No Un-Banning After Second Incident?

[NullWolf]

Some have over a hundred replies and thousands of views.

 

And, while obviously, not all of them are people being banned, a fair number is. I suggest you read them so you may make yourself more aware of the situation.

 

I'm just here for the popcorn...

 

My take on the cheat detection, is that like the game itself, it's in BETA... I'd imagine they're refining / modifying it just like they are with the game itself. Sure, they could possibly have licensed cheat detection from elsewhere, but then they'd still have issues integrating it into their code, or we could have end up with something like punk buster...

Edited May 10, 2013 by NullWolf

[XDeathCoreX]

Mistakes have consequences too.  Was everyone suddenly raised to not be responsible for the things they do?

By not blaming others or anything else, the person takes responsibility.

[SymphNo9]

Since when did video games become such serious business that the prospect of losing out of hundreds of dollars worth of an account just for being forgetful is suddenly acceptable?

 

If the dev didn't care, the game would already be flooded by cheaters. It takes one guy and a host service to spread the application to the rest of the playerbase. Also, he already got a second chance but screwed up again for being careless. Lesson learned, hopefully.

[Kishward]

Well just looking at this thread alone there is one person in all the posts claiming to know one person who was banned.. and this thing has reached 9 pages.

 

No one else posting in this thread has claimed to have been banned.

 

I don't think the number of threads or responses to them are indicative of any data referencing the number of people actually affected by this. Most of the replies have followed the exact same path as this thread has. People arguing back and forth over whether or not the system is just or not.

[XDeathCoreX]

It is the new generation mentality, everything is the parents fault, the school's fault, the government's fault, the game developer's fault, I have not done anything wrong!!!

Wait a minute.

 

What does taking responsibility have to do with the current ban system.

 

Where did all this talk on responsibility come from?

 

You guys should stop changing the subject.

[Enot83]

Sheer volume of thread now means 10+

 

Your evidence is unsubstantial and contradicts what you said.  There are very few threads regarding this in comparison to the total number of users and threads and users. 

 

Thanks for making my argument for me.

 

@XDeathCoreX

It's in wake of the OP, who some are claiming making mistakes shouldn't have punishment associated with them (or as steep) when that mistake breaks the EULA.  Even though the user in the OP was given a second chance.

Edited May 10, 2013 by Enot83

[The_Lunatic_]

Well just looking at this thread alone there is one person in all the posts claiming to know one person who was banned.. and this thing has reached 9 pages.

 

No one else posting in this thread has claimed to have been banned.

 

I don't think the number of threads or responses to them are indicative of any data referencing the number of people actually affected by this. Most of the replies have followed the exact same path as this thread has. People arguing back and forth over whether or not the system is just or not.

 

I've been banned.

 

Entirely my own stupid fault, I'm entirely aware of that. Was cheating on some HTML game and logged in for a daily reward.

 

I contacted support, they were quick about it, uninstalled cheat engine to remove the possiblity in future.

 

But, I wasted support's time, I shouldn't have been banned for having two completely unrelated programs running. And I know I'm not the only one, thus I can can conclude, this system can be improved and thus relieve stress upon the support system.

 

 

Sheer volume of thread now means 10+

 

Your evidence is unsubstantial and contradicts what you said.  There are very few threads regarding this in comparison to the total number of users and threads and users. 

 

Thanks for making my argument for me.

 

Okay.

 

You seem to feel like you actually have a point, and arguing that point beyond your own capacity seems to give you some satisation, usually such people tend to take some sort of superiority from getting the last word in, so, I'll let you have that, if it makes you feel better.

Edited May 10, 2013 by Cingal

[Inez]

Are people seriously of the opinion that banning people for running a program called "Cheat Engine" is going to stop people intentionally trying to cheat?

 

 

I mean, seriously? Like, okay, I know, if it's unguarded, people -could- use it to cheat, but, anyone who is going in with the attitude to cheat this game is either going to do one of the following things.

 

1: Look up a guide. These will usually contain a program or some sort of bypass for the protection. As it, stands it seems all the current protection does is runs a check for the NAME of the process, you know this is bypassed?

 

You can rename the process.

 

Likewise, you can rename your "Paint.exe" process to "Cheatengine" and you will get banned for running paint while warframe is open.

 

It's a horribly ineffective system, and I honestly can't say if there's even more to it than that.

 

2: Anyone who is stupid enough to try and cheat with cheatengine, probably isn't smart enough to actually do anything with it, if they're also incapable of figuring that the process interacting with Warframe will get you banned.

 

 

Anyone who is in defense of this system is just woefully unaware of how these programs work, and how hacking games in general works. This protection is cheap, it is ineffective and wastes the time of support and utimately costs players.

 

Even looking at these forums, "I've been banned for leaving cheat engine open" is one of the biggest topics. It's a very common program because it has uses outside of just "Cheating", it's primary function as a cheat engine is horribly ineffective because any game with even the most modest cheat protection, it simply won't work on without some know-how.

 

It's an extreme minority of malcious players who are honestly launching this game and expecting to get away with running "CheatEngine.exe".

 

People who are trying to hack games, just don't work like that, for the most part, they fall into a group called "Script Kiddies", (Actual term) which is basically just people who go to the various cheating websites on the internet, download somebody else's work and use that to cheat.

 

The people who make these hacks are very capable of bypassing a simple "If running process X, Ban" style protection, and the current system is woefully incapable of protecting against that and is just far too trigger happy with legitmate players.

 

Please, if you're going to take a side in this, actually educate yourself on the reality of the situation. If you're honestly going into this discussion thinking that there's some large group of cheaters using "CheatEngine" and are being thwarted by this system, you're just wrong.

 

Your post makes the assumption that their cheat protection is a simple check vs named processes.  If you've seen the source code, let us know what processes it checks for.  You haven't seen the source?  You're making wild assumptions?  Oh.

 

Most people aren't nearly as smart as your post claims.  Most cheaters see a comment in a forum somewhere or used CE on some other game and figure they'll try it on Warframe.

 

The more dedicated cheaters, who don't mind their computer getting pwned by viruses and are willing to run any random executable they dl from the internet, yeah, they can probably find a way around it.

 

True hackers are pretty much impossible to stop without all kinds of extra coding to check for abnormalities.   However the number of hackers that want to cheat in videogames is very small.

 

The point is, even a simple check for named processes stops most of the casual cheaters.  If you'd prefer a lot more cheaters in game, by all means rail against DE's anti-cheat system.  

 

And as for real programmers "accidentally" leaving a memory editor open twice while playing Warframe, you'd have to be pretty gullible to buy that.  For everyone who believes the OP, I have some nice swampland in Florida to sell ya.  Limited time offer!

[XDeathCoreX]

Sheer volume of thread now means 10+

 

Your evidence is unsubstantial and contradicts what you said.  There are very few threads regarding this in comparison to the total number of users and threads and users. 

 

Thanks for making my argument for me.

 

@XDeathCoreX

It's in wake of the OP, who some are claiming making mistakes shouldn't have punishment associated with them (or as steep) when that mistake breaks the EULA.  Even though the user in the OP was given a second chance.

I wonder.

 

Does this EULA state that one cannot run a cheat program with Warframe or does the person have to cheat to break the EULA in this case?

 

Not asking this for anyone's sake. Just curious.

[Mainabi]

I don't want to sound disrespectful or something like that

 

BUT how about taking care of your files?

Order your pictures into a picture folder

.lua scripts into a lua named folder

etc etc

 

leaving everything on the desktop and "accidentaly" making that mistake, sorry but S#&$ happens.

[The_Lunatic_]

Your post makes the assumption that their cheat protection is a simple check vs named processes.  If you've seen the source code, let us know what processes it checks for.  You haven't seen the source?  You're making wild assumptions?  Oh.

 

Most people aren't nearly as smart as your post claims.  Most cheaters see a comment in a forum somewhere or used CE on some other game and figure they'll try it on Warframe.

 

The more dedicated cheaters, who don't mind their computer getting pwned by viruses and are willing to run any random executable they dl from the internet, yeah, they can probably find a way around it.

 

True hackers are pretty much impossible to stop without all kinds of extra coding to check for abnormalities.   However the number of hackers that want to cheat in videogames is very small.

 

The point is, even a simple check for named processes stops most of the casual cheaters.  If you'd prefer a lot more cheaters in game, by all means rail against DE's anti-cheat system.  

 

And as for real programmers "accidentally" leaving a memory editor open twice while playing Warframe, you'd have to be pretty gullible to buy that.  For everyone who believes the OP, I have some nice swampland in Florida to sell ya.  Limited time offer!

 

It absolutely is a simple name check. Having "Beta tested" this "Feature" I can confirm that to you.

 

Welcome to do that same, just rename any process to "CheatEngine" and run Warframe.

 

That's the first layer of protection. The next is the actual protection, it prevents people from interacting with the game via whatever program they're using.

 

My argument is, the first layer is pointless, as nobody stopped by the first, would not be stopped by the second.

 

Especially not if they're a "Casual hacker" as you say.  All the first layer does is occasional catch users who are just running CE for whatever reason and catch people who would have been caught by the second layer anyway.

 

So, my question is: Why do we need the name check?

[Drusus]

But, I wasted support's time, I shouldn't have been banned for having two completely unrelated programs running. And I know I'm not the only one, thus I can can conclude, this system can be improved and thus relieve stress upon the support system.

 

Here's the thing though Cingal.  You classify that as wasting Support's time.

 

I get why from your point of view.

 

But might I suggest that using support's time to re-actively correct that error is, on the scale of things, a much drastically lower opportunity cost on their time than having to re-actively chase and investigate every potential report of live cheating without having such a hard line defense in place.

 

Instead, they are able to respond to a clean, discreet case of restoring service to you with a clear 'Hey, this was how it triggered, please be sure not to do this again' quickly, promptly and with a known start and end point to the investigative process, including clear details of what triggered the ban.

 

The alternative requires a great deal more time to investigate and evaluate all the possible variables in a more forgiving or allowance driven model of cheat prevention and response.

 

I know you see it as a time waste but thanks to the model such as it is, you were able to be restored to prompt service pretty quickly as I recall.  The alternative would be to very likely slow down reactions for both dealing with guilty parties (thereby lengthening the time of exposed pain and frustration for many many users subjected to the effects of cheating players) and also dealing with legitimate cases such as yours where no harm/foul was intended.

 

I still think the current method is the most for least in terms of gains versus losses in terms of time and service level offered.

[XDeathCoreX]

Here's the thing though Cingal.  You classify that as wasting Support's time.

 

I get why from your point of view.

 

But might I suggest that using support's time to re-actively correct that error is, on the scale of things, a much drastically lower opportunity cost on their time than having to re-actively chase and investigate every potential report of live cheating without having such a hard line defense in place.

 

Instead, they are able to respond to a clean, discreet case of restoring service to you with a clear 'Hey, this was how it triggered, please be sure not to do this again' quickly, promptly and with a known start and end point to the investigative process, including clear details of what triggered the ban.

 

The alternative requires a great deal more time to investigate and evaluate all the possible variables in a more forgiving or allowance driven model of cheat prevention and response.

 

I know you see it as a time waste but thanks to the model such as it is, you were able to be restored to prompt service pretty quickly as I recall.  The alternative would be to very likely slow down reactions for both dealing with guilty parties (thereby lengthening the time of exposed pain and frustration for many many users subjected to the effects of cheating players) and also dealing with legitimate cases such as yours where no harm/foul was intended.

 

I still think the current method is the most for least in terms of gains versus losses in terms of time and service level offered.

Sounds like a cop out. Just ignore all second offenses and move on. To hell with them mistake or not, which then leads to more threads like this and more tickets like this and then you'll get your sheer volume...

 

Just you watch and see...

[crow-k]

And what if cheating adds replay value to a game you are already bored off and would make you play it again especially if you get something you really want?

Not when it involves others. You can ****er t he system all you want, you leave anything involving another player in any way alone. You can cheat in super mario bro 1. I don't care, you bring that crap near Warframe and I have no problem with what DE would and does do. Your arguing to argue. You have no position other than I do not like it. 

[XDeathCoreX]

Temporary bans leading to a permanent ban is the best solution in this case. They all don't have to be short. think of it as having so and so attempts to log in before being locked out except in this case it's only one attempt and the lockout is longer.

 

How long it is would be up for debate, just not too long for first offense or forever in the few cases after.

Edited May 10, 2013 by XDeathCoreX

[Drusus]

Sounds like a cop out. Just ignore all second offenses and move on. To hell with them mistake or not, which then leads to more threads like this and more tickets like this and then you'll get your sheer volume...

 

Just you watch and see...

 

Not intended as a cop out.  I came up in the IT era where Compaq seriously evaluated (literally did a cost feasibility study) on the need to add a key labeled 'Any' to their computer keyboards to reduce the sheer number of calls to support about not being able to find that key when told to 'Press Any Key'

 

I don't believe they'd have taken this measure unless they genuinely felt it was more supportable, cost effective and offered the greater service base per hour/dollar invested in maintaining it.

 

I could always be wrong but I give them that benefit of doubt as it's what I would do.

[XDeathCoreX]

Not when it involves others. You can ****er t he system all you want, you leave anything involving another player in any way alone. You can cheat in super mario bro 1. I don't care, you bring that crap near Warframe and I have no problem with what DE would and does do. Your arguing to argue. You have no position other than I do not like it. 

FYI: That post has NOTHING to do with Warframe.

 

But thanks for caring :)

[GottFaust]

To those saying that the number of people banned is not a vast minority lets do some simple math:

Number of accounts by the last published data from DE that I've seen: 1,000,000

Number of "Halp I've been banned!" threads (based on the search feature): 25

Number of individuals complaining about being banned in said threads: 38

Total % of accounts that have admitted (complained about?) being banned: 38 / 1,000,000 = 0.000038 or 0.0038%

Minimal % to equate to a numerical majority: 50.0001% (Rounded to 4 decimal places for ease of reading)

Now some quick boolean logic:

percentBanned = 0.0038

percentUnbanned = 100 - 0.0038 = 99.9962

if(percentBanned > percentUnbanned){

return true;

}else{

return false;

}

return value? false.

Edited May 10, 2013 by GottFaust

[crow-k]

FYI: That post has NOTHING to do with Warframe.

 

But thanks for caring :)

It is what i do. GL.

[Enot83]

To those saying that the number of people banned is not a vast minority lets do some simple math:

Number of accounts by the last published data from DE that I've seen: 1,000,000

Number of "Halp I've been banned!" threads (based on the search feature): 25

Number of individuals complaining about being banned in said threads: 38

Total % of accounts that have admitted (complained about?) being banned: 38 / 1,000,000 = 0.000038 or 0.0038%

Minimal % to equate to a numerical majority: 50.0001% (Rounded to 4 decimal places for ease of reading)

Now some quick boolean logic:

percentBanned = 0.0038

percentUnbanned = 100 - 0.0038 = 99.9962

if(percentBanned > percentUnbanned){

return true;

}else{

return false;

}

return value? false.

 

Lol, thanks, glad someone else found his claims as ridiculous as I did.  I loved how he turns to the psychoanalysis to strawman his way out of the box he put himself into.

 

It's no surprise seeing as he has been banned before for something similar, its clear the bias stems from.

[Missile]

I've been banned.

 

Entirely my own stupid fault, I'm entirely aware of that. Was cheating on some HTML game and logged in for a daily reward.

 

I contacted support, they were quick about it, uninstalled cheat engine to remove the possiblity in future.

 

But, I wasted support's time, I shouldn't have been banned for having two completely unrelated programs running. And I know I'm not the only one, thus I can can conclude, this system can be improved and thus relieve stress upon the support system.

 

 

 

Okay.

 

You seem to feel like you actually have a point, and arguing that point beyond your own capacity seems to give you some satisation, usually such people tend to take some sort of superiority from getting the last word in, so, I'll let you have that, if it makes you feel better.

lucky you, it took them 7 and a half days to answer to me...

[XDeathCoreX]

lucky you, it took them 7 and a half days to answer to me...

Sounds like they were too busy during those days answering mostly ban tickets.

[Nehmetawy]

I wonder.

 

Does this EULA state that one cannot run a cheat program with Warframe or does the person have to cheat to break the EULA in this case?

 

Not asking this for anyone's sake. Just curious.

 

https://warframe.com/eula'>Use cheats, automation software (bots), hacks, mods or any other unauthorized third-party software, tools or content designed to modify the Software, the Service or the Game experience;

 

Since you were curious Mr. XDeathCoreX

[Inez]

It absolutely is a simple name check. Having "Beta tested" this "Feature" I can confirm that to you.

 

Welcome to do that same, just rename any process to "CheatEngine" and run Warframe.

 

That's the first layer of protection. The next is the actual protection, it prevents people from interacting with the game via whatever program they're using.

 

My argument is, the first layer is pointless, as nobody stopped by the first, would not be stopped by the second.

 

Especially not if they're a "Casual hacker" as you say.  All the first layer does is occasional catch users who are just running CE for whatever reason and catch people who would have been caught by the second layer anyway.

 

So, my question is: Why do we need the name check?

The name check is because its BY FAR the easiest thing to do.  Game companies have limited resources. 

 

If you can think up a simple, efficient low resource algorithm to check for all kind of hacks you should be working as a programmer, maybe even apply to DE.  

 

Also, simple checks like these do catch lots of hackers.  Most people who want to cheat at videogames are completely stupid.  They think, hey, CheatEngine worked great for my single player games, even on a few mp games (people used to use it in Dungeon Defenders) lets try it in Warframe.  Or they just read a random forum post somewhere talking about Cheat Engine.

 

Most of the people not in this category download random executables from the internet, sometimes even paying money for them.  This is a great idea if you're using someone else's computer, pretty stupid if its your own.

 

The number of people smarter than these two groups is very, very small.

 

You can never 100% eliminate hacking.  The goal is to minimize the amount of hacking.

[crow-k]

and make it daunting to consider.