Handling Cheaters Gracefully vs Hardline ToS + Questionable legality of bans

[StealthPaladin]

And there's the proof of your gas lighting

Not one case is about a videogame company perma banning.

You're using online services that offer a physical products versus an online service that offers digital media of which you rent a licence to play.

The new cases are not landmark cases like these. It is normal to search by citation when you're looking for motions that ended up being settled. I could go on and on but you know what believe what you want I dont care anymore. All this talk about legality is not for SE but only forum members that are acting in bad faith. Not going to indulge you.

I left my feedback. Risks exists always for companies. The risks are not even the main reason that solutions are needed. I am totally sure that Yoshii P already cares, without risk of legal problems, to be good to the players. In my mind that includes drawing a clear line so I don't have to worry when using Discord or if I use mods that others are using for convenience. Right now good players are penalized by the lack of clarity.

So go ahead and take my thoughts out of context; try and make the focus on legalities when I'm just offering my opinion as a programmer that thought hey I care about the pressures the team might be facing. Even if I'm wrong about case law, which I'm not, there's nothing wrong with me voicing my opinion. It is yall gaslighting by trying to manufacture this character assault but as a believer in speech I will just remove my self from the situation. Though I am also somewhat petty and its hard not to respond when people throw around wrong assumptions as fact in the face of opinions they don't like. Ugh. So dang rude tho.

I will check occasionally if anyone has engaged with me in an honest good faith way. Or even just yelled at me about the best solutions instead of trying to pretend they know anything about legal issues. Until then, good day to you all and thanks to those who provided honest feedback

[StealthPaladin]

An MMO is ...
This is a key area in which Square Enix are failing the entire player base. Cheating is real and in PvP will just kill the game mode really fast if they remain hands off. However, there's also users that are so reliant on appearance mods or QoL UI plug-ins that they're threatening to quit if they no longer work.

They've backed themselves between a rock and a hard place while also ignoring the macOS and PlayStation player base which doesn't have ANY of these tools, QoL or just outright cheats/hacks. It needs addressing and all portions of the player base will probably have to concede on something.

Well we disagree some on interpretation of things and I'd contend that the FTC issue briefly mentioned is where things do get into the MMO model (well only when both client and sub are paid and paid digital assets exist) but as mentioned above, I am completely out of steam to explore that any further and I am not a lawyer certainly not one to get that far into the weeds. I had to have it explained to me and it took a long long time. That's all I have the energy left to say on that.

But you provide very straightforward feedback, appreciated. I guess I don't like the combat plugins myself but you do bring up great points. Those players do exist and some of them probably don't even think they're doing anything wrong. If clear lines were drawn, then at least all players could be on an even playing field. If an addon does something that changes the difficulty EVERYONE has the option to use it, not just cheaters. So yea I think you have a very well balanced position there with some good insights. The potential of getting them on consoles is a whole can of worms, but cross-platform could be done with a well made SDK. It certainly can't be done with the current situation.

[StealthPaladin]

I hope that third party programs are never allowed in FF14. Just see WoW, many players there can't even play anymore without third party programs. And in FF14 some players tell that the game play is to easy without realizing that they have a dozen third party cheat programs running already.

So I keep asking folks this, but I'm genuinely curious.

Do you think that should include tools such as Discord? (which runs in parallel offering voice chat and information)
Do you think that should include tools such as Gshade? (which just enhances graphics)
Do you think that should include tools such as something that gives sorting options to inventory?

Are you really saying that ALL such tools are bad and no line can be drawn? Or could it be that you don't count some of the above as offending tools? Whatever you think no shade toward you for it, I just am trying to understand

I think the line should be content ok, competitive edge bad -- and I brought up free speech, perhaps foolishly, thinking well tools like Discord do give a competitive edge but its hard to describe why it is different than other tools in ToS terms. So I thought, well if the boundary has that leeway it kind of says, OK communication is defensible as long as you aren't circumventing anything (like someone blocking you in game / harassments)

To me it seems a bit harsh to say NO tools but it would be fair at least. And that is pretty clear. I feel like a lot of people would be sad tho, if enforcement kicked up and it is still at the NO tools level, and of course I would never get to make my dream plugins.

[StealthPaladin]

There is no productive conversation to come from this thread. You are debating something that isn't up for debate.

As long as the team cares about feedback, everything is up for debate.
Really there's nothing ever that's not up for debate anywhere. Perhaps I could lose a debate, but that's fine I already accomplished giving them my feedback whether they take it or not.

There's no point listening to a forum for feedback if they wanted everything set in stone
However the team appears, to me, as having such moral character that I believe they do care

[StealthPaladin]

I can not fathom a world where a profitable business would invite more work to itself policing mods/add ons for no profit. The ToS as it is coupled with the dev’s rather hands-off stance regarding many mods is honestly as ideal as it gets.

Absolutely, in my initial 2 posts I am suggesting that these actions could save money by
1. Reducing the requirements of enforcement
2. Reducing the volume of valid bad-behavior reporting by the userbase
3. Turn addons from something detracting from development to something that works to stay in line with the FFXIV team's wishes
4. A stretch, but potentially alleviating the need for the dev team to make certain improvements themselves. They could put out a wishlist for example

Idk if that's enough, but it was my thinking. You're right if its not enough to matter toward profitability then probably aint gonna happen lol

[Qacona]

No. Only terms the court holds valid are valid. For any agreement, but as I pointed out the standard is far stricter for the type of software SE has. There is no point trying to convince anyone -- we are the judge of future attempts to take them to trial. Your argument that "oh it IS legally binding" doesn't matter. A lawyer convincing a judge that they should at least go to trial is all that matters. Not winning or losing, not what the ToS say not any of that.

I swore I'd never post on the FF14 forums, but discount store legal advice is one of my favourite things so I've been sucked in.

Now about 90% of what you've posted is nonsense or misrepresented at best. But lets say that you hire a law wizard who convinces a judge that it's illegal to ban you [which you won't].

But say you did, now it's time to discuss damages.

A judge isn't going to force SQEN to unban your account and provide you service, so you're going to need to think about the dollar value of the damage you've suffered.

You could argue that you bought software that's now worthless. Ok, that's $100 or so?

You might want your subscription fees back as well, but you paid for specific services and received those services so you will never convince a judge that the 'services you received' (an entertainment product) were retroactively damaged by the banning.

You might even argue that the character is yours as well, so congrats. A few weeks after the court case is finalised, you'll get a CD with your character data on it.

Enjoy your $100.

PS: If you do want to argue this, find me a case where a judge has put a perpetual 'specified performance' order in place against a company.

[StealthPaladin]

I swore I'd never post on the FF14 forums, but discount store legal advice is one of my favourite things so I've been sucked in.

Now about 90% of what you've posted is nonsense or misrepresented at best. But lets say that you hire a law wizard who convinces a judge that it's illegal to ban you [which you won't].

But say you did, now it's time to discuss damages.

A judge isn't going to force SQEN to unban your account and provide you service, so you're going to need to think about the dollar value of the damage you've suffered.

You could argue that you bought software that's now worthless. Ok, that's $100 or so?

You might want your subscription fees back as well, but you paid for specific services and received those services so you will never convince a judge that the 'services you received' (an entertainment product) were retroactively damaged by the banning.

You might even argue that the character is yours as well, so congrats. A few weeks after the court case is finalised, you'll get a CD with your character data on it.

Enjoy your $100.

PS: If you do want to argue this, find me a case where a judge has put a perpetual 'specified performance' order in place against a company.

refer to above. already addressed multiple times that courts have already allowed actions that disagree with your synopsis. already addressed that sub fees have counted in arbitration to avoid action courts were threatening to allow, despite clauses. the reasons i gave then are still my same reasons for disagreeing with your take. none of those arguments rely on a specified performance order as that is a different line of attack entirely. there's nothing left to cover and the conversations about law have not been relevant to the addon problem this thread is about.

as mentioned repeatedly, since you did not actually review the history of this as you claimed, i've already repeated everything i can repeat faithfully that i've been told by our company's legal folks. if i try to go further i would not be able to do so honestly so there's nothing else i can really say. only saying this much since you were not bringing a character attack or insults, or not very insulting anyway

i understand you think im wrong. ok. no problem. in my line of reasoning subs matter, in yours they dont. however do note that offending addon developers purchase hundreds of copies. in either case, the addon problem is the problem not an imaginary legal case

if i could delete every reference to law in my original post without making the entire thread senseless i would because it has been ridiculously derailing all conversation and my reasoning would not change except to move it to user relations liability instead. SE already is conscious of consumer rights beyond what is required of them, so it really doesn't matter that much. Businesses don't want to ban customers without a good reason anyway. Whatever you think motivates that, whether in part liability or not, same difference

[kaynide]

So I keep asking folks this, but I'm genuinely curious.

Do you think that should include tools such as Discord? (which runs in parallel offering voice chat and information)
Do you think that should include tools such as Gshade? (which just enhances graphics)
Do you think that should include tools such as something that gives sorting options to inventory?

Are you really saying that ALL such tools are bad and no line can be drawn? Or could it be that you don't count some of the above as offending tools? Whatever you think no shade toward you for it, I just am trying to understand

I think the line should be content ok, competitive edge bad -- and I brought up free speech, perhaps foolishly, thinking well tools like Discord do give a competitive edge but its hard to describe why it is different than other tools in ToS terms. So I thought, well if the boundary has that leeway it kind of says, OK communication is defensible as long as you aren't circumventing anything (like someone blocking you in game / harassments)

To me it seems a bit harsh to say NO tools but it would be fair at least. And that is pretty clear. I feel like a lot of people would be sad tho, if enforcement kicked up and it is still at the NO tools level, and of course I would never get to make my dream plugins.

The thing here is, you're lumping together things that are not the same.

Discord specifically is no different than having your pals on Skype, or Line or any other communications tool. It can be run completely independent of the game and does not interface with the software. It's like saying having physical printouts of the game map with treasure chest locations marked is bannable. Or that playing with two screens on your computer is bannable. It's nonsense.

The line is already there: They do not want you using (tools, apps, whatever) that directly interface with the game, or alter the game files. The most grey-zone thing out there would be texture swapping, model editing or perhaps the bard auto-music player. These WOULD be bannable if caught, but since it doesn't cause any actual mechanical cheating advantage to "win", the Devs don't care. Like I said earlier, speed limit or seat belt laws. It's not about whether it gives a competitive edge.

If you want to make an app that enhances inventory management, or one that auto-rolls loot, or one that auto-throws away "junk", I can't imagine it would be a problem until it's automating your actions or allowing you to do something you shouldn't be able to do (like giving items to GC for seals, or automatically doing Leves, or highlight players hidden behind walls etc).

[StealthPaladin]

The thing here is, you're lumping together things that are not the same.

Discord specifically is no different than having your pals on Skype, or Line or any other communications tool. It can be run completely independent of the game and does not interface with the software. It's like saying having physical printouts of the game map with treasure chest locations marked is bannable. Or that playing with two screens on your computer is bannable. It's nonsense.

The line is already there: They do not want you using (tools, apps, whatever) that directly interface with the game, or alter the game files. The most grey-zone thing out there would be texture swapping, model editing or perhaps the bard auto-music player. These WOULD be bannable if caught, but since it doesn't cause any actual mechanical cheating advantage to "win", the Devs don't care. Like I said earlier, speed limit or seat belt laws. It's not about whether it gives a competitive edge.

Thanks for clarifying that. Was not trying to lump these things together, they are specifically different. Simply to see where you personally set the line. Really what you're saying seems perfectly reasonable to me.

Only thing I'd counter is Discord DOES break the current ToS as a 3rd party tool, though true I don't believe that is the intent of the rule at all. However Discord does interface with the game process to provide overlays and show status especially. Currently that is bannable, but they look the other way as you point out for many types of mods.

Assuming they did not increase enforcement in the near future, leaving things alone would be workable. Though not my ideal, for many that might be good enough. If they actually take the full no-3rd party tools stance due to the recent cheating, well then they may have to be "fair" and just throw out all 3rd party tool use

I don't think it has any real risk of being slammed by them, but then IMO the ToS should be softened to reflect the reality. The idea of switching to in game penalties is another way of giving clarity to the line without actually saying it out loud

If you want to make an app that enhances inventory management, or one that auto-rolls loot, or one that auto-throws away "junk", I can't imagine it would be a problem until it's automating your actions or allowing you to do something you shouldn't be able to do (like giving items to GC for seals, or automatically doing Leves, or highlight players hidden behind walls etc).

This is a good place to draw the line imo. Automation is at least one very clear category.

[Johners]

Only thing I'd counter is Discord DOES break the current ToS as a 3rd party tool, though true I don't believe that is the intent of the rule at all. However Discord does interface with the game process to provide overlays and show status especially. Currently that is bannable, but they look the other way as you point out for many types of mods.

Using Discord as an example of third-party tools is just as disingenuous as that time Yoshi-P used Excel or a Calculator as an example of a third-party tool. These are completely egregious examples and don't reflect the reality of the situation.

At the end of the day, there's a massive problem with Square Enix's hands-off stance that they've held and the player base has largely self-moderated so the developers stay off of their backs. There's easily more than double the amount of players there were even a year ago and this laid back approach just isn't scalable anymore.

MMOs and other online games in general have to combat the fact some players will do anything to gain a competitive advantage while ignoring the consequences for the rest of the player base. Even some of the QoL UI plugins are a tad questionable in this regard, especially those for market board functions.

Unfortunately Square Enix, specifically Yoshi-P as the face of FFXIV, has a problem with wanting to tackle big decisions that confront the player base. The consequences of this problem will only get worse the longer they allow players to freely go at it with third-party tools.

You can ask for an official modding/plugin framework but if you look at what other MMOs and online games allow, at the very best we'll get a UI framework like World of Warcraft. You're not going to get an official version of XIVAlex or NoClippy. You're not going to get an official version of appearance modifications because they don't like lewd mods and they also sell cosmetics on the optional item store. At the very best we'd get some of the QoL UI plugins alongside ACT and Cactbot.