Should UO Use PunkBuster to Stop Cheats?

[Sweeney]

Exactly. The internet today isn't so much about privacy as it is about security. Cookies/Websites/Apps record your info no matter what.. even disabling cookies that is but one method to gain information, the others cannot be avoided without proxy servers and whatnot.

Firewalls/Anti-virus/Spyware blockers/etc keep your information from being exploited. Get over the information gap, it's over.

Try thinking about the hack and cheat and script abilities.. do you want it or not?

 

[Nyte Doombringer]

Im the same as Petra. I have tons of things going on when I am ingame. ICQ, MSN, FireFox, Winamp, sometimes I am working on graphics between playing and have graphic programs open. I dont have any private personal information stored on my computer other then forums I go too, no bank info, anything like that.
I playe wow for 2,5 years and I think they had something that scanned your system for cheats as well.
I would have issues if there where performance problems as they say UO does eat alot of memory. I mean get a few people together for an event and you are crawling, which does amaze me in a 2d game considering I played wow a 3d heavy graphics game and did 40man raids, no lag at all ect.
Also as someone else said given UO's history of banning people ect, and their non-existing customer service people have complained about for years on here, I am not sure I would trust this. Sure you say if you are not cheating you dont have anything to worry about but you know how that goes. I guess I am just a bit unsure since I have not played games using this before. I dont want to be banned not having done anything and then getting ahold EA becoming a nightmare ect. You all seen it happen before on different issues through the years. I have never tryed to contact EA about anything luckily never had too but I have read the nightmares people have.

 

[Stratic Fanatic]

Im the same as Petra. I have tons of things going on when I am ingame. ICQ, MSN, FireFox, Winamp, sometimes I am working on graphics between playing and have graphic programs open. I dont have any private personal information stored on my computer other then forums I go too, no bank info, anything like that.
I playe wow for 2,5 years and I think they had something that scanned your system for cheats as well.
I would have issues if there where performance problems as they say UO does eat alot of memory. I mean get a few people together for an event and you are crawling, which does amaze me in a 2d game considering I played wow a 3d heavy graphics game and did 40man raids, no lag at all ect.
Also as someone else said given UO's history of banning people ect, and their non-existing customer service people have complained about for years on here, I am not sure I would trust this. Sure you say if you are not cheating you dont have anything to worry about but you know how that goes. I guess I am just a bit unsure since I have not played games using this before. I dont want to be banned not having done anything and then getting ahold EA becoming a nightmare ect. You all seen it happen before on different issues through the years. I have never tryed to contact EA about anything luckily never had too but I have read the nightmares people have.

*sigh*
It detects known cheats. Not icq, not msn, not anything else. You can run 10000 legit apps with no problem. Dont be so paranoid.

 

[Whinemaker]

Here, the digested version of the FAQ for those of you too busy to read the original one but somehow have found the time to participate in the debate here.

Q: What if I don't want to install PunkBuster on my computer?
A: We will provide at least one shard to play on that will not require PunkBuster. Non-PunkBuster servers will be barred from using the character transfer service. There also might be other rules in place to help enforce the rules of the game.

Q: Does it collect any personally identifiable information?
A: No. It doesn’t collect personal info and will never be used for that purpose. It merely checks to see if you have any illegal programs running in the background as you play Ultima Online. Here is a link to the PunkBuster privacy policy: http://www.evenbalance.com/index.php?page=privacy.php

Q: Will it have any impact on system performance?
A: There might be some performance impact, but it should not [be] noticeable to the vast majority of players. The upcoming public beta test period will help us spot potential problems.

Q: Will PunkBuster flag programs that could be used for other games, but aren't actively being used with Ultima Online?
A: It will detect running programs like this and will keep you from playing Ultima Online, even if these programs aren’t being used with Ultima Online. However, if one of these programs is installed, but isn't running at the same time you are playing Ultima Online, it will not prevent you from playing Ultima Online.

Q: Will PunkBuster collect screenshots of my computer?
A: PunkBuster will only take screenshots of the Ultima Online game screen itself.

 

[Sweeney]

It only detects KNOWN programs and their signatures.. EXACTLY like anti-virus software works.

[edit] Just saw the previous post, I'm too slow [/edit]

 

[UOKaiser]

Because I want an argument

They may not implement it...but I know a hell of a lot more about PB than you do. Ill keep my cat in the bag for now.....

But tell me why a cheat deterrent should not be in UO? Please explain.

Sure they can put a cheat deterrent if they find a good one. But check it out the games punkbuster is used for. There all fps because the hacks for them are hacks at least thats my take on it. WOW implements there own anti cheat measure called Warden.

 

[Whinemaker]

WOW implements there own anti cheat measure called Warden.

Just curious... what does Warden do and how is it different from PB?

 

[Stratic Fanatic]

Sure they can put a cheat deterrent if they find a good one. But check it out the games punkbuster is used for. There all fps because the hacks for them are hacks at least thats my take on it. WOW implements there own anti cheat measure called Warden.

90% all cheaters in UO would be done with PB.
Just a simple check for certain programs.
Done.

 

[UOKaiser]

90% all cheaters in UO would be done with PB.
Just a simple check for certain programs.
Done.

There's the problem "check for certain programs" What if it had no idea what those programs are because there private open source.

 

[Stratic Fanatic]

There's the problem "check for certain programs" What if it had no idea what those programs are because there private open source.

Private isnt open source.

 

[Nyte Doombringer]

Just curious... what does Warden do and how is it different from PB?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Warden_(software)

 

[Sweeney]

There's the problem "check for certain programs" What if it had no idea what those programs are because there private open source.

If your private, opensource programs were being run, with the same signatures and RAM interaction as cheat/hack programs.. there would be a problem.

But considering UO-segregated RAM access would be known by ANY (not just PB) programs.. the private, opensourced program you are referring to would likely switch to a more benign format.

 

[UOKaiser]

Just curious... what does Warden do and how is it different from PB?

Warden was made for Blizzard games it checks the memory area that Blizzard games run in. It's integrated with each one through the patch. But it still checks for hash values that are known as cheats.
They have it as warden in wiki you can read up on it.

 

[Whinemaker]

Thanks... and I pulled this off the Wiki page

Warden now scans warcraft game memory space only, with exception of a few tools. It should be noted that warden is two programs. One starts when the game is started and reads memory program hashes one time, potentially displaying a screen saying that you have software running that violates your TOS, locking you out of the login screen. Another which watches the memory space the game operates in exclusively. After some research it seems the background running version of Warden can be updated at the whim of Blizzard staff to detect more.​

I don't see how that's any different from PB.

 

[Stratic Fanatic]

Warden was made for Blizzard games it checks the memory area that Blizzard games run in. It's integrated with each one through the patch. But it still checks for hash values that are known as cheats.
They have it as warden in wiki you can read up on it.

You type a lot and dont say anything. :/

MD5 and hooks are what PB looks for. Client and server.

 

[Petra Fyde]

I did a google search for 'punkbuster eula'. I found it here
Here's the bits I have a problem with

Licensee understands and agrees that the information that may be inspected and reported by PunkBuster software includes, but is not limited to, devices and any files residing on the hard-drive and in the memory of the computer on which PunkBuster software is installed. Further, Licensee consents to allow PunkBuster software to transfer actual screenshots taken of Licensee’s computer during the operation of PunkBuster software for possible publication. Licensee understands that the purpose and goal of PunkBuster is to ensure a cheat-free environment for all participants in online games. Licensee agrees that the invasive nature of PunkBuster software is necessary to meet this purpose and goal. Licensee agrees that any harm or lack of privacy resulting from the installation and use of PunkBuster software is not as valuable to Licensee as the potential ability to play interactive online games with the benefits afforded by using PunkBuster software.

Whether they do or don't look for anything other than game cheats, they've given themselves the right to. They take the right to look at absolutely anything on your pc.

I'd rather the solution was the scanner they've added to SA, from EA.

 

[Nyte Doombringer]

Well I was playing wow when they implemented Warden. Ofc people moaned and groaned blah blah blah same blah different game. I never even new it was running or checked except for the message I got when i started the game sometimes. In wow you have 1000s of adons you can run and user interfaced everything. They where totally legal. I ran a interface with 200 different adons on it and no problems from Warden. If punkbuster is the same and does not hinder my performance in UO then I dont care either way as I prolly wont even notice it.

 

[UOKaiser]

You type a lot and dont say anything. :/

MD5 and hooks are what PB looks for. Client and server.

I was speaking about warden on that post. Tell me what will pb look for? I mean in UO what illegal program can PB stop in UO and how will it stop it. Forgot to add with out disabling uoassit

 

[Nyte Doombringer]

I did a google search for 'punkbuster eula'. I found it here
Here's the bits I have a problem with

Licensee understands and agrees that the information that may be inspected and reported by PunkBuster software includes, but is not limited to, devices and any files residing on the hard-drive and in the memory of the computer on which PunkBuster software is installed. Further, Licensee consents to allow PunkBuster software to transfer actual screenshots taken of Licensee’s computer during the operation of PunkBuster software for possible publication. Licensee understands that the purpose and goal of PunkBuster is to ensure a cheat-free environment for all participants in online games. Licensee agrees that the invasive nature of PunkBuster software is necessary to meet this purpose and goal. Licensee agrees that any harm or lack of privacy resulting from the installation and use of PunkBuster software is not as valuable to Licensee as the potential ability to play interactive online games with the benefits afforded by using PunkBuster software.

Hmm yes well I dont like that part either tbh. Would it not be more effective if UO actually implement their own solutions to cheaters, I have seen many many suggestions here on the forums for different ways to stop cheaters. I know the code is old in this game and people can hack it but geez the first week DF was out they ripped that code apart too and they implements tons of fixed to stop things. OK I dont play DF but I was reading the forums for a while having a good laugh at all the moaning.
There will always be cheaters in games even the newest, shiniest games. There is always someone out there hacking a game.

 

[Sweeney]

I was speaking about warden on that post. Tell me what will pb look for? I mean in UO what illegal program can PB stop in UO and how will it stop it.

hah.. any of the public ones. What was the point of this post exactly? Try googling for "UO hack" and you will get a list. Some require membership, which can be easily forged and maintained.. especially by a company that dedicates itself to keeping up to date on the available hacks/cheats/exploits.

 

[UOKaiser]

Well I was playing wow when they implemented Warden. Ofc people moaned and groaned blah blah blah same blah different game. I never even new it was running or checked except for the message I got when i started the game sometimes. In wow you have 1000s of adons you can run and user interfaced everything. They where totally legal. I ran a interface with 200 different adons on it and no problems from Warden. If punkbuster is the same and does not hinder my performance in UO then I dont care either way as I prolly wont even notice it.

Im curious though. Even though warden is made for blizzard games and I assume it should be very effective has all the cheats stop or are there still some out there?

 

[Stratic Fanatic]

I was speaking about warden on that post. Tell me what will pb look for? I mean in UO what illegal program can PB stop in UO and how will it stop it.

They stop illegal cheat programs. Period.
WoW scans your drive in the same way.

I dont see why everyone is so paranoid. For all anyone knows UO is doing the same thing right now

Get over yourself. PB doesnt need or want you info.

FFS.

 

[UOKaiser]

hah.. any of the public ones. What what the point of this post exactly? Try googling for "UO hack" and you will get a list. Some require membership, which can be easily forged and maintained.. especially by a company that dedicates itself to keeping up to date on the available hacks/cheats/exploits.

Checking.... exploits it won't stop cause thats just UO code. Public okay thats correct. But how about multiple open source script engine that has being modified from public script engine and kept private away from public but still uses the scripts that have being made.

 

[AesSedai]

- Yes.

x: Seriously: Would Punkbuster still be a viable entity / would it still exist if it actually took personal information, violated your privacy, or wrongfully banned a significant amount of income providing legitimate players? No. And if they have done as much, and you know they have, then do us all a favor and sue their pants off so that they no longer exist, make a few dollars for yoursef and a lot of money for your favorite lawyers, thx.

(Considering what little I've experienced from playing other games that have PunkBuster: it would be a no-brainer as it has never come close to hurting me or my gameplay and it has removed quite a few punks that were trying to ruin games by cheating.)

Unless some similar proprietary program such as UOCheatBusters might take its place...
It would certainly not be the end of cheating if PB were implemented but it would be another tool in the arsenal that could immensely help the GMs (& players, of course) prevent cheating and clean up our game's playing field & therefore improve our UO.

I'm 100% for improving methods of detecting cheaters, even if it proves to be as invasive as some cookies and websites such as google.com can be in regards to gathering personal information & creating profiles based on your interweb activities.

The thing about PB, from what I understand, is that it will not flag any users unless they are using an illegal program that the UO team has specifically marked to be illegal &/or they have manipulated UO game files in a way that the UO team has deemed to be illegal... so no worries as ICQ, MSPaint, Minesweeper & such would in no way raise any warning flags.

But guess what: Unless / until warhammer adopts PB... I fear that UO will not be looking into it or any other 3rd party solutions to the cheating pandemic. That's just my gut feeling on the subject, knowing that it was already invested in and ultimately shot down for UO at least once.

 

[Sweeney]

Checking.... exploits it won't stop cause thats just UO code. Public okay thats correct. But how about multiple open source script engine that has being modified from public script engine and kept private away from public but still uses the scripts that have being made.

Are you saying you wrote your own personal UO non-pro status app using public sources? I still don't see how you are defending this without admitting you use these programs.

 

[Stratic Fanatic]

Im done with this thread until there are some intelligent posters.

My point to have a cheat deterrent > the naysayers. Yet the poll proves otherwise. Not surprising. :/

When everyone leaves because they are tired of the same ol crap.....maybe Ill say "I told ya so". Cheating isnt so fun when you are the only one playing.

 

[UOKaiser]

Are you saying you wrote your own personal UO non-pro status app using public sources? I still don't see how you are defending this without admitting you use these programs.

Im saying it's not hard to do so. It's like you know it will work with them without using them youreself. Like I said it goes both ways. This is the fact I never use anything against the rules in EA. I use Kr now I used 3d before and 2d for traditional things.
I've experimented with so called programs over the years but not in ea, only in the forbidden areas of the internet where it was allowed to do so. I would never ever do anything to jeopordize my very old accounts. I don't pay money just for it all to go down the drain all those years of hard work.
Im just saying pb wont do what you think it will do in UO like it does for fps. They put it and it will consume UO strained profits. I always feel where like 1k players away from closing down

 

[Whinemaker]

Here's the bits I have a problem with

Licensee understands and agrees that the information that may be inspected and reported by PunkBuster software includes, but is not limited to, devices and any files residing on the hard-drive and in the memory of the computer on which PunkBuster software is installed. Further, Licensee consents to allow PunkBuster software to transfer actual screenshots taken of Licensee’s computer during the operation of PunkBuster software for possible publication. Licensee understands that the purpose and goal of PunkBuster is to ensure a cheat-free environment for all participants in online games. Licensee agrees that the invasive nature of PunkBuster software is necessary to meet this purpose and goal. Licensee agrees that any harm or lack of privacy resulting from the installation and use of PunkBuster software is not as valuable to Licensee as the potential ability to play interactive online games with the benefits afforded by using PunkBuster software.

I run icq, I need to keep in touch with Stratics staff.

Sorry for sounding like an a-hole Petra... but I think you can kiss your ICQ goodbye.
Here's a bit from the ICQ EULA:

By using the ICQ service and software and the Internet in general, you may be subject to various risks, including among others:
...
Unauthorized invasion of your privacy during, or as a result of, your use or another's use of the system.
...
If you do not wish to be subjected to these risks, you are advised not to use the ICQ service and software.​

I haven't done a search on Firefox and iRC etc... but I'm sure they of have something similar written in their EULA as well.
I think it's all just a bunch of legal mumbo jumbo in case they got sued over it. Never studied law so I can't tell you exactly whether that's the case or not though.

 

[Siteswap]

I'd be all for it in principle. My concern is its reliability. I used to run punkbuster a few years back when playing Battlefield 1942 online (it was mandatory). It used to kick me from the game fairly regularly (maybe a couple of times in an hour session) presumably because it thought I was running some cheat. Ive never ran any sort of cheat in my life in an online game. Because of this I'd have serious reservations not because of the privacy issue, more with the reliability issue ... I dont want to get kicked from UO several times a session when i'm doing nothing wrong.

Siteswap

51 (5 ball shower)

 

[AesSedai]

New Idea?

PunkBuster (or ~UOCheatBuster program) that we could selectively accept.

• If we agree, then give us a small discount in UO subscription fees
• The discount would be a money making (not too mention PR) benefit, as this could help provide GMs with more automated tools & more efficient methods to focus on actual cheaters

x: Nay, even better for the EAMythic number crunchers: Increase fees slightly for every player that does not want to accept such a program
(ask me to work for UO too; I have many ideas like this freebie, heh)

 

[UOKaiser]

New Idea?

PunkBuster (or ~UOCheatBuster program) that we could selectively accept.

• If we agree, then give us a small discount in UO subscription fees
• The discount would be a money making (not too mention PR) benefit, as this could help provide GMs with more automated tools & more efficient methods to focus on actual cheaters

I doubt it. Most likely because of the extra cost in implementing a system they will raise the monthly fee to cover.
So assuming whatever cheat buster program works and for some reason it stops all cheats indefinetly then any players who used the cheats will close there accounts and move on and the players who don't like the measures will move on and the players that don't want to pay extra will move on. Add to this the usual decreasing subscriptions with but a small gain of returning players cause lets face it UO is old ,very old and chances of new players coming in are very slim with no advertising and no new technology = not enough profit to keep game running. Though I think the jap shards will probably stay around much longer than any of the others.
Even KR and future SA technology is years behind.

 

[HillBilly]

..... stops all cheats indefinetly then any players who used the cheats will close there accounts...

Umm thats the point. I WANT them to lose their accounts.



Stop sticking up for cheaters.

 

[Sweeney]

Sorry people for my poll-newbieness.. this should have been public. I've seen maybe 2 people defend their position against implementing an anti-cheat program.. these people need to be commended for speaking out. It's the ones who do not defend their actions, who hide behind anonymity in polls that we need to watch out for.

 

[UOKaiser]

Umm thats the point. I WANT them to lose their accounts.



Stop sticking up for cheaters.

Am not, Im looking at things from a overall perspective. UO is a low funded game as you can tell from lack of players. If UO had a million subscribers or even 100k subscribers we probably wouldnt be even talking about this. But as it stands this game only sticks around if it makes profit thats it. If it stops making profit then we are all lucked out. GM bans forever only serious offensives and we get a clear all duper ban every couple of years.
But in reality every account banned foever means 1 less payment. EA can afford to lose maybe 5% of the players in bans but if it reaches a crazy amount well you know.
Look around we almost know everyone in our shards already. I do not want to see UO close down. So if I have to tolerate 11 year olds that call everyone newb all day or cheaters a bit then so be it. Better that than to close UO.
As long as they put away all dupers and ban once in a while then it's all good.
It's all about money. The penny counters don't care anything about the game as long as they don't lose profit. And I want the penny counters to be happy. Well time to sleep. Todays my birthday need to have some fun.

 

[Petra Fyde]

I'm fine with the idea of an anti-cheat program, I'll happily sign the SA agreement. I would be fine with something like 'warden', which is what SA appears to have, something scanning RAM for programs running. I'm not fine with giving anyone the right to look at anything and everything on my hard drive. I accept that they are not, in fact, doing that *now*.

Maybe I'm paranoid, but with governments wanting the right to pry into everyone's lives then losing all the damn records, and phishing rife, maybe I'm not.

 

[Jermosh]

Buy your gold now!

 

[Thangorodrim]

The comments and attitude here are truly pathetic - "You are either with us or with the terrorists." Privacy is a (diminishing) right that I do not choose to part with lightly.

Anyway, I voted no primarily because I am not going to consent to a EULA that allows any mounted drive to be perused by third parties.

Perhaps more importantly - in this age of easy, turnkey desktop virtualization (meaning available to script kiddie types, not just the technically sophisticated) techniques like punkbuster or the alleged RAM scanner embedded in SA are easily subverted.

Even outside that exigency, punkbuster enabled FPS are still rife with cheating, aim-bots, etc.

The fact is that if EA wanted to crack down they could identify through traffic analysis and their item / player database inappropriate activity, flag associated accounts, investigate and ban. I am 100% for that, however, they seem to lack the will.

 

[Sweeney]

The comments and attitude here are truly pathetic - "You are either with us or with the terrorists." Privacy is a (diminishing) right that I do not choose to part with lightly.

Anyway, I voted no primarily because I am not going to consent to a EULA that allows any mounted drive to be perused by third parties.

Perhaps more importantly - in this age of easy, turnkey desktop virtualization (meaning available to script kiddie types, not just the technically sophisticated) techniques like punkbuster or the alleged RAM scanner embedded in SA are easily subverted.

Even outside that exigency, punkbuster enabled FPS are still rife with cheating, aim-bots, etc.

The fact is that if EA wanted to crack down they could identify through traffic analysis and their item / player database inappropriate activity, flag associated accounts, investigate and ban. I am 100% for that, however, they seem to lack the will.

If you think PunkBuster was so easily made useless.. don't you think it would have hurt the company and or made it step up?

It isn't a viable cheat-detector company for no reason...



And if I could change it I would, the topic should have been "PB like" not PB. But examine your own self-conscious beliefs.. you are supporting the hackers by demanding that NO PROGRAM EVER examine what programs you have running.

I will bet a million gold that EVERY program designed to detect cheats/hacks/etc uses your computer's RAM to detect malicious apps.

Prove me wrong.

 

[Bomb Bloke]

PunkBuster works by detecting "certain programs". If they can't get a hold of a copy of those programs, they don't know what they are, and hence can't detect them.

A certain well known scripting program actually has an open source version.

Think about this. That means anyone can make their own, slightly customised build - and only they will have a copy of it. PunkBuster wouldn't be able to detect it, because it's developers wouldn't be able to get a hold of the code in order to know what to look for.

Unless, of course, they start copying RAM dumps from people's PCs and reading through them. There's pretty much no way they could reliably find what they were looking for without "accidently" going through user's personal information at some point or other.

Assuming they didn't take this route, while it might shut a fair few "casual" scripters down, the hardcore scripters out there (eg gold farmers and the ones actually causing problems) would simply hire a programmer to maintain a non-PunkBuster-detectible version of the Voldemort program and continue as normal.

 

[CatLord]

A significant portion of the people who are against punkbuster are quite frankly people who cheat in UO to make $$

You can be hired by some of the UO brokers and collect $200 per week while playing/scripting on three accounts...

http://www.uoforums.com/uo-chesapea...uth-and-nothing-but-the-truth-so-help-me.html

"Heck with PB if it ruins my income!"


Enjoy UO.

 

[Rogal]

I voted yes because I have experience using Punk Buster.
It's used for Call of Duty 4, I've never lagged using it and never had any problems of anyother kind with it.

Things have gotten so bad with cheaters in UO it's not a question of if something should be done anymore but When.

 

[Sweeney]

You can be hired by some of the UO brokers and collect $200 per week while playing/scripting on three accounts...

http://www.uoforums.com/uo-chesapea...uth-and-nothing-but-the-truth-so-help-me.html

"Heck with PB if it ruins my income!"


Enjoy UO.

haha.. nice link.

It amazes me how many people vote 'No' on this thread.. my pitiful fault I didn't allow names (newbie poll poster). The few that have spoken out for 'No' at least defend their position.. they have my respect if not my belief.

It saddens me how fear and paranoia keep many people from supporting this addition.. and their pathetic threats of quitting keep the bosses from implementing any sort of program. They fail to see how many people that quit in the past, who would come back if they thought such grimy problems were taken care of.

I'll cry for you all.

 

[Littleblue]

Todays my birthday need to have some fun.

Happy Birthday UOKaiser!

 

[The Home Guild]

[Gasp] Punk Buster talk again.
Like many and years before when it was brought up..I say no.
Many will quit over privacy issues,ea will lose money thus is why they never did it back then.People can only dream and wish..but i don't see it happening.

 

[Snakeman]

A significant portion of the people who are against punkbuster are quite frankly people who cheat in UO to make $$

This Punkbuster issue has been brought up more times then a hookers stockings. and each time killed by legitimate safety concerns by all. I do resent this comment & many others will also. If EA / Punkbuster & any other sob that has a pot to P in wants the full liability issue on a claim IF someone's Personal Info, Company Info or Clientele's info is breached then fine. But I nor anyone else has seen this promise to us made to us in any way, shape or form. They DO ADMIT it CAN look at ones complete hard drive IF it wants. That in itself is enough for anyone with half a brain to realize, No I do not want this program on my computer if it can if it wants to. It in itself is a virus/spyware. EA wants to do something about the cheats, hacks, bots, well just walk aroud & see the Crap the rest of us players see. People sitting for 8 to 20 hrs in one place macroing skills, macroing in easy sight at banks, their home, provisioneer shops, carp shops, mage shops or secluded places / towns people hardly ever go to. Go sit in heartwood & listen to the invisible fletchers going at it for hrs on end. Actually check out complaints on scripters players have sent in instead of the gd canned orange dot bs crap "we'll check into it" & NEVER do. Watch the bots run around placing the books 3 to 5 times a day, not to hard to miss! have GM's Actually WALK AROUND, invisible as they normally are & watch. Easiest way to catch someone & and a hella lot less cash flow lost then loosing honest subscription players.

And before I get the "WTF don't you surf the net dude" yes I do & with another computer, which if it gets a virus I could care less. For it takes all of an hr to reformat it with what it has on it. End of my rant, sorry but I'm ripped for accusations made that all against Punkbusters are scripters. Thats total BS

 

[T'Challa]

Many forget that UO is an international game, and must abide by the laws of all nations where it is sold.

That said, check out some of Germany's privacy laws.

 

[HD2300]

They wont do it. They would lose to much $$ for banning accts

Exactly.

What has EA done in the last 5 years? Nothing, Nada, Zip, except say it is high on their list of priorities.

 

[Belanos/Icicle]

only problem with PB that I see is that their privacy policy says they don't consider their screenshots to be private data. So, any conversations you have in-game are not protected, and its perfectly possible that the screenshots will be of whatever window happens to be over the gamescreen at the time - never seen a program that took screenshots that could do it to a background window. I use online banking a lot, as well as paypal and a few other things that deal with personal data. If these non-protected screenshots are taken right after I enter my UO account name, my bank account number, my name and social security number... you get the point.
Other than that, PB sounds fine. This might be the same privacy policy issue that EA chose not to use PB over, anyway.

 

[Infiniti]

Anyone playing WOW is playing with PB running in the background and there are a LOT of people playing that game. I've heard no complaints about PB and think it would be an asset to UO. I have nothing to hide so I voted yes and nothing I say ingame would be interesting to anyone but the person I'm chatting with.

 

[Magnus]

Hey, its 2006 all over again. I am totally farming blackrock.