Creative use of mechanic, or exploit

[Knobley]

They've made their statement by nerfing the current "creative use of game mechanics". Now that Zolo is a no-no, we can safely say that doing anything similar to Zolo NOW would be an exploit.
…
Given that Blizzard has put their foot down on Zolo, it's reasonable to expect that they do not believe that similar methods should be used for other bosses.

I respectfully disagree.

Let me be clear here, in no way am I encouraging anyone to seek out and implement questionable practices that may get their accounts in trouble. That’s not my purpose, and I’m not defending that.

But I do think there’s a difference between “creative use of game mechanic” and “exploit” and that difference is more than semantics. It’s my hope that this post will be viewed in the spirit that it’s intended, which is a discussion of this difference.

I see two parts of the TOS that come into play here:

“Using or exploiting errors in design, features which have not been documented, and/or "program bugs" to gain access that is otherwise not available, or to obtain a competitive advantage over other players;”

There were no programming defects, bugs, or geometry glitches that were being “exploited” with the Zolo trick. There was (possibly) an error in design. But who we to say whether this was what Blizzard intended or not? I don’t know anyone I would trust to speak on behalf of Blizzard’s intentions other than Blizzard.

It can be found in these forums that Blizzard’s position with regard to the Zolo trick were sought for and obtained.

Now we have Vrakthris saying:

“Don't think of it as a nerf, Ekodas, think of it as adjusting a method of gaining massive amounts of very easy relatively no risk experience which our developers never intended.”

It seems that Blizzard’s has “adjusted” their position with regard to Zolo.

So what else is new? Blizzard adjusts things with every patch.

Sure this was a side effect that the developers never intended, but we have no authority for saying that until THEY say that.

Moreover, it’s not that Zolo is a no-no now. Zolo is not a no-no now. There’s nothing in the world stopping anyone from running Zolo just like they have been all along, there’s just no profit in it anymore. What’s changed is the game mechanic. Policing game mechanics is part of Blizzard’s job and they have adjusted this particular mechanic as they saw fit. To make the blanket claim that other “zolo-like” mechanics that Blizzard has (through neglect, oversight, or, and this is important, purposeful intention) allowed to remain in the game is an exploit is, respectfully, to overstep your bounds. Policing game mechanics is Blizzard’s job.

Using game mechanics to maximum benefit is what we do as players. We do it all the time, with builds, spell combinations, group make-up, what have you. Indeed, it’s essentially what the game IS.

To my thinking, calling the Zolo trick an exploit (then or now) is akin to calling “cheat death” an exploit. There’s no way that Blizzard (composed of fallable people) is ever going to have their game mechanics perfect, or balanced in such a way that everyone’s happy. Part of what we agree to when we play the game is that this is Blizzard’s sandbox we’re playing in. The Zolo trick was within the rules of Blizzard’s sand box. They said so. It still is. So are any zolo-like mechanics that remain in the game, whether they yield results we care for or not. We may have opinions about whether those mechanics are “good” or “bad” or “balanced”, but we need to recognize those opinions for what they are… opinions.

The other part of the TOS that comes into play says:

”Anything that Blizzard considers contrary to the "essence" of the program.”

That’s a loophole big enough to drive a freight train through, but the deciding factor is still Blizzard. Blizzard’s consideration with regard to Zolo was sought for and obtained. Who’s to say that Blizzard considers Zolo-like mechanics that remain in the game contrary to the “essence” of the program? Maybe other zolo-like mechanics that remain in the game are intended. Heck, the zolo-mechanic itself remains in the game.

It’s a game mechanic. It was programmed in. It’s not a bug, it’s not a geometry glitch, it’s not an undocumented feature. It’s a game mechanic. Game mechanics in WoW are relatively fluid. They change often. This one changed. Others may not have. That doesn’t make them not a mechanic.

Respectfully,
Knobly

[Talamarr]

Personally, I agree with you Knobley. However, I think the disconnect with some of us here is the scope of the definition of "exploit" and what is acceptable to discuss. I have very strong feelings about how creators of MMOs can jump on people for finding and using things in the game that the creators did not intend. If anything, they should be thanking these people for acting as testers and finding bugs, or "errors in design" not punishing people. As a software developer myself, I can't blame my clients for an error they discovered in one of my apps. It's my fault. I'm not sure why game companies get to act differently.

It's human nature to want to find more efficient ways to do things. And finding tricks and shortcuts can be fun and exciting if they're within the rules. It IS a game, after all.

Regardless, like I said before and like you said, it really doesn't matter; it's Blizzard's sandbox and ultimately their choice to do whatever.

And to speak to your point; I really like this community, it's contributors and it's drive to play within the rules and keep things honest. But I would like to at least voice my opinion that topics shouldn't be censored unless there is clear indication from Blizzard that they are against the rules (botting, account sharing, win trading, etc) and let grey area discussions continue.

[Sanctume]

The Zolo encounter is not trivial. That event for the level it is intended can be quite difficult if the skeleton totem is not contained quickly.

Furthermore, not all 70 classes can efficiently take advantage of that design flaw. It was specific enough that Blizzard did not bother with it for some time until some video of it was posted.

The side benefit of this was the exp gains were really fast. Blizzard removed that side benefit and left the encounter as is.

There was no "exploit" that violated the ToS--it's the same encounter even after the exp nerf. There is no bug in the encounter, it's an intended mini boss fight.

[Vyndree]

There is no bug in the encounter, it's an intended mini boss

The bug in the encounter was the amount of experience gained.

Exploiting a bug for the purposes of faster-than-usual experience gain could be considered an exploit by:
1) exploiting an error in design
2) using such exploits to gain a competitive advantage over other players

Granted, it was allowed and confirmed to be allowed (for the time being) by blue posters. In that sense, I think doing it back then was ok. In fact, you can still do the fixed-Zolo today and I don't consider that an exploit. However, given the fact that Blizzard has nerfed both Athene-methods and Zolo-methods of speed-boosting (that is, boosting at an accellerated rate through the specific use of design flaws) you can clearly see that it was neither intended, nor allowed to continue.

Blizzard may be a benevolent deity at times, and choose not to hastily ban for things like this, but I wouldn't count on their benevolence continuing now that they've made their stand. They've hotfixed both situations.

I never said Zolo was an exploit THEN. I'm saying Zolo, or Zolo-similar encounters, would be an exploit NOW.


That being said -- did we really need to start a brand new topic on the exact same subject?

[Knobley]

That being said -- did we really need to start a brand new topic on the exact same subject?

If you see this as the exact same subject, then you TOTALLY missed my point.

Where I see a tweeked game mechanic in an, until recently, obscure little corner of the game, you see a Fell Reaver-like foot coming down. Where I see a specific adjustment, you see a sweeping generalization. I can’t overstate the enormous disparity between these two perspectives.

Knobley

[Basilikos]

I think you missed the point of the other thread.

Quoted for truth.

[Draz]

If you see this as the exact same subject, then you TOTALLY missed my point.

I think you missed the point of the other thread.

I understand where he is coming from, the fact that Vyndree seems to know EXACTLY what blizzard is thinking about when coming up with these encounter designs, skews the issue hah!

[MoonD0G]

There is no bug in the encounter, it's an intended mini boss

The bug in the encounter was the amount of experience gained.

If you really want to get technical, the amount of experience gained was not a bug. If you were around that lvl doing the instance like normal, the encounter was normal. The "bug" you could refer to is that a specific class was designed in such a way that they could expand that experience gained indefinitely. change the class or change the encounter, take your pick, but it was not a "bug". they just made a change to an encounter as they do all the time.

But like knobley said, that wasnt even the point of this post in the first place.

[Basilikos]

Blizzard may be a benevolent deity at times, and choose not to hastily ban for things like this, but I wouldn't count on their benevolence continuing now that they've made their stand. They've hotfixed both situations.

I never said Zolo was an exploit THEN. I'm saying Zolo, or Zolo-similar encounters, would be an exploit NOW.

Everybody needs to read this again.

[Knobley]

I never said Zolo was an exploit THEN. I'm saying Zolo, or Zolo-similar encounters, would be an exploit NOW.

Everybody needs to read this again.

I'm saying that's a HUGE inference based on insufficient evidence.