Automated Bot'ing: WoWGlider vs Blizzard

[Nebu]

Can someone educate me?  Is WoW glider simply a specialized clicky macro program or am I missing something deeper?

[bhodi]

It plays the character for you. Put him in a mobile-bag-of-improvement laden zone, and move him every few levels. You can could 'glide' a character to 60 in a week.

[Nebu]

It plays the character for you. Put him in a mobile-bag-of-improvement laden zone, and move him every few levels. You can could 'glide' a character to 60 in a week.

That tells me nothing about the mechanics of WoW glider.  Is it a script program?  Is it a modified clicky macro? 

I've made a number of macro routines for many mmog's, some text based, some mouse based, but all were able to play my character for me given a set of prexisting conditions.  The mechanics of this program will have a lot to do with how it's treated in this case.  If you played UO or ATitD in the past, you'd know how easy some of these scripts are to create under the right conditions. 

[bhodi]

I don't know how the backend worked. I never used it. It's a layer on top of the game, a very sophisticated layer that moved the mouse and clicked the keyboard for you. I don't know what it's input was, whether it looked into the guts of the game or did visual palette-matching on the screen.

I believe it had things like waypointing, pathing, auto-targeting/killing, so you basically pathed out a rough circle in your selected kill area and it would wander around like a guy on a rail, killing anything within targeting range, chasing it, but eventually going back to the rail. This made it quite clear visually whether the character was botting, since you could watch it behave in a very particular fashion.

[Driakos]

Personally, I think the boilerplate MMO EULA is crap.  Someone mentioned if you don't like it don't play.  Well, I myself always read the EULA thoroughly these days before I start a game, I refuse to break it.  Was tempted to play Eve, but they have the same EULA.  To me that's a really sad state of affairs when a gamer has to read a 7 page legal document to decide if they want to play a game, to make sure they won't inadvertently cheat somehow.  To me, you don't want bots in your game, make a game that can't be botted.  Otherwise STFU QQ more, nub game publishers.

I don't read em for games.

It's pretty easy to figure out what is cheating and not cheating.

[Nebu]

It's pretty easy to figure out what is cheating and not cheating.

I don't think it's so easy.  Many games will allow attended macroing (due to the needs of the handicapped etc.) but will not allow unattended macroing.  The language in the case of the exceptions can often be vague.  I think that the growth in this industry, especially that induced by Blizzard, will make for some very interesting legal matters.  Regardless, I expect that in most cases the battles will simply be settled due to attrition rather than fought to a conclusion. 

[Simond]

Obviously WoWglider will get crushed,  but how fundamentally different is it from some of the some of the hundreds of allowable interface mods that could be said, depending in the situation automate game processes and could be argued give an unfair advantage to the user?

Blizzard has control over what the UI allows, and can (and has) removed functionality from it which they deem unwanted (see: decursive).

They have no such control over botting programs.

[Furiously]

If I can leave my character sitting in the undead field in WPL and kill 1/3 of the mobs there, getting a purple item every other day plus making 30 gold in Runecloth and 50 gold in item drops daily. That really seems like it is good for me. Why should I care that I'm monopolizing 1/3 of the spawns? I pay my fee to play the game the way I want!

[Lantyssa]

I was always under the impression WoWs design would encourage botting.

This is probably because I've usually felt the next step in diku evolution would involve more of the game doing the work parts for you.

Granado Espada (I now want to say Espadrille everytime. ><) is the game for you!

This thread makes all the bots sad.

[Nebu]

If I can leave my character sitting in the undead field in WPL and kill 1/3 of the mobs there, getting a purple item every other day plus making 30 gold in Runecloth and 50 gold in item drops daily. That really seems like it is good for me. Why should I care that I'm monopolizing 1/3 of the spawns? I pay my fee to play the game the way I want!

Green text aside, there are MANY ways to avoid this happening in the first place that go beyond simply banning macro bots.

[koboshi]

What's at stake is not whether botting programs are illegal - a patently ridiculous assertation IMO - but rather, does a company have the right to say what goes on in their own sandbox?

Saying botting programs are illegal is the same thing as saying that a homeowner can't allow cheating or handicaps or something like that during a poker game in his basement.

  Whose basement is it in the metaphor?  As I see it it's not the player (I paid for the game I can do what I want) but rather Blizzard’s (house rules: no botting.  Don’t like it, go next door to Lineage II).  Blizzard must protect their game’s rules, that’s all their game is.  If you go to a boxing ring with a knife you get in trouble, it's a game and therefore there are inherent expectations.  Or to make a less obviously illegal example, if you kick someone in a boxing match you could get kicked out of the sport.  I use boxing as an example because it has rules which define it as a sport: no hitting below the belt, no grabbing/holding, no kicking, etc.  If you don’t play by those rules you shouldn't be allowed to compete.

Just bite the fucking bullet and let me make/buy a max level character already. Most people, I assume, bot because Diku levels are retarded and they dont want to grind.

  This is the true problem, an MMO is not its scripted single player quest lines, it is its endgame.  Players should be able to use the leveling process to learn the ropes of the game to begin with or simply jump into the 'endgame' and perhaps fall back on them for soloing opportunities.  The problem is many companies still don’t truly understand that it isn’t the journey, it’s the destination.  The endgame needs to be the primary focus of the game and not the insipid lore drenched FedEx missions or economically irrelevant bunny killing quests.

  To put it another way, the best way to eliminate third party development is to internalize or make irrelevant the processes they perform.  Outside program runs spell check on you browser's text windows, add that functionality to your browser.  In a much older example, there was a hack for AOL who, way back in the day, made you queue up all of your downloads, so files would be downloaded before you shut down AOL, and while they were downloading you were online (and paying for it by the minute) but couldn’t browse. Someone figured out a workaround that would allow you to download and surf at the same time.  AOL eliminated the problem by eliminating the restrictions while downloading.  Point is, third party developers are often times pointing out some process a program should or shouldn’t have, and should not be considered to be simply exploiting a program.

[Nebu]

Seems to me that allowing macros would be the acid test for any mmog.  If you allow them and few people use them, you'd know that a) players would rather experience the content than have their computer play it for them and b) that your in game mechanics are built in such a way as to make macroing difficult/impossible. 

Give me more dynamic games with fewer treadmills in the place of content.  Then you no longer have to worry about macro bots.

[JoeTF]

The whole idea of mmorpg is based on grind. That's what differs Q2 from WOW. If it doesn't have grind, it won't get people addicted and if they're not addicted, there is no bloody way they'll keep paying 15$/month.

Another curios thing here: mmo devs are non-stop moaning how it's impossible to make new content fast enough for players to digest, yet somehow single player games doesn't have that problem. Eh?

[Valmorian]

Another curios thing here: mmo devs are non-stop moaning how it's impossible to make new content fast enough for players to digest, yet somehow single player games doesn't have that problem. Eh?

What are you talking about?  A single player game doesn't have to have ongoing content that lasts for months and years of playtime.

[JoeTF]

But for the money you pay for it, it only have to last for month or two.

[Calantus]

Singleplayer games get 2-3 years to develop, test, and polish content that will only last a measurement of days in most cases. Even something like Baldur's Gate I only got maybe 2-3 weeks of content (back when I was time starved with school and having to share) originally. I've gone back to it a number of times and racked up a pretty large /played, but that doesn't help the MMOG that wants me from now until eternity.

[Nebu]

Singleplayer games get 2-3 years to develop, test, and polish content that will only last a measurement of days in most cases. Even something like Baldur's Gate I only got maybe 2-3 weeks of content (back when I was time starved with school and having to share) originally. I've gone back to it a number of times and racked up a pretty large /played, but that doesn't help the MMOG that wants me from now until eternity.

True, but for $15 a month and potentially more shouldn't the consumer expect at least a modest amount of new content monthly?  It's a subscription.  We should be getting more than just database storage for that $15.  If the consumers demand more, they're more likely to get more.

[Valmorian]

But for the money you pay for it, it only have to last for month or two.

No kidding.  Now how much development time do you think that game took? 

[Merusk]

Awesome, it's like 1997 all over again.

Wheee.

[Rasix]

Singleplayer games get 2-3 years to develop, test, and polish content that will only last a measurement of days in most cases. Even something like Baldur's Gate I only got maybe 2-3 weeks of content (back when I was time starved with school and having to share) originally. I've gone back to it a number of times and racked up a pretty large /played, but that doesn't help the MMOG that wants me from now until eternity.

True, but for $15 a month and potentially more shouldn't the consumer expect at least a modest amount of new content monthly?  It's a subscription.  We should be getting more than just database storage for that $15.  If the consumers demand more, they're more likely to get more.

And yet people here bought Vanguard and are likely going to buy LOTRO.  We're the "hardcore" consumer and you won't see a damn person here voting with their wallet.

I can't believe we're having the MMO v. Single player game discussion again.  /facepalm

Edit: Heh, interesting stat:

Estmiated total /played time in WoW: 1200 hours
Longest it has ever taken me to beat an RPG in the past 5 years: 80 hours

[koboshi]

Singleplayer games get 2-3 years to develop, test, and polish content that will only last a measurement of days in most cases. Even something like Baldur's Gate I only got maybe 2-3 weeks of content (back when I was time starved with school and having to share) originally. I've gone back to it a number of times and racked up a pretty large /played, but that doesn't help the MMOG that wants me from now until eternity.

True, but for $15 a month and potentially more shouldn't the consumer expect at least a modest amount of new content monthly?  It's a subscription.  We should be getting more than just database storage for that $15.  If the consumers demand more, they're more likely to get more.

This is why dynamic and user created content is all that really matters.  The current mmog's development cycle is like jumping out of a car going 60.  Yea, your technically running at 60MPH for a second or two before you eat pavement, but it doesn't matter how much training you do before hand the best you can hope for in that model is not to bleed to death after the fall.

[Nebu]

Awesome, it's like 1997 all over again.

Wheee.

You realize that a large majority of the posts on this site are little more than a rehash, right?  We discuss this stuff out of both frustration and a hope that something will eventually change.  So far we've been mostly disappointed.

[Morfiend]

And yet people here bought Vanguard and are likely going to buy LOTRO.  We're the "hardcore" consumer and you won't see a damn person here voting with their wallet.

I vote with my Wallet. I refuse to buy Vanguard, and I probably wont buy LOTRO. Nether game should be rewarded with my money. I think it will be very hard for me to spend money on any MMO until they can improve on WoWs level of polish, or they actually innovate, like say Conan is looking like it might.

I also refused to buy Battlefield 2142 due to the spyware. I really wanted to, since a bunch of my friends play it, but I wanted to vote with my wallet. If more people did, maybe we wouldnt have this shit constantly pushed on us.

[Rasix]

And yet people here bought Vanguard and are likely going to buy LOTRO.  We're the "hardcore" consumer and you won't see a damn person here voting with their wallet.

I vote with my Wallet. I refuse to buy Vanguard, and I probably wont buy LOTRO. Nether game should be rewarded with my money. I think it will be very hard for me to spend money on any MMO until they can improve on WoWs level of polish, or they actually innovate, like say Conan is looking like it might.

I also refused to buy Battlefield 2142 due to the spyware. I really wanted to, since a bunch of my friends play it, but I wanted to vote with my wallet. If more people did, maybe we wouldnt have this shit constantly pushed on us.

Yah, a tad too much hyberbole in what I said.  It's just maddening though that there's a lot of ivory tower types that continually rail against the industry and its practices.. and then buy something they know is flawed, shitty, and sends the wrong message to the people making these games.

Anyhow, botting.  Yah. I wonder what makes it so repulsive in diku's compared to sandboxes like SWG or UO.  I don't really, but I'm trying to rerail this ridiculous derail.

[Nebu]

Yah, a tad too much hyberbole in what I said.  It's just maddening though that there's a lot of ivory tower types that continually rail against the industry and its practices.. and then buy something they know is flawed, shitty, and sends the wrong message to the people making these games.

So tell me, how am I supposed to determine the quality of a game for myself without buying it?  I bought Vanguard because I wasn't in the beta and wanted to see what it was about for myself.  I demonstrated my disdain by cancelling my sub after the first two weeks.  Apparently that isn't good enough?  Am I supposed to blindly believe in the reviews I read and assume that there's some magic reviewer out there that has exactly the same gaming tastes as I do? 

[Merusk]

Awesome, it's like 1997 all over again.

Wheee.

You realize that a large majority of the posts on this site are little more than a rehash, right?  We discuss this stuff out of both frustration and a hope that something will eventually change.  So far we've been mostly disappointed.

Really? Crap I haddn't noticed that at all over the last 8 years. Huh.

However, rehasing things like "I pay $15 a month, give me a single-player game every month" does seem silly.

Anyhow, botting.  Yah. I wonder what makes it so repulsive in diku's compared to sandboxes like SWG or UO.

Personally, I find it wrong in sandbox or diku, but hey that's me.   In fact, it's probably worse for sandboxes because you can hose their economies much easier.  DIKUs have gone the instancing route, so even though world-spawns might be monopolized, you're not screwed out of ever seeing an upper end item because of some bot.

In the end it's up to the game companties to decide how much they want to enfoce any prohitions against it, though, and that's the complaint I see Blizz having against Glider.  It might not be the route they're going to use to win, but that's got to be the initial  spark that spurred the suit. 

Seems to me that allowing macros would be the acid test for any mmog.  If you allow them and few people use them, you'd know that a) players would rather experience the content than have their computer play it for them and b) that your in game mechanics are built in such a way as to make macroing difficult/impossible. 

Give me more dynamic games with fewer treadmills in the place of content.  Then you no longer have to worry about macro bots.

No, you're ALWAYS going to have to worry about macro bots so long as there's user input and players willing to buy their way through the game.  You're always going to have the guy that wants that edge in a competitve game, or wants more cash in a Diku, or wants to monopolize some market in a sandox. 

There is no way you will ever make things too difficult/ impossible to macro or program a bot for.  If you did, then there's no way a human can play it.  The best you can hope for is making things incredibly arcane and complex, however then you'll quickly get to the point it become a bigger pain in the ass to the legitimate users than the botters and then what's the point.

[Nebu]

Really? Crap I haddn't noticed that at all over the last 8 years. Huh.

However, rehasing things like "I pay $15 a month, give me a single-player game every month" does seem silly.

If I had said that, I'd agree. Take a look at what I said again and see if I made any sense.  I expect content additions for my $15, not an entirely additional game's worth of content. What's silly about that?

No, you're ALWAYS going to have to worry about macro bots so long as there's user input and players willing to buy their way through the game.  You're always going to have the guy that wants that edge in a competitve game, or wants more cash in a Diku, or wants to monopolize some market in a sandox. 

There is no way you will ever make things too difficult/ impossible to macro or program a bot for.  If you did, then there's no way a human can play it.  The best you can hope for is making things incredibly arcane and complex, however then you'll quickly get to the point it become a bigger pain in the ass to the legitimate users than the botters and then what's the point.

I disagree.  I think that it's possible to make content that's interesting, dynamic, and random enough that predicting outcomes to the point of making macros would be difficult.  I also think that people buy games to play.  If the "play" is fun, they won't want to macro unless you've instilled some system which rewards it.

[Samwise]

If the "play" is fun, they won't want to macro unless you've instilled some system which rewards it.

I agree with what you said.

[cosapi]

  This is the true problem, an MMO is not its scripted single player quest lines, it is its endgame.  Players should be able to use the leveling process to learn the ropes of the game to begin with or simply jump into the 'endgame' and perhaps fall back on them for soloing opportunities.  The problem is many companies still don’t truly understand that it isn’t the journey, it’s the destination.  The endgame needs to be the primary focus of the game and not the insipid lore drenched FedEx missions or economically irrelevant bunny killing quests.

So in other words. Adding in the "whole game"?

[koboshi]

So in other words. Adding in the "whole game"?

?

[Margalis]

The endgame if a lot of games is crap, I'd rather that *not* be the focus.

[waylander]

What the practical difference between a bot and an anti-social, kill stealing retard gamer?

And why does this topic seem to have parallels to the US' illegal drug policy/war on drugs?

Because in places such as tunnels, dungeons, quest areas, etc where there are static spawns a couple of these idiots camping in a NO PVP area is bad news.  They can basically bottleneck a whole lot of people who might need to do something in that area.

The worst example I remember is from Asheron's Call when bots first came out there. Dungeons became empty tombs because you'd go in there to find 10 macro bots killing all the mobs, and the more high level dungeons turbine made the more bots showed up.

I don't mind UI enhancements that make the game more fun or centralized to play, but I absolutely hate bots that play the game and do everything for the player.

[koboshi]

The endgame if a lot of games is crap, I'd rather that *not* be the focus.

If the endgame is crap then your just playing an expensive and poorly paced single player game.  The endgame is what true game remains when the four years of premade content is burned away in the first few months.  The only reason to stick with a title once you have gotten to the top level (or gotten to the top two or three times for you die hards) is the endgame.  The endgame is the MMO.  If you don't like that it means the game sucks!  The fact that MMOs have gotten better and better at delaying your realization of that fact is not game design, it's fraud.

[Sparky]

If the "play" is fun, they won't want to macro unless you've instilled some system which rewards it.

I agree with what you said.

Lots of people will cheat in multiplayer games where there's no persistent achievement so playing can only be it's own reward.  Beating the other guy is so much more important that having a good time or being challenged.  Though that's obviously a subset of all macroers/cheats.

[damijin]

The only problem with everyone saying "If the game is fun, no one will automate" is that you will never make a game that has progression which is always fun.

People are going to automate. The best thing you can do to fight against it is have a strong community which condemns it, while simultaneously making it very likely for the user to get banned (first offense perma-ban).