Earning Trophies on 3rd Party, Independently Revived PSN Game Servers

[Sergen]

46 minutes ago, Matto_lsi said:

Ok, now that the question was posed, and answered by the site creator, and even the person who created Gonespy chimed in, let's move on to the more important question.

 

If I don't have any trophies in Bulletstorm, can I get the Plat?

 

As someone who purchased the game on a great sale ($5, disc), and merely ONE WEEK later the servers were shut down, I have never even started this game, and it still irks me that I never got the chance.  I'd like to play it, and Plat it, but I won't start it unless I have confirmation that all trophies requiring online functionality can be earned.  I see a trophy for 200 challenges being discussed, and it seems unknown whether this will pop.  Hopefully someone can confirm.  But are there any others?  I haven't studied the trophy guide for this game in years (since that fateful day I sat down to play it to learn the servers had just closed).  So a quick scan now shows a lot of trophies that might be very hard to earn, or maybe even still impossible.  Comments?  Any feedback?  I realize it might take some time for people to check this out.

 

And to be honest, this entire 11 page discussion has been about trophies (not whether or not we can play the games we love, though I did see that point raised here and there).  So with trophies in mind, if anyone can answer these questions and say definitively if the many online-based trophies from this game can be earned now (or not), that would be very helpful to all of us.

 

(And no, I will not 'just check' or be the guinea pig.  I might not have 100% on my profile, but I do always get the plat.  I have 1 account, and won't risk it without confirmation, and even then I'll be a little hesitant.)

 

Unfortunately until someone tests the trophies in particular, nobody knows if they will be obtainable by playing on the revived server. Supposedly for the 200 challenges trophy, the stats were saved through Gamespy's own stat tracker, so unless the game saves it in the background without you having to see the stats, that trophy might remain unobtainable. I don't know how long the trophy takes but if @dj_helyx tries the game out this weekend and fulfils the trophy requirement, we could know for sure if the platinum would be obtainable with Gonespy. Manually counting how many challenges you did would have to be the way to be sure if the game can't show you the stats for it. On Killzone 2, the stats don't save 100%, but for the ribbon based trophies, you can stay within the same lobby and fulfil all the ribbon requirements and unlock the trophy. Maybe for Bulletstorm if you stay in the same private lobby and complete 200 challenges in one go, the trophy would unlock if you do not back out, so that would be something worth trying if the challenges don't take incredibly long to do in the same session. 

Edited March 16, 2018 by Sergen

[NeM2k2]

1 hour ago, B1rvine said:

I guess my ultimate issue with this whole thing is -- I'd like to have clearer, solid, black and white regulations, and the reasoning behind it -- and then create logical rules based on those accordingly that leave no room for a gray area or exceptions.

 

Unfortunately life's not always like that. Sometimes there is no black-and-white, but shades of gray. Do you really want to say "no" to all custom servers and close the door entirely on your users that simply want to play the games that they own the way they were supposed to be played? Likewise, you wouldn't want to say "yes" to all custom servers, because you want to preserve the integrity of your leaderboards. So, say "yes", but with the caveat that if your trophy metadata looks suspicious, then we'll flag you like we've always done, unless you can supply proof that your metadata is not uncommon?

 

Quote

1) The fact you wouldn't condone a private server raises a huge red flag and directly relates to my previous paragraph. Hypothetical scenario for you... Someone gets flagged for getting trophies after servers shut down on an online game.  They prove they earned the trophies on an exact replica private server, and compare their private server to yours. If there was only a generic rule simply allowing custom servers, PSNP would then have to un-flag them, since on a "technical" level, they're doing the exact same thing as you.  If the site did keep this person flagged, they'd be cherry picking servers based on ethics (the gray area), and then it becomes an argument of who's ethics are more popular or whatever. The ethical dilemma could occur on hundreds of different issues (not necessarily even only the custom server thing, but any slightly different scenario thats possibly flaggable.)  But to use the server example, I'll throw this to you:  What if this "private" server had MORE people than your public server, would it be an issue then? Suddenly its not so easy.

 

I think I misunderstood your initial question. Does your hypothetical example assume that Gonespy exists, and a private alternative also exists? I would have concerns about the legitimacy of the private alternative - how do you know if their server accelerated earning of trophies if they don't share proof that it works or how it works, or that it would technically be possible to change the code to accelerate the unlocks? If they claimed "oh we just used Gonespy" when they were actually using their own you'd have the trophy metadata to fall back on right? And the burden of proof would be back on the user.

 

If your hypothetical example assumes there is no public, free alternative like Gonespy - only a private version that only the creator and his mates can play  - then I would be against that. There should be no barrier to entry.

 

Quote

2) No, its not guilty until innocent. Really though, what I'm talking about, again, is an ethical dilemma. Why do you get to determine public custom servers are legit and private aren't? Your biggest supporter, already disagrees and said private servers should be allowed. Also, what exactly is a "known public server?" How should someone who heavily advertises on Gamefaqs.com about reviving a server, on a super unpopular game and nobody notices in the trophy community until a flag is raised. They could make a great argument that it was "public" for a time.  Essentially, too much gray area and ethical issues here that need SUPER clear definitions and reasoning.

 

I never said I got to determine anything. You asked for my opinion, and I gave it. I'm not the authority of any trophy site so my opinion doesn't really mean anything - why did you ask me for my opinion then turn it on me and claim I'm making all the rules?

 

I would describe a "known public server" is one that is documented, freely available, open source?, and hopefully known/tested by a public community. I don't want to paint Gonespy as the shining beacon of an example, but I went out of my way before unlocking trophies on my own account to document and give as much proof as I can - including videos. If you make your own server, don't tell anyone about it, unlock a bunch of trophies, and then get flagged (before or after releasing it) you shouldn't be surprised if you have even the slightest hint of how strict trophy/achievement tracking sites can be about this kind of thing. If you release public proof ahead of time, then if people question your unlock dates then you can point back to Google or your gamefaq forum posts or your youtube proof and say "see, I did this back on suchandsuch a date".

 

Quote

3) Official glitches on servers everyone's on the same footing, so that's fair game.  Sly basically said "Do this at your own risk." AKA Maybe. That's not a good "official" rule.  What happens if someone finds an legitimate error in your code 6 months from now and its discovered trophies are easier (I know nothing of Bulletstorm, and I'm sure your code is good... but for arguments sake).  Does maybe mean "oh well, everyone gets flagged?"  I mean, lets be honest, the first person who ever had their PS3 YLOD on them in 2008 may have earned trophies out of order impossibly. And that was LONG before the rules existed here prohibiting saves. Why should they be retroactively affected? Which brings me to the ethical dilemma again, why should a sudden rule change going 180 from before just because of some new "gray scenario" have the ability to affect tons of gamers legitimacy? What's the next "big debate" going to be, and will it affect any previous rules? Enough on this.

 

Treat it the same as if someone found a legitimate error in an official server I guess, and allow it. Everyone using the same custom server would be subject to the same glitches, unless they were messing with the code to accelerate unlocks (which would hopefully show up in the metadata). You can't take back trophy unlocks, so you either fix the glitch or leave it as is - just like how official servers do.

 

Edited March 16, 2018 by NeM2k2
doubleposted somehow

[B1rvine]

8 minutes ago, NeM2k2 said:

snip

 

Thanks for the response again.  I did add in some edits, but I'll reiterate here.

 

So, I don't actually care too much about your opinion on my questions themselves.  I wanted to give you a myriad of "new" situations I bet tons of people will disagree on, highlight problems regarding gray areas in general, and how a new "situation" poses a problem of innocent people getting flagged even if they're following the rules as written, or guilty people getting a free pass suddenly if something changes in their favor.  I'm not limiting this problem to the custom server situation, but really any gray area that arises.

 

But if we do use the custom server example, if the new rules get created in the next few days simply state "Custom servers for defunct online games are allowed," and someone made a private server, and then the whole community shunned that, followed by the rules then being changed after the fact to "only public servers are allowed" because of that situation, that would be completely unfair to the person who made the private server, and they would be flagged.

 

Focusing on the other way around, it was currently written in black and white, custom servers are NOT allowed until a few hours ago, but yet nobody will be flagged for this method because of public support.  So if the rules can completely change 180 degrees once, what's preventing them from swaying another direction later? Eventually somethings gonna clash.  

[TheLakota]

3 minutes ago, B1rvine said:

So, I don't actually care too much about your opinion on my questions themselves.

 

[B1rvine]

6 minutes ago, TheLakota said:

 

 

Don't put words in my mouth.  I was posing rhetorical questions I wasn't expecting answers to, to highlight the issues with ethical dilemmas based on ill defined gray areas, or how changing a rule 180 degrees that is in black and white isn't fair.

 

He didn't address any of the problems of ethical dilemmas I was actually focusing on, or how to avoid them. Rather he answered all the questions I made to "highlight" why those problems exist, which a response isn't relevant.

 

Edited March 16, 2018 by B1rvine

[TheLakota]

Just now, B1rvine said:

 

Don't put words in my mouth.  I was posing rhetorical questions I wasn't expecting answers to, to highlight the issues with ethical dilemmas based on ill defined gray areas, or how changing a rule 180 degrees that is in black and white isn't fair.

 

After reading your replies in this thread -- and others -- I don't believe you. You oftentimes engage in what's known as a Gish Gallop by drowning participants with verbosity and following up with "gotcha" moments.

 

You posed those questions in the hopes at least one of them couldn't be answered in wretch-inducing detail. After they had been, we're now supposed to believe the questions posed were rhetorical in nature?

[NeM2k2]

16 minutes ago, B1rvine said:

He didn't address any of the problems of ethical dilemmas I was actually focusing on, or how to avoid them. Rather he answered all the questions I made to "highlight" why those problems exist, which a response isn't relevant.

 

All of my answers boiled down to:

 

Is there a known custom server solution for this shutdown game that is proven to work at the time of unlock? If yes, does the trophy metadata look reasonable for people who are using it or something similar? If yes, then ok. If no, then flag.

Edited March 16, 2018 by NeM2k2

[B1rvine]

25 minutes ago, TheLakota said:

 

After reading your replies in this thread -- and others -- I don't believe you. You oftentimes engage in what's known as a Gish Gallop by drowning participants with verbosity and following up with "gotcha" moments.

 

You posed those questions in the hopes at least one of them couldn't be answered in wretch-inducing detail. After they had been, we're now supposed to believe the questions posed were rhetorical in nature?

 

Well, you're wrong then about my intent. Plain and simple.

 

My initial posts in this thread at least, stated my reasons for not supporting this.  People are free to disagree with me. And I have no problem with that...  And if the rules are going to be changed to support something I don't like... fine, so be it, I can't change that.  I do think there are definite problems I pointed out in my last "big" post, and it was about when the rules are "simple" it opens up many, many, many gray areas.  The questions I posed were to give examples of how a "simple" rule would then create new gray areas, and if new situations arose because of those, there would be even more... I don't like the idea of a "tree" of gray areas growing.  I'd rather have as much concrete absolutes as possible, to eliminate the "same" dispute ending with two different outcomes, etc, or creating a situation where new rules aren't compatible with the old rules.  

 

I am sorry if that wasn't clear.

 

Edit: this should be evident by my first sentence:  "TLDR Version:  We need solid rules, based on logic"

 

Edit 2: I then go on to say the "main issue" I have is about ethical dilemmas, and use the entirety of the rest of my post, including posing questions, to highlight that thesis. Obviously, people are going to disagree on those exact questions, which illustrates the need for what I'm pointing out, more solid rules.

Edited March 16, 2018 by B1rvine

[ProfBambam55]

1 hour ago, B1rvine said:

 @MMDE

@NeM2k2

@BlindMango

@ProfBambam55

i think most of us get why you're against this but please just relax and don't make it personal as you are attempting to...i think a majority of people see the current reality and based on his one post, so does the site owner...you disagree...we get it...you want to create a rule for cases like this now...we get it...you want a rule for every imaginary case that you can think of that might be affected by this now...we get it...

 

it's one game...it's cool...it's new...it's exciting...give it a few days/weeks/months to simmer and see if the PSN community self-destructs is what I recommend...so far what, one trophy has been earned?...and the concern is that the leaderboards will just explode with cheaters who now want to play games legit on reincarnated servers to earn unobtainable trophies (I know,  that's not what you're saying)?...

 

i may or may not be the most vocal supporter but it's of no importance...if you think I have any kind of clout in the psnp community, then you must be delusional...if I did, a white list would've been implemented a long time ago and the leaderboards and site stats would be quite different...the fact is i have absolutely none...

 

unlike you, perhaps I and many others just see the situation for what it, key word, currently is : an innovative idea that gives people a chance to play a portion of a game or possibly even few games that went dead a few years ago...i'm not worried about all the things you may be because well, they don't really exist...they're just hypothesis based on paranoid extrapolations...if they weren't then you could back them up with fact...but you don't have fact so you're reaching...the Sony ToS...tagging numerous people...reaching...we need concrete rules that are worded perfectly for this brand-new-not-really-sure-how-it will-affect-anything situation...reaching...waiting for someone to provide fact that you could jump on and say "see, I'm right"...but there is really none...it's new territory...so perhaps a bit of patience and an open mind are needed...

 

i have faith that should the current situation get out of hand or change most of us will accept this change gracefully whether we agree with it or not...I think most of us will also be watching to see what comes of this...how many people do you think will be watching this game's stats?...i'm guessing a lot more than the average game...

 

i think it's totally justified and understandable to be concerned about how this will affect future unobtainable mp trophies but there's a point where you just have to let things progress before you start creating a big huff over potentially nothing...and again, I think most of us understand that...and i think we're still at the point of "does this thing really work?"...

 

your earlier reference of calling those of us who don't see this as a problem similar to #metoo which deals with sexual harassment victims shows that for you this is personal and you feel personally insulted that things didn't go your way...honestly, it made me lose a lot of respect for you that people who don't agree with you are seen as similar to victims of sexual harassment in your mind...quite frankly, as we go on I find your actions/words kind of embarrassing and egoism emerging rather than logic...

 

again, please just relax...you feel strongly about your opinion...we get it...unfortunately, a majority disagree with you...it's not personal...it just is what it is...why are you having a hard time accepting this?...because you're convinced that you're right and we're all wrong?...maybe you are...maybe you're not...can we just agree to disagree and see what happens...it's just trophies...there's really no rush in coming up with a new rule that covers everything yet, is there?...let the grey be grey for a bit...it's a tad early for concrete law imo...this is a private web site not a house of commons...banal statement : we don't all need to agree on all aspects of it all the time...it would be pretty bland if we did...

[B1rvine]

5 minutes ago, ProfBambam55 said:

snip

 

One last post from me then I'm done for awhile.

 

I shifted the conversation away from liking/dislking the suggestion to problems with the PSNP rules and how to make them (imo) better a little while ago.  For the record, I also mentioned several posts back that I actually don't have a problem with custom servers, if the rules defining cheating are written in a more concrete manner that closes gray areas, not necessarily limited to this issue, but really any issue. 

 

The problems are not hypothetical, we already have scenarios where MMDE's current decisions differ from Grimy's past decisions for the exact same issue, and a few cases where mods go back and forth with the flag, based on their interpretation of the rules, publicly.  So my ultimate point is, where these gray areas exist: should we base ANY decision on the existing rules from a logical or ethical standard?  My last few posts were attempting to convey this, and point out I think logical are better, and you can read my last few posts if you care about why, but I that was lost on the people I was talking with.

 

Sure, that one comment you mention was distasteful, I admit it, but honest.  If PSNP does pride itself on following Sony's standards, then they're in the wrong here.  If its by some other standard, then its all good. Either way, I think highlighting potential loopholes because of gray areas, where its okay to completely reverse an existing standard is worth talking about. 

 

 

 

[FlyingDutchmen85]

15 hours ago, ProfBambam55 said:

ok...let's forget about the "what ifs" and ridiculous extrapolation and analogies for a sec here...the case by case stuff is nonsense since there is only one case here to discuss at this point in time...just look at this... 

 

I believe the entire point of this discussion is the use of custom servers in general. Not the specific bulletstorm case. So I don't think it's ridiculous extrapolation, since it's literally what the thread was created for.

 

Quote

it's f**king amazing...if this guy gets flagged then I would consider our site to be a little odd in terms of how leaderboards are policed...even if the server is private and only this person can earn the trophies, it's incredible what they have achieved...hats off to their dedication...they deserve every trophy they earn imo...

 

and yes, of course they need a pc to run their server, that's kind of how servers work...that doesn't automatically make it cfw cheating as far as I'm concerned...they are totally playing and earning trophies within the boundaries of the game...unbelievable...

 

I agree it's amazing what they pulled off. But does that entitle them to a trophy? Is the amount of effort the measure to which to determine whether something is done legitimately?

 

On Bulletstorm specific, I don't know enough about the game to determine whether the trophy is earned legitimately. I don't know how scores are calculated and if server-side factors play a role in this. But that's exactly why I think a case-by-case judgement would be appropriate. 

[turpinator1986]

21 hours ago, Sergen said:

 

You’re treating it like anyone can do it in minutes, while the person who brings a server back up also mentioned this his profession was IT based. And the topic is about “third party revived servers” not “modded servers for currently available games”. When the game is officially available, it is breaching terms in regards to editing an existing server, but there’s no rules against emulating a server or connecting to an emulated server on PSN. Anyone who wants to create conditions to simplify trophies for games that are currently online would simply hack the trophies with CFW. Trophies have been available on PSN for nearly 10 years now, but only 1 person in that time brought back a server and informed people on a trophy forum that the trophies would be obtainable again through that server.

You’re welcome to your opinion sergen but I wish you would change the language you use when talking about this because you’re being really misleading. You’re a clever guy so you’re onviously doing that on purpose in order to gain false support from people who don’t understand this enough to know better. It isn’t ‘bringing a server back up’. You’re making it sound like this will bring back the servers that were there to start with. That’s not true. You should use language like ‘creating an alternative server’. Also the first sentence of your response there answers why this shouldn’t be allowed. ‘You’re treating this like anyone can do it in minutes’. You acknowledge not everyone will be able to do this so for me that immediately means it shouldn’t happen as it’s not an equal chance for everyone. 

[ProfBambam55]

20 minutes ago, FlyingDutchmen85 said:

 

I believe the entire point of this discussion is the use of custom servers in general. Not the specific bulletstorm case. So I don't think it's ridiculous extrapolation, since it's literally what the thread was created for.

 

 

I agree it's amazing what they pulled off. But does that entitle them to a trophy? Is the amount of effort the measure to which to determine whether something is done legitimately?

 

On Bulletstorm specific, I don't know enough about the game to determine whether the trophy is earned legitimately. I don't know how scores are calculated and if server-side factors play a role in this. But that's exactly why I think a case-by-case judgement would be appropriate. 

Ok, but the only case we have to go off is this one game, bulletstorm...so what case by case judgments are you referring to?...fear 2 and ghostbusters seem to be other potential games using the same gonespy server...this is basically one case...let's call it the gonespy case for simplicity...what other cases are there that merit clarification?...imaginary ones?...

 

the rules we have now are based on things that people have done in the past to unlock trophies illegitimately/legitimately not things we anticipate people will do in the future...is there a need to create case by case rules before such cases even exist?...if so, we might find ourselves with a pretty exhaustive list...can we not just create a rule for this case and be happy with that for now?...

 

if you look at the videos you will see that this person is playing on the exact server (correct me if I'm wrong) content that was available previously earning the trophies in exactly the same way that anyone who would've earned them up to this point...that is what's amazing and merits their entitlement imo...not the effort meriting their entitlement... 

Edited March 16, 2018 by ProfBambam55

[Sergen]

8 minutes ago, turpinator1986 said:

You’re welcome to your opinion sergen but I wish you would change the language you use when talking about this because you’re being really misleading. You’re a clever guy so you’re onviously doing that on purpose in order to gain false support from people who don’t understand this enough to know better. It isn’t ‘bringing a server back up’. You’re making it sound like this will bring back the servers that were there to start with. That’s not true. You should use language like ‘creating an alternative server’. Also the first sentence of your response there answers why this shouldn’t be allowed. ‘You’re treating this like anyone can do it in minutes’. You acknowledge not everyone will be able to do this so for me that immediately means it shouldn’t happen as it’s not an equal chance for everyone. 

 

I'm saying that because he used examples to say that people would make alternative servers whenever a difficult trophy came along, as well as that the thread title says "3rd Party, Independently Revived" game servers, if it is brought back by a third party, that is something the game developer hasn't done and the original post explains how one person brought back the servers for Bulletstorm. How many times have the words "custom server" been used now? People genuinely just support the idea of being able to play on any type of server and fulfil the requirements for the trophies in a legitimate way. What I am saying about people being able to do what they do with servers is that not everyone will be able to create a server for a game, but when the instructions are there from someone else to replicate what they've done then you can only blame the person who cannot follow the instructions. Games have RNG trophies and not everyone has an equal chance to get those, does that mean that nobody should be allowed to get them because some people won't be so lucky when they go for them? 

 

If you want everyone to have an equal chance at every trophy on PSN then you might as well flag everyone because a lot of people try and fail to get trophies for a lot of games. As far as I'm concerned, if the revived server is available with public information, it doesn't give anyone an unfair advantage and when someone goes online on one of those games they're not earning the trophies in an unfair way. Also, the person who brought back Bulletstorm used publicly available information from the Gamespy SDK: https://github.com/gonespy/bstormps3#in-order-to-use-the-server-you-need and said it's the only reason he had the opportunity to do anything with Bulletstorm, as far as I'm concerned if people can restore the servers with publicly available information then everyone has an equal chance, it just takes the person knowing how to apply it to a game with their own ingenuity. 

Edited March 16, 2018 by Sergen

[FlyingDutchmen85]

2 minutes ago, ProfBambam55 said:

Ok, but the only case we have to go off is this one game, bulletstorm...so what case by case judgments are you referring to?...fear 2 and ghostbusters seem to be other potential games using the same gonespy server...this is basically one case...let's call it the gonespy case for simplicity...what other cases are there that merit clarification?...imaginary ones?...

 

the rules we have now are based on things that people have done in the past to unlock trophies illegitimately not things we anticipate people will do in the future...is there a need to create case by case rules before such cases even exist?...if so, we might find ourselves with a pretty exhaustive list...can we not just create a rule for this case and be happy with that for now?...

 

if you look at the videos you will see that this person is playing on the exact server (correct me if I'm wrong) content that was available previously earning the trophies in exactly the same way that anyone would've earned them up to this point...that is what's amazing and merits their entitlement imo...not the effort... 

 

First off; sorry my reply to you was a bit out of order. I replied to your post from 4 pages ago, without realizing there were four more pages of content (including an answer from Sly, and more info on the server).

 

I actually think we mean the same thing.

The case-by-case I mean is making a decision based on each case. So like now there is a decision on this case; the gonespy-case as you say.

But doesn't give an all-out approval for every future imaginary case there could be. Those can be judged separately when the time comes. Which I think is the same you mean, based on a few of your previous posts I read in the mean time.

 

Concerning the Bulletstorm video; I don't have enough knowledge of the game to judge whether the way he is playing is the same. From what I read in further explanations the server doesn't do much with calculating scores, so it does seem to be earning the trophies in the same way as before. With that I agree, it's amazing and fine that he/she is earning the trophies this way.

[ProfBambam55]

3 minutes ago, FlyingDutchmen85 said:

 

First off; sorry my reply to you was a bit out of order.

I actually think we mean the same thing. 

no need to apologize...i'm all for discussion...i do agree though...i think we do actually mean the same thing...

[B1rvine]

Alright -- I lied, I'm back. can't sleep... My issue with the server rule isn't the rule itself but how to deal with inconsistencies.

 

It is my opinion that any newly created rules should not break any previously established ones already in place, and feelings shouldn't have any play in changing those rules.  People already flagged -- or not -- may benefit or suffer because of this.  This is evident because people are flagged from things 8 years ago, before trophy rules existed.  

 

So if we suddenly change a rule previously flaggable to unflaggable, what happens when another issue forces us to change it again.  Are all of you people , especially against the flag system, really so confident there won't be any change later where a mod will keep someone flagged based on whatever the mood is, because of an oversight now?  I'm surprised you all are so against me... I'm actually trying to help you all avoid getting flagged, or at least keep the dispute process consistent...

 

I hope I've worded this crystal clear, and I've avoided using scenarios in forms of questions this time that aren't relevant to what I'm -really- talking about. This is why we should prepare for the future, and not just hope for the best.

 

Edited March 16, 2018 by B1rvine

[DaivRules]

37 minutes ago, B1rvine said:

Alright -- I lied, I'm back. can't sleep... My issue with the server rule isn't the rule itself but how to deal with inconsistencies.

 

It is my opinion that any newly created rules should not break any previously established ones already in place, and feelings shouldn't have any play in changing those rules.  People already flagged -- or not -- may benefit or suffer because of this.  This is evident because people are flagged from things 8 years ago, before trophy rules existed.  

 

So if we suddenly change a rule previously flaggable to unflaggable, what happens when another issue forces us to change it again.  Are all of you people , especially against the flag system, really so confident there won't be any change later where a mod will keep someone flagged based on whatever the mood is, because of an oversight now?  I'm surprised you all are so against me... I'm actually trying to help you all avoid getting flagged, or at least keep the dispute process consistent...

 

I hope I've worded this crystal clear, and I've avoided using scenarios in forms of questions this time that aren't relevant to what I'm -really- talking about. This is why we should prepare for the future, and not just hope for the best.

 

 

Its not that we are against inconsistencies, it’s that we would have been against making rules for obtaining trophies in 2006. You know, before they actually had a chance to exist and see what they were about. Knowledge of this Bulletstrom server is now public on PSNP so any disputes from the first post on can refer to this thread.

Any new stuff that arises can’t all be predicted ahead of time.

You’re worried about the custom servers, but why don’t you propose some specific wording of rules dealing with accepting the servers, but addressing the second part of Slys comment. Let’s see how effective those rules would have been 12 months from now.

[FlyingDutchmen85]

44 minutes ago, B1rvine said:

Alright -- I lied, I'm back. can't sleep... My issue with the server rule isn't the rule itself but how to deal with inconsistencies.

 

It is my opinion that any newly created rules should not break any previously established ones already in place, and feelings shouldn't have any play in changing those rules.  People already flagged -- or not -- may benefit or suffer because of this.  This is evident because people are flagged from things 8 years ago, before trophy rules existed.  

 

So if we suddenly change a rule previously flaggable to unflaggable, what happens when another issue forces us to change it again.  Are all of you people , especially against the flag system, really so confident there won't be any change later where a mod will keep someone flagged based on whatever the mood is, because of an oversight now?  I'm surprised you all are so against me... I'm actually trying to help you all avoid getting flagged, or at least keep the dispute process consistent...

 

I hope I've worded this crystal clear, and I've avoided using scenarios in forms of questions this time that aren't relevant to what I'm -really- talking about. This is why we should prepare for the future, and not just hope for the best.

 

 

What rules do you feel have been changed by this?

The rules I see that somewhat relate to this are:

Quote

• Using CFW (Custom Firmware) to unlock trophies - Similar to using save files to auto-unlock trophies, using files and custom firmware on any console to unlock trophies instead of playing within the game environment is flaggable. This is 100% done on purpose, it can't be done on accident by regular players, and you will get flagged if your timestamps are detected.
• Joining hacked multiplayer lobbies that auto-unlock trophies - Due to the impossibility of these times affecting specific game leaderboards, it's not fair to players who unlocked trophies under normal circumstances. Right now there isn't a 'white list' system for these kinds of games and a regular flag is made - you'll have to hide that game to get back on the leaderboards. If this happens to you, don't sync your trophies and go here to see how to reverse it.

 

The use of custom servers bears some resemblance to CFW, since both are custom software. The rule states that using this CFW to unlock trophies instead of playing within the game environment is flaggable.

Further I think the joining hacked multiplayer lobbies has some resemblance here due to the (hypothetical) situation where a custom server changes the trophy conditions without the knowledge of the player.

 

As by the decision the use of Custom server would be allowed as long as the trophies are still earned in the same way. If they're not earned in the same way they can be flagged. I don't think this is really changing any rules, just clarifying them due to developments.

From what I gather the specific instance of the Bulletstorm servers are still earning the trophies in the correct way.

Should in the future there arise any custom servers that do change the way you earn the trophies, the rules (and decision from this thread) still allow for those to be disallowed.

[Raitandrul]

The leaderboards are already full with hacked trophies with "legit" timestamps. Whoever wants to use this software surely wants to fulfill the requirements to get trophies and not just hack them.

[B1rvine]

1 hour ago, FlyingDutchmen85 said:

What rules do you feel have been changed by this?

 

I posted this a few posts ago, but the biggest offender is actually "Boosting" in the unflaggable means, by that last sentence, dead to rights. The two you mentioned would partially fall under that category as well.

• Boosting - Playing online via coordinating with other players in a way to speed up progress in obtaining a trophy through normal means via in-game exploits, glitches, coordination, private lobbies, and or other doable means within the in-game environment. Hacked lobbies, hacking, or exploits performed via external means (outside of the game as created) are flaggable.

 

So a computer and special software falls under the "external" means. Also, again, I'm not only referring to this custom server issue, but rules changing in general due to inconsistent or incomplete descriptions. The rules just got updated on how cross saves are allowed too, which directly had influence to the recent Sound Shapes dispute.  If that hadn't occurred, the guy fell under unflaggable means at the time the dispute started.  (I don't agree he should be unflagged, but I'd be pissed in general if a rule was updated after the dispute started and it affected an outcome I was invested in.)

 

1 hour ago, DaivRules said:

Its not that we are against inconsistencies...

...Any new stuff that arises can’t all be predicted ahead of time...

...why don’t you propose some specific wording of rules dealing with accepting the servers...

 

You asked me how PSNP was inconsistent with Sony Terms of Service, and I answered.  After that, I made a post regarding gray area ethical dilemmas as a whole, and possible inconsistencies based on outcomes made by them evident here in my first two paragraphs. I did pose some ethical dilemmas to the guy who created this, in an attempt to illustrate my point which is --- what if so many "what ifs" occur that result in a rule being retracted, due to another decision by ethical concerns rather than logical rules already in place, and what happens to previous trophy earners "now in the wrong" again (so no, this is not a "gish gallop"). The lot of you continually giving your opinion on the single server example wasn't addressing my point, and didn't help matters.

 

New stuff can't be predicted fully, you are correct.  But some problems can be envisioned, and have been brought up. So we could start there.

 

I haven't addressed new wording yet, because we haven't established the old rules have been broken yet by this new one, which I think is important before we can continue and "restart" or add to them.  Honestly, I doubt anything we discuss is gonna make much of a difference either. It rarely does, as BamBam pointed out with his whitelist thing.  I did get Mango to update something regarding cross saves, so I'll call that a win for the week.

 

 

 

 

Edited March 16, 2018 by B1rvine

[Floriiss]

Personally I'm against this and I completely support everything that has been said by @MMDE. I might be in the minority seeing how many people react positivey to this, but I've got my own reasons. I think it's good that @Sergen mentioned something about showing evidence, but you really think that's possible? I mean.. there's plenty of throphies that require a lot of grinding. For example playing 50+ hours or 10k+ kills. How do you expect people to give proof of that? Do you need to record every kill or hours upon hours of gameplay? First of all, people don't have time to rewatch all that stuff. Secondly, we don't know what's going on behind the scenes. Let's say we record our final kills or final minutes and show that the trophy actually pops, what happened before that? We don't know.
 

On 15-3-2018 at 0:11 PM, MMDE said:

So you got one person hosting a server, and nobody else can do this? I think that can lead to some serious abuse in the community. People may just keep it to a small group of people they like, exclude those they don't like, take money for it etc etc.

 

This reminds me of something.. 

 

[Sergen]

16 minutes ago, Floriiss said:

Personally I'm against this and I completely support everything that has been said by @MMDE. I might be in the minority seeing how many people react positivey to this, but I've got my own reasons. I think it's good that @Sergen mentioned something about showing evidence, but you really think that's possible? I mean.. there's plenty of throphies that require a lot of grinding. For example playing 50+ hours or 10k+ kills. How do you expect people to give proof of that? Do you need to record every kill or hours upon hours of gameplay? First of all, people don't have time to rewatch all that stuff. Secondly, we don't know what's going on behind the scenes. Let's say we record our final kills or final minutes and show that the trophy actually pops, what happened before that? We don't know.
 

 

This reminds me of something.. 

 

 

You're bringing up an argument that people have refuted more than a few times. If people want to hack trophies, they would just do it with edited time stamps for dates when the servers were officially up, nobody is going to revive a server just to hack trophies. Game servers have been revived on PC and PS2 for many years now, can anyone give an example of a revived server from either of those platforms where stats are hyper-inflated by the person who restored the server? For the most part, the people who restore those servers want the game to be playable again and in this case the server revival is coming to PSN in some capacity and in turn, people who play on those servers will earn trophies for performing actions within the games. 

 

You also don't know if someone on an official game server has edited their own stats, so maybe we should flag everyone in-case they record a trophy and show their last match and stats, since we don't know what happened in the middle. If the person claims they played on a private server, they can provide people the details to getting on that server and everyone who has the game can be free to test that server to see if there is anything wrong within it. This website is full of people looking for any excuse to flag people so I'm sure if people made any custom server, someone on this website would also be going on the same custom server with the publicly available information. 

 

As it currently stands, nobody has used a custom server to hyper-inflate their stats and the only example currently shows that someone was doing their trophies legit on a custom server, wait until it happens before jumping to conclusions. It's been nearly 10 years since trophies were introduced to PSN and in that whole time, only one person has restored a game server to benefit trophy hunters, if it took that long then what makes you think trophy hunters would bring back a server to hack the trophies? It would more than likely take longer to bring back a server and hack the stats on that server than it would to play the game legit and it certainly would take longer than using CFW to unlock the trophies. It really baffles me how people don't think logically about these things, tools already exist for people to hack, this isn't introducing hacking to unobtainable games because hackers already know how to do that within minutes and without even playing or owning a copy of the game. 

Edited March 16, 2018 by Sergen

[DaivRules]

15 minutes ago, Floriiss said:

Personally I'm against this and I completely support everything that has been said by @MMDE. I might be in the minority seeing how many people react positivey to this, but I've got my own reasons. I think it's good that @Sergen mentioned something about showing evidence, but you really think that's possible? I mean.. there's plenty of throphies that require a lot of grinding. For example playing 50+ hours or 10k+ kills. How do you expect people to give proof of that? Do you need to record every kill or hours upon hours of gameplay? First of all, people don't have time to rewatch all that stuff. Secondly, we don't know what's going on behind the scenes. Let's say we record our final kills or final minutes and show that the trophy actually pops, what happened before that? We don't know.

 

 

Time between trophies would show exactly what you're asking for without needing any videos. Also, information for that private server would likely be listed on this site. I don't see what the problem is.

[FlyingDutchmen85]

57 minutes ago, B1rvine said:

I posted this a few posts ago, but the biggest offender is actually "Boosting" in the unflaggable means, by that last sentence, dead to rights. The two you mentioned would partially fall under that category as well.

• Boosting - Playing online via coordinating with other players in a way to speed up progress in obtaining a trophy through normal means via in-game exploits, glitches, coordination, private lobbies, and or other doable means within the in-game environment. Hacked lobbies, hacking, or exploits performed via external means (outside of the game as created) are flaggable.

 

So a computer and special software falls under the "external" means. Also, again, I'm not only referring to this custom server issue, but rules changing in general due to inconsistent or incomplete descriptions. The rules just got updated on how cross saves are allowed too, which directly had influence to the recent Sound Shapes dispute.  If that hadn't occurred, the guy fell under unflaggable means at the time the dispute started.  (I don't agree he should be unflagged, but I'd be pissed in general if a rule was updated after the dispute started and it affected an outcome I was invested in.)

 

Ahh I see now. I didn't see your earlier post.

I agree that these are 'external' means, though you could still argue that it's not an exploit. However I don't think that discussion semantics is the point here.

It's really difficult to write fully complete descriptions, especially with new developments coming along. So I think it's inevitable that rules need to be updated or even changed. The question is how to handle the changes when they need to be made. Do you retroactively (is that proper english?) flag people? Or do you only allow flags from after the rule was changed (if possible to determine something like that)? I think that would all depend on the specific situation and change.

For this case it's clearly a new development.

I don't know the details of the Sound Shapes dispute you mention, so I can't really respond to that.

 

30 minutes ago, Sergen said:

As it currently stands, nobody has used a custom server to hyper-inflate their stats and the only example currently shows that someone was doing their trophies legit on a custom server, wait until it happens before jumping to conclusions. It's been nearly 10 years since trophies were introduced to PSN and in that whole time, only one person has restored a game server to benefit trophy hunters, if it took that long then what makes you think trophy hunters would bring back a server to hack the trophies? It would more than likely take longer to bring back a server and hack the stats on that server than it would to play the game legit and it certainly would take longer than using CFW to unlock the trophies. It really baffles me how people don't think logically about these things, tools already exist for people to hack, this isn't introducing hacking to unobtainable games because hackers already know how to do that within minutes and without even playing or owning a copy of the game.

 

To be fair I think you're oversimplifying the potential problems with hacked/modded servers here. And over generalizing by saying people don't think logically in this matter.

For an individual it would be easier to hack their personal trophies a different way, if that's what they're after. But that doesn't mean that a custom server couldn't still have a broader effect on trophies, especially for the other people using the server that didn't put it up themselves. There are plenty of trophies that can be influenced by server-side factors, which could even happen without the intent just to get the trophies.

Modding communities have been modding games for years, including mods that make the game work different in area's where they feel it's lacking. If someone goes through the trouble of raising a custom server, I don't think it's such a leap that they would possible mod parts of the game that they felt was lacking. Which could then effect the trophies on there. Also not every hypothetical custom server may be raised with the sole purpose of getting the trophies, but might be raised with the intent of playing the game (maybe in modded form) again.

 

Off course this is all highly hypothetical, but so is your original question.

If you're asking if the custom Bulletstorm server should be allowed to be used, then yes we don't need to worry much about inflated stats etc. (based on what I understand of the specific case).

However if you ask the hypothetical question, should it be allowed to use custom servers to get trophies. Then the worries of modded servers are fair and not that illogical.