of it somewhere, that you're not going to ever listen to it again? The vendor has no choice but to say "no refunds".

    True, but (some kinds of content) on an MMO, different rules would apply. For example, player housing. Returning it would mean you can't go into it any longer, for example.



  • Correct. My (poorly articulated) point was that not all "virtual" or "digital" goods are the same.


  • Discourse touched me in a no-no place

    @NedFodder said:

    Correct. My (poorly articulated) point was that not all "virtual" or "digital" goods are the same.

    Oh, yes, definitely.



  • @FrostCat said:

    As you might expect, they vary, though, and aren't the same.

    Of course. Local control is what makes the US great.

    @FrostCat said:

    IIRC Florida's lemon law only applies to actual lemons, and you can't change your mind once you've bought a car and decide to return it, if it's not defective.

    About, I dunno, 15-20 years ago a lot of States expanded their lemon laws to where you're allowed a "grace period" during which you can return any car for a full refund, even if the car has no defects. I think in WA it's 72 hours. As a response to really, really seedy car salesmen.

    Other than that, the car has to be taken back for ... IIRC 3 warranty repairs over 6 months before it can be declared a "lemon".


  • Discourse touched me in a no-no place

    @blakeyrat said:

    About, I dunno, 15-20 years ago a lot of States

    Yes. But not Florida, at least not as of about 5 years ago. I have a friend who made the mistake of visiting a car dealership in Tampa on a whim, after working late and before eating supper (yes, he is aware he is TRWTF). They basically shut him in a room for a couple of hours and worked him over until they talked him into buying a new Altima. The next day he tried to back out, and they told him no.

    Luckily for him he could afford it.



  • @blakeyrat said:

    which is like managing to climb Everett while in a straightjacket.

    I haven't found any definitive information on the highest point in Everett, but from Google Earth, it appears to be in the neighborhood of Paine Field. It's a rather long walk to there from the waterfront at sea level, but it's only about 600 feet (183m) of elevation gain, and it's not terribly steep. I don't see why you couldn't do while wearing a straightjacket if you really wanted to.

    Filed under: My shoulder aliens claim he meant Everest, but I'm responding to what he wrote, not what they say.



  • @FrostCat said:

    I have a friend who made the mistake of visiting a car dealership in Tampa on a whim, after working late and before eating supper (yes, he is aware he is TRWTF).

    I bought my car on an empty stomach too, that's a fucking nasty tactic by dealerships.

    I wasn't expecting it because the Chrysler I first bought, I was in and out in less than 2 hours, even with all the paperwork/approvals etc.

    This Ford dealer kept me waiting for ages and ages, and since my only transportation was my trade-in car (that I technically would have been stealing if I drove it to a McDonalds or whatever), I had no alternative but to sit there and take it.

    Fortunately for me, being hungry makes me ANGRY not more susceptible, and I gave the finance guy the business when he tried to pull the wool over my eyes TWICE. The second time I was so angry I got up to leave the dealership, and only then did he give up and stop trying to upsell me on useless crap.

    Anyway. There are good dealerships and bad ones. Lesson learned. If you buy your first car at a good dealership, you really have no idea how bad the bad ones are.

    (In retrospect, I should have either ordered a pizza or something, or asked them for a loaner, or their pick-up driver, to go get some food. But again: lesson learned. I foolishly kept believing the guy when he was like, "just 10 more minutes.)



  • @loopback0 said:

    Legitimately bought and then cheated at. You break the rules, you get banned. It's an incentive (even if it's a smallish one) to not cheat.

    @FrostCat said:

    You get caught shoplifting from a store, they're probably going to ban you from going back in. Do you think that's wrong, too? That's the closest equivalent I can think of.

    I would suspect they just disable cheaters' accounts, rather than delete them, otherwise forgiveness would be fairly meaningless ("well, we'll let you back in but you'll have to buy everything again"). That would be a case where I'd probably agree the cheater should get their money back. But in general I don't really have a problem with cheaters having to shoulder a financial cost, because it probably functions as a deterrent.

    You don't pay in advance to go into the store.

    This would be a more apt analogy. Say I got a tab in a store. Paid the money upfront, with the understanding I'll be able to just take things out of the store until the money runs out. But then I break some rule and am kicked out, not allowed back in. What about my tab? I still have money there! Do they just get to keep it?

    And what kind of incentive is that giving them? They'll just find any pretext to kick me out, so they don't have to spend any more resources on servicing me.

    That's not fair.



  • That's completely unlike the real situation.

    The real situation is more like how Nintendo treats flash carts: THE DEVIL. I don't think they're allowed to brick your DS for Using It WrongTM anymore, but not by choice.





  • @cartman82 said:

    This would be a more apt analogy. Say I got a tab in a store. Paid the money upfront, with the understanding I'll be able to just take things out of the store until the money runs out. But then I break some rule and am kicked out, not allowed back in. What about my tab? I still have money there! Do they just get to keep it?

    The shop gave you rules. Did the rules up front state they'd kick you out without refund if you broke them?



  • @FrostCat said:

    "I got tired of cheaters so I started cheating".

    I have some sympathy for the position that "so many people are cheating that you can't survive 30 seconds without cheating, too." Joining them is not the right response, of course, but I can understand the urge to do so.



  • @loopback0 said:

    The shop gave you rules. Did the rules up front state they'd kick you out without refund if you broke them?

    Doesn't matter. They don't get to make whatever rule they want.



  • @HardwareGeek said:

    I have some sympathy for the position that "so many people are cheating that you can't survive 30 seconds without cheating, too." Joining them is not the right response, of course, but I can understand the urge to do so.

    Fine, then isolate the cheaters on their own server. They paid for it. Let them play.



  • But the rule was made before they paid.

    They agreed to stick to those rules by signing up/paying. If they break them, then they broke the contract and not the vendor.

    Making up rules after payment and penalising the buyer for not adhering to them is a different matter, but that's not what's happening here.



  • @blakeyrat said:

    A) Fuck you.

    I like you, too, but when people here speak of you "having sand in your vagina," I'm sure it's strictly figurative. Therefore, you're really not my type.



  • @loopback0 said:

    But the rule was made before they paid.

    They agreed to stick to those rules by signing up/paying. If they break them, then they broke the contract and not the vendor.

    Making up rules after payment and penalising the buyer for not adhering to them is a different matter, but that's not what's happening here.

    Two points.

    First, even if you make up rules beforehand, there are restrictions against unfair rules. I mean, who knows what small-print crap you're agreeing with when you click OK before installing the game. Doesn't mean these are actually enforceable by law.

    But even more than that, it feels different if you're buying a product, instead of leasing a service. When I buy a thing, I expect it to be mine. Don't care about any of their stupid rules. If there's any service attached to the product (like a multiplayer service), I expect that to be provided, so I can enjoy the product I have purchased. Otherwise, refund.

    If they want to ban people at will, I'd be more comfortable if they were selling The Multiplayer Service and the "game" was just a meaningless accessory you get for free and use to access their servers. I would still expect some kind of refund (based on the lease time), but I'd feel less iffy about keeping all the money in that case.



  • Banning someone for cheating is a fair rule though.



  • @loopback0 said:

    Banning someone for cheating is a fair rule though.

    Yes. It's a fair rule to set up for a single server. It's not a fair rule to set up for the entire product.

    You can provide an alternative "cheater" server. Or you can allow others to set up their own servers. Or you can give them money back. But you can't just take their money and don't let them use the product they paid for.



  • Or maybe the players shouldn't be dicks and cheat



  • @blakeyrat said:

    (that I technically would have been stealing if I drove it to a McDonalds or whatever),

    Why would you transact on the trade in at a different time than the new car?



  • Say, you buy a ticket for a rock concert for some serious money. You get into the area, then you get into a fight, trash the place, and puke under the stage, all before the first song ends. The security swiftly throws you out.

    Do you expect to get a refund? Do you expect the band to play a special set just for you and other piss drunks? No, you go home, and if you're lucky you can even keep your now-worthless ticket.



  • "So, now that you gave us your car, we've decided we're not going to sell you that new one. The metro station is that-a-way, have a nice day!"



  • If that was indeed anything like being given a product to take home and use, you might have a point.

    This is more like getting banned here because you are insufficiently Jeffish.



  • You're buying a client (a ticket) and a right to enter the server (the gig). That right can be waived for some reason or another, and you're left with the ticket that doesn't get you entry anywhere.

    The only real difference is that you're not physically kicked out, and that you're free to enter at any time, as long as you have the right to that.



  • @Maciejasjmj said:

    Say, you buy a ticket for a rock concert for some serious money. You get into the area, then you get into a fight, trash the place, and puke under the stage, all before the first song ends. The security swiftly throws you out.

    Do you expect to get a refund? Do you expect the band to play a special set just for you and other piss drunks? No, you go home, and if you're lucky you can even keep your now-worthless ticket.

    That's not even close to where we are with game cheaters. In fact, that's all the way on the other end of the spectrum. Not only are you buying a pure service instead of product, but a one time only kind of service.

    To move towards my end, imagine you bought a season ticket. Let's say, you're expecting to tour with the band and go to 20 concerts. You screw up on the third one. And then, they not only kick you out from one show, but void your ticket for all the remaining shows. Without paying the difference.

    Even that's wrong IMO.

    Now move about a hundred miles further from that, into "bought an actual product" category. That's where we are with banning game cheaters.


Log in to reply
 

Looks like your connection to What the Daily WTF? was lost, please wait while we try to reconnect.