Curse

Amity and Truth · Sep 11, 2006, 03:54 PM // 15:54

After observing a flamewar in the game about whether a trick is really a trick or just an exploit, i came to think about this topic. A discussion that will probably get heated quite fast as well... so please, try to keep it as civil as possible. For the sake of having a neutral discussion i'll refer to Tricks, Glitches and Exploits as "Not intended Game feature" or NIGF in short.
I'm doing this to not call anyone a cheater just because my opinion on NIGFs differs from that of the vast majority of GW Players.

During the months of playing Guildwars, i've seen and witnessed a multitude of NIGFs. Some did have only a minor influence on small parts of the game while others had the power to dictate gameplay, few even BROKE the gameplay. Yet, all these NIGFs had one thing in common. No one really knew if it really was just a trick or allready a downright cheat.
I'll give some examples about what i'm talking about:

The "book" or "gear" Trick.
Probably one of the most famous NIGFs. When someone was wielding an item, every single AI monster in range went for the one carrying the item and ignored everyone else. This allowed for insanely easy farming runs and had a very huge impact on PVE Gameplay in some of the Highlevel Areas as in everyone was either using this NIGF or kicked from the party.
Yet, the question of this thread applies. Was it really just a trick? Or was it an exploit of scripted AI behavior?

The "unlimited energy, no penalty" Trick.
There was a short period where spells like Thunderclap did not end when the caster reached 0 energy and thus became insanely more powerful. As soon as people got to know about this, the whole "Trick or exploit" discussion started again.
It even went on as A-net patches this NIGF out of the game.

The "no negative exhaustion" Trick.
Through clever switching of weapons, one could avoid the exhaustion penalty on some spells - like shock. This was very popular in GVG for a long time until A-Net patched it.
Yet again, Trick? Skill or exploit?

These were just three examples of varying impact on the game. All of which got heavily used (or abused) by the community and were mostly regarded as skill and normal. In short, the topic of this discussion is:

How do YOU decide whether something is an exploit, a trick or just pure skill?

And keep in mind:
Don't post unpatched exploits, don't turn this into a farmbuild discussion (as i'm full well aware that some people regard farming monks as an exploit themselves). AND, keep it civil. Thank you.

_____________________________________

My personal opinion on this is that every single NIGF is an exploit. They tend to bend or break rules in the game. Sometimes to a degree that the "normal" style of playing suddenly becomes the "no way" style of playing.
So basically whenever i hear someone go like "I know a trick!!!1!!!" i'm most likely to listen what it exactly is and if it abuses something in a not intended way i abandon the group as i've got no interest in taking part in exploits. But i find it harder and harder to keep on doing this as the general level of acceptance for these kind of things was raised quite a bit.

A while ago, using NIGFs to bypass mission failure was considered pure exploitism. Nowadays it is even advertised by players for their group "even on failure, we will succed through uber trick lol!". A while ago, people hated on everything that is "Bot" but now they're even exploiting them for their own personal gain (and the gain of the Bots) - no i won't go into detail on that one but most players will know about it nonetheless.

Kakumei · Sep 11, 2006, 03:59 PM // 15:59

I don't think the contention should really be whether it's an exploit or not, but rather whether these "features" are intended or not. The "no energy? no problem!" Thunderclap glitch above was an exploit, and clearly unintended, seeing how quickly (relatively) it was patched.

I'm of the same mind--if it's unintended, it's almost certainly an exploit. But if it's a PvP-involved NIGF, and everyone else is using it, I most certainly will too--I see no reason to put myself at a disadvantage.

Sli Ander · Sep 11, 2006, 04:12 PM // 16:12

From my Pve aspect: For me it depends on whether the 'trick' would be viable if the game were a real world, this being mitigated by affect on the game. For example, shooting through stone when the enemy can't is a trick in some areas, because it barely affects anything(and often the ai can do the same).

An exploit in my opinion is anything that deliberately takes advantage of game mechanics to an absurd level. By this I mean AI that attack someone carrying a certain weapon, position AI so that they get stuck in the middle of nowhere,etc. I may stand on the other side of a wall and toss down smites, but the AI always has a chance to run around and get me(or use spells). If my pet or partners are bodyblocking or distracting him, then its simply strategy.If I'm taking advantage of a lag which is causing the AI to ignore my spells(on a regular basis) then its exploitation.Like you said though, its a very fine line. And of course there are those very gray areas like 55'ing.I can't even form a solid opinion on 55'ing BECAUSE it can swing either way.

Anyway thats my 2 cents on the matter.

EternalTempest · Sep 11, 2006, 04:32 PM // 16:32

Exploit is something that is anet missed / that needed to be fix.

The axe that would take two of the same base mods (3 total)
Using EoE to kill the winning the HoH team so they could not claim there treasure.
Using EoE to give the other side points in AvA before the timmer counts down.
Being able to do Ascension more then once for repeated 50k Reward.
Being able to xfer items in to pre-searing.

------------------------------------------------------------------------

Now the "Gear" trick was a trick. And was valid / not an exploit. Also those that use the trick have no right to complain when anet removed it. I think the reason they had to change it was Factions was about to come out and they had some issues with a Ritualist holding an item.. from a spell/skill.

ubermancer · Sep 11, 2006, 04:56 PM // 16:56

I cant tell you what an exploit is, but I know it when I see it.

~inter

Samuel Dravis · Sep 11, 2006, 04:59 PM // 16:59

Quote:

Now the "Gear" trick was a trick. And was valid / not an exploit. Also those that use the trick have no right to complain when anet removed it. I think the reason they had to change it was Factions was about to come out and they had some issues with a Ritualist holding an item.. from a spell/skill.

I agree. Getting rid of that trick didn't really touch experienced teams, just the ones with newbies in them who don't know how to handle aggro. I figure Anet only fixed it because of the Rit as well (man it would suck to be a rit if it was still around lol).

Mrscoombes · Sep 11, 2006, 05:10 PM // 17:10

Once someone said the 55HP monk was an exploit, which in my opinion it isn't, more skill than trickery.

lyra_song · Sep 11, 2006, 05:29 PM // 17:29

This is a hard thing.

I mean...gathering ranged aggro then hiding behind a wall. Isnt that an exploit of their AI? They are too dumb to walk around and use direct line of sight .-.

i think...that anything that cannot be countered is an exploit.

55 Monk - Trick (Desecrate enchantments, vamp touch, etc. )

Thunderclap - GLITCH/Exploit (it was basically unplayable vs a E/R with this hex on you)

Gear Tank - Trick (They could still kill the tank if your monks got careless or lagged)

Exhaustion Thing - Exploit

unienaule · Sep 11, 2006, 05:32 PM // 17:32

IMO, it's kind of hard to see if something is a trick or if it's an exploit until some time has passed. For example, apparently the armor absorption on knight's boots was a trick, but then it got nerfed, so it wasn't intended. 55HP monks have been around FOREVER and Anet has shown that they can alter items people have, so it's not an exploit.

Malice Black · Sep 11, 2006, 05:53 PM // 17:53

IMO everything is above board until Anet say otherwise.

The Fox · Sep 11, 2006, 06:13 PM // 18:13

Exploit - something being used for gain that was unintended.

"Trick" - knowledge of game mechanics, which aid the player.

Fair Game - anything possible that doesn't hurt other players (gaming experience).

Example - in the game Sacred I would shoot multipule arrows with a skill and then quickly swap my weapon to a dagger with + % critical chance. and then switch back and fire again after the previous arrows hit for extra damage. Sure this added massive damage that seemed insane BUT it was how the game calculated damage... so why shouldn't I weapon swap??? Is that an exploit or "trick"?

NOTE - if something's a "bug" that is never fixed... doesn't that really make it a feature of the game?

We are just victims of the programers bad code.

Amity and Truth · Sep 11, 2006, 06:13 PM // 18:13

Quote:

Originally Posted by The Admins Bane

IMO everything is above board until Anet say otherwise.

The problem with this is, that someone is in danger of getting banned for using something. One good example would be the Experience Glitch when fighting the Doppelganger. A certain method allowed for the repeated gain of experience points.
This was fixed fast enough (you can look this one up in the update archive somewhere) but did cost a few people their account for exploiting game mechanisms. However IIRC, this was the only publically confirmed ban due to abusing an exploit in the game. Either A-Net stopped doing such widescale bans or they made them less public.

Quote:

Originally Posted by unienaule

IMO, it's kind of hard to see if something is a trick or if it's an exploit until some time has passed.

Hmmm. Interesting point about the subject. I guess if something has been around for long enough of a time it's regarded as simple game mechanism and intended.
On a sidenote, my use of intended ist probably somewhat misleading as i don't really know what is intended by A-net and can only guess. I thought the Armor Absorption was intended the way it was for a long time, but then again i was proven wrong by the update.

The Fox · Sep 11, 2006, 06:29 PM // 18:29

Quote:

Originally Posted by Amity and Truth

On a sidenote, my use of intended ist probably somewhat misleading as i don't really know what is intended by A-net and can only guess. I thought the Armor Absorption was intended the way it was for a long time, but then again i was proven wrong by the update.

One should not be responsible for guessing what A-net intends, when their account is what is at stake.

A-Net changes skills and balances stuff frequently, so their intensions are never certain to be permanate, which means one could never truely "wait" long enough to see if it's an exploit or "trick"... without A-Net actually telling us what their current intensions are. If a skill is not preforming how it's description says then we have "been told" by A-net, and could then conclude that it's a coding error.

Reguardless... I'm sticking to the idea that we are the victims of their mistakes, so until they fix the code error, why should be not use some bugged skill when others will. Why should we force ourselves into a disadvange that was caused by A-net? AND WHY SHOULD THEY BAN PEOPLE FOR IT? Ok, no more posts in this tread by me so I don't dig a bigger whole for myself.

Malice Black · Sep 11, 2006, 06:31 PM // 18:31

Quote:

The problem with this is, that someone is in danger of getting banned for using something. One good example would be the Experience Glitch when fighting the Doppelganger. A certain method allowed for the repeated gain of experience points.
This was fixed fast enough (you can look this one up in the update archive somewhere) but did cost a few people their account for exploiting game mechanisms. However IIRC, this was the only publically confirmed ban due to abusing an exploit in the game. Either A-Net stopped doing such widescale bans or they made them less public.

Interesting...Anet got tough which is their choice i guess but unnecessary they could have just rolled back the xp gained and left it at that.

Amity and Truth · Sep 11, 2006, 06:42 PM // 18:42

Keep in mind, the ban for the experience thing is quite an old story. Without looking it up it's been happening within the very first 1-2 months after releasing the game.
The reason why we don't see more public bans for exploits might just be that they've learned from that situation to not let it happen again. Maybe they didn't possess the rollback ability back then. I remember the first trader reset which also wasn't rolled back.

/edit:
Maybe a thread could help, where people can ask whether something is an exploit and violating their EULA or not. A-net could answer with a short "Intended / Not Intended". That might also help in seeing if they are aware of a flaw or if it somehow bounced of their support system.

Malice Black · Sep 11, 2006, 06:46 PM // 18:46

possibly but they are trying too hard to balance this game that its getting beyond belief.

TheMosesPHD · Sep 11, 2006, 06:46 PM // 18:46

Of the three you listed I'd say the book "trick" was the only sneaky feature that was orginally intended to work the way it did by the designers. If you look at presearing, which has many different quests that train you in different usable features you'll encounter later on, one of the first quests you can get is the quest with the Honeycomb, where you pick up the Honeycomb and the bee swarms aggro onto you and follow you across the bridge. This to me says it was definitely an intended feature, and is why they never nerfed it until the ritualist urns came along which made the script impractical since the ritualist would've always been the focus fire of the enemies.

Shigernafy · Sep 11, 2006, 06:51 PM // 18:51

Just for the sake of the argument Ive decided to post the link to the Merriam Webster definitions of Trick, Exploit, Glitch, and Skill. I have also included the definitions which I deem are relevant to this thread. Maybe it will be helpful to keep this discussion on track.

Trick:
1: a crafty procedure or practice meant to deceive or defraud.
2: a mischievous act (prank).
3: to deceive by cunning or artifice (cheat).

Exploit:
1: to make productive use of : (utilize) <exploiting your talents> <exploit your opponent's weakness>.
2: to make use of meanly or unfairly for one's own advantage <exploiting migrant farm workers>.

Glitch:
1: a usually minor malfunction (bug) <a glitch in a spacecraft's fuel cell>.
2: a minor problem that causes a temporary setback (snag).

Skill:
1: the ability to use one's knowledge effectively and readily in execution or performance.
2: dexterity or coordination especially in the execution of learned physical tasks.
3: a learned power of doing something competently : a developed aptitude or ability <language skills>.

Please forgive me if I forgot something, or made a mistake, and dont hesitate to correct me if Im wrong.

Malice Black · Sep 11, 2006, 06:54 PM // 18:54

i wouldnt put the "gear trick" in any of these because imo it was an intended feature

Amity and Truth · Sep 11, 2006, 07:02 PM // 19:02

Please, don't focus on a single example. They are what they are - mere examples. I tried to choose a wide scale of examples that influenced the game. And the gear trick was one of the more strongly discussed ones when it was hot and fresh. Each one of my examples sparked a discussion back then - and about every argument was also said back then.

The general intention of this topic is to discuss the fine line about how to decide and classify. And while certain specific examples might still spark an interesting discussion - it's slightly off topic. Thank you