Jump to content
NQ-Naerais

“Marketplace Heist” Response

Recommended Posts

4 minutes ago, JohnnyTazer said:

It doesn't matter.  Same amount of people would cancel their sub if they weren't banned.  

lol. They dropped a ban on someone for using an in-game mechanic that was their fck-up. Nobody cares if someone edited market 15 because the devs left it unlocked. Just like nobody (including NQ) would care if you cried because you left your base unlocked.

I'm not going to put more time into this game when arbitrary bans are handed out.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, nottheuberjuice said:

When anyone has ever received a ban for killing NPCs? Sure you might ruin your quest (game mechanics) or nothing would happen if they are not supposed to die.
There is some common sense, but NQ acts like mods of a minecraft servers (aka man children) that ban anyone who touch their precious castles and I am not being sarcastic.

No one that I know of but that's not what you did. I stated my opinion on what I think NQ should do regarding how they handled it, whether they have a hand in the minecraft community is not something I'd care to wager on lol. Some people can get very touchy over their castles I agree.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Dadekster said:

No one that I know of but that's not what you did. I stated my opinion on what I think NQ should do regarding how they handled it, whether they have a hand in the minecraft community is not something I'd care to wager on lol. Some people can get very touchy over their castles I agree.

Something I answered to a journalist that reached out. 
https://techraptor.net/gaming/news/dual-universe-devs-ban-players-for-marketplace-heist

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

@Scoopy “I knew we were gonna get in trouble but we did it anyway and the ban isn’t fair it’s all NQ’s fault”. If you know something is wrong, and you intentionally break it for laughs, you shouldn’t complain when they lay down the law and ban you. You had an expectation of the consequences, and instead of being a responsible community member you exploited it and broke something that’s gonna take some time to bring back online. You’re not getting sympathy from the community dude, they lost out because of your poor judgement.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

@nottheuberjuice  You're saying you honestly didn't know you weren't supposed to be able to edit and remove stuff from the market?  But were you involved with making the sign, asking not to be banned?

 

That kind of seems like at least someone knew you shouldn't be taking the stuff.

 

You also said that the markets were still working when you left.  But were you involved in the decision to post about your exploits on reddit?

 

Because it seems like the subsequent housecleaning that took place, wouldn't have, if the reddit post hadn't been made.

 

I think if anyone who was banned wants to be mad at someone, you should be mad at whoever it was who decided to make a post on reddit, instead of reporting something that they clearly knew might get them banned.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
15 minutes ago, nottheuberjuice said:

Wrong. Leaving rights to do something is what it says. Its not opening the door, its opening the door and giving rights for someone to do what they want within those rights. That open door example is a flawed analogy despite being and easy one to understand.

And you are talking "rules" side of things, me speaking that it shouldn't be possible to be done in game if its not intended on a mechanical level. Players will always bypass rules and look for advantages in games if they are creative and curious, which devs don't seem to appreciate. Banning people for their curiosity to explore your game is barbaric.

Regarding happening in other games: Ark is a pretty terrible example from equally immature developers, if that indeed happened. If it happened in a poorly thrown together game it doesn't mean it is fine to do it if you want, as a developer, to have any kind of good reputation.

Novaquark fucked up for not having good rule book and acted out of emotion, not following any of their own rules that are vague as hell anyway.
If you want to see good example of set rules: look at games like EVE, WoW, Starbase, Star Citizen, etc where they have explicit and very clear sets of rules instead of blanket statements that have been thrown together out of necessity to protect yourself.

"... know a bit more than a fresh noob about the build mode and RDMS in order to even think, "oh hey lets see if build mode works on these dev owned constructs" and then do it"

This is not what happened. Not sure where you took it from. I was at station when me and Scoopy were about to log off for the night. I wanted to modify my ship that was parked at marketplace and accidentally clicked on the floor, which allowed me to enter build mod. 
If you want facts -- ask devs to provide logs that say when was my first login in the game and how long have I played, which they will likely not, at least I wouldn't expect that from lying cowards like NQ.

What is said and what is meant are two different things. Just because the system is called permissions and rights doesn't mean that if I DON'T set restrictions I am inviting everyone to come and mess with my stuff. It means that it becomes physically possible for them to mess with my stuff. Similarly, if I lock my door, barring violent entry, it is not physically possible for you to come in and take my TV. Leaving it unlocked gives you access to do something but it does NOT mean that access is intended, and additionally while it would be OK to take advantage of another player who foolishly didnt set permissions, this obviously does not apply to the developers of the game. None of these analogies are flawed. It is the principles behind them and the violation if the principles being compared, not the specific acts themselves. Its crazy to me how some of you can sit there and argue, "oh its just online, it's just a video game I can do whatever I want cuz it isnt real and nothing from the real world can be extrapolated to what I do in game". I want you to repeat this as a mantra to yourselves when you find out there are consequences and you cannot do whatever you want just because it is a video game online. See if it helps get you unbanned. Yes, criminals also try to bypass laws and take advantages with creativity and curiosity. Does this now nullify the concept of crime and law? This is why rules and punishment for breaking said rules exist, exactly BECAUSE there will always be people trying to get around them. Calling wilful intent to ruin developer owned constructs, "exploration" is a disengenuous load of BS my friend. I also find it funny those of you defending this are acting like you are the arbiters of good will and good reputation in the gaming industry. "Oh man if they rightfully ban me for exploiting a mistake they make their reputation is gonna tank!". In what world do you believe your position is the majority? 

 

So you did understand the fundamentals of the game then? Because knowing how RDMS, build mode and removing/editing constructs works is a fundamental knowledge of those systems. You then took advantage of the open market instead of reporting it and leaving it alone.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
41 minutes ago, nottheuberjuice said:

Something I answered to a journalist that reached out. 
https://techraptor.net/gaming/news/dual-universe-devs-ban-players-for-marketplace-heist

 

I didn't exactly peruse it but I get the gist of it. If you are lucky and NQ thinks it over when they get a hot minute you 'might' get unbanned if they want to play the bigger man and say hey, mistakes all around etc. etc. let's take this as a learning lesson/work with community etc. Might even be a nice PR thing for them, who knows?! Crazier things have happened, but I wouldn't hold my breath over it either.


A piece of advice however, running off at the mouth and insulting the other side will NOT help. That said, I have no clue if you even want to come back and play after this experience. What I do know is that a lot of people learned some stuff about this game though, good or bad is perspective I suppose. Once again, good luck!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, Atmosph3rik said:

@nottheuberjuice  You're saying you honestly didn't know you weren't supposed to be able to edit and remove stuff from the market?  But were you involved with making the sign, asking not to be banned?

 

That kind of seems like at least someone knew you shouldn't be taking the stuff.

 

You also said that the markets were still working when you left.  But were you involved in the decision to post about your exploits on reddit?

 

Because it seems like the subsequent housecleaning that took place, wouldn't have, if the reddit post hadn't been made.

 

I think if anyone who was banned wants to be mad at someone, you should be mad at whoever it was who decided to make a post on reddit, instead of reporting something that they clearly knew might get them banned.

Scoopy put the sign up, because, well, it was funny. Not saying I didn't take anything away from the market but that is beyond the point that I already made some comments ago.
Correction: there was no exploit
What happened cause of reddit wouldn't happen if GMs wouldn't ignore us and other people reporting the issue days in advance. We were playing the game, not sitting waiting around to hear whether something is ok or not. Just not having it as OK, is quite ridiculous.
I put the reddit up, because I didn't think that this community is this toxic and serious about a minecraft in space, which, after everything, is just a video game.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
19 minutes ago, Promulgator said:

lol. They dropped a ban on someone for using an in-game mechanic that was their fck-up. Nobody cares if someone edited market 15 because the devs left it unlocked. Just like nobody (including NQ) would care if you cried because you left your base unlocked.

I'm not going to put more time into this game when arbitrary bans are handed out.

Plenty of people care. Ones with decent moral standing. Thats why offenders were punished. Arbitrary lol. Ingame mechanic lol. Yes completely leave out any contexts to make it seem like they didn't do nuffin.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
18 minutes ago, Ram said:

What is said and what is meant are two different things. Just because the system is called permissions and rights doesn't mean that if I DON'T set restrictions I am inviting everyone to come and mess with my stuff. It means that it becomes physically possible for them to mess with my stuff. Similarly, if I lock my door, barring violent entry, it is not physically possible for you to come in and take my TV. Leaving it unlocked gives you access to do something but it does NOT mean that access is intended, and additionally while it would be OK to take advantage of another player who foolishly didnt set permissions, this obviously does not apply to the developers of the game. None of these analogies are flawed. It is the principles behind them and the violation if the principles being compared, not the specific acts themselves. Its crazy to me how some of you can sit there and argue, "oh its just online, it's just a video game I can do whatever I want cuz it isnt real and nothing from the real world can be extrapolated to what I do in game". I want you to repeat this as a mantra to yourselves when you find out there are consequences and you cannot do whatever you want just because it is a video game online. See if it helps get you unbanned. Yes, criminals also try to bypass laws and take advantages with creativity and curiosity. Does this now nullify the concept of crime and law? This is why rules and punishment for breaking said rules exist, exactly BECAUSE there will always be people trying to get around them. Calling wilful intent to ruin developer owned constructs, "exploration" is a disengenuous load of BS my friend. I also find it funny those of you defending this are acting like you are the arbiters of good will and good reputation in the gaming industry. "Oh man if they rightfully ban me for exploiting a mistake they make their reputation is gonna tank!". In what world do you believe your position is the majority? 

 

So you did understand the fundamentals of the game then? Because knowing how RDMS, build mode and removing/editing constructs works is a fundamental knowledge of those systems. You then took advantage of the open market instead of reporting it and leaving it alone.

Your analogy is entirely flawed. 

What the developers did was akin to leaving their door open with a big sign saying "mi casa, su casa, you can take what you want" permissions aren't locks but permissions to do what you want with the stuff, the developers are clear on this themselves when it comes to friends taking your stuff and running. They have said they will not treat that as an offense as you gave them permission to interact and do what they want with your stuff. Much like how in EvE online some of the biggest losses have been because someone gives roles (permissions) to the wrong person (such as a spy) NQ set their rules out in the same way, however when it's their stuff that they forget to put a "This is my property" sign on they cry and ban because the other players now have their toys. 

Video games =/= real life. However the best way to phrase open permissions for anyone is eating from a buffet in the middle of a public area (with CCTV) with a sign that says "free buffet, help yourself" then the cops are called for theft after you eat some and the owner of the buffet saying "well I never fully filled out the sign there, it should have said;" " gluten free buffet help yourself if you are me, or a close personal friend of mone "

If that were the case you might be detained, but when the CCTV (the logs) show that you followed what the sign said you would be released and more than likely the owner of said buffet would be in trouble for wasting police time. 

 

Also you might want to bare in mind that with your real life analogy there is a judicial system IRL and police who are (or should be) a neutral third party. 

This is more akin to finding said person eating from your signposted free buffet and taking that to mean you can now kidnap them and hold them prisoner indefinitely. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
13 minutes ago, DavidDavidson said:

Your analogy is entirely flawed. 

What the developers did was akin to leaving their door open with a big sign saying "mi casa, su casa, you can take what you want" permissions aren't locks but permissions to do what you want with the stuff, the developers are clear on this themselves when it comes to friends taking your stuff and running. They have said they will not treat that as an offense as you gave them permission to interact and do what they want with your stuff. Much like how in EvE online some of the biggest losses have been because someone gives roles (permissions) to the wrong person (such as a spy) NQ set their rules out in the same way, however when it's their stuff that they forget to put a "This is my property" sign on they cry and ban because the other players now have their toys. 

Video games =/= real life. However the best way to phrase open permissions for anyone is eating from a buffet in the middle of a public area (with CCTV) with a sign that says "free buffet, help yourself" then the cops are called for theft after you eat some and the owner of the buffet saying "well I never fully filled out the sign there, it should have said;" " gluten free buffet help yourself if you are me, or a close personal friend of mone "

If that were the case you might be detained, but when the CCTV (the logs) show that you followed what the sign said you would be released and more than likely the owner of said buffet would be in trouble for wasting police time. 

No, you want to pretend there was a sign saying you could do anything you wanted, because you had the physical access to. Again, there is a difference between accidentally giving physical access, and intending physical access to be granted. Accidentally not setting permissions is NOT an intention for you to freely mess with things. This mental gymnastics is WHY you were banned.

 

Additionally, it is common sense to anyone with morals that the developers and owners of the game are exempt from rules pertaining to PLAYERS of the game. We are not devs, or owners. We are players. Rules for players to not apply to developers. You think it should because you think that is fair. This is not about fulfilling your personal sense of fairness. Life is not fair.

 

Video games do not need to = real life for actions to have consequences. Principles exist across everything. Violating these principles is generally unacceptable unless specifically stated otherwise. 

 

Your analogy is flawed. You can fix it by accurately stating the intent of the buffet. What you did was actually akin to walking thru the open back door to a buffet, and started eating whatever you wanted, because it is a buffet, without acknowledging that the buffet hasn't opened and no one should be in there eating until X time of the day when it is open, as that is the intent. The intent here was not to allow anyone to access the buffet without permission. The intent here was not to allow anyone to access the market without permission. But someone forgot and left the back door to the kitchens open so you guys thought you'd walk in and eat. But someone forgot and left the permissions open to the market so you guys thought you'd start taking whatever. No one intended for you to eat at the buffet without permissions, despite it being a buffet and that meaning people eat at them. No one intended for you to access the market without restrictions, despite it being a market and that meaning people access them for trading. Accidentally making a mistake is never an invitation for you to take advantage of that mistake. You can still take advantage though. Being able to do things and the intent for you to be able to do them are separate.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
14 minutes ago, nottheuberjuice said:

What happened cause of reddit wouldn't happen if GMs wouldn't ignore us and other people reporting the issue days in advance. We were playing the game, not sitting waiting around to hear whether something is ok or not. Just not having it as OK, is quite ridiculous.

 

What were you waiting for?  Once you filed the report you should have just walked away.  Did you think NQ was going to contact you and say 'Hey go for it, help yourself, the markets all yours!" 

 

You file a bug report because you found something wrong in the game.  It's a report, not a customer service ticket.  They don't respond to them.

 

If you filed a report then you knew something was broken.  It doesn't matter how long it takes for NQ to come around and fix it.  there's no amount of time that suddenly justifies you doing whatever you want.

 

I also don't understand why you keep mentioning Minecraft in space, like that's a bad thing.  Minecraft is insanely successful, and also, that's exactly what this is.

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
14 minutes ago, Atmosph3rik said:

I also don't understand why you keep mentioning Minecraft in space, like that's a bad thing.  Minecraft is insanely successful, and also, that's exactly what this is.

 

 

Sorry I do not address the other points since they were addressed, but I never meant that Minecraft in space is a "bad" thing, which is the game I chose to back some years ago and was inspired by it. 

But the game developers acting like some moderators on a maincraft servers that do what they want and who don't own their actions and mistakes is a "bad" thing. Putting a blame on their customer instead of learning and ending everything on a positive note without causing the toxicity in the community we see now is a bad thing.

Because no matter what arguments were passed from each side, valid or invalid, it doesn't change the fact that the whole thing blew up and community got split because of their response. And it is their fuck up, too, that everyone discusses this now and they won't make any statement on the matter to try to smooth things out for any of the sides, thus why I called them cowards earlier, too, and I believe rightfully so, since they just vanished into the abyss and left everything to discord moderation.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
33 minutes ago, Ram said:

No, you want to pretend there was a sign saying you could do anything you wanted, because you had the physical access to. Again, there is a difference between accidentally giving physical access, and intending physical access to be granted. Accidentally not setting permissions is NOT an intention for you to freely mess with things. This mental gymnastics is WHY you were banned.

 

Additionally, it is common sense to anyone with morals that the developers and owners of the game are exempt from rules pertaining to PLAYERS of the game. We are not devs, or owners. We are players. Rules for players to not apply to developers. You think it should because you think that is fair. This is not about fulfilling your personal sense of fairness. Life is not fair.

 

Video games do not need to = real life for actions to have consequences. Principles exist across everything. Violating these principles is generally unacceptable unless specifically stated otherwise. 

 

Your analogy is flawed. You can fix it by accurately stating the intent of the buffet. What you did was actually akin to walking thru the open back door to a buffet, and started eating whatever you wanted, because it is a buffet, without acknowledging that the buffet hasn't opened and no one should be in there eating until X time of the day when it is open, as that is the intent. The intent here was not to allow anyone to access the buffet without permission. The intent here was not to allow anyone to access the market without permission. But someone forgot and left the back door to the kitchens open so you guys thought you'd walk in and eat. But someone forgot and left the permissions open to the market so you guys thought you'd start taking whatever. No one intended for you to eat at the buffet without permissions, despite it being a buffet and that meaning people eat at them. No one intended for you to access the market without restrictions, despite it being a market and that meaning people access them for trading. Accidentally making a mistake is never an invitation for you to take advantage of that mistake. You can still take advantage though. Being able to do things and the intent for you to be able to do them are separate.

Again you are wrong. You cannot seem to comprehend that real life and video games are not the same thing. This actually worries me. 

 

They the developers should be held to a higher standard than players, so when they drop the ball and screw up they should brush it off and act like adults. They didn't. In fact:

As for it being against the EULA, which is the claim of NQ. Let me quote the EULA for you:

"We can not get involved with permission based theft, whether as an individual or an organization."

 

It seems that they, as an organization have gotten involved. They have violated their own EULA  while quoting their EULA as reason to ban.  

That is the textbook definition of trying to throw a mods=gods hissyfit and you are enabling them. 

 

 

As for your final paragraph, you are either distorting facts intentionally or are too much of a smoothbrain to understand what you are saying. Your analogy once again does not fit. Instead it would be like placing a sign on or beside the back door saying "this door is open, feel free to come in and see the buffet inside" with the "free buffet" sitting just inside the back door. 

 

To sum up. The developers have it in their EULA themselves that permission based theft is fine. This is like a developer alt getting scammed then banning the person who scammed them because they wield the banhammer. Childish and liable to get them bad press (which they are now getting in spades). They should have said "oh, well its a beta, we screwed up, we will amend the EULA, fix the problem, thank the people for paying to beta test our game (not sure how old you are but when I grew up you got paid to beta test, in cash or a free product or at least got to play for free for the beta duration) and start fixing things from there. That would have been an adult move to make. 

 

However they didn't do that. 

 

 

Also on the fact that the game is filled with beta testers you don't seem to understand that the job of beta testers is to find out things like this. We have real life beta testers for both cyber and real life security. They are called penetration testers. They are literally paid to break into buildings, steal employee data, engage in corporate espionage by the corporation they are stealing from, on the grounds that they (obviously) give what they take back. They are paid generously for their work, they don't get fired for exposing a flaw, unless their employer knows about it and wants to ignore it. 

Novaquirk have been ignoring permission issues for quite some time, so I see this as ingame pen testing by beta testers, kind of like the difference between an IRL pen tester breaking into Joe the Janitor's office, helping himself to Joe's lunch and sitting in his seat, but instead breaking into the CEO's office, using the exact same method and sitting at their desk sipping a glass of $20,000 per bottle wine. 

I would liken it to (but not compare it directly to) fallout 76 and the developer room. I liken it to that as players found a problem. Only difference is they hacked their way into that dev room. It wasn't like the developer room was sitting around for all to see. I'm sure you know the amount of shit Bethesda got for their reaction to the dev room saga and that was legitimate hacking into a room that should have been removed. This is a group of players discovering that an area wasn't under the right protections and under the game rules and EULA they proceeded to help themselves. 

Nowhere in the EULA does it say "developers should be immune to all player acts" so your analogy is wrong and the EULA backs what I'm saying. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, nottheuberjuice said:

How do a new player know it was a criitcal structure to the game? Please point me out where the game tells you that. Thanks.

From the tutorial with Aphelia, where she explains basic functionalities of the game, and each place purpose.

 

oC3NkNU.jpg

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, Ater Omen said:

From the tutorial with Aphelia, where she explains basic functionalities of the game, and each place purpose.

 

oC3NkNU.jpg

 

I think only first screenshot touches on markets being essential, but good collage, thanks for taking your time to make it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I heard a rumor about how people can set any construct to public.

 

Basically, either have a laggy connection or be really fast, approach a random construct, and before the client loads the rights, r-click the construct and share it with all.

 

Any truth to this?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
15 minutes ago, DavidDavidson said:

Again you are wrong. You cannot seem to comprehend that real life and video games are not the same thing. This actually worries me. 

 

They the developers should be held to a higher standard than players, so when they drop the ball and screw up they should brush it off and act like adults. They didn't. In fact:

As for it being against the EULA, which is the claim of NQ. Let me quote the EULA for you:

"We can not get involved with permission based theft, whether as an individual or an organization."

 

It seems that they, as an organization have gotten involved. They have violated their own EULA  while quoting their EULA as reason to ban.  

That is the textbook definition of trying to throw a mods=gods hissyfit and you are enabling them. 

 

 

As for your final paragraph, you are either distorting facts intentionally or are too much of a smoothbrain to understand what you are saying. Your analogy once again does not fit. Instead it would be like placing a sign on or beside the back door saying "this door is open, feel free to come in and see the buffet inside" with the "free buffet" sitting just inside the back door. 

 

To sum up. The developers have it in their EULA themselves that permission based theft is fine. This is like a developer alt getting scammed then banning the person who scammed them because they wield the banhammer. Childish and liable to get them bad press (which they are now getting in spades). They should have said "oh, well its a beta, we screwed up, we will amend the EULA, fix the problem, thank the people for paying to beta test our game (not sure how old you are but when I grew up you got paid to beta test, in cash or a free product or at least got to play for free for the beta duration) and start fixing things from there. That would have been an adult move to make. 

 

However they didn't do that. 

 

 

Also on the fact that the game is filled with beta testers you don't seem to understand that the job of beta testers is to find out things like this. We have real life beta testers for both cyber and real life security. They are called penetration testers. They are literally paid to break into buildings, steal employee data, engage in corporate espionage by the corporation they are stealing from, on the grounds that they (obviously) give what they take back. They are paid generously for their work, they don't get fired for exposing a flaw, unless their employer knows about it and wants to ignore it. 

Novaquirk have been ignoring permission issues for quite some time, so I see this as ingame pen testing by beta testers, kind of like the difference between an IRL pen tester breaking into Joe the Janitor's office, helping himself to Joe's lunch and sitting in his seat, but instead breaking into the CEO's office, using the exact same method and sitting at their desk sipping a glass of $20,000 per bottle wine. 

I would liken it to (but not compare it directly to) fallout 76 and the developer room. I liken it to that as players found a problem. Only difference is they hacked their way into that dev room. It wasn't like the developer room was sitting around for all to see. I'm sure you know the amount of shit Bethesda got for their reaction to the dev room saga and that was legitimate hacking into a room that should have been removed. This is a group of players discovering that an area wasn't under the right protections and under the game rules and EULA they proceeded to help themselves. 

Nowhere in the EULA does it say "developers should be immune to all player acts" so your analogy is wrong and the EULA backs what I'm saying. 

If I am the one who cannot seem to comprehend that real life and video games are not the same thing why do you keep referencing reality in relation to this event? This point is irrelevant. It is irrelevant that video games are not real life. That isn't the point at all, and video games not being real life does not give you permission to do what you want, like you want to pretend it does.

 

If the devs should brush it off and act like adults, why shouldn't you or Scoopy? Absolutely nothing you did or have done was mature. Yes, let's see you quote and then misinterpret the EULA, like you misinterpret RDMS.

 

"We can not get involved with permission based theft, whether as an individual or an organization". This doesn't mean what you think it does. This means, whether RDMS theft involves a single individual or an entire IN-GAME organization, we cannot get involved. This does not mean, "individuals nor NQ as a company cannot get involved" Or they would have said, company. Organization is the specific word used in this game to refer to an Org, a group of players who make an Org through the org system. NOT NQ as a company "organization". So, no, they did not violate their own EULA. This quote is saying that if players use RDMS theft against other players, NQ cannot (doesn't want to) get involved. However, this is NOT the case. Players used RDMS theft against NQ themselves, who are not players, but developers. How you twist these things to defend yourself is beyond me but you guys get a gold medal in mental gymnastics here.

 

My analogy does fit. There is NO SIGN giving permissions to do anything you want. You pressing the Build mode key and finding that permissions were not set IS NOT the same thing as purposefully not setting permissions to purposefully allow you to do anything you want. They just are not the same thing, whatsoever. What is the same thing, is you accidentally finding out the permissions weren't set, and someone accidentally finding a door wasn't locked, then taking advantage of that. You keep twisting and twisting reality as if it helps your case at all.

 

The developers have it in the EULA themselves that permission based theft AGAINST OTHER PLAYERS, individuals or an organization, is fine. YOU make assumptions that are wrong and get punished for it. This is nothing like an alt getting scammed then banning you. This is a straight up, developer owned and made construct. Not a dev's alt. It isn't childish, your continued mental gymnastic defense of your reprehensible actions is. There is little to no bad press around this, most people agree you got what you deserved, and none of you are arbiters of reputation for video games. They should not have said that, because while they made a mistake, they did not make the mistake. You did. Intentionally ruining developer owned constructs is not beta testing. There are proper ways to do things and you did nothing properly here. You should have, as everyone has told you, simply reported it and moved on with your day. They do not need to thank people paying to beta test, people get their thanks for payment by being given access to the game. However, they do thank their testers and supporters. Cowtowing to digital criminals is not an adult move to make.

 

The job of beta testers is to REPORT things like this they find out, not continue to dismantle whatever they wanted. We are not penetration testers. I figured one of your arguments might be referring to yourselves and what you did in the same light as a paid penetration tester. These people are being paid to find faults, exploit them, and then give all necessary data on how it was done to the person that hired them. WE are paying to find faults, NOT exploit them, and then report the faults and move on. This is not comparable. I do not care about F76, nor the players of the game. It shouldn't have even been made IMO.

 

Nowhere in the EULA does it say, "developers are players therefore rules designed for players also apply to developers." Because devs are not players. That is your indication that whatever rules are made for players, they do not affect anyone who isn't a player, i.e. a developer. My analogy is spot-on and the EULA you are misinterpreting to fit your own narrative.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Ram said:

If I am the one who cannot seem to comprehend that real life and video games are not the same thing why do you keep referencing reality in relation to this event? This point is irrelevant. It is irrelevant that video games are not real life. That isn't the point at all, and video games not being real life does not give you permission to do what you want, like you want to pretend it does.

 

If the devs should brush it off and act like adults, why shouldn't you or Scoopy? Absolutely nothing you did or have done was mature. Yes, let's see you quote and then misinterpret the EULA, like you misinterpret RDMS.

 

"We can not get involved with permission based theft, whether as an individual or an organization". This doesn't mean what you think it does. This means, whether RDMS theft involves a single individual or an entire IN-GAME organization, we cannot get involved. This does not mean, "individuals nor NQ as a company cannot get involved" Or they would have said, company. Organization is the specific word used in this game to refer to an Org, a group of players who make an Org through the org system. NOT NQ as a company "organization". So, no, they did not violate their own EULA. This quote is saying that if players use RDMS theft against other players, NQ cannot (doesn't want to) get involved. However, this is NOT the case. Players used RDMS theft against NQ themselves, who are not players, but developers. How you twist these things to defend yourself is beyond me but you guys get a gold medal in mental gymnastics here.

 

My analogy does fit. There is NO SIGN giving permissions to do anything you want. You pressing the Build mode key and finding that permissions were not set IS NOT the same thing as purposefully not setting permissions to purposefully allow you to do anything you want. They just are not the same thing, whatsoever. What is the same thing, is you accidentally finding out the permissions weren't set, and someone accidentally finding a door wasn't locked, then taking advantage of that. You keep twisting and twisting reality as if it helps your case at all.

 

The developers have it in the EULA themselves that permission based theft AGAINST OTHER PLAYERS, individuals or an organization, is fine. YOU make assumptions that are wrong and get punished for it. This is nothing like an alt getting scammed then banning you. This is a straight up, developer owned and made construct. Not a dev's alt. It isn't childish, your continued mental gymnastic defense of your reprehensible actions is. There is little to no bad press around this, most people agree you got what you deserved, and none of you are arbiters of reputation for video games. They should not have said that, because while they made a mistake, they did not make the mistake. You did. Intentionally ruining developer owned constructs is not beta testing. There are proper ways to do things and you did nothing properly here. You should have, as everyone has told you, simply reported it and moved on with your day. They do not need to thank people paying to beta test, people get their thanks for payment by being given access to the game. However, they do thank their testers and supporters. Cowtowing to digital criminals is not an adult move to make.

 

The job of beta testers is to REPORT things like this they find out, not continue to dismantle whatever they wanted. We are not penetration testers. I figured one of your arguments might be referring to yourselves and what you did in the same light as a paid penetration tester. These people are being paid to find faults, exploit them, and then give all necessary data on how it was done to the person that hired them. WE are paying to find faults, NOT exploit them, and then report the faults and move on. This is not comparable. I do not care about F76, nor the players of the game. It shouldn't have even been made IMO.

 

Nowhere in the EULA does it say, "developers are players therefore rules designed for players also apply to developers." Because devs are not players. That is your indication that whatever rules are made for players, they do not affect anyone who isn't a player, i.e. a developer. My analogy is spot-on and the EULA you are misinterpreting to fit your own narrative.

You're the one who started using RL analogies talking about barring your door, et cetera. I felt you might be able to connect with those or understand them, so I used them. Reading through your post you seem to have me confused with someone else. You should read the username of the person you quote before posting. It's usually a good idea. 

 

Why should I ¿brush it off? I literally have nothing to do with scoopy other than agreeing that the reason he was banned is spurious and based off of butthurt rather than rules or the EULA. I've kept up a bit of a dialog with uber as he seems like a decent guy caught up in something he didn't deserve. 

 

As for the EULA, you are twisting it a EULA is an agreement between players and the [/b] developers[/b] not a set of rules for all players to abide by but a license agreement. Find something in the EULA that says that players can be banned when a developer fucks up. The OP reads like a straight up whine from the developers with the "this isn't a quick fix" line being the icing on the cake. That reads, to me as "thanks to what you did we needed to fix things rather than keep collecting your money every 3 months" 

As for it being a "developer owned construct" maybe the developers should have put in some code so that these developer owned constructs can never be tampered with by players. How's that for an amazing idea, its almost like what the developers should have learned from this, rather than getting their game negative publicity on multiple sites for childish behavior. 

 

As for the "no sign" the sign is that you can interact with the item. That is the sign. It doesn't have to be a giant neon billboard. 

 

"There is no bad press surrounding this" sure there isn't. A video from a popular YouTuber with nearly 100k subs is no bad press. Keep living in your own little world. You also keep referring to me as someone who took part in this, one of the 4 players it would seem. I'll state again, I am a third party. 

 

You're saying that people do not need thanked to beta test then are saying that beta testing is a job in the very next paragraph. Have you ever had a job? A job isn't paying someone to use their unfinished product. 

 

As for beta testers and pen testers, they are one and the same. This flaw was known about for a long time before this incident made the developers have to do something. In fact (from what I've heard) this was reported in discord DM to a GM before they decided the developers didn't care and as such they showed what happens when you snooze; you lose. 

 

Finally (thank god) just because it doesn't say something in a EULA doesn't mean the developers can do what they want then cite said EULA for the reason they dished out bans. That just further weakens their position. An EULA is like a set of demi-laws or rules and as such it must be throrugh. You don't just get arrested for "you were breaking a law that isn't a law yet but you made me work so you're goin to jail buddy". 

 

Now I'll be going to bed, I've had enough of your tirades and verbal valium to practically put me into winter hibernation. One last thing though, why do you keep saying "mental gymnastics" you've said it at least once per post. It is extremely repetitious. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well, that post of mine was in poor taste. I'll admit to that.

 

Anyway, the zeal of the fanboys will keep them blind to any reason. There is literally no reason to try and discuss anything with them, even when facts and logic is presented. They will just go and toss out their esotheric beliefs at us till we drown. It's what they do best. At this point, I'm giving them till my 3m subscription ends before I just hang it up and ditch this dumpster fire.

If they don't clean up their act, they can be sure that I'll be making the rounds warning everyone how this game that had alot of promise, decided to go full retard on the player base.
Even if I don't, at this rate, the game will die out. I'll at least save other players some money and grief.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.

×
×
  • Create New...