Exploit vs Exploit? Defined...
The1_NuclearOnion
Member Posts: 908 ★★★
I'm a little confused as to the nature of an exploit vs. an exploit.
I mean using a cheat or modded game seems pretty straight forward cheating and good cause for ban. However....
If finding a game bug that is beneficial is "Exploiting" when it is a known bug to kabam and it was temporarily advantageous to a few people who discovered it, then what is a crash, or game bug, or parry not working, or dexterity (pops up but doesn't happen), or nerfs after players pour purchased or grinded resources into a champ, etc? What is it called when a game bug puts players at a disadvantage that costs them real time and money? see definition at the bottom...
By the same standard it is exploiting, only the above is from kabam to user.
From what I can gather, If a game bug costs players resources it's deemed acceptable. If bugs cost kabam game resources it's cause for a ban? I've done none of the above but this still bothers me.
An exploit can't be a one way street and not get fiery backlash from players. Right or wrong, I see a clear double standard that is causing the uproar.
Definition:
Exploit - verb - to utilize, especially for profit; (in a video game) the use of a bug or flaw in game design to a player’s advantage or to the disadvantage of other players.
Player use it to their advantage = exploit = ban
A known bug that causes disadvantage to player = exploit = no response?
I mean using a cheat or modded game seems pretty straight forward cheating and good cause for ban. However....
If finding a game bug that is beneficial is "Exploiting" when it is a known bug to kabam and it was temporarily advantageous to a few people who discovered it, then what is a crash, or game bug, or parry not working, or dexterity (pops up but doesn't happen), or nerfs after players pour purchased or grinded resources into a champ, etc? What is it called when a game bug puts players at a disadvantage that costs them real time and money? see definition at the bottom...
By the same standard it is exploiting, only the above is from kabam to user.
From what I can gather, If a game bug costs players resources it's deemed acceptable. If bugs cost kabam game resources it's cause for a ban? I've done none of the above but this still bothers me.
An exploit can't be a one way street and not get fiery backlash from players. Right or wrong, I see a clear double standard that is causing the uproar.
Definition:
Exploit - verb - to utilize, especially for profit; (in a video game) the use of a bug or flaw in game design to a player’s advantage or to the disadvantage of other players.
Player use it to their advantage = exploit = ban
A known bug that causes disadvantage to player = exploit = no response?
13
This discussion has been closed.
Comments
This threads argument defined.
soph·ist·ry
the use of fallacious arguments, especially with the intention of deceiving.
a fallacious argument.
Equivocation
(also known as: doublespeak)
Description: Using an ambiguous term in more than one sense, thus making an argument misleading.
Example #1:
I want to have myself a merry little Christmas, but I refuse to do as the song suggests and make the yuletide gay. I don't think sexual preference should have anything to do with enjoying the holiday.
Explanation: The word, “gay” is meant to be in light spirits, joyful, and merry, not in the homosexual sense.
Example #2:
The priest told me I should have faith.
I have faith that my son will do well in school this year.
Therefore, the priest should be happy with me.
Explanation: The term “faith” used by the priest, was in the religious sense of believing in God without sufficient evidence, which is different from having “faith” in your son in which years of good past performance leads to the “faith” you might have in your son.
Exception: Equivocation works great when deliberate attempts at humor are being made.
Tip: When you suspect equivocation, substitute the word with the same definition for all uses and see if it makes sense.
It's an exploit when Kabam says it is.
Well I'm glad that you were able to get that off your chest. I mean not literally off your "chest". and I'm not talking about a container for gold, I mean....Oh nevermind dude. I wish you would have made a point with all that.
In short, relate this to how I may have done whatever the heck you said and I'll consider it.
That said, my definition still stands!
Let's add this one while we're at it:
Context - the circumstances that form the setting for an event, statement, or idea, and in terms of which it can be fully understood and assessed.
I think most readers on this forum will understand my context just fine. Except maybe the armchair "flag"ers.
I suggested Kabam start crowd sourcing their players and rewarding for the discovery of exploits rather than banning. Many software and technology companies take this approach and are successful with it.
It could change their current PR problems and inconsistent standpoints into a winning situation for everyone.
Since I have your ear. You are also guilty of using a false equivalency, actively exploiting a bug is in now way comparable to bugs in software.
I made my point and you are helping to illustrate it with this comment so I thank you.
False equivalence is a logical fallacy in which two opposing arguments appear to be logically equivalent when in fact they are not. This fallacy is categorized as a fallacy of inconsistency.
A common way for this fallacy to be perpetuated is one shared trait between two subjects is assumed to show equivalence, especially in order of magnitude, when equivalence is not necessarily the logical result. False equivalence is a common result when an anecdotal similarity is pointed out as equal, but the claim of equivalence doesn't bear because the similarity is based on oversimplification or ignorance of additional factors. The pattern of the fallacy is often as such: "If A is the set of c and d, and B is the set of d and e, then since they both contain d, A and B are equal". d is not required to exist in both sets; only a passing similarity is required to cause this fallacy to be able to be used.
False equivalence arguments are often used in journalism and in politics, where the minor flaws of one candidate may be compared to major flaws of another.
Kabam messed up with this one on all sides
verb
ikˈsploit/Submit
1.
make full use of and derive benefit from (a resource).
That's the definition of the verb exploit. I think where Kabam decided to draw the line was the people who took "full" advantage and benefit of this issue. To my knowledge no one was permanently banned. 7% of the people were banned for taking full advantage of the exploit. They said someone ran the quest 200 times. You can argue that person might have done it to stick it to Kabam for feeling some slight over issues and other bugs with the game that need to be fixed, but that same person is sticking it to the other players too and gaining a competitive advantage. You may not like what Kabam chose to do to handle this situation, but it is their game and their decision ultimately. However, you can quit playing if it matters that much to you.
Crowd Sourcing companies actually reward people for these discoveries. Just a thought.
I've debated weighing in, but since you mention crowd sourcing I'll throw my two cents in. The people that were banned were not doing any crowd sourcing. They never once tried to notify Kabam that there was an issue that needed fixing. I think that's what makes this an exploit (cause there was some bad intention at hand to knowing continue to profit off of a bug instead of reporting it and moving on).
BTW crowd sourcing would be a great idea for Kabam to look into though. Marvel once had the no-prize given to astute readers who spotted issues or errors in the comics and pointed them out.
The issue IMO isn't how many times the exploit was taken advantage of; it is the inconsistency in how the developers treat bugs that benefit a player and ones that do not. My feeling is that if they are going to take away rewards that were earned because of a bug, they need to refund the resources lost or used by the players because of a bug. We know they don't return the items to us when their game crashes several times in a night, or when a champ stops working properly (like the unusable Nightcrawler right now). Seems to me it is hypocritical to now take away rewards and ban players for these bugs.
Their game, their rules, well within the TOS to do what they did, doesn't make it a good idea and certainly doesn't help their perception of a cash grab organisation that doesn't care about its players or feedback that currently persists in the general population.
This is exactly how they approached the exploitation of a bug in the game. Most players (93%) who benefited simply had thier rewards removed while few players (7%) were banned due to exploiting to an extreme degree.
This is thier statement on exploiting bugs.
Hi everybody.
This is a very important note for all of our players on the dangers of using exploits, mods, or hacks in the Contest. It also speaks to expected player behavior in the game.
While most summoners are honest and play the game legitimately, some players may be tempted to use exploits or mods to unbalance the game in their favor,. We do not ignore these concerns, and we are continuously investigating any cases that arise or are reported to us. We will punish those that break the rules. This means that using exploits or applications that modify the experience of the game, or upset the balance of fair play, can result in being banned from the game permanently as well as our forums.
Not all violations are of the same severity, and as a result differing punishments may apply. For instance, an in-game exploit that a player uses once or twice due to ignorance or inability to avoid it is our fault. In instances like this, it is very unlikely that any action would be taken against a player, although the team may certainly remove any incorrect rewards over granted as a result of the exploit when possible. An exception to this would be if it becomes clear that a player users an avoidable exploit to an extreme degree to their benefit, and in doing so puts other players at a disadvantage. Players that have used a 3rd Party Hack or Modification to beat another Alliance or Player can see their account immediately banned.
Little more FFT.
Hanlon's razor is an aphorism expressed in various ways including "Never attribute to malice that which is adequately explained by stupidity" or "Don't assume bad intentions over neglect and misunderstanding." It recommends a way of eliminating unlikely explanations for a phenomenon (a philosophical razor).
Then what about the old perfect block teams that people used to skate through AQ and ROL and other modes of the game? Yes, it saved us from having to use items and spend units on potions and revives. But what you forget is it did not unjustly enrich us in the same way that people who were running quests tens or hundreds of times to get extra rewards.
gives me more money than what I asked for. is it ok to exploit it?
No, the bank will hold you liable for it.
Insightful thanks.
As for "They are in fact consistent with their statements"
A statement on how they handle exploits (thank you BTW for posting that) and the practical execution and interpretation of severity and intention are two different things.
In other words, the community in the forums seems to have a problem of consistency with actual responses as opposed to the official statements about exploits. Not as strong of a stance when the role is reversed you would admit?
Many summoners did actually offer the rewards back once they realised from the exploit but still got banned regardless.
I agree. I have mentioned that they SHOULD crowd source not that that is what was happening. That I know.
That's not exactly true. Many summoners who ran quests to 100% completion and received the rewards had merely the rewards taken. The bans were for the people that were running the quick routes of the master difficulty quests over and over. Don't be fooled...kabam is far smarter than you give them credit for. There is a reason the bans came almost 6 days after the issue was resolved. They do thorough investigations.
And if a banks atm is not working correctly do they just leave it there and allow customers to use it at their own risk? In my experience if I use an atm and it charges me like I took money but it didn't dispense they fix the machine and give me back my money. They don't just let people gamble on if it work correctly
This is correct. I ran the last quest of heroic 6 times just to reach 100% completion during the issue. I received extra rewards, but did not use them at all. The rewards were removed, but I am still able to play. I think people that were banned are people that did way more than that.
I can agree, "no", and also say that if you take out money from an ATM legitimately and it freezes, holds your card, and doesn't deliver the cash but shows it was taken out. Compensation/restoration is in order. The bank cannot exploit you in ANY way either. There's lawful protection from that.
Wasn't it mentioned on the forums that there was an issue and not to take advantage of it? Or would you just have preferred they shut the game down completely while they figured it out and fixed it?
1st most players don't grace these forums, and yes. I would be perfectly fine if they pulled the game down for weeks if it meant they actually fixed the bugs going on. Bugs that both positively and negatively effect the player base. If there is a vote on such put me in the shut it down and fix tally