Account suspension discussion [merged]

[Faaris.8013]

@Voltekka.2375 said:

 

>You know what all of the above does? It defames a company. Libel like this, makes a company get a bad name, people dont spend money on said company.

 

You know, I said I'm outta here, but I feel I have to defend myself on this one. There was one thing Anet could have done to prevent all that from happening: communicate what they have done! When the first rumors came up about them capturing all processes and sending the data to their servers, they could have posted an official rectification on their Twitter, Facebook and here and on reddit, telling everybody that they filtered locally. They could have contacted the reddit user who started this. They decided not to do that and instead let the issue grow for days.

 

Whatever kind of damage came with this, Anet did nothing to prevent it.

[Martimus.6027]

People who were banned: "WHY AM I BANNED?"

 

ANET: "You did the thing we said not to."

 

Also people who were banned: "NO I didn't i only did X thing"

 

ANET: "That is one of the things not to do so we banned you"

 

Again people who were banned: "I Demand to be unbanned even though i did the thing you said not to do and got caught"

 

ANET: "lol bai"

[GreyWolf.8670]

> @"Notjes.7182" said:

> How are communication tools like TS or discord allowed? They clearly provide an advantage.

 

They do not alter messages sent to the server nor do they interact with the game client.

[Deihnyx.6318]

> @"mrstealth.6701" said:

> > @"Voltekka.2375" said:

> > You know what all of the above does? It defames a company. Libel like this, makes a company get a bad name, people dont spend money on said company. Psychology of the masses wont make people look for truth of whatever. They will remember that "ANET violated privacy and banned people wrongly". That company loses earnings. The game gets less and less stuff. The game dies. All that because you cheated, you got caught, and you want revenge for... Being banned for 6 months (not even a permaban).

> >

> > I hope you feel better about trying to ruin the experience for the vast majority of other players. Sincerely, on behalf of users who dont use cheatprograms, thanks.

>

> It's not defamation if the claims are true. Even though it seems that the privacy violation isn't as severe as initially thought, Anet out of nowhere dropped a snooping feature into their game that reports back running programs to them. We now *think* it was only reporting back positive hits on the set of programs they were looking for, but I've not seen a definitive answer on that.

>

> And by their own admission, Anet was banning people for having a multi-purpose program open at the same time as GW2. They didn't care whether or not they had any reason to believe the program was actually being used to cheat in GW2. It's logical to assume that a program made specifically for cheating in GW2 was being used to cheat in GW2, but even in those cases Anet was using a detection method that is known to potentially give false positives. When the program is one commonly used for cheating in tons of other games, you need to be very certain that it was actually being used in *your game* before you drop the banhammer on someone for having it running. Anet has proven many times over the years that they detect and log enough information to determine when illicit activity is happening. They *chose* not to do that this time, instead relying fully on an automated tool with obvious faults, that was outright designed to ban anyone that looks like they *might* be cheating.

>

> I'm sure a large number of the people caught in this ban wave were actually cheating, but that does not change the fact that the system Anet used was poorly thought out and highly likely to ban innocent players. A problem compounded by their stance of not considering appeals, and apparent lack of bothering with actual evidence beyond their faulty detection tool.

>

> If Anet wants to stop players from running Cheat Engine along side GW2, they should have left the detection system in as a local-only scanner(no data being sent back to Anet) that prevents running the game while Cheat Engine is running. What they chose to do instead was just careless and amateurish. I expect better from them, because I know they are capable of it.

 

The problem is that this whole thing turned from what was initially a debate about false positives (which happens... and people were unbanned) into a legal issue, and a lot, lot of dishonesty when it comes to reading the ToS, as demonstrated recently again (seriously, we're discussing whether we had to sign the ToS before or after buying? nobody even read them and it's not like common sense doesn't tell you that cheating is at your own risk).

For the false positives, sure, the debate is fair. I understand both sides of the "Cheat Engine" debate. I personally think that people who are knowledgeable enough to use it should know better but to keep it running while playing an MMO, but well, you can make dumb mistakes and it's fair to claim that there was no malicious intent.

However this drama was big enough so that other sites relayed it. And that IS a problem, because that is not nearly as bad as what is written on these sites, and these sites have no interest in digging deep to find out.

 

And it the end, it hurts the game, it hurts the legit players, and Anet is probably not going to do anything about cheaters anytime soon.

I know I wouldn't, not with a gaming community slowly turning into witch hunters.

[RoseofGilead.8907]

> @"Rankomonaut.4708" said:

> > @"usnedward.9023" said:

> > > @"Rankomonaut.4708" said:

> >

> > > Big Problem is that Anet decided to ignore all pleas. And yes, I know, everybody says they did nothing and that's the problem: The only "person" that could verify that is ArenaNet themselves and here's the fun part: They don't want or can't. So they show us it's better to kitten some innocents alongside as long as ppl get scared enough. *clap clap*

> >

> > That's odd. I plead my case before ANET and they told me exactly what I did though I already knew. Thought it was worth a shot to get ban lifted and they are being very stern on that. So the pleas do not go unanswered it's just the answer you get you do not want. I asked earlier in this post for people to open ticket and post ANET's response. Funny how I was the only one that did that. Because all these "I didn't do it" actually DID do it.

> >

> So far I didn't get an answer to my 2 mails. So, what's the point? Good for you that you got one though.

> €dit: skipped the quoted a bit

> also:

> sent a new support ticket

 

Just so you know: putting in multiple tickets only sets your response time back. I'd delete all tickets except for your first one and just try to be patient because there are a lot of people putting in tickets right now.

[Zushada.6108]

To be perfectly honest, I don't agree with banning people without direct identification of what they did. Blanket statements do not inform the user of what software/hack etc is the problem. I have read a fair number of comments in this thread and many claim to have never used illegal software.

 

Whether this is true or not, I am indifferent as I am glad to see that Anet takes these matters seriously.

 

However, as others have mentioned, they did cause their own problem in many ways when they permitted 3rd party add-ins but then tried to identify or delineate which ones were acceptable. Out of curiosity, I took a look at the TacO website and it has a number of features I would really love to see in this game. I just won't use it because I do not want to risk my account being banned because I misunderstood the already muddied waters over 3rd party tools.

 

What I do think, is that banning an account for 6 months is a very severe punishment; particularly when the suspension message does not identify which specific add-ons or macros were the reason for the suspension. Yes they were listed on the forums later but I think, the add-ins or macros **specific to each user **should be identified in the ban message. To me, these types of suspensions, without user specific reasons, are like coming home from work and grounding your kid for 3 weeks and never telling them why. Plus, just telling the user up front which tools got them banned likely lighten the Service desk tickets in the days after. ;-)

 

Just my 2 cents but a severe punishment like this really should come with a reason.

[Bloodstealer.5978]

> @"Rankomonaut.4708" said:

> Having the guts to suspend people for running programs while playing gw2 (why did we? Because we can? Why do we buy that lots of ram and cpu? Yea, so we can multitask.) but no guts at all if it comes to probably face the ugly truth of false accusations, that's lame imo.

> The minimal update from Ms Gayle are almost to be taken ironic, although thx for the info about CE.

> If I had known that programs running with gw2 would be a problem I would have closed my other activities. (Just check my steam account and check the hours on my idle game).

> Big Problem is that Anet decided to ignore all pleas. And yes, I know, everybody says they did nothing and that's the problem: The only "person" that could verify that is ArenaNet themselves and here's the fun part: They don't want or can't. So they show us it's better to kitten some innocents alongside as long as ppl get scared enough. *clap clap*

>

> PS: I think the worst is that all the gold will be gone when the 10th of Oct arrives. My wife got a mail with her gold and she was a false positve, I guess we "black sheep" (wether guilty or not) won't get it back. So I hope you guys spent your gold and didn't safe it like me. 2001 or something gold.. *sob* Here goes my hoarding..

 

Well there is a positive.. I have noticed fewer farming bots in various locations.. so much so I can see grass again and butterflies.

All is good in the world as far as I am concerned.. then again I never had the urge to load up any third party applications on the list or others besides... but hey be happy, if they were really, really serious about hitting the cheats they could of/should of banned many, many, many more and look into their alt accounts as well. But then again this thread would likely of been 10,000 pages long with even more "I never di nothing wrong honest, those applications were for personal use on otherstuff.

Nah to make a difference they didn't need a ban wave, they needed a tsunami.. I just hope this is just the first of a continued effort... though history maybe shows this was just their yearly purge for PR sake.

[Bloodstealer.5978]

> @"usnedward.9023" said:

> > @"Rankomonaut.4708" said:

>

> > Big Problem is that Anet decided to ignore all pleas. And yes, I know, everybody says they did nothing and that's the problem: The only "person" that could verify that is ArenaNet themselves and here's the fun part: They don't want or can't. So they show us it's better to kitten some innocents alongside as long as ppl get scared enough. *clap clap*

>

> That's odd. I plead my case before ANET and they told me exactly what I did though I already knew. Thought it was worth a shot to get ban lifted and they are being very stern on that. So the pleas do not go unanswered it's just the answer you get you do not want. I asked earlier in this post for people to open ticket and post ANET's response. Funny how I was the only one that did that. Because all these "I didn't do it" actually DID do it.

>

> > @"mrstealth.6701" said:

> > > @"usnedward.9023" said:

> > > • The ToS is CLEAR that at any time they can view your processes and determine the state of the game and it’s use. It is you the player who failed to read it, read it and didn’t care or didn’t think you would get caught.

> > >

> >

> > That section of the ToS is rather vague. I'm not really sure if monitoring "CPU PROCESSES RELATED TO HARDWARE YOU USE WITH THE GAME" is supposed to be referring to specific hardware used to interact with the game, like a keyboard or mouse, or hardware as in the computer in general. It's also further obfuscated with a generic "including, but not limited to" clause, which kinda makes it a free-for-all to mean whatever they want it to mean on any given day.

>

> To be fair you should post the whole section and not just something unfairly short. Most importantly the part about memory and other devices. Do not ignore it to present your weak case. When you read the entirety of it YOU are at fault. Make sure to read the BOLD parts ;)

>

> ArenaNet HAS THE RIGHT, BUT NO OBLIGATION, TO MONITOR OPERATION OF ANY SERVICE, CONTENT OR GAME AT ANY TIME AND IN ANY MATTER, **INCLUDING BUT NOT LIMITED TO MONITORING COMMUNICATIONS AND COMMUNICATIONS INTERFACES, STORAGE DEVICES, RANDOM ACCESS MEMORY**, OR CPU PROCESSES RELATED TO HARDWARE YOU USE WITH THE GAME. SUCH MONITORING MAY ALSO INCLUDE, BUT IS NOT LIMITED TO, MONITORING FOR THE PURPOSES OF DETECTING THE GAME UNDER SECTION 8© or 8(e). YOU CONSENT TO THE FOREGOING MONITORING AND ACKNOWLEDGE THAT ArenaNet MAY, AT ANY TIME, AND IN ANY MANNER, COMMUNICATE ANY INFORMATION BETWEEN HARDWARE YOU USE WITH THE GAME AND ANY MECHANISM ArenaNet MAY CHOOSE FOR SUCH COMMUNICATIONS. YOU ALSO ACKNOWLEDGE THAT AS A RESULT OF SUCH MONITORING ArenaNet MAY IN ITS REASONABLE DISCRETION TAKE ANY ACTION, OR NO ACTION WHATSOEVER, INCLUDING BUT NOT LIMITED TO:

>

> **8 © Use, or provide others with, any software related to the Game, including any automation software (a.k.a. “bot”) or software designed to change or modify operation of the Game;**

> 8(e) Use, or provide others with, any service related to the Game, including but not limited to:

> (i) any service that interacts with the Game; or

> **(ii) any service that that would change characteristics related to an Account or Character ID, such as increasing the level of a character (a.k.a. power-leveling);**

 

I am liking this player more and more.. :)

 

I noticed no one else posted out their responses from ANET, as you requested, neither was there any response to my questions, namely why they had those applications in the first place, why they were running with gw2 at the same time over a period of time or what they actually used them for if not to cheat.... like with your request, NO DICE .

[mrstealth.6701]

My issue with this situation is basically limited to banning for having a process running that could be, but not necessarily was, used to cheat in some way in the game, and relying on a tool can give false positives with no recourse for the banned player.

 

The privacy issue is a fairly minor concern unless it turns out that they were actually reporting back all processing, instead of locally filtering for only the cheat tools they were searching for. And even if they were reporting back all processes, it's not that severe of a privacy violate as no personal or confidential data would be involved. Just a list of running processes. Despite everything that has happened, I still don't think Anet would be doing anything shady with that info if they collected it.

 

Debating EULAs is generally pointless in the long run. Even with listing some specifics, Anet's terms still seem give them broad power to interpret what rights they have and bestow new rights upon themselves whenever they want to. All while the players are confined within a tiny set of rights that essentially say "you can only play this game for however long we want you to, and our word is law unless we decide to be generous and allow you to settle an issue via arbitration." That's the way their, and every other company's EULA will work until enough consumers put up the time and money to shred their agreement (giving up their rights to the game/software/service in the process) and battle it out in a courtroom, or some legislation gets passed to limit the company's power and established legally protected consumer rights.

 

edit:

I would like the clarify that I don't think consumer protections should cover cases where clear rules were set, and there is total certainty that the player broker them. They should be there to insure that the terms are set clearly, and don't have vague wording that essentially gives a company unlimited rights to do whatever they want. A company should not have the right to deem you guilty until proven innocent, without anything but unreliable/circumstantial evidence, then refuse you any recourse to attempt to establish innocence.

[Nightlark.4029]

> @"Bloodstealer.5978" said:

> > @"usnedward.9023" said:

> > > @"Rankomonaut.4708" said:

> >

> > > Big Problem is that Anet decided to ignore all pleas. And yes, I know, everybody says they did nothing and that's the problem: The only "person" that could verify that is ArenaNet themselves and here's the fun part: They don't want or can't. So they show us it's better to kitten some innocents alongside as long as ppl get scared enough. *clap clap*

> >

> > That's odd. I plead my case before ANET and they told me exactly what I did though I already knew. Thought it was worth a shot to get ban lifted and they are being very stern on that. So the pleas do not go unanswered it's just the answer you get you do not want. I asked earlier in this post for people to open ticket and post ANET's response. Funny how I was the only one that did that. Because all these "I didn't do it" actually DID do it.

> >

> > > @"mrstealth.6701" said:

> > > > @"usnedward.9023" said:

> > > > • The ToS is CLEAR that at any time they can view your processes and determine the state of the game and it’s use. It is you the player who failed to read it, read it and didn’t care or didn’t think you would get caught.

> > > >

> > >

> > > That section of the ToS is rather vague. I'm not really sure if monitoring "CPU PROCESSES RELATED TO HARDWARE YOU USE WITH THE GAME" is supposed to be referring to specific hardware used to interact with the game, like a keyboard or mouse, or hardware as in the computer in general. It's also further obfuscated with a generic "including, but not limited to" clause, which kinda makes it a free-for-all to mean whatever they want it to mean on any given day.

> >

> > To be fair you should post the whole section and not just something unfairly short. Most importantly the part about memory and other devices. Do not ignore it to present your weak case. When you read the entirety of it YOU are at fault. Make sure to read the BOLD parts ;)

> >

> > ArenaNet HAS THE RIGHT, BUT NO OBLIGATION, TO MONITOR OPERATION OF ANY SERVICE, CONTENT OR GAME AT ANY TIME AND IN ANY MATTER, **INCLUDING BUT NOT LIMITED TO MONITORING COMMUNICATIONS AND COMMUNICATIONS INTERFACES, STORAGE DEVICES, RANDOM ACCESS MEMORY**, OR CPU PROCESSES RELATED TO HARDWARE YOU USE WITH THE GAME. SUCH MONITORING MAY ALSO INCLUDE, BUT IS NOT LIMITED TO, MONITORING FOR THE PURPOSES OF DETECTING THE GAME UNDER SECTION 8© or 8(e). YOU CONSENT TO THE FOREGOING MONITORING AND ACKNOWLEDGE THAT ArenaNet MAY, AT ANY TIME, AND IN ANY MANNER, COMMUNICATE ANY INFORMATION BETWEEN HARDWARE YOU USE WITH THE GAME AND ANY MECHANISM ArenaNet MAY CHOOSE FOR SUCH COMMUNICATIONS. YOU ALSO ACKNOWLEDGE THAT AS A RESULT OF SUCH MONITORING ArenaNet MAY IN ITS REASONABLE DISCRETION TAKE ANY ACTION, OR NO ACTION WHATSOEVER, INCLUDING BUT NOT LIMITED TO:

> >

> > **8 © Use, or provide others with, any software related to the Game, including any automation software (a.k.a. “bot”) or software designed to change or modify operation of the Game;**

> > 8(e) Use, or provide others with, any service related to the Game, including but not limited to:

> > (i) any service that interacts with the Game; or

> > **(ii) any service that that would change characteristics related to an Account or Character ID, such as increasing the level of a character (a.k.a. power-leveling);**

>

> I am liking this player more and more.. :)

>

> I noticed no one else posted out their responses from ANET, as you requested, neither was there any response to my questions, namely why they had those applications in the first place, why they were running with gw2 at the same time over a period of time or what they actually used them for if not to cheat.... like with your request, NO DICE .

 

Sorry you didn’t like my answers to the questions about 1) having the application in the first place; 2) why the application could be running over a long period of time (though GW2 wasn’t running, heh); and 3) uses outside of cheating.

 

And I can’t post any response from ANet support because I have no reason to contact them. I guess you were just looking for reasons from people who had been banned for running programs alongside GW2, and are unwilling to accept answers (at least to 1&3) for having an application in the first place and uses outside of cheating, unless the person giving them got hit by the ban wave.

[usnedward.9023]

> @"mrstealth.6701" said:

> Then Anet goes and bans people for just having a process running, taking no consideration as to whether or not it's actually being used for any of their stated prohibited activity, or whether it's even related to or interacting with the game at all.

 

So tired of hearing this argument. It's a tool that can be used to cheat.

 

> @"Zushada.6108" said:

> To be perfectly honest, I don't agree with banning people without direct identification of what they did. Blanket statements do not inform the user of what software/hack etc is the problem. I have read a fair number of comments in this thread and many claim to have never used illegal software.

 

If those who got hit with the ban open a ticket ANET will tell them what they did. ANET post in general what they did. YOU wanting to know specifics of what they did is a privacy concern unless those who request an answer decide to share it.

 

> What I do think, is that banning an account for 6 months is a very severe punishment; particularly when the suspension message does not identify which specific add-ons or macros were the reason for the suspension. Yes they were listed on the forums later but I think, the add-ins or macros **specific to each user **should be identified in the ban message. To me, these types of suspensions, without user specific reasons, are like coming home from work and grounding your kid for 3 weeks and never telling them why. Plus, just telling the user up front which tools got them banned likely lighten the Service desk tickets in the days after. ;-)

 

> Just my 2 cents but a severe punishment like this really should come with a reason.

 

Again. They identified the programs or cheats involved. Also the ban message DOES include why you were banned. It is not specific as yes, it is a generic message stated the offender was using a third party software. The end user knows what they did and again can open a ticket and get a "specific" response like mine:

 

_During our investigation, we have detected that you had the program "Nabster" running with your account. This program goes against our Terms of Service and Rules of Conduct. As such your account access has been temporarily suspended. We will not be reducing or removing the suspension on the associated account.

Regards,_

 

**Senior GM Heart

Guild Wars 2 Support Team**

 

 

 

[Ardenwolfe.8590]

@"usnedward.9023" Thank you for sharing your experience and honesty.

[mrstealth.6701]

> @"usnedward.9023" said:

> > @"mrstealth.6701" said:

> > Then Anet goes and bans people for just having a process running, taking no consideration as to whether or not it's actually being used for any of their stated prohibited activity, or whether it's even related to or interacting with the game at all.

>

> So tired of hearing this argument. It's a tool that can be used to cheat.

 

That's the point. It *can be*, not *it was*. I have two programs on my PC that *can be* used to create multi-keypress/function macros by pressing only one button. Using it in that way is explicitly prohibited by Anet's rules, as a way to cheat or provide an unfair advantage. I have not used either program in this manner for GW2, and have never been banned from the game despite having at least one of them running for the entirety of my time playing it since beta.

 

By the standard of "it's a tool that can be used to cheat", I should have been banned for using Logitech Gaming Software way back in 2012. But Anet appears to apply some actual care and effort in determining whether or not a macro-capable program like LGS is actually being used for macros in GW2. Anet even goes so far as to actually allow macros for musical instruments, which shows that they are very much capable of determining what you are really doing ingame with these tools. Why is there a double standard for a program such as Cheat Engine, and its mere existence along side GW2 is considered proof of guilt?

 

Looking at the prohibited things in Anet's rules (and setting aside the vague wording that allow it to mean almost anything) and statements made by Anet employees on the forums/reddit, the actual use of programs in relation to GW2 is something they have always looked at in regard with decisions to take action against players. That's why a massive portion of the playerbase hasn't been banned for using LGS, Corsair CUE, Razer Synapse, AutoHotKey, overlays, or graphics tweaks/enchancers. Now Anet has inexplicably done a 180 after nearly 6 years, and decided that simply having a program running at the same time as the game means you must be using it to cheat.

 

I guess I'll be sitting here waiting for my ban for having LGS and CUE running.

[Obtena.7952]

> @"mrstealth.6701" said:

> > @"usnedward.9023" said:

> > > @"mrstealth.6701" said:

> > > Then Anet goes and bans people for just having a process running, taking no consideration as to whether or not it's actually being used for any of their stated prohibited activity, or whether it's even related to or interacting with the game at all.

> >

> > So tired of hearing this argument. It's a tool that can be used to cheat.

>

> That's the point. It *can be*, not *it was*.

 

That point isn't relevant. Think about that. People were not necessarily banned because they used software to cheat (thought that's are REALLY good reason to do so as well).

 

 

[mrstealth.6701]

> @"Obtena.7952" said:

> > @"mrstealth.6701" said:

> > > @"usnedward.9023" said:

> > > > @"mrstealth.6701" said:

> > > > Then Anet goes and bans people for just having a process running, taking no consideration as to whether or not it's actually being used for any of their stated prohibited activity, or whether it's even related to or interacting with the game at all.

> > >

> > > So tired of hearing this argument. It's a tool that can be used to cheat.

> >

> > That's the point. It *can be*, not *it was*.

>

> That point isn't relevant. Think about that. People were not necessarily banned because they used software to cheat (thought that's are REALLY good reason to do so as well).

>

>

 

Why isn't it relevant? There is quite a distinction between having software that could possibly be used for cheating, and having software that was definitely being used for cheating. Anet appears to have been going by the latter standard up till now, and they are even continuing to use that standard for tons of other software that can just as easily be used for cheating or other illicit activity. But for some reason, they decided to create a double standard for Cheat Engine and the potential false positives their detection tool was turning up.

 

If people were not necessarily banned for using software to cheat, in a ban wave that was specifically targeted at people using software to cheat, then why were they banned? If there was no software being used to cheat in GW2, then there does not appear to be any actual reason for the ban.

[Obtena.7952]

> @"mrstealth.6701" said:

> > @"Obtena.7952" said:

> > > @"mrstealth.6701" said:

> > > > @"usnedward.9023" said:

> > > > > @"mrstealth.6701" said:

> > > > > Then Anet goes and bans people for just having a process running, taking no consideration as to whether or not it's actually being used for any of their stated prohibited activity, or whether it's even related to or interacting with the game at all.

> > > >

> > > > So tired of hearing this argument. It's a tool that can be used to cheat.

> > >

> > > That's the point. It *can be*, not *it was*.

> >

> > That point isn't relevant. Think about that. People were not necessarily banned because they used software to cheat (thought that's are REALLY good reason to do so as well).

> >

> >

>

> Why isn't it relevant?

 

Because it's not why people were banned (or at least not the ONLY reason). You simply have to read Anet's statement to see why they were banned. I'm not going to argue with you about it ... if you care to stick your head in the sand, go ahead. It was pretty clear.

[mrstealth.6701]

> @"Obtena.7952" said:

> > @"mrstealth.6701" said:

> > > @"Obtena.7952" said:

> > > > @"mrstealth.6701" said:

> > > > > @"usnedward.9023" said:

> > > > > > @"mrstealth.6701" said:

> > > > > > Then Anet goes and bans people for just having a process running, taking no consideration as to whether or not it's actually being used for any of their stated prohibited activity, or whether it's even related to or interacting with the game at all.

> > > > >

> > > > > So tired of hearing this argument. It's a tool that can be used to cheat.

> > > >

> > > > That's the point. It *can be*, not *it was*.

> > >

> > > That point isn't relevant. Think about that. People were not necessarily banned because they used software to cheat (thought that's are REALLY good reason to do so as well).

> > >

> > >

> >

> > Why isn't it relevant?

>

> Because it's not why people were banned (or at least not the ONLY reason). You simply have to read Anet's statement to see why they were banned. I'm not going to argue with you about it ... if you care to stick your head in the sand, go ahead. It was pretty clear.

 

I'm aware of what their statement says, and it's nothing but an admission of the careless manner in which this ban wave was carried out. Their reason was essentially saying that they had no actual reason (or evidence) for a number of these bans, based on their own specified rules, official statements, and history of how banning decisions have been handled. I wouldn't expect any reasonable person to accept that as an actual validation for their actions.

 

"I don't care what I said before, I'm doing this now because I want to" is the type of reason I'd expect to hear from a 5 year old.

[Bloodstealer.5978]

> @"Nightlark.4029" said:

> > @"Bloodstealer.5978" said:

> > > @"usnedward.9023" said:

> > > > @"Rankomonaut.4708" said:

> > >

> > > > Big Problem is that Anet decided to ignore all pleas. And yes, I know, everybody says they did nothing and that's the problem: The only "person" that could verify that is ArenaNet themselves and here's the fun part: They don't want or can't. So they show us it's better to kitten some innocents alongside as long as ppl get scared enough. *clap clap*

> > >

> > > That's odd. I plead my case before ANET and they told me exactly what I did though I already knew. Thought it was worth a shot to get ban lifted and they are being very stern on that. So the pleas do not go unanswered it's just the answer you get you do not want. I asked earlier in this post for people to open ticket and post ANET's response. Funny how I was the only one that did that. Because all these "I didn't do it" actually DID do it.

> > >

> > > > @"mrstealth.6701" said:

> > > > > @"usnedward.9023" said:

> > > > > • The ToS is CLEAR that at any time they can view your processes and determine the state of the game and it’s use. It is you the player who failed to read it, read it and didn’t care or didn’t think you would get caught.

> > > > >

> > > >

> > > > That section of the ToS is rather vague. I'm not really sure if monitoring "CPU PROCESSES RELATED TO HARDWARE YOU USE WITH THE GAME" is supposed to be referring to specific hardware used to interact with the game, like a keyboard or mouse, or hardware as in the computer in general. It's also further obfuscated with a generic "including, but not limited to" clause, which kinda makes it a free-for-all to mean whatever they want it to mean on any given day.

> > >

> > > To be fair you should post the whole section and not just something unfairly short. Most importantly the part about memory and other devices. Do not ignore it to present your weak case. When you read the entirety of it YOU are at fault. Make sure to read the BOLD parts ;)

> > >

> > > ArenaNet HAS THE RIGHT, BUT NO OBLIGATION, TO MONITOR OPERATION OF ANY SERVICE, CONTENT OR GAME AT ANY TIME AND IN ANY MATTER, **INCLUDING BUT NOT LIMITED TO MONITORING COMMUNICATIONS AND COMMUNICATIONS INTERFACES, STORAGE DEVICES, RANDOM ACCESS MEMORY**, OR CPU PROCESSES RELATED TO HARDWARE YOU USE WITH THE GAME. SUCH MONITORING MAY ALSO INCLUDE, BUT IS NOT LIMITED TO, MONITORING FOR THE PURPOSES OF DETECTING THE GAME UNDER SECTION 8© or 8(e). YOU CONSENT TO THE FOREGOING MONITORING AND ACKNOWLEDGE THAT ArenaNet MAY, AT ANY TIME, AND IN ANY MANNER, COMMUNICATE ANY INFORMATION BETWEEN HARDWARE YOU USE WITH THE GAME AND ANY MECHANISM ArenaNet MAY CHOOSE FOR SUCH COMMUNICATIONS. YOU ALSO ACKNOWLEDGE THAT AS A RESULT OF SUCH MONITORING ArenaNet MAY IN ITS REASONABLE DISCRETION TAKE ANY ACTION, OR NO ACTION WHATSOEVER, INCLUDING BUT NOT LIMITED TO:

> > >

> > > **8 © Use, or provide others with, any software related to the Game, including any automation software (a.k.a. “bot”) or software designed to change or modify operation of the Game;**

> > > 8(e) Use, or provide others with, any service related to the Game, including but not limited to:

> > > (i) any service that interacts with the Game; or

> > > **(ii) any service that that would change characteristics related to an Account or Character ID, such as increasing the level of a character (a.k.a. power-leveling);**

> >

> > I am liking this player more and more.. :)

> >

> > I noticed no one else posted out their responses from ANET, as you requested, neither was there any response to my questions, namely why they had those applications in the first place, why they were running with gw2 at the same time over a period of time or what they actually used them for if not to cheat.... like with your request, NO DICE .

>

> Sorry you didn’t like my answers to the questions about 1) having the application in the first place; 2) why the application could be running over a long period of time (though GW2 wasn’t running, heh); and 3) uses outside of cheating.

>

> And I can’t post any response from ANet support because I have no reason to contact them. I guess you were just looking for reasons from people who had been banned for running programs alongside GW2, and are unwilling to accept answers (at least to 1&3) for having an application in the first place and uses outside of cheating, unless the person giving them got hit by the ban wave.

 

No, no.. I already answered your post in case you missed that.. your response was what I was as I said a very reasonable counter, which I was asking for from those affected by the ban.. but they just never did and it seems they also couldn't be bothered to post out the responses from anet as requested by usenedward. So added to the apparent change around on previous statements they made re what they "only" used (prior to the list being issued by anet) to the but now I only have these as well on my pc.. but I don't use them etc etc.. just makes me think meeeh they cheated, they got stung, cya in 6 months.. except we all know they are already back in game on their alt/new accounts - such is the lacking of real cheat prevention in GW2 thus far.

[IndigoSundown.5419]

> @"mrstealth.6701" said:

>

> By the standard of "it's a tool that can be used to cheat", I should have been banned for using Logitech Gaming Software way back in 2012. But Anet appears to apply some actual care and effort in determining whether or not a macro-capable program like LGS is actually being used for macros in GW2. Anet even goes so far as to actually allow macros for musical instruments, which shows that they are very much capable of determining what you are really doing ingame with these tools. Why is there a double standard for a program such as Cheat Engine, and its mere existence along side GW2 is considered proof of guilt?

 

Macros are commonly used, legitimate tools in many programs. Maybe ANet doesn't accept that CE has "legitimate" uses. I've seen the claims herein that if it is closed it might take "5-10 minutes" to get back to where one was working. Is that standard for debugging tools, or is CE just not very good?

 

Maybe those who submit a ticket because CE was the only program they used will be investigated further.

 

I guess we'll see.

[CETheLucid.3964]

> @"Ardenwolfe.8590" said:

> Yes, it's time to lock this thread. Going in circles now. Again, thank you Gaile for listing which programs weren't acceptable.

>

 

Agreed. I think it's run it's course.

[Bloodstealer.5978]

> @"mrstealth.6701" said:

> > @"usnedward.9023" said:

> > > @"mrstealth.6701" said:

> > > Then Anet goes and bans people for just having a process running, taking no consideration as to whether or not it's actually being used for any of their stated prohibited activity, or whether it's even related to or interacting with the game at all.

> >

> > So tired of hearing this argument. It's a tool that can be used to cheat.

>

> That's the point. It *can be*, not *it was*. I have two programs on my PC that *can be* used to create multi-keypress/function macros by pressing only one button. Using it in that way is explicitly prohibited by Anet's rules, as a way to cheat or provide an unfair advantage. I have not used either program in this manner for GW2, and have never been banned from the game despite having at least one of them running for the entirety of my time playing it since beta.

>

> By the standard of "it's a tool that can be used to cheat", I should have been banned for using Logitech Gaming Software way back in 2012. But Anet appears to apply some actual care and effort in determining whether or not a macro-capable program like LGS is actually being used for macros in GW2. Anet even goes so far as to actually allow macros for musical instruments, which shows that they are very much capable of determining what you are really doing ingame with these tools. Why is there a double standard for a program such as Cheat Engine, and its mere existence along side GW2 is considered proof of guilt?

>

> Looking at the prohibited things in Anet's rules (and setting aside the vague wording that allow it to mean almost anything) and statements made by Anet employees on the forums/reddit, the actual use of programs in relation to GW2 is something they have always looked at in regard with decisions to take action against players. That's why a massive portion of the playerbase hasn't been banned for using LGS, Corsair CUE, Razer Synapse, AutoHotKey, overlays, or graphics tweaks/enchancers. Now Anet has inexplicably done a 180 after nearly 6 years, and decided that simply having a program running at the same time as the game means you must be using it to cheat.

>

> I guess I'll be sitting here waiting for my ban for having LGS and CUE running.

 

You are right, ANET do seem to like playing in grey areas, not just with this particular point.

I too have LGS with my keyboard/mouse setup and like you don't use their functionality, but I too see your point and maybe this is something that ANET should be clearing up. I wonder if there is there something different maybe with the behavioural properties of CE specifically compared to other off the shelf applications like LGS, Razer Synapse etc.

 

But yes maybe ANET do need to clear up some of these grey areas in game and out of game.

[mrstealth.6701]

> @"Bloodstealer.5978" said:

> > @"mrstealth.6701" said:

> > > @"usnedward.9023" said:

> > > > @"mrstealth.6701" said:

> > > > Then Anet goes and bans people for just having a process running, taking no consideration as to whether or not it's actually being used for any of their stated prohibited activity, or whether it's even related to or interacting with the game at all.

> > >

> > > So tired of hearing this argument. It's a tool that can be used to cheat.

> >

> > That's the point. It *can be*, not *it was*. I have two programs on my PC that *can be* used to create multi-keypress/function macros by pressing only one button. Using it in that way is explicitly prohibited by Anet's rules, as a way to cheat or provide an unfair advantage. I have not used either program in this manner for GW2, and have never been banned from the game despite having at least one of them running for the entirety of my time playing it since beta.

> >

> > By the standard of "it's a tool that can be used to cheat", I should have been banned for using Logitech Gaming Software way back in 2012. But Anet appears to apply some actual care and effort in determining whether or not a macro-capable program like LGS is actually being used for macros in GW2. Anet even goes so far as to actually allow macros for musical instruments, which shows that they are very much capable of determining what you are really doing ingame with these tools. Why is there a double standard for a program such as Cheat Engine, and its mere existence along side GW2 is considered proof of guilt?

> >

> > Looking at the prohibited things in Anet's rules (and setting aside the vague wording that allow it to mean almost anything) and statements made by Anet employees on the forums/reddit, the actual use of programs in relation to GW2 is something they have always looked at in regard with decisions to take action against players. That's why a massive portion of the playerbase hasn't been banned for using LGS, Corsair CUE, Razer Synapse, AutoHotKey, overlays, or graphics tweaks/enchancers. Now Anet has inexplicably done a 180 after nearly 6 years, and decided that simply having a program running at the same time as the game means you must be using it to cheat.

> >

> > I guess I'll be sitting here waiting for my ban for having LGS and CUE running.

>

> You are right, ANET do seem to like playing in grey areas, not just with this particular point.

> I too have LGS with my keyboard/mouse setup and like you don't use their functionality, but I too see your point and maybe this is something that ANET should be clearing up. I wonder if there is there something different maybe with the behavioural properties of CE specifically compared to other off the shelf applications like LGS, Razer Synapse etc.

>

> But yes maybe ANET do need to clear up some of these grey areas in game and out of game.

 

I think prohibiting macro use is a fairly common thing for MMOs, and I would assume a good amount of other online games where they could give a player a considerable advantage. Given the widespread use of gaming mice/keyboards that have accompanying software with this functionality, game devs seem to always base their detection on actual macro use instead of the software's presence. While CE does have a more illicit nature in how it is commonly used to interact with a game, especially in regard to potential use with online games, it's use for single player games seems to be far more common and easier than using it for online games. I really do not understand why Anet decided to handle their detection of it so differently, and for such a short time. Just as with macro software, there is only illicit use if the player chooses to activate and use it with the game. All they managed to accomplish was getting rid of some problem accounts (almost certainly far fewer individual problem players), with a high probability of taking out a good number of innocent people along the way.

 

This whole mess just makes no sense. It was done about as sloppily as possible, like burning down an entire forest to get rid of a single pesky raccoon when you could just use a trap to catch only it. At least if you do catch another creature in a trap, you can simply release it, instead of having already summarily executed it and everything else in sight.

 

As for clearing up grey areas, it seemed like Anet had actually been doing that for quite some time now. There have been statements from Anet staff saying that software not giving an advantage or imbalance in favor of one player over another is generally allowed. This did come with the caveat of using third party software is done at your own risk, and pointing the the ToS/CoC for particular things that are not allowed. All of which seems to indicate that CE running in the background, not interacting/interfering with the game, or being used to provide any unfair advantage to the player should be fine.

[Obtena.7952]

> @"mrstealth.6701" said:

> > @"Obtena.7952" said:

> > > @"mrstealth.6701" said:

> > > > @"Obtena.7952" said:

> > > > > @"mrstealth.6701" said:

> > > > > > @"usnedward.9023" said:

> > > > > > > @"mrstealth.6701" said:

> > > > > > > Then Anet goes and bans people for just having a process running, taking no consideration as to whether or not it's actually being used for any of their stated prohibited activity, or whether it's even related to or interacting with the game at all.

> > > > > >

> > > > > > So tired of hearing this argument. It's a tool that can be used to cheat.

> > > > >

> > > > > That's the point. It *can be*, not *it was*.

> > > >

> > > > That point isn't relevant. Think about that. People were not necessarily banned because they used software to cheat (thought that's are REALLY good reason to do so as well).

> > > >

> > > >

> > >

> > > Why isn't it relevant?

> >

> > Because it's not why people were banned (or at least not the ONLY reason). You simply have to read Anet's statement to see why they were banned. I'm not going to argue with you about it ... if you care to stick your head in the sand, go ahead. It was pretty clear.

>

> I'm aware of what their statement says, and it's nothing but an admission of the careless manner in which this ban wave was carried out.

 

Regardless ... arguing about it serves no purpose. You might not like the reason, yet that is the reason for it. Don't like the way Anet runs the game and treats customers? You have a choice. I mean, what are your trying to do by this discussion? Anet owns the accounts ... they CAN do what they please with them. IF that bothers you, you shouldn't play MMO's; they are all the same.

 

 

[mrstealth.6701]

> @"Obtena.7952" said:

> > @"mrstealth.6701" said:

> > > @"Obtena.7952" said:

> > > > @"mrstealth.6701" said:

> > > > > @"Obtena.7952" said:

> > > > > > @"mrstealth.6701" said:

> > > > > > > @"usnedward.9023" said:

> > > > > > > > @"mrstealth.6701" said:

> > > > > > > > Then Anet goes and bans people for just having a process running, taking no consideration as to whether or not it's actually being used for any of their stated prohibited activity, or whether it's even related to or interacting with the game at all.

> > > > > > >

> > > > > > > So tired of hearing this argument. It's a tool that can be used to cheat.

> > > > > >

> > > > > > That's the point. It *can be*, not *it was*.

> > > > >

> > > > > That point isn't relevant. Think about that. People were not necessarily banned because they used software to cheat (thought that's are REALLY good reason to do so as well).

> > > > >

> > > > >

> > > >

> > > > Why isn't it relevant?

> > >

> > > Because it's not why people were banned (or at least not the ONLY reason). You simply have to read Anet's statement to see why they were banned. I'm not going to argue with you about it ... if you care to stick your head in the sand, go ahead. It was pretty clear.

> >

> > I'm aware of what their statement says, and it's nothing but an admission of the careless manner in which this ban wave was carried out.

>

> Regardless ... arguing about it serves no purpose. You might not like the reason, yet that is the reason for it. Don't like the way Anet runs the game and treats customers? You have a choice. I mean, what are your trying to do by this discussion? Anet owns the accounts ... they CAN do what they please with them. IF that bothers you, you shouldn't play MMO's; they are all the same.

>

>

 

My choice is to point out the problems with how they've handled this in the hopes of preventing a repeat of this mess. I'd rather see the game and the company improve, than walk away from both over a misstep. To me, that's better than missing out on something I enjoy, and denying Anet a customer and supporter that's been with them for 13 years.

[Obtena.7952]

I don't get that. You think their reason to ban people is somehow going to change because people don't like how they handled the situation? That makes no sense. Again, Anet said why they banned people. If you don't want to miss out on playing the game, simply don't do things that would get you banned.

 

So again ... if you don't do things that get you banned and you aren't banned, what's your beef here? If how Anet handled this situation bothers you that much, there isn't turning back the clock here. You have the choice to not patronize companies that you don't feel treat you well. It's pretty funny to think that you think that Anet is going to take some less serious approach to something as serious as this ... because it leaves a little sour taste with you. That's not how this works.