Which is why I have clearly said that for it to be "not cheating" the full agreement of everyone involved in that world has to be obtained... and leaderboards have to be disabled.
The TOI/TOS etc., in legal terms, can only be in effect for those who are party to the agreement in the first place and the TOS applies to Live (the service), not to the product Xbox. Certainly the CD of the game is a product and, as such, I CAN tie a string through the hole and hang it on my Christmas tree or use it as a coaster if I want... and Microsoft, 4J and Mojang can have nothing to say about it. The legal question of whether the download is, in an of itself, a product or a service hasn't, to my knowledge, been definitively answered as yet (i.e. tested in a court of law, etc.)
As for your last comment, no one is "forcing" anyone to do anything here. No one should be trying to force others to not use a glitch by blanketly accusing them of cheating either. AND I still feel that the game programmers should not be abrogating their responsibility to "fix" glitches by just telling customers not to use them. It would be somewhat akin to having a car manufacturer say something like - Yes, we know your car has defects in the brakes that we did not intend to put there... so, just don't use the brakes (since using brakes is to your advantage). Also, it might be prudent to consider how much control over what players do with a game you want to grant/hand over to gaming companies... heck, to companies in general. How much of a say do you want them to have in deciding what you can and cannot do for your own personal enjoyment?
If you feel it is cheating, then "to thine ownself be true" - just don't do it... even in a single-player world. You can also opt not to play in a world with anyone who uses it... No one, after all, if forcing you to play with them nor is anyone forcing you to call other people "cheaters." when all the specifics of the incident are not being stated by the OP (and indeed, the OP probably doesn't even know all the specifics either).
You misunderstood a good chunk of my post. When I made my argument regarding the TOI, I was stating that the TOI was irrelevant when it comes to cheating because the cheating is implied, even when offline. Example, you play a fps game where you find a glitch that allows you to see and shoot through the walls. Unless you are doing something entirely different in the game that specifically incorporates this glitch, then this is cheating because you are exploiting a glitch that is giving you an advantage in a fixed system. So basically if you do the campaign and use this glitch, then you cheated because you haven't played the game the way it was supposed to be played.
In regarding to your response about forcing others to glitch. The debate is not about the control or whether or not people should have the right to glitch, its about what is considered cheating. Example, I tell people I built an awesome house in survival minecraft, and my friend says they did the exact same thing, except that they duplicated. When we say survival minecraft in our conversation, the game mechanics are already pre-determined in which duplicating is not even considered a factor as its not supposed to be in survival. In short, in claiming they did survival, they technically did, but they cheated because they did not play it within the pre-set programming.
Your argument about the vehicle does not hold up for the simple reason that the brakes are a main component of the vehicle that have to be present, which means that any glitches that impede the proper operation of the brakes would not be considered cheating if used by the player, because it has now become a requirement of the game itself.
Also I would like to point out that games themselves can actually cheat the player. Example, an enemy soldier somehow ends up in the wall, which stops you from killing them and advancing through the game. At this point the standard rules are broken and it becomes acceptable for the player to use a cheat themselves in order to restore the proper balance( Kill the one soldier using your own glitch, but don't kill any others that are not glitches as you would then be cheating yourself.)
Finally, I would like to finish by pointing out that your argument about the programmers having added glitches, intentionally or not into the game, sounds more like an attempt by you to justify using glitches and claiming its legit. Lets make this easy....You don't have to use the glitches in the first place. Cheat codes are called cheat codes for a very simple reason and any glitches that you find in game are not even supposed to be there to begin with.
How is this not locked for redundancy? This has been gone over more times than I can count.
Agreed.
"Cheating" is such a harsh word.
People who are accused of 'cheating' immediately go into Defense Mode.
In the Minecraft context, "Cheating" is simply doing something you shouldn't (be able to) do for your own gain.... or to make the game easier than how it was designed/intended.
Is it a huge deal? No.
But taking advantage of a glitch, duping, or bug is "cheating", strictly speaking.
If you have a Ace up your sleeve, is it cheating? Sure.
If all the other players have Aces up their sleeves, it is cheating? Sure.
If all the other players know all the others have Aces up their sleeves, is it cheating? Sure.
Should you have a Ace up your sleeve, even if 5 Aces was 'accidently' in included in the pack by the manufacturer? Of course not.
We're all looking at it from the 'cheater' view- is it ok?
We should be asking, instead of what the cheater thinks, what the cheatee thinks.
You misunderstood a good chunk of my post. When I made my argument regarding the TOI, I was stating that the TOI was irrelevant when it comes to cheating because the cheating is implied, even when offline. Example, you play a fps game where you find a glitch that allows you to see and shoot through the walls. Unless you are doing something entirely different in the game that specifically incorporates this glitch, then this is cheating because you are exploiting a glitch that is giving you an advantage in a fixed system. So basically if you do the campaign and use this glitch, then you cheated because you haven't played the game the way it was supposed to be played.
In regarding to your response about forcing others to glitch. The debate is not about the control or whether or not people should have the right to glitch, its about what is considered cheating. Example, I tell people I built an awesome house in survival minecraft, and my friend says they did the exact same thing, except that they duplicated. When we say survival minecraft in our conversation, the game mechanics are already pre-determined in which duplicating is not even considered a factor as its not supposed to be in survival. In short, in claiming they did survival, they technically did, but they cheated because they did not play it within the pre-set programming.
Your argument about the vehicle does not hold up for the simple reason that the brakes are a main component of the vehicle that have to be present, which means that any glitches that impede the proper operation of the brakes would not be considered cheating if used by the player, because it has now become a requirement of the game itself.
Also I would like to point out that games themselves can actually cheat the player. Example, an enemy soldier somehow ends up in the wall, which stops you from killing them and advancing through the game. At this point the standard rules are broken and it becomes acceptable for the player to use a cheat themselves in order to restore the proper balance( Kill the one soldier using your own glitch, but don't kill any others that are not glitches as you would then be cheating yourself.)
Finally, I would like to finish by pointing out that your argument about the programmers having added glitches, intentionally or not into the game, sounds more like an attempt by you to justify using glitches and claiming its legit. Lets make this easy....You don't have to use the glitches in the first place. Cheat codes are called cheat codes for a very simple reason and any glitches that you find in game are not even supposed to be there to begin with.
In a totally, completely, solitaire environment, "cheating" can only be decided by that sole, lone player. No one else is affected and there is NOTHING that precludes an individual player from playing any game using an alternate set of rules... That is how so many different versions of Solitaire have been developed over the centuries.
"Cheating" is not inherently implied... it is an accusation made by others... and, when the game is solitary in nature, by those who have no business even knowing what a person does when they play a game on their own and in such a manner so as intentionally not affect anyone else. Therefore, if a person in Minecraft takes the care to disable the leaderboards before making their own rules in their own world (a practice encouraged by the Minecraft designers), they are in fact taking measures to expressly avoid cheating others.
People who are not party to whatever "agreement" a individual makes with himself or with a group of others in his world about the "rules" for that world have no rights at all to assess that "contract." You have no legal rights under any agreement you are not party to (basic principle of contract law). Furthermore, you cannot even begin to ascertain what I do in my own worlds from ANY of the comments I've made here and you have most certainly never played Minecraft with me either online or offline... yet, now you're accusing me of "cheating" and of being "defensive" as well. I can, therefore, truthfully say that your accusations are completely unfounded... and it wouldn't matter what it is I actually do in my worlds. (BTW - I don't exit without saving and I don't duplicate items ever... but I also don't blanketly accuse other people of it and I don't believe that people who do it in their own worlds are arbitrarily cheating. IF they believe they are cheating, they are. If they don't believe they are cheating, they aren't - unless they are involving someone else in their worlds who doesn't agree with them.)
What I am objecting to are all the blanket accusations of cheating that fly around these forums... they serve no good purpose. The only "victims" of all this alleged "cheating" are apparently the accused cheaters, whose names get drug through the mud online by people who have no real full knowledge of what it is they are actually doing in their own worlds and "no rights" to make such accusations because they are not a part of those worlds.
The concept of "advantage" in accusations of cheating is also a bogus one. If making rules to one's own advantage is "cheating" in a solitaire Minecraft world... then making rules of any kind to everyone's advantage in any world must also be "cheating." Therefore, there must be only one "right way" to play a game of solitaire. The concept of "advantage" goes to the nature of those who accuse others of cheating... they don't tend to complain and make the accusation when the action is to their own advantage... only when it isn't.
I did not say that the developers intentionally put in glitches... they do, however, intentionally leave them unfixed... often forever. They also provide no official specific instructions regarding what is and is not a glitch. The only way a player might even realize that duplication is a glitch is by reading third-party forums and such. If the player doesn't intentionally mod the code of the game, for all they know they might have just stumbled onto the best combination of keys to press to do the "job" at hand. If a defect is there inherent in the product purchased, the manufacturer of a product cannot prevent the customer from using that defect to their own advantage. They can, perhaps, suggest not using it (and will generally do so if the customer can be harmed by the defect); but it still up to the manufacturer to correct the error. (In the case of the car manufacturer I gave above... they do recalls of the product.)
Again, an area of ambiguity in all of this is whether or not a downloaded game, in and of itself, is just a product or a service... However, there were strong objections from the crowd when Microsoft first proposed the Xbox One... which would have essentially made all the games a "service" - hence, players couldn't resell them, etc.
You misunderstood a good chunk of my post. When I made my argument regarding the TOI, I was stating that the TOI was irrelevant when it comes to cheating because the cheating is implied, even when offline. Example, you play a fps game where you find a glitch that allows you to see and shoot through the walls. Unless you are doing something entirely different in the game that specifically incorporates this glitch, then this is cheating because you are exploiting a glitch that is giving you an advantage in a fixed system. So basically if you do the campaign and use this glitch, then you cheated because you haven't played the game the way it was supposed to be played.
In regarding to your response about forcing others to glitch. The debate is not about the control or whether or not people should have the right to glitch, its about what is considered cheating. Example, I tell people I built an awesome house in survival minecraft, and my friend says they did the exact same thing, except that they duplicated. When we say survival minecraft in our conversation, the game mechanics are already pre-determined in which duplicating is not even considered a factor as its not supposed to be in survival. In short, in claiming they did survival, they technically did, but they cheated because they did not play it within the pre-set programming.
Your argument about the vehicle does not hold up for the simple reason that the brakes are a main component of the vehicle that have to be present, which means that any glitches that impede the proper operation of the brakes would not be considered cheating if used by the player, because it has now become a requirement of the game itself.
Also I would like to point out that games themselves can actually cheat the player. Example, an enemy soldier somehow ends up in the wall, which stops you from killing them and advancing through the game. At this point the standard rules are broken and it becomes acceptable for the player to use a cheat themselves in order to restore the proper balance( Kill the one soldier using your own glitch, but don't kill any others that are not glitches as you would then be cheating yourself.)
Finally, I would like to finish by pointing out that your argument about the programmers having added glitches, intentionally or not into the game, sounds more like an attempt by you to justify using glitches and claiming its legit. Lets make this easy....You don't have to use the glitches in the first place. Cheat codes are called cheat codes for a very simple reason and any glitches that you find in game are not even supposed to be there to begin with.
Agreed.
"Cheating" is such a harsh word.
People who are accused of 'cheating' immediately go into Defense Mode.
In the Minecraft context, "Cheating" is simply doing something you shouldn't (be able to) do for your own gain.... or to make the game easier than how it was designed/intended.
Is it a huge deal? No.
But taking advantage of a glitch, duping, or bug is "cheating", strictly speaking.
If you have a Ace up your sleeve, is it cheating? Sure.
If all the other players have Aces up their sleeves, it is cheating? Sure.
If all the other players know all the others have Aces up their sleeves, is it cheating? Sure.
Should you have a Ace up your sleeve, even if 5 Aces was 'accidently' in included in the pack by the manufacturer? Of course not.
We're all looking at it from the 'cheater' view- is it ok?
We should be asking, instead of what the cheater thinks, what the cheatee thinks.
In a totally, completely, solitaire environment, "cheating" can only be decided by that sole, lone player. No one else is affected and there is NOTHING that precludes an individual player from playing any game using an alternate set of rules... That is how so many different versions of Solitaire have been developed over the centuries.
"Cheating" is not inherently implied... it is an accusation made by others... and, when the game is solitary in nature, by those who have no business even knowing what a person does when they play a game on their own and in such a manner so as intentionally not affect anyone else. Therefore, if a person in Minecraft takes the care to disable the leaderboards before making their own rules in their own world (a practice encouraged by the Minecraft designers), they are in fact taking measures to expressly avoid cheating others.
People who are not party to whatever "agreement" a individual makes with himself or with a group of others in his world about the "rules" for that world have no rights at all to assess that "contract." You have no legal rights under any agreement you are not party to (basic principle of contract law). Furthermore, you cannot even begin to ascertain what I do in my own worlds from ANY of the comments I've made here and you have most certainly never played Minecraft with me either online or offline... yet, now you're accusing me of "cheating" and of being "defensive" as well. I can, therefore, truthfully say that your accusations are completely unfounded... and it wouldn't matter what it is I actually do in my worlds. (BTW - I don't exit without saving and I don't duplicate items ever... but I also don't blanketly accuse other people of it and I don't believe that people who do it in their own worlds are arbitrarily cheating. IF they believe they are cheating, they are. If they don't believe they are cheating, they aren't - unless they are involving someone else in their worlds who doesn't agree with them.)
What I am objecting to are all the blanket accusations of cheating that fly around these forums... they serve no good purpose. The only "victims" of all this alleged "cheating" are apparently the accused cheaters, whose names get drug through the mud online by people who have no real full knowledge of what it is they are actually doing in their own worlds and "no rights" to make such accusations because they are not a part of those worlds.
The concept of "advantage" in accusations of cheating is also a bogus one. If making rules to one's own advantage is "cheating" in a solitaire Minecraft world... then making rules of any kind to everyone's advantage in any world must also be "cheating." Therefore, there must be only one "right way" to play a game of solitaire. The concept of "advantage" goes to the nature of those who accuse others of cheating... they don't tend to complain and make the accusation when the action is to their own advantage... only when it isn't.
I did not say that the developers intentionally put in glitches... they do, however, intentionally leave them unfixed... often forever. They also provide no official specific instructions regarding what is and is not a glitch. The only way a player might even realize that duplication is a glitch is by reading third-party forums and such. If the player doesn't intentionally mod the code of the game, for all they know they might have just stumbled onto the best combination of keys to press to do the "job" at hand. If a defect is there inherent in the product purchased, the manufacturer of a product cannot prevent the customer from using that defect to their own advantage. They can, perhaps, suggest not using it (and will generally do so if the customer can be harmed by the defect); but it still up to the manufacturer to correct the error. (In the case of the car manufacturer I gave above... they do recalls of the product.)
Again, an area of ambiguity in all of this is whether or not a downloaded game, in and of itself, is just a product or a service... However, there were strong objections from the crowd when Microsoft first proposed the Xbox One... which would have essentially made all the games a "service" - hence, players couldn't resell them, etc.
-
View User Profile
-
View Posts
-
Send Message
Forum AdminThe topic has been covered many times before. The discussion is going in circles with nothing new that can be added.