Item Identification idea

[Konge]

Ok?

So what exactly does the other side have?...nothing whatsoever, just a belief based at best on wishful thinking...no numbers from anywhere, no indicators from other games, no nothing.

Where on my side I have the facts from other MMOs (some where I have indeed been privy to the true numbers), behavioral studies of gamers over a decade, human psychology, numbers from several websites (who would have to have some grand conspiracy to all be completely wrong by a huge margin) and many other things that all supports my side.

To say that this is equal to some completely unsubstantiated belief that defies psychology and knowledge within the field, is ludicrous at best.

What exactly do you have?

All you have is "factual information" that you say you have, but don't disclose.

That's the same as me saying you're really an alligator in disguise and saying I have "factual evidence" and "sources" to confirm that.

You can say it all you want, but the thing is, you're not proving it to anyone.

Apparently you don't understand that, even though that's Persuasion 101.

So, as I stated before. You don't KNOW anything all you're doing is saying you KNOW stuff from credible sources. Doesn't work sunshine.

 

[Lord Chaos]

Try reading 101.

 

[Konge]

Try reading 101.

Go to any college/university website, and look up bibliography. Then come back to me, kid.

You don't understand, saying you have sources doesn't prove anything to anyone.

You actually have to give them. Maybe you need the reading comprehension lecture, because I've said this a good 3 or 4 times and you keep pedaling on about "I have sources, no one else has anything blah blah blah." Saying you have something means nothing.

 

[Viper09]

Chaos, if you have facts then present it to us. Yes you cannot link to the site but you can copy the facts here. You say you have facts, but you say nothing else at all and make no attempt to even show them.

 

[Kiminality]

How on earth are you able to motivate yourself to perform such an in-depth and irrefutable analysis of cheating in UO, when you can't be bothered to do the bare minimum of research when it comes to all the questions you've littered the forums with?

 

[Lord Chaos]

How on earth are you able to motivate yourself to perform such an in-depth and irrefutable analysis of cheating in UO, when you can't be bothered to do the bare minimum of research when it comes to all the questions you've littered the forums with?

1. Because many of the subjects that this falls under (including psychology) are my specialties.
2. You're full of ****.
3. You're full of ****.

Next!

 

[Konge]

1. Because many of the subjects that this falls under (including psychology) are my specialties.
2. You're full of ****.
3. You're full of ****.

Next!

If those are you specialties, I'd highly recommend you take a refresher course, because my sources state 95% of your arguments are written by a two year old. They're very reputable.

 

[Viper09]

So, because you say it's your specialty, you expect us to believe you even when you haven't shown us even an ounce of proof other than what you claim to have access to...in addition to being so rude to people here who haven't even been rude to you. (yes some are being rude to you here but not everyone)

 

[AesSedai]

- I'm certainly not a psychologist but I am still leaning towards projection on several levels. In regards to assuming that everyone needs an easy button for looting items as well as declaring that the opposite position is clearly in the wrong for the belief that there are more legitimate item looters than cheating looters. But that's just how my thoughts toward this subject lean, still.

 

[Kiminality]

1. Because many of the subjects that this falls under (including psychology) are my specialties.
2. You're full of ****.
3. You're full of ****.

Next!

This is now my favourite post.
You really aren't very good at civilised discussion, are you...
And you still haven't justified these "factual truths", so I can't shake the feeling that points 2 and 3 apply to you.

 

[Vertigo]

Well, I'm in before lock.
And please don't feed the trolls.
Thank you.

 

[Kiminality]

I guess you left your Moderator badge in your other pants?

 

[Basara]

Actually to make your claims correct the following would need to be true.

1. UO is magically more cheat free than other games of similar types/playstyle.
2. UO is magically more cheat free than other similar games, despite being so much easier to cheat in, much much easier.
3. UO is magically more cheat free than other similar games, despite there being next to no enforcement against cheating.
4. UO is magically more cheat free, despite being a lot more annoying, frustrating and hardcore than other similar type games. (library turn-ins, looting, resource gathering, healing, etc. etc.)
5. The numbers on those sites are wrong.
6. The staffers and players who have said they cheated in some fashion are somehow magically not an approximation of what the rest of the game are, they're simply a magical tiny minority that happened to gravitate there.
7. Those you know are somehow different than other MMO players and of course tell you if they cheat, despite knowing that you'd probably throw them out or report them.

And so on and so forth.

Wow - 4 Straw man fallacies and 2 unconfirmable bits of hearsay which are most likely made up from nothing. Bravo, you can BS with the best of them in DC...

And, #5 can't be use to prove anything for the following reasons...

1. Counters such as those can be set to any starting number by the owner, and can in many cases can be set self-increment to make it look like more people are downloading than is the case (the counters keep track of the real numbers internally, and can be checked by the page owner easily). Anyone that's ever used a free counter on their web page for anything can tell you that.

2. Said cheats are universally known to fail with client patches and/or server publishes, and require reinstalls from a new version that have fixes applied to overcome the patch/publish changes. so, if one assumes a new download for every other patch & publish (there have been 47-48 full publishes, several times that in incremental mini-publishes, and several hundred patches just since the release of AoS in 2003) it's fairly safe to assume that each 100,000 downloads listed probably reflects about 2000 users making at least 50 corrective re-downloads after game alterations, over a 2-3 year period. You can't even assume that each download with a different e-mail is unique, because most long-term players have probably used 3-10 e-mail addresses over the length of their playing, and probably different addresses from the ones their accounts are associated with.

3. There's no way to know how many of the listed downloads (initial, and re-downloads to correct for a patch) are from people who haven't played in years.

Give it up... You're beginning to sound like USAF General Jack T. Ripper from "Dr. Strangelove"....

 

[Lord Chaos]

What strawman fallacies?

1. These are not free counter style. And why on earth would all of them bloat their numbers to the same level...some form of conspiracy to make cheating look like its more frequent than it actually is and of course they change the number every time, lol.

2. Scripts do not need to be reloaded, its the program itself that needs to be updated, so you're wrong. Its only the EC client looter that needs to be updated with every EC patch, but that site resets its counter every time there's a new patch.

Again, what exact evidence do you have to support that the majority of UO is legit? Anything? Heck, even strawmans, logic, etc. I'll take it, do you have even the slightest that can show that the UO crowd is somehow magically more legit than other PvP games like Lineage, Lineage 2 and others, despite UO being fantastically easy to cheat in?

 

[Fink]

either people are scripters themselves or they're being extraordinary stupid.

I'm pretty sure you can be both, but if I have to choose I'd rather be stupid than lazy.

 

[Konge]

What strawman fallacies?

1. These are not free counter style. And why on earth would all of them bloat their numbers to the same level...some form of conspiracy to make cheating look like its more frequent than it actually is and of course they change the number every time, lol.

You apparently don't understand the concept of marketings "band wagon."

2. Scripts do not need to be reloaded, its the program itself that needs to be updated, so you're wrong. Its only the EC client looter that needs to be updated with every EC patch, but that site resets its counter every time there's a new patch.

You 'know' and awful lot about this, so obviously, you yourself has to be a cheater according to your own logic.

Again, what exact evidence do you have to support that the majority of UO is legit? Anything? Heck, even strawmans, logic, etc. I'll take it, do you have even the slightest that can show that the UO crowd is somehow magically more legit than other PvP games like Lineage, Lineage 2 and others, despite UO being fantastically easy to cheat in?

What evidence do you have? You actually have none. And you don't get it, see, in order to actually have evidence, you have to give it. And generally, what you say has to be from more than just the cheating websites. You see, one source doesn't actually cut it as research. So again, we come back to the same thing. YOu actually have nothing. And instead of actually providing something, you just continue to stay everyone else has nothing.

Where did you learn to debate?

 

[Lord Chaos]

I've provided plenty, you just need to learn to read.

And considering my stane is the most logic stance for UO to be in, then the burden of proof really be on your guys to show that your belief has any merit whatsoever.

 

[Konge]

I've provided plenty, you just need to learn to read.

And considering my stane is the most logic stance for UO to be in, then the burden of proof really be on your guys to show that your belief has any merit whatsoever.

No, you're said you found the download counter information from the website and it's high.

Wow, brilliant.

Looks like you actually need to learn to read, because I've already disputed that.

You still have no proof.

Next. Or are you just going to continue spilling out bull**** because no one's buying.

 

[Lord Chaos]

Actually I provided a lot more proof than that.

But again, you guys are the ones making the unlikely claim that most players are completely legit (as per Petra post) and as such the burden of proof is on you, as the logical default lies in my court.

 

[Kiminality]

...

Your claim that most cheat was the original claim, based off download counts that account for all users.
Those downloads will fall into four groups:
1.) Downloaded for use on EA shards
2.) Downloaded for use on free shards
3.) Downloaded for use on both
4.) Downloaded for non-use, or re-downloaded
Each group has a different statistical impact on the total number.
Group 1 solely affects the count on EA
Group 2 solely affects the count on free shards
Group 3 affects both
Group 4 has no affect on either, since either it's not being used, or its usage is over-represented in the download count (if a person were to download it twice, then they wouldn't be using it twice)
There's also a fifth group that comes to mind - a marginal group that represents one download for use on multiple accounts.

So, basically, your claims that most people use them are based entirely on supposition.
Your "evidence" is bad.

Edit: Missed the original point I was meaning to make...
Your claim came first, with specious proof to back it up.
The counter-claim was based off that, so the burden of proof should lie with both sides.
Without figures for how the download counts fit into the groups, neither side of the argument can hold up their side of the argument with "factual truths" backed up with evidence, because the evidence isn't reliable enough.
You claim to be good at this...

 

[kelmo]

With apologies to those many UO players that do not cheat and would like to have their say in this matter... This troll has more than run it's course.

*sticks a fork in it*