The ones banned were not your average player just trying to buy ships. They watched for a long time and gathered data and got mainly the ones selling credits for cash.
@@Swill880 They are trying to hide the fact that you could have spend either 900€ for a ship or like 30€ paying UEC and have your ship for basically a year ... well now maybe just 6 months till 4.0 gets a release. They certainly don't need to bring people's attention to that, because they want and need money, badly.
I'm confused about why you are trying to justify Real Money Laundering scams that hurt the general process of development with that idea. I get that the ships are expensive and it's cost prohibitive to buy them, but using RMT sites is a much worse alternative to just earning the money in game through legitimate means. Shortcutting yourself to bigger ships won't make much sense in the long run even upon full release someday. @@Traumglanz
Duping once and voting on the issue with the counsel is one thing. Abusing it to cause server instability issues is a whole different thing. Abusing a known exploit is wrong, enjoy your vacation, caustic players.
You know what I find hilarious is that one of the youtube ads for your video is literally a website where you can buy UEC from these people. Holy shit they are brazen!
Note that different nations have different laws covering virtual currency, encompassing the likes of bitcoin to in-game currencies. In the UK, rulings exist that virtual currency is property (AA v Persons Unknown, Re Bitcoin [2019] EWHC 3556 (Comm); Fetch ai Ltd and another v Persons Unknown Category A and others [2021] EWHC 2254 (Comm)) so the holder has title and can sell. On the point that a seller may have acquired items improperly, common law is that when such instruments are transferred, the purchaser who takes them in good faith, for value and without notice of the defect in title, acquires a good title even though the seller may have had a bad or defective title or no title at all.
They didn't get people that use the exploit 5 times, but 20 or more. I don't need to keep doing it that way to test something. Also they know very well their test base. I believe everyone of them were real dupers.
Sometimes letting exploiters get comfy is necessary to get them to show other, unreported exploits. Its Alpha, and their Invictus week could have been delayed and the exploiters banned before the exploit was patched. Sometimes the fix for an exploit can break other things and maybe the patch of the exploits needed to wait until they were certain nothing serious was broken.
I have mixed feelings on their approach. They had ample time to fix the issue, but decided their deadline was more important. I don't know what the criteria was for the suspensions or if the ones caught up in it were guilty of duping over multiple patches. That being said, I'm glad they FINALLY started taking a stand on a larger level. Were there more than 600 people duping, absolutely. I think they made an example out of this group. I just hope they stay consistent which is a problem they have had in the past.
Pretty sure "you can't ban them because kickstarter" doesn't hold any real legal water. Honestly, even if it does, it would only be for the relative handful of kickstarter backers. No other fkn game works that way, you're not exempt from being banned from other games just because you spent money on it a decade ago.
I did my part and took out 32 dupers in total, scumbags! Screwed the system up for cargo/salvage. If you love the game and help find issue that’s one thing but to keep going and going therefore making it hard for others or making people not want to play is where we come after you and make life hell! People got to know our names and even had UA-cam videos of us taking them out! 🎉😂
i thought i was suspended yesterday when i couldnt log into the launcher i also did not know about that suspension notification thing and no one on spectrum or my org knew what to do. turns out it was the rsi rc launcher being dumb and reinstalling the old launcher let me login and play. as for the whole suspension thing i did not take part in the exploit but i do think i did it unintentionally early on in the patch cycle before it became known as an exploit.
If the exploit in the PTU is known, I think it would be sensible to wait for the live version before taking action. Since PTU testers have discovered and reported the exploit, the concern lies with the live players. Waiting for them to reveal themselves is a logical strategy in my opinion.
Initially I felt like 2.5 months was excessive. But after hearing how badly the servers were affected and the response from 2 of the largest streamers to the bad performance and the fact that they probably would have made even more money If the server performance was better I understand.
I have talked to people who where buying "gold" in SC, back when they where "selling the idea of selling an 890 for way cheap" . Their take when I approached them with the hard fact of wipes, their response was they would pay for aUEC to bypass the grind and the wipes didn't concern them, it was worth it to them even if fleeting. That had me scratching my head a bit, and a bit dismayed.
@@hanzo52281 how is it cheating? They messed up und are now banning people for it and you people even defend them for it that’s why people call us a cult…
@@hanzo52281 From a legal perspective, one situation comparable to "duping" you may find interesting relates to virtual world Britannia. A player was banned for in-game actions the developer objected to. The player had to be allowed back, arguing successfully that if the developer did not want their actions to be possible then the developer could and should make them impossible (Lastowka, G. (2010), Virtual Justice. The new laws of online worlds). A second case is Bragg v Linden Research Inc. Bragg bought in-game land for real cash but the game developer asserted the purchase was through an exploit and banned the player, citing a EULA. The case settled, with Linden relaxing its EULA substantially and Bragg successful, after the court repeatedly referenced virtual property and found the EULA and ToS to be "procedurally as well as substantively unconscionable" affecting enforceability. A third and related case is Davidson & Associates v Internet Gateway. While ruling that a EULA was enforceable in this specific instance given the equal sophistication of parties, the judge focused on situations with disparity and stated that "current legal rules may not be enforceable in all cases if valuable property interests [in virtual objects] are at issue". It is not clear that all courts will enforce EULAs encompassing excessive restrictions that allow platform owners to do what they like with valuable virtual property. A few thousand dollars' worth of ships is valuable virtual property. In some nations those thousands of dollars' of ships are deemed player property under national law and the developer has no right to control (although the developer does have obligations as a custodian of the player's virtual property). The Taiwanese Criminal Code defines virtual property as moveable (an important distinction with consequences for theft and fraud) and acknowledges the right to control virtual property at the level of code granted to the owner of the code (purchasing player), "not the owner of the server on which the code happens to reside or the intellectual property owner of the code" (CIG here).
How about them delaying a hotfix for the exploits then, Mike? You said it yourself, they knew about it from PTU, but then they still release it because of ILW, fair enough. But we have heard that the fix has already been done since a couple of SCL ago, but they kept delaying it. I genuinely agree to the banhammer, fk em duper. But then again, CIG still need to have a semblance of priority on what to work on. These things will happen, even moreso with a game that is in active development, but I hope they will prioritize more in rectifying it rather than banning people in the future. Because we don't know what metric they use? I even accidentally did the exploits because I fly away in an empty cargo freelancer, but its full when I went to the outposts to haul some commodities. I can sell it again..the first time around I was questioning myself...maybe I didn't sell it the first time before I logged off. When it happens again, I ask Global and they say that I accidentally did the exploits. I was selling things like Titanium or Gold, not RMC..on a rented freelancer..even the constant relogging and tram riding wasn't worth the hassle. So I say fk it and just haul like usuals. Thankfully nothing happens to the account but I hope they prioritize more in fixing it. On a side note, if only they were so bold and just make RMCO dirt cheap because its flooding the market, duping won't even worth the time. It only works on RMCO because by the nature of it being used as repair resources, its unlimited..unlike any other commodities which need to be mined or wait on outposts' production.
i was talking to a duper in global the other day, apparently racked up enough aUEC that he sold off on ebay to buy a polaris lmao, wonder if he was one of the 600
I don't think that is correct. We all agreed to the Terms Of Service when we supported SC and made our accounts. If I get myself banned for violating TOS, CIG doesn't owe me anything. Not even a refund lol. TOS protects companies from such abuse and loop holing, like backers thinking "Muahaha I can't be banned. I can't do whatever I want".
@@saltemikereacts I said if someone was banned for violating TOS, they are not owed anything... Not even a refund. I don't understand your question lol Appreciate the video though! I am a casual viewer😊
@@saltemikereactswouldn't they not be entitled to a refund because of the way all the purchases are worded as donations? I may be off base with that as I'm only under the assumption that I've pledged money to a project and haven't actually purchased anything except for a physical mug.
They will never get ahead of UEC farming and exploitation as long as it is tied to in game progression. There is a lot of history on this and it is really interesting for anyone who is interested. I hope they hire someone with actual experience with this kind of thing.
there are probably ToS cases that might allow CIG to ban kickstarter backers or any account while in alpha without refunds. although, should be interesting after 1.0.... the amount of money on some accounts will be an exploit/cheat deterrent in and of itself. blizzard used to have a pretty good cheater policy in WoW lol
Question: CIG sells aUEC for real money as well correct? What is the percentage of the banned accounts that are aUEC sellers? Is there a way to know that information? Also question: was not this exploit identified before the need to target and suspend players. To be clear I don't have any issue with the suspensions. If they were not in the process of selling ships would this have gone on for so long.
Well... *puts on nerd glasses* technically CIG sells UEC and not aUEC. We can't farm UEC in-game atm. They do mirror our UEC account into aUEC for each patch but that's it for now until 1.0 when UEC gets implemented i guess.
I backed the kickstarter might number 9 and picked the 3ds version of the game. I never got my pledge and the company is dead. They never even gave me a steam version.
Just because they know about the exploit doesn't mean they've collected all of the data they needed to not only completely close that exploit but also learn more in general about how exploits are used, what players are doing with the credits they gain from those exploits, and so forth. You really don't get to claim that exploiting is okay because they haven't yet done anything to people about that exploit. You know it's against the rules. If you're testing and confirming and letting them know, great. If you continually use the exploits over and over again, and these people knew they were, and littering their ships everywhere and so forth, they had it coming.
SO anyone with a C2 during this update has known about the cargo grid issues.. Unable to do a secound load of anything because the grid appears to be full when it is in fact empty.. There are 2 cures for this.. 1. Claim the ship.. blow it up or abandon it over and over for every load.. 2. duping.. The dupe glitch fixes the cargo grid EVERY time.. So is it fair to ban people for duping when CIG has a broken game issue that some people use to avoid another broken game issue? The fact that CIG should have wiped money AND ships for 3.23 anyway means they weren't getting useful in game market data anyway! The ban is/was useless and just looks bad. Its CIGs fault in more then one way. in my case.. I made very little money "duping" 3 or 4 extra million in comparison to the others that where clearly doing it to make BILLIONS probably. When i found out that duping was causing server issues i stopped playing Star Citizen for that update.. So i haven't been banned for any amount of time and i cant really tell as of this morning if any of my money was taken away.. I was clearly not abusing it enough to get anyone's attention BUT that said.. Even those that where doing it alot more then me where in many cases simply dealing with CIGs issues.
How long did they know about the exploit, and how long would it take to gather and track those doing it? You don't act on this stuff straight away, you watch these people, log it, and when you're ready, you do it all at once. Its not just people exploiting, but getting creds from those exploiting.
Wait they banned Anaryl 😂😂😂😂😂😂😂 I was wondering why I didn't see him in Star Marine he was on so much to the point that I thought cig was testing a AI in star Marine. Like no joke he had the worst ping to like 250 😂😂😂😂. Imagine telling somebody you got banned from Star citizen from being annoying and they gave you your money back😂😂 im in tears
I think the reason some creators like to hate on SC is because they thought they were gonna be "the guy" who streams and makes content for SC. They thought they were getting in early to develope and build a community so that when the game launched, they were off to the races to be Star PewdiePie. Then 12 years later, they are bitter old men who had their shot stolen from them.
Personally I think it's harsh considering their agility to get a fix was ass and the company it self compounded the issue. It's weird to me there is player accountability but nothing for the developer here. If it's people selling aUEC for money yeah fuck that. Perma ban makes sense.
thats how BDO works, no matter how old is bug. If you get caught expoliting, account gets deleted, not even suspended. No explanation get provided. players so afraid they dont even use macros because it might fall into "using bot" category and get account deleted.
It’s a step in the right direction that they ban players for this. But they did launch it live knowing this was a thing also… idk how I feel about it all.
Griefers and cheaters need to be perma banned to keep this game from becoming a toxic filled wasteland like Eve Online. Glad to see CIG dealing with both. o7 😎👍
I think suspension is better than a ban, because cig can watch these accounts when game goes live. and use this info to cast a larger net for this stuff on live
We are all adults, we know perfectly when we are abusing an exploit, if you do it, you risk it, .... and you know it, so if they catch you be ready for the punishment.
consequences matter but all of this will get deleted, so effectively doesn't matter because it's still just an alpha, no economy, no game, not even UEC to even account for. I do understand the value of CIG approaching it for future indications. I do not and would not exploit this project(beside CCU's sales lol) so while i dont aggree with the exploiters i still think giving them, punishment is misplaced besides to set precedent. But precedent gets broken by CIG all the time so lol. Gold sellers should be removed/banned form every game imo, and genuinely good luck with that.
When CIG going to address cheating. What isbstance on cheating? I mean it will going to happen. If your only game is start citizen than I will let you knownthat cheaters, nowdays are everywhere.
Invictus isn’t about selling 3.23 it’s about selling the dream of the game. The dupers and exploiters are cringe but they’re gonna wipe it anyway. Building hype and cultivating a huge community around star citizen was most likely their intention with their strategic timing of the patch release.
LOL. they wont make more money waiting.... They let those griefers buy new ships, then banned them... lol. if they waited and banned them first, they probably would have lost sales from those banned. lol.
I just wish cig was honest with us, if invictus is more important because the project needs funding, fine. But say so and dont take us for dumb and say exploit was priority when its clearly not.
Not pointless to the sellers, because there'll always be someone to fool into buying it. It's just pointless for buyers to buy it. But I agree with your premise.
Simple .. dupers means more in game money to easily buy ships which means less need to buy ships with real money which means less profits.. that's the real reason ..
You say it's because they wanted to make the game better, but if you think about it marketing sell aUEC soooo not about the game, still only about marketing.
"Exploit the Game (or any part thereof) or any of the other RSI Services, for any commercial purpose, including without limitation (a) use at a cyber cafe, computer gaming center or any other location-based site; (b) for gathering in-game virtual, items or resources for sale outside the Game; or (c) performing in-game services in exchange for payment outside the Game, e.g., power-leveling." "Exploit errors in design, features which are not documented and/or bugs to gain access that would otherwise not be available to obtain any competitive advantage." "This above-referenced list of conduct rules provides only examples of unacceptable conduct and is not intended to be a complete or exclusive list of prohibited conduct. Your online conduct should be guided by common sense and respect for others who access and use the RSI Services (whether or not such third parties are registered users of the RSI Services) and for the employees and representatives of RSI and its affiliates and contractors. " "These rules of conduct are enforced by RSI at its reasonable discretion. RSI may address harmful or unacceptable conduct by communicating private or public warnings, by suspension or removal of access to some or all of the RSI Services, including game access, Spectrum access, account access, or access to specific game or website features and permissions. The actions taken and the duration of such actions is at RSI’s reasonable discretion and will take into account factors such as context, cultural norms and standards, legality in applicable or relevant jurisdictions, frequency, repetition and the severity or egregiousness of the conduct."
if you cant ban, then they need to change their tos to allow for bans. Breaking tos can get you banned from other alpha games? like thats such an empty i dont understand laws argument ive ever heard
this is just typical. all mmorpg do this, it do not help shit. Why dont you dev a system to keep track of all monny in the game so you can just easy combat this in the future. so you can roll back bugs /expoits
Bottom line for CIG is that in dealing with situations like "duping" it needs to understand its exposure under law, particularly in countries outside the US, but even there, too. Starting with the familiar: if you have an online bank account, consider your reaction were the bank to restrict your access to that account and funds within it. One scenario is that the restriction was because you did something covered by criminal law and a judge followed a formal process resulting in funds being frozen. Another scenario is that a person at the bank deemed it a good idea and did it because they could. Now consider a player with $2,000 of ships bought with cash being deprived of access to those ships with a justification based on an arbitrary EULA and ToS outside of criminal law. Those ships are virtual property with significant value. Courts have ruled that where such virtual property is involved then EULA terms may be unconscionable and unenforceable, even in the backward (in terms of virtual property laws) US. In some nations, those ships are outside CIG's control already under law: they are the exclusive property of the player regardless of arguments that the items exist because of code that CIG wrote and has IP in or that the code sits on a CIG server. CIG may not control that which is no longer its property. CIG remains a custodian of the property, however. This brings with it the obligation to replace virtual property should, for example, a player's ships be stolen and sold on the grey market. Such a thief would face a multi-year jail term if convicted. CIG has created its own virtual currency. In some parts of the world it is ruled that such virtual currency is not the property of the creator on acquisition by others. The sale of virtual currency for real currency is legitimate and not restricted by the creator. And, as shown even in the US, a player who acquires virtual items through "holes" in a developer's code can argue successfully that it was the developer's responsibility to close those holes if they found the use of them objectionable. The US is backward in the area of laws covering virtual property and virtual worlds. It's driven by an industry that's long-established compared with new and emerging markets that hopes to cling to rapidly-ageing IP laws and contract because that fits historic notions of ownership and control. Star Citizen is played wider than the US, however, and those in the US should not assume that the rest of the world is like the US. The US looks set to be compelled to change to be more consistent with other nations in the arena of virtual property law, in fact.
@@edmundduke1296 National law that contradicts a developer's EULA takes precedence and courts can declare terms unenforceable within specific cases. To give an example from data protection laws: a US-based firm can get me to sign that my data can be stored on its servers in the US and do that. National law dictates that my personal data cannot be held in servers in the US. The fact I signed something to that effect is meaningless. The US firm would still be contravening national law and open to fines (to a maximum of 4% of its global revenues).
economy is a bit more than just that. Not all in game yet and quanta as they call it is very far away. These activities are producing, supplying, buying, selling, and the consumption of goods and services.
I have mixed feelings and definitely come away feeling a little disturbed, although I suspect if I knew exactly what those particular 600 players were doing I wouldn't. First: I think there is no economy at all. CIG has never taken it seriously. The exploit was known and greenlit with no statement. There's way worse things in the game than these players getting to sell twice and they're basically hurting no one except maybe CIG website sales. The exploit is literally not as bad as PvPing in a Hornet that has broken acceleration. Banning backers for this is absolutely absurd a warning and request not to do it again is definitely as far as any disciplinary action should go. (This time) Second: Now on the other hand my above mentality obviously has to change before the dream version of the game that only exists in our heads come out. By taking action CIG is actually taking the smallest step in this direction and they shouldn't be critiqued for caring. The problem is now if CIG is requiring players to take this alpha seriously, as a live competitive game, they have to start doing their part too... And that's not just quadrupling the prices of ships in what looks like a sales incentive then walking away. It's not a bad precedent for the very long run of the game (seven years from now) but just giving out 90 day bans for something that had gone completely mainstream in the game, that CIG made no statements about or efforts to stop seems like a bit much. ...Now I'm just left with question "why 600?" and if I knew what those particular 600 people where doing I might cheer for their ban. But I also can't rule out incompetence when it comes to CIG. Is this 300 friendly fires? Is this everyone they could identify involved in duping at all? By these implied rules why wasn't everyone PvPing in the F7A suspended? Why are they going to all this work retroactively to ban people when they wouldn't go to any work at all to stop the issue initially? CIG should have known this was popular in every server we played on and made a statement before swinging around the ban hammer. Like most things CIG does it might not be that bad but the whole situation was handled poorly.
CIG is brain dead. Highly possible I would have bought the iron clad but bc the game was so broken for us salvagers I was too mad and definitely won’t be spending any money on it for a while. Such a dumb decision to prioritize “ship sale” over fixing the game. Why would I spend money on a broken game so they lost out on a sale and I’m sure I’m not the only one who thought the same thing. 17:18
You're getting mad over an entirely self-invented issue. There is no evidence of prioritizing ship sales over acting accounts. I've worked in CC before. Collecting evidence and actioning accounts takes a LOT of time. Then you have to send it up the chain and make sure the leads believe the action won't create potential backlash and they'll spend weeks pussyfooting around the mere thought that they'll have a PR problem from it. Game studios are full of beurocrats. You throwing a fit is just a you problem.
If CIG had a man sack they'd have banned those players. The economy is gonna be awesome for about 2 weeks before UEC sellers ruin the game after launch permanently.
@@alexanderdooley5833 Imagine watching Tony Z's whole presentation on how intricate the economy and Quanta are going to be and not caring that sh*tbirds like these dudes are going to ruin it mere weeks after launch. It's an incredibly bad take by you.
Yeah, make sure you read the user manual and rule booklet for this video game to avoid having it taken from you. This our future as gamers? I didn't dupe nor get banned but this makes me sick. They should have taken the duped money away from the dupers and fixed their dam game. Now there is probably close to 600 less wallets that will open. Cancel culture will eventually cancel it self.
Dang I was hoping Mike would address this issue, but I guess I will. I am ok with what they did BUT NOT WITH HOW. I feel that it's a slippery slope, especially in a developing game, but what is the difference from a bug, a glitch, an exploit. And where is the line for each. Where is it communicated what is ok and what isn't? Most people arnt going to be up to date on cigs posts spectrum. This duping issue was a clearish example of you probably shouldn't. But anyone remember the "gear insurance" by placeing ur gear on the mule? That was technically duping. All I'm saying is, in most mmos they have banner notifications, "hey x event is starting", "hey server maintenance in 5min" ext. All I'm asking is that cig make it crystal clear what is ok and what isn't. Next time there is an exploit they don't like, just have a banner notification at the top of the screen every time u log in saying "hey this exploit is being addressed and use of it will result in consequence" that way we all know the rules and no one can say that they didn't know.
I didn't get a suspension, but I also wasn't parking outside A18, clogging it up. I didn't make billions of aUEC, let alone sell it for cash. I just like doing RMC trucking. I just wanted to run RMC without having to blow up/claim my ship and wait every time I did a run. Unfortunately, the ghost cargo ruined the thrill of running RMC since it heavily reduced the risk.
@MWTGoldenGun yes, there was another exploit that the seller dupers would do to sell the ghost cargo at full profit price at A18, so you sold it at full price 2x. I would sell my ghost cargo at reclamation and disposal for slightly less than the buy price at picker's field.
I’m glad the RMTers got their comeuppance (if they actually care, which I suspect they don’t). But I have to admit I’m amused to think that some of the folks coming out of the woodwork to cheer CIG for doing this probably exploited the hell out of bugs like the Mule dupe glitch in the past.
Probably should have declared it as a bannable exploit first. Otherwise it's just another game loop/feature or a cargo grid workaround. Not even "real" duping since it was finite, may as well have been a typo in the buy price with extra steps.
let me start off by saying this is not even a game we are glorified test dummies for a game that's not even out yet. We are testers and our job is to test but we being penalized for things that we find out that supposedly are not supposed to be there..
What impresses me the most is despite having the largest development budget of any game in history so far and over 10 years of time to work on things CIG still struggles to fix even the most basic features.
Here’s the thing, after buying the cargo we are forced to do the “bug” by storing our ship at the station which forces us to sell our cargo twice by retrieving the ship from the fleet terminal which duplicates our cargo NOT BY CHOICE but because IT’S A FUCKING BUG and CIG was FULLY AWARE of this. Why should we get banned for something that we have no choice to do by not losing our hard earned money In case of a server related Issue or a game crashing. Also why stop doing cargo hauling If cargo hauling Is part of the game. I just feel like some of this should be mostly to CIG responsibility and some to the dupers that Intentionally mess with the servers by abandoning their ships and not storing It at the fleet terminal like they’re suppose to.
If the PU is a test environment, why are they suspending people? The players showed CIG the exploit existed. CIG sat on it. Nobody should be getting banned in a test environment. The whole point of a test environment is to show where the bugs are. When I was playing in the PU I had cargo duplicating between storing a ship at a station or landing zone both between sessions and within a session. Quite often storing my ship at a landing zone I was selling at meant I had to sell twice because the cargo would still be there when I recalled the ship. I couldn't buy new cargo to sell until I sold the cargo the game thought I had. The alternative would have been to insurance claim the ship. At which point your play session is effectively over and you might as well go do something else. It'll be interesting to see if I got a ban when I next log in.
@@Nimoodles they're not. But if the game is so broken I don't need to do anything other than play the game normally to trigger the bug and the developer does nothing about it. They shouldn't be banning or suspending people. Similarly, if the PU is a "test environment" as CIG continually claim when it suits them. They shouldn't be banning or suspending people. Nothing matters in "test environments". So there's no reason to ban or suspend anybody. All they need to do is wipe. Like they keep doing after saying wiping had ended. They wiped before 3.23. Just wipe for 3.23.2 problem solved.
@@aikiwolfie The thing is, people accidentally stumbling across bugs so egregious that they ruin the economy is not common. It's the people who find it, then spread it like wildfire on top of abusing it themselves, that draw so much attention to this. If the person who discovers the bug just reports it and tells nobody, this would not be as much of an issue as it is. CIG devs might tell you that it's a live test environment, but they haven't treated it like one in years. That hasn't been the official reality of the game for a while. That reaction doesn't really fly. They started talking about wanting to treat LIVE as if its a live service game two years ago. Almost three. If that's the operating context, then yes; they absolutely should be banning people. Especially if it disrupts the entire flow of the game in the first place. You can't balance or get feedback on the cost of play, the economy, the time it takes to earn items, the entire ship gameplay loop goes out the window the second thousands of people are multi billionaires handing out stimulus checks to everyone they meet. There is nothing being tested if players have no sense of progression.
@@Nimoodles what economy? There is no economy to be ruined. Trade locations operate on arbitrary supply and demand numbers. And they refresh at arbitrary intervals. There is no economy.
@@aikiwolfie Yeah, people like to pretend there isn't an economy to justify their abusive behaviors. You having a job, and you spending money from that job on ships with variable prices, is an economy. It's not a complex one, but the fact that players can directly impact material inventories and their value means there is one. It's pretty indisputable. I don't know why people pretend it's not a thing. CIG has done several wipes because of it. Lol.
In all honesty this is fucked, getting suspended for exploiting in an alpha. I think they should be paying people to find and exploit this shit, since it shows how serious the exploits can and will be, if they end up going live.
They need to also ban content creators that show exactly how to do the exploits. If you run across it on your own then fine, report it to the IC. Also, once the IC is confirmed by the 10 people it needs for validation, it needs to be hidden so people cannot scour the IC and find these reports detailing the exploit and how to do it and continue to exploit it.
I have a hard time taking any of this seriously while they're in alpha. So some people cheated in a game that's gonna be wiped. Why should I care? I'm also not a big fan of perma bans anyways. These exploits, as I see it, are mistakes on the devs part for not ironing them out before going to the live server. That's what a test server should be for. In a full game, they can be more careful about these but in an alpha content should be coming out fast enough that these things are sometimes missed. No sweat. Fix the exploit qnd wipe.
Lol, got an ad before the video started for buying aUEC. Absolutely shameless.
I got it midway
I can't believe people are that dumb, buy fake money for a game that will wipe before full release
I just got one too in the middle
Not sure who you’re calling shameless but just in case, he doesn’t choose his ads. You’re targeted based on your internet searches.
@@Swill880 I'm well aware he doesn't pick his ads. My comment was in regards to the dupers that are RMTing.
The ones banned were not your average player just trying to buy ships. They watched for a long time and gathered data and got mainly the ones selling credits for cash.
It’s a great point and I wished they’d state that. Very plausible that the delay was solely because of this initiative
@@Swill880 They are trying to hide the fact that you could have spend either 900€ for a ship or like 30€ paying UEC and have your ship for basically a year ... well now maybe just 6 months till 4.0 gets a release.
They certainly don't need to bring people's attention to that, because they want and need money, badly.
I'm confused about why you are trying to justify Real Money Laundering scams that hurt the general process of development with that idea. I get that the ships are expensive and it's cost prohibitive to buy them, but using RMT sites is a much worse alternative to just earning the money in game through legitimate means. Shortcutting yourself to bigger ships won't make much sense in the long run even upon full release someday. @@Traumglanz
Duping once and voting on the issue with the counsel is one thing. Abusing it to cause server instability issues is a whole different thing. Abusing a known exploit is wrong, enjoy your vacation, caustic players.
You know what I find hilarious is that one of the youtube ads for your video is literally a website where you can buy UEC from these people. Holy shit they are brazen!
Note that different nations have different laws covering virtual currency, encompassing the likes of bitcoin to in-game currencies. In the UK, rulings exist that virtual currency is property (AA v Persons Unknown, Re Bitcoin [2019] EWHC 3556 (Comm); Fetch ai Ltd and another v Persons Unknown Category A and others [2021] EWHC 2254 (Comm)) so the holder has title and can sell. On the point that a seller may have acquired items improperly, common law is that when such instruments are transferred, the purchaser who takes them in good faith, for value and without notice of the defect in title, acquires a good title even though the seller may have had a bad or defective title or no title at all.
There was a gold seller in my server last night spamming chat. I screenshot it and sent it to CIG.
Same
They didn't get people that use the exploit 5 times, but 20 or more. I don't need to keep doing it that way to test something. Also they know very well their test base. I believe everyone of them were real dupers.
Sometimes letting exploiters get comfy is necessary to get them to show other, unreported exploits. Its Alpha, and their Invictus week could have been delayed and the exploiters banned before the exploit was patched. Sometimes the fix for an exploit can break other things and maybe the patch of the exploits needed to wait until they were certain nothing serious was broken.
I have mixed feelings on their approach. They had ample time to fix the issue, but decided their deadline was more important. I don't know what the criteria was for the suspensions or if the ones caught up in it were guilty of duping over multiple patches. That being said, I'm glad they FINALLY started taking a stand on a larger level. Were there more than 600 people duping, absolutely. I think they made an example out of this group. I just hope they stay consistent which is a problem they have had in the past.
If you do something wrong and you knew it was wrong when you did it; don't ask me to be sympathetic.
Pretty sure "you can't ban them because kickstarter" doesn't hold any real legal water. Honestly, even if it does, it would only be for the relative handful of kickstarter backers. No other fkn game works that way, you're not exempt from being banned from other games just because you spent money on it a decade ago.
Agreed its in their rules and they are legally covered. They can ban if they need to.
Finally! A reasonable, fair, and comprehensive opinion on the issue that makes sense! Thank you SaltEMike!
I did my part and took out 32 dupers in total, scumbags! Screwed the system up for cargo/salvage. If you love the game and help find issue that’s one thing but to keep going and going therefore making it hard for others or making people not want to play is where we come after you and make life hell! People got to know our names and even had UA-cam videos of us taking them out! 🎉😂
i thought i was suspended yesterday when i couldnt log into the launcher i also did not know about that suspension notification thing and no one on spectrum or my org knew what to do. turns out it was the rsi rc launcher being dumb and reinstalling the old launcher let me login and play. as for the whole suspension thing i did not take part in the exploit but i do think i did it unintentionally early on in the patch cycle before it became known as an exploit.
If the exploit in the PTU is known, I think it would be sensible to wait for the live version before taking action. Since PTU testers have discovered and reported the exploit, the concern lies with the live players. Waiting for them to reveal themselves is a logical strategy in my opinion.
Initially I felt like 2.5 months was excessive. But after hearing how badly the servers were affected and the response from 2 of the largest streamers to the bad performance and the fact that they probably would have made even more money If the server performance was better I understand.
I have talked to people who where buying "gold" in SC, back when they where "selling the idea of selling an 890 for way cheap" . Their take when I approached them with the hard fact of wipes, their response was they would pay for aUEC to bypass the grind and the wipes didn't concern them, it was worth it to them even if fleeting. That had me scratching my head a bit, and a bit dismayed.
Exploits have been covered in TOS for many years. Glad they are finally taking tangible action on this nonsense and I feel no sympathy for the dupers.
lol tos mean ain’t shit if people start suing.
Cheaters suing because they got caught and temp banned? Good luck with that buddy...
@@hanzo52281 how is it cheating? They messed up und are now banning people for it and you people even defend them for it that’s why people call us a cult…
@@hanzo52281 cig has to legally refund everyone they ban since the tech demo is not done so no cig cant perma ban.
@@hanzo52281 From a legal perspective, one situation comparable to "duping" you may find interesting relates to virtual world Britannia. A player was banned for in-game actions the developer objected to. The player had to be allowed back, arguing successfully that if the developer did not want their actions to be possible then the developer could and should make them impossible (Lastowka, G. (2010), Virtual Justice. The new laws of online worlds).
A second case is Bragg v Linden Research Inc. Bragg bought in-game land for real cash but the game developer asserted the purchase was through an exploit and banned the player, citing a EULA. The case settled, with Linden relaxing its EULA substantially and Bragg successful, after the court repeatedly referenced virtual property and found the EULA and ToS to be "procedurally as well as substantively unconscionable" affecting enforceability.
A third and related case is Davidson & Associates v Internet Gateway. While ruling that a EULA was enforceable in this specific instance given the equal sophistication of parties, the judge focused on situations with disparity and stated that "current legal rules may not be enforceable in all cases if valuable property interests [in virtual objects] are at issue". It is not clear that all courts will enforce EULAs encompassing excessive restrictions that allow platform owners to do what they like with valuable virtual property. A few thousand dollars' worth of ships is valuable virtual property.
In some nations those thousands of dollars' of ships are deemed player property under national law and the developer has no right to control (although the developer does have obligations as a custodian of the player's virtual property). The Taiwanese Criminal Code defines virtual property as moveable (an important distinction with consequences for theft and fraud) and acknowledges the right to control virtual property at the level of code granted to the owner of the code (purchasing player), "not the owner of the server on which the code happens to reside or the intellectual property owner of the code" (CIG here).
How about them delaying a hotfix for the exploits then, Mike? You said it yourself, they knew about it from PTU, but then they still release it because of ILW, fair enough. But we have heard that the fix has already been done since a couple of SCL ago, but they kept delaying it.
I genuinely agree to the banhammer, fk em duper. But then again, CIG still need to have a semblance of priority on what to work on. These things will happen, even moreso with a game that is in active development, but I hope they will prioritize more in rectifying it rather than banning people in the future.
Because we don't know what metric they use? I even accidentally did the exploits because I fly away in an empty cargo freelancer, but its full when I went to the outposts to haul some commodities. I can sell it again..the first time around I was questioning myself...maybe I didn't sell it the first time before I logged off. When it happens again, I ask Global and they say that I accidentally did the exploits.
I was selling things like Titanium or Gold, not RMC..on a rented freelancer..even the constant relogging and tram riding wasn't worth the hassle. So I say fk it and just haul like usuals.
Thankfully nothing happens to the account but I hope they prioritize more in fixing it.
On a side note, if only they were so bold and just make RMCO dirt cheap because its flooding the market, duping won't even worth the time. It only works on RMCO because by the nature of it being used as repair resources, its unlimited..unlike any other commodities which need to be mined or wait on outposts' production.
Agreeable, were there an economy to exploit.
i was talking to a duper in global the other day, apparently racked up enough aUEC that he sold off on ebay to buy a polaris lmao, wonder if he was one of the 600
LOL Instauec add at the end of the video, can't get better than that!
I don't think that is correct. We all agreed to the Terms Of Service when we supported SC and made our accounts. If I get myself banned for violating TOS, CIG doesn't owe me anything. Not even a refund lol.
TOS protects companies from such abuse and loop holing, like backers thinking "Muahaha I can't be banned. I can't do whatever I want".
Then why doesn’t everyone who gets banned get a refund?
@@saltemikereacts I said if someone was banned for violating TOS, they are not owed anything... Not even a refund.
I don't understand your question lol
Appreciate the video though! I am a casual viewer😊
@@saltemikereactswouldn't they not be entitled to a refund because of the way all the purchases are worded as donations? I may be off base with that as I'm only under the assumption that I've pledged money to a project and haven't actually purchased anything except for a physical mug.
Who are you, Comcast? TOS are worded such that everyone and no one is guilty, depending on nothing more than the service provider’s whim.
They will never get ahead of UEC farming and exploitation as long as it is tied to in game progression. There is a lot of history on this and it is really interesting for anyone who is interested. I hope they hire someone with actual experience with this kind of thing.
there are probably ToS cases that might allow CIG to ban kickstarter backers or any account while in alpha without refunds. although, should be interesting after 1.0.... the amount of money on some accounts will be an exploit/cheat deterrent in and of itself. blizzard used to have a pretty good cheater policy in WoW lol
The irony, while listing to this an advert came up on you tube asking me to buy auec haha…
So I didn't do the exploits to make lots of credits. But during this patch I lost my M2 and Taurus. CIG ran an exploit on me.
Question: CIG sells aUEC for real money as well correct? What is the percentage of the banned accounts that are aUEC sellers? Is there a way to know that information? Also question: was not this exploit identified before the need to target and suspend players. To be clear I don't have any issue with the suspensions. If they were not in the process of selling ships would this have gone on for so long.
Well... *puts on nerd glasses* technically CIG sells UEC and not aUEC. We can't farm UEC in-game atm. They do mirror our UEC account into aUEC for each patch but that's it for now until 1.0 when UEC gets implemented i guess.
I am just glad they actually did something, but they have to keep it up. This should not be a one and done situation
And I get a UEC ad while watching this
I backed the kickstarter might number 9 and picked the 3ds version of the game. I never got my pledge and the company is dead. They never even gave me a steam version.
Just because they know about the exploit doesn't mean they've collected all of the data they needed to not only completely close that exploit but also learn more in general about how exploits are used, what players are doing with the credits they gain from those exploits, and so forth.
You really don't get to claim that exploiting is okay because they haven't yet done anything to people about that exploit. You know it's against the rules. If you're testing and confirming and letting them know, great. If you continually use the exploits over and over again, and these people knew they were, and littering their ships everywhere and so forth, they had it coming.
SO anyone with a C2 during this update has known about the cargo grid issues.. Unable to do a secound load of anything because the grid appears to be full when it is in fact empty..
There are 2 cures for this.. 1. Claim the ship.. blow it up or abandon it over and over for every load.. 2. duping.. The dupe glitch fixes the cargo grid EVERY time.. So is it fair to ban people for duping when CIG has a broken game issue that some people use to avoid another broken game issue? The fact that CIG should have wiped money AND ships for 3.23 anyway means they weren't getting useful in game market data anyway! The ban is/was useless and just looks bad. Its CIGs fault in more then one way.
in my case.. I made very little money "duping" 3 or 4 extra million in comparison to the others that where clearly doing it to make BILLIONS probably. When i found out that duping was causing server issues i stopped playing Star Citizen for that update.. So i haven't been banned for any amount of time and i cant really tell as of this morning if any of my money was taken away.. I was clearly not abusing it enough to get anyone's attention BUT that said.. Even those that where doing it alot more then me where in many cases simply dealing with CIGs issues.
damn im so out of the loop just waiting for 4.0 and every week seems that something happens
lol I got an ad for uec seller on this vid.
How long did they know about the exploit, and how long would it take to gather and track those doing it? You don't act on this stuff straight away, you watch these people, log it, and when you're ready, you do it all at once. Its not just people exploiting, but getting creds from those exploiting.
I've said it before and I'll say it again. Why oh why do they release major updates and run ship sale events at the same frigging time.
Game economy? I think they meant CIG's economy ....?
Wait they banned Anaryl 😂😂😂😂😂😂😂 I was wondering why I didn't see him in Star Marine he was on so much to the point that I thought cig was testing a AI in star Marine. Like no joke he had the worst ping to like 250 😂😂😂😂. Imagine telling somebody you got banned from Star citizen from being annoying and they gave you your money back😂😂 im in tears
I think the reason some creators like to hate on SC is because they thought they were gonna be "the guy" who streams and makes content for SC. They thought they were getting in early to develope and build a community so that when the game launched, they were off to the races to be Star PewdiePie. Then 12 years later, they are bitter old men who had their shot stolen from them.
Personally I think it's harsh considering their agility to get a fix was ass and the company it self compounded the issue. It's weird to me there is player accountability but nothing for the developer here. If it's people selling aUEC for money yeah fuck that. Perma ban makes sense.
Plot twist: all 600 accounts were free fly that never bought a game package. Source: trust me bro
Salty hey it was a animated picture
thats how BDO works, no matter how old is bug. If you get caught expoliting, account gets deleted, not even suspended. No explanation get provided. players so afraid they dont even use macros because it might fall into "using bot" category and get account deleted.
Wish I could fucking play, ships are still MIA from terminals. When I log on I have to hitch hike all over the fucking place!
big diff between suspended and banned...
It’s a step in the right direction that they ban players for this. But they did launch it live knowing this was a thing also… idk how I feel about it all.
Griefers and cheaters need to be perma banned to keep this game from becoming a toxic filled wasteland like Eve Online. Glad to see CIG dealing with both. o7 😎👍
There is nothing on earth that can drive “toxic” players out of an MMO permanently.
I think suspension is better than a ban, because cig can watch these accounts when game goes live. and use this info to cast a larger net for this stuff on live
We are all adults, we know perfectly when we are abusing an exploit, if you do it, you risk it, .... and you know it, so if they catch you be ready for the punishment.
They are treating it like a game, cool. When are they going to develop it like a game?
These are exploit early and exploit often people. Ban them permanently. Give them their money back.
Loophole for ppl that used alot of money if they refunded
consequences matter but all of this will get deleted, so effectively doesn't matter because it's still just an alpha, no economy, no game, not even UEC to even account for. I do understand the value of CIG approaching it for future indications. I do not and would not exploit this project(beside CCU's sales lol) so while i dont aggree with the exploiters i still think giving them, punishment is misplaced besides to set precedent. But precedent gets broken by CIG all the time so lol. Gold sellers should be removed/banned form every game imo, and genuinely good luck with that.
After 11 years doing something good LOL!!
Hmm my friends that exploited 100's millions did not get suspended? this smells bs that ppl got suspended, i dont think they did at all
they have got so bad that on 2 seperate servers i saw gold selling sites in chat advertising
When CIG going to address cheating. What isbstance on cheating? I mean it will going to happen. If your only game is start citizen than I will let you knownthat cheaters, nowdays are everywhere.
I'm really hoping this mentality changes soon as well. If they got really good at cosmetics it would easily offset some ship sales.
Invictus isn’t about selling 3.23 it’s about selling the dream of the game.
The dupers and exploiters are cringe but they’re gonna wipe it anyway.
Building hype and cultivating a huge community around star citizen was most likely their intention with their strategic timing of the patch release.
i would suspend someone distributing exploits publicly especially people farming views for it
LOL. they wont make more money waiting.... They let those griefers buy new ships, then banned them... lol. if they waited and banned them first, they probably would have lost sales from those banned. lol.
I just wish cig was honest with us, if invictus is more important because the project needs funding, fine. But say so and dont take us for dumb and say exploit was priority when its clearly not.
It's pointless selling aUEC for real money, because there will be wipes until proper release. You'll lose the aUEC that you spent real money on.
Not pointless to the sellers, because there'll always be someone to fool into buying it. It's just pointless for buyers to buy it. But I agree with your premise.
money for beginners are to little. you will do delivery missions for month. someone gave me 1million and it made a whole différence playing the game.
@@jensbronton I agree with that. Someone helpful will make a whole difference. But why spend real money on aUEC when it will get wiped?
Simple .. dupers means more in game money to easily buy ships which means less need to buy ships with real money which means less profits.. that's the real reason ..
You say it's because they wanted to make the game better, but if you think about it marketing sell aUEC soooo not about the game, still only about marketing.
where is the TOS that says you can be suspended for doing an exploit
"Exploit the Game (or any part thereof) or any of the other RSI Services, for any commercial purpose, including without limitation (a) use at a cyber cafe, computer gaming center or any other location-based site; (b) for gathering in-game virtual, items or resources for sale outside the Game; or (c) performing in-game services in exchange for payment outside the Game, e.g., power-leveling."
"Exploit errors in design, features which are not documented and/or bugs to gain access that would otherwise not be available to obtain any competitive advantage."
"This above-referenced list of conduct rules provides only examples of unacceptable conduct and is not intended to be a complete or exclusive list of prohibited conduct. Your online conduct should be guided by common sense and respect for others who access and use the RSI Services (whether or not such third parties are registered users of the RSI Services) and for the employees and representatives of RSI and its affiliates and contractors. "
"These rules of conduct are enforced by RSI at its reasonable discretion. RSI may address harmful or unacceptable conduct by communicating private or public warnings, by suspension or removal of access to some or all of the RSI Services, including game access, Spectrum access, account access, or access to specific game or website features and permissions. The actions taken and the duration of such actions is at RSI’s reasonable discretion and will take into account factors such as context, cultural norms and standards, legality in applicable or relevant jurisdictions, frequency, repetition and the severity or egregiousness of the conduct."
if you cant ban, then they need to change their tos to allow for bans. Breaking tos can get you banned from other alpha games? like thats such an empty i dont understand laws argument ive ever heard
Only bans IMO should be ESP AIMBOT CHAMS hacks I've seen aimbot s in arena and pi since 2.6
Forza Horizon devs have suspended someone's account for 4000 years - for a car livery featuring North Korean jokes - why CIG couldn't do this instead?
So you're telling me, if I'm annoying and bad enough, I can finally get a full refund and get off MR BONES WILD RIDE? HALLELUJAH!
The amount of annoying you would have to be would be a full time job…
this is just typical. all mmorpg do this, it do not help shit. Why dont you dev a system to keep track of all monny in the game so you can just easy combat this in the future. so you can roll back bugs /expoits
Thats not true, they can 100% ban. When u get the game u agree to their terms of service. If u break those they can legally ban u permanently.
Bottom line for CIG is that in dealing with situations like "duping" it needs to understand its exposure under law, particularly in countries outside the US, but even there, too.
Starting with the familiar: if you have an online bank account, consider your reaction were the bank to restrict your access to that account and funds within it. One scenario is that the restriction was because you did something covered by criminal law and a judge followed a formal process resulting in funds being frozen. Another scenario is that a person at the bank deemed it a good idea and did it because they could.
Now consider a player with $2,000 of ships bought with cash being deprived of access to those ships with a justification based on an arbitrary EULA and ToS outside of criminal law. Those ships are virtual property with significant value. Courts have ruled that where such virtual property is involved then EULA terms may be unconscionable and unenforceable, even in the backward (in terms of virtual property laws) US.
In some nations, those ships are outside CIG's control already under law: they are the exclusive property of the player regardless of arguments that the items exist because of code that CIG wrote and has IP in or that the code sits on a CIG server. CIG may not control that which is no longer its property. CIG remains a custodian of the property, however. This brings with it the obligation to replace virtual property should, for example, a player's ships be stolen and sold on the grey market. Such a thief would face a multi-year jail term if convicted.
CIG has created its own virtual currency. In some parts of the world it is ruled that such virtual currency is not the property of the creator on acquisition by others. The sale of virtual currency for real currency is legitimate and not restricted by the creator. And, as shown even in the US, a player who acquires virtual items through "holes" in a developer's code can argue successfully that it was the developer's responsibility to close those holes if they found the use of them objectionable.
The US is backward in the area of laws covering virtual property and virtual worlds. It's driven by an industry that's long-established compared with new and emerging markets that hopes to cling to rapidly-ageing IP laws and contract because that fits historic notions of ownership and control.
Star Citizen is played wider than the US, however, and those in the US should not assume that the rest of the world is like the US. The US looks set to be compelled to change to be more consistent with other nations in the arena of virtual property law, in fact.
When you signed up you agreed that all property in game belongs to CIG.
@@edmundduke1296 National law that contradicts a developer's EULA takes precedence and courts can declare terms unenforceable within specific cases. To give an example from data protection laws: a US-based firm can get me to sign that my data can be stored on its servers in the US and do that. National law dictates that my personal data cannot be held in servers in the US. The fact I signed something to that effect is meaningless. The US firm would still be contravening national law and open to fines (to a maximum of 4% of its global revenues).
he wrote about a negative effect on the economy. Wich economy 😂😂
Uhh the inability to sell RMC as a regular player for the past 3 weeks...
Sir. Do. You. Even. Play. The. Game?
Well, based on the economic data they collected, they lowered mission payouts. The economic data that included duping. There you go.
They reset our money to get better data on how the current system rewards players financially, these dupers fucked with that data.
economy is a bit more than just that. Not all in game yet and quanta as they call it is very far away.
These activities are producing, supplying, buying, selling, and the consumption of goods and services.
exactly
do not buy money
I have mixed feelings and definitely come away feeling a little disturbed, although I suspect if I knew exactly what those particular 600 players were doing I wouldn't.
First:
I think there is no economy at all. CIG has never taken it seriously. The exploit was known and greenlit with no statement. There's way worse things in the game than these players getting to sell twice and they're basically hurting no one except maybe CIG website sales. The exploit is literally not as bad as PvPing in a Hornet that has broken acceleration. Banning backers for this is absolutely absurd a warning and request not to do it again is definitely as far as any disciplinary action should go. (This time)
Second:
Now on the other hand my above mentality obviously has to change before the dream version of the game that only exists in our heads come out. By taking action CIG is actually taking the smallest step in this direction and they shouldn't be critiqued for caring. The problem is now if CIG is requiring players to take this alpha seriously, as a live competitive game, they have to start doing their part too... And that's not just quadrupling the prices of ships in what looks like a sales incentive then walking away.
It's not a bad precedent for the very long run of the game (seven years from now) but just giving out 90 day bans for something that had gone completely mainstream in the game, that CIG made no statements about or efforts to stop seems like a bit much. ...Now I'm just left with question "why 600?" and if I knew what those particular 600 people where doing I might cheer for their ban. But I also can't rule out incompetence when it comes to CIG. Is this 300 friendly fires? Is this everyone they could identify involved in duping at all? By these implied rules why wasn't everyone PvPing in the F7A suspended? Why are they going to all this work retroactively to ban people when they wouldn't go to any work at all to stop the issue initially? CIG should have known this was popular in every server we played on and made a statement before swinging around the ban hammer.
Like most things CIG does it might not be that bad but the whole situation was handled poorly.
I don’t think it was the ship sale. And if it was about that, I don’t care.
I’d say fixing the issue by the .1a patch is “expedient.”
CIG is brain dead. Highly possible I would have bought the iron clad but bc the game was so broken for us salvagers I was too mad and definitely won’t be spending any money on it for a while. Such a dumb decision to prioritize “ship sale” over fixing the game. Why would I spend money on a broken game so they lost out on a sale and I’m sure I’m not the only one who thought the same thing. 17:18
You're getting mad over an entirely self-invented issue. There is no evidence of prioritizing ship sales over acting accounts.
I've worked in CC before. Collecting evidence and actioning accounts takes a LOT of time. Then you have to send it up the chain and make sure the leads believe the action won't create potential backlash and they'll spend weeks pussyfooting around the mere thought that they'll have a PR problem from it.
Game studios are full of beurocrats. You throwing a fit is just a you problem.
If CIG had a man sack they'd have banned those players. The economy is gonna be awesome for about 2 weeks before UEC sellers ruin the game after launch permanently.
They backed the game, they can't ban outright. 3months is long enough...
@@alexanderdooley5833 Imagine watching Tony Z's whole presentation on how intricate the economy and Quanta are going to be and not caring that sh*tbirds like these dudes are going to ruin it mere weeks after launch.
It's an incredibly bad take by you.
The people triggered by this have a guilty conscience
I don't know, UA-camrs should also have consequences. If they can temp ban a player, they can ban a UA-camr's game account.
Yeah, make sure you read the user manual and rule booklet for this video game to avoid having it taken from you. This our future as gamers? I didn't dupe nor get banned but this makes me sick. They should have taken the duped money away from the dupers and fixed their dam game. Now there is probably close to 600 less wallets that will open. Cancel culture will eventually cancel it self.
Dang I was hoping Mike would address this issue, but I guess I will. I am ok with what they did BUT NOT WITH HOW. I feel that it's a slippery slope, especially in a developing game, but what is the difference from a bug, a glitch, an exploit. And where is the line for each. Where is it communicated what is ok and what isn't? Most people arnt going to be up to date on cigs posts spectrum. This duping issue was a clearish example of you probably shouldn't. But anyone remember the "gear insurance" by placeing ur gear on the mule? That was technically duping. All I'm saying is, in most mmos they have banner notifications, "hey x event is starting", "hey server maintenance in 5min" ext. All I'm asking is that cig make it crystal clear what is ok and what isn't. Next time there is an exploit they don't like, just have a banner notification at the top of the screen every time u log in saying "hey this exploit is being addressed and use of it will result in consequence" that way we all know the rules and no one can say that they didn't know.
I didn't get a suspension, but I also wasn't parking outside A18, clogging it up. I didn't make billions of aUEC, let alone sell it for cash.
I just like doing RMC trucking. I just wanted to run RMC without having to blow up/claim my ship and wait every time I did a run. Unfortunately, the ghost cargo ruined the thrill of running RMC since it heavily reduced the risk.
Is that why Area 18 was always full of C2's stranded all over the spaceport? That had something to do with this exploit?
@MWTGoldenGun yes, there was another exploit that the seller dupers would do to sell the ghost cargo at full profit price at A18, so you sold it at full price 2x.
I would sell my ghost cargo at reclamation and disposal for slightly less than the buy price at picker's field.
I’m glad the RMTers got their comeuppance (if they actually care, which I suspect they don’t). But I have to admit I’m amused to think that some of the folks coming out of the woodwork to cheer CIG for doing this probably exploited the hell out of bugs like the Mule dupe glitch in the past.
Probably should have declared it as a bannable exploit first. Otherwise it's just another game loop/feature or a cargo grid workaround. Not even "real" duping since it was finite, may as well have been a typo in the buy price with extra steps.
let me start off by saying this is not even a game we are glorified test dummies for a game that's not even out yet.
We are testers and our job is to test but we being penalized for things that we find out that supposedly are not supposed to be there..
What impresses me the most is despite having the largest development budget of any game in history so far and over 10 years of time to work on things CIG still struggles to fix even the most basic features.
Here’s the thing, after buying the cargo we are forced to do the “bug” by storing our ship at the station which forces us to sell our cargo twice by retrieving the ship from the fleet terminal which duplicates our cargo NOT BY CHOICE but because IT’S A FUCKING BUG and CIG was FULLY AWARE of this. Why should we get banned for something that we have no choice to do by not losing our hard earned money In case of a server related Issue or a game crashing. Also why stop doing cargo hauling If cargo hauling Is part of the game. I just feel like some of this should be mostly to CIG responsibility and some to the dupers that Intentionally mess with the servers by abandoning their ships and not storing It at the fleet terminal like they’re suppose to.
If the PU is a test environment, why are they suspending people? The players showed CIG the exploit existed. CIG sat on it. Nobody should be getting banned in a test environment. The whole point of a test environment is to show where the bugs are.
When I was playing in the PU I had cargo duplicating between storing a ship at a station or landing zone both between sessions and within a session. Quite often storing my ship at a landing zone I was selling at meant I had to sell twice because the cargo would still be there when I recalled the ship. I couldn't buy new cargo to sell until I sold the cargo the game thought I had. The alternative would have been to insurance claim the ship. At which point your play session is effectively over and you might as well go do something else.
It'll be interesting to see if I got a ban when I next log in.
L take.
Bug smashing and bug reporting are NOT the same thing as repeatedly and maliciously exploiting. Lmao.
@@Nimoodles they're not. But if the game is so broken I don't need to do anything other than play the game normally to trigger the bug and the developer does nothing about it. They shouldn't be banning or suspending people.
Similarly, if the PU is a "test environment" as CIG continually claim when it suits them. They shouldn't be banning or suspending people. Nothing matters in "test environments". So there's no reason to ban or suspend anybody. All they need to do is wipe. Like they keep doing after saying wiping had ended.
They wiped before 3.23. Just wipe for 3.23.2 problem solved.
@@aikiwolfie The thing is, people accidentally stumbling across bugs so egregious that they ruin the economy is not common. It's the people who find it, then spread it like wildfire on top of abusing it themselves, that draw so much attention to this. If the person who discovers the bug just reports it and tells nobody, this would not be as much of an issue as it is.
CIG devs might tell you that it's a live test environment, but they haven't treated it like one in years. That hasn't been the official reality of the game for a while. That reaction doesn't really fly. They started talking about wanting to treat LIVE as if its a live service game two years ago. Almost three. If that's the operating context, then yes; they absolutely should be banning people. Especially if it disrupts the entire flow of the game in the first place.
You can't balance or get feedback on the cost of play, the economy, the time it takes to earn items, the entire ship gameplay loop goes out the window the second thousands of people are multi billionaires handing out stimulus checks to everyone they meet.
There is nothing being tested if players have no sense of progression.
@@Nimoodles what economy? There is no economy to be ruined. Trade locations operate on arbitrary supply and demand numbers. And they refresh at arbitrary intervals.
There is no economy.
@@aikiwolfie Yeah, people like to pretend there isn't an economy to justify their abusive behaviors. You having a job, and you spending money from that job on ships with variable prices, is an economy. It's not a complex one, but the fact that players can directly impact material inventories and their value means there is one. It's pretty indisputable. I don't know why people pretend it's not a thing. CIG has done several wipes because of it. Lol.
Why don’t they just make something useful
So there is a way to get a full refund on all these broken ships I wasted my money on! 🧠
Ah yes, salty internet kid dispensing legal knowledge.
Do tell us the paragraphs that prevent CIG from perma-banning people.
In all honesty this is fucked, getting suspended for exploiting in an alpha. I think they should be paying people to find and exploit this shit, since it shows how serious the exploits can and will be, if they end up going live.
They need to also ban content creators that show exactly how to do the exploits. If you run across it on your own then fine, report it to the IC. Also, once the IC is confirmed by the 10 people it needs for validation, it needs to be hidden so people cannot scour the IC and find these reports detailing the exploit and how to do it and continue to exploit it.
I disagree how is a duper making a game.less fun?I had more fun killing dupers so it was more fun?
"Director of Player Relations" sounds like marketing to me.
I started buy auec after the last "not wipe" because CIG loves wiping my ships I played the game for.
It’s people like you buying from cheaters that enables them and makes the game worse for everyone.
I have a hard time taking any of this seriously while they're in alpha.
So some people cheated in a game that's gonna be wiped. Why should I care? I'm also not a big fan of perma bans anyways. These exploits, as I see it, are mistakes on the devs part for not ironing them out before going to the live server. That's what a test server should be for.
In a full game, they can be more careful about these but in an alpha content should be coming out fast enough that these things are sometimes missed. No sweat. Fix the exploit qnd wipe.
Why aren't these players just sent to the in-game prison for extended time, instead of account bans in an alpha game
Its more like better late than never they should have gotten on top of the duping when it started to become a problem not later