Rockstar bans FiveM modders - Polidicks

[QUOTE=man with hat;48440204]That's not what emulation means. I'm adding you to my ignore list. You aren't acquainted with what it means to reverse engineer or emulate, which are key things for FiveM. Do I need to provide a source for 1 + 1 as well? No, it's common sense, or at least I thought it would be, but not many people seem to know what potential profit is.[/QUOTE] 1 + 1 = 2. But 1 + 1 can also = 1 Citation: [url]http://mathforum.org/library/drmath/view/57110.html[/url] See. It's not hard to cite your sources at all. Now you try.

[QUOTE=Grenadiac;48440306]it's not even accurate because people playing fivem isn't causing money to fall out of rockstar's bank account, i.e. [B]they aren't losing money[/B][/QUOTE] It's the same bullshit arguments that people have over piracy. Potential loss of sales versus the lost sale. Then there's the potential of the product inspiring a sale. Same thing applies here, when I play a lot of FiveM, I might become inspired to do some heists in GTA:O. Who is there to say that won't happen? When Rockstar bans me, they ensure they'll make absolutely nothing.

[QUOTE=Velocet;48440324]When Rockstar bans me, they ensure they'll make absolutely nothing.[/QUOTE] not really, you already bought the game.

[QUOTE=elixwhitetail;48440291]This is not a response to Zedacon's post but a blind repetition of what you previously argued. This is not a constructive argument, this is bullshitting until you win.[/QUOTE] Sadly, I could say the same of your post. [QUOTE=Grenadiac;48440306]it's not even accurate because people playing fivem isn't causing money to fall out of rockstar's bank account, i.e. [B]they aren't losing money[/B] they might be experiencing an extremely small dent in their profit from sharkcards (so extremely small it'd be immeasurable by any legally admissable scale) but [B]that's their own fault for fucking their customers so hard they decided to make their own multiplayer from scratch[/B] once again rockstar is exploiting the licensing loophole to punish consumers for not playing the game the way it wants them to[/QUOTE] No, Rockstar is missing out on customers that have moved to another service that isn't even authorized to be operating in the first place.

[QUOTE=man with hat;48440348]No, Rockstar is missing out on customers that have moved to another service that isn't even authorized to be operating in the first place.[/QUOTE] [B]WHY[/B] have these customers moved on? Could it be that R* was providing an awful product that wasn't worth their money? i.e. the supply was not in demand?

[QUOTE=elixwhitetail;48440359][B]WHY[/B] have these customers moved on? Could it be that R* was providing an awful product that wasn't worth their money? i.e. the supply was not in demand?[/QUOTE] The why is irrelevant. I don't think Rockstar is interested in the why, I think they're interested because they're losing money.

[QUOTE=man with hat;48440366]The why is irrelevant. I don't think Rockstar is interested in the why, I think they're interested because they're losing money.[/QUOTE] Im no business man but I do understand that if I did something and I thought it was great and pushed it out to people who then said ITS SHIT and went to something else, I would want to find out WHY they all said its shit

[QUOTE=man with hat;48440366]The why is irrelevant. I don't think Rockstar is interested in the why, I think they're interested because they're losing money.[/QUOTE] i stopped playing gta online altogether, should they ban me because now there's no chance of me buying a shark card???

[QUOTE=Grenadiac;48440251]do you have a fucking learning disorder ain't shit being "emulated" or "imitated", it's literally their own code and system entirely separate from rockstar's in all ways fivem's architecture is reliant on a centralized dedicated server that the client connects to gta:o uses entirely p2p networking they cannot be any more different from a functional/operational standpoint[/QUOTE] Okay okay the client-server architecture might very well be different. But just creating a relatively simple server doesn't make it work with a game that has no method at all of doing so built in already. To actually get the game to play along with their parts there would need to be some reverse engineering to work out how entity management is performed, to spawn and update various entities that are being networked and to actually get the game to connect to the server in the first place. Those claiming "they never reverse engineered the game" aren't really thinking about the interconnection between the game and their systems. They totally would have had to reverse engineer the game to mod it at all. Whether or not the particular way they did it violates the R* T&Cs? fuck if I know I'm not a lawyer lmao.

[QUOTE=man with hat;48440366]The why is irrelevant. I don't think Rockstar is interested in the why, I think they're interested because they're losing money.[/QUOTE] The why is [B]completely relevant[/B] if you're going to argue in economics terms, lol. You can't just decide what arguments are legitimate or not. R* isn't interested in the why because they'd rather milk their customer base, and now that their customers increasingly have a BETTER alternative, they have a choice: Improve their own service and retain customers, or shut the competition down. They decided to be anticompetitive instead of actually improving their product. This is predatory, not competitive. You're defending a giant commercial enterprise that has chosen not to compete and instead hammer down a superior alternative. You can do this if you want, but have the integrity to admit that this is what you are doing. If R* is losing money, which you say but have not proven one bit, they should desperately care about why. If YOU ran a business and your customer base started leaving you in significant enough numbers to threaten your profit, wouldn't you care why? Or would you just burn the competition's offices down?

[QUOTE=Megaman1811;48440391]Im no business man but I do understand that if I did something and I thought it was great and pushed it out to people who then said ITS SHIT and went to something else, I would want to find out WHY they all said its shit[/QUOTE] They should, but it doesn't appear that way. Players have always complained to the company. Sometimes the company looks to make it right, sometimes they keep players in the dark, and sometimes they do nothing at all. [quote]If R* is losing money, they should desperately care about why. If YOU ran a business and your customer base started leaving you in significant enough numbers to threaten your profit, wouldn't you care why? Or would you just burn the competition's offices down?[/quote] They should. They definitely should care. It just doesn't seem that way.

[QUOTE=man with hat;48440435]They should. They definitely should care. It just doesn't seem that way.[/QUOTE] AND YET THEY'RE THE VICTIM??! I can't believe you are a real person. You have to be a gimmick.

[QUOTE=man with hat;48440348] No, Rockstar is missing out on customers that have moved to another service that isn't even authorized to be operating in the first place.[/QUOTE] No, you can't prove this. See my post.

[QUOTE=MightyLOLZOR;48440344]not really, you already bought the game.[/QUOTE] I'm clearly talking about microtransactions. The goal of this is to make more money, so why would you ban people who could make you money?

[QUOTE=elixwhitetail;48440460]AND YET THEY'RE THE VICTIM??! I can't believe you are a real person. You have to be a gimmick.[/QUOTE] They're bad people for making a game that you don't like? You bought it. I think Rockstar should have been more transparent about their actions in this whole fiasco, but yes, they're the victims because they're losing potential profit. Oops, I mentioned the words "potential profit". I guess the tape is going to get rewound - again. [QUOTE=hexpunK;48440403]Okay okay the client-server architecture might very well be different. But just creating a relatively simple server doesn't make it work with a game that has no method at all of doing so built in already. To actually get the game to play along with their parts there would need to be some reverse engineering to work out how entity management is performed, to spawn and update various entities that are being networked and to actually get the game to connect to the server in the first place. Those claiming "they never reverse engineered the game" aren't really thinking about the interconnection between the game and their systems. They totally would have had to reverse engineer the game to mod it at all. Whether or not the particular way they did it violates the R* T&Cs? fuck if I know I'm not a lawyer lmao.[/QUOTE] I appreciate the fact that you understand it isn't possible to do what they're doing without reverse engineering the game.

[QUOTE=man with hat;48440487]they're the victims because they're losing potential profit.[/QUOTE] I'd like to see your Rockstar employee ID, please.

From this to the Steam Summer Sale scam I've come to be quite opposed to Rockstar. Will definitely not be buying any of their games.

[QUOTE=man with hat;48440487]They're bad people for making a game that you don't like? You bought it. I think Rockstar should have been more transparent about their actions in this whole fiasco, but yes, they're the victims because they're losing potential profit. Oops, I mentioned the words "potential profit". I guess the tape is going to get rewound - again. I appreciate the fact that you understand it isn't possible to do what they're doing without reverse engineering the game.[/QUOTE] the engine gtaV is based on is a modified version of the one used in gtaiv.

[QUOTE=man with hat;48440487]They're bad people for making a game that you don't like? You bought it. I think Rockstar should have been more transparent about their actions in this whole fiasco, but yes, they're the victims because they're losing potential profit. [/QUOTE] Loss of potential profit does not make a company the victim of anything other than their own poor operation.

Just goes to show you how shitty the video game industry is getting nowadays.

All this shit going on with Rockstar makes me wanna get a refund on GTA V but I've played 60 hours on it and owned it since April so idk I actually could get my money back. But still, banning modders for working on a better multiplayer is just petty and stupid.

[QUOTE=man with hat;48440244]To emulate is to imitate. It has nothing to do with who made the code. I've already said what I needed to say. He knows neither the definition of reverse engineer nor emulation, yet, makes an attempt to participate in arguments about them.[/QUOTE]how the fuck do you even manage to function in your life holy shit A few things: - The ToS/EULA is non-binding, it is not recognized in a legal court of law as a valid contract. You can be banned for being a shithead in an online game, but a ToS or EULA can't claim your immortal soul or state the company can't stuff spider eggs in your asshole. By the way, if they did do those things they'd be immediately null and void because they would violate existing laws and the authors would have drafted the document knowing that it was in violation of existing statutes and laws. - One of the people banned hadn't even activated his game yet (according to him) and even if he had, Rockstar would have to prove that he was involved. Technically he can sue them, and because of the size of this whole thing he might even be able to claim for emotional damages and attack on his character. Obviously that would require a robust legal team and is unlikely to happen, but it's still technically an option for him. - Emulators are not illegal, at all. Nintendo lost hard in US courts regarding that, and as long as they're not being used for profit or sold, all emulation software is perfectly legal. Under the legal definition of emulation (i.e. using dumped code to construct some type of clone) FiveM has not produced an emulation anyway. Let's address your previous posts: - Getting pissed at Rockstar is not "victim shaming" what the fuck is wrong with you? That's capitalism, if people don't want to buy their shit because they're assholes then [b]tough tits.[/b] That's how the fucking free market works. Deal with it. - This was a stupid example, but you could totally get proof of your coworker sucking the boss dick and I'm 99% your company's bylaws are [i]crystal fucking clear[/i] about that kind of fraternization especially if it leads to workplace promotions. You're bopping all over going "but the eula you guys!!!" and ignoring the not-so-bullshit legal technicality that would help you. Take it to your fucking shareholders holy shit. - You literally ignored somebody for being right, basically you plugged your ears and went "LALALALA CAN'T HEAR YOU OVER THE SOUND OF HOW RIGHT I AM!" Great fucking job. - The reason why you can't prove that Rockstar is losing money because people are going to a "competing service" is because it's baseless conjecture. Yeah I'd agree that they did this to secure their cash flow but they really fucked the family dog on this one and have turned their customers against them. I don't play GTA:V, I don't own it, but now I definitely won't purchase it for sure or any other Rockstar game.

I didn't read the whole thread, but goodbye social club, I hated you in GTA 4 and also removed you in that one.

To buying a shark card isn't already a cheat ? And they can ban me I found the online game disatreous to much kids, I the only thing I loved to play online is to play modding stuff with friends...

[QUOTE=man with hat;48440487]They're bad people for making a game that you don't like? You bought it. I think Rockstar should have been more transparent about their actions in this whole fiasco, but yes, they're the victims because they're losing potential profit. Oops, I mentioned the words "potential profit". I guess the tape is going to get rewound - again.[/QUOTE] But are they going to really lose any potential revenue? If anything, more people will buy GTAv with the prospect of having more possibilities in multiplayer, thus actually raising their actual potential revenue, since they'll get a higher installed player base, and I'm pretty sure that there's people who bought the game expecting for something like FiveM to pop up. Not only Tibia managed to thrive in midst of the growth of OpenTibia servers, it managed to gain players from it, since people had an easier time getting the hangs of the mechanics on an easier server would eventually transition to the actual official servers in search for better quality, that's because they had a product to sell, if GTA:V is worse than FiveM then it would die by the time it thrives anyways. [QUOTE=man with hat;48440487]I appreciate the fact that you understand it isn't possible to do what they're doing without reverse engineering the game.[/QUOTE] EULA/ToS terms are only ass-covering terms in most parts, that doesn't mean that you should go around enforcing it. GTA on PC has always been amazing due to mods, and any thread regarding GTA V pre PC Release you had talks about mods and multiplayer mods. R* is shitting on the community to get 'potential nickles' they're not even sure they will lose. That's both greedy and retarded. [QUOTE=man with hat;48440244]To emulate is to imitate. It has nothing to do with who made the code. I've already said what I needed to say. He knows neither the definition of reverse engineer nor emulation, yet, makes an attempt to participate in arguments about them.[/QUOTE] [url=https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Emulator]Reimplementation is not emulation[/url], get your terminology right if you're going to shit on somebody like that.

[QUOTE=JumpinJackFlash;48441224]how the fuck do you even manage to function in your life holy shit A few things: - The ToS/EULA is non-binding, it is not recognized in a legal court of law as a valid contract. You can be banned for being a shithead in an online game, but a ToS or EULA can't claim your immortal soul or state the company can't stuff spider eggs in your asshole. By the way, if they did do those things they'd be immediately null and void because they would violate existing laws and the authors would have drafted the document knowing that it was in violation of existing statutes and laws. - One of the people banned hadn't even activated his game yet (according to him) and even if he had, Rockstar would have to prove that he was involved. Technically he can sue them, and because of the size of this whole thing he might even be able to claim for emotional damages and attack on his character. Obviously that would require a robust legal team and is unlikely to happen, but it's still technically an option for him. - Emulators are not illegal, at all. Nintendo lost hard in US courts regarding that, and as long as they're not being used for profit or sold, all emulation software is perfectly legal. Under the legal definition of emulation (i.e. using dumped code to construct some type of clone) FiveM has not produced an emulation anyway. Let's address your previous posts: - Getting pissed at Rockstar is not "victim shaming" what the fuck is wrong with you? That's capitalism, if people don't want to buy their shit because they're assholes then [b]tough tits.[/b] That's how the fucking free market works. Deal with it. - This was a stupid example, but you could totally get proof of your coworker sucking the boss dick and I'm 99% your company's bylaws are [i]crystal fucking clear[/i] about that kind of fraternization especially if it leads to workplace promotions. You're bopping all over going "but the eula you guys!!!" and ignoring the not-so-bullshit legal technicality that would help you. Take it to your fucking shareholders holy shit. - You literally ignored somebody for being right, basically you plugged your ears and went "LALALALA CAN'T HEAR YOU OVER THE SOUND OF HOW RIGHT I AM!" Great fucking job. - The reason why you can't prove that Rockstar is losing money because people are going to a "competing service" is because it's baseless conjecture. Yeah I'd agree that they did this to secure their cash flow but they really fucked the family dog on this one and have turned their customers against them. I don't play GTA:V, I don't own it, but now I definitely won't purchase it for sure or any other Rockstar game.[/QUOTE] I've explicitly stated that I think this is more a morality issue than it is a legal one. I didn't bother reading the rest of your post. [QUOTE=JohnnyOnFlame;48441571][url=https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Emulator]Reimplementation is not emulation[/url], get your terminology right if you're going to shit on somebody like that.[/QUOTE] Lol? Emulation is synonymous with reimplementation. I'm not even sure why you're linking to that page, because it's describing exactly what they're doing. [highlight](User was banned for this post (""I didn't bother reading the rest of your post." Then stop posting." - Seiteki))[/highlight]

people aren't paying to suck my dick, and are instead going to cindy down on the corner and paying her to suck their dicks instead. this potential loss in profit is hurting me, so I'm just going to go murder cindy. it's okay, because it's a loss in potential profit :^)

[QUOTE=MightyLOLZOR;48440081]they can still play the single player though.[/QUOTE] Their social club accounts have been banned, they can't log into the launcher, so they can't play any game that uses social club. [QUOTE=man with hat;48440155]It's a sound argument from my side. I've explained how they would lose profits and why. If you want more info, look up the legality of [B]private servers[/B] or [B]server emulators[/B].[/QUOTE] They're not emulating anything, they're not replacing existing rockstar server's they completely made their own [QUOTE=hexpunK;48440403]Okay okay the client-server architecture might very well be different. But just creating a relatively simple server doesn't make it work with a game that has no method at all of doing so built in already. To actually get the game to play along with their parts there would need to be some reverse engineering to work out how entity management is performed, to spawn and update various entities that are being networked and to actually get the game to connect to the server in the first place. Those claiming "they never reverse engineered the game" aren't really thinking about the interconnection between the game and their systems. They totally would have had to reverse engineer the game to mod it at all. Whether or not the particular way they did it violates the R* T&Cs? fuck if I know I'm not a lawyer lmao.[/QUOTE] Even if the reverse engineering was illegal (it isn't in EU in this case, don't know about US), the only one who did it was NTAuthority, yet they ban everyone including the guy that moderated the issue tracker. If they had a solid legal case they wouldn't have just banned them, they would've thrown a cease & desist at them

[QUOTE=Goz3rr;48441685]They're not emulating anything, they're not replacing existing rockstar server's they completely made their own[/QUOTE] To emulate is not to make an exact replica - it's to imitate, surpass, etc.

[QUOTE=man with hat;48441752]To emulate is not to make an exact replica - it's to imitate, surpass, etc.[/QUOTE] But what the modders did wasn't emulation. They created their own code and their own servers