I do notice that you're steadfastly avoiding certain question in the hope I won't underline them. I hope this is an oversight on your part.
poiumty said:
in the same way that a housekeeper you paid for is not your slave.
Wow...exaggerate much?
You want to argue using emotional appeal, go scream at a housewife or something. Or join a party, I hear they're really into stuff like that.
You seem to have mixed up facetious and flippant. My responses had a serious point.
All of your "Terrible Consequences" don't mean a single iota of difference to 99% of the players. They just make a difference to the rules set down by the designers. Which means the rules are wrong.
If the rules need to be that strict, enforce them. Simple variable checks can flag that.
If the rules are there as guidelines, let them have their fun, and then reverse it.
Simple. It's how EVE, Everquest and a lot of the other games work. In fact,
Everquest: Gates of Dischord introduced it's own "exploit" of Plat-fishing in order to get people to try the new area. 5 days of people getting 100 times the money they're used to. Didn't impact the economy at all.
Like...every other multiplayer game...
Nope.
Name 5 multiplayer games that don't have exploits.
I can't speak for what EA did or how ethical it was because that's another subject entirely. But banning cheaters in general is common practice if you want your game to be respected.
Like Everquest, Eve, Team Fortress, Left 4 Dead, Minecraft, Grand Theft Auto, Diablo... what?
I put forward the idea of a punishment fitting to the crime.
So you'd design, code and model entire new content for the game simply as a cheater response?
Yeah, like others have done before me.
http://www.escapistmagazine.com/news/view/94524-Arkham-Asylum-Pirates-Get-a-Gimpy-Batman
I wish we lived in a world where that would be viable too.
I wish you lived in the same world the rest of us do, it would make this so much easier to discuss.