These forums have been archived and are now read-only.

The new forums are live and can be found at https://forums.eveonline.com/

EVE General Discussion

 
  • Topic is locked indefinitely.
 

ISBoxer: pay to win in eve?

First post First post
Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
ashley Eoner
#101 - 2014-06-23 20:43:52 UTC
Prostetnik Vogon Jeltz wrote:
Ramona McCandless wrote:
Prostetnik Vogon Jeltz wrote:


It is also against the EULA

I would love to see a ban on multiboxing software


wut


CONDUCT
A. Specifically Restricted Conduct

Your continued access to the System and license to play the Game is subject to proper conduct. Without limiting CCP's rights to control the Game environment, and the conduct of the players within that environment, CCP prohibits the following practices that CCP has determined detract from the overall user experience of the users playing the Game.

1. You may not take any action that imposes an unreasonable or disproportionately large load on the System.
2. You may not use your own or third-party software to modify any content appearing within the Game environment or change how the Game is played.
3. You may not use your own or any third-party software, macros or other stored rapid keystrokes or other patterns of play that facilitate acquisition of items, currency, objects, character attributes, rank or status at an accelerated rate when compared with ordinary Game play. You may not rewrite or modify the user interface or otherwise manipulate data in any way to acquire items, currency, objects, character attributes or beneficial actions not actually acquired or achieved in the Game.



As you can see part 2 states "You may not use your own or third-party software to modify any content appearing within the Game environment or change how the Game is played", which multiboxing software obviously does.

and part 3 "You may not use your own or any third-party software, macros or other stored rapid keystrokes or other patterns of play that facilitate acquisition of items, currency, objects, character attributes, rank or status at an accelerated rate when compared with ordinary Game play.". Multiboxing software allows the acquisition of items in an accelerated way.

Therefore is in contravention of the EULA.
Except your wrong there is nothing changed in the game play environment. Ship models etc all stay the same.

Multiboxing does not allow for the accelerated acquisitions on a per account basis.


It seems to me that isboxer isn't even your problem. Your problem is that anyone can have more then one account or character.. Hell your argument would apply to having more then one character on an account since that fits your definition of "accelerated acquisition of items"..
Carmen Electra
AlcoDOTTE
Test Alliance Please Ignore
#102 - 2014-06-23 20:46:16 UTC
Prostetnik Vogon Jeltz wrote:
Therefore is in contravention of the EULA.


The only wrench in your works would be the official position taken by CCP re: ISBoxer.

Bacon makes us stronger
Barzai Mekhar
True Confusion
#103 - 2014-06-23 20:51:15 UTC  |  Edited by: Barzai Mekhar
Prostetnik Vogon Jeltz wrote:

As you can see part 2 states "You may not use your own or third-party software to modify any content appearing within the Game environment or change how the Game is played", which multiboxing software obviously does.

and part 3 "You may not use your own or any third-party software, macros or other stored rapid keystrokes or other patterns of play that facilitate acquisition of items, currency, objects, character attributes, rank or status at an accelerated rate when compared with ordinary Game play.". Multiboxing software allows the acquisition of items in an accelerated way.

Therefore is in contravention of the EULA.


Both passages are open to interpretation, so stating that they are "obvious" shows you're only looking to find confirmation for your opinion. However, according to the most recent official interpretation:
-Part 2 refers to modification of the game client which is not done.
-Part 3 compares acquisition on a by-account basis, not on a by-player basis.

Not like this hasn't come up before.
Ramona McCandless
Silent Vale
LinkNet
#104 - 2014-06-23 20:52:58 UTC
Prostetnik Vogon Jeltz wrote:
Ramona McCandless wrote:
Prostetnik Vogon Jeltz wrote:


It is also against the EULA

I would love to see a ban on multiboxing software


wut
Blah
Therefore is in contravention of the EULA.


So how do you ban something that is banned ?

Even though it expressly isnt by CCP ruling

"Yea, some dude came in and was normal for first couple months, so I gave him director." - Sean Dunaway

"A singular character could be hired to penetrate another corps space... using gorilla like tactics..." - Chane Morgann
iskflakes
#105 - 2014-06-23 20:58:08 UTC
Perhaps the problem is bombers rather than isboxer?

-
Bland Inquisitor
Ministry of War
Amarr Empire
#106 - 2014-06-23 20:58:14 UTC
macro
ˈmakrəʊ/
noun
noun: macro; plural noun: macros; noun: macro instruction; plural noun: macros instruction; plural noun: macro instructions

1.
Computing
a single instruction that expands automatically into a set of instructions to perform a particular task.

Macro replicate keystrokes to perform tasks.
ISBoxing replicates keystrokes to perform tasks.

Some of the illogical dribble in this thread scares me. EvE used to be a game for the more educated, logically minded individual. It seems that in its drive to increase population its swallowed up a bunch of drama-centric riffraff that are incapable of backing up arguments with facts, or debating and counter-debating a statement without resorting to insults and slander.

Simple fact for you;

ISBoxer is a 3rd party macro program. It copies keystrokes and replicates them across multiple accounts simultaneously. The very justification of being able to charge for said service is that it gives an advantage to its consumers. So to argue it isn't macro software and it doesn't give you an advantage over other players, is to argue against the very justification of being able to charge real money for it.
Carmen Electra
AlcoDOTTE
Test Alliance Please Ignore
#107 - 2014-06-23 20:59:14 UTC
Ramona McCandless
Silent Vale
LinkNet
#108 - 2014-06-23 21:00:34 UTC
Bland Inquisitor wrote:


Simple fact for you;.


CCP allow it

Case closed ffs

"Yea, some dude came in and was normal for first couple months, so I gave him director." - Sean Dunaway

"A singular character could be hired to penetrate another corps space... using gorilla like tactics..." - Chane Morgann
Bland Inquisitor
Ministry of War
Amarr Empire
#109 - 2014-06-23 21:02:19 UTC
Ramona McCandless wrote:
Bland Inquisitor wrote:


Simple fact for you;.


CCP allow it

Case closed ffs


We used to allow slavery and Child labour, your saying we should of accepted that also even if its morally objectionable?
Marsha Mallow
#110 - 2014-06-23 21:04:28 UTC
Prostetnik Vogon Jeltz wrote:
Therefore is in contravention of the EULA.

I really wouldn't even bother with this. It's been ranted about repeatedly and there is a GM statement somewhere, which I can't be arsed to dig out, confirming ISBoxer isn't violating the EULA. Perhaps the spirit, but v0v

Trippia can and has explained this fairly clearly somewhere, it's something to do with the way ISBoxer interracts with the client.

Whether it's fair or not is a different matter. I'm not sure how multiboxing miners then sitting there grinding for ISK is 'winning Eve'. Or using fleets of ISBoxing bombers. It's not like you're going to take a region with your 10 or 20 bombing alts is it, so what exactly are they 'winning' other than the odd fight and a few squeals of outrage?

Indy and market wise some of us can beat the crap out of other players, corps and alliances with dozens of alts. Or just a handful. It's not even like they need to be logged in at the same time.

Next up: nerf the players. Because, well it's not fair. Some of them have minds and stuff Straight

Ripard Teg > For the morons in the room:

Sweets > U can dd my face any day
Falin Whalen
Federal Navy Academy
Gallente Federation
#111 - 2014-06-23 21:05:42 UTC
Prostetnik Vogon Jeltz wrote:
Ramona McCandless wrote:
Prostetnik Vogon Jeltz wrote:


It is also against the EULA

I would love to see a ban on multiboxing software


wut


CONDUCT
A. Specifically Restricted Conduct

Your continued access to the System and license to play the Game is subject to proper conduct. Without limiting CCP's rights to control the Game environment, and the conduct of the players within that environment, CCP prohibits the following practices that CCP has determined detract from the overall user experience of the users playing the Game.

1. You may not take any action that imposes an unreasonable or disproportionately large load on the System.
2. You may not use your own or third-party software to modify any content appearing within the Game environment or change how the Game is played.
3. You may not use your own or any third-party software, macros or other stored rapid keystrokes or other patterns of play that facilitate acquisition of items, currency, objects, character attributes, rank or status at an accelerated rate when compared with ordinary Game play. You may not rewrite or modify the user interface or otherwise manipulate data in any way to acquire items, currency, objects, character attributes or beneficial actions not actually acquired or achieved in the Game.



As you can see part 2 states "You may not use your own or third-party software to modify any content appearing within the Game environment or change how the Game is played", which multiboxing software obviously does.

and part 3 "You may not use your own or any third-party software, macros or other stored rapid keystrokes or other patterns of play that facilitate acquisition of items, currency, objects, character attributes, rank or status at an accelerated rate when compared with ordinary Game play.". Multiboxing software allows the acquisition of items in an accelerated way.

Therefore is in contravention of the EULA.

Well #2 is moot as it doesnt modify any content in the game itself and as for #3 it doesnt store rapid keystrokes or macros and doesn't accelerate the rate at which items are aquired versus ordinary game play, because you have ten accounts aquiring ten items at the same time is not the same as one account aquiring ten items at the same time, so why is ISBoxer bad?

"it's only because of their stupidity that they're able to be so sure of themselves." The Trial - Franz Kafka 
Ramona McCandless
Silent Vale
LinkNet
#112 - 2014-06-23 21:07:58 UTC  |  Edited by: Ramona McCandless
Bland Inquisitor wrote:
Ramona McCandless wrote:
Bland Inquisitor wrote:


Simple fact for you;.


CCP allow it

Case closed ffs


We used to allow slavery and Child labour, your saying we should of accepted that also even if its morally objectionable?


These things are also legal in EvE

Wanna buy a used sebiestor?

Seriously though, if you have a problem with it, fit a catty and go do somehting about it

"Yea, some dude came in and was normal for first couple months, so I gave him director." - Sean Dunaway

"A singular character could be hired to penetrate another corps space... using gorilla like tactics..." - Chane Morgann
Scipio Artelius
Weaponised Vegemite
Flying Dangerous
#113 - 2014-06-23 21:09:59 UTC
Bland Inquisitor wrote:

Simple fact for you;

ISBoxer is a 3rd party macro program. It copies keystrokes and replicates them across multiple accounts simultaneously. The very justification of being able to charge for said service is that it gives an advantage to its consumers. So to argue it isn't macro software and it doesn't give you an advantage over other players, is to argue against the very justification of being able to charge real money for it.

But an even simpler fact for you:

CCP have interpreted the EULA as it relates to ISBoxer and similar forms of multiboxing software and said it's ok in its current form.

There's not much point arguing beyond that because CCP own the game and can rule on clauses of the EULA as they see fit.
Prostetnik Vogon Jeltz
Brutor Tribe
Minmatar Republic
#114 - 2014-06-23 21:11:03 UTC
Prostetnik Vogon Jeltz wrote:
[quote=Ramona McCandless][quote=Prostetnik Vogon Jeltz]


2. You may not use your own or third-party software to modify any content appearing within the Game environment or change how the Game is played.
.



Note the part about "how the game is played"

that is the part I was pointing out :)
TigerXtrm
KarmaFleet
Goonswarm Federation
#115 - 2014-06-23 21:11:06 UTC
I'm still of the opinion that 'the player must be manually sending the command' is open for interpretation.

I can see ISBoxer being legal to organize your screen (like, have multiple client's ship controls next to each other). But I really don't see how using it to send commands to clients is legal in any way.

If you have 20 clients, you click on one button in one client and the program then sends it to the other 19 clients. Those other 19 clients are botting. Those 19 clients are not receiving manual input. And by automating the input of those 19 clients you are by definition gaining an advantage or 'accelerating gameplay which would not be possible otherwise'. Because let's face it, no-one would be able to give the same command to 19 clients at the same time without ISBoxer.

I really wish CCP would be crystal clear about this issue for once instead of leaving us with a super vague and easy to misinterpret comment about 'manual input'.

My YouTube Channel - EVE Tutorials & other game related things!

My Website - Blogs, Livestreams & Forums
Ramona McCandless
Silent Vale
LinkNet
#116 - 2014-06-23 21:12:13 UTC
Scipio Artelius wrote:
Bland Inquisitor wrote:

Simple fact for you;

ISBoxer is a 3rd party macro program. It copies keystrokes and replicates them across multiple accounts simultaneously. The very justification of being able to charge for said service is that it gives an advantage to its consumers. So to argue it isn't macro software and it doesn't give you an advantage over other players, is to argue against the very justification of being able to charge real money for it.

But an even simpler fact for you:

CCP have interpreted the EULA as it relates to ISBoxer and similar forms of multiboxing software and said it's ok in its current form.

There's not much point arguing beyond that because CCP own the game and can rule on clauses of the EULA as they see fit.


That's what I said, but then apparently that made it the same as slavery and child labour, somehow

"Yea, some dude came in and was normal for first couple months, so I gave him director." - Sean Dunaway

"A singular character could be hired to penetrate another corps space... using gorilla like tactics..." - Chane Morgann
Prostetnik Vogon Jeltz
Brutor Tribe
Minmatar Republic
#117 - 2014-06-23 21:15:12 UTC
ashley Eoner wrote:
[quote=Prostetnik Vogon Jeltz][quote=Ramona McCandless][quote=Prostetnik Vogon Jeltz]

It seems to me that isboxer isn't even your problem. Your problem is that anyone can have more then one account or character.. Hell your argument would apply to having more then one character on an account since that fits your definition of "accelerated acquisition of items"..



so only controlling one character and gaining the items for another 'X' characters by use of third party software is not accelerated?
Bland Inquisitor
Ministry of War
Amarr Empire
#118 - 2014-06-23 21:16:43 UTC  |  Edited by: Bland Inquisitor
Ramona McCandless wrote:
Scipio Artelius wrote:
Bland Inquisitor wrote:

Simple fact for you;

ISBoxer is a 3rd party macro program. It copies keystrokes and replicates them across multiple accounts simultaneously. The very justification of being able to charge for said service is that it gives an advantage to its consumers. So to argue it isn't macro software and it doesn't give you an advantage over other players, is to argue against the very justification of being able to charge real money for it.

But an even simpler fact for you:

CCP have interpreted the EULA as it relates to ISBoxer and similar forms of multiboxing software and said it's ok in its current form.

There's not much point arguing beyond that because CCP own the game and can rule on clauses of the EULA as they see fit.


That's what I said, but then apparently that made it the same as slavery and child labour, somehow


Do not confuse context with contents. Laws are updated to keep in sync with the times, often what starts the process is public outcry. This is what this thread is.
Ramona McCandless
Silent Vale
LinkNet
#119 - 2014-06-23 21:18:53 UTC
Bland Inquisitor wrote:

Do not confuse context with circumstance. Laws are updated to keep in sync with the times, often what starts the process is public outcry. This is what this thread is.


Ok, so what has changed between when CCP ruled Isboxer wasnt breaking EULA and now?

Id like to point out I dont like Isboxer for several reasons, but none of them are "because its illegal", when it definately isnt.

And morality is not something I let concern me

"Yea, some dude came in and was normal for first couple months, so I gave him director." - Sean Dunaway

"A singular character could be hired to penetrate another corps space... using gorilla like tactics..." - Chane Morgann
ashley Eoner
#120 - 2014-06-23 21:20:48 UTC  |  Edited by: ashley Eoner
Prostetnik Vogon Jeltz wrote:
ashley Eoner wrote:
[quote=Prostetnik Vogon Jeltz][quote=Ramona McCandless][quote=Prostetnik Vogon Jeltz]

It seems to me that isboxer isn't even your problem. Your problem is that anyone can have more then one account or character.. Hell your argument would apply to having more then one character on an account since that fits your definition of "accelerated acquisition of items"..



so only controlling one character and gaining the items for another 'X' characters by use of third party software is not accelerated?

Not when you look at it on a per account basis.


Now you better be careful cause the interpretation you're trying to run with bans PI alts and more. Hell buying a plex is against the TOS according to you.