Funcom Feedback loop closure on Support and Removing problem players

I’ve made sure that this video / topic etc is in compliance with the TOS. So if this post is edited, closed or removed its because of other reasons.

I openly ask the question to the community and funcom. What are we doing with this whole exploiter / cheater ecosystem and what are the next steps. How do we actually get ahead of this and less about haggling the toss on what cheats are being used.

All games suffer from exploits, however the games that last are the ones where the publishers outwardly show signs of working to stamp them out. Facepunch for example dont keep an open dialogue you report the cheater, you wait days, you get an email, “person is banned thankyou” and everyone moves on with their day… the loop has closure…

Funcom it just drags on…and you never get closure.

Closure is important. Where is the closure on this set of issues and how do we get that going forward?


Can’t say I disagree with anything in your video. I’ve never personally seen a post get deleted, so I’ll have to take your word that it happens.

I thought the bit at the end about doing away with official servers entirely was really interesting. I’d never considered that possibility before. In a world like that I wonder how new players would be supported. Helping them find their first server would be essential in terms of growing the player base.

1 Like

Deleted is probably rare, but locked and unlisted (which is effectively the same thing) happens. Sometimes (if rarely) for what I’d consider frivolous reasons.

Honest question:
What happens if a cheating player is someone who spent a lot of real money (good client) within the game?
Banning/punishing a “big munne” spender could push this client out of the game, while punishing (maybe?) a low-buyer client could be easier to do (who cares losing someone who didn’t bring much money?)
What if a clan is composed by many “money-whalers” that actively keep bringing money into the game?
Would you really punish them for cheating? Or just giving 'em a “friendly warning”?
This is the question behind everything;
would you “fight for justice” or “fight for money”?

That’s the rotting path of the videogame industries nowadays…


That sounds like something that might apply to dishonest purveyors of microtransactional-based games (morally questionable to begin with).

This topic was automatically closed 7 days after the last reply. New replies are no longer allowed.