Ubisoft to Punish Players Who Exploit Glitch in The Division's "Falcon Lost"

Ubisoft to Punish Players Who Exploit Glitch in The Division's "Falcon Lost"

1031062

There is a big glitch in Falcon Lost, and Ubisoft says that exploiting it violates its Code of Conduct.

Falcon Lost, a raid-style Incursion that was introduced to The Division in last week's update, has a pretty nasty exploit - and Ubisoft plans on punishing any players that take advantage of it. Players can clip through a wall, bypassing the boss encounter in order to get to the loot.

On the forums, community manager Natchai Stappers said that Ubisoft is working on a fix, and intends to punish any players who have exploited it, although no specifics were given as to what this punishment would look like.

"We are working on fixing the exploit. Obviously it is against our Code of Conduct and the team is looking into what can be done in terms of punishment for those who have exploited."

Posters on the forums don't appear happy with the response, however. A number have criticized Ubisoft for not catching the exploit, and even more for saying it will punish players for taking advantage of it.

"I'm glad to see you are fixing the exploit, but seriously upset because you are actually blaming US for your badly coded game," one poster wrote. "Are you going to punish every Double Revive, every Perma-healing mask, and every other aspect of this game that doesn't work as intended and becomes an advantage for the players? I think you should put you efforts on avoid present and future situations like these, because exploits will happen on this and every other game."

This isn't the only issue to present following the implementation of the patch. There was also an issue with disappearing characters, although that was quickly identified and fixed.

Permalink

I've attempted it three times. Not a single successful attempt, always getting wiped out immediately at the APC. So I haven't had a chance to even use an exploit, because no group gets that far.

If you're playing The Division, no further punishments are needed.

I keep wandering if there isn't some deep meta commentary about the dangers of unrestricted authority hiding in the Division, but with the rest of the game being so aggressively dull I'm not sure it's that clever.

Its Ubisofts game, they can punish players as they like.

And if players dont like it, then for fucks sake find something better to play.

fix-the-spade:
I keep wandering if there isn't some deep meta commentary about the dangers of unrestricted authority hiding in the Division, but with the rest of the game being so aggressively dull I'm not sure it's that clever.

Extra Credits covered it. Suffice it to say they dont seem to think it was any kind of clever/intentional commentary.

Does the exploit grant unfair power to players over other players?
[YES] -Fix it, and only punish exploiters who use it to grief other players.
[NO] -Fix it, and don't punish anyone, you controlling, authoritarian weirdos.

Punish players, go for it. But patch it, assholes. Don't leave it and think that just punishing is enough. You are a bunch of hacks if that is the route that is going (kind of like the back pack and logging issue). And when I say fix it, I don't mean wait till the next big patch, you morons.

gigastar:

Extra Credits covered it. Suffice it to say they dont seem to think it was any kind of clever/intentional commentary.

I mean, Extra Credits also misrepresents the facts and even outright lies (portraying the Rioters and Cleaners as innocent victims rather than the bandit/inquisitor stand-ins that they really are is laughable)... but yes, they do have that opinion, dumb as it is.

As far as the news story goes, if you exploit glitches in a game to get ahead when it's clearly against the rules (both as written in the user agreements and the rules of fair play) you shouldn't be surprised when you get bannerino'd.

Personally I don't have the game and don't want it because it looks like a duller Borderlands, with enemies that are meat-spongier than ever.

scotth266:

gigastar:

Extra Credits covered it. Suffice it to say they dont seem to think it was any kind of clever/intentional commentary.

I mean, Extra Credits also misrepresents the facts and even outright lies (portraying the Rioters and Cleaners as innocent victims rather than the bandit/inquisitor stand-ins that they really are is laughable)...

I think you missed the point of that video. I reccomend some further reading;
https://killscreen.com/articles/the-perverse-ideology-of-the-division/
http://birthmoviesdeath.com/2016/03/18/the-division-game-review-welcome-to-trumps-america

MeatMachine:
Does the exploit grant unfair power to players over other players?
[YES] -Fix it, and only punish exploiters who use it to grief other players.
[NO] -Fix it, and don't punish anyone, you controlling, authoritarian weirdos.

Sums up my opinion perfectly. Unless there's a competitive aspect I'm missing, it's a dick move to punish the players.

Ah yes the "code of conduct", that thing you have no actual choice of refusing since you already bought the game and which most people tend to skip through cos..honestly who the hell reads every single EULA agreement in every game they buy? It's not like you can negotiate the terms of the contract like you would in the real world.
The whole code of conduct excuse has always been a bit iffy.

gigastar:

scotth266:

gigastar:

Extra Credits covered it. Suffice it to say they dont seem to think it was any kind of clever/intentional commentary.

I mean, Extra Credits also misrepresents the facts and even outright lies (portraying the Rioters and Cleaners as innocent victims rather than the bandit/inquisitor stand-ins that they really are is laughable)...

I think you missed the point of that video. I reccomend some further reading;
https://killscreen.com/articles/the-perverse-ideology-of-the-division/
http://birthmoviesdeath.com/2016/03/18/the-division-game-review-welcome-to-trumps-america

The importance of their 'point' in the video doesn't have any bearing on how improper it is to outright lie and deliberately misinform to people not familiar with the game as an attempt to spread their gospel further. I don't necessarily think their conclusion is wrong but it's still a really scummy way to go about it.

And given this is far from the first time Extra Credits has done something like this I'm not at all inclined to give the benefit of the doubt to them

gigastar:

scotth266:

gigastar:

Extra Credits covered it. Suffice it to say they dont seem to think it was any kind of clever/intentional commentary.

I mean, Extra Credits also misrepresents the facts and even outright lies (portraying the Rioters and Cleaners as innocent victims rather than the bandit/inquisitor stand-ins that they really are is laughable)...

I think you missed the point of that video. I reccomend some further reading;
https://killscreen.com/articles/the-perverse-ideology-of-the-division/
http://birthmoviesdeath.com/2016/03/18/the-division-game-review-welcome-to-trumps-america

On the contrary, I understood the video perfectly. The video makes the following claims:

1) In a real-world setting, the player's actions have meaning. They comment on our society whether or not the developer intends it.
2) The game espouses totalitarianism.
3) The game lacks self-awareness about all of this.
4) The people you shoot are "disaster survivors" who ought to be treated with sympathy
5) The game is racist (maybe unintentionally) - the video uses the Rioters as the example for this.
6) The game is classist (maybe unintentionally) - the video uses the Cleaners as the example for this.

The first point is the only one with any sense of legitimacy, and even then it doesn't really apply to the Division, which has an inherent sense of unrealism built into it - both because it's a work of apocaylpse fiction, and because it has a lot of near-future sci-fi built into the setting (automated sentry turrets, building a supervirus using your computer, etc).

The second point is complete baloney, and I can only assume that the video creator doesn't know what totalitarianism is. If the game was espousing totalitarianism you'd be allowed to shoot anyone (which is one of the things the video maker incorrectly implies) instead of allowing you to only shoot people actively committing crimes. The video maker also implies that the Division is shady or secretive, but at the start of the game everyone knows what the Division is - so it's pretty clear that you're operating in the open. The game's whole premise is that things are so shitty (90% of the population dead and the rest in near-complete anarchy) that the Division is the only answer left. If you aren't willing to accept that premise, then fine - but arguing that it supports totalitarianism when the Division's only goal is to restore America to pre-disaster status is a joke.

The third point is even MORE baloney. The Division has numerous NPCs (including two major members of the supporting cast) openly criticize The Division's unlimited authority. Moreover, the game's main antagonist is a rogue Division agent who abused his status to try and make himself king shit of turd mountain - not exactly subtle commentary about how unlimited power can go horribly wrong.

The fourth point is, as I noted, absolutely laughable. The game's enemies are essentially the standard military apocalypse bandits/inquisitors, with the Rioters/Rikers filling the bandit roles and the Cleaners being Inquisitors. The Last Man Battalion or whatever they're called fill in as the standard "evil military" faction to round out the set. None of the enemies in the game deserve sympathy - they're murderers, rapists, thieves (which in a low-resource environment basically makes you a murderer) and generally act like miniature Skeletors. You can complain that the game's enemies lack depth and you'd be right - but trying to cast them in a sympathetic light is impossible.

In the fifth point the video maker tries to push the idea that, since the Rioters all wear hoodies, and black people in the US sometimes wear hoodies, and because black people sometimes riot due to police oppression, the game is obviously pushing racism (whether intentionally or not). This is a load of tripe for a few obvious reasons - the biggest one being that there is no connection between The Division's Rioters and the rioters of the real world - The Division's Rioters are mere bandits. And when you've got a faction named Rioters, well - what's the quintessential gear for a rioter? Something that obscures the face, usually either a hoodie, ski mask, or bandana. Hell, in his own video the picture he uses to depict riots in the US has multiple people wearing exactly that kind of outfit as they tip over a police car. If you look up pictures of the Greek riots, the top results also tend to have people in masks committing crimes, so it's not like this is an American-centric thing either.

EDIT: I also forgot that in the game's promotional materials, the Rioters are introduced by a distinctly white-sounding guy going "IT'S EVERY MAN FOR HIMSELF", and features several of their members mugging an obviously black guy.

The sixth point tries to claim that the Cleaners are obviously a symbol to get people to hate unions, which is amusing because the whole union thing is little more than a backstory bullet-point. The Cleaners don't seem interested in espousing union ideals in the game so much as they are interested in PURGING THE FILTHY XENOS burning anything they think is unclean. He also tries to make the claim that the Cleaners and The Division are doing the same thing - except the Cleaners mercilessly kill infected people, while your mission has you try to save them.

So yeah, I saw the video. I just happen to think that it (and a lot of other criticism of The Division) is complete and utter horseshit coming from people who don't understand the point of military fiction/apocalypse fiction, or are actively trying to portray it as harmful to society - which is a song and dance we've seen before but fail to learn from.

Sigh... this is why you let the raid boss drop the loot on death, noobs...

scotth266:

gigastar:

Extra Credits covered it. Suffice it to say they dont seem to think it was any kind of clever/intentional commentary.

I mean, Extra Credits also misrepresents the facts and even outright lies (portraying the Rioters and Cleaners as innocent victims rather than the bandit/inquisitor stand-ins that they really are is laughable)... but yes, they do have that opinion, dumb as it is.

To be fair, they were talking about how the first Rioters they met looked like just random people with hoodies on the street. Of course they aren't innocents. They are going to shoot you first, because they are the enemies in the game. And they never said the Cleaners were innocent. They were asking "what makes them different to the agents when both factions have the goal of getting rid of those who they see dangerous?" The answer is obvious (the Cleaners consider everyone dangerous; agents don't kill those who they consider innocent); even if both factions are playing the role of judge, jury and executioner.

CaitSeith:

scotth266:

gigastar:

Extra Credits covered it. Suffice it to say they dont seem to think it was any kind of clever/intentional commentary.

I mean, Extra Credits also misrepresents the facts and even outright lies (portraying the Rioters and Cleaners as innocent victims rather than the bandit/inquisitor stand-ins that they really are is laughable)... but yes, they do have that opinion, dumb as it is.

To be fair, they were talking about how the first Rioters they met looked like just random people with hoodies on the street. Of course they aren't innocents. They are going to shoot you first, because they are the enemies in the game. And they never said the Cleaners were innocent. They were asking "what makes them different to the agents when both factions have the goal of getting rid of those who they see dangerous?" The answer is obvious (the Cleaners consider everyone dangerous; agents don't kill those who they consider innocent); even if both factions are playing the role of judge, jury and executioner.

From the video:

"And then there's the fact that the people you're shooting are disaster survivors. They're ordinary people who have lived through a horrific event, and without due process, without acknowledging their fourth amendment rights, you just gun down any of them who appear to be acting out of line."

Admittedly that line comes just before he starts talking about the Rioters, but the idea runs throughout the video. In particular about the Cleaners:

"There's not only a race divide, but also a class divide going on here, as most of the stories that you hear from these individuals fit the working-class story mould, and the second faction of enemies you encounter is the sanitation workers union, who are depicted as having gone crazy from the strain of the outbreak. And I should note, that while they are depicted as having gone crazy, and so must be stopped with the unquestioned application of lethal force, they're basically doing the same thing the player character is. They're going around the city burning whatever they feel is contaminated in order to wipe out the infection and help restore the city - which isn't all that unlike wandering around the city shooting whatever you think is contributing to the breakdown of society."

The pink is where he turns up the sarcasm.

Sure, he never outright states that the Cleaners are pure as the driven snow, but the implications in his word usage about how much of a dick you are for gunning them down are thick and heavy. Everything in his video is laden with the idea that The Division is evil for enforcing order on the Skeletors of apocalyptic New York City.

Reminds me of Destiny. "Stop playing the game the way we don't want you to."
Does it violate their Code of Conduct though? If it does, they're well within their rights to punish players using the exploit.
That being said, if it isn't giving players an advantage over others, what's the problem? Fix it and leave it at that. If I were in that position, I'd leave the glitch in as long as it didn't affect anything else. It's not the players of my game that put the glitch in and if they don't want to glitch past a boss, they won't.

While I'm sure that Ubisoft put some sort of "don't use any glitches, exploits, yada yada" clause into their terms of service, I also think that such clauses are corporate bullshit that ignore the inquisitive nature of most gamers.

If there's a shortcut, we'll find it. If there's an easier way to grind, we'll find it. If there's an optimization, we'll find it. And if there's a glitch that gets us into a locked area, you can bet your ass that we'll find it.

More importantly, the line between "unintended feature" and "glitch," and "glitch" and "exploit" is so incredibly grey as to be nearly useless. If I can reload slightly faster by switching weapons mid-reload, does that count as an exploit? If I can use the geometry to climb to a good but unintended vantage point, is that an exploit?

To punish players AFTER the fact for utilizing exactly what was coded into the game is just as pathetic as it is insulting.

Side note: The DLC for the first Borderlands had a similar glitch, allowing you into a massive loot room that normally has a several-minute timer preventing you from taking more than a fraction of it. Good times.

It's so classic. People knowingly cheat, fully aware that a punishment may well be on the way. Then when they're told it's coming, they complain that the person who makes the rules is at fault. I usually don't agree with any of the "gamers are entitled" nonsense, but every time some part of a community is busted for cheating and is told they're going to be punished, this same old bullshit about "it's YOUR fault developer, not mine waah waah waah" springs up.

When you break the rules, you're doing it wrong. Just because you CAN touch the ball with your hands in football doesn't mean the referee won't give you a warning for doing it. Is it your fault for touching the ball, or should the rules of football instead force you to wear a straitjacket? This is the kind of stuff toddlers are taught in kindergarden for goodness sake!

I would find it highly amusing if Massive decides to punish glitchers. You know, considering actual hackers are still running rampant on the PC, with a 3 day ban being the worst punishment they receive.
Whatever punishment they dole out will probably be negligible, or they shoot themselves in the foot by treating glitchers worse than people actually hacking the game.
Either way, the glitching is more or less a symptom of a broken loot system, so instead of *EDIT* punishing players *END EDIT* they should probably focus on fixing the actual game.

gigastar:
Extra Credits covered it. Suffice it to say they dont seem to think it was any kind of clever/intentional commentary.

Well, I basically agreed with everything EC had to say.

I still wonder who decided that a game where you play what amounts to a Stasi or Gestapo officer was a surefire winner.

Karathos:
It's so classic. People knowingly cheat, fully aware that a punishment may well be on the way. Then when they're told it's coming, they complain that the person who makes the rules is at fault. I usually don't agree with any of the "gamers are entitled" nonsense, but every time some part of a community is busted for cheating and is told they're going to be punished, this same old bullshit about "it's YOUR fault developer, not mine waah waah waah" springs up.

When you break the rules, you're doing it wrong. Just because you CAN touch the ball with your hands in football doesn't mean the referee won't give you a warning for doing it. Is it your fault for touching the ball, or should the rules of football instead force you to wear a straitjacket? This is the kind of stuff toddlers are taught in kindergarden for goodness sake!

Punishing the players instead of fixing the problem is a bad idea.

Besides, where's the sense in punishing a player after the fact? It's not like they knew this would happen, and some may have found it on accident. Plenty of games have glitches that are completely harmless, but fun. Heck, it's actually a mainstay in many speedruns. Is there really any harm in using the fog gate in Demon's Soul's to kill the Maneater Boss? It's cheap, sure, but it isn't hurting anyone. At WORST Ubisoft should simply remove the loot from their inventory and give them an online message. God forbid a person chooses to play a game they bought in a way that the developer's didn't intend. It's the developer's fault, they should take ownership.

But this is Ubisoft, and a Tom Clancy game, so no surprises there.

It might be a bad idea, but what is the alternative? Just ignore it? Sounds like a terrific idea. Actual lawmakers IRL could learn something from that attitude. Oh you stole something? Better let you off with a slap on the wrist just in case there's a protest afterward.

Comparing singleplayer progression and speedrunning in a singleplayer game like Demon's Souls to a multiplayer game with a natural curve for loot progression and gear strength like The Division is moot. I'm sure all those people getting absolutely decimated in Dark Zone PvP by people who have glitched their way into max level gear in no time at all really support this whole 'victimless crime' excuse.

It's not the developer's fault when people agree to terms of service which clearly state that any known issues or bugs being used in a way that the game isn't meant to be played may result in your account being suspended or completely terminated. Finishing an Incursion without a single combat is not some kind of "clever use of game mechanics" or playing it "unlike the developer intended", it's just cheating. Give yourself a little credit and stop acting intentionally dense. You can carry the ball across the court in basketball, but if you do you're gonna get called an idiot and taken off the court.

"But I'm just playing the game in a way the person who developed it didn't intend, and where does it say I can't do this?"
"You agreed to the rules - or terms one might say, of basketball before we started."
"Oh."

Fox12:

Punishing the players instead of fixing the problem is a bad idea.

But they're not punishing players instead of fixing the problem. They're punishing players in addition to fixing the problem.

Something Amyss:

Fox12:

Punishing the players instead of fixing the problem is a bad idea.

But they're not punishing players instead of fixing the problem. They're punishing players in addition to fixing the problem.

There shouldn't have been a problem in the first place. They're punishing players for their own incompetence : /

Fox12:

There shouldn't have been a problem in the first place. They're punishing players for their own incompetence : /

They're punishing players for opting to exploit a glitch which gives high-end gear in a game with a strong PVP element. I have zero sympathy for anyone who gets hit here. This is not, as per your comparison, a single player speedrun or some such. It's a competitive game with rules, and people are violating those rules for an advantage. In fact, Ubisoft had damn well better enforce their rules, given how necessary the PVP is in end game and how much cheaters are breaking the game.

Creator002:

That being said, if it isn't giving players an advantage over others, what's the problem?

It is. The gear acquired from Falcon Lost has some pretty game-changing bonuses. The gear score for the loot people are going after is 240, which is 1.5 times that (roughly) what I'm picking up through play because my friends and I simply don't have the gear to do Falcon Lost. This also means we really can't do the Dark Zone at all, because we're completely outclassed by people who already have complete gear sets thanks to this. The irony is that this gear can also be picked up in the Dark Zone to my understanding, but good luck getting there if everyone and their brother can curb stomp you as easy as look at you.

Apparently, however, it is now Ubisoft's duty to now allow this play imbalance to continue, because we wouldn't want to upset the players who chose to break the rules to gain such an advantage.

Something Amyss:

Creator002:

That being said, if it isn't giving players an advantage over others, what's the problem?

It is. The gear acquired from Falcon Lost has some pretty game-changing bonuses. The gear score for the loot people are going after is 240, which is 1.5 times that (roughly) what I'm picking up through play because my friends and I simply don't have the gear to do Falcon Lost. This also means we really can't do the Dark Zone at all, because we're completely outclassed by people who already have complete gear sets thanks to this. The irony is that this gear can also be picked up in the Dark Zone to my understanding, but good luck getting there if everyone and their brother can curb stomp you as easy as look at you.

Apparently, however, it is now Ubisoft's duty to now allow this play imbalance to continue, because we wouldn't want to upset the players who chose to break the rules to gain such an advantage.

No. Now that I know the glitch does disadvantage those that don't use it, it NEEDS to be fixed. I still don't think those that did use it before Ubisoft said they'd be punished should be punished, but those after have been warned and are on their own.

Creator002:
Reminds me of Destiny. "Stop playing the game the way we don't want you to."
Does it violate their Code of Conduct though? If it does, they're well within their rights to punish players using the exploit.
That being said, if it isn't giving players an advantage over others, what's the problem? Fix it and leave it at that. If I were in that position, I'd leave the glitch in as long as it didn't affect anything else. It's not the players of my game that put the glitch in and if they don't want to glitch past a boss, they won't.

To be fair, Bungie didn't punish players for exploiting the raids, particularly the boss encounters, at all. Period. Hell at some points they openly laughed and joked along with the players at some of the weird and crazy exploits that were found, before just patching them out.

They basically said, "Oh, that's a pretty neat and funny way of completing this boss encounter. We'll have to patch it of course, but feel free to enjoy it while it lasts."

No punishing involved. If anything, the exploits found allowed them to avoid making the same mistakes in the future, because if I recall correctly the most recent raid doesn't have any MAJOR boss exploits like the first two did.

Now the PvP cheaters on the other hand...that's a very different story. Lots of banhammers there...

 

Reply to Thread

Log in or Register to Comment
Have an account? Login below:
With Facebook:Login With Facebook
or
Username:  
Password:  
  
Not registered? To sign up for an account with The Escapist:
Register With Facebook
Register With Facebook
or
Register for a free account here