Jump to content

“Marketplace Heist” Response


NQ-Naerais

Recommended Posts

On 10/19/2020 at 6:05 PM, Emptiness said:

Except that it wasn't NQ stuff. The markets are owned by Aphelia. Where is it stated that Aphelia is NQ? Aphelia should not be NQ.

This market heist should have had an ingame response, not a Hand of Zod response.

So by stealing from Aphelia you basically stole from God.  What did you expect would happen xD

Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 hours ago, blazemonger said:

Talking to a mirror now are we?

 

I'd say the ones trying to pin this on one party is actually the ones trying to make this all about he players. NQ plays a part in this all because they made a dumb but I woud expect honest mistake of leaving a market RDMS open to the public. They also posted very specific rules about RDMS which in no way exclude anything from it being fine to steal from a public RDMS construct.

 

NQ makes a big effort to spin the events into using an exploit or bug to gain access which his not the case. They also claim these guys went in with intent to cause damage to the database and the market mechanic which is not correct as there is no evidence at all that even remotely would make this viable.

 

I'm not seeing anyone saying these guys need to go free, I do see many saying that NQ not in any way taking even the slightest bit of responsibility here and owning up to it is not good. Punitive action is absolutely in place and justified. A permaban is way over the top. NQ tried to show how tough they can be, in stead they pretty much showed they have no sense of what is a measured reaction and totally lack any form of empathy and understanding of the situation.

 

It is crazy that a NQ dev even needs to touch RDMS to move a market, it is also at best a weakness that removing a market terminal will actually break the database to the point where it's not a matter of pasting a new market object in, renaming it and restoring the link. There is nothing there that NQ can blame these guys for outside of maybe the fact that they cause the problem NQ now has.

 

I actually understand the reaction by NQ but the pendulum on this swung way across into the red on the opposite side form where it came and that is now causing a fallout that is far more damaging than the in game damage and NQ could have prevented that from happening but choose to pretty much close the book and go back to their usual silence.

What you'd say now contradicts your previous post, again I'm disappointed, blaze. There is only one thing to pin on one party and that is the offending players. NQ pasted a new market and a bug reset RDMS, players wilfully broke EULA/TOS and took advantage of that mistake for their own gain. Pin blame for making the mistake of not double checking RDMS glitches after pasting, but that is a normal Human oversight anyone could make. Wilfully taking advantage of that is not a Human oversight it is wilful intent to do things they admit and you already admitted they shouldn't have done. Very specific rules relegated to PLAYERS. Not developers. Again why do you make points and then contradict them later? 

 

These guys exploited an RDMS bug that resets permissions on a moved market. A construct which the game tutorial states is a critical gameplay structure. They did exactly what they were accused of. What intent behind dismantling any part of the market is not intent to ruin the market? Even if the database wasn't harmed the fact remains they did something they shouldn't have.

 

It is not crazy the devs need RDMS for markets. That is how the game is designed. In what world are developer made constructs the same as player made? Developers are not players. Developers using the tools they made to make a market construct does not mean the construct is applicable for targeting like a player construct is. Obviously. Why do you keep flipping your argument on itself? First you say they broke EULA/TOS and deserved punishment but now you are saying there is nothing NQ can blame these players for?

 

YouTubers making biased videos with the narrative that players did nothing wrong, which is a lie, and spreading this garbage argument is what causes any sort of pendulum swinging into the red. What video games allow players to mess with developer made things and not get banned for it? Which? None? At all? So why would this be surprising to anyone with a moral compass and an average IQ? Only the ones who think it is acceptable to do something like this would find it unfair and boycot the game they didn't even know about and if they did wouldn't play for longer than a few weeks anyway because they're most likely not the niche type of player this kind of game appeals to anyway. Regardless of that, do you really want a ton of people who think its acceptable to mess with developer stuff and have no concept of the separation between developer and player to be in the game with you?

 

Nothing NQ could do would appease the ones complaining. They're the type that nothing is ever good enough and they'll demand more. I've seen plenty of people, in this thread even, saying that the players shouldn't only be unbanned, but be apologized to and given free 3 months sub. You could all be making ban appeals and actually probably get their bans reduced but instead you want to fill the forums and discord with ridiculous arguments defending wilfully harmful actions and acting like NQ should take responsibility for players deciding of their own volition to commit an act they themselves knew and admitted they shouldn't have done. NQ takes responsibility for bugs and glitches like RDMS resets when moving markets. The players need to take responsibility for their actions taking advantage of this. Idk how many more times this needs to be repeated. Again, we can argue over the severity of the punishment, but they deserved punishment and everyone arguing is arguing from the standpoint that the punishment wasn't justified because of the lack of severity in the action committed, and the severity in the punishment. This is morally bankrupt.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, DavidDavidson said:

That's a good video. Subbed and liked.

Seems like Scoopy and Uber wanted to have some fun in a beta they paid $120 for. The pls no ban sign is an obvious joke and the fact that uber and scoopy are saying that one guy got permabanned for taking two whole lamps is kind of telling of how little the developers care for "even justice" in their game. 

My opinion is that Uber and Scoopy did nothing wrong, they just wanted to have some fun and leave their mark on a game. The fact that other players have gotten away with griefing by trying to make areas inaccessible or create lag and are still playing shows that this is more to to with the developers having a bruised anu... uhh... ego than anything else as it makes them look silly and they now have to do some work to fix market 15.

As for actions affecting other players, which people keep bringing up, it seems Uber and Scoopy made sure they didn't grief other players, they wanted to leave a small mark on a beta game. Instead the developers have left one giant shitstain. 

After listening to the video... I can't stand Scoopys voice, sounds like the typical kid that goes out and causes trouble and then wonders why he gets in trouble for it.

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, LouHodo said:

After listening to the video... I can't stand Scoopys voice, sounds like the typical kid that goes out and causes trouble and then wonders why he gets in trouble for it.

 

 

So your opinion is based on the fact that you don't like his voice? 

200 IQ here guys. This man can deduce the morals and merit of a person simply by the sound of their voice. No doubt you'll be sought after by police forces around the world to tell them who is guilty and who isn't based on their voice alone, after all who needs evidence or even laws when you can condemn someone for having a voice you don't like. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

27 minutes ago, DavidDavidson said:

So your opinion is based on the fact that you don't like his voice? 

200 IQ here guys. This man can deduce the morals and merit of a person simply by the sound of their voice. No doubt you'll be sought after by police forces around the world to tell them who is guilty and who isn't based on their voice alone, after all who needs evidence or even laws when you can condemn someone for having a voice you don't like. 

There is a lot of other factors into my opinion of him.

 

Inflection on answers.

Tone and way he gave answers almost in a flippant way. Knowing he was breaking EULA and still performed the act he did.  

 

I can say I don't like his voice but I am not judge.  I was just a person who looked for bad guys and put them in bags.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, Ram said:

What you'd say now contradicts your previous post,

It does? I doubt that. While my initial response may have been different and I refined it somewhat, I have been on the same position since.

 

Quote

Nothing NQ could do would appease the ones complaining. They're the type that nothing is ever good enough and they'll demand more. 

 

This is absolutely wrong and just shows you have not even read (or possibly understood) what most here who do feel NQ is wrong are saying. It is in fact people like yourself who keep on trying to portray "the ones complaining" in the way you do, even when you must know that this is not even close to the facts. But this is not new and you and some others have a habit of trying to stick to your prejudice that way, that much is clear. In fact "we" are not the ones complaining, "we" are arguing NQ is overreacting. You are actually the one complaining here while bringing very little, if anything, to the table to actually have a discussion based on valid arguments. You just paint anyone who thinks different as a whiner and complainer.

 

I am not hearing people say that these guys should get off the hook. I'm also not hearing anyone say they made the right choice.

What I am hearing is that NQ overreacted and that their response is really not fair. For me, I feel NQ went out of their way to spin what they had in such a way they felt they could claim using an exploit or a bug, neither is the case here, and they try and portray these guys as malicious exploit abusers who deliberately and knowingly sent out to destroy the market and cause damage to the system because they know NQ would have to put in serious time to restore this situation.

 

The problem here is that NQ does not at any time take ownership of the fact a dev made a dumb mistake, clearly not intentional, by not setting RDMS on the construct after moving it. NQ tries to define what happened as an exploit and/or a bug because a dev made a mistake which frankly is silly and really is not at all a reasonable and fair way of handling this.

 

If NQ had smacked these guys over the head and excluded them from the game for say 4 weeks no one would have had much of an issue and this whole thing would have been over by now. If they turned this into a bit of fun story wise, it would possibly have been a good bit of positive PR, instead it is now pretty much causing damage to the game well beyond what these guys did and that is a shame and could have been prevented. Consequences for these guys are absolutely justified here, what NQ choose to do is well over the top and completely out of whack in relation to what happened.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, LouHodo said:

After listening to the video... I can't stand Scoopys voice, sounds like the typical kid that goes out and causes trouble and then wonders why he gets in trouble for it.

I don't think his tone of voice or how you perceive him as a person is relevant here. 

 

If you'd make the argument that he appears to not have an sense of remorse or implication of understanding what he did was wrong then sure, I think you have a point and it does not help his case. That does not take away from the opinion that NQ treated this way to harsh and underestimated both the fallout and the fairly very thin reasoning they applied which can be fairly easily poked holes in.

 

But yeah, it does appear that at least this Scoopy character seem to not really comprehend that what was done was at best not smart. Virtual just is happy he gets another shot at bringing up his own pet peeve currently even when he has a point which, unfortunately again, falls back to NQ not being great at handling incidents and issues in game by misjudging and poorly communicating one issue which then gives reason, grounds and motivation to someone to turn around and take it out on another player at which time NQ has put themselves against the wall unable to actually act even when the action clearly is pure griefing.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm just going to state this heavy handed action was intended to cover for their mistakes.  No sympathy for the devs in this, stuff like this makes me not want to support them.  God complex, and taking an opposite stance to the RDMS rules, because it was their error and not that of a player.  I should have processed my refund during launch, haven't had time to play, don't think I want to now.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, NordakBalrem said:

I'm just going to state this heavy handed action was intended to cover for their mistakes.  No sympathy for the devs in this, stuff like this makes me not want to support them.  God complex, and taking an opposite stance to the RDMS rules, because it was their error and not that of a player.  I should have processed my refund during launch, haven't had time to play, don't think I want to now.

I've given your post 3 likes and none seem to be taking. Every time I refresh and see that your post has no likes I refresh, go back a page and like. Then a posted the URL back in and again likes don't appear. 

Strange that. Must be a mistake on the developers part. There seems to be a lot of that goring around lately as a bunch of my likes seem to have vanished. 

If it keeps happening I'll just respond with "<quote> +1" I mean I'm sure it's unintentional the developers seem mature and don't seem like the sort to try to engage in garrys incident type damage control measures. Not at all, they're straight arrows. 

Honk honk. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, blazemonger said:

I don't think his tone of voice or how you perceive him as a person is relevant here. 

 

If you'd make the argument that he appears to not have an sense of remorse or implication of understanding what he did was wrong then sure, I think you have a point and it does not help his case. That does not take away from the opinion that NQ treated this way to harsh and underestimated both the fallout and the fairly very thin reasoning they applied which can be fairly easily poked holes in.

 

But yeah, it does appear that at least this Scoopy character seem to not really comprehend that what was done was at best not smart. Virtual just is happy he gets another shot at bringing up his own pet peeve currently even when he has a point which, unfortunately again, falls back to NQ not being great at handling incidents and issues in game by misjudging and poorly communicating one issue which then gives reason, grounds and motivation to someone to turn around and take it out on another player at which time NQ has put themselves against the wall unable to actually act even when the action clearly is pure griefing.

That is a fair assessment.  I can agree with that.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I wont ever be buying this game. It was your own fault. Its ok for players to do it to each other but not allowed to do it to you. Then you directly use them as examples rather then timing them. Reminds me of someone from the 40s, hmm. 

EDIT: let me re word this so you can understand. It was ok for players to exploit each other, but was wrong from players to exploit the market 15. While days prior were seeing others being praised for doing set exploitation. Then when development team made a mistake. Karma caused PLAYERS TO EXPLOIT them in the exact same manner. Devs ruling; GETTEM OUTTTA HERE!
Do you not see the parallels here?
I will be staying away from DU and nova thats for sure. Got enough pain in my life with Kakao Pearl Abyss and CCP, I do not need to suffer more. o7 good luck all fly safe.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 hours ago, DavidDavidson said:

So your opinion is based on the fact that you don't like his voice? 

200 IQ here guys. This man can deduce the morals and merit of a person simply by the sound of their voice. No doubt you'll be sought after by police forces around the world to tell them who is guilty and who isn't based on their voice alone, after all who needs evidence or even laws when you can condemn someone for having a voice you don't like. 

Yeah I agree an astounding amount of pleb/mob in this community. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Anopheles said:

This thread: sound and fury signifying nothing.

 

Let it die.

Wanna be white knights to the rescue. Apparently your wish for censorship doesn't happen here. 

And yes we now all this talk will not lead to something unless NQ makes another mistake and sees a Chance to blame it on the players. Their silence now is out of fear obviously. This is exactly the kind of behavior you see in kids - overreact then try to let it blow over by keeping quiet. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

i understand blabla "20years of mmo we all know blabla"
The thing is, market 15 was public by mistake, they push B and took things because it was public.

There is no bug, or bug to report, or exploit or anything, so NQ just had to shut the server down, fix things, take things back and thats all.
You can't permaban people for pushing B , when the EULA says : "you are responsible for RDMS failure"

I know they shouldnt do that, but they didnt exploit any thing or any bug, they just push B, its ALL NQ fault, and they said "we permaban bug exploit and thief"
There is no bug or exploit here.

i once tried to PM  NQ-staff for a major issue, guess what, doesnt work, and then, for market 15 "they didnt tried to contact us with those 2 months waiting support ticket"

NQ just should hire a CM and GM, not devs with CM/GM masks.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 10/22/2020 at 4:42 PM, GraXXoR said:

So someone using hover engines on an elevator boosting them into space? JC himself said that this was never envisioned and he saw the practice bringing those who did it great profits, since getting to space the "proper way" takes nearly 100x more fuel.

Strictly, by the above definition you gave, they are exploiting the game.

It is an exploit when they say it is. It is okay when they say it is. How is this so hard to understand?

 

They are the ones to define the rules.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, Kra said:

It is an exploit when they say it is. It is okay when they say it is. How is this so hard to understand?

 

They are the ones to define the rules.

No its still an exploit by their own definition. It's tolerated in h i n d s i g h t, they might as well have considered this a bannable offense and then all the white knights and fan boys would be "omg it was so obvious". 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

32 minutes ago, Kra said:

It is an exploit when they say it is. It is okay when they say it is. How is this so hard to understand?

 

They are the ones to define the rules.

exploit bug is something not supposed to happen with standards rules, when you press B on market 15 while u have permission, its not a exploit.
when u hover close to a construct, you hover up, its not an bug,  and when u go to space with that, its still not a bug, its a "not intended mechanic/feature"


"exploit bug" have a definition, they define rules, not the meaning of words.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

51 minutes ago, Charlouf said:

exploit bug is something not supposed to happen with standards rules, when you press B on market 15 while u have permission, its not a exploit.
when u hover close to a construct, you hover up, its not an bug,  and when u go to space with that, its still not a bug, its a "not intended mechanic/feature"


"exploit bug" have a definition, they define rules, not the meaning of words.

Well, lets take a look at said definition. Lets take wikipedia one:
"In video games, an exploit is the use of a bug or glitches, game system, rates, hit boxes, speed or level design etc. by a player to their advantage in a manner not intended by the game's designers."
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Video_game_exploit

First sentence say it all. Applying here: market open to build was not intended by game designers so using b on market was an exploit. 
Congratulation on invalidating your point with your argumentation. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, Elrood said:


First sentence say it all.

You are right, it says it all :

when devs let market RDMS on public,  and players press B on it, it work, nothing not intended on that, RDMS work just fine.

devs mistake are not bug, thats just dev mistakes.

i hope you will understand that one day.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

22 hours ago, Iorail said:

The issue lays in the matter of reporting and leaving it to luck, that be, they either look at the ticket and close the loop or ignore the ticket until it sorts itself out. Because tickets are backed up for months ( I still have a few exploit tickets open since forever), it’s must likely that the only way this bugs and exploits will be close once and for all it’s when stuff like the market heist happens. I lost it when the banning occurred (even tho I agree 100% on the ban) because the only reason this happened was because it made NQ look really bad on Reddit, nothing else. Yet, the same is happening to players but that’s ok.......double standards it’s the nail in the coffin they really don’t need.

 

With that said, I have never supported cheating in any game, and punishment needs to be handle in all cases and not in a select few, regardless if this is a beta, a paid beta or a poorly executed Alpha pretending to be a Beta. At this point it’s all up to us, do we really want to continue to support this dumpster fire and help put it out or do we simply walk away cause the flames got to big, that’s real question.

The RDMS was 100% working as intended tho. They just failed to set it correctly or maybe intentionally set it wrong (you can only judge that in hindsight now if you want to believe NQs proganda). Also there was no advantage, the open market was avaible to everyone. Their own law stated: if you leave something unlocked and its stolen, its 100% your responsibility. its absolutely our intention and the intended game mechanics. there will be no interference by the game designers.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

15 minutes ago, carijay766 said:

The RDMS was 100% working as intended tho. They just failed to set it correctly. Also there was no advantage, the open market was avaible to everyone.

Regardless my point still stand, if it happens to a player is ok, but if it happens to them is a ban, that’s the problem. We are way pass why it happen and well beyond into double standards after the facts. So it’s ok for me to go and take everything from you if you made an RDMS mistake but god forbids I do the same to any NQ structures, see my point here?
When they present a set of half written rules and then 180 on said rules we have bigger issues than all the bugs and exploits that still plagued this game. And just in case, there is still exploits regarding RDMS and TU’s/STU’s that allow me to change permissions even when I’m not allow to, so that’s that. So we are left to wonder what really happened for a ban to occur cause I can’t trust what the players claim vs what NQ is trying to hide.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

26 minutes ago, Charlouf said:

You are right, it says it all :

when devs let market RDMS on public,  and players press B on it, it work, nothing not intended on that, RDMS work just fine.

devs mistake are not bug, thats just dev mistakes.

i hope you will understand that one day.

Check software engineering bug definition. ?Every bug is a developer mistake. I do understand it. You don't know definitions. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
×
×
  • Create New...