Industry Practice: Banning for found-bug exploit

I've recently had an argument with a friend about what the "norm" is regarding banning/being banned for exploiting a bug in a game that the user found by normally using the game.

Q1: I understand that you can momentarily freeze the account of such a user and confiscate anything obtained through the bug or reset the account but is it "normal" to ban them forever for exploiting a found (non-created) bug?

Q2: Does this happen for CoC? What happens if we realize that their is a bug that we can advantage from in Coc and use it until we are caught and temporarily frozen the account. Are we doomed to be banned?

I feel like game bugs are largely a responsibility of the game creator. And that you can temporarily freeze and confiscate accordingly but not ban them forever just because a user exploited a bug repeatedly or more than a certain #.

What do you think is the norm? In general, and from the standard of CoC?

:confused:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by noobody

I've recently had an argument with a friend about what the "norm" is regarding banning/being banned for exploiting a bug in a game that the user found by normally using the game.

Q1: I understand that you can momentarily freeze the account of such a user and confiscate anything obtained through the bug or reset the account but is it "normal" to ban them forever for exploiting a found (non-created) bug?

Q2: Does this happen for CoC? What happens if we realize that their is a bug that we can advantage from in Coc and use it until we are caught and temporarily frozen the account. Are we doomed to be banned?

I feel like game bugs are largely a responsibility of the game creator. And that you can temporarily freeze and confiscate accordingly but not ban them forever just because a user exploited a bug repeatedly or more than a certain #.

What do you think is the norm? In general, and from the standard of CoC?

:confused:

---

I'm opinionless....

Anyone with opinion or knowledge about the matter please...

From my experience with other online games, temporary or permanent bans are the norm for bug exploitation. It is the developers' fault for these bugs. However, it is also the developers' rule to refrain from such exploitations, which you agree to at the creation of your account.

I don't doubt that SC enforces the same thing. It really depends on how serious the exploit is though, in most cases.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by noobody

Anyone with opinion or knowledge about the matter please...

---

The answer for any game should be found under the terms and conditions of the specific game, and it is normally done on a game by game, offense by offense basis. A permanent ban in a game like CoC for exploitation is unlikely.

General rule of thumb the punishment should be determined by the magnitude of the offense.

Speaking of games in general, I've click wrap agreed for many game platforms, but for third publisher terms, I often don't go through a click wrap but usually only a browser wrap. I forgot when I explicitly agreed to the terms of CoC if there was any such occasion, but is a click-wrap the norm for games?

I had the argument as we differed on whether we were supposed to find it normal to be banned for having "exploited" (big word) a bug that existed because the game developer made a clear or unclear mistake.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by noobody

Speaking of games in general, I've click wrap agreed for many game platforms, but for third publisher terms, I often don't go through a click wrap but usually only a browser wrap. I forgot when I explicitly agreed to the terms of CoC if there was any such occasion, but is a click-wrap the norm for games?

I had the argument as we differed on whether we were supposed to find it normal to be banned for having "exploited" (big word) a bug that existed because the game developer made a clear or unclear mistake.

---

For CoC Specifically there was no I agree terms of conditions button when the game was installed it does however carry the generic Itunes Terms and Conditions.

For other games as I said before it's case specific, generally speaking if your actions are having a negative affect on other paying customers playing experience then you can expect action against you by the developers. While a bug is the fault of the developer, doing something that explicitly contradicts the terms and conditions of a game that you have agreed to put the fault back on you unless you can demonstrate that you clearly had and definitively had no idea it was an exploit.

In the case of you using and exploit to outwardly negatively impact the experience of other players, not only do you need to examine your selfish nature but you are damaging the core image of the game you are playing and destroying it for others and yourself.

To answer your question it is normal for developers to protect their products as and where necessary.

My Q isn't whether developers are in their right to defend interest and if we should expect it. That is normal.

My Q is whether a long or eternal ban (not just frozen or confiscated items) is justified when (1) a user exploits a bug that was not created by the user but found in the regular process of use, AND/OR when (2) the user did not "explicitly" (by a click of some sort or a clear process to read the terms in signing up) agree to the game's terms.

The question is of extreme degree of punishment and the process of agreement + the justification of ban and likely no refund for the exploit of a bug by fault of the developer and where the fruit of the exploit is likely confiscable or resettable (w/ exceptions of course).

So the norm is that it is not excessive to get eternally banned when user does that w/ no clear agreement to such terms?

I'm sure there's something about 'we should report any issues/bugs immediately'.

In fact the License agreement states:

'You agree that you will not, under any circumstances:
- Use cheats, EXPLOITS....designed to modify or interfere with the Service, any Supercell game, or any Supercell game experience'

Also...

"Supercell reserves the right to determine what conduct it considers to be in violation of the rules of use or otherwise outside the intent or spirit of these Terms of Service or the Service itself. Supercell reserves the right to take action as a result, which may include terminating your Account and prohibiting you from using the Service."

So...Tut Tut...dont' do it!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Icekool17

I'm sure there's something about 'we should report any issues/bugs immediately'.

In fact the License agreement states:

'You agree that you will not, under any circumstances:
- Use cheats, EXPLOITS....designed to modify or interfere with the Service, any Supercell game, or any Supercell game experience'

Also...

"Supercell reserves the right to determine what conduct it considers to be in violation of the rules of use or otherwise outside the intent or spirit of these Terms of Service or the Service itself. Supercell reserves the right to take action as a result, which may include terminating your Account and prohibiting you from using the Service."

So...Tut Tut...dont' do it!

---

Firstly, the word "designed" in the first sentence isn't applicable if the player is just using an oversight or intentional bug designed by the developer. So in terms of non-hacking offenses that doesn't really apply.

Also, wasn't the elixir "glitch" something that would fall under that category? They knew about that for a long time, basically everybody was using it, but no bans or resets. My point is, all of their bans or suspensions are arbitrary and capricious but at the end of the day they call the shots because they made the game, which makes sense.