[Sevv]

Originally Posted by LyonheartLakshmi

Maybe it's just me, but you kinda lost credibility the moment you said that

lol meh i had to but simple fact is it finally died tried to stop this like 3 pages ago or so? maybe just a lil over the top lmao sorry ; ;

[Macht]

Originally Posted by aozora

I apologize for the ad hominem, but you make me sad....

Lol, alright you obviously don't see it in my perspective.

If the people are the same as me who have put their emotions and whatever else into the game. If they went with windower because it was the only way to enable them to play the game properly then I see no reason why they would not get the SE Offical Windower for the game, unless they are that insainly lazy.

Point is the Official Windower, I would think, will not have these cheats that the unoffical one does. So regardless of this hersay of "might" or "potentially" you can straight out black list the unoffical and the company doesn't has to worry about recourse.

What a customer going to complain they weren't cheatting, the company can just ask then "Why didn't you use our offical windower then?". This gives the purpose and power for SE to attack those that don't because of the premise that if they still want to use the old windower they are cheating. That is it, it removes the need of having to say that they might be playing legit. If they are using the offical windower then SE will know they are legit, PERIOD!

To also add I emphasise obedience because as I've generally found the players that can obey a rule have often been better at supporting other players. For me if someone is resistant to this change the most likely cause would be that a plug-in or something that enables them to cheat keeps them using the old windower. Players that are enabled to cheat and do it are likely to steal, be vulgar, rude, lie, and continue on the list of bad actions. These are players I could not give a damn about, I would preffer them gone.

If you want to say that I have that "Eastern Mindset" it really doesn't bother me one bit, though I find it humorus being a "Westerner". You really wouldn't be the first to call me it either. Regardless I do value Rules, Family, and Friends at the highest.

Originally Posted by aozora

Oh, this is interesting. It looks like the concept of virtual property itself has been granted a US patent...
http://patft.uspto.gov/netacgi/nph-P...S=PN/6,119,229
Virtual property system
Abstract
A digital object ownership system is disclosed. The system includes a plurality of user terminals, where each terminal is accessible by at least one individual user. The system also includes at least one central computer system that is capable of communicating with each of the user terminals. A plurality of digital objects are provided, where each of the digital objects has a unique object identification code. Each of the digital objects are assigned to an owner. The digital objects are persistent, such that each of the digital objects is accessible by a particular user both when the user's terminal is in communication with the central computer system and also when the user's terminal is not in communication with the central computer system. The digital objects have utility in connection with communication over a network in that the object requires both the presence of the object identification code and proof of ownership.
Inventors: Martinez; Ronald (Mill Valley, CA), Schneier; Bruce (Minneapolis, MN), Guerin; Greg (Tempe, AZ)
Assignee: The Brodia Group (San Francisco, CA)
Appl. No.: 08/834,027
Filed: April 11, 1997
So, uh, what does it mean when virtual property ownership is someone else's intellectual property?

Boy, get the feeling I'm going to be beating a dead horse with this but.....

You should re-read that, in particular this spot "The digital objects are persistent, such that each of the digital objects is accessible by a particular user both when the user's terminal is in communication with the central computer system and also when the user's terminal is not in communication with the central computer system".

You character and all of it's actual data is housed at Square-Enix's Servers, under the normal operation of the game you can not access your character data without the central computer system. So your character, gil, equipment, etc... are not your property. However a different game such as Diablo, the character is stored on your computer so you can access him even when not connected to Blizzard's Server. Those characters regardless of what Blizzard says are your property.

This is the same when it comes to content you download. This is were sites like Rhapsody are in gray area with the subscriptions. Because you payed for the subscription in order to be able to download an unlimited amount of songs. Once they are downloaded to your system you do have property/ownership of this data, so were does Rhapsody have the right to take this away from you when you cancel your subscription? Even worse that I've seen, when does a singer/artist have the right to pull Rhapsody's License for the song and so any songs you had through the subscription also become unusable.

Playstation Store that you access through the PS3 also an example of virtual property. Every game you download from the Playstation Store, once it's on your system so you can play it if you are online or offline, Sony does not have the right to take it back from you.

[IfritnoItazura]

aozora: This is straying very far away from windowed mode and Windower, and speculations on the impacts of S-E's change of stance on the issues.

Philosophical discussions of "Free thinking", "Authority", and "Obedience" probably belong in Off Topics forum, if they belong on this site anywhere. Discussion of client-vendor power relationship in the context of FFXI is probably best served as its own thread in General FFXI Discussion, if you wish to continue that train of thoughts.

Right now, all the meandering countering and posturing you're engaged in are mostly stuck on minor, terminology quibbles, which has little to do with the topic.

Well, that's how I see it, anyway. =/

[aozora]

Originally Posted by Murphie

OMG It's just an MMO that you don't even have to play. Just stop if you don't like the rules.

Huh?

Trying to understand objectively how power exchanges work, and then asking how or why that authority should be is given is about 8,000 miles from "I don't like to play this fun game."

1) The power to create rules comes from authority (in this case, third party software).
2) Authority is given and allowed by people (in this case, to SE). Investigate why.
3) Therefore, I don't like this game.

...

My brain hurts now. Going back to lurking.

[aozora]

Originally Posted by IfritnoItazura

aozora: This is straying very far away from windowed mode and Windower, and speculations on the impacts of S-E's change of stance on the issues.

Philosophical discussions of "Free thinking", "Authority", and "Obedience" probably belong in Off Topics forum, if they belong on this site anywhere. Discussion of client-vendor power relationship in the context of FFXI is probably best served as its own thread in General FFXI Discussion, if you wish to continue that train of thoughts.

Right now, all the meandering countering and posturing you're engaged in are mostly stuck on minor, terminology quibbles, which has little to do with the topic.

Well, that's how I see it, anyway. =/

It's an illustration, I think, a part of a whole. When I saw this topic start with "Yay, rule breakers will be punished! No excuse!" it piqued my interest, is all. Why people would see things that way.

I apologize for the intrusion.

[Murphie]

Originally Posted by aozora

It's an illustration, I think, a part of a whole. When I saw this topic start with "Yay, rule breakers will be punished! No excuse!" it piqued my interest, is all. Why people would see things that way.

I apologize for the intrusion.

Because rule breakers should be punished. No excuses. There are far more worthy venues for "fighting the power". The rules as set forth by the company that run the MMO I happen to play? Not one of them. Not by a long shot.

[neighbortaru]

please drop this silly argument. now. for reals. please.

[Murphie]

We could just close the thread. It's pretty much run it's course. Then again, it is news.

Anyway, dropping.

[Arctic Wolf]

It still might take a while. They didn't say anything about windowed mode at the "5th Anniversary Party" summary.



Ps. Are you planning on keeping the System Message thing when you have a URL in your post, or could you not make it so that only the URL gets replaced?

[Guren]

Nooo! That will make it so people can run illegal programs now! You couldn't before because you can't alt-tab.

[felpa_de_osa]

people were already running illegal programs such as bot tools to name one I would see zero difference between now and if they implement windower/window mode.

[Taskmage]

I'm pretty sure Guren's post was meant to be ironic ...

At any rate, this conversation has been done to death. I'm gonna put the stake in it now before it rises again.