Bans for Exploiting Bugs [MERGED THREADS]



  • SuperflexSuperflex Posts: 17
    DNA3000 said:

    BDVM said:

    Lots of pro-Kabam sounding comments so far ... interesting!!!

    There's no pro-Kabam position in any of this. Kabam made a horrible mistake in allowing this design flaw to appear, and that's that. If anyone is arguing differently, they are just wrong. But trying to claim that Kabam's mistake excuses player cheating behavior is a bridge way, way too far. There's some people who think we're only required to play fair if we are forced to, and if we aren't forced to play fair it is not their fault if they break the rules. In other words, rules should be impossible to break, not e
    Lormif said:

    Superflex said:

    The way this was handled was somewhat jarring. As with most things in life, if there's an opportunity to gain an advantage via a discrepancy or a loophole, some people will exploit it regardless of the consequences.

    I think a warning for first time offenders and a 48 hour ban for past transgressors would have been a more sensible approach. Also, if the content had been properly tested prior to and immediately upon release, this situation would not have occurred. And, it's virtually become the norm for new content to have something go wrong on release, but only on this occasion players had a ridiculous advantage as opposed to being habitually under the cosh.

    Perusing through the comments, some have asserted the situation is analogous to shoplifting or other similar clunky representations. I'm afraid none are even remotely in the same ballpark. Moreover, to even try to compare malfunctioning game content to tangible situations is a pointless exercise. It's much simpler to frame this if we look at problem at its root; to wit, x company has made a mistake and consumers have exploited this. Indeed, there are three recent situations we can apply this to, where the aforementioned occurred:

    i) An airline company had a promotion on flights but released it with incorrect pricing. Thousands took advantage and bought tickets.

    ii) A major retailer's customer loyalty scheme had a special promotion which incorrectly allowed customers to buy items for pennies if they bought just one item from a selected list. Plenty of customers bought a list item and got a basketload of other groceries for much less than what the list item cost.

    iii) A major bank's ATM went haywire and began paying out money even if you had none in your account. Word got out and scores if not hundreds of account holders took advantage before the bank noticed the problem and shut the machine down.

    In the first two instances, the respective companies took ownership of their mistake and allowed the customers to keep their gains. In the final case, the bank had to take the matter to court to retrieve the money from a few account holders. The judgement went their way but the payback terms made the whole exercise a phyrric victory; weekly payments of £1-2 a week as virtually all were unemployed and on benefits.

    Many companies make mistakes when setting up and releasing promotions for their products. When customers take advantage of this, most companies don't bother to clawback their losses as the PR disaster that would emerge as a result could become an existential threat to their future prosperity. Indeed, this is almost always the case, albeit in the ToS of the promotion it will clearly state "we reserve the right to withdraw services and goods at any time" with a plethora of hypothetical scenarios that could make this a possibility. Indeed, not much different to our current predicament.

    On a side note, I'm not affected by this in any way personally or as an alliance member and I have no motivation or ulterior motives; I'm simply expressing my thoughts as a fellow gamer...

    You seem to think ther is some magic amount of testing that is “adequte enough” to find all buts, there is not. In addition the first 2 are mistakes in advertising, and a reasonable person would not have expected them to be incorrect, because you cannot know if those were incorrect or not. The third you mention the payback of the money that was “phyrric”, but that is just the CIVIL acction, you are ignoring the CRIMINAL action against those people.
    The most important distinction between those situations and this one is that in those situations all of the losses were from the company itself. They could decide to recoup those losses or let them go, because the only loser in those errors was the company.

    But when a player cheats an online game, the losers are not the game operator. It is the other players in the game whom they just acquired an unfair advantage over. In that respect it is nothing like one person getting a freebee from a company, because in that situation the person gains and the company loses. In the banking situation the bank lost money and the people who exploited the malfunctioning ATM got money. All other banking customers were unaffected.

    Suppose any one of those entities said okay, it was our error so we're just going to let it go. Instead we're just going to claw the losses back from the rest of our customers. I think people would look at the policy of "letting it go" a whole lot differently.

    That's unavoidable in MCOC, because I'm not talking about Kabam raising prices on offers. I'm talking about every alliance that loses to an alliance that contains players that received more rewards than they were supposed to. Every alliance that places lower in AQ because an alliance gained more prestige and jumped them. And a thousand other little ways in which players who gain unfair advantages over other players will lift their own gameplay on the backs of other players they will push downward. That's completely unavoidable, and something Kabam can never compensate for.

    If people think Kabam is just supposed to let this go because they have some delusion that this is how "good companies" do it in the real world, I think they just don't understand how online games work or possibly how life works. If a company wants to let customers keep stuff they accidentally give away, I don't care. But if a company wants to give unfair advantages to some customers at my expense then I very much do care, and I suspect it would be a public relations nightmare if a company were to do that. Everyone is fine with corporations coming out behind. But when a few customers get away with cheating the system at the other customers expense that's when you have riots.

    I wish these examples from Unit Mastery Marketing 101 would factor the actual real world situation into them.
    I absolutely agree with your point that Kabam couldn't let this go and said as much in the post Lormif quoted where I said serial opportunists should face punitive measures. Conversely speaking, I should've explicitly stated that the items have to also be taken back but I assumed that was implied when I asked for warnings and 48 hour bans. If this wasn't the case, I profusely apologise.

    Where I digress with you is with the point concerning the implications on others. Indeed, what's occurred here has an impact on other players, but my standpoint is it's only a game and thus it doesn't have any real life consequences. OTOH, two of the examples I mentioned can and do impact people in detrimental ways. So in the instance of the major retailer - there are millions of people living on the poverty line here in the UK. Many rely on promotions and loyalty schemes to stock up on essential items, saving plenty of money in the process. If there's a problem with the scheme, its usually put on hold or cancelled altogether. This can then directly hit the pockets of those on the margins, who now have to either wait for the next promotion or lump it and pay the normal price.

    Similarly, with the airline story - if for example we take an Indian migrant construction worker working in Dubai, living in squalid conditions and working for a pittance. Every penny saved gets sent back to india to help the extended family, who depend on this person for their existence. Many such workers rely on these flight promotions to be able to afford to go home to visit their families once in a while. The cheaper the flight, the more money they have for their families. If there's a glitch and tickets are being sold for a much cheaper price, everybody who can take advantage will do so and the booking systems become jammed. This decreases the chance of the migrant worker securing a cheaper ticket. Moreover, they're not likely to be as tech savvy compared to the more the affluent aspirants so that puts them at a further disadvantage when navigating a clogged up system. If they need to get home for an occasion such as a wedding and all the cheap tickets have been sold, they'll have no choice but to pay the higher fare, which will no doubt have an adverse affect on their financial affairs.

    In any case, the line's been drawn in the sand and we all know what to expect if this happens again.
  • GroundedWisdomGroundedWisdom Posts: 25,614 ★★★★★
    SWORD78 said:

    The Most Stupid thing is that people who still exploited is just not as much didn’t get banned but people who exploited It more got a week ban

    Exploiting is Exploiting and Kabam is Favoring players

    And why the Ban if the Rewards are being taken away it is honestly Shady things like this that Hurt Kabam rather than help them. At most they should not allow participation in Alliance Events because They could cheat in that sense.

    I’m disappointed in you Kabam

    As far as I know, people who did more than one extra run received the same punishment. Once is a fair enough mistake.
This discussion has been closed.