Last edited by FlaviusMaximus; 10-09-2013 at 12:36 AM.
Heres the problem you have, you dont understand responsibility. I dont run the risk of losing my house because i keep a job, many times ive kept jobs I HATED so i could raise my kids well and have a home.
Yes, the real world does have a lot of simple stupid people (maybe some even think its acceptable to graffiti their own parents houses when they are adults).
Yep, i stick to my gun, when parents dont they create permachildren like many we have in this game, simple and stupid.
It seems to be for you. In addition to the inappropriate nature of your analogy it is also just plain false. You see, it wouldn't be an exploit to use a knife to cut. That is what it was intended to do. In fact, exploits relating to morality will fail completely for a reason already mentioned. A better analogy if you want something at least half right(far, far better than yours) would be finding a way out of a law through a technicality...Something that big business in the US clearly has no problem with. Note, if they have no problem doing it, it would be immoral of them to judge others for doing it, on a mildly ironic note.
I did an Ethics course a long time ago during my first year of university. There were only 2 ethical theories I remember since they were the only 2 that I somewhat accepted as logical.
"Is it against the rules?" is not the question if we're looking purely from a moral perspective. Gandhi's whole shebang was to intentionally disobey unfair laws and peacefully cop the consequences.
Assuming you're not amongst the first to dupe, given the existing mass of dupers, it's disingenuous to attribute almost any macro negative consequences about devaluing the economy or hurting innocents under utilitarianism since you couldn't change that.
But, you get high personal utility.
I think it's perfectly ethical for non-early-exploiters to dupe (under utilitarianism).
Utilitarianism also subscribes to the idea that the greater and more widespread someone's public humiliation (assuming it's even mildly enjoyable to watch for some reason) the more ethical it is to broadcast said humiliation, so it's not really the best moral arbiter.
My undoubtledly academically scoffable summary of Kantism is that it boils down to the question of:
"Would the system collapse if everybody did the [action in question]?"
Somewhat. The Shard Exchange would in many ways. As would some challenges, raids and token farms.
So I'd say duping is immoral under Kantism.
I think I end up on the side of it being mildly unethical, probably due to personally subscribing to something close to kantism since it takes into account the wider consequences.
Khyber: Aggrim (Completionist!)
All of my builds are grossly out of date. Just roll a human or drow mechanic / assassin rogue thing.
Blind insta-kills floating eye balls.
imagine someone have left gun on street. then psycho comes and shoot his victim.
whos guilty ?
psycho cause it was him who shoots? very likely
the man who left dangerous weapon on steet? negligently but yeah, owning such tool bring some responsibility
police, who doesnot responded to warning theres gun lying in time? yes, theyre paid for it
people shouting in public: "hey folks, isaw something lying on street! maybe its gun! it can be used for killing people! ...now what?
How do you conclude the Shard Exchange collapses? That makes no sense. The value of certain collectibles would go down. Is that inherently a bad thing? Generally consumers enjoy it when the costs of goods and services go down.
No, it's just more of the same ego propping. "My precious digital loot I was hoarding got devalued because someone else sold it for less!" "Some noob is wearing/crafting gear he didn't EARN!" "Instead of getting some sucker to pay 500 shards for my loot, he was able to pay 50 shards for someone else's!"
I doubt the folks who did much buying on the ASAH were farming those quests much, or they wouldn't have had any desire to buy the items from those quests.
i maybe would like to buy Kronzeks Cruelty (everyone must love the mechanic of rare drop from rare spawn ), as from couple years of farming i got only one while i got several sets of epic ingredients
If Turbine is partially to blame is irrelevant since in Turbine's case the crime bears the penance (like all this is doing any good to DDO). Exploiters were well aware of what they were doing and knew the risks. Banning them from the game isn't capital punishment; it's just a game. Though, I have to admit, it's interesting seeing how some people believe they can actually convince their fellow players that having droves of rampant cheaters messing around is for DDO's own good.
I dont think its good for ddo, nor saying duping alone was good n right thing. But I personnaly have feeling lot of people are making that stand cause this affair is big slap into turbine face and feels like they had to get some for all those years of nonclear communications, stealth nerfing, making their precious loots obsolete and driving this game to pay2win model.
I started posting on this forums as big fanboi, defending turbine as being part of game dev team (not turbines ofc) i know whats about develop stuff, but thru years i turned into bit bitter one poster, cause as being part of dev team myself i know whats about to stuff.
this game simply shifted from fair one to "Nevermind the players are cheating, Dungeon Master lies"
sorry for mistakes, but if it takes couple minutes and editing tool wont open, i wont bother
Advocating repeated nerfs in the name of "balancing the game" then complaining about how DDO is moving away from D&D, is a direct contradiction in logic - D&D 3.5 (what DDO is based on) is not a balanced game. We can either have a balanced clone MMO with homogenized classes, or we can have a D&D game. We cant have both.
That won't stop the hard-core cheaters, but it will stop a ton of people because they won't want to risk a perma-ban.
Well, I would make an exception in your case; but other customers see that and will identify with the banned dufus, regardless of what that dufus did.
I don't care what people think morally of the situation, so the point you're trying to make on user behavior after the fact isn't even the least bit interesting to me. People take advantage. Congrats, you've provided zero additional insight into something any half awake observer could see in an untold number of markets. Welcome to the real world, one where a portion of any system's users will always do whatever a system allows, regardless of the system. If a developer thinks some nominal agreement stops them, they should quit now and go serve burgers. The same applies if a developer doesn't care about how users are abusing your system. I build and design secure systems, and the idea I would ever trust someone on the other end to follow a policy is ludicrous beyond belief, and would get people laughed out of a shop.
Your only option as a company who delivers softwares systems to customers is to back up your usage policy with actual secure code. You somehow doubt this? I suppose you think banks shouldn't bother locking their vaults, or even build a vault, I mean, so long as they comminucate to their customers not to steal and they will be punished. Cause obviously they are smarter than all their customers, PhDs in behavioral science to boot, and perfect implementors of punishment. Maybe you have a point, I mean, it wasn't like anyone tried to steal when we used to promptly hang cattle thieves, oh wait. Why don't we take the same general approach for secure comms? We'll just put faith in our swift and certain justice system.
If their back end isn't so daunting how come their code is ****? How come this problem, a problem they already got burned by extensively, burned them again? You know why it burned them again, because their software development cycle is ****. Any process auditing firm worth paying would tell you that flat out. Doesn't matter what their QA policy is, if you get burned twice by the same major issue, and didn't have a test to catch it before go live, you're incompetent. The software development cycle is owned by developers, and if they're too weak to know how to implement a solid one, they're too weak to be trusted. Maybe their buggy as hell code is just a false flag operation and they've really got really well designed data structures and verbose logging that would put the romance languages to shame. Maybe the moon is made of cheese.
How come their hotfix isn't really a fix at all, and now either it's broke elsewhere or it's still an issue? The launcher itself essentially says "we're broken, please don't try this" on the front page (granted their launcher code is bugged so I don't even see it because the scrollbar positions itself on a message halfway down everytime I start it). They've had two updates since the problem surface, now three, and where was this fix on the first two? You think they held it back because they wanted to create a honey trap for all the exploiters? Ingenious Turbine, and also 100% false.
You're quite possibly the biggest software developer apologist I've ever read. Go read thedaily***. You think somehow mgmt is holding everyone down, and if only they'd get their act together the little developers could let their lights and talents shine. Pure apologencia. I don't care why other people are mad, I don't even care about the people who did dupe, or who didn't. I don't care about their behavior, their excuses, their feelings, or their justifications. I ain't got time for that, nor interest. People gonna do, what people gonna do, to the extent you let them. What I do care about is the mechanics of software development, and that's it. Call it a long held professional interest in forcing good practices on the software world I interact with and I'm more than happy to push/prod/force developers/companies into other lines of work because they build steaming piles of ****. I'm simply pointing out Turbine has a pitiful excuse for a software development cycle, policies be damned. That's a fact, and my professional diagnosis.
This form's session has expired. You need to reload the page.Reload