EPTIn my opinion, if you pay 50 bucks for an account, you should be allowed to do whatever the hell you want with it...But when you start to make profit on your 50 dollar investment, where do you draw the line? Should Activision get a cut? It's sort of in a fuzzy grey area and I think thats why it's sparked such mixed responses.
Progamers selling account leveling services - Page 26
| Forum Index > SC2 General |
|
Zedromas
Canada112 Posts
In my opinion, if you pay 50 bucks for an account, you should be allowed to do whatever the hell you want with it...But when you start to make profit on your 50 dollar investment, where do you draw the line? Should Activision get a cut? It's sort of in a fuzzy grey area and I think thats why it's sparked such mixed responses. | ||
|
Danglars
United States12133 Posts
On July 19 2012 13:07 Zedromas wrote: The volume of players, and games played on BattleNet dilutes things like power levelled accounts and smurfs etc. I dont think it really compromises a normal player's experience on the ladder. If it is against the EULA then it's up to Blizzard to figure out a way to fix the problem, and TL is in the right to frown on such actions. In my opinion, if you pay 50 bucks for an account, you should be allowed to do whatever the hell you want with it...But when you start to make profit on your 50 dollar investment, where do you draw the line? Should Activision get a cut? It's sort of in a fuzzy grey area and I think thats why it's sparked such mixed responses. I'm with you on this. The volume of players willing to pay money for an account AND somebody to make believe with it is small compared to player population. The effect is minimal. It would be news to me if there was a significant filling of grandmaster league with accounts power-leveled. It's sole mechanic of limiting population to 200 can have an adverse effect towards those who would otherwise be there if not for leveled accounts. As is said, Blizzard can fix the problem in their own time along with the maphackers and other online issues. As it stands, the effects are hardly noteworthy. | ||
|
phodacbiet
United States1740 Posts
On July 19 2012 13:07 Zedromas wrote: The volume of players, and games played on BattleNet dilutes things like power levelled accounts and smurfs etc. I dont think it really compromises a normal player's experience on the ladder. If it is against the EULA then it's up to Blizzard to figure out a way to fix the problem, and TL is in the right to frown on such actions. In my opinion, if you pay 50 bucks for an account, you should be allowed to do whatever the hell you want with it...But when you start to make profit on your 50 dollar investment, where do you draw the line? Should Activision get a cut? It's sort of in a fuzzy grey area and I think thats why it's sparked such mixed responses. You mean like how pro gamers are making a profit out of their 50 dollars account by winning tourneys? Should pro gamers start paying tournament taxes each time they win to Activision? | ||
|
fairymonger
United States81 Posts
| ||
|
Makura
United States317 Posts
| ||
|
rd
United States2586 Posts
On July 19 2012 11:44 FairForever wrote: How is it any different? Maphackers ruin the play for everyone else Powerleveling ruins the play for everyone else Obviously one is way worse than the other, but both are wrong. This isn't a single player game - for one to benefit, another has to suffer How is it any different other than one is obviously way worse than the other? It sounds like you answered your own question. Difference is one isn't wrong. A GM that was flawed from the start makes it appear wrong. No one really cares about the players that buy achievements/portraits/other leagues that aren't GM. Or players that just decide to log on their friends account and play. You'll never prove whether or not money was involved. And what a ridiculous over-the-top exaggeration. Powerleveling ruins the game for everyone. I don't think that numerical value would exceed 10. Virtually no one in this thread has been affected by this at all. On July 19 2012 11:58 FairForever wrote:+ Show Spoiler + On July 19 2012 11:48 Kluey wrote: Why does Powerleveling ruin the game for everyone else? A silver player in GM isn't actually going to ladder, he's just getting GM to show off. Likewise, if Naama plays on any account, he's giving games to people of his skill level which is just fine... Apart from Portraits, there isn't many things that you gain anyways. Each game of SC2 is a new game and nothing carries over. 1) Portrait farming is illegal - you can get banned for it 2) This will give undeserved losses to lower level players, and once the account is no longer powerleveled, undeserved wins to high level players Oh no, players aren't playing their best to be correctly ranked within a flawed ladder that will never truly represent skill. IT'S THE END OF THE WORLD. The ladder can only function like the utopia of competition everyone wants it to be if everyone who ladders plays at their maximum potential and doesn't do anything but play at their maximum potential. No multiple accounts, no sharing. Theres simply no incentive to do so. It was designed for casual players. On July 19 2012 13:16 phodacbiet wrote: You mean like how pro gamers are making a profit out of their 50 dollars account by winning tourneys? Should pro gamers start paying tournament taxes each time they win to Activision? Pro gamers don't pay those taxes. The tournaments do. Blizzard pretty much acknowledges they don't care about any tournament whose prize pool is less than $5000 by merit of their licenses. | ||
|
Glon
United States569 Posts
On July 17 2012 14:08 Glon wrote: We can go on and on in circles about whether Hacking is "wrong" or not. Something that is technically illegal doesn't make it wrong. For example, it is illegal to 30 MPH on a 25. However, is it wrong? Of course not, in fact is widely considered "right." So, we must ask ourselves if leveling services are doing harm, and if so, to what level of harm they are causing. I think they are doing minimal harm, only really being noticeable in a few circumstantial cases. That is my 2 cents, and as a semi/full pro I would enjoy the extra $$ income. Here's an even better analogy: Pandora is illegal to stream, yet 75% of streamers use it anyways (even switching to pandora screen in between games to pause/skip). And yet, there aren't threads popping up suggesting that we defeature/hate streamers who stream pandora. Again, the difference between "illegal" and "wrong" -- In this case, like the 2 above, they're illegal yes, but not necessarily wrong. | ||
|
InfCereal
Canada1759 Posts
On July 19 2012 08:54 dudesrslywtf wrote: Why does it need to be more wrong? Even if they are equally wrong, it's still wrong. All the same, I would expect for any pro-gamer who is shown to have a connection with the hacker community to be disciplined appropriately. Edit: I just realized that your quotation marks around "wrong" implies that you might not think donating money to the people making hacks is bad. I don't even know what to say to that. I couldn't care less where people's money goes. Regardless, you didn't address the point of my post. | ||
|
FairForever
Canada2392 Posts
On July 19 2012 10:40 vileChAnCe wrote: You quit because you occasionally get matched up with unfair opponents? Ladder still functions properly 90% of the time and I guarantee you that if you continued to practice and play ladder you would be matching against proper opponents and growing. The very person you quoted was leagues above me at one point, he'd trash me so hard that to most people it would seem like I was wasting my time. But to be able to see that much difference in play helped me grow substantially, it gave me goals outside of going 50/50 on ladder. If you changed your perspective and saw those games as learning experiences and motivation it would help you dramatically. This isn't a problem its just another thing the community lit on fire. Team Liquid needs to lock the thread and come to a formal conclusion before the mob drags peoples reputation through the mud. Well, I guess maphacking is okay because > 90% of the time you're playing proper opponents? You can't just use that argument. I don't think it's "lit the community on fire" and I don't think it should. It's not a huge deal imo. But it's still something that should be frowned upon, because it's against the terms of service and it also hurts the integrity of the ladder. | ||
|
Iyerbeth
England2410 Posts
| ||
|
nem-san
11 Posts
On July 19 2012 13:38 Makura wrote: If your gonna pay to get your account level... why not just pay for coaching and actually get better? because then you have to do something yourself... that cant be right?! i dont get it. what the point to be in master or grand master if you cant play in it yourself? | ||
|
korona
1098 Posts
| ||
|
______z
2 Posts
On July 19 2012 13:07 Zedromas wrote: In my opinion, if you pay 50 bucks for an account, you should be allowed to do whatever the hell you want with it...But when you start to make profit on your 50 dollar investment, where do you draw the line? Should Activision get a cut? It's sort of in a fuzzy grey area and I think thats why it's sparked such mixed responses. you really didnt think hard about this one did you I hope taxi drivers don't have to start paying their car manufacturers because they're making money off of their cars | ||
|
dacimvrl
Vatican City State582 Posts
i only see it as a smurf account that will go inactive in a season most pros have smurf accounts, so? | ||
|
dacimvrl
Vatican City State582 Posts
On July 19 2012 13:07 Zedromas wrote: In my opinion, if you pay 50 bucks for an account, you should be allowed to do whatever the hell you want with it...But when you start to make profit on your 50 dollar investment, where do you draw the line? Should Activision get a cut? It's sort of in a fuzzy grey area and I think thats why it's sparked such mixed responses. so the other day, I bought some pencils and started drawing by the coffee shop, and this couple came up to me and said they were very interested in my sketches and wanted to buy them. I told them to buy me a cup of mocha instead of paying me cash. So, should I have shared the cup of mocha with the shop which sold me the handmade sketchbook and pencil? | ||
|
korona
1098 Posts
On July 20 2012 00:16 dacimvrl wrote: what's the big deal? i only see it as a smurf account that will go inactive in a season most pros have smurf accounts, so? One big difference is that a top level player's smurf will not start from bronze level. If they have had their MMR reset their MMR will start around platinum/diamond level if and when they win all their 5 placement matches. It does not take many matches for them to start facing master level opponents after that. But if you level a bronze account, it takes some 50 to 100 straight wins to level it up to master. Lots of low level opponents are crushed during that journey. And if the leveler seeks to humiliate his opponents like e.g. Dragon often does, it makes it even worse. The SC2 userbase is getting smaller and ladder anxiety is a real issue. The ladder is the only competitive arena for large portion of the active players, who are not good enough to compete in tournaments. Powerleveling should be frowned upon and if somebody does it publicly there should be consequences. | ||
|
rd
United States2586 Posts
On July 20 2012 00:49 korona wrote: One big difference is that a top level player's smurf will not start from bronze level. If they have had their MMR reset their MMR will start around platinum/diamond level if and when they win all their 5 placement matches. It does not take many matches for them to start facing master level opponents after that. But if you level a bronze account, it takes some 50 to 100 straight wins to level it up to master. Lots of low level opponents are crushed during that journey. And if the leveler seeks to humiliate his opponents like e.g. Dragon often does, it makes it even worse. The SC2 userbase is getting smaller and ladder anxiety is a real issue. The ladder is the only competitive arena for large portion of the active players, who are not good enough to compete in tournaments. Powerleveling should be frowned upon and if somebody does it publicly there should be consequences. Lol. Do those low level opponents know the difference? Someone trying to get out of bronze as fast as possible will just 4 gate/2 rax/x pool. I can't imagine a bronze league player will analyze the game and immediately conclude their opponent was several leagues above them on a smurf. And really, if they did come to that conclusion, how often do they analyze ANY game they lose overwhelmingly and conclude it was a smurf for the sake of feeling better? I can just imagine... "Shit, that four gate hit 30 seconds faster than normal. What a fucking smurfer. I NEED TO GO ON TL AND COMPLAIN ABOUT THIS RIGHT AWAY!" It just goes back to the supposed smurfing players who are apparently rampant in low leagues tanking their MMR and fucking with low level players. How in the world do you distinguish a loss where the player doesn't immediately leave? How do you enforce players always playing to their full potential with such objectivity? You can't. Like, you almost imply the only opponents these players fight are smurfs and that the ladder is such a failure they actually can't compete with their peers which is just total bullshit. Also lol @ ladder anxiety. | ||
|
schaf
Germany1326 Posts
 This coming from a guy who was around 2 wins 60 losses on BW ICCUP, so apparently I'm a little masochistic in this way. On Topic: Solution is easy! Just remove grandmaster or make it a league like every other, I really dont get why it hasnt happened already. Playing good at the beginning of a season grants you a spot among the *best 200* from your area for like 2-3 months. wtf. For sure getting in is hard but dropping out seems to me being even more challenging | ||
|
TRaFFiC
Canada1448 Posts
| ||
|
Zedromas
Canada112 Posts
On July 19 2012 23:30 ______z wrote: you really didnt think hard about this one did you I hope taxi drivers don't have to start paying their car manufacturers because they're making money off of their cars On July 20 2012 00:27 dacimvrl wrote: so the other day, I bought some pencils and started drawing by the coffee shop, and this couple came up to me and said they were very interested in my sketches and wanted to buy them. I told them to buy me a cup of mocha instead of paying me cash. So, should I have shared the cup of mocha with the shop which sold me the handmade sketchbook and pencil? The point I was trying to make is not that I think Activision should get more money, it's that THEY think they should get more money. Doesnt GSL have to purchase the rights to Starcraft to be able to hold big tournamentss? They make huge profits off of the advertisements and fanfare brough in by the name of the game. When you buy a car there is already the understanding that you can do whatever the hell you want with it. If I purchase a brand new Porsche I can go and drive it off a cliff if I like. I can resell it, pay someone to make it better, give it away...these types of boundaries arent as well known or clearly defined in the virtual world so it's hard to say whether a pro should be allowed to make money by abusing the ladder system and people's laziness. | ||
| ||
