Galleon lunch glitch

@nirgaming1-2
according to the ToS using this or any other bug is a bannable offense. aside from that, do you really want to use something that will give you an unfair advantage? wouldn't that take all the fun out of winning? wouldn't that make any defeat that much worse?

@closinghare208 apparently this glitch still exists from 2018, so no way they dont know about it ..

@nirgaming1-2 I think after 2 years Rare had forfeit a right to ban anybody for it. Plenty time to fix it if they did not like. Clearly they have no problem with it.

@bronzeinquiztor haha yeah mistyped

@theblackbellamy Unless they tampering with game not really bannable, same with hardware, unless its connecting unauthorized hardware to console everything else would be a stretch.

@theblackbellamy said in Galleon lunch glitch:

@nirgaming1-2 said:

is it bannable by any chance

In-game exploits should never be bannable. You can argue whether or not they should be patched out, and I think this one should be, as fun as it is to do. But I don't think anyone should be outright banned for doing something the game allows, whether or not it was an intended feature.

I don't think i should be sent to jail if i take something from a store. I mean they could have locked everything in a safe, since they didn't they forfeit there rite to have me arrested. obviously this is a silly way of thinking about it. because they didn't fix something that is clearly banned in there ToS does not mean its fair game.

Also, anyone know how hard it is to find an fix a bug in a program as complex as SoT? its normally very VERY hard.

@jadescissors32 said in Galleon lunch glitch:

@theblackbellamy Unless they tampering with game not really bannable, same with hardware, unless its connecting unauthorized hardware to console everything else would be a stretch.

Incorrect. please stop spreading incorrect guesses as factual information

Does no one read the ToS (Terms of Service)? its all very clear.

Since i can't let anything go, here is a few parts of what you all agreed to by playing this game

1. Cheating and Tampering Software. For any device that can connect to Xbox Services, we may automatically check your device for unauthorized hardware or software that enables cheating or tampering in violation of the Code of Conduct or these Terms, and download Xbox app software updates or configuration changes, including those that prevent you from accessing the Xbox Services, or from using unauthorized hardware or software that enables cheating or tampering.

2. Since competition is best when it’s fair, a level playing field is one of the most important requirements for gaming. When people cheat, use exploits, or otherwise tamper with hardware or software to gain a competitive advantage, it ruins the experience for everyone. Because of this, cheating, tampering, and the use of exploits is never acceptable in the Xbox community. Like, never.

Now you can not like what i am saying, but it is very clear and you have all agreed to these things by using SoT which is on the Xbox platform

Links
point 1) https://www.microsoft.com/en-us/servicesagreement
point 2) https://www.xbox.com/en-US/legal/community-standards

@shifty189 XBOX services ToS? They are clear. Sliding on the side of galleon is not tampering with software "game" nor connecting unauthorized hardware or software to XBOX services.
People need to start exposing companies who abuse their services. Don't be afraid, expose it.
Now again, clearly this is not a problem for rare otherwise they would have fixed this.
If anybody should stop is people like you who spread FUD. People should have fun. If sliding on the side of galleons makes them happy than we should not shame them.

@jadescissors32 said in Galleon lunch glitch:

@shifty189 XBOX services ToS? They are clear. Sliding on the side of galleon is not tampering with software "game" nor connecting unauthorized hardware or software to XBOX services.
People need to start exposing companies who abuse their services. Don't be afraid, expose it.
Now again, clearly this is not a problem for rare otherwise they would have fixed this.
If anybody should stop is people like you who spread FUD. People should have fun. If sliding on the side of galleons makes them happy than we should not shame them.

Dude Jade off my tail! don't call me out because you want to cheat and I'm telling you that you will be banned for it. Read my post. I'll pull the specific part out for you the use of exploits is never acceptable in the Xbox community do you think this fun little slide of your was an intended feature? do you not see how people can and do use it to get an unfair advantage? i do not appreciate people exploiting the game to board my ship from 2 map tiles away without even making a cannon sound.

Now i provided definitive proof that what you are saying is a lie and will get people banned, where is your proof that its allowed? and do not tell me that its in game so its fine.

if your not going to read what I'm saying or my links don't bother to reply, you make yourself look bad.

@shifty189 My proof that this is not exploit is that has not been fixed in a patch after public disclosure. Its been 2 years at least. You can believe whatever you want but now this is a feature.

@uzugijin Actually Software developers are required to address bugs/exploit in the game. Thats why software companies release fixes immediately when they publicly disclosed or provide guidance on exploits. Thats why ability to see through water was pretty much fixed right a way when it become public knowledge.
This has not been fixed for 2 years, so it seems Rare does not share your concerns.
Again people need to stop spreading FUD.

@jadescissors32 said in Galleon lunch glitch:

@uzugijin Actually Software developers are required to address bugs/exploit in the game. Thats why software companies release fixes immediately when they publicly disclosed or provide guidance on exploits. Thats why ability to see through water was pretty much fixed right a way when it become public knowledge.
This has not been fixed for 2 years, so it seems Rare does not share your concerns.
Again people need to stop spreading FUD.

Stop, your Embarrassing yourself. Are you a software engineer? Have you ever wrote program in your life? Can you name more than one programming language? If the answer to any of these is no then you have no idea. The reason this is not on their priority list is because their license user agreement already forbids the use of it, and they will ban players for using an exploit whether they think it’s an exploit or not.

So again I will say to make my point. I have shown you that they have said clearly that exploits are a bannable offense. At this point you are trolling. Come up with something more meaningful to say other than “they should have fixed it by now” because YOUR (or my) standards on the matter are not relevant.

Should be pretty clear, if you don't understand English is not our concern.

Cheating, tampering, and the use of exploits

Since competition is best when it’s fair, a level playing field is one of the most important requirements for gaming. When people cheat, use exploits, or otherwise tamper with hardware or software to gain a competitive advantage, it ruins the experience for everyone. Because of this, cheating, tampering, and the use of exploits is never acceptable in the Xbox community. Like, never.

I legit got a guy banned last week, due to him using the underwater glitch, so I dare you to use exploits against my crew, I'll clip it and report you.

@nirgaming1-2 @theblackbellamy @jadescissors32

They can ban for it. Only issue is that its hard to detect. Without actual video evidence theres no way to actually know. Its produced in game without altering any files. The only way is to figure out statistics or have video proof.

Its like the WoW glitch that players found to bypass all the mobs in that one raid and skip right to the Boss. The reason why WoW was able to know that players use that glitch is because they probably noticed that the players kill statistics didn't show any of the mobs before reaching the boss, or maybe they had statistic timers on how fast players completed the raid instance. Something that should take 2 hours taking 20mins??

The things about exploits is that the developer has all the power in deciding what they view as an exploit and what they don't. The fact that they haven't said anything "recently" doesn't negate that fact.

I can't remember exactly who, but a few players have been caught using this exploit and have been suspended for it and I think 1 or 2 have actually been perma banned after repeated use. I think a few streamers have gotten hit with this as they did the exploit on their stream so there was video evidence for it.

Now for the claim that its been in the game since 2018. They actually did make a video about that glitch and made an update to try and fix it. I guess they couldn't get all of it or the fact that its not completely wide spread yet. I might be mistaken but I could have sworn it was fixed but eventually came back with another update. Probably when they added the ship invisible walls to stop players from shooting through the boat.

I know there was a patch that fixed dolphin diving and they even made remarks about the self launch from outpost docks. The Galleon I think is only a few months old (could be longer, covid lockdown has got my timeline all mixed up) and I thought they had actually fixed that but I'll have to check again.

Fact is you can get banned for it. Rare has stated that it is an exploit. The only ones who can dictate if its really an exploit or not is Rare. Doesn't matter how long it takes them to do it, they can ban you and theres nothing you can do.

The Microsoft ToS supersedes Rare's ToS, if they have one. SoT runs on a Microsoft platform, which means the players of the game have to adhere to Microsoft ToS. Which is why Rare probably has only a CoC.

Cheating or really exploitation is the use of any unintended game mechanic that leads to player advantage or another players disadvantage. Does this help the player over the opponent?? Yes it does. Its an exploit and if found can be banned but again its hard to prove.

The only kicker is that again, all of this is hard to prove. Most players don't even know other players are using it. The only ones who know are really the crew mates. Not only can you launch yourself but you can also silent board that way also. I don't think there is any in game analysis that they are tracking that can prove that it is even being used server side.

Now maybe if the player was launching from lets say DR and makes it to Smugglers Bay in like 2mins they have an idea that something fishy is going on, because I'm sure they track player movement in meters and islands visited, so if a person is cutting near islands in 10 second intervals might be sus to them.

However, again, its very hard to prove that anyone is using this tactic. If or when you get found out then yes it will lead to a ban. First offense I heard was about 3 days or 5. Second offense is perma ban.

@xultanis-dragon said in Galleon lunch glitch:

@nirgaming1-2 @theblackbellamy @jadescissors32

The things about exploits is that the developer has all the power in deciding what they view as an exploit and what they don't.

No They not. They get away with it because most people won't fight back.

Do you think if Company A sold $1000 app to other companies (Company B) that require you to use online service, than month later turn around and say you are not using it right (we now want you to only look at it) therefore we suspend your account and you now lost $1000. Would the Company B just roll over ? Or call it Deceptive Trade Practice and let the Legal team handle.
If what you saying is true than buying any software would be risky business.
Clearly if that's true I can crank up software on monthly basis and, come up with some excuse to just ban people from using it, rename company and repeat. Collect money and get away with it.

Since we are on topic let me leave this here: This is EU contract terms consumer protection directive:

"***Unfair contract terms

Standard contract terms have to be drafted in plain intelligible language and ambiguities are to be interpreted in favour of consumers.

Contract terms are unfair and, therefore, not binding on consumers if, contrary to the requirements of good faith, they cause significant imbalance in the parties’ rights and obligations to the detriment of the consumer. A list of examples of terms that may be regarded as unfair illustrates this general requirement (see the Annex to the Directive).

EU countries must make sure that effective means exist under national law to enforce these rights and to prevent the continued use of unfair contract terms.***"

So lets look at the mouse saga:
Mouse is third part accessory approved for game, mouse comes from factory with 100-12000 dpi
Company arbitrarily interpreting that maybe if you are using mouse at 10000 dpi (they dont even know what your setting is) violates their agreement is a stretch and violation of above.
https://ec.europa.eu/info/law/law-topic/consumers/consumer-contract-law/unfair-contract-terms-directive_en
Again they get away with it because nobody is fighting back.

@jadescissors32
dude what are you talking about? this is a game. what your saying is obsered and your trolling. STOP your embarrassing yourself! can i wear metal spiked cleats playing soccer? i bought them so why not, who cares if i hurt someone rite? why do YOU think its ok for someone to use a exploit that is clearly an exploit when the TOS clearly says you can be banned. you think RARE or Microsoft is being a bully by protecting players from people that use exploits? you think its some how unfair that they have a bug in there program that you can abuse? GET OVER YOURSELF. you have rites, you do. but they end when they negatively affect someone else. You have no point in quoting EU law. it adds nothing to your argument.

here are the facts

1. this EXPLOIT give an unfair advantage to players (if they use it)
2. the agreement that you agreed to says if you use an exploit (like this) you can be banned
3. EU law protects you from unfair corporate practices
4. using an exploit will get you banned, and there is no defense for it.
   ~

why are you pushing this so much? is using exploits the only way you can play games? do you think for some reason you deserve an unfair advantage? don't answer i already know that your just a troll.

so what exactly about banning players that abuse an exploit is unfair? they told you clearly that you will be banned for using an exploit, sounds fair to me.

Please use this, please kill people using this. (really don't use this or any other exploits i don't really want you to get banned.) then you will find out exactly how wrong you are.

@jadescissors32 said in Galleon lunch glitch:

No They not. They get away with it because most people won't fight back.

Yes they can. The developers and the company decide what is the exploit and what isn't. Its not that most people won't fight back, just some exploits are really hard to detect or even punish unless there is video proof.

Do you think if Company A sold $1000 app to other companies (Company B) that require you to use online service, than month later turn around and say you are not using it right (we now want you to only look at it) therefore we suspend your account and you now lost $1000. Would the Company B just roll over ? Or call it Deceptive Trade Practice and let the Legal team handle.

Depends on how the app was sold or what contract the app was sold under. If the app was sold under use of proprietary for business then yes they can indeed revoke the app and say "you haven't used this app correctly we are revoking your use for it" even if they spent $1B. Doesn't matter. Depends on the contract.

If its a point of sale for the complete ownership of said product, then usually the product itself with have a ToS and by using said product you are agreeing to that. If you are in violation of said product the company can hold you liable for misuse and take legal action.

So yes, they can. Most things nowadays to cover Liability, ownership, or even protection from people misusing programs or apps, everyone agrees to a ToS when they create an account.

If what you saying is true than buying any software would be risky business.

Buying any software IS risky business, its just that most companies make sure that their products can not be misused. If it could be, they could be sued, which comes into liability and protection clauses. Which is why almost everything has a ToS nowadays protecting the company and holds the user liable for any law suits.

Companies can still get sued if it looks like they didn't do enough to prevent the issue but usually never gets that far because they have more expensive lawyers and money.

Clearly if that's true I can crank up software on monthly basis and, come up with some excuse to just ban people from using it, rename company and repeat. Collect money and get away with it.

You could up to a point actually. If this account you are posting on is ever actually connected to a the real person then you kinda just eff'd yourself.

If you made a program and added a clause in the ToS and discovered that people were misusing the product then you could block them or remove them from use of the program.

Just put in the clause that there are no refunds. However, this is the tricky part. If you are banning people from the app because they are using something unintended, then how easily was it available and do people know its unintended??

Then the other problem is that if you did this a few times and someone realizes it, you opened yourself up to a case of fraud and can be sued. It depends on intent and clearly that intent can be defined.

If you make it seem like the exploitation that you are banning people from the app is part of its normal use then you could be screwed.

Example -

You have a program that can help save your files on your phone, but under the save button you have a "hack" button, now that button will download the nearest phones files. You have a ToS and it says to NOT use that hack option under any circumstance. You, however, have the icon under the save icon and not only under it, the hack icon is just as big and prominent as well as colorful and resembles the save icon.

It would be hard to ban anyone for using the hack option because of how your GUI was created.

Now lets say there was no button, however, you made it really simple for people to gain access to other accounts and download the files. You would be held liable for the lack of protection and the people in question would be held liable for the misuse of the product.

The scenario with Rare and this is completely different.

Common sense would dictate that this is clearly unintended first and foremost, so you would have to explain how you believe that the developers had intended that players use the side of the ship as a launching point, which I don't think you'd be able to do lol.

Secondly this isn't openly presented as an option. You can't go to the side of the ship and there be an icon that says "launch from ship".

Need to brush up on your laws and ToS.

Its mostly intent, interpretation of the law or contract, and what you can prove. There is no way you can prove this is a mechanic that Rare had wanted, the ToS from microsoft clearly states no exploitation or hacking, Rare runs on Microsoft and is OWNED by Microsoft. SoT is a Rare/Microsoft game. There is also no way anyone would believe you that you were using this mechanic without believing its an actual exploit.

Before you try - Saying something like "How can they prove my intent?? I can just say, I never believed it was an exploit" . Then you would have to explain why you actually believe launching from the side of the ship is not an exploit and if you go with "Well Rare never fixed it" . By implying that Rare had not fixed it yet, you are implying that there is something that Rare needs to fix. If it needs to be fixed then its an exploit.

Sorry broski, you got no leg to stand on here. Rare's baby. Rare says what goes. As the mechanic is CLEARLY unintended consequence of coding and gives a player an advantage over other players it is classified as an exploit. Rare could come out and say "no its intended" which is their right, but they could also just start tossing out the ban hammers and you would have no recourse.

Only reason they don't because its hard to prove someone is doing it. Plain and simple.

SIDE NOTE This is in reply to your mouse portion.

I'm guessing this is because of the DPI glitch??

Adding increased DPI to your mouse is not against the rules. However, increasing the DPI to your mouse so that you can move your character so fast that the character model glitches around in order to protect yourself, that could be considered an exploit because your intent is to circumvent the games resources by making your character model glitch all over the place, giving you an advantage over your opponent.

Again, its about intent, interpretation, proof. There is no definitive way you can proof that what you are doing was intended to be in the game if your argument is only "I shouldn't be banned, they should fix it". That implies you know you are doing something that you shouldn't but are doing it simply because you discovered an unintended way to do it.

@xultanis-dragon said in Galleon lunch glitch:

@jadescissors32 said in Galleon lunch glitch:

No They not. They get away with it because most people won't fight back.

Yes they can. The developers and the company decide what is the exploit and what isn't. Its not that most people won't fight back, just some exploits are really hard to detect or even punish unless there is video proof.

No They can not, that would be direct violation of EU consumer protection laws, and any employee of Fortune 500 knowingly violating those laws will have very quick conversation with HR (ban-hammer would swing other way)

This is specifically called out in Annex to EU law as an example.

(c) making an agreement binding on the consumer whereas provision of services by the seller or supplier is subject to a condition whose realization depends on his own will alone;

So no, they can't interpret as they wish...
So no, nobody can make money by making software and banning people from using it just because.
Its illegal.
Ambiguous ToS are always to be resolved to Consumer.

If people where getting banned for it this would be all over the forums. Clearly that's not the case. I mean this is 2 year old problem. There should be tons of posts of people getting banned by now.

@jadescissors32 said in Galleon lunch glitch:

Ambiguous ToS are always to be resolved to Consumer.

I'm sorry, what about the ToS is ambiguous?

again quoting the EU law here is not relevant. The EU protections are to PROTECT consumers not to let them get away with breaking clearly defined ToS.

[mod edited]

Now to make this even shorter, spreading misinformation that Rare is violating rules is illegal.

So Unless you have proof that Rare indeed banned anybody for things like that than simply spreading FUD on public Forum is bad.

People should enjoy game, and enjoy services provided. Have FUN.

@jadescissors32

Alright first off,

You have to read the beginning and not the annex. This is under the condition in which a contract CAN be annexed.

1. A contractual term which has not been individually negotiated shall be regarded as unfair if, contrary to the requirement of good faith, it causes a significant imbalance in the parties' rights and obligations arising under the contract, to the detriment of the consumer.

--- This means that if the contract was created under good faith and is NOT intentionally trying to screw over the consumer, then it does not need to be individually negotiated nor can it be annexed. The key word in the phrase is good faith. Very important because thats what you would have to argue to win if you have a counter claim, which you would be hard pressed if your answer implies that you discovered something that wasn't intentionally suppose to be available but kept using it anyways because they didn't fix it fast enough for you.

2. A term shall always be regarded as not individually negotiated where it has been drafted in advance and the consumer has therefore not been able to influence the substance of the term, particularly in the context of a pre-formulated standard contract.

-------basically says that the contract is not individually negotiated if it was created before a sit down with the Consumer.

The fact that certain aspects of a term or one specific term have been individually negotiated shall not exclude the application of this Article to the rest of a contract if an overall assessment of the contract indicates that it is nevertheless a pre-formulated standard contract.

------- Basically meaning that even if you have 1 predrafted line in the contract that wasn't negotiated but still negotiated 1000 other terms. The contract would still NOT be considered individually negotiated.

Where any seller or supplier claims that a standard term has been individually negotiated, the burden of proof in this respect shall be incumbent on him.

-----basically if any term was negotiated and they want to contest it saying "we didn't agree to that" and its different to the terms on the contract, burden of proof falls on the seller or supplier.

3. The Annex shall contain an indicative and non-exhaustive list of the terms which may be regarded as unfair.

--------Basically says they have a list of terms that are regarded as unfair just in case they need to use it.

So literally, this says that unless the predraft ToS or predrafted contract was made in bad faith, example: like your idea to create a program to intentionally sell and then ban people just to keep their money, the contract is legitimate.

It does not need to be negotiated AT ALL. You have to proof that the ToS is in bad faith and good luck trying to prove that.

The first 3 parts of this law negate anything after it because of the term GOOD FAITH. You have to prove that its not in good faith.

@xultanis-dragon
i'm going to stop replying to this Troll. the two of us have explained everything to him and he is either not listening or simply trolling (good troll by the way). Thank you for laying it all out in a the fashion that you did.