Jump to content

  • Curse Sites
Help
* * * - - 9 votes

So it seems a lot of naughty boys and girls got one last gift from Santa this Christmas


  • This topic is locked This topic is locked
640 replies to this topic

#481 XPhiler

XPhiler

    Seraph Guardian

  • Members
  • 1826 posts

Posted 22 January 2013 - 09:42 AM

View Postraspberry jam, on 21 January 2013 - 05:45 PM, said:

We are not talking about legal responsibility here since no party is legally responsible - exploiting in a game is not a crime (as long as it is not actual hacking, for example of the server side). We are talking about moral responsibility. Also we are talking about which situation is best for us as players.

If recipes and salvage ratios are correctly set up then the prices will auto adjust. It should be obvious that if the jewel is so valuable (and probably by design), then the salvage ratio of it should be low...

You can set up a macro that presses 1 and then put a weight on the key, and leave. There's your "bot" (and also, that's what I did with the double click macro).

There were four graphical bugs. I can repeat them at will (all of them are tricky to repeat). One of them is rather well known because it is right outside of Divinity's Reach! There was also an invisible wall. I can't say if that was added during the wintersday update or earlier, but it was there then and isn't there now.

Of course you repeat it as much as possible during the time of the wintersday patch. For all you know they could remove it when wintersday ends. More importantly the exploit should not be there to begin with.

I am not saying they're legally responsible but morality is more aligned with legal responsibility then with the english language. what do I mean, If i was walking down the street carrying a backpack which had a banana peel in a side pocket and that banana peel falls down without me realising and someone slips and gets hurt am I morally guilty of them getting hurt? no it was totally an accident I had no control over. On the other hand if I carelessly threw the peel away on the pavement and someone got hurt I am definitely morally responsible. In both cases using the english language you can say I facilitated the accident but I am only guility morally or otherwise when I facilitated that situations knowningly.

It is obvious only if you know how much the value of that jewel is. Do you expect a tester thats testing 1000s of different things to know the value of something made up of 2 compontent one of which isnt even in game yet?  And not only that, s/he must know the prices of every compontent involved in the recipe.

Actually many MMOs consider artificially holding down a key to actually be botting and correctly so. Botting is using an artificial means to have something play the game for you. If its a complex program, a simple program simulating key presses or an object holding down a key doesnt matter.
http://atlantica.nex...!/page2&nxid=12
"Holding down the G key with a weight though is considered "3rd party utility" which is technically against the rules. Someone can get banned for holding down the G key with a weight."

Ohh so now you're attributing every existant issue to every release they make and worst yet instead of seeing fixes as a quality improvement in a release as they really are, you're using them as proof that the release in question was flawed while ignoring the possiblity those fixes were for issues that existed prior to that release. Nice. Way to be objective. Be honest you dont really care about how perfect a release really is, even if it contains just 1 small miniscule bug and people exploit it you'll still blame arenanet for that one small miniscule bug. You say that you dont want perfect software and you dont simply because you're just trying to find any excuse possible to shift the blame from the really guilty party (exploiters) onto arenanet from some wierd reason. You just said it yourself clear as day. You have no idea what bugs where included with this release yet all this time you have been saying exploiters shouldnt be blamed because Arenanet released faulty software yet again. You do agree perfect software is impossible and you do claim that perfect software is not what you expecting, that all you want is just close to perfect software. Yet the only bug that you mention that you arent even sure was introduced with this release is an invisible wall that may or may not have been there and that was fixed during the event anyway? is 1 invisible wall not close to perfect code enough for you?

Ohh really, and since when recipes stop functioning after the event? Halloween ones are still active. And Arenanet themselves said recipes will remain active. There is just one reason for people repeating the recipe as much as possible because they knew fully well it was an exploit and that it was a matter of time for it to be shut down. 2 days and in those 2 days 270k ectos were created. That means the exploit was run approximately 300k times. And keep in mind only 200 people got banned so its very likely the majority of those 300k runs were run by these 200 people.

#482 XPhiler

XPhiler

    Seraph Guardian

  • Members
  • 1826 posts

Posted 22 January 2013 - 09:58 AM

View Postraspberry jam, on 22 January 2013 - 07:21 AM, said:

Isn't it interesting that people with experience often believe that they are the only ones that have that. I have been working in game development (as programmer or designer) for almost 10 years now. It's not like I'm saying random things.

You are now aware that this particular bug was server side. The large variety of PCs involved does not matter then. Also, most of the actually annoying bugs are stuff like that a skill doesn't work properly. This also does not have anything to do with the hardware that the client runs on.
The majority of the bugs are not in the actual engine of the game, but in the scripting of it (skills, recipes etc). Having QA on those scripts would not cause your game to disconnect or crash.

If you're in game design / development then you know fully well that bugs can be anywhere and that Matterdor is right and you do have to test everything. Adding a new simple object with its own texture might be enough to cause the client to run out of video memory on a bunch of low end graphic cards that you said you support. It could also be something crazy like a new armor model that when paired with another armor piece causes clipping that ends up triggering a some overflow in your lightmap calculation that never occured before. You're right that the majority of bugs are in scripts rather then the client or the engine but that doesnt mean you have no reason to test the client with each release. And remember because of their agressive release schedule they have to run tests on the client (multiple platforms / languages), content (played using all the different classes and races),  regression testing and all this in a week or maybe two. Frankly I have no idea how a person who is involved in this line of work wouldnt be amazed how you're pulling it off. Comparing the quality of wintersday with that of lost shores already shows a massive improvement in quality.

#483 Menehune

Menehune

    Vanguard Scout

  • Members
  • 500 posts
  • Location:Germany

Posted 22 January 2013 - 10:14 AM

View Postraspberry jam, on 22 January 2013 - 07:21 AM, said:

Isn't it interesting that people with experience often believe that they are the only ones that have that. I have been working in game development (as programmer or designer) for almost 10 years now. It's not like I'm saying random things.

You are now aware that this particular bug was server side. The large variety of PCs involved does not matter then. Also, most of the actually annoying bugs are stuff like that a skill doesn't work properly. This also does not have anything to do with the hardware that the client runs on.
The majority of the bugs are not in the actual engine of the game, but in the scripting of it (skills, recipes etc). Having QA on those scripts would not cause your game to disconnect or crash.

Congratulations! You must be the highest paid dev in the world since you are apparently the only dev that can produce perfect bug free software. :rolleyes:

Even though the bug was server side, you ignore the fact that the server software interacts with the client. A server side bug could cause data to be sent back to the client that may cause clients running on systems with certain gfx cards to crash. Oh, but such things never happen in your world of perfect bug free software. nvm.

#484 Illein

Illein

    Golem Rider

  • Members
  • 2039 posts

Posted 22 January 2013 - 11:37 AM

Gave this whole thing some more thought and I agree with some of the offenders who claimed that it was inconsequent of Arena Net to ban this time, but not the last time.

If we take the Godskull Exploit for example - crafting themselves Legendary Precursors out of what was basically worth zilch, I'd see the similarities in those two cases, yet once the offenders got away with a slap on the wrist - the other time they got permanently banned.

It was within the first two weeks of the game's release though and Arena Net wanted not to be too harsh on players for it, guess now they're paying the price for it, if people think they can exploit their way to wealth without a risk or bearing the consequences of it.

How do they say? The road to hell is paved with good intentions.

It probably would have served them better if they were packing the banhammer at that first offence already, as obviously a lot of people didn't take them for full after their "write an apology letter and delete your stuff"-half measurement. Being all the more surprised at the enforcing of full measurements now.

Edited by Illein, 22 January 2013 - 11:39 AM.


#485 raspberry jam

raspberry jam

    Vigil Crusader

  • Members
  • 4790 posts

Posted 22 January 2013 - 12:55 PM

View PostXPhiler, on 22 January 2013 - 09:42 AM, said:

I am not saying they're legally responsible but morality is more aligned with legal responsibility then with the english language. what do I mean, If i was walking down the street carrying a backpack which had a banana peel in a side pocket and that banana peel falls down without me realising and someone slips and gets hurt am I morally guilty of them getting hurt? no it was totally an accident I had no control over. On the other hand if I carelessly threw the peel away on the pavement and someone got hurt I am definitely morally responsible. In both cases using the english language you can say I facilitated the accident but I am only guility morally or otherwise when I facilitated that situations knowningly.

It is obvious only if you know how much the value of that jewel is. Do you expect a tester thats testing 1000s of different things to know the value of something made up of 2 compontent one of which isnt even in game yet?  And not only that, s/he must know the prices of every compontent involved in the recipe.

Actually many MMOs consider artificially holding down a key to actually be botting and correctly so. Botting is using an artificial means to have something play the game for you. If its a complex program, a simple program simulating key presses or an object holding down a key doesnt matter.
http://atlantica.nex...!/page2&nxid=12
"Holding down the G key with a weight though is considered "3rd party utility" which is technically against the rules. Someone can get banned for holding down the G key with a weight."

Ohh so now you're attributing every existant issue to every release they make and worst yet instead of seeing fixes as a quality improvement in a release as they really are, you're using them as proof that the release in question was flawed while ignoring the possiblity those fixes were for issues that existed prior to that release. Nice. Way to be objective. Be honest you dont really care about how perfect a release really is, even if it contains just 1 small miniscule bug and people exploit it you'll still blame arenanet for that one small miniscule bug. You say that you dont want perfect software and you dont simply because you're just trying to find any excuse possible to shift the blame from the really guilty party (exploiters) onto arenanet from some wierd reason. You just said it yourself clear as day. You have no idea what bugs where included with this release yet all this time you have been saying exploiters shouldnt be blamed because Arenanet released faulty software yet again. You do agree perfect software is impossible and you do claim that perfect software is not what you expecting, that all you want is just close to perfect software. Yet the only bug that you mention that you arent even sure was introduced with this release is an invisible wall that may or may not have been there and that was fixed during the event anyway? is 1 invisible wall not close to perfect code enough for you?

Ohh really, and since when recipes stop functioning after the event? Halloween ones are still active. And Arenanet themselves said recipes will remain active. There is just one reason for people repeating the recipe as much as possible because they knew fully well it was an exploit and that it was a matter of time for it to be shut down. 2 days and in those 2 days 270k ectos were created. That means the exploit was run approximately 300k times. And keep in mind only 200 people got banned so its very likely the majority of those 300k runs were run by these 200 people.
No, morality is not more aligned with legal responsibility than it is with the English language, since you can explain a moral system using English.

If you throw a banana peel on the street without thinking, then you are probably not intending for anyone to get hurt. If someone still does get hurt, yes, you are facilitating them to get hurt. Is it your fault? Yes, because you should not be dumb enough to put banana peels everywhere, regardless of your intentions. This is the same as forgetting to lock the door or accidentally releasing a bug. You write the numbers in some file and don't intend for exploits to happen. But you should not be dumb enough to write the wrong thing in something that people paid to play (if this was free-to-play with no profit interest behind it, they would absolutely be in their rights to ban people).

No, I don't expect a tester to know the price of a jewel. I expect the people who are creating the recipes to have keep tabs on the subsystem that they are creating though. If I were in their shoes and I was considering involving such a jewel in the recipe, the pretty much first thing I'd do is to get some info about current price, price history, expected amount of jewels on the market etc.

Anyway yes we all know that Nexon are *s and that they ban people for whatever thing. ANet have said that they don't consider keyboard macros as bots though.

Uh? I blame ANet for putting a miniscule bug in a patch? Wait a minute here. Who else should I blame? Maybe Bioware somehow hijacked the patch as it was being downloaded to players? Yes, of course I blame ANet for bugs that ANet introduce into the game. That bugs are impossible to completely avoid is beside the point. The bugs that do exist still exist.

Recipes have been removed (or their salvage ratios). For example, after noticing the snowflake recipe/salvage issue, the loop was fixed, right?

View PostXPhiler, on 22 January 2013 - 09:58 AM, said:

If you're in game design / development then you know fully well that bugs can be anywhere and that Matterdor is right and you do have to test everything. Adding a new simple object with its own texture might be enough to cause the client to run out of video memory on a bunch of low end graphic cards that you said you support. It could also be something crazy like a new armor model that when paired with another armor piece causes clipping that ends up triggering a some overflow in your lightmap calculation that never occured before. You're right that the majority of bugs are in scripts rather then the client or the engine but that doesnt mean you have no reason to test the client with each release. And remember because of their agressive release schedule they have to run tests on the client (multiple platforms / languages), content (played using all the different classes and races),  regression testing and all this in a week or maybe two. Frankly I have no idea how a person who is involved in this line of work wouldnt be amazed how you're pulling it off. Comparing the quality of wintersday with that of lost shores already shows a massive improvement in quality.
You seem to be confused as to what actually reasonably needs to be tested and how that should happen. For example, if you are developing crafting recipes you don't need to test for video memory being exhausted. A crafting recipe is the same regardless of whether you run the game on a high end i7 with 24 gb ram or a laptop from 2003. You are babbling, stop that.

View PostMenehune, on 22 January 2013 - 10:14 AM, said:

Congratulations! You must be the highest paid dev in the world since you are apparently the only dev that can produce perfect bug free software. :rolleyes:

Even though the bug was server side, you ignore the fact that the server software interacts with the client. A server side bug could cause data to be sent back to the client that may cause clients running on systems with certain gfx cards to crash. Oh, but such things never happen in your world of perfect bug free software. nvm.
I earn enough. Thank you. But I don't produce bug free software, I don't know where you got that from lol. Server side bugs could potentially send back data that crashes the client for certain graphics cards, especially if the client was poorly written. But I don't think that a recipe can have that effect. Do you?

#486 Menehune

Menehune

    Vanguard Scout

  • Members
  • 500 posts
  • Location:Germany

Posted 22 January 2013 - 01:48 PM

View Postraspberry jam, on 22 January 2013 - 12:55 PM, said:

...
I earn enough. Thank you. But I don't produce bug free software, I don't know where you got that from lol. Server side bugs could potentially send back data that crashes the client for certain graphics cards, especially if the client was poorly written. But I don't think that a recipe can have that effect. Do you?

Well it certainly seems that way at least implicitly with your insistance that ArenaNet produce such perfect bug free software.

Why couldn't a recipe have such an effect if e.g. under certain rare circumstances the server sends a numeric result field as double precision when the client expects an integer? The only question then is will the client fail gracefully or CTD? That ofc depends on how the dev coded, or not, any error handling/exception catching routine(s).

#487 raspberry jam

raspberry jam

    Vigil Crusader

  • Members
  • 4790 posts

Posted 22 January 2013 - 02:47 PM

View PostMenehune, on 22 January 2013 - 01:48 PM, said:


Well it certainly seems that way at least implicitly with your insistance that ArenaNet produce such perfect bug free software.

Why couldn't a recipe have such an effect if e.g. under certain rare circumstances the server sends a numeric result field as double precision when the client expects an integer? The only question then is will the client fail gracefully or CTD? That ofc depends on how the dev coded, or not, any error handling/exception catching routine(s).
Naaa. What I want is for ANet to take full responsibility of bugs, since that would lead to that they had a profit motive of creating as bug free code as they can. Currently the motive is to create as bug free code as they can get away with, not the same thing. I'm thinking about my interests as a player here.

Hopefully, the server code that reads recipe scripts will throw a fit if it says 3.57 green blobs or whatever. As you say an error catching routine, but also structural - as in that the value sent to the client isn't floating point even when it exists on the server. Robust code usually have input checks as early as possible.

#488 Menehune

Menehune

    Vanguard Scout

  • Members
  • 500 posts
  • Location:Germany

Posted 22 January 2013 - 03:29 PM

View Postraspberry jam, on 22 January 2013 - 02:47 PM, said:

Naaa. What I want is for ANet to take full responsibility of bugs, since that would lead to that they had a profit motive of creating as bug free code as they can. Currently the motive is to create as bug free code as they can get away with, not the same thing. I'm thinking about my interests as a player here.

Hopefully, the server code that reads recipe scripts will throw a fit if it says 3.57 green blobs or whatever. As you say an error catching routine, but also structural - as in that the value sent to the client isn't floating point even when it exists on the server. Robust code usually have input checks as early as possible.

As far as I'm concerned, as some others have mentioned, ArenaNet have fulfilled their responsibility by 1st blocking then fixing the bug apparently as soon as they could since it was done fairly quickly.

C'mon, as a dev yourself, you know perfectly well, or should know that variable type mismatch is among the most common causes of bugs and can lurk in software for years before being "triggered". Similar to unchecked data length that can lead to buffer overflow which is a common cause of security issues. Not to mention that a lot of lazy devs, of whom hopefully none work for ArenaNet, make liberal and injudicious use of type casting which can make code a nightmare to debug. Such bugs can even be found in open source software after hundreds or even thousands of eyballs have inspected the code. Java anyone?

#489 XPhiler

XPhiler

    Seraph Guardian

  • Members
  • 1826 posts

Posted 22 January 2013 - 03:34 PM

Spoiler

Edited by Feathermoore, 22 January 2013 - 03:45 PM.
Stop with the quote wars


#490 Matterdor

Matterdor

    Fahrar Cub

  • Members
  • 30 posts
  • Server:Aurora Glade

Posted 22 January 2013 - 03:47 PM

Spoiler

Edited by Feathermoore, 22 January 2013 - 05:50 PM.
Do not split up quotes like this.


#491 XPhiler

XPhiler

    Seraph Guardian

  • Members
  • 1826 posts

Posted 22 January 2013 - 03:50 PM

View Postraspberry jam, on 22 January 2013 - 02:47 PM, said:

Naaa. What I want is for ANet to take full responsibility of bugs, since that would lead to that they had a profit motive of creating as bug free code as they can. Currently the motive is to create as bug free code as they can get away with, not the same thing. I'm thinking about my interests as a player here.

Hopefully, the server code that reads recipe scripts will throw a fit if it says 3.57 green blobs or whatever. As you say an error catching routine, but also structural - as in that the value sent to the client isn't floating point even when it exists on the server. Robust code usually have input checks as early as possible.

How did you expect them to take responsability exactly? What more should they have done to satisfy you exactly?

Its always about how far you want to take your testing. A recipe is unlikely to effect the client but can none the less. There are always insidious bugs that can be hard to forsee. How about a situation where you introduce a number new ingredients and due to human error 2 ingredients are given the same ID. Crafting works fine because the ID exist but when it comes to salvaging and the client tried to retrieve the ingredient associated with that ID returns 2 ingredients even though its expecting 1. That causes an exception but no problem the client handles that and generates a report for it but we got an issue the UI didnt get the ingredient it was excepting and retries the query causing the exception again and gets stuck in this loop. That results in a memory leak as well as the client hanging. The bug would never have been caught because prior to this ficticious update there was never a case where 2 ingredients shared the same id so part of the client that was thought as robust turns out is not so robust after all.

A recipe can also have bugs based on language as well. What if a recipe is called something that when translated involves unicode characters and the client didnt support that. You send it for translation and the translator that is most likely not even part of your company might have no clue he is support to restrict himself to the basic ascii set.

So I would suggest one should never understimate what can go wrong.

#492 Gli

Gli

    Seraph Guardian

  • Members
  • 1026 posts

Posted 22 January 2013 - 04:15 PM

View Postraspberry jam, on 22 January 2013 - 02:47 PM, said:

Naaa. What I want is for ANet to take full responsibility of bugs, since that would lead to that they had a profit motive of creating as bug free code as they can. Currently the motive is to create as bug free code as they can get away with, not the same thing. I'm thinking about my interests as a player here.
I posted a simple breakdown of this issue a few days ago. Let me quote myself:

View PostGli, on 17 January 2013 - 01:34 PM, said:

There will be bugs, and if they're out of hand, a software product will stop being commercially viable.

If they're acceptably scarce and/or quickly fixed by an individual user's standard, there's no problem. If they're too much to bear for an individual user, said user could just stop using the software and maybe even get a refund or damages if applicable.
I guess I forgot about the option to irrationally expect miracles and post on forums about it until you're blue in the face.

Edited by Gli, 22 January 2013 - 04:45 PM.


#493 raspberry jam

raspberry jam

    Vigil Crusader

  • Members
  • 4790 posts

Posted 23 January 2013 - 10:19 AM

View PostMenehune, on 22 January 2013 - 03:29 PM, said:

As far as I'm concerned, as some others have mentioned, ArenaNet have fulfilled their responsibility by 1st blocking then fixing the bug apparently as soon as they could since it was done fairly quickly.

C'mon, as a dev yourself, you know perfectly well, or should know that variable type mismatch is among the most common causes of bugs and can lurk in software for years before being "triggered". Similar to unchecked data length that can lead to buffer overflow which is a common cause of security issues. Not to mention that a lot of lazy devs, of whom hopefully none work for ArenaNet, make liberal and injudicious use of type casting which can make code a nightmare to debug. Such bugs can even be found in open source software after hundreds or even thousands of eyballs have inspected the code. Java anyone?
In that case nothing more needs to be done. No bans need be issued. But in that case, the profits of the exploit should be removed.

Variable type mismatches, sure. In numerical values maybe as being the wrong precision (unsigned char variable being assigned the value 1000) or using integers in divisions when you want decimals in the result... But consider that recipes are probably don't exist as literals in the code, they are probably in a database somewhere. Since you can't use a noninteger amount of crafting material, the field for each component count is probably specified as integer. Even if not, the structure that is read from the database probably use integers. Actually, if not, then it's so badly done that we'd probably see all kinds of bugs everywhere.

Eh, yeah, true, we do. But even more, I mean. Recipes would be the least problem.

View PostXPhiler, on 22 January 2013 - 03:34 PM, said:

Only one problem, they didnt put the feature there without thinking or by being careless like one would do if they threw the banana peel on the street. The wanted to be nice, provide a way of getting good gear cheaply for christmas, like say storing the banana peel in your backpack until you come across a bin to dispose of it properly. Here we're talking about a good deed (a nice xmasy recipe you can craft for cheap) that unforseen by them allowed for abuse.

Now this is even better, why should the business model used have any bearing on anything? What if this had a subscription? would you be pushing for jail sentences for developers? It does matter if we paid or not for the game. It doesnt matter they were not good enough to forsee the exploit before it got out (thought that would have been nice) we know people arent perfect and they make mistake. What matters is how people act. Arenanet did their part, when they became aware of the exploit they stopped it and took corrective action. I am not sure what more can you possibly expect?



You're assuming one person handles the process of creating a recipe from top to bottom. This is defenitely not the case. Also keep in mind this was a holiday item intended to be cheaper on purpose. Like I said you're underestimating the complexities a tester or even the content developer had to go through. The item itself was purposefully cheap to make. I mean it was many times easier to get a snowflake then an actual gem stone. snowflakes had obviously no historical price as they were new. Also the jewel being salvaged in itself was not the problem either. The problem was that such items when they were level 75+ and salvage have a 90% chance of dropping an ecto that was never part of the recipe. Thus looking at the ingredents that made up the item and how much of those ingredients you can get back if you salvage them was not enough to find the problem since the problem was external to that. And lets not forget that you're doing all of this under the pressure of a pretty hard deadline.


Once again macros arent a problem, artifically sticking a key to keep repeating while you're away from the keyboard has nothing to do with macros. And its not just nexon, thats just the first thing I came across with a quick search. I've seen multiple companies claim they'd consider that the same as botting and thats the right way to view it in my opinion.


You love playing with words dont you. But once again no one was banned for coming across the bug (if you can even call it that) people were banned for finding an exploit and exploited it. You said multiple times these exploiters should not have been blamed and instead Anet should be to blame. So you dont want to blame arenanet for introducing the bug, you want to blame arenanet for the exploit. You're free to blame whoever you want that doesnt mean you're right and most certainly doesnt mean that just cause you decided to shift the blame from the party thats really guilty (exploiters) that party should walk away free like nothing happened.



Sure if the whole game consisted of this one recipe you'd be right but guess what there is a ton more to it. Unless the company you work for has millions of testers, you know well enough that no tester is dedicated to test one single thing and that one single thing alone. There are thousands of test cases that need to be addressed in a limited span of time. Just cause testing a single recipe doesnt involve test on multiple architectures it doesnt mean that testing department does have to infact do tests on multiple architectures to test say jumping puzzles and other new instances that could have an effect on the underlying architecture the client runs on.



Once again this recipe was not the only thing that required testing and as Menehune correctly said before it most like had a low priority on the testing queue as well because like you correctly said how much damage can a simple recipe do? As long as it crafts correctly using different material ordering to be safe it works as intended, there done test the next recipe since there are another 273 to go and thats just covering recipes, then we have to test the new maps, the open world presents, the magic snow, the jumping puzzle, the guitar hereo chime bell thing, the toyapocalipse, the toy dungeon, the golem airship entrace in each of the 5 cities, the new mobs, the setup for entering the dungeons, the snowball fight etc...  and lets not forget we need to test many of these using multiple combination, we to test the snowball fight using 5 races / 8 professions / 3 roles each can choose when pariticipating in the snowball fight and each of these we have to do on multiple architectures, using multiple languages. And when all you finish all that you need to regression test all the client again because you never know, one of those changes might have caused a sideeffect somewhere else.

yeah .... no its definitely not just get this one recipe and test it against every possible conseavable issue, there is much much more work QA has to do then that.
Look at what you made the mods do. Don't * around, quote the entire post instead.

Yes they did put in this carelessly, that's the entire point here. It was careless. If they had taken care, they would not have caused all these exploits to happen.

The business model is important because ANet is a company and companies can be expected to act in the way that generates the maximum profit. If it would be profitable to them to hire more QA staff, then they would do so - and that would lead to a better game for us.

How do you know how many people are involved in creating a recipe? It's likely to be not much more than one. In either case, the problem was that when creating the item, the recipe for crafting it was apparently created without caring about the results of salvage. 90% chance for ecto? Come on lol. Obviously when creating a crafted item the recipe and the salvage ratios should be developed side by side.

Why do you think that holding down a key is a bot? What if I sit at my desk holding down the key using just my finger, is that a bot too? :P What if I put that weight on the key while I still sit there? Does the weight become a bot when I stop watching it? I better watch out, that weight must be some kinda transformer robot! :lol:

For me as a player, ANet is guilty of the exploit. Because there will always be unsavory characters, enabling them to exploit will mean that exploits happen. Merely fixing the bug is not enough: ANet must bear full responsibility for it, and that means not using the banhammer.

Well duh of course a jumping puzzle would need to be tested in a different manner than recipes would. That is because jumping puzzles and recipes are completely different types of content. When we are discussing someone who got banned for exploiting a jumping puzzle we can get back to that line of discussion.

Apparently a recipe can do a lot more damage than an INVISIBLE WALL IN THE MIDDLE OF A WvW MAP especially when people use that wall to become invincible. And yet people get banned for the recipe while no one gives a shit about the WvW map. There's still a WvW bug that lets you vibrate through walls etc. but people rarely get banned for it.
But durr hurr the economy, who cares about WvW. Well in that case the QA should match that.

And it doesn't.

View PostMatterdor, on 22 January 2013 - 03:47 PM, said:


From a development standpoint what you are saying below does sound like "random things".



But it goes directly to the number of testers that they require and how they spread those testers around. Any business is in it to make money. Testers costs money. It all comes down to the complexity of the system. To make matters worse, all complex systems have a large amount of shared code so changing any of that shared code will effect both the client and the server.



This is the part that doesn't make sense. Recipes, skills, etc will not use scripts at all as that would be highly inefficient. These would be simple database values with various random components included (materials, visual effects, outputs, etc). Scripting, which has a much higher processing component, would be used for things like boss actions, dynamic events and the flow of these events. It is also possible for a recipe to trigger a client disconnect or graphical problem because it may create a sequence of events on the client that have not occurred before.



Their motive will always be to create as bug free code as possible within the constraints of the budget. They are not going to have 3 testers sitting waiting to just test how recipes can be abused. That would be an inefficient use of resources and would only make the game (or expansions) more expensive and give us less bang for buck. It's about balancing the number of bugs against the cost and release time for the software. Testing works on diminishing returns, you find fewer and fewer bugs as you test more and more. A/Net have to balance the cost, release timeframe and quality. It doesn't help to have perfect software if the Wintersday event is 3 weeks late, nor does it make any sense to release software if they are making a loss.
Well now we're getting somewhere. Yes it goes to the number of testers they use. And also how much time they spend on dry running/code inspection/etc. As it is now, they do as little of that as they can get away with. When a bug appears, they are comfortable with not catching it because they can just ship the bug and then ban anyone who exploits it. As long as the playerbase accepts this, there will not be a profit motive in finding bugs before they ship. If we didn't accept it though, the shittiness of their software would cost more money than the extra testers would.

Yes, recipes would probably be database values, not scripts. What i meant was that they are not part of the actual engine code, instead being on the same level as scripts development-wise, handled by game designers, not programmers.
I don't really see how the recipe could create a disconnect or graphical problem. The item being created, yes, possibly.

Of course they should not, and don't, have three testers sitting around checking for recipe abusing possibilities. That this item would be open to abuse by repeated crafting and salvage would be self evident without using a tester for anyone who saw the full data for the item. 90% chance for ecto when salvaged?, but no ecto used for crafting? The salvage ratios are probably also database values, but when creating a brand new item there should be a review (it could be as short as a matter of seconds) for creation and salvage. I don't mean running it in game, I mean looking at the values that you enter into the database.
That is obviously not done that way, but doing it would be the requisite QA procedure.

View PostXPhiler, on 22 January 2013 - 03:50 PM, said:

How did you expect them to take responsability exactly? What more should they have done to satisfy you exactly?

Its always about how far you want to take your testing. A recipe is unlikely to effect the client but can none the less. There are always insidious bugs that can be hard to forsee. How about a situation where you introduce a number new ingredients and due to human error 2 ingredients are given the same ID. Crafting works fine because the ID exist but when it comes to salvaging and the client tried to retrieve the ingredient associated with that ID returns 2 ingredients even though its expecting 1. That causes an exception but no problem the client handles that and generates a report for it but we got an issue the UI didnt get the ingredient it was excepting and retries the query causing the exception again and gets stuck in this loop. That results in a memory leak as well as the client hanging. The bug would never have been caught because prior to this ficticious update there was never a case where 2 ingredients shared the same id so part of the client that was thought as robust turns out is not so robust after all.

A recipe can also have bugs based on language as well. What if a recipe is called something that when translated involves unicode characters and the client didnt support that. You send it for translation and the translator that is most likely not even part of your company might have no clue he is support to restrict himself to the basic ascii set.

So I would suggest one should never understimate what can go wrong.
Uh... If the same ID is given to two ingredients then a multitude of possibilities exist. If the code is robust enough it would be literally impossible, as the code that reads the tables of what ingredient has what ID, name, icon and so on would detect that two have the same ID. Also since they have probably existed in a database somewhere and the ID probably was used as primary key it would again not be possible.

But let's be XPhiler and pretend that some completely improbable situation matters to this discussion. The same ID for two different ingredients. Possibility 1 is that the data structure used for these is some sort of map which means that when the second ingredient is read it overwrites the first. Ingredient number 1 would not exist in the system. I guess this would be detected quickly. Possibility two, some inefficient piece of shit way is used to keep track of ingredients, so that two with the same ID can co-exist. In this case, whenever you need to find an ingredient, you need to scan for it in your data structure... Probably the first one you find will be returned.

Bet let's be XPhiler and pretend that these events, which are improbable in themselves but probable under our assumptions, don't actually happen. Instead the single ingredient variable somehow becomes an array of variables (violating type checking in compile time, but this is XPhiler world where that doesn't matter), and the presence of an array for some reason causes an error report. For some reason this, which is probably the most well-tested component of the UI, stops working and instead happens to query for an ingredient, and since we're doing the whole infinitely-impossible scenario, the error report box always queries for the ingrdient with the duplicated ID.

This bug will "never" be caught because no one ever saw the error report dialog box that queries for ingredients. THIS IS GW2, you see that damn box at least once per play session.

Also do you have any idea of how string tables work?

View PostGli, on 22 January 2013 - 04:15 PM, said:

I guess I forgot about the option to irrationally expect miracles and post on forums about it until you're blue in the face.
I don't expect miracles. I expect companies to take responsibiltiy for their own products.

Oh wait, yes, ok I see what you mean. Why would they do that when they have a playerbase that not only bends over but also literally applies the lube themselves?

#494 XPhiler

XPhiler

    Seraph Guardian

  • Members
  • 1826 posts

Posted 23 January 2013 - 12:07 PM

Spoiler

Mod Edit:Do NOT Quote wars. Splitting up a post into multiple components and responding to them individually causes people to take statements out of context, fractures discussions, and typically ends up in posts twice to three times as long as they need to be. If you do not want a large block of text in a quote (the text in the quote doesn't matter) just replace it all with "snip" or some other statement.

Plus it just looks downright terrible and is hard to follow. Argue the central points, make a concise and coherent argument. Quote wars inhibit this process. Don't do it.

Edited by Feathermoore, 23 January 2013 - 02:26 PM.
Quote wars (stop it)


#495 Gli

Gli

    Seraph Guardian

  • Members
  • 1026 posts

Posted 23 January 2013 - 12:11 PM

View Postraspberry jam, on 23 January 2013 - 10:19 AM, said:

I don't expect miracles. I expect companies to take responsibiltiy for their own products.

Oh wait, yes, ok I see what you mean. Why would they do that when they have a playerbase that not only bends over but also literally applies the lube themselves?
They acknowledged the bug and fixed it. No one was inconvenienced by it, so that's plenty of responsibility taken.

It doesn't even stop there. They went beyond the call of duty and cleaned up the playerbase a little. What's not to commend?

#496 Sevens

Sevens

    Vanguard Scout

  • Members
  • 441 posts

Posted 23 January 2013 - 12:47 PM

People cheated...exploited a bug, got caught and are now whining and crying that they got banned
Boo Freaking Hoo
Good riddance to bad rubbish

#497 Illein

Illein

    Golem Rider

  • Members
  • 2039 posts

Posted 23 January 2013 - 03:56 PM

View PostGli, on 23 January 2013 - 12:11 PM, said:

They acknowledged the bug and fixed it. No one was inconvenienced by it, so that's plenty of responsibility taken.

It doesn't even stop there. They went beyond the call of duty and cleaned up the playerbase a little. What's not to commend?

And refunded culprits all the gem purchases they've ever made - I mean... how much more could you really do?

#498 Darkobra

Darkobra

    Seraph Guardian

  • Members
  • 1366 posts
  • Location:Scotland

Posted 23 January 2013 - 04:41 PM

A public apology for banning people that fully knew they were taking advantage of an exploit? Let's see how long that one takes to happen!

#499 Hrefna

Hrefna

    Fahrar Cub

  • New Members
  • 11 posts

Posted 23 January 2013 - 04:54 PM

I had an interesting experience yesterday while maxing my leatherworking craft. I had crafted a few pieces of gold lvl80 armor using T5 materials. This variant had used 15 large bones for the insignia and also silk + thick leather pieces. Taking into consideration that the large bones cost ~1.5s each and I could only get very little from merchant for the armor pieces I used a high end salvage kit hoping to get some bones back. I did not get bones but instead thick leather and ECTO. To me it is clearly a bug.I salvaged the 7 armor pieces I had made to get to lvl400 and got 7 ectos from them, and then no more. It was not intended gain for me and after all its relatively small. But if  I started to make more armors with the sole purpose of salvaging them for ectos I would not be the slightest in doubt. This is abusing a bug and I would risk ban. I had actually believed this would be fixed by now, but appearently not.

#500 Krazzar

Krazzar

    Legend of the Norn

  • Members
  • 7986 posts
  • Server:Sanctum of Rall

Posted 23 January 2013 - 07:09 PM

View PostHrefna, on 23 January 2013 - 04:54 PM, said:

I had an interesting experience yesterday while maxing my leatherworking craft. I had crafted a few pieces of gold lvl80 armor using T5 materials. This variant had used 15 large bones for the insignia and also silk + thick leather pieces. Taking into consideration that the large bones cost ~1.5s each and I could only get very little from merchant for the armor pieces I used a high end salvage kit hoping to get some bones back. I did not get bones but instead thick leather and ECTO. To me it is clearly a bug.I salvaged the 7 armor pieces I had made to get to lvl400 and got 7 ectos from them, and then no more. It was not intended gain for me and after all its relatively small. But if  I started to make more armors with the sole purpose of salvaging them for ectos I would not be the slightest in doubt. This is abusing a bug and I would risk ban. I had actually believed this would be fixed by now, but appearently not.

You could always salvage ectos from rares and above on items from items requiring level 65 and above, because that is when the exotic tier begins, using black lion salvage kits. You can salvage them with other kits as well, but there is less of a chance to get an ecto. This is because you have a chance to salvage a rarer material, in this case ectos. I usually save up rares above level 65 and salvage a bunch at a time. Last time I salvaged 10 and got 10 ectos, the time before I salvage 11 and got 12 ectos. Not every item will give you one ecto and some may give you two. I haven't bought a single ecto since I found that out about a month into the game. I also saved up all my keys and chests and have 8 black lion salvage kits left.

Do people not know that? That's how I maxed every one of the crafting professions besides cooking. No wonder some people are having such a hard time getting gear, they don't know how to get ectos, although some people have to know about it, otherwise rares under level 80 wouldn't sell like they do.

Edited by Krazzar, 23 January 2013 - 07:12 PM.


#501 Astral Projections

Astral Projections

    Vanguard Scout

  • Members
  • 446 posts
  • Guild Tag:[MIND]
  • Server:Henge of Denravi

Posted 23 January 2013 - 08:11 PM

View PostHrefna, on 23 January 2013 - 04:54 PM, said:

I had an interesting experience yesterday while maxing my leatherworking craft. I had crafted a few pieces of gold lvl80 armor using T5 materials. This variant had used 15 large bones for the insignia and also silk + thick leather pieces. Taking into consideration that the large bones cost ~1.5s each and I could only get very little from merchant for the armor pieces I used a high end salvage kit hoping to get some bones back. I did not get bones but instead thick leather and ECTO. To me it is clearly a bug.I salvaged the 7 armor pieces I had made to get to lvl400 and got 7 ectos from them, and then no more. It was not intended gain for me and after all its relatively small. But if  I started to make more armors with the sole purpose of salvaging them for ectos I would not be the slightest in doubt. This is abusing a bug and I would risk ban. I had actually believed this would be fixed by now, but appearently not.
If I understand what you wrote, you made a rare above level 67 which you were able to salvage and get an ecto? If so, this is neither a bug nor an exploit. The only way to get ectos since they are not a drop, is to salvage rare or exotic weapons and armor at level 68 and above. Either crafted or found items are used.

Edited by Astral Projections, 23 January 2013 - 08:14 PM.


#502 Hrefna

Hrefna

    Fahrar Cub

  • New Members
  • 11 posts

Posted 23 January 2013 - 11:13 PM

Yes im perfectly aware that you gain ectos from salvaging certain weapons and I have my very modest ecto stash  from  salvaged drops.
But I dont think you should be able to get some material from salvage that has not been used to craft it. (I also  crafted  bows as a huntsman, using  elder wood + leather and got mithril from the salvage, its not really a profit, but also not logic)
Getting ectos out of lesser materials using your own craft abilities, that simply doesnt sound right to me.

#503 Millimidget

Millimidget

    Vanguard Scout

  • Members
  • 499 posts

Posted 24 January 2013 - 01:51 AM

View PostMenehune, on 22 January 2013 - 01:48 PM, said:

Well it certainly seems that way at least implicitly with your insistance that ArenaNet produce such perfect bug free software.

Why couldn't a recipe have such an effect if e.g. under certain rare circumstances the server sends a numeric result field as double precision when the client expects an integer? The only question then is will the client fail gracefully or CTD? That ofc depends on how the dev coded, or not, any error handling/exception catching routine(s).
If they had used the wrong data type instead of the wrong numerial, and that was causing people to CTD, I'm sure they would have hastily hotfixed it. It only existed for so long, and was allowed to be abused so severely, because they dismissed it as inconsequential.

I'm willing to accept that their obvious priorities were on enjoying the holidays, and I'm even willing to give them the benefit of the doubt and say that at least some of them deserved a vacation, but I draw the line at the point where they're outraged about this, and feign innocence as if none of this was within their control until the ban-hammer fell.

If this had happened at any other time of the year, I'm sure it would have been resolved much more quickly. But don't take it out on players because your employees couldn't be bothered to work over the holidays, at least certainly not for something that within the context of the game's larger issues isn't really that big of a deal, as it's not like the recipe still exists in its earlier form.

View PostIllein, on 23 January 2013 - 03:56 PM, said:

And refunded culprits all the gem purchases they've ever made - I mean... how much more could you really do?
As I said earlier in the thread, I think their legal counsel suggested that doing so was cheaper than any possible legal actions resulting from not refunding the banned players.

Allegedly it was only 200 or so players banned, and once you account for players who don't buy gems, and that most people who have bought gems haven't spent hundreds (or thousands) on them; I doubt it was really all that much money.

Edited by Millimidget, 24 January 2013 - 01:54 AM.


#504 Trei

Trei

    Golem Rider

  • Members
  • 2930 posts
  • Server:Jade Quarry

Posted 24 January 2013 - 02:01 AM

View PostHrefna, on 23 January 2013 - 11:13 PM, said:

Yes im perfectly aware that you gain ectos from salvaging certain weapons and I have my very modest ecto stash  from  salvaged drops.
But I dont think you should be able to get some material from salvage that has not been used to craft it. (I also  crafted  bows as a huntsman, using  elder wood + leather and got mithril from the salvage, its not really a profit, but also not logic)
Getting ectos out of lesser materials using your own craft abilities, that simply doesnt sound right to me.
Which came first?
Chicken or egg? Ectos salvaged from ectos-required item or the item?

I do understand where you are coming from, actually.
But your ideal logical salvage system would call for individual salvage set tables and will take up a lot more data to store, process, add/remove, upkeep and test (for new items).
Logic in this case isn't really that essential enough to be worth all that hassle.

Edited by Trei, 24 January 2013 - 02:03 AM.


#505 Millimidget

Millimidget

    Vanguard Scout

  • Members
  • 499 posts

Posted 24 January 2013 - 02:10 AM

Out of curiosity, who was the developer that flubbed the initial recipe? Does he still work for Anet? Was he reprimanded in any way?

I'd probably be far more accepting of Anet's actions if I saw some actual remorse on their end, instead of them constantly trying to portray themselves as some sort of victim.

#506 Astral Projections

Astral Projections

    Vanguard Scout

  • Members
  • 446 posts
  • Guild Tag:[MIND]
  • Server:Henge of Denravi

Posted 24 January 2013 - 05:44 AM

View PostHrefna, on 23 January 2013 - 11:13 PM, said:

Yes im perfectly aware that you gain ectos from salvaging certain weapons and I have my very modest ecto stash  from  salvaged drops.
But I dont think you should be able to get some material from salvage that has not been used to craft it. (I also  crafted  bows as a huntsman, using  elder wood + leather and got mithril from the salvage, its not really a profit, but also not logic)
Getting ectos out of lesser materials using your own craft abilities, that simply doesnt sound right to me.
If you could only salvage ectos from items that were made from ectos, how would new ectos, or sufficient amount of new ectos, come into the game? The way it is set up, ectos come from rare or exotic items level 68 or above. What the items are made of is not a consideration, only rarity and level. They would be even more scarce if they only came from some items and their prices would skyrocket.

#507 Krazzar

Krazzar

    Legend of the Norn

  • Members
  • 7986 posts
  • Server:Sanctum of Rall

Posted 24 January 2013 - 06:07 AM

View PostTrei, on 24 January 2013 - 02:01 AM, said:

Which came first?
Chicken or egg? Ectos salvaged from ectos-required item or the item?

I do understand where you are coming from, actually.
But your ideal logical salvage system would call for individual salvage set tables and will take up a lot more data to store, process, add/remove, upkeep and test (for new items).
Logic in this case isn't really that essential enough to be worth all that hassle.

That post was meant to call attention to the generation of ectos by crafting rares, which do not require ectos to make (except for jewlery).

It would be perfectly feasible to design the salvage tables to support that idea, after all, salvage tables had to be set in the first place, they could have set them differently just as easily. That's not the intent, though. This is a system that was very purposefully included to give more value to items in lower tiers and help them keep that value.  That means you have a larger range of crafting materials you can use to get to your goals. It also makes players more self-sufficient, it gives them a path to exotics without farming. There is a very clear theme throughout the design of GW2; farming is discouraged and diverse (as diverse as possible) economic activity is given incentive. This is a pretty clear message, one way to get the exact exotic gear you want is to craft it, that takes ectos which you can also craft. Once you're done crafting items for yourself you can craft to make money in the game. The alternatives all involve farming (grinding) at one point or another and less economic activity and more money generation, exactly what Anet does not want.

Edited by Krazzar, 24 January 2013 - 06:09 AM.


#508 raspberry jam

raspberry jam

    Vigil Crusader

  • Members
  • 4790 posts

Posted 24 January 2013 - 08:34 AM

View PostGli, on 23 January 2013 - 12:11 PM, said:

They acknowledged the bug and fixed it. No one was inconvenienced by it, so that's plenty of responsibility taken.

It doesn't even stop there. They went beyond the call of duty and cleaned up the playerbase a little. What's not to commend?
The bans, of course. People were inconvenienced by those, by the way.

Banning players implies that the exploit was these players' fault.

View PostXPhiler, on 23 January 2013 - 12:07 PM, said:


What did I make mods do exactly?  Quoting the entire post makes it ugly, too long and messy, will try putting in a spoiler to keep it neater.


I dont agree, not every mistake a person does is the result of carelessness.



Profitablity is a complex topic. Things like more QA can lead to more profitably or they may not. More QA doesnt even guarantee better quality. More QA personnel would make an impact if the recipe was not tested at all because of lack of man power, its just as possible that it was tested, but the tester simply missed the exploit.

Because of general practices of division of labor, to create a new item you'll need a varity of skills. Modellers, Artists, Data input, QA etc...

Hmmm sorry to burst your bubble but every item thats level 75+ and of rare+ quality has a calculated 90% of dropping an ecto when using the highest quality salvage kit. That has nothing to do with this or any other exloit, its just how it is. This wasnt something they develop for this item, its an inherit property of the game.



its fairly simple, a bot is something thats playing instead of you. if you're holding down the key yourself then you're the one doing the playing. If you put a weight on the key then its that wieght doing the playing. Sitting there watching it or not doesnt make a difference.



Exactly, there will always be unsavory characters, so they will always exploit given the chance ergo the only solution is if they cant play by the rules ban them. You know fully well that no matter how much effort you put in, no matter how much money you spend you will never, ever, ever ensure that no exploit makes it in the game ergo your only option is even if it looses you money remove players who cant play by the rules if you want to get rid of exploiting. Unless you believe arenanet are sitting on their hands doing nothign they're already doing the best they can do, I am sure you agree no exploit is in arenanet's best interest. You're all the time dwelling how companies are driven by profit and exploits make them loose money because people profit abnormally and they can use that profit to buy gems instead of real cash. So no matter what, whether they ban players or not, they'll still try their very best to ensure no exploits are released if not for the sake of their game, which personally i think it is also something they care very much about, for the sake of profit. So tell me how will not banning exploiters actually benefit the game?



You're the one saying no one cared about this exploit, doesnt make it true and its certainly not true. I am sure all those players who farmed ectos to sell them without doing any cheating care very much that because of these exploiters the price of the item they farmed dropped by 30% in 2 days. I am also certain that crafters didnt appriciate the reduction in markup because of the fall in price of a major ingredient either.

As for damage to the game, yes this exploit did far more damage then an invisible wall in the middle of WvW. In fact technically speaking an invisible wall that makes a person invisible in the middle of WvW does absolutely nothing. WvW is not a death match, how many players you kill is meaningless, its about conquering and holding onto objectives so unless this invisible wall was right next to an outpost / tower or whatever it had 0 impact on the game while the recipe exploit in just 2 days resulted in a 30% drop in ecto prices. If it had not been stopped how much more damage would i have done in a week or a month.



so many assumptions here. how do you know they do as little testing as they can get away with?

You dont even know what you're talking about cause you got everything wrong. Funny how you can feel so strongly and sure of yourself without even knowing the basic facts of what you're arguing about. Let me explain for your benefit.

To create an exotic Ring you need 3 things, a jewel, a setting and the band
In wintersday they issues some really cheap ways of creating some exotic jewerly.

The recipe at issue required 6 mithril ore, 1 ecto, 1 snowflake to create the jewel (brilliant snowflake)

Then you need to use this in your exotic ring recipe
.
Compare this with a normal exotic where you'd need the setting, the ring and 5 jewels that each is created using the same kind of recipe IE 1 ecto, 1 filigree and a gem stone.

Now why was this an expliot? Well when you salvage any level 75+ exotic you have an 80% chance of getting 0-3 ectos back this is not tied to any materials used to create the exotic item. You also have an 80% chance of getting some of the materials back.
with the winterday ring that meant that you had an 80% chance of getting the brilliant snowfake back meaning that 4 times out of 5 to create 5 exotic rings you just need to invest a little mithril and thats it.

In a normal exotic ring recipe you still have 80% chance of getting some of the materials back but you dont get all 5 of the jewels back you get a fraction of that, which essentially offsets the amount of ectos you get.

The mistake arenanet did wasnt a bug or anything it was being overly generous. They wanted these exotic rings to be easy to get so they made it so you required 1 jewel instead of 5. In fact the fix they implemented was a way in the middle that is they changed so you need 3 jewels instead of 1.  I hope you see now that this "bug" wants easy to detect because it was meant to be a cheaply crafted item and its direct salvaging was consistent with everything else nothign change there. The problem was that level 75+ rare+ items when salvage all have a chance of returning 0-3 ecto in addition to a fraction of what was required to craft that item. Normally this is not a problem because the expense required to craft it offsets somewhat the extra gain but because this was purposely cheap in wintersday spirit it didnt. in fact in a single 5 item run you could get enough money to craft another 15 items more or less.


You do realise this was an entirely ficticious senario that was just meant to illustrate a possible scenario of why it is important to test the client even after something as simple as a recipe is added to the game right? not sure why you went through all the trouble of explaining why the scenario itself isnt very likely. That was not the point at all. But well hope you enjoyed writing all that for nothing.


I know how strings work fully well and I also know how in games you're not even really working with string but instead with sprites. And I also know how Gw2 takes this even a step further because text in gw2 is actually a 3d object. Play it in stereoscopic 3D and you'll see the text above the objects is actually at the same depth as the object rather then flat on a 2d plain. Lot of complexity that means a lot of things can go wrong. But by all means lets not appriciate any of that and simply reduce all that to "have you any idea how strings work"

You dont expect miracles, thats good cause you're not going to get them... but hey what do you expect exactly? The moment they found out about the exploit they took action, they did their best to ensure exploits dont hit again not just by making sure that exploits dont get in game as best as they can without resorting to the supernatural but by also by banning people who can play fair (which costs them money and bad publicity) what more do you want? but yes by all means continue with your thinking that we should actually be angry at arenanet for trying to defend honest players from dishonest players. In fact you know what, why dont you go in forums of other MMOs and reply to all threads begging for exploiters to get banned that they should instead by happy because the company of their MMO is taking full responsability for those exploits. They might ask you to explain your logic there but I am sure you got a good answer for them right?


lol

Yes, mistakes are the result of, knowingly or unknowingly, being careless. Being overly generous is being careless. Thus the "overly" part.

It doesn't really matter why it can drop an ecto. It's inherited from being a rare or better item (thank you for your extensive explanation of it by the way), but so what? The things going into crafting and the full list of things potentially resulting from a salvage should have been presented to the person deciding what ingredients to put into the recipe. Not doing so means that there is a lack of proper QA routines.

So ok, how do you separate the input of the weight from the input of the finger? I mean, when you are making your bot detection routines?

No, that's just the point; they don't do anything in their power to prevent exploits from being released. They do just the bare minimum that they can get away with doing (to answer your question about that: because they are a company and that means that they will do what is profitable). And that won't change no matter what. However, by putting the blame on the playerbase, ANet can get away with more because suddenly people don't think that it is their fault.

And again no, the statement that a recipe can't do much damage came from your post. That assumption was originally ANet's, as they obviously didn't prioritize checking the recipe. The people who for reason X farmed ecto was surely upset about the exploit, but that just means that it was those players that ANet didn't care enough about to prioritize. Literally. I would argue, though, that the invisible wall did more damage; the in-game economy is completely meaningless in any way whatsoever, while an invisible wall affects the actual gameplay.

Yes, I know it was an entirely fictitious scenario, and I pointed out how unlikely it was in order to show why it was a stupid example. A recipe that can be salvaged to get loads and loads of free ectos, though, is not unlikely at all.

String tables are used to handle multiple languages. For example when you switch from English to German, the table of German strings is loaded to replace the table of English strings.
I don't know why you call a 3D object a "sprite".

But the players that were banned did play fair. All they did was use the tools that ANet gave them. How is that not fair?

#509 Gli

Gli

    Seraph Guardian

  • Members
  • 1026 posts

Posted 24 January 2013 - 11:57 AM

View Postraspberry jam, on 24 January 2013 - 08:34 AM, said:

The bans, of course. People were inconvenienced by those, by the way.

Banning players implies that the exploit was these players' fault.
Don't be ridiculous, they weren't inconvenienced by the bug, they were greedily trying to have their way with it.

The presence of the exploit was ANet's fault. ANet fixed it. Exploiting it was the player's fault. ANet banned them.

View Postraspberry jam, on 24 January 2013 - 08:34 AM, said:

But the players that were banned did play fair. All they did was use the tools that ANet gave them. How is that not fair?
Now you're really getting desperate. Exploits always use an unmodified client without 3rd party tools. Taking advantage of exploits is disallowed regardless. Are you saying you reject the general notion of 'exploit' altogether?

#510 raspberry jam

raspberry jam

    Vigil Crusader

  • Members
  • 4790 posts

Posted 24 January 2013 - 12:15 PM

View PostGli, on 24 January 2013 - 11:57 AM, said:

Don't be ridiculous, they weren't inconvenienced by the bug, they were greedily trying to have their way with it.

The presence of the exploit was ANet's fault. ANet fixed it. Exploiting it was the player's fault. ANet banned them.


Now you're really getting desperate. Exploits always use an unmodified client without 3rd party tools. Taking advantage of exploits is disallowed regardless. Are you saying you reject the general notion of 'exploit' altogether?
Well, the economy was temporarily slightly upset by the exploit, thereby inconveniencing players. Regardless of that, other bugs cause inconvenience, and ANet taking a greater responsibility for bugs in the form of quality control would mean that there are less bugs overall, and thereby less inconvenience.

Not banning players that only used the tools that ANet gave them would mean that ANet would be signaling that they actually are taking full responsibility for what happened when they handed out said tools. To me as a non-exploiting player :angel: it doesn't matter much who exploited and who didn't, what matters is the inconvenience caused by the exploit. That will happen at any time when an exploit is possible, since the supply of unsavory players can be approximated by infinity.

Since exploits will (can) be used whenever they are available, the effect on myself (and on you as well, so I don't know why you disagree with me) is entirely dependent on ANet.

As for your question: Why would it be illegal to use inputs that the client is designed to accept? Wouldn't it be better to disallow these inputs?




0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users