Is GShade allowed?

[kpxmanifesto]

I mean...they accepted entries from gshade users for the fanfest art contest and the screenshot entries galery is full of people using gshade. Like so obviously full that it is not just a single mistake that gotten into the accepted entries through slipping through the cracks. SE knew that people use gshade and they basically made a whole part of the entire contest around that and altering screenshots.

If that's the case then I don't think SE would have an issue with it. If they're allowing it in an official contest then I'm going to assume that they're condoning it too.

[GaiusDrakon]

If that's the case then I don't think SE would have an issue with it. If they're allowing it in an official contest then I'm going to assume that they're condoning it too.

But we can't just assume; that's the problem.

What does the GM response mean?

[Wilford111]

I mean it's spelled out in black and white, I don't know what more you want.

[Thaciscokidd]

As long as you don't run around with a banner saying that you are using X(streaming, talking in-game about it, posting on twitter.) you are perfectly fine.

They don't have something actively scanning your computer so just don't broadcast it.

[Klytania]

They made a public statement explicitly saying that it's ok. Also, the way Gshade works hasn't changed, so why would their policy?

Until they come out and explicitly say NO (even then what are they going to do about it?) You can use it.

[GaiusDrakon]

They made a public statement explicitly saying that it's ok. Also, the way Gshade works hasn't changed, so why would their policy?

Until they come out and explicitly say NO (even then what are they going to do about it?) You can use it.

Ok, but what does the GM response mean then? Why would they say that the 7 year old post is no longer applicable?

[Klytania]

Ok, but what does the GM response mean then? Why would they say that the 7 year old post is no longer applicable?

GMs get things wrong all the time. A private response to someone's inquiry doesn't constitute a policy change.

What they're doing right now is performative, so obviously they aren't going to contradict the latest thing YoshiP says. They got embarrassed by the heavy mod use and worst kept secret about XIV getting so much negative public attention, so they are playing whack-a-mole while overreacting like crazy.

It's stupid and makes them look incompetent, but it's what they're doing.

The correct move is to keep your head down and don't worry about it.

[Packetdancer]

Ok, but what does the GM response mean then? Why would they say that the 7 year old post is no longer applicable?

Because the ToS has changed -- more than once -- in the past nine years since that post was made. What was true in 2013 may not be true in 2022.

Obviously I would prefer if they'd say outright that ReShade/GShade is still permitted, given that I have done a lot of artistic screenshot work in the past using GShade. (And I write shaders that are included in GShade.) But I am not surprised that they won't; explicitly stating exceptions at this point is just asking for headaches on their part.

[Larirawiel]

You think that ff14 saves your entire combat log in some secret files?

No Gshade for you sorry se whiteknight^^.

I am not a whiteknight for SE or Gshade. But i know how Gshade works.

So does a virus scan tho.
ACT can do a lot of things so it depends, but using it to parse is tolerated so long as you don't make a huge spectacle about it or harass people with it.
I mean people are openly advertising it in PF and don't get in trouble.

This is true. Antivirus software scans and analyses the game data too and would technically violate the TOS. And this is a reason why i mentioned it in another thread, that the "new" TOS created 30 light years² of new grey area.

It seems to me, that the creators of the new TOS have absolutely no clue what they are talking about and what the consequences are of it. I can grasp the intention of it. But the road to hell is paved with good intentions.



Cheers

[Welsper59]

I can grasp the intention of it. But the road to hell is paved with good intentions.

What exactly do you think the intention of it is? I can tell you that it has literally nothing to do with protecting players, if that's what you meant by good intentions.