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

[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]

As usual, terrible people ruin everything for everybody else.

You know what they say about a few bad apples. They spoil the bunch.

Ever wonder why that is? From https://www.mentalfloss.com/article/...il-whole-bunch

We’ve all heard the saying "one bad apple spoils the whole bunch," and have probably seen instances where it does apply to people, but does it actually happen with fruit?

Yes. As they ripen, some fruits, like apples and pears, produce a gaseous hormone called ethylene, which is, among other things, a ripening agent. When you store fruits together, the ethylene each piece emits prods the others around it to ripen further, and vice versa. (Fun tip: Want to quickly ripen an avocado? Stick it in a paper bag with an apple overnight.)

The riper a piece of fruit is, the more ethylene it produces, and overripe fruit gives off even more ethylene, eventually leading to a concentration of the gas that’s enough to overripen all the fruit. Given the right conditions and enough time, one apple can push all the fruit around it to ripen—and eventually rot.

Additionally, an apple that is infested with mold will contaminate other fruit it's stored with as the mold seeks additional food sources and spreads. In both cases, it actually does take just one single apple to start a domino chain that ruins the rest of the bunch.

Back on topic, it is a shame that a few players can do something that can harm the whole playerbase. But while I don't, personally, think FF14 is unplayable w/o a parser or waypoints, I do understand their use for those who raid and want to push themselves to the limit.

[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.

[Seraphor]

Who actually changes waymarks in combat? You don't have the time.

This seems like a 100% improvement to me.

[RyuDragnier]

Question is how it's implemented (as always) and SE is contradicting itself.



and



So dynamic battles, which change based on phases, can't change marker places because you're in combat the whole time.

Raid leaders be like:

Meanwhile the screen is cluttered with useless waymarks because you can't remove them. . .

GG SE, you've over complicated something that doesn't need to be complicated.

No offense, but if you can't handle clutter on the screen, how on earth have you survived some of these Savage Raids and EXs? Clutter is the name of the game in several of those.

[AngelCheese77]

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.

Fair enough. I don't use ACT myself, so you gave some facts I didn't know about.

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.

The fuzzy area is possibly the intent. Like say FFlogs. The fact the data is there and accessible to anyone whether or no 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.

Yup, and that's the thing. The program itself isn't bad, but it's seen as bad when used inappropriately. And I think that's the rub. Because you can ask people not to use the data in a harassing manner, but when emotions come into play, or a player is just mean in general ...

/shrugs. I don't know. I've only been in one situation where someone shamed DPS by using ACT or some program to see what it was. This was in a public DF. I would think ACT and the like are used in private PF or those who do things together.

So do you think it is something we should continue to be concerned about? Should players continue to use ACT or other programs and be careful of not showing in some way they are doing it?

[AngelCheese77]

Who actually changes waymarks in combat? You don't have the time.

This seems like a 100% improvement to me.

I've done it very rarely, in regards of using it to show where a group needed to move in DD with the purple crystal auras. But otherwise it's the markers like the triange.

[QT_Melon]

Fair enough. I don't use ACT myself, so you gave some facts I didn't know about.

That's absolutely fine. I mean I've been a mod/admin on other boards (just to give you an idea) that are about art.

It's like when people don't know much about Photoshop and instantly equate that or another tool like say a Luciograph (A projector used to put images on a wall for the purpose of tracing) that we get into problems where people take part of an argument and not understand when and when is its use appropriate. "Photoshop is cheating" "Tracing is cheating" Yes both can be abused but "you can't trace if you can't draw" (wise person said this to many).

Yup, and that's the thing. The program itself isn't bad, but it's seen as bad when used inappropriately. And I think that's the rub. Because you can ask people not to use the data in a harassing manner, but when emotions come into play, or a player is just mean in general ...

/shrugs. I don't know. I've only been in one situation where someone shamed DPS by using ACT or some program to see what it was. This was in a public DF. I would think ACT and the like are used in private PF or those who do things together.

So do you think it is something we should continue to be concerned about? Should players continue to use ACT or other programs and be careful of not showing in some way they are doing it?

In the case of plugins, one should not make something that injects client data. Useful or not. Though I think SE not following up on their idea of allowing plugins has led to the waymark issue.

In the case of ACT, I actually find LESS cases of documented harassment using the parser in game than not. I do mean documented, like say Authur's stream and the recent thread that happened in the thanking Yoshi P for stance on DPS.
What I do see though is when it happens, it is the usual way I expect the thread to run its course. Someone who plays this game casually says something controversial and then the dogpiling occurs. "let's dig up the logs" and the usual back and forth of shouting a player down, instead of just skipping over a silly statement and being more intellectual about it. In fact, I would say the thread played out like Authur's stream. The BLM was being silly and Authur took the bait and made it a public spectacle. Often it's due to the fact "a little knowledge is dangerous" people have a general understanding of it but not in depth and can often pass claims as full truths. Intermediate players tend to fall in this category the most.

In Authur's case much of it would have been avoided by simply following the rule of BLURRING player names. It's usually in a setting - read plugin (overlay) that doesn't let you see other people's names. In the case of FFLogs, I feel such a feature should in place as well. The mere fact it uploads people's parses without his/her permission I find to be a problem as first level security and how it runs the site. I find the site useful for other reasons like following up rotation, but that's on another site Anaylsis and even that has its issues - isn't perfect in its diagnosis.


Basically a site like FFlogs should by default "blur names" until a player verifies and decides their name can be displayed. That's not to eliminate the collection of data itself like what other jobs were in the party and his/her damage. But that may take a bit more programming/coding that is possible at this point and how it would work.


So I don't see ACT as a problem for the most part, using it in public/private groups (not disclosing it to shame or harass a player specifically is fine).