Updates to the Prohibited Activities in FINAL FANTASY XIV and Account Penalty Policy

[LittleImp]

I'll believe that when I get banned for it.

Chances are I won't.

Many people don't want to leave things to chance or vague interpretation on a game where it can take 7-10 years for an account strike to fall off of your account, particularly when users will pour thousands of hours into the progression of a single character over a span of years.

I think most people would agree that it's unlikely someone might be actioned for things like that under these new policies, but are still uncomfortable with the new examples that still paint it within the realm of possibility.

[MaxCarnage]

If people can't control their own emotions, then they have to start trying to control other people's behaviour.
~ John Cleese

[FedoraTheExplorer]

Many people don't want to leave things to chance or vague interpretation on a game where it can take 7-10 years for an account strike to fall off of your account, particularly when users will pour thousands of hours into the progression of a single character over a span of years.

I think most people would agree that it's unlikely someone might be actioned for things like that under these new policies, but are still uncomfortable with the new examples that still paint it within the realm of possibility.

That's a problem with the "many people" then. Literally, don't be rude and you're good.

[aveyond-dreams]

Seeing as how we are now at risk of being punished for correcting mistakes like outdated gear and giving basic instructions directly to people who need them, the only logical solution to protect myself would be to simply leave the instance. Earlier today I had a tank wearing a combination of Noct and Syrcus Tower gear. In a level 67 trial. He had less health than me as a dragoon.

If this was a dungeon I would have left on the spot but the fight started before anyone noticed the *issue.* Naturally the healers struggled to keep this tank alive and wasted their heals on them instead of trying to keep everyone else alive and when I examined this person's gear the problem was shockingly apparent. Why should we not call out players like this?

"Please equip level appropriate gear @tank."

"@tank that gear is not going to work in this fight"

"Wearing crystal tower gear in this fight is pretty much griefing @tank"

"@tank you do not have enough HP to survive the mechanics in this fight"

"@tank that gear is nearly 20 levels below the level of this fight, please equip better gear or leave"

This is not "being rude" these are absolute statements of facts. In any case I feel awful for having carried this person through that fight (barely), and I wish I had been in Limsa baking cookies instead of doing trial roulette at that time. If only there were more gear and skill checks during the levelling process, behaviour like this would be taken care of without anyone else having to get involved. It's one thing to be a casual but it is another thing to just not care at all or to be that ignorant of how easy it is to get gear in this game. (Hint hint! The literal MSQ!)

[ZodiacHeart42]

Seeing as how we are now at risk of being punished for correcting mistakes like outdated gear and giving basic instructions directly to people who need them, the only logical solution to protect myself would be to simply leave the instance. Earlier today I had a tank wearing a combination of Noct and Syrcus Tower gear. In a level 67 trial. He had less health than me as a dragoon.

If this was a dungeon I would have left on the spot but the fight started before anyone noticed the *issue.* Naturally the healers struggled to keep this tank alive and wasted their heals on them instead of trying to keep everyone else alive and when I examined this person's gear the problem was shockingly apparent. Why should we not call out players like this?

"Please equip level appropriate gear @tank."

"@tank that gear is not going to work in this fight"

"Wearing crystal tower gear in this fight is pretty much griefing @tank"

"@tank you do not have enough HP to survive the mechanics in this fight"

"@tank that gear is nearly 20 levels below the level of this fight, please equip better gear or leave"

In any case I feel awful for having carried this person through that fight (barely), and I wish I had been in Limsa baking cookies instead of doing trial roulette at that time. If only there were more gear and skill checks during the levelling process, behaviour like this would be taken care of without anyone else having to get involved. It's one thing to be a casual but it is another thing to just not care at all or to be that ignorant of how easy it is to get gear in this game. (Hint hint! The literal MSQ!)

Nope. Naming a player for anything that can be viewed as negative, or calling them out for anything that they do that is against ToS, is strictly forbidden. Best to just muck through it or leave the dungeon and risk the penalty, I guess.

[TheMightyMollusk]

This thread is going in so many circles it's making me dizzy. Think I'm just gonna bow out.

[Haseno]

Nope. Naming a player for anything that can be viewed as negative, or calling them out for anything that they do that is against ToS, is strictly forbidden. Best to just muck through it or leave the dungeon and risk the penalty, I guess.

And that is unacceptable.

Constructive Criticism is often negative, because most criticism references a negative aspect.

The TOS is a war on reality, and thus, is unacceptable.

[Krotoan]

You think that is cynicism when ppl literaly get assulted for opening a door for somone, or someone gets sued for saving a life lol..

You a little naive for the modetn world i suggest go outside expience the truth of reality today that kindness gets u in trouble just the same if not more.

In real life if someone punches you for opening a door or if someone sues you for "saving their life" there are legal processes and consequences. In the video game world, which we are talking about now, if someone reports you for being nice it doesn't automatically result in a negative to you like say a punch to the face would. The GM has to look at it and in context make a decision. Generally if someone was there and watched you get punched in the face for opening a door the utter majority would go "that was uncalled for". Getting REPORTED by someone isn't the punch or the lawsuit. Just like someone can bring accusations against you but they need to be ruled in their favor to become a negative consequence.

I have no illusions that the world isn't full of irrational and inexplicable people, but I have yet to encounter an account in this game of someone leveling something against someone else that is obviously a non-infraction and having the GM's take the nonsense side.

You personally have said you "just don't trust authority", but that is your problem and mental hurdle to overcome, the presence of enforceable rules and avenues to report infractions especially with HUMAN review, is something we've had for a long time that's worked reasonably well and all this hand wringing about the slippery slope it could become if implemented badly is "sky is falling" levels of unnecessary panic.

Cynicism is warranted when someone brings up a story that just so happens to be unverifiable but expresses perfectly the worst case scenario being realized. I don't believe you because it sounds like a fabrication to prove a point.

And that is unacceptable.

Constructive Criticism is often negative, because most criticism references a negative aspect.

The TOS is a war on reality, and thus, is unacceptable.

Sounds like you won't be playing the game if you don't agree to terms then since you specifically HAVE to agree to those terms when you press the "play" button. You have no right to service. You can either utilize it or not.

[TheMightyMollusk]

The TOS is a war on reality, and thus, is unacceptable.

Okay, now I'm out. There's just no topping that level of hyperbole.

[Haseno]

unfortunately then, you signed your agreement to THEIR rules every time you log in. this is their house, and their rules. as I learned when I was younger "if you dont like the rules, dont play the game" and it applies in life, and online gaming.

you can go on and on and on about your "right" to free speech, but the truth is, you are in someone else's house, that they built and they have rules. and those rules, you signed up to follow. end of story. the same rule set apply to all that log into the game and as such, virtually sign their acceptance of that agreement every single time they do.

if you disagree with them that much, there is only one option that you have. just one.

going on and on about your violation and calling SE a "tyrant" for imposing rules in their game, is going well outside the box for a molehill to take a stand on.

Just because I accept their TOS as a condition of being able to login, doesn't mean I view their TOS as valid. That isn't how reality works. A Terms of Service agreement is corporate nonsense, and people don't genuinely have commitments to them. Myself included.

When I see bad policy. I'm not going to embrace it, and I will call it out.

If they don't like that, perhaps they should consult their customers.