Curse

The Great Al · Jan 12, 2008, 05:45 AM // 05:45

Also, if it does come out that there was no hacking involved, I hope Gaile doesn't get flamed for this. She obviously didn't make up that answer for us, if anything, one of the programmers/managers told her to tell us that. She wouldn't just intentionally lie to us, in all seriousness.

blakecraw · Jan 12, 2008, 05:49 AM // 05:49

I haven't read the whole thread here so ignore this if I'm repeating things but:

I think anet needs to prove to the community that this originated from a client hack, not a glitch, to differentiate it from the outpost ferrying bugs that have been abused in the past (the fact that anet's staff couldn't get to the outpost without hacking doesn't prove anything; being unable to prove that somebody died of natural causes does not mean they were murdered). If the discovery of this mystery outpost did originate from a legitimate hack, then it is not the same as the other ferrying that has happened, and therefore anet is not using any double standard by only banning people involved in this, so nobody has any right to complain about inconsistent ban practices, which is a weak argument anyway.

If this did somehow begin as a game bug, not a hack, then anet has a dilemma: they probably can't find everybody who exploited other various map-travel glitches, so they can't ban all of them (and from the sound of it that is a large portion of the community, and banning that many people would probably not have a good impact on gameplay anyway), and they can't morally justify unbanning these 117 people who were caught knowingly exploiting a bug (assuming it was a bug of course, not a hack) for personal gain. So, since anet looks bad no matter how they respond if this was not a hack, of course they are going to say it was a hack; therefore I for one do not trust their word that this was indeed a hack, until they prove it.

just my thoughts on how to clear this up

Zehnchu · Jan 12, 2008, 05:50 AM // 05:50

Quote:

Originally Posted by arcanemacabre

Jut got on, scanned through the thread, and I have to say: if "truzo 117" is telling the truth on how it was done, I disagree with the bans. If it's true, this was not a hack, and while it was an exploit, I don't see this as being serious enough for banning. This doesn't come anywhere close to ruining the economy like the dupe exploit. But I don't know. If it really did involve hacking of anykind - let the banhammer drop hard.

I have to disagree,

First even if by some fluke that mapping back to your guild hall then mapping as to go back to DOA you ended up in the hidden test outpost only for devs.

The problem is that once you left you would not be able to get back there again, unless you can duplicate that fluke again (or altered your client so you can gain access to the area). But at that point it wouldn’t really be worth it.

Which leaves you with the fact that these people took advantage of an exploit that allowed characters to be parked in this outpost (much like urgoz/deep) then with those parked people they would ferry a select few to this outpost then change characters (be ferried in themselves) and go from there. And not have to fight the other 4 bosses and only have to fight one to get the quest rewards or end rewards. So it really doesn’t matter about the outpost even if the case it was accessible by chance. It’s the actions of the 117 people who exploited this outpost after they gained accessed to it.

I think a lot of people here have a good understanding on the fact that the banned people accepted the quest then got or ferried people into the outpost killed the end boss skipping the other four and did this over and over again at the same time getting the end rewards.

Jake_Steel · Jan 12, 2008, 05:51 AM // 05:51

Anet doesn't need or even have to prove to some people on a message board that it was hack.

They believe(know) it was hack, they can act accordingly. It's there server (such is the case in ALL online game btw) and they can whenever and however they see fit.

Harrier's haste · Jan 12, 2008, 05:51 AM // 05:51

Quote:

Originally Posted by blakecraw

I haven't read the whole thread here so ignore this if I'm repeating things but:

I think anet needs to prove to the community that this originated from a client hack, not a glitch, to differentiate it from the outpost ferrying bugs that have been abused in the past (the fact that anet's staff couldn't get to the outpost without hacking doesn't prove anything; being unable to prove that somebody died of natural causes does not mean they were murdered). If the discovery of this mystery outpost did originate from a legitimate hack, then it is not the same as the other ferrying that has happened, and therefore anet is not using any double standard by only banning people involved in this, so nobody has any right to complain about inconsistent ban practices, which is a weak argument anyway.

If this did somehow begin as a game bug, not a hack, then anet has a dilemma: they probably can't find everybody who exploited other various map-travel glitches, so they can't ban all of them (and from the sound of it that is a large portion of the community, and banning that many people would probably not have a good impact on gameplay anyway), and they can't morally justify unbanning these 117 people who were caught knowingly exploiting a bug (assuming it was a bug of course, not a hack) for personal gain. So, since anet looks bad no matter how they respond if this was not a hack, of course they are going to say it was a hack; therefore I for one do not trust their word that this was indeed a hack, until they prove it.

just my thoughts on how to clear this up

But how though? Make a video of it and put it on Youtube or Veoh?

garethporlest18 · Jan 12, 2008, 05:59 AM // 05:59

Quote:

Originally Posted by jrk247

Well if it really did take all those steps for this to work when would you stop and realise it wasn't how the game was supposed to be played?

Says clearly in the EULA that you will be banned if you exploit the game. I don't agree with a mass perma banning but if you knew what you were doing was exploiting the game stop QQing and learn your lesson.

The point of the matter is, if these guys are going to stay banned, then ANet better own up and ban everyone who's ever used an exploit in this game. Because it's against the EULA. Duncan/Guild Ferrying, all against the EULA.

DivineEnvoy · Jan 12, 2008, 06:03 AM // 06:03

Out of curiousity, how many of you, who are banned at the moment, would ever go to DoA again if you are unbanned?

Kayu Ishida · Jan 12, 2008, 06:04 AM // 06:04

What was supposed to be a simple solution to an alleged problem has now evolved into something much more sever. For over the past 24 hours I’ve been hearing near to nothing, save hate and garbage, being spewed all across this thread, and any sort of light that is shone upon the masses has been beaten down by ignorance and insults. Enough is enough, and this is all I can take before exploding into a wave of frustration, disappointment, and utter distress.

I cannot stress enough how ludicrous it is to think that all the infamous 117 are greedy, evil, unforgivable hackers whose sole purpose was to exploit a programming error until all their selfish needs were satisfied while all other members of the Guild Wars gaming community were abandoned in the depths of an economic crash. Does that description sound over exaggerated and harsh? Well, anyone who knows the truth will be forced to agree on the fact that it is an inaccurate perception of the real situation, a situation that only Arena Net and the 117 know the truth behind. I ask you, why are the 117 being accused of such atrocities when there was never any hard, solid proof presented to the public that they were really guilty of the crimes they supposedly committed?

A veil of imprecision shrouds the definitions of “exploiting” and “cheating”, and now should we add “hacking”? I have had the honor of personally knowing a handful of the 117, and I will not be the first to admit that they are not hackers. In fact, they are so far from hackers, one of them can’t even set up Outlook. Does that sound like a hacker to you? None of them know what .dat files are. Are they still hackers? It is despicable when someone is wrongfully accused of being something they are not, and then the majority of the community exiles the accused and kicks them when they are down and stone then until they bleed. When did we all become liable judges? What justification exists that gives us the right to insult and spell out the fate of the defendants?

The definite lines between justice and discrimination are now blurred. Who is wrong? Who is right? The people that are not members of the two parties will never know the real truth, so let’s stop fooling each other. Arena Net is not telling the truth, and the 117 are not telling the truth… so where will this arguing get us?

The greatest lose that every single one of us will suffer from is trust. Those who were banned will never trust Arena Net again. Those who befriended the 117 will never trust Arena Net again. Those who felt they were cheated by the 117 will never trust the players Arena Net shuns from Guild Wars again. Those who stumble across future glitches will never feel comfortable reporting the instance, because can you truly invest a full amount of trust in the fact that you won’t be banned for accidently exploiting a glitch? Will you ever trust someone who says to you “Let’s go farm so-and-so! There’s an easy way to do it” without fearing you’re exploiting the game? Where does your trust waver now, or better yet has your trust in anything even faltered? If not, then leave the emotions to those who have felt the impact behind the bans.

I am sorry, Miss Grey, that you were the messenger who was selected to be the bearer of bad news. Being the face of Arena Net, your task was to retell the story the developers and the suits instructed you to relate to the public. I hope you will be able to sleep at night knowing that it’s your job to say what you are supposed to say, while knowing the truth is behind closed doors. No one will believe my friends because of the label you and your co-workers have placed on them. The perfect word was already used to describe the feeling that your accusations have wrought: demoralizing. It really is the perfect word, agreed?

I’ve grown tired of all of this. I want my friends back. I want them to have their dignity back. What right do you have to deny them of that? So you think they cheated you in a game? Big deal. Their reputation is ruined because of this nonsense, and that is much harder to fix than an imagined economy. My friends have been nothing but kind, helpful, and generous to countless gamers, and this is how they are repaid? Would you like to know a fact, a truth behind the handful of the 117 I know? They are great friends and have shown great amounts of character in this dark and unjust situation. That is more than I can say about several of the people who have posted here. Be ashamed, be very ashamed that you can judge people you don’t know and feel completely comfortable with yourselves...

Now I am ashamed of myself for ranting when I am completely tired and not in the best state of mind. Most sorry to those who has nothing to do with my peeves, and to all gamers out there, good luck to you.

GloryFox · Jan 12, 2008, 06:05 AM // 06:05

Quote:

I haven't read the whole thread here so ignore this if I'm repeating things but:

I think anet needs to prove to the community that this originated from a client hack, not a glitch, to differentiate it from the outpost ferrying bugs that have been abused in the past (the fact that anet's staff couldn't get to the outpost without hacking doesn't prove anything; being unable to prove that somebody died of natural causes does not mean they were murdered). If the discovery of this mystery outpost did originate from a legitimate hack, then it is not the same as the other ferrying that has happened, and therefore anet is not using any double standard by only banning people involved in this, so nobody has any right to complain about inconsistent ban practices, which is a weak argument anyway.

If this did somehow begin as a game bug, not a hack, then anet has a dilemma: they probably can't find everybody who exploited other various map-travel glitches, so they can't ban all of them (and from the sound of it that is a large portion of the community, and banning that many people would probably not have a good impact on gameplay anyway), and they can't morally justify unbanning these 117 people who were caught knowingly exploiting a bug (assuming it was a bug of course, not a hack) for personal gain. So, since anet looks bad no matter how they respond if this was not a hack, of course they are going to say it was a hack; therefore I for one do not trust their word that this was indeed a hack, until they prove it.

just my thoughts on how to clear this up

I'm sorry ANet does not have to prove crap. You only have a license to use their game, that's all. That license is revocable at will by ANet. If ANet woke up on Tuesday and choose to kick everyone who had green dye they can.

Therefore the key to not getting a BAN is to not do anything that draws their attention in a negative fashion. THIS IS COMMON SENSE!!!

They have a RIGHT to refuse service to anyone for any reason. It's on the ALL RIGHTS RESERVED clause.

Quote:

quoted by the EULA sections 3 & 14
3. LICENSE TO USE

Subject to the terms of this Agreement, NC Interactive grants to you, for your personal use only, a non-exclusive, revocable, nontransferable (except as permitted in Section 4(a)) license to use the Service, and a non-exclusive, revocable, nontransferable (except as permitted in Section 4(a)) license to use the Software in connection with the Service, without charge except for new Campaigns and Additional Features which will be charged on a prepaid basis according to Section 5.

You may not (a) sublicense, rent, lease, loan or otherwise transfer the Software or the Service (or any part thereof), including without limitation access keys; (b) modify, adapt, reverse engineer or decompile the Software, or otherwise attempt to derive source code from the Software; (c) create any derivative works in respect of the Software or the Service; or (d) otherwise use the Software or the Service except as expressly provided in this Agreement. You should keep your access key in a safe place and not share it with anyone else. The access key can be used only once. Title to the Software, and all rights with respect to the Software and Service not specifically granted under this Agreement, including without limitation all rights of reproduction, modification, distribution, display, disassembly and decompilation and all copyright, patent, trademark, trade secret and other proprietary rights and interests are reserved to NC Interactive.

14. TERMINATION

(a) NC Interactive reserves the right to suspend or terminate this Agreement (including your Software license and your Account) immediately and without notice if you breach this Agreement or willfully infringe any third party intellectual property rights, or if we are unable to verify or authenticate any information you provide to us, or upon game play, chat or any player activity whatsoever which is, in our sole discretion, inappropriate and/or in violation of the spirit of the Game(s) as described in the Rules of Conduct.

Should NC Interactive decide to suspend or terminate this Agreement with a User under any circumstances, the User will lose access to your Account.

(b) You agree that if the Service or your Account is suspended, terminated or cancelled for any reason or length of time, you are not entitled to any reimbursement or refund of any fees or unused access time.

I work for software companies and it is a standard for all software contracts.

If you annoy ANET they can and will ban you. Deal with life it happens then move on. Meanwhile I'm enjoying my Guild Wars even more knowing that 117 trouble makers are GONE.

The community has been satisfied.

blakecraw · Jan 12, 2008, 06:07 AM // 06:07

Quote:

Originally Posted by Jake_Steel

Anet doesn't need or even have to prove to some people on a message board that it was hack.

They believe(know) it was hack, they can act accordingly. It's there server (such is the case in ALL online game btw) and they can whenever and however they see fit.

Of course they can do whatever they want with their server, but it is bad practice to whip out bans then not come out with hard proof that the claim backing them up is true. I have no idea how they would go about proving this (post chat logs with public enemy #1 gloating about his hacked client?), but I think it is the only way to prove that they are correct in their belief (knowledge) that the outpost was accessed via a hack.

jezz · Jan 12, 2008, 06:09 AM // 06:09

Quote:

Originally Posted by arcanemacabre

Jut got on, scanned through the thread, and I have to say: if "truzo 117" is telling the truth on how it was done, I disagree with the bans. If it's true, this was not a hack, and while it was an exploit, I don't see this as being serious enough for banning. This doesn't come anywhere close to ruining the economy like the dupe exploit. But I don't know. If it really did involve hacking of anykind - let the banhammer drop hard.

yes totally agree..
IF truzo 117 is telling complete truth. perma ban maybe too harsh..IMO

jrk247 · Jan 12, 2008, 06:09 AM // 06:09

Quote:

Originally Posted by garethporlest18

The point of the matter is, if these guys are going to stay banned, then ANet better own up and ban everyone who's ever used an exploit in this game. Because it's against the EULA. Duncan/Guild Ferrying, all against the EULA.

Yeah they should, but I doubt they will.

untitled2005 · Jan 12, 2008, 06:11 AM // 06:11

Instead of a permanent ban, how about wiping everything clean from the offenders and stuffing all their storage and character slots with gemstones that cannot be traded, sold or deleted? Everyone would be happy then.

Creeping Carl · Jan 12, 2008, 06:17 AM // 06:17

Quote:

Originally Posted by Kayu Ishida

I cannot stress enough how ludicrous it is to think that all the infamous 117 are greedy, evil, unforgivable hackers whose sole purpose was to exploit a programming error until all their selfish needs were satisfied while all other members of the Guild Wars gaming community were abandoned in the depths of an economic crash.

Why is it ludicrous? You act as though there are never bad people who do things to harm people and cheat the system.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Kayu Ishida

Does that description sound over exaggerated and harsh?

Not at all.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Kayu Ishida

Well, anyone who knows the truth will be forced to agree on the fact that it is an inaccurate perception of the real situation, a situation that only Arena Net and the 117 know the truth behind. I ask you, why are the 117 being accused of such atrocities when there was never any hard, solid proof presented to the public that they were really guilty of the crimes they supposedly committed?

And how would you know there was never any proof? Are you one of the guilty ones who got banned? If you are, then you know what they say about prison: They're full of "innocent" people.

Drop of Fear · Jan 12, 2008, 06:17 AM // 06:17

good morning dear.
Hack or not, u kept it secret for months to exploit it as much as u could knowing it was a critical exploit.
Play with words as u like, post as many pages of rants u believe is appropriate, honest players will keep thanking anet for their effort to protect the game they love from greedy people who exploit it in every possible way they can.

Rant some more, then turn off your monitor, clean your brain from all the crap and ask youself " did i deserve it ?"
If the answer is "yes" then stop posting crap here and either get another copy of gw and play honestly or leave the game.
If the answer is "no" then accept that a.net has the rights to take all the actions to protect their gaming environment.

GloryFox · Jan 12, 2008, 06:39 AM // 06:39

The difference between this situation and Duncan is very clear. With Duncan one could easily assume that it was a necessary function to allow players who had not beat the previous missions allowance into the final Duncan mission for the purpose of forming a party with ease for those who did beat the previous 4 areas. It was as is when the game was released therefore one could argue that it was intended. Everyone in the game still started at the same town location available to everyone else and it was not a secret etc.

In the case of Mallyx you had access to a town that was not even located properly on the map. You could not simply travel there. You cheated the starting point that was not available to everyone else. You skipped the path and went end game. You then exploited this easy access for personal gain, wealth and prestige breaking the spirit of the game. Completed the mission then rinse repeated entering a mission only available to you and your chosen few. This is not the same as Duncan as much as you want it to be. Your lying to yourself and others.

Thank GOD that ANet has chosen to re set everyone to ground zero with GW2. Where honest players have a chance vs. the corrupt and the sneaky.

Meta4ik · Jan 12, 2008, 06:55 AM // 06:55

Quote:

Originally Posted by GloryFox

The difference between this situation and Duncan is very clear. With Duncan one could easily assume that it was a necessary function to allow players who had not beat the previous missions allowance into the final Duncan mission for the purpose of forming a party with ease for those who did beat the previous 4 areas. It was as is when the game was released therefore one could argue that it was intended. Everyone in the game still started at the same town location available to everyone else and it was not a secret etc.

In the case of Mallyx you had access to a town that was not even located properly on the map. You could not simply travel there. You cheated the starting point that was not available to everyone else. You skipped the path and went end game. You then exploited this easy access for personal gain, wealth and prestige breaking the spirit of the game. Completed the mission then rinse repeated entering a mission only available to you and your chosen few. This is not the same as Duncan as much as you want it to be. Your lying to yourself and others.

Thank GOD that ANet has chosen to re set everyone to ground zero with GW2. Where honest players have a chance vs. the corrupt and the sneaky.

This actually seems exactly the same as duncan except it wasnt a runner it was a party leader going out of GH. The outpost in itself was not intended but then again why was it labeled like an elite mission status. The people in duncan reaped the rewards just like we did. Took alot less time to kill the boss. Still recived the same rewards. As for the map if you looked at it on the map it was right under DoA just like how the Deep is right under Cavalon.

You can't see me · Jan 12, 2008, 06:58 AM // 06:58

There's only one thing that needs to be said here.

Anyone who has done DoA before at least once should have the common sense to see that the exploit was not of normal playstyle and can therefore logcially assume it was a bug. It's no big secret that bug abuse is against the terms Arenanet made you agree to before using an account in their ownership. Anyone who say this should have left the game instead of staying to complete the exploit. They all know that bug abuse is against the rules, and it wouldn't have been very hard to figure out that an outpost not located on the map is a bug. They knowingly violated the terms of use, and recieved fair punishment in the eyes of Arenanet.

And don't go on saying "They didn't know". Come on, seriously, if you don't have the sense to recognize that skipping areas and going to a hidden outpost is a bug, then I would think that you would have been banned ages ago for not knowing that using third party programs is against the rules, even with the notice on the login screen. This isn't handing out bans at random. This is punishing those who violated the terms of use. If you want to harp on Arenanet for that, then you can do it all you want, but the fact is, they had every right, rhyme and reason to ban anyone involved who did not leave the game or was not on thier first time, which I doubt anyone was or did.

jeesuss89 · Jan 12, 2008, 07:04 AM // 07:04

Quote:

Originally Posted by You can't see me

And don't go on saying "They didn't know". Come on, seriously, if you don't have the sense to recognize that skipping three areas and going to a hidden outpost is a bug, then I would think that you would have been banned ages ago for not knowing that using third party programs is against the rules, even with the notice on the login screen.

Three areas, huh??? Well, I guess one person doesn't know...

You can't see me · Jan 12, 2008, 07:07 AM // 07:07

Quote:

Originally Posted by jeesuss89

Three areas, huh??? Well, I guess one person doesn't know...

Pardon the typo, it is corrected now, but you get the idea. I'm a bit sleepy. I mixed it up with the three dungeons prior to duncan on that same thoughtline if you must know.

Regardless, it makes no point expressed in the above invalid, if I did or did not intend to say that.