|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 2 post(s) |
Hllaxiu
Shiva Morsus Mihi
|
Posted - 2008.04.20 20:54:00 -
[1]
Originally by: Verone
Nice double standards there, CCP.
The interface through which this works is a CCP provided plain text ASCII file on your hard drive. Thats probably why there isn't a blanket "Its a EULA violation" statement from CCP.
I'm really curious how CCP will fix this, or if they will at all... --- Our greatest glory is not in never failing, but in rising up every time we fail. - Emerson |
Hllaxiu
Shiva Morsus Mihi
|
Posted - 2008.04.21 02:28:00 -
[2]
Originally by: Kvirie
Originally by: Luminary Mind
Quote: It's no more metagame than Teamspeak.
VOIP is metagaming, really?
I think the argument is that using VoIP outside of the game, in game is metagaming. (ie, people not playing the game can interact with those playing the game) --- Our greatest glory is not in never failing, but in rising up every time we fail. - Emerson |
Hllaxiu
Shiva Morsus Mihi
|
Posted - 2008.04.22 05:15:00 -
[3]
Originally by: Dante Cyberon
Gm's while being CCP are not the Developers, all we want is an official mark of approval from a senior CCP developer that does not have a disclaimer other than "We hold the right to change our minds" etc.
Bah stupid alt -Blane Xero
Uh, GMs > Devs as far as banning you is concerned... |
Hllaxiu
Shiva Morsus Mihi
|
Posted - 2008.04.22 15:54:00 -
[4]
Originally by: Kaimon ValDreth I know it rocks because the owning programmer in this case CCP always has access to the same places to public does to get these cheats and can keep their changes in process names up to date. I think it would really work wonders on the MACRO and other cheating issues in this game but hell what do I know
Because its impossible to randomize the process name... --- Our greatest glory is not in never failing, but in rising up every time we fail. - Emerson |
Hllaxiu
Shiva Morsus Mihi
|
Posted - 2008.04.22 17:54:00 -
[5]
Originally by: Ki An
Originally by: Cori4n The GM post specifically said it did not presently violate the EULA. Although, unfortunately, the post also said that CCP is going to break this method, it made it quite clear that for the time being BACON is (although frowned upon) allowed.
Cheaters will cling to any defense c/d?
Uh, the GM said it was allowed, in that it violates no rules. They will change things such that it won't work in the future, but that doesn't change the entire not violating the EULA thing. |
|
|
|