FFXIV Devs: Please STOP punishing normal players for others breaking the rules.

[ForteNightshade]

Was said program made by SE? No.

Was said program actively changing data in the game? Yes. (Though only changing waymark positional data. Nothing too serious)

Guess what? That means it's cheating under ToS' guidelines. Which also means using it makes you liable for a ban. Don't like that? Don't use it.

Being against the ToS and cheating are two different things. No one has ever denied it being against the ToS. It's the silly notion moving markers through saved presets constitutes cheating in the same way say, other programs that call out every mechanic or revealing AoE indicating.

Put another way. Mods are against the ToS and are just as liable to get you banned; as is ACT. Neither are cheating. They're simply against the rules.

That's the issue. Unless it is a feature provided by the game, automating game play via third party tool has never been allowed as far as I can tell.

People should have put in a concerted effort to request for this feature rather than going the route of third party tool.

People did. The dev team is notoriously slow about adding features likes this. We still can't glamour outside city states.

This tool also did not automate gameplay, it moved markers based on pre-saves—somethings players did themselves during downtime. It's literally the same thing that's being added in 5.2 except you could do it during combat. The whole automation came from another program that piggybacked off this one and actually did place markers based on what mechanics were going out. The infamous "Trine markings" for Perfect is an example of the latter. And it's likely what caused SE to act.

[Kenky]

Being against the ToS and cheating are two different things. No one has ever denied it being against the ToS. It's the silly notion moving markers through saved presets constitutes cheating in the same way say, other programs that call out every mechanic or revealing AoE indicating.

Put another way. Mods are against the ToS and are just as liable to get you banned; as is ACT. Neither are cheating. They're simply against the rules.

Sorry, but when a computer decides to hold your hand because you can't compete to a degree you're expected to, then it is indeed cheating. To say it's not is like saying athletes who dope up are legit. (Both seen as artificially granting advantage without really earning said advantage).

The fact that ACT is against ToS gives SE every right to punish people that use it (And they now are, funny that!). The difference between ACT and Mods (in some fashion at least) is that ACT takes information from the game and relays it to a 3rd party. The same way that a 3rd party program could (in theory) inject code to rig outcomes. See the issue?

Some mods, while still being against ToS, don't meddle with the coding of the game outside of client-side visuals. That don't affect the server. It's still punishable and plenty of people that have tried to cry victim for being banned because they got caught showing it off don't really have a right to complain.

If you know what you're doing is punishable, yet continue to do it. Why do you get to voice an opinion? You know you're guilty and you're found guilty, so why should you be given time to lie and claim innocence?

[SaberMaxwell]

Sorry, but when a computer decides to hold your hand because you can't compete to a degree you're expected to, then it is indeed cheating. To say it's not is like saying athletes who dope up are legit. (Both seen as artificially granting advantage without really earning said advantage).

I don't disagree with this statement at all. I don't think it negates what Forte was saying in the way you think it does though; Forte's statement was that there are degrees of cheating, and having marker presets is not on the same level of cheating as having the machine actively showing invisible AoEs. I think the former should be a feature, and SE came so close to implementing it and outright killing the tool, but my group never used it and instead our SCH did it manually through the fight as needed. I think the latter is an outright betrayal of the spirit of the mechanics.

The fact that ACT is against ToS gives SE every right to punish people that use it (And they now are, funny that!).

Except they're not. Their stance literally has not changed on ACT: use it if you want but don't advertise that you're using it. This is the general playerbase being punished because a subset of a subset decided to push the envelope and all of us losing a valuable feature.

The difference between ACT and Mods (in some fashion at least) is that ACT takes information from the game and relays it to a 3rd party. The same way that a 3rd party program could (in theory) inject code to rig outcomes. See the issue?

Some mods, while still being against ToS, don't meddle with the coding of the game outside of client-side visuals. That don't affect the server. It's still punishable and plenty of people that have tried to cry victim for being banned because they got caught showing it off don't really have a right to complain.

All the more reason for SE to implement a first party solution and stop letting the third parties do as they will. What happened with Paisley is an inevitability of relying on your playerbase to supplement desired features in the game.

That said, again, they haven't changed their stance on ACT. It's in the exact same grayzone that mods are in: don't ask, don't tell.

[Kenky]

Forte's statement was that there are degrees of cheating

Except they're not. Their stance literally has not changed on ACT: use it if you want but don't advertise that you're using it.

Cheating is still cheating. Doesn't matter if you just poked the bear versus hitting it with a cinderblock, you still did it and are liable for punishment. I doubt the bear is going to let you off because you poked it. Similarly I doubt any company is going to let you walk away unscathed if you intentionally break their ruleset (that you agree to) to further your own personal agenda of using virtual numbers to ruin someone's day.

And they indeed are punishing people. Not for using ACT naturally, but by using what ACT tracks as justifiable reason to attack other people. They never wanted people to be subject to harassment because they don't play optimally and that is the main reason as to why they'll never add a SE-Published ACT. It says a lot when this sort of behavior runs rampant over here, yet every other game (that I know runs ACT) isn't as toxic or spiteful. For a game that tries to prosper a "friendly" community, we sure do trip at certain hurdles, don't we?

FFXIV is a game, first and foremost. Not everyone plays them at the same rate and nobody has been given the right to tell other people how to do things, least of all a minority that decides cheating for a hollow victory matters more than actually achieving the victory by their own means.

And lastly, no. Their stance hasn't changed with ACTs. They've just started to actively voice that they're going after people who are caught using it and it's somewhat really easy to find out who is and who isn't. Friendly conversation in party chat suddenly turning to hatespewing is a good indication.

[QT_Melon]

And lastly, no. Their stance hasn't changed with ACTs. They've just started to actively voice that they're going after people who are caught using it and it's somewhat really easy to find out who is and who isn't. Friendly conversation in party chat suddenly turning to hatespewing is a good indication.

Huh? NO.

ACT is a read only parser. They're going after MODS or tools that inject Client Data.

http://forum.square-enix.com/ffxiv/t...282-14-2020%29

Regarding Mods and Third Party Tools

(00:12:42)

Near the end of last year, inappropriate screenshots that were created using mods and the usage of third-party tools in endgame content became a hot topic, so we went over these topics to provide our stance as the development and operations teams.

Before the matter of whether mods are allowed or not, posting inappropriate screenshots using mods violates simple public decency, so please don't do it. Not only will you face risks such as account suspension, you may even face penalties in real life.

In addition to this issue of decency, we are aware that there has been constant debate over whether mods are allowed or not. “Mods” refer to the addition of graphics and maps that do not exist in the game, or data that alters the game’s programming. Installing and playing with these is a violation of the FFXIV Terms of Service. As such, our answer to “Are mods allowed?” would be “It’s prohibited by the Terms of Service.”

In some cases, there have been games where mods improved their gameplay value and led to growth in their community activity, and the developers officially endorsed the mod. Situations like these where the players, community, development and operations teams respected each other brought about this “mod culture,” which we believe isn’t something that should be broadly categorized into “good” or “bad.”

Next we’ll move onto third-party tools. As a premise, the use of third-party tools is also prohibited by the FFXIV Terms of Service. As such, like mods, if we were asked whether using third-party tools is allowed, our answer would be “Please don’t use them.” However, what would be considered a “tool” will vary for each person, making it extremely difficult to draw a line. The developers also do not have the right to confirm what kinds of applications are installed on your computer or smartphones, and do not have the right to ask you to refrain from using certain applications.

Suppose we were asked “Are we allowed to use FFXIV and voice chat programs at the same time?” Voice chat doesn’t directly interact with FFXIV’s data, and whether it should be considered a third-party tool is ambiguous, so it’d be difficult to provide a definitive answer. Even ACT, which calculates damage values based on the battle log displayed in-game, is difficult to determine as a tool or not and would be considered a grey area.

With that ambiguity in mind, the development and operations teams have taken the stance of “Please don’t use third party tools.” This is because using third-party tools puts that player’s account at risk.

We understand some of you would like us to clearly define what’s allowed, or simply prohibit all tools. However, it is impossible to individually verify an infinite number of applications and software, and we cannot determine what would be considered “all tools” due to the ambiguity of what constitutes the definition of a “tool” in the first place.

However, calculating another player’s DPS and posting that information online to shame them is clearly harassment and warrants a penalty. That would be an issue even before we consider whether using tools is allowed or not. Additionally, we often receive requests for an official damage calculation tool, but we would never implement one. The reason for this is because it may become the root of many disputes within the community.

Finally, we’d like to explain our policy on plugins, such as those for ACT. In the category of plugins, there are some malicious ones that negatively disrupt game balance or fraudulently manipulate memory. Some examples include the plugin that automatically placed waymarks that was widely talked about in the community, and the plugin that placed self-made graphics on invisible AoEs to make them appear to be visible. Keep in mind that these have an extremely high risk of resulting in a penalty. The development and operations teams have been working on the system side to prevent these types of malicious plugins.

Tools, reporting wars, penalties... these wouldn’t be relevant to you if you were enjoying the game normally. We’d like for players to enjoy the game itself, and we also would like to enjoy working together with our players as we develop the game.

Additional Waymarks and New Save/Load Feature

(00:40:02)

As a result of our countermeasure against the plugin mentioned above, as of Patch 5.2 you will no longer be able to place waymarks once a battle has commenced. However, implementing only this would cause a loss of functionality for many players for what a small group of plugin users did. To counteract it, we increased the number of waymarks to eight to lessen the need for re-placing the waymarks during each phase. We will also be adding new features that can save and restore waymark positions per content. This means you’ll be able to save and replicate the position of waymarks that were placed by other players as well. We showed this off in the gameplay as well, so be sure to check it out.

[AngelCheese77]

Huh? NO.

ACT is a read only parser. They're going after MODS or tools that inject Client Data.

http://forum.square-enix.com/ffxiv/t...282-14-2020%29

So I read what you quoted, and there can be confusion on how they describe their stance on ACT.

By the bolded statements, SE sees ACT as as a tool, but also a plug-in. Both of which are against the ToS, but are also undetectable unless SE puts in some sort of program with FF14 that reads what programs are in our computers.

Now, you would think "Well, if SE says it's against the ToS, then isn't it?" Apparently not, since they also consider it in a grey area.

Overall, from watching the stream live, and reading the translation, SE is more concerned about the "cheating" part of tools/plug-ins (the waypoints, the mods that change maps or gear looks) as well as the toxicity it can cause if used in a negative way. They are relying on people to be kind to each other and play by the rules, but sadly, as many of us know .... that doesn't always work and there is always someone who will ignore it and do what they want.

Honestly, SE is just making it more difficult on themselves and the playerbase. Do we report those people? But SE said it is a grey area ... but it's also against their ToS ... but they asked us to not use third party tools ... they should make something to know if someone is using them ... but that causes issues with privacy and computer issues ....

See the problem? SE needs to take a stance on this. Not grey ... a straight up is it good or bad. That would stop the confusion we have right now.

[QT_Melon]

So I read what you quoted, and there can be confusion on how they describe their stance on ACT.

By the bolded statements, SE sees ACT as as a tool, but also a plug-in. Both of which are against the ToS, but are also undetectable unless SE puts in some sort of program with FF14 that reads what programs are in our computers.

Now, you would think "Well, if SE says it's against the ToS, then isn't it?" Apparently not, since they also consider it in a grey area.

Overall, from watching the stream live, and reading the translation, SE is more concerned about the "cheating" part of tools/plug-ins (the waypoints, the mods that change maps or gear looks) as well as the toxicity it can cause if used in a negative way. They are relying on people to be kind to each other and play by the rules, but sadly, as many of us know .... that doesn't always work and there is always someone who will ignore it and do what they want.

Honestly, SE is just making it more difficult on themselves and the playerbase. Do we report those people? But SE said it is a grey area ... but it's also against their ToS ... but they asked us to not use third party tools ... they should make something to know if someone is using them ... but that causes issues with privacy and computer issues ....

See the problem? SE needs to take a stance on this. Not grey ... a straight up is it good or bad. That would stop the confusion we have right now.

Bolding the part I'm taking issue with.

Basically it's not Base ACT.

They're specifically referring to a PLUG IN. Basically they're EXTRAS you add on to the tool.

The waymark is a PLUG IN
The AOES are PLUG INs

ACT itself is only a reader. That's WHY I bolded the PLUGIN parts

But the rest of your statement is agreeing with much of what I'm saying. I just think what you're saying in bold is worded a bit poorly.


The other statement about making this harder for the playerbase. It's really not. Bolded of my statement said where they drew the line. "posting online to shame a player" Basically they didn't say "just posting it online" they said "SHAME" it's the context of said tool and its intention.

However, calculating another player’s DPS and posting that information online to shame them is clearly harassment

The fuzzy area is possibly the intent. Like say FFlogs. The fact the data is there and accessible to anyone whether or not the person agreed to have their parses posted isn't so much of a problem. But in arguments where say a casual player unaware of this site gets into an argument with another player who knows their job. The first response is generally going to FFLogs to prove their point and really just embarrass and shame a player.

It's rather rare for me to see someone to actually use it more constructively during these disagreements. It's done to "shout" down the other person. While I DO understand people's justification about credentials and such the way the tool is used is how SE would interpret harassment. The fact it doesn't ask for permission from other parties involved I can understand why it's seen in a negative light from the start. It's really just a tool but I think the fact it lacks one layer of first level disclosure makes these types of arguments happen more.

If we look at FFlogs as a place for applications (as in applying for a job) in itself is a great start. However the inherent problem with FFlogs is it's displaying information of people WHO DIDN'T apply for a job. (Savage). Yes one can go in and hide said logs if they get an account, but that's only if they're aware.

[linay]

See the problem? SE needs to take a stance on this. Not grey ... a straight up is it good or bad. That would stop the confusion we have right now.

They do have a stance on it: don't use third party tools. The problem is enforcement and whether certain tools like voice chat overlay is really something they should care about.

There is a quotation that might clarify their reasoning:

With that ambiguity in mind, the development and operations teams have taken the stance of “Please don’t use third party tools.” This is because using third-party tools puts that player’s account at risk.

So even if a third party tool doesn't change game data, but merely reads it, there could be things that it reads that the player might not want it to read, from a security or privacy standpoint.

That is why the gray area exists because you can't say that ACT is allowed because it "only reads data." Even a "harmless" overlay may have inappropriate usage.

That's why they'll have to go through the gray area on a case by case basis. That doesn't mean there is no stance taken, just a matter of enforcement, and if you get punished for using third party tool, you have no excuse because their stance is clear.