STIHL.2489 Posted April 17, 2018 Share Posted April 17, 2018 > @"moonstarmac.4603" said: > PS: Please return the public DHUUM Bans like GW1. Thank you, have a nice die. You know, I didn't play GW1, but the idea of some lich-god-thing coming in and killing a player, for cheating, does sound pretty awesome! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
moonstarmac.4603 Posted April 17, 2018 Share Posted April 17, 2018 > @"STIHL.2489" said: > > @"moonstarmac.4603" said: > > PS: Please return the public DHUUM Bans like GW1. Thank you, have a nice die. > > You know, I didn't play GW1, but the idea of some lich-god-thing coming in and killing a player, for cheating, does sound pretty awesome! Check it out. Happens around :25. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ratche.6204 Posted April 17, 2018 Share Posted April 17, 2018 Ah Cheat Engine, Joseph W. Cheat really should have named his program better. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Shikigami.4013 Posted April 17, 2018 Share Posted April 17, 2018 > @"SkyShroud.2865" said: > > @"Shikigami.4013" said: > > > @"SkyShroud.2865" said: > > > The thread derail so much, people keep talking about EULA and TOS, as if anyone of you here are legit lawyers. > > > > > > Banning because of cheat engine nevertheless is still a double standard. There are many debugging tools out there and cheat engine is simply one of the many. It really puzzling decision to ban people using cheat engine while excluding other debugging tools available which can technically do more than what cheat engine can do. It can even be seen as a immature, not well thought and unprofessional decision. Naturally, since it was decided to only ban cheat engine and not include other debugger, such decision can be easily seen as generalization than a professional one. Afterall, hackers will use more than one debugger tool while hacking a online game. > > > > You know what the basis is for a government agency to determine which items are weapons, which items are weapons you need a licence for, and which items are completely illegal and may not even be owned? **They look primarily at what the item in question was made for.** > > > > The much cited "bread knife" is not labled as a weapon because it was not intended to be a weapon but to slice bread. A baseball bat is not classified as being a weapon because it was made to play baseball with and not to kill someone with a swing to his head, just like a brick of stone is not labled to be a weapon because it was made to build a wall and not hit a head. On the other hand, there are knives that are classified as a weapon because they were intended to be a weapon - even if you could slice bread with them. There are sticks of wood connected with a chain (Nunchaku) that are classified as a weapon because in this time and environment their sole reason to exist is being a weapon, although once long ago they were allegedly made as a threshing tool by farmers in japan. It is the **purpose** of an item that decides what the law and subsequently the public opinion decides in regards to being a weapon or being a tool. > > > > For that reason, "Cheat engine" is a cheat program, and not a "multipurpose tool" or a "powerful debugger". It is designed to cheat, and the fact that it can be used for other things does not make it less of a cheat program, just like the ability to slice bread with a combat knife like used by john rambo in the movies does not make it a bread knife. > > > > As I wrote in an earlier post, you will not be able to buy and drive a tank and then tell the police that you are not using it for war but only drive in it because you feel so safe. A tank is made for war, a car is made for driving. And to come back to what I wrote earlier in **this** thread: Because a car is made for driving and not for running people over with it, it is not classified as a weapon, although you can easily kill any pedestrian with a car if you decide to. > > > > > > Oh? Using your logic, cheat engine is made for single player game, not multiplayer game thus again base on your logic, how is it applicable to multiple players game? > > You are simply using the category of weapon and not the item itself. Unfortunately, there are way **more powerful** debugger tools and thus easily the same category yet you conveniently denounce them. How absurd to call things that are technically much powerful more legal. You are double standard too and you are not objectively arguing about things. If you don't understand what are being said, I will phrase it the "weapon" way you are using, to you a gun is illegal but a shotgun is not. It was made to cheat, not to debug. Noone cares what kind of games it was made to use with, it is cheat software. A french bread knife is still a bread knife even though it may have been made to slice a baguette in france, while in other countries it was made to slice oval loafs of bread or bread made with rye flour and not wheat flour. You are just nitpicking and twisting words here by stating that a cheat software becomes anything else than a cheat software if it was made for single player games and not for multiplayer games, which by the way is a claim that I am sure you will be unable to back up with any source. Just for you I went to that programs websites and checked for myself, and what I found was just this: _Q:What is Cheat Engine? A:Cheat Engine is a tool that helps you figure out how a game/application works and make modifications to it. [...]_ Notice how it does not say "Cheat Engine is a tool that helps you figure out how a singleplayer game/application works and make modifications to it."? Also, legal or illegal is not the same as weapon or not weapon. A gun is a weapon because its purpose is being one, the same goes for a shotgun. The reason why a gun is allowed (in your contry, not in mine) and a shotgun isn't is of course not because a shotgun is a weapon and a gun is not. The law is a little more extensive than just to say "All weapons are forbidden and all non-weapons aren't" The principle that you are not getting because like so many people you don't understand analogies well is this: The nature of an item is determined by its purpose. For you and the other people lacking understanding of analogies I will expand this just a little, with equally little hope that you will then understand. I'll give you two more examples: A piece of butter can be food or art. (Google Beuys and butter.) A strong push to someone's back can either be murder or an act of saving someone's life, depending on if that person stands at the edge of a cliff or in front of an approaching train. Now, what does a piece of software which can be used to cheat ot to debug, an item that can be used to kill someone or play a game with, a piece of butter that can be food or art and a push to the back that can be murder or lifesaving in common? The same thing everything in this world has in common. The definition of something comes from the intent/purpose. And a software that was made and intended to cheat with will stay cheat software, no matter what you write. The fact that there are more powerful debuggers that are made for debugging and not for cheating does not justify labeling a cheat software as "multipurpose tool" or "powerful debugger". It is cheat software, and ArenaNet decided to target cheat software. Maybe next time they decide to also target powerful debuggers. But this is as hypothetical as all the horrible scenarios that people came up with in this thread about ArenaNet searching your harddrive, transmitting word documents, checking what webpage you browse and all the other nonsense. As I am 100% sure that you will come up with more stuff that is not logical, not well thought out, and has nothing to do with the fact that ArenaNet just happens to have the right to decide on their own if they want to hunt for users of cheat software or for users of debuggers, I will end my communication with you here. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Obtena.7952 Posted April 17, 2018 Share Posted April 17, 2018 > @"Faaris.8013" said: > > @"Rajani Isa.6294" said: > > So you are saying checking what processes are running is beyond what is needed for anti-cheat software? > > No, I never said that. I said sending all data about running processes to Anet's servers instead of checking them locally is beyond what is needed for anti-cheat software. > > > @"Obtena.7952" said: > > > @"GreyWolf.8670" said: > > > > @"Faaris.8013" said: > > > > > > > The point is that you are not bound to the EULA or any other agreement if you were not shown it and agreed to it before buying the game (in Germany). When I go to the Anet webpage and purchase GW2, then get the download link and install the game, it's already too late for the EULA. > > > > > > > > > > No. You must agree to the EULA when you create your account **before** can you buy the game from ArenaNet **or** play it. > > > > Exactly. I haven't seen ANY MMO where you don't click on agreement at SOME point and if you don't, you don't get access to the game ... EVEN in Germany. > > This doesn't matter: > > >Dass der Nutzer die Taste „Ich bin mit den Lizenzbestimmungen einverstanden“ angeklickt hat, ist in der Regel folgenlos, da der Nutzer sich diesem Prozedere nur deshalb unterwirft, weil er anders die Software nicht installieren kann. > > http://www.kitten-legal.de/09-lizenzvertrag-eula > > roughly translates to: That the user had to click the button "I agree to the licensing terms" is generally without consequences, since the user only follows this procedure because otherwise, the software cannot be installed. > > That might be confusing for many, but it's how the law works. It doesn't matter? I would beg to differ ... unless no one in Germany that was hacking was banned. Actually, don't bother ... I know people in Germany that have been banned from MMO's ... so yes, it does matter. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Shikigami.4013 Posted April 17, 2018 Share Posted April 17, 2018 > @"SkyShroud.2865" said: > Don't. Let his arguments fall apart slowly, one by one. > > If he switched to "how is it used" from "what is it made for". I can highlight that fact and it will show everyone how conveniently he switched from one principle to another, then use his own fallacies arguments against him. How interesting! "Oh, of course I can use a tank to drive like a car in america (Oops, it just needs "Modifications" and "A special permit" to do so) How about this: "Oh, of course you can use cheat engine while playing GW2! (Oops, it just needs "Modification" and "A special permit" to do so) Did you mean that by using someone's fallacies against them? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ashen.2907 Posted April 17, 2018 Share Posted April 17, 2018 > @"STIHL.2489" said: > > @"moonstarmac.4603" said: > > PS: Please return the public DHUUM Bans like GW1. Thank you, have a nice die. > > You know, I didn't play GW1, but the idea of some lich-god-thing coming in and killing a player, for cheating, does sound pretty awesome! It most certainly was. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mokk.2397 Posted April 17, 2018 Share Posted April 17, 2018 Why would any one who is serious about programming use Cheat Engine when there are so many other True and Better debuggers available .You only need to search what Cheat engine is most commonly used for [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cheat_Engine](http://https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cheat_Engine "https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cheat_Engine") as compared to a multitude of Much Much better debuggers [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_debuggers](http://https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_debuggers "https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_debuggers"). If you are using Cheat Engine then the common convention is you use it for cheating PERIOD! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SkyShroud.2865 Posted April 17, 2018 Share Posted April 17, 2018 > @"Shikigami.4013" said: > > @"SkyShroud.2865" said: > > > @"Shikigami.4013" said: > > > > @"SkyShroud.2865" said: > > > > The thread derail so much, people keep talking about EULA and TOS, as if anyone of you here are legit lawyers. > > > > > > > > Banning because of cheat engine nevertheless is still a double standard. There are many debugging tools out there and cheat engine is simply one of the many. It really puzzling decision to ban people using cheat engine while excluding other debugging tools available which can technically do more than what cheat engine can do. It can even be seen as a immature, not well thought and unprofessional decision. Naturally, since it was decided to only ban cheat engine and not include other debugger, such decision can be easily seen as generalization than a professional one. Afterall, hackers will use more than one debugger tool while hacking a online game. > > > > > > You know what the basis is for a government agency to determine which items are weapons, which items are weapons you need a licence for, and which items are completely illegal and may not even be owned? **They look primarily at what the item in question was made for.** > > > > > > The much cited "bread knife" is not labled as a weapon because it was not intended to be a weapon but to slice bread. A baseball bat is not classified as being a weapon because it was made to play baseball with and not to kill someone with a swing to his head, just like a brick of stone is not labled to be a weapon because it was made to build a wall and not hit a head. On the other hand, there are knives that are classified as a weapon because they were intended to be a weapon - even if you could slice bread with them. There are sticks of wood connected with a chain (Nunchaku) that are classified as a weapon because in this time and environment their sole reason to exist is being a weapon, although once long ago they were allegedly made as a threshing tool by farmers in japan. It is the **purpose** of an item that decides what the law and subsequently the public opinion decides in regards to being a weapon or being a tool. > > > > > > For that reason, "Cheat engine" is a cheat program, and not a "multipurpose tool" or a "powerful debugger". It is designed to cheat, and the fact that it can be used for other things does not make it less of a cheat program, just like the ability to slice bread with a combat knife like used by john rambo in the movies does not make it a bread knife. > > > > > > As I wrote in an earlier post, you will not be able to buy and drive a tank and then tell the police that you are not using it for war but only drive in it because you feel so safe. A tank is made for war, a car is made for driving. And to come back to what I wrote earlier in **this** thread: Because a car is made for driving and not for running people over with it, it is not classified as a weapon, although you can easily kill any pedestrian with a car if you decide to. > > > > > > > > > > Oh? Using your logic, cheat engine is made for single player game, not multiplayer game thus again base on your logic, how is it applicable to multiple players game? > > > > You are simply using the category of weapon and not the item itself. Unfortunately, there are way **more powerful** debugger tools and thus easily the same category yet you conveniently denounce them. How absurd to call things that are technically much powerful more legal. You are double standard too and you are not objectively arguing about things. If you don't understand what are being said, I will phrase it the "weapon" way you are using, to you a gun is illegal but a shotgun is not. > > It was made to cheat, not to debug. Noone cares what kind of games it was made to use with, it is cheat software. A french bread knife is still a bread knife even though it may have been made to slice a baguette in france, while in other countries it was made to slice oval loafs of bread or bread made with rye flour and not wheat flour. > You are just nitpicking and twisting words here by stating that a cheat software becomes anything else than a cheat software if it was made for single player games and not for multiplayer games, which by the way is a claim that I am sure you will be unable to back up with any source. Just for you I went to that programs websites and checked for myself, and what I found was just this: > _Q:What is Cheat Engine? > A:Cheat Engine is a tool that helps you figure out how a game/application works and make modifications to it. [...]_ > Notice how it does not say "Cheat Engine is a tool that helps you figure out how a singleplayer game/application works and make modifications to it."? > > Also, legal or illegal is not the same as weapon or not weapon. A gun is a weapon because its purpose is being one, the same goes for a shotgun. The reason why a gun is allowed (in your contry, not in mine) and a shotgun isn't is of course not because a shotgun is a weapon and a gun is not. The law is a little more extensive than just to say "All weapons are forbidden and all non-weapons aren't" > > The principle that you are not getting because like so many people you don't understand analogies well is this: The nature of an item is determined by its purpose. > For you and the other people lacking understanding of analogies I will expand this just a little, with equally little hope that you will then understand. I'll give you two more examples: > > A piece of butter can be food or art. (Google Beuys and butter.) > A strong push to someone's back can either be murder or an act of saving someone's life, depending on if that person stands at the edge of a cliff or in front of an approaching train. > > Now, what does a piece of software which can be used to cheat ot to debug, an item that can be used to kill someone or play a game with, a piece of butter that can be food or art and a push to the back that can be murder or lifesaving in common? The same thing everything in this world has in common. The definition of something comes from the intent/purpose. And a software that was made and intended to cheat with will stay cheat software, no matter what you write. The fact that there are more powerful debuggers that are made for debugging and not for cheating does not justify labeling a cheat software as "multipurpose tool" or "powerful debugger". It is cheat software, and ArenaNet decided to target cheat software. Maybe next time they decide to also target powerful debuggers. But this is as hypothetical as all the horrible scenarios that people came up with in this thread about ArenaNet searching your harddrive, transmitting word documents, checking what webpage you browse and all the other nonsense. > > As I am 100% sure that you will come up with more stuff that is not logical, not well thought out, and has nothing to do with the fact that ArenaNet just happens to have the right to decide on their own if they want to hunt for users of cheat software or for users of debuggers, I will end my communication with you here. Hey genius. To cheat, you need to debug it, you need to break it down. That's why we call it debugging tool, it is technically in that category. You are not tech savvy, I understand that but somehow I get that you are trying to mislead people in thinking debugging tool and cheating tool are different. However, that is not true, debugging tool and cheating does the same thing; it let you look into the execution codes and modify them. You keep on trying to mislead people who are just not technical about those things, mixing technical words with non-technical words. Intentionally or not intentionally, matters not, because it certainly isn't objective. That one kind of fallacy you are performing. Second is, as mentioned, they technically fall under the same category. It is just you are trying to deny that even though you are explicitly told they are the same category yet you don't seem to able accept that fact. Third, you copy something that is completely out of context and who knows where you copy them from, then claim it wasn't made for single player. That is yet another fallacy. Here, I got this from their main site under "About Cheat Engine", "Cheat Engine is an open source tool designed to help you with modifying single player games running under window so you can make them harder or easier depending on your preference." Fourth. As expected, you went from "What it is made for" to "How it is used". It is totally expected because from the get go, you have no clear idea of your principles and objectives. You are simply arguing for the sake of arguing. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ubi.4136 Posted April 17, 2018 Share Posted April 17, 2018 Cheat engine was made to "make them ("games") harder or easier depending on your preference". No one is running cheat engine to make GW2 harder. It was "made" to make games play at the difficulty users of the program wanted. It appears that they all wanted to make GW2 easier, giving them an advantage over other players, and subsequently, it's use got all of them banned. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Deihnyx.6318 Posted April 17, 2018 Share Posted April 17, 2018 So... with this famous reddit post getting updated, and that everyone assumed was true without double-checking, I HOPE we can now put the "legal" and "huge privacy breach" argument to rest? Or is it still about company-bashing? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Shikigami.4013 Posted April 17, 2018 Share Posted April 17, 2018 > @"SkyShroud.2865" said: > > @"Shikigami.4013" said: > > > @"SkyShroud.2865" said: > > > > @"Shikigami.4013" said: > > > > > @"SkyShroud.2865" said: > > > > > The thread derail so much, people keep talking about EULA and TOS, as if anyone of you here are legit lawyers. > > > > > > > > > > Banning because of cheat engine nevertheless is still a double standard. There are many debugging tools out there and cheat engine is simply one of the many. It really puzzling decision to ban people using cheat engine while excluding other debugging tools available which can technically do more than what cheat engine can do. It can even be seen as a immature, not well thought and unprofessional decision. Naturally, since it was decided to only ban cheat engine and not include other debugger, such decision can be easily seen as generalization than a professional one. Afterall, hackers will use more than one debugger tool while hacking a online game. > > > > > > > > You know what the basis is for a government agency to determine which items are weapons, which items are weapons you need a licence for, and which items are completely illegal and may not even be owned? **They look primarily at what the item in question was made for.** > > > > > > > > The much cited "bread knife" is not labled as a weapon because it was not intended to be a weapon but to slice bread. A baseball bat is not classified as being a weapon because it was made to play baseball with and not to kill someone with a swing to his head, just like a brick of stone is not labled to be a weapon because it was made to build a wall and not hit a head. On the other hand, there are knives that are classified as a weapon because they were intended to be a weapon - even if you could slice bread with them. There are sticks of wood connected with a chain (Nunchaku) that are classified as a weapon because in this time and environment their sole reason to exist is being a weapon, although once long ago they were allegedly made as a threshing tool by farmers in japan. It is the **purpose** of an item that decides what the law and subsequently the public opinion decides in regards to being a weapon or being a tool. > > > > > > > > For that reason, "Cheat engine" is a cheat program, and not a "multipurpose tool" or a "powerful debugger". It is designed to cheat, and the fact that it can be used for other things does not make it less of a cheat program, just like the ability to slice bread with a combat knife like used by john rambo in the movies does not make it a bread knife. > > > > > > > > As I wrote in an earlier post, you will not be able to buy and drive a tank and then tell the police that you are not using it for war but only drive in it because you feel so safe. A tank is made for war, a car is made for driving. And to come back to what I wrote earlier in **this** thread: Because a car is made for driving and not for running people over with it, it is not classified as a weapon, although you can easily kill any pedestrian with a car if you decide to. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Oh? Using your logic, cheat engine is made for single player game, not multiplayer game thus again base on your logic, how is it applicable to multiple players game? > > > > > > You are simply using the category of weapon and not the item itself. Unfortunately, there are way **more powerful** debugger tools and thus easily the same category yet you conveniently denounce them. How absurd to call things that are technically much powerful more legal. You are double standard too and you are not objectively arguing about things. If you don't understand what are being said, I will phrase it the "weapon" way you are using, to you a gun is illegal but a shotgun is not. > > > > It was made to cheat, not to debug. Noone cares what kind of games it was made to use with, it is cheat software. A french bread knife is still a bread knife even though it may have been made to slice a baguette in france, while in other countries it was made to slice oval loafs of bread or bread made with rye flour and not wheat flour. > > You are just nitpicking and twisting words here by stating that a cheat software becomes anything else than a cheat software if it was made for single player games and not for multiplayer games, which by the way is a claim that I am sure you will be unable to back up with any source. Just for you I went to that programs websites and checked for myself, and what I found was just this: > > _Q:What is Cheat Engine? > > A:Cheat Engine is a tool that helps you figure out how a game/application works and make modifications to it. [...]_ > > Notice how it does not say "Cheat Engine is a tool that helps you figure out how a singleplayer game/application works and make modifications to it."? > > > > Also, legal or illegal is not the same as weapon or not weapon. A gun is a weapon because its purpose is being one, the same goes for a shotgun. The reason why a gun is allowed (in your contry, not in mine) and a shotgun isn't is of course not because a shotgun is a weapon and a gun is not. The law is a little more extensive than just to say "All weapons are forbidden and all non-weapons aren't" > > > > The principle that you are not getting because like so many people you don't understand analogies well is this: The nature of an item is determined by its purpose. > > For you and the other people lacking understanding of analogies I will expand this just a little, with equally little hope that you will then understand. I'll give you two more examples: > > > > A piece of butter can be food or art. (Google Beuys and butter.) > > A strong push to someone's back can either be murder or an act of saving someone's life, depending on if that person stands at the edge of a cliff or in front of an approaching train. > > > > Now, what does a piece of software which can be used to cheat ot to debug, an item that can be used to kill someone or play a game with, a piece of butter that can be food or art and a push to the back that can be murder or lifesaving in common? The same thing everything in this world has in common. The definition of something comes from the intent/purpose. And a software that was made and intended to cheat with will stay cheat software, no matter what you write. The fact that there are more powerful debuggers that are made for debugging and not for cheating does not justify labeling a cheat software as "multipurpose tool" or "powerful debugger". It is cheat software, and ArenaNet decided to target cheat software. Maybe next time they decide to also target powerful debuggers. But this is as hypothetical as all the horrible scenarios that people came up with in this thread about ArenaNet searching your harddrive, transmitting word documents, checking what webpage you browse and all the other nonsense. > > > > As I am 100% sure that you will come up with more stuff that is not logical, not well thought out, and has nothing to do with the fact that ArenaNet just happens to have the right to decide on their own if they want to hunt for users of cheat software or for users of debuggers, I will end my communication with you here. > > > Third, you copy something that is completely out of context and who knows where you copy them from, then claim it wasn't made for single player. That is yet another fallacy. Here, I got this from their main site under "About Cheat Engine", "Cheat Engine is an open source tool designed to help you with modifying single player games running under window so you can make them harder or easier depending on your preference." > My quote does not have any context on the official website it came from, which is the programs homepage FAQ section, question number 1. One would expect that the programs own homepage would be able to be clear about how the apparently most frequently asked question should be answered. Rest is the stuff I expected and no longer comment on. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SkyShroud.2865 Posted April 17, 2018 Share Posted April 17, 2018 > @"Shikigami.4013" said: > > @"SkyShroud.2865" said: > > > @"Shikigami.4013" said: > > > > @"SkyShroud.2865" said: > > > > > @"Shikigami.4013" said: > > > > > > @"SkyShroud.2865" said: > > > > > > The thread derail so much, people keep talking about EULA and TOS, as if anyone of you here are legit lawyers. > > > > > > > > > > > > Banning because of cheat engine nevertheless is still a double standard. There are many debugging tools out there and cheat engine is simply one of the many. It really puzzling decision to ban people using cheat engine while excluding other debugging tools available which can technically do more than what cheat engine can do. It can even be seen as a immature, not well thought and unprofessional decision. Naturally, since it was decided to only ban cheat engine and not include other debugger, such decision can be easily seen as generalization than a professional one. Afterall, hackers will use more than one debugger tool while hacking a online game. > > > > > > > > > > You know what the basis is for a government agency to determine which items are weapons, which items are weapons you need a licence for, and which items are completely illegal and may not even be owned? **They look primarily at what the item in question was made for.** > > > > > > > > > > The much cited "bread knife" is not labled as a weapon because it was not intended to be a weapon but to slice bread. A baseball bat is not classified as being a weapon because it was made to play baseball with and not to kill someone with a swing to his head, just like a brick of stone is not labled to be a weapon because it was made to build a wall and not hit a head. On the other hand, there are knives that are classified as a weapon because they were intended to be a weapon - even if you could slice bread with them. There are sticks of wood connected with a chain (Nunchaku) that are classified as a weapon because in this time and environment their sole reason to exist is being a weapon, although once long ago they were allegedly made as a threshing tool by farmers in japan. It is the **purpose** of an item that decides what the law and subsequently the public opinion decides in regards to being a weapon or being a tool. > > > > > > > > > > For that reason, "Cheat engine" is a cheat program, and not a "multipurpose tool" or a "powerful debugger". It is designed to cheat, and the fact that it can be used for other things does not make it less of a cheat program, just like the ability to slice bread with a combat knife like used by john rambo in the movies does not make it a bread knife. > > > > > > > > > > As I wrote in an earlier post, you will not be able to buy and drive a tank and then tell the police that you are not using it for war but only drive in it because you feel so safe. A tank is made for war, a car is made for driving. And to come back to what I wrote earlier in **this** thread: Because a car is made for driving and not for running people over with it, it is not classified as a weapon, although you can easily kill any pedestrian with a car if you decide to. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Oh? Using your logic, cheat engine is made for single player game, not multiplayer game thus again base on your logic, how is it applicable to multiple players game? > > > > > > > > You are simply using the category of weapon and not the item itself. Unfortunately, there are way **more powerful** debugger tools and thus easily the same category yet you conveniently denounce them. How absurd to call things that are technically much powerful more legal. You are double standard too and you are not objectively arguing about things. If you don't understand what are being said, I will phrase it the "weapon" way you are using, to you a gun is illegal but a shotgun is not. > > > > > > It was made to cheat, not to debug. Noone cares what kind of games it was made to use with, it is cheat software. A french bread knife is still a bread knife even though it may have been made to slice a baguette in france, while in other countries it was made to slice oval loafs of bread or bread made with rye flour and not wheat flour. > > > You are just nitpicking and twisting words here by stating that a cheat software becomes anything else than a cheat software if it was made for single player games and not for multiplayer games, which by the way is a claim that I am sure you will be unable to back up with any source. Just for you I went to that programs websites and checked for myself, and what I found was just this: > > > _Q:What is Cheat Engine? > > > A:Cheat Engine is a tool that helps you figure out how a game/application works and make modifications to it. [...]_ > > > Notice how it does not say "Cheat Engine is a tool that helps you figure out how a singleplayer game/application works and make modifications to it."? > > > > > > Also, legal or illegal is not the same as weapon or not weapon. A gun is a weapon because its purpose is being one, the same goes for a shotgun. The reason why a gun is allowed (in your contry, not in mine) and a shotgun isn't is of course not because a shotgun is a weapon and a gun is not. The law is a little more extensive than just to say "All weapons are forbidden and all non-weapons aren't" > > > > > > The principle that you are not getting because like so many people you don't understand analogies well is this: The nature of an item is determined by its purpose. > > > For you and the other people lacking understanding of analogies I will expand this just a little, with equally little hope that you will then understand. I'll give you two more examples: > > > > > > A piece of butter can be food or art. (Google Beuys and butter.) > > > A strong push to someone's back can either be murder or an act of saving someone's life, depending on if that person stands at the edge of a cliff or in front of an approaching train. > > > > > > Now, what does a piece of software which can be used to cheat ot to debug, an item that can be used to kill someone or play a game with, a piece of butter that can be food or art and a push to the back that can be murder or lifesaving in common? The same thing everything in this world has in common. The definition of something comes from the intent/purpose. And a software that was made and intended to cheat with will stay cheat software, no matter what you write. The fact that there are more powerful debuggers that are made for debugging and not for cheating does not justify labeling a cheat software as "multipurpose tool" or "powerful debugger". It is cheat software, and ArenaNet decided to target cheat software. Maybe next time they decide to also target powerful debuggers. But this is as hypothetical as all the horrible scenarios that people came up with in this thread about ArenaNet searching your harddrive, transmitting word documents, checking what webpage you browse and all the other nonsense. > > > > > > As I am 100% sure that you will come up with more stuff that is not logical, not well thought out, and has nothing to do with the fact that ArenaNet just happens to have the right to decide on their own if they want to hunt for users of cheat software or for users of debuggers, I will end my communication with you here. > > > > > > Third, you copy something that is completely out of context and who knows where you copy them from, then claim it wasn't made for single player. That is yet another fallacy. Here, I got this from their main site under "About Cheat Engine", "Cheat Engine is an open source tool designed to help you with modifying single player games running under window so you can make them harder or easier depending on your preference." > > > My quote does not have any context on the official website it came from, which is the programs homepage FAQ section, question number 1. > One would expect that the programs own homepage would be able to be clear about how the apparently most frequently asked question should be answered. > > Rest is the stuff I expected and no longer comment on. > > Which again you didn't read everything. Q:Will Dark Byte help me with online games? A:No Q:Can I use Cheat Engine to hack, crack or unprotect other programs ? A:No, you may only use cheat engine for legal activities. If the license agreement of a game says to not disassemble it, then do not use ce's disassembler features! (Unless you live in a place like Europe where the law precedes license agreements and where you have the right to reverse engineer all software for personal use) If you want to argue, please read everything and not just things convenient for your arguments. At the end of the day, the purpose of the software does not matter, it all depends on how the users use it. Thus, my initial comment still stand, if anet does not ban all debugger tools, it is double standard. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Shikigami.4013 Posted April 17, 2018 Share Posted April 17, 2018 > @"SkyShroud.2865" said: > > @"Shikigami.4013" said: > > > @"SkyShroud.2865" said: > > > > @"Shikigami.4013" said: > > > > > @"SkyShroud.2865" said: > > > > > > @"Shikigami.4013" said: > > > > > > > @"SkyShroud.2865" said: > > > > > > > The thread derail so much, people keep talking about EULA and TOS, as if anyone of you here are legit lawyers. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Banning because of cheat engine nevertheless is still a double standard. There are many debugging tools out there and cheat engine is simply one of the many. It really puzzling decision to ban people using cheat engine while excluding other debugging tools available which can technically do more than what cheat engine can do. It can even be seen as a immature, not well thought and unprofessional decision. Naturally, since it was decided to only ban cheat engine and not include other debugger, such decision can be easily seen as generalization than a professional one. Afterall, hackers will use more than one debugger tool while hacking a online game. > > > > > > > > > > > > You know what the basis is for a government agency to determine which items are weapons, which items are weapons you need a licence for, and which items are completely illegal and may not even be owned? **They look primarily at what the item in question was made for.** > > > > > > > > > > > > The much cited "bread knife" is not labled as a weapon because it was not intended to be a weapon but to slice bread. A baseball bat is not classified as being a weapon because it was made to play baseball with and not to kill someone with a swing to his head, just like a brick of stone is not labled to be a weapon because it was made to build a wall and not hit a head. On the other hand, there are knives that are classified as a weapon because they were intended to be a weapon - even if you could slice bread with them. There are sticks of wood connected with a chain (Nunchaku) that are classified as a weapon because in this time and environment their sole reason to exist is being a weapon, although once long ago they were allegedly made as a threshing tool by farmers in japan. It is the **purpose** of an item that decides what the law and subsequently the public opinion decides in regards to being a weapon or being a tool. > > > > > > > > > > > > For that reason, "Cheat engine" is a cheat program, and not a "multipurpose tool" or a "powerful debugger". It is designed to cheat, and the fact that it can be used for other things does not make it less of a cheat program, just like the ability to slice bread with a combat knife like used by john rambo in the movies does not make it a bread knife. > > > > > > > > > > > > As I wrote in an earlier post, you will not be able to buy and drive a tank and then tell the police that you are not using it for war but only drive in it because you feel so safe. A tank is made for war, a car is made for driving. And to come back to what I wrote earlier in **this** thread: Because a car is made for driving and not for running people over with it, it is not classified as a weapon, although you can easily kill any pedestrian with a car if you decide to. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Oh? Using your logic, cheat engine is made for single player game, not multiplayer game thus again base on your logic, how is it applicable to multiple players game? > > > > > > > > > > You are simply using the category of weapon and not the item itself. Unfortunately, there are way **more powerful** debugger tools and thus easily the same category yet you conveniently denounce them. How absurd to call things that are technically much powerful more legal. You are double standard too and you are not objectively arguing about things. If you don't understand what are being said, I will phrase it the "weapon" way you are using, to you a gun is illegal but a shotgun is not. > > > > > > > > It was made to cheat, not to debug. Noone cares what kind of games it was made to use with, it is cheat software. A french bread knife is still a bread knife even though it may have been made to slice a baguette in france, while in other countries it was made to slice oval loafs of bread or bread made with rye flour and not wheat flour. > > > > You are just nitpicking and twisting words here by stating that a cheat software becomes anything else than a cheat software if it was made for single player games and not for multiplayer games, which by the way is a claim that I am sure you will be unable to back up with any source. Just for you I went to that programs websites and checked for myself, and what I found was just this: > > > > _Q:What is Cheat Engine? > > > > A:Cheat Engine is a tool that helps you figure out how a game/application works and make modifications to it. [...]_ > > > > Notice how it does not say "Cheat Engine is a tool that helps you figure out how a singleplayer game/application works and make modifications to it."? > > > > > > > > Also, legal or illegal is not the same as weapon or not weapon. A gun is a weapon because its purpose is being one, the same goes for a shotgun. The reason why a gun is allowed (in your contry, not in mine) and a shotgun isn't is of course not because a shotgun is a weapon and a gun is not. The law is a little more extensive than just to say "All weapons are forbidden and all non-weapons aren't" > > > > > > > > The principle that you are not getting because like so many people you don't understand analogies well is this: The nature of an item is determined by its purpose. > > > > For you and the other people lacking understanding of analogies I will expand this just a little, with equally little hope that you will then understand. I'll give you two more examples: > > > > > > > > A piece of butter can be food or art. (Google Beuys and butter.) > > > > A strong push to someone's back can either be murder or an act of saving someone's life, depending on if that person stands at the edge of a cliff or in front of an approaching train. > > > > > > > > Now, what does a piece of software which can be used to cheat ot to debug, an item that can be used to kill someone or play a game with, a piece of butter that can be food or art and a push to the back that can be murder or lifesaving in common? The same thing everything in this world has in common. The definition of something comes from the intent/purpose. And a software that was made and intended to cheat with will stay cheat software, no matter what you write. The fact that there are more powerful debuggers that are made for debugging and not for cheating does not justify labeling a cheat software as "multipurpose tool" or "powerful debugger". It is cheat software, and ArenaNet decided to target cheat software. Maybe next time they decide to also target powerful debuggers. But this is as hypothetical as all the horrible scenarios that people came up with in this thread about ArenaNet searching your harddrive, transmitting word documents, checking what webpage you browse and all the other nonsense. > > > > > > > > As I am 100% sure that you will come up with more stuff that is not logical, not well thought out, and has nothing to do with the fact that ArenaNet just happens to have the right to decide on their own if they want to hunt for users of cheat software or for users of debuggers, I will end my communication with you here. > > > > > > > > > Third, you copy something that is completely out of context and who knows where you copy them from, then claim it wasn't made for single player. That is yet another fallacy. Here, I got this from their main site under "About Cheat Engine", "Cheat Engine is an open source tool designed to help you with modifying single player games running under window so you can make them harder or easier depending on your preference." > > > > > My quote does not have any context on the official website it came from, which is the programs homepage FAQ section, question number 1. > > One would expect that the programs own homepage would be able to be clear about how the apparently most frequently asked question should be answered. > > > > Rest is the stuff I expected and no longer comment on. > > > > > > Which again you didn't read everything. > > Q:Will Dark Byte help me with online games? > A:No Irrelevant as Dark Byte is the author, not the software. This states that the author is not willing to help a user not that the software can't do it without his help. > Q:Can I use Cheat Engine to hack, crack or unprotect other programs ? > A:No, you may only use cheat engine for legal activities. If the license agreement of a game says to not disassemble it, then do not use ce's disassembler features! (Unless you live in a place like Europe where the law precedes license agreements and where you have the right to reverse engineer all software for personal use) > "You may not" is different from "you can not", Cheaters give a "kitten" about what they may and may not do. > If you want to argue, please read everything and not just things convenient for your arguments. At the end of the day, the purpose of the software does not matter, it all depends on how the users use it. [Already refuted repetition removed] Read everything like you, who only picked the thing convenient for his argument while trying to dismiss my quote with unfounded accusations which prove that you had no idea that it came from the except same website as your quote? Right. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SkyShroud.2865 Posted April 17, 2018 Share Posted April 17, 2018 > @"Shikigami.4013" said: > > @"SkyShroud.2865" said: > > > @"Shikigami.4013" said: > > > > @"SkyShroud.2865" said: > > > > > @"Shikigami.4013" said: > > > > > > @"SkyShroud.2865" said: > > > > > > > @"Shikigami.4013" said: > > > > > > > > @"SkyShroud.2865" said: > > > > > > > > The thread derail so much, people keep talking about EULA and TOS, as if anyone of you here are legit lawyers. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Banning because of cheat engine nevertheless is still a double standard. There are many debugging tools out there and cheat engine is simply one of the many. It really puzzling decision to ban people using cheat engine while excluding other debugging tools available which can technically do more than what cheat engine can do. It can even be seen as a immature, not well thought and unprofessional decision. Naturally, since it was decided to only ban cheat engine and not include other debugger, such decision can be easily seen as generalization than a professional one. Afterall, hackers will use more than one debugger tool while hacking a online game. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > You know what the basis is for a government agency to determine which items are weapons, which items are weapons you need a licence for, and which items are completely illegal and may not even be owned? **They look primarily at what the item in question was made for.** > > > > > > > > > > > > > > The much cited "bread knife" is not labled as a weapon because it was not intended to be a weapon but to slice bread. A baseball bat is not classified as being a weapon because it was made to play baseball with and not to kill someone with a swing to his head, just like a brick of stone is not labled to be a weapon because it was made to build a wall and not hit a head. On the other hand, there are knives that are classified as a weapon because they were intended to be a weapon - even if you could slice bread with them. There are sticks of wood connected with a chain (Nunchaku) that are classified as a weapon because in this time and environment their sole reason to exist is being a weapon, although once long ago they were allegedly made as a threshing tool by farmers in japan. It is the **purpose** of an item that decides what the law and subsequently the public opinion decides in regards to being a weapon or being a tool. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > For that reason, "Cheat engine" is a cheat program, and not a "multipurpose tool" or a "powerful debugger". It is designed to cheat, and the fact that it can be used for other things does not make it less of a cheat program, just like the ability to slice bread with a combat knife like used by john rambo in the movies does not make it a bread knife. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > As I wrote in an earlier post, you will not be able to buy and drive a tank and then tell the police that you are not using it for war but only drive in it because you feel so safe. A tank is made for war, a car is made for driving. And to come back to what I wrote earlier in **this** thread: Because a car is made for driving and not for running people over with it, it is not classified as a weapon, although you can easily kill any pedestrian with a car if you decide to. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Oh? Using your logic, cheat engine is made for single player game, not multiplayer game thus again base on your logic, how is it applicable to multiple players game? > > > > > > > > > > > > You are simply using the category of weapon and not the item itself. Unfortunately, there are way **more powerful** debugger tools and thus easily the same category yet you conveniently denounce them. How absurd to call things that are technically much powerful more legal. You are double standard too and you are not objectively arguing about things. If you don't understand what are being said, I will phrase it the "weapon" way you are using, to you a gun is illegal but a shotgun is not. > > > > > > > > > > It was made to cheat, not to debug. Noone cares what kind of games it was made to use with, it is cheat software. A french bread knife is still a bread knife even though it may have been made to slice a baguette in france, while in other countries it was made to slice oval loafs of bread or bread made with rye flour and not wheat flour. > > > > > You are just nitpicking and twisting words here by stating that a cheat software becomes anything else than a cheat software if it was made for single player games and not for multiplayer games, which by the way is a claim that I am sure you will be unable to back up with any source. Just for you I went to that programs websites and checked for myself, and what I found was just this: > > > > > _Q:What is Cheat Engine? > > > > > A:Cheat Engine is a tool that helps you figure out how a game/application works and make modifications to it. [...]_ > > > > > Notice how it does not say "Cheat Engine is a tool that helps you figure out how a singleplayer game/application works and make modifications to it."? > > > > > > > > > > Also, legal or illegal is not the same as weapon or not weapon. A gun is a weapon because its purpose is being one, the same goes for a shotgun. The reason why a gun is allowed (in your contry, not in mine) and a shotgun isn't is of course not because a shotgun is a weapon and a gun is not. The law is a little more extensive than just to say "All weapons are forbidden and all non-weapons aren't" > > > > > > > > > > The principle that you are not getting because like so many people you don't understand analogies well is this: The nature of an item is determined by its purpose. > > > > > For you and the other people lacking understanding of analogies I will expand this just a little, with equally little hope that you will then understand. I'll give you two more examples: > > > > > > > > > > A piece of butter can be food or art. (Google Beuys and butter.) > > > > > A strong push to someone's back can either be murder or an act of saving someone's life, depending on if that person stands at the edge of a cliff or in front of an approaching train. > > > > > > > > > > Now, what does a piece of software which can be used to cheat ot to debug, an item that can be used to kill someone or play a game with, a piece of butter that can be food or art and a push to the back that can be murder or lifesaving in common? The same thing everything in this world has in common. The definition of something comes from the intent/purpose. And a software that was made and intended to cheat with will stay cheat software, no matter what you write. The fact that there are more powerful debuggers that are made for debugging and not for cheating does not justify labeling a cheat software as "multipurpose tool" or "powerful debugger". It is cheat software, and ArenaNet decided to target cheat software. Maybe next time they decide to also target powerful debuggers. But this is as hypothetical as all the horrible scenarios that people came up with in this thread about ArenaNet searching your harddrive, transmitting word documents, checking what webpage you browse and all the other nonsense. > > > > > > > > > > As I am 100% sure that you will come up with more stuff that is not logical, not well thought out, and has nothing to do with the fact that ArenaNet just happens to have the right to decide on their own if they want to hunt for users of cheat software or for users of debuggers, I will end my communication with you here. > > > > > > > > > > > > Third, you copy something that is completely out of context and who knows where you copy them from, then claim it wasn't made for single player. That is yet another fallacy. Here, I got this from their main site under "About Cheat Engine", "Cheat Engine is an open source tool designed to help you with modifying single player games running under window so you can make them harder or easier depending on your preference." > > > > > > > My quote does not have any context on the official website it came from, which is the programs homepage FAQ section, question number 1. > > > One would expect that the programs own homepage would be able to be clear about how the apparently most frequently asked question should be answered. > > > > > > Rest is the stuff I expected and no longer comment on. > > > > > > > > > > Which again you didn't read everything. > > > > Q:Will Dark Byte help me with online games? > > A:No > Irrelevant as Dark Byte is the author, not the software. This states that the author is not willing to help a user not that the software can't do it without his help. > > > Q:Can I use Cheat Engine to hack, crack or unprotect other programs ? > > A:No, you may only use cheat engine for legal activities. If the license agreement of a game says to not disassemble it, then do not use ce's disassembler features! (Unless you live in a place like Europe where the law precedes license agreements and where you have the right to reverse engineer all software for personal use) > > > "You may not" is different from "you can not", Cheaters give a "kitten" about what they may and may not do. > > > If you want to argue, please read everything and not just things convenient for your arguments. At the end of the day, the purpose of the software does not matter, it all depends on how the users use it. [Already refuted repetition removed] > Read everything like you, who only picked the thing convenient for his argument while trying to dismiss my quote with unfounded accusations which prove that you had no idea that it came from the except same website as your quote? Right. > > > > Are you gonna restart your confusion of "How it is used" vs "Purpose of the tool" again? Then you conveniently cut away the last part of the statement. Like I have said, you really just want to argue for the sake of arguing. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mrstealth.6701 Posted April 17, 2018 Share Posted April 17, 2018 > @"Ubi.4136" said: > Cheat engine was made to "make them ("games") harder or easier depending on your preference". > No one is running cheat engine to make GW2 harder. It was "made" to make games play at the difficulty users of the program wanted. > It appears that they all wanted to make GW2 easier, giving them an advantage over other players, and subsequently, it's use got all of them banned. From what I've read about this mess, it only appears that they all had Cheat Engine running at the same time GW2 was open. That's surely enough evidence to warrant a closer inspection of activity on the account, but it's hardly proof that anything illicit was going on. Cheat Engine could have been left open in the background, or being used for another game. There is room to argue that having Cheat Engine running at the same time as an online game is risky/careless, but I would argue that it is equally careless for a developer to ban someone without being certain they are actually using it in their game. If banning for the mere existence of Cheat Engine is going to be the new acceptable standard, then I guess I should be banned for having Logitech Gaming Software and Corsair Utility Engine running all of the time. One of the primary functions of both of those programs is running multi-keypress macros, which is explicitly prohibited by Anet's rules. In fact, for CUE, a macro is the default option selected when setting up a new key function. Yet despite having these programs running constantly for years, I have never been banned from GW2. I assume this is because Anet actually takes the time to check whether or not macros are being used, instead of summarily banhammering everyone using a program that could potentially be used for prohibited activities. What is their excuse for not taking the same level care with players running Cheat Engine? If Anet can bother to check whether someone is using a macro to play music or automate gameplay, they can surely make an effort to determine whether someone running Cheat Engine is actually using it to cheat in GW2. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nightlark.4029 Posted April 17, 2018 Share Posted April 17, 2018 > @"Shikigami.4013" said: > > @"SkyShroud.2865" said: > > Don't. Let his arguments fall apart slowly, one by one. > > > > If he switched to "how is it used" from "what is it made for". I can highlight that fact and it will show everyone how conveniently he switched from one principle to another, then use his own fallacies arguments against him. > > How interesting! > "Oh, of course I can use a tank to drive like a car in america (Oops, it just needs "Modifications" and "A special permit" to do so) > > How about this: > "Oh, of course you can use cheat engine while playing GW2! (Oops, it just needs "Modification" and "A special permit" to do so) > > Did you mean that by using someone's fallacies against them? > Who cares that you have to fill out some paperwork? Point is, it is possible for an individual to own a fully functional tank in America (and some other countries). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Shikigami.4013 Posted April 17, 2018 Share Posted April 17, 2018 > @"SkyShroud.2865" said: > > @"Shikigami.4013" said: > > > @"SkyShroud.2865" said: > > > > @"Shikigami.4013" said: > > > > > @"SkyShroud.2865" said: > > > > > > @"Shikigami.4013" said: > > > > > > > @"SkyShroud.2865" said: > > > > > > > > @"Shikigami.4013" said: > > > > > > > > > @"SkyShroud.2865" said: > > > > > > > > > The thread derail so much, people keep talking about EULA and TOS, as if anyone of you here are legit lawyers. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Banning because of cheat engine nevertheless is still a double standard. There are many debugging tools out there and cheat engine is simply one of the many. It really puzzling decision to ban people using cheat engine while excluding other debugging tools available which can technically do more than what cheat engine can do. It can even be seen as a immature, not well thought and unprofessional decision. Naturally, since it was decided to only ban cheat engine and not include other debugger, such decision can be easily seen as generalization than a professional one. Afterall, hackers will use more than one debugger tool while hacking a online game. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > You know what the basis is for a government agency to determine which items are weapons, which items are weapons you need a licence for, and which items are completely illegal and may not even be owned? **They look primarily at what the item in question was made for.** > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > The much cited "bread knife" is not labled as a weapon because it was not intended to be a weapon but to slice bread. A baseball bat is not classified as being a weapon because it was made to play baseball with and not to kill someone with a swing to his head, just like a brick of stone is not labled to be a weapon because it was made to build a wall and not hit a head. On the other hand, there are knives that are classified as a weapon because they were intended to be a weapon - even if you could slice bread with them. There are sticks of wood connected with a chain (Nunchaku) that are classified as a weapon because in this time and environment their sole reason to exist is being a weapon, although once long ago they were allegedly made as a threshing tool by farmers in japan. It is the **purpose** of an item that decides what the law and subsequently the public opinion decides in regards to being a weapon or being a tool. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > For that reason, "Cheat engine" is a cheat program, and not a "multipurpose tool" or a "powerful debugger". It is designed to cheat, and the fact that it can be used for other things does not make it less of a cheat program, just like the ability to slice bread with a combat knife like used by john rambo in the movies does not make it a bread knife. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > As I wrote in an earlier post, you will not be able to buy and drive a tank and then tell the police that you are not using it for war but only drive in it because you feel so safe. A tank is made for war, a car is made for driving. And to come back to what I wrote earlier in **this** thread: Because a car is made for driving and not for running people over with it, it is not classified as a weapon, although you can easily kill any pedestrian with a car if you decide to. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Oh? Using your logic, cheat engine is made for single player game, not multiplayer game thus again base on your logic, how is it applicable to multiple players game? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > You are simply using the category of weapon and not the item itself. Unfortunately, there are way **more powerful** debugger tools and thus easily the same category yet you conveniently denounce them. How absurd to call things that are technically much powerful more legal. You are double standard too and you are not objectively arguing about things. If you don't understand what are being said, I will phrase it the "weapon" way you are using, to you a gun is illegal but a shotgun is not. > > > > > > > > > > > > It was made to cheat, not to debug. Noone cares what kind of games it was made to use with, it is cheat software. A french bread knife is still a bread knife even though it may have been made to slice a baguette in france, while in other countries it was made to slice oval loafs of bread or bread made with rye flour and not wheat flour. > > > > > > You are just nitpicking and twisting words here by stating that a cheat software becomes anything else than a cheat software if it was made for single player games and not for multiplayer games, which by the way is a claim that I am sure you will be unable to back up with any source. Just for you I went to that programs websites and checked for myself, and what I found was just this: > > > > > > _Q:What is Cheat Engine? > > > > > > A:Cheat Engine is a tool that helps you figure out how a game/application works and make modifications to it. [...]_ > > > > > > Notice how it does not say "Cheat Engine is a tool that helps you figure out how a singleplayer game/application works and make modifications to it."? > > > > > > > > > > > > Also, legal or illegal is not the same as weapon or not weapon. A gun is a weapon because its purpose is being one, the same goes for a shotgun. The reason why a gun is allowed (in your contry, not in mine) and a shotgun isn't is of course not because a shotgun is a weapon and a gun is not. The law is a little more extensive than just to say "All weapons are forbidden and all non-weapons aren't" > > > > > > > > > > > > The principle that you are not getting because like so many people you don't understand analogies well is this: The nature of an item is determined by its purpose. > > > > > > For you and the other people lacking understanding of analogies I will expand this just a little, with equally little hope that you will then understand. I'll give you two more examples: > > > > > > > > > > > > A piece of butter can be food or art. (Google Beuys and butter.) > > > > > > A strong push to someone's back can either be murder or an act of saving someone's life, depending on if that person stands at the edge of a cliff or in front of an approaching train. > > > > > > > > > > > > Now, what does a piece of software which can be used to cheat ot to debug, an item that can be used to kill someone or play a game with, a piece of butter that can be food or art and a push to the back that can be murder or lifesaving in common? The same thing everything in this world has in common. The definition of something comes from the intent/purpose. And a software that was made and intended to cheat with will stay cheat software, no matter what you write. The fact that there are more powerful debuggers that are made for debugging and not for cheating does not justify labeling a cheat software as "multipurpose tool" or "powerful debugger". It is cheat software, and ArenaNet decided to target cheat software. Maybe next time they decide to also target powerful debuggers. But this is as hypothetical as all the horrible scenarios that people came up with in this thread about ArenaNet searching your harddrive, transmitting word documents, checking what webpage you browse and all the other nonsense. > > > > > > > > > > > > As I am 100% sure that you will come up with more stuff that is not logical, not well thought out, and has nothing to do with the fact that ArenaNet just happens to have the right to decide on their own if they want to hunt for users of cheat software or for users of debuggers, I will end my communication with you here. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Third, you copy something that is completely out of context and who knows where you copy them from, then claim it wasn't made for single player. That is yet another fallacy. Here, I got this from their main site under "About Cheat Engine", "Cheat Engine is an open source tool designed to help you with modifying single player games running under window so you can make them harder or easier depending on your preference." > > > > > > > > > My quote does not have any context on the official website it came from, which is the programs homepage FAQ section, question number 1. > > > > One would expect that the programs own homepage would be able to be clear about how the apparently most frequently asked question should be answered. > > > > > > > > Rest is the stuff I expected and no longer comment on. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Which again you didn't read everything. > > > > > > Q:Will Dark Byte help me with online games? > > > A:No > > Irrelevant as Dark Byte is the author, not the software. This states that the author is not willing to help a user not that the software can't do it without his help. > > > > > Q:Can I use Cheat Engine to hack, crack or unprotect other programs ? > > > A:No, you may only use cheat engine for legal activities. If the license agreement of a game says to not disassemble it, then do not use ce's disassembler features! (Unless you live in a place like Europe where the law precedes license agreements and where you have the right to reverse engineer all software for personal use) > > > > > "You may not" is different from "you can not", Cheaters give a "kitten" about what they may and may not do. > > > > > If you want to argue, please read everything and not just things convenient for your arguments. At the end of the day, the purpose of the software does not matter, it all depends on how the users use it. [Already refuted repetition removed] > > Read everything like you, who only picked the thing convenient for his argument while trying to dismiss my quote with unfounded accusations which prove that you had no idea that it came from the except same website as your quote? Right. > > > > > > > > > > Are you gonna restart your confusion of "How it is used" vs "Purpose of the tool" again? > > Then you conveniently cut away the last part of the statement. Like I have said, you really just want to argue for the sake of arguing. You are the confused one. a) My post to which you answered by accusing me of switching from "how it is used" to "what it is made for" never even was about "how it is used" The terms I used to point out how items were defined were "what was it made for" and "what is its purpose" (both bolded) which mean exactly the same. I only used different words so that more people would understand the meaning. Seems you did not. b) Now you accuse me of restarting my confusion of "How it is used" vs "Purpose of the tool". Wait, what? You can't even recall your own posts, much less mine. Again, the post I made used "what was it made for" and "what is its purpose" (both bolded) to make clear that software is cheat software when it was created to cheat. c) I cut off one statement (and intentionally made clear that I cut it off) because we already discussed that and I had stated that I would not go back to that and keep arguing. As a result of me avoiding further argument you accuse me of arguing. No further comment. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SkyShroud.2865 Posted April 17, 2018 Share Posted April 17, 2018 > @"Shikigami.4013" said: > > @"SkyShroud.2865" said: > > > @"Shikigami.4013" said: > > > > @"SkyShroud.2865" said: > > > > > @"Shikigami.4013" said: > > > > > > @"SkyShroud.2865" said: > > > > > > > @"Shikigami.4013" said: > > > > > > > > @"SkyShroud.2865" said: > > > > > > > > > @"Shikigami.4013" said: > > > > > > > > > > @"SkyShroud.2865" said: > > > > > > > > > > The thread derail so much, people keep talking about EULA and TOS, as if anyone of you here are legit lawyers. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Banning because of cheat engine nevertheless is still a double standard. There are many debugging tools out there and cheat engine is simply one of the many. It really puzzling decision to ban people using cheat engine while excluding other debugging tools available which can technically do more than what cheat engine can do. It can even be seen as a immature, not well thought and unprofessional decision. Naturally, since it was decided to only ban cheat engine and not include other debugger, such decision can be easily seen as generalization than a professional one. Afterall, hackers will use more than one debugger tool while hacking a online game. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > You know what the basis is for a government agency to determine which items are weapons, which items are weapons you need a licence for, and which items are completely illegal and may not even be owned? **They look primarily at what the item in question was made for.** > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > The much cited "bread knife" is not labled as a weapon because it was not intended to be a weapon but to slice bread. A baseball bat is not classified as being a weapon because it was made to play baseball with and not to kill someone with a swing to his head, just like a brick of stone is not labled to be a weapon because it was made to build a wall and not hit a head. On the other hand, there are knives that are classified as a weapon because they were intended to be a weapon - even if you could slice bread with them. There are sticks of wood connected with a chain (Nunchaku) that are classified as a weapon because in this time and environment their sole reason to exist is being a weapon, although once long ago they were allegedly made as a threshing tool by farmers in japan. It is the **purpose** of an item that decides what the law and subsequently the public opinion decides in regards to being a weapon or being a tool. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > For that reason, "Cheat engine" is a cheat program, and not a "multipurpose tool" or a "powerful debugger". It is designed to cheat, and the fact that it can be used for other things does not make it less of a cheat program, just like the ability to slice bread with a combat knife like used by john rambo in the movies does not make it a bread knife. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > As I wrote in an earlier post, you will not be able to buy and drive a tank and then tell the police that you are not using it for war but only drive in it because you feel so safe. A tank is made for war, a car is made for driving. And to come back to what I wrote earlier in **this** thread: Because a car is made for driving and not for running people over with it, it is not classified as a weapon, although you can easily kill any pedestrian with a car if you decide to. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Oh? Using your logic, cheat engine is made for single player game, not multiplayer game thus again base on your logic, how is it applicable to multiple players game? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > You are simply using the category of weapon and not the item itself. Unfortunately, there are way **more powerful** debugger tools and thus easily the same category yet you conveniently denounce them. How absurd to call things that are technically much powerful more legal. You are double standard too and you are not objectively arguing about things. If you don't understand what are being said, I will phrase it the "weapon" way you are using, to you a gun is illegal but a shotgun is not. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > It was made to cheat, not to debug. Noone cares what kind of games it was made to use with, it is cheat software. A french bread knife is still a bread knife even though it may have been made to slice a baguette in france, while in other countries it was made to slice oval loafs of bread or bread made with rye flour and not wheat flour. > > > > > > > You are just nitpicking and twisting words here by stating that a cheat software becomes anything else than a cheat software if it was made for single player games and not for multiplayer games, which by the way is a claim that I am sure you will be unable to back up with any source. Just for you I went to that programs websites and checked for myself, and what I found was just this: > > > > > > > _Q:What is Cheat Engine? > > > > > > > A:Cheat Engine is a tool that helps you figure out how a game/application works and make modifications to it. [...]_ > > > > > > > Notice how it does not say "Cheat Engine is a tool that helps you figure out how a singleplayer game/application works and make modifications to it."? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Also, legal or illegal is not the same as weapon or not weapon. A gun is a weapon because its purpose is being one, the same goes for a shotgun. The reason why a gun is allowed (in your contry, not in mine) and a shotgun isn't is of course not because a shotgun is a weapon and a gun is not. The law is a little more extensive than just to say "All weapons are forbidden and all non-weapons aren't" > > > > > > > > > > > > > > The principle that you are not getting because like so many people you don't understand analogies well is this: The nature of an item is determined by its purpose. > > > > > > > For you and the other people lacking understanding of analogies I will expand this just a little, with equally little hope that you will then understand. I'll give you two more examples: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > A piece of butter can be food or art. (Google Beuys and butter.) > > > > > > > A strong push to someone's back can either be murder or an act of saving someone's life, depending on if that person stands at the edge of a cliff or in front of an approaching train. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Now, what does a piece of software which can be used to cheat ot to debug, an item that can be used to kill someone or play a game with, a piece of butter that can be food or art and a push to the back that can be murder or lifesaving in common? The same thing everything in this world has in common. The definition of something comes from the intent/purpose. And a software that was made and intended to cheat with will stay cheat software, no matter what you write. The fact that there are more powerful debuggers that are made for debugging and not for cheating does not justify labeling a cheat software as "multipurpose tool" or "powerful debugger". It is cheat software, and ArenaNet decided to target cheat software. Maybe next time they decide to also target powerful debuggers. But this is as hypothetical as all the horrible scenarios that people came up with in this thread about ArenaNet searching your harddrive, transmitting word documents, checking what webpage you browse and all the other nonsense. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > As I am 100% sure that you will come up with more stuff that is not logical, not well thought out, and has nothing to do with the fact that ArenaNet just happens to have the right to decide on their own if they want to hunt for users of cheat software or for users of debuggers, I will end my communication with you here. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Third, you copy something that is completely out of context and who knows where you copy them from, then claim it wasn't made for single player. That is yet another fallacy. Here, I got this from their main site under "About Cheat Engine", "Cheat Engine is an open source tool designed to help you with modifying single player games running under window so you can make them harder or easier depending on your preference." > > > > > > > > > > > My quote does not have any context on the official website it came from, which is the programs homepage FAQ section, question number 1. > > > > > One would expect that the programs own homepage would be able to be clear about how the apparently most frequently asked question should be answered. > > > > > > > > > > Rest is the stuff I expected and no longer comment on. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Which again you didn't read everything. > > > > > > > > Q:Will Dark Byte help me with online games? > > > > A:No > > > Irrelevant as Dark Byte is the author, not the software. This states that the author is not willing to help a user not that the software can't do it without his help. > > > > > > > Q:Can I use Cheat Engine to hack, crack or unprotect other programs ? > > > > A:No, you may only use cheat engine for legal activities. If the license agreement of a game says to not disassemble it, then do not use ce's disassembler features! (Unless you live in a place like Europe where the law precedes license agreements and where you have the right to reverse engineer all software for personal use) > > > > > > > "You may not" is different from "you can not", Cheaters give a "kitten" about what they may and may not do. > > > > > > > If you want to argue, please read everything and not just things convenient for your arguments. At the end of the day, the purpose of the software does not matter, it all depends on how the users use it. [Already refuted repetition removed] > > > Read everything like you, who only picked the thing convenient for his argument while trying to dismiss my quote with unfounded accusations which prove that you had no idea that it came from the except same website as your quote? Right. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Are you gonna restart your confusion of "How it is used" vs "Purpose of the tool" again? > > > > Then you conveniently cut away the last part of the statement. Like I have said, you really just want to argue for the sake of arguing. > > You are the confused one. > a) My post to which you answered by accusing me of switching from "how it is used" to "what it is made for" never even was about "how it is used" > The terms I used to point out how items were defined were "what was it made for" and "what is its purpose" (both bolded) which mean exactly the same. I only used different words so that more people would understand the meaning. Seems you did not. > > b) Now you accuse me of restarting my confusion of "How it is used" vs "Purpose of the tool". Wait, what? You can't even recall your own posts, much less mine. Again, the post I made used "what was it made for" and "what is its purpose" (both bolded) to make clear that software is cheat software when it was created to cheat. > > c) I cut off one statement (and intentionally made clear that I cut it off) because we already discussed that and I had stated that I would not go back to that and keep arguing. As a result of me avoiding further argument you accuse me of arguing. No further comment. > > Lol! You should read again, you really should, post are made in black and white, it doesn't change. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
artemis.6781 Posted April 18, 2018 Share Posted April 18, 2018 This whole thread should just be closed! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rankomonaut.4708 Posted April 18, 2018 Author Share Posted April 18, 2018 > @"mrstealth.6701" said: > > @"Ubi.4136" said: > > Cheat engine was made to "make them ("games") harder or easier depending on your preference". > > No one is running cheat engine to make GW2 harder. It was "made" to make games play at the difficulty users of the program wanted. > > It appears that they all wanted to make GW2 easier, giving them an advantage over other players, and subsequently, it's use got all of them banned. > > From what I've read about this mess, it only appears that they all had Cheat Engine running at the same time GW2 was open. That's surely enough evidence to warrant a closer inspection of activity on the account, but it's hardly proof that anything illicit was going on. Cheat Engine could have been left open in the background, or being used for another game. There is room to argue that having Cheat Engine running at the same time as an online game is risky/careless, but I would argue that it is equally careless for a developer to ban someone without being certain they are actually using it in their game. > > If banning for the mere existence of Cheat Engine is going to be the new acceptable standard, then I guess I should be banned for having Logitech Gaming Software and Corsair Utility Engine running all of the time. One of the primary functions of both of those programs is running multi-keypress macros, which is explicitly prohibited by Anet's rules. In fact, for CUE, a macro is the default option selected when setting up a new key function. Yet despite having these programs running constantly for years, I have never been banned from GW2. I assume this is because Anet actually takes the time to check whether or not macros are being used, instead of summarily banhammering everyone using a program that could potentially be used for prohibited activities. What is their excuse for not taking the same level care with players running Cheat Engine? > > If Anet can bother to check whether someone is using a macro to play music or automate gameplay, they can surely make an effort to determine whether someone running Cheat Engine is actually using it to cheat in GW2. this Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Susy.7529 Posted April 18, 2018 Share Posted April 18, 2018 > @"GreyWolf.8670" said: > > @"Susy.7529" said: > > > @"STIHL.2489" said: > > > > @"Jason.5983" said: > > > > > @"STIHL.2489" said: > > > > > > @"FrizzFreston.5290" said: > > > > > > > @"STIHL.2489" said: > > > > > > > Well, to all the players that are taking a stand against this, and plan to leave the game, for whatever reasons. I hope you and the cheaters you are standing with, find a nice game that you can all play together, without anyone imposing any rules or regulations on you and how you want to play the game. > > > > > > > > > > > > Don't all games have game rules? > > > > > > > > > > You would think.. but after reading this topic, I have seen that some players get upset when those rules get enforced, so, to all of them, both the cheaters and the enables, I hope they find a wonderful game to play together.. that is not this one. > > > > > > > > "Enablers". It's troubling that you would insinuate that. By your own logic, at the other end of the spectrum, you could be called an enabler of unethical privacy intrusions. Sound fair? No? I didn't think so. > > > > > > You signed a contract saying you allow them to do this... explain to me how it's unethical? > > > > If you sign a contract you do that for the overall benefits it offers (aka playing the game you like in this case). It doesn't always mean that you agree on every single points of that contract, it just means you believe that benefits are greater than disadvantages (aka the points you consider unfair/unethical). > > Then you disagreed and shouldn't have created your account. You don't get to pick with parts of a contract you want to apply to you. False, it's subjective, if someone disagrees with some points he may still create an account if he believe he can tolerate those points. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GreyWolf.8670 Posted April 18, 2018 Share Posted April 18, 2018 > @"Susy.7529" said: > > @"GreyWolf.8670" said: > > > @"Susy.7529" said: > > > > @"STIHL.2489" said: > > > > > @"Jason.5983" said: > > > > > > @"STIHL.2489" said: > > > > > > > @"FrizzFreston.5290" said: > > > > > > > > @"STIHL.2489" said: > > > > > > > > Well, to all the players that are taking a stand against this, and plan to leave the game, for whatever reasons. I hope you and the cheaters you are standing with, find a nice game that you can all play together, without anyone imposing any rules or regulations on you and how you want to play the game. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Don't all games have game rules? > > > > > > > > > > > > You would think.. but after reading this topic, I have seen that some players get upset when those rules get enforced, so, to all of them, both the cheaters and the enables, I hope they find a wonderful game to play together.. that is not this one. > > > > > > > > > > "Enablers". It's troubling that you would insinuate that. By your own logic, at the other end of the spectrum, you could be called an enabler of unethical privacy intrusions. Sound fair? No? I didn't think so. > > > > > > > > You signed a contract saying you allow them to do this... explain to me how it's unethical? > > > > > > If you sign a contract you do that for the overall benefits it offers (aka playing the game you like in this case). It doesn't always mean that you agree on every single points of that contract, it just means you believe that benefits are greater than disadvantages (aka the points you consider unfair/unethical). > > > > Then you disagreed and shouldn't have created your account. You don't get to pick with parts of a contract you want to apply to you. > > False, it's subjective, if someone disagrees with some points he may still create an account if he believe he can tolerate those points. Sure, you can physically click on the Accept button but you're still bound by it if you do so. It's not subjective, it's a legal document. If you don't agree to the contents then don't sign it. There's no option to negotiate the terms. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Deihnyx.6318 Posted April 18, 2018 Share Posted April 18, 2018 > @"Susy.7529" said: > > @"GreyWolf.8670" said: > > > @"Susy.7529" said: > > > > @"STIHL.2489" said: > > > > > @"Jason.5983" said: > > > > > > @"STIHL.2489" said: > > > > > > > @"FrizzFreston.5290" said: > > > > > > > > @"STIHL.2489" said: > > > > > > > > Well, to all the players that are taking a stand against this, and plan to leave the game, for whatever reasons. I hope you and the cheaters you are standing with, find a nice game that you can all play together, without anyone imposing any rules or regulations on you and how you want to play the game. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Don't all games have game rules? > > > > > > > > > > > > You would think.. but after reading this topic, I have seen that some players get upset when those rules get enforced, so, to all of them, both the cheaters and the enables, I hope they find a wonderful game to play together.. that is not this one. > > > > > > > > > > "Enablers". It's troubling that you would insinuate that. By your own logic, at the other end of the spectrum, you could be called an enabler of unethical privacy intrusions. Sound fair? No? I didn't think so. > > > > > > > > You signed a contract saying you allow them to do this... explain to me how it's unethical? > > > > > > If you sign a contract you do that for the overall benefits it offers (aka playing the game you like in this case). It doesn't always mean that you agree on every single points of that contract, it just means you believe that benefits are greater than disadvantages (aka the points you consider unfair/unethical). > > > > Then you disagreed and shouldn't have created your account. You don't get to pick with parts of a contract you want to apply to you. > > False, it's subjective, if someone disagrees with some points he may still create an account if he believe he can tolerate those points. And if people don't respect them, Anet may still ban them. And these people from Europe can still try getting that to court if they fill that they should be able not to give a kitten about ToS and freely cheat in games. Easy as that :D I do hope people are happy, it got Guild Wars 2 some bad press on the internet, outside of the GW2 community, where the news was relayed incomplete, without the recent reddit update where the guy admits Anet didn't just send your list of hashed processes without filtering. I don't believe that the people who pushed for a internet-wide drama even care about the game. You got what you wanted though, there will likely not be any other attempt at catching cheaters and they'll be back in no time in game. All of that for you so called privacy of happy windows users. What a waste. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gandalf.1537 Posted April 18, 2018 Share Posted April 18, 2018 This is the exact reason I do not use 3rd party anything. I don't care if the people that make it says it's legit. Unless I hear from the people that made the game that it's okay to use, then I won't use it. Simple as that. Sorry but it's your fault for using something that's 3rd party. Also you got to remember, some 3rd party addons / apps can do things to their servers that can cause security issues or something bad. While I am sure not all bad but however you must remember, the company is protecting it's investment and their users as well as their servers. I don't know if they'll ever tell us which 3rd party apps are known to be safe but I don't know. I am quite happy with what anet provided me with, if they decide to make something or due some changes then i'll stick with what's safe to use by them from them. :) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts