Botting in Runescape

[Radicap]

There's a musuem that OWNS the Mona Lisa. I can take photos of it all day and I'm not stealing a damn thing. Hell, they can lock up the painting and refuse to show it to the public, as is their right, but I can post and sell all the copies I want. I'm not stealing. I have to actually take or destroy the Mona Lisa to be charged with theft. Property is very clear in this matter.

 

The difference is that the Louvre gives visitors permission to bring cameras or recorders and take photographs of the exhibits. The movie studios don't give online pirates permission to make copies of their work, and Jagex does not give permission to players to cheat at their game. It goes back to agreement of the terms of purchase. It should also be pointed out that while the Louvre owns the Mona Lisa, the French government owns the Louvre, making it public property.

[Stev]

Someone I know was in a Skype call with Jacmob a few days ago, and according to him, through Jacmob, Optimus is slated for May, but they may do a mass ban/mini nuke pre/during BXPW.

A mass ban? So they store the names of botters and allow them to bot until they CBA to ban them all? As opposed to ban them immediately?

[Vezon Dash]

Someone I know was in a Skype call with Jacmob a few days ago, and according to him, through Jacmob, Optimus is slated for May, but they may do a mass ban/mini nuke pre/during BXPW.

A mass ban? So they store the names of botters and allow them to bot until they CBA to ban them all? As opposed to ban them immediately?

 

Jagex is helping keep down inflation for BXPW. :thumbsup:

[Platinum_Myr]

The issue with copyright is that it tries to apply a physical idea (property) onto a virtual idea. Sharing an idea means benefit for everything, detriment only in a sense of loss of control. Sharing physical property actually means depriving yourself of the benefit of using that property. The idea can be copied for free (the only hard physical limit on information is deleting it. Yes, it does cost some energy to realistically copy information, but its not a minimum physical limit.) A physical item can't be copied for free (have to at minimum have the physical elements of the item)

 

Property has physical laws, (I own it because it is in my possession.) Ideas don't follow the same physical laws. We create laws as society, but they don't have the same physical analogs, because these break down when applied to information.

 

It is illegal in most places to break copyright, because the society has agreed. Whether it is *moral* or not is a much different story, and you will get different answers depending on how you choose to evaluate morality of a course of action.

[NukeMarine]

There's a museum that OWNS the Mona Lisa. I can take photos of it all day and I'm not stealing a damn thing. Hell, they can lock up the painting and refuse to show it to the public, as is their right, but I can post and sell all the copies I want. I'm not stealing. I have to actually take or destroy the Mona Lisa to be charged with theft. Property is very clear in this matter.

 

The difference is that the Louvre gives visitors permission to bring cameras or recorders and take photographs of the exhibits. The movie studios don't give online pirates permission to make copies of their work, and Jagex does not give permission to players to cheat at their game. It goes back to agreement of the terms of purchase. It should also be pointed out that while the Louvre owns the Mona Lisa, the French government owns the Louvre, making it public property.

Wow, talk about missing the point. Ok, let's say the Louvre or even the French government proclaims "Since we own the original, selling photos of the Mona Lisa is illegal". In your childish view of the world, is it now illegal to sell photos of the Mona Lisa in any country? Is the French government RIGHT to make such a law? If your only distinction between right and wrong is that some law exists, you've got a naive view of the world. Laws are made by men. As such, some laws are just and some are corrupt. What we as noble persons should do is strive to do the right thing regardless of the law. When what is the law and what is right do not intersect, it is incumbent upon the noble persons to try to change the law back to what is right and just.

 

Now, is it right and just for what Jagex is demanding about it's game? For the most part, yes. However, they make some idiotic judgements at times. Something stupid like "Playing Runescape while playing the XBox is AFK and is a bannable offense". On the other hand, I don't think it's right how a program just removes the need for a player to be present. In the middle is this happy medium where a majority of players wouldn't bat an eye at the gameplay one way or another. Again, this isn't about what Jagex or the law of whatever country says, this is about what's right and wrong in a massive online role playing game.

[Jonanananas]

There's a museum that OWNS the Mona Lisa. I can take photos of it all day and I'm not stealing a damn thing. Hell, they can lock up the painting and refuse to show it to the public, as is their right, but I can post and sell all the copies I want. I'm not stealing. I have to actually take or destroy the Mona Lisa to be charged with theft. Property is very clear in this matter.

 

The difference is that the Louvre gives visitors permission to bring cameras or recorders and take photographs of the exhibits. The movie studios don't give online pirates permission to make copies of their work, and Jagex does not give permission to players to cheat at their game. It goes back to agreement of the terms of purchase. It should also be pointed out that while the Louvre owns the Mona Lisa, the French government owns the Louvre, making it public property.

Wow, talk about missing the point. Ok, let's say the Louvre or even the French government proclaims "Since we own the original, selling photos of the Mona Lisa is illegal". In your childish view of the world, is it now illegal to sell photos of the Mona Lisa in any country? Is the French government RIGHT to make such a law? If your only distinction between right and wrong is that some law exists, you've got a naive view of the world. Laws are made by men. As such, some laws are just and some are corrupt. What we as noble persons should do is strive to do the right thing regardless of the law. When what is the law and what is right do not intersect, it is incumbent upon the noble persons to try to change the law back to what is right and just.

 

Now, is it right and just for what Jagex is demanding about it's game? For the most part, yes. However, they make some idiotic judgements at times. Something stupid like "Playing Runescape while playing the XBox is AFK and is a bannable offense". On the other hand, I don't think it's right how a program just removes the need for a player to be present. In the middle is this happy medium where a majority of players wouldn't bat an eye at the gameplay one way or another. Again, this isn't about what Jagex or the law of whatever country says, this is about what's right and wrong in a massive online role playing game.

 

 

The Mona Lisa is a bad example because it has been owned by several people over the years and there are I don't know how many thousands of copies floating around, but yes of course the Louvre has the right to forbid the taking of photos of the Mona lisa and make it illegal. Wouldn't just be very effective because there are a lot of other, legal sources for this.

 

If bot making isn't illegal because of current law, then simply because they are using flaws in the law to hide. If you think rationally about it, it should be obvious that it should be illegal. Those guys are making money off the work of another without their permission. If you can't see why that should be illegal....

[Vezon Dash]

Immoral? No. Against the spirit? Yes.

 

As for the second part.... I have never stopped being friends with any of my friends because they botted in Runescape, but I have lost respect for them. Cheating is cheating, and cheating is not condoned where I come from.

 

Well my point for saying that its ridiculous to be mad at someone over runescape is that a lot of people get too addicted to RS and lose touch with reality.

 

If you would react differently to an irl friend cheating runescape then pokemon then theres a problem.

 

I would be a little put off if my friends did cheat me at Pokemon, but they don't.

I mean, It isn't like I hate them or disrespect them. I just don't think as highly of them because of what they are doing. Who knows? They could be cheating on their taxes or more important things next.

[Stev]

If bot making isn't illegal because of current law, then simply because they are using flaws in the law to hide. If you think rationally about it, it should be obvious that it should be illegal. Those guys are making money off the work of another without their permission. If you can't see why that should be illegal....

Completely incorrect. They're making money off of their hundreds, if not thousands, of hours put into writing a bot. Who gives a damn if it's for a game that someone else wrote? It's like if I decided to charge for my DGSweeper. It's my program. It doesn't matter that it'll only work and was built with and for RuneScape. It was my time and my energy put into developing it. A bot is no different.

 

By your logic, companies like GameShark should never have existed because they simply supplied cheats for another company's game.

[Guest jrhairychest]

If bot making isn't illegal because of current law, then simply because they are using flaws in the law to hide. If you think rationally about it, it should be obvious that it should be illegal. Those guys are making money off the work of another without their permission. If you can't see why that should be illegal....

Completely incorrect. They're making money off of their hundreds, if not thousands, of hours put into writing a bot. Who gives a damn if it's for a game that someone else wrote? It's like if I decided to charge for my DGSweeper. It's my program. It doesn't matter that it'll only work and was built with and for RuneScape. It was my time and my energy put into developing it. A bot is no different.

 

By your logic, companies like GameShark should never have existed because they simply supplied cheats for another company's game.

 

Did you forget the Mark Snellmen Case which legally states it isnt ok in RS (OrTradeMe Post 567)? Who gives a damn how many hours you put into your cheating mechanisms? Just because you can it doesnt mean its legal or moral. Jagex and the fair playing community do not want it. The law backs them up. You have no rational argument that justifies doing this.

 

Time might even tell on companies like Gameshark if playing communities/game developers get ticked off with cheats or mechanisms to do so. Like the Snellmen case, it only takes one lawsuit.

[Makoto_the_Phoenix]

If bot making isn't illegal because of current law, then simply because they are using flaws in the law to hide. If you think rationally about it, it should be obvious that it should be illegal. Those guys are making money off the work of another without their permission. If you can't see why that should be illegal....

 

Yes, let's consider it rationally.

 

Creating a bot (analogous to exploiting software bugs and/or using a Gameshark) isn't illegal. It's definitely amoral. As a software engineer, I can't afford to conflate the two together, since what is very clearly illegal differs from what is very clearly amoral.

 

People make money off of the work of others all of the time; we just have it in more acceptable forms. Take music loops, for instance - someone else created that 5-second loop of some random sound, and yet artists are putting it into their work and making insane amounts of cash. It goes up from there; some artists borrow or take clips from other songs outright and use them as their own. (Some modern for-instances: J Cole - "Workout" vs. Kanye West - "The New Workout Plan and Paula Abdul - Straight Up"; Lil' Wayne - 6 Foot 7 Foot vs. Day-O). But that's not a bad thing; it's actually acceptable in our modern culture.

 

Now don't get me wrong, I don't agree with the people using the bots. They should be punished in a manner analogous to breach of contract. As in, their accounts should be banned, their credit card number should be blacklisted, and they shouldn't have the privilege of using the product any further. The botmakers themselves are a harder breed to fight, so long as a market for what they create still exists. What would be better would be to either educate the consumer on the amoral use of this product, or to sculpt your environment in such a way that performing this amoral task is more of a detriment than a benefit.

[Jonanananas]

Stev: Yeah they might have put a lot of work into it. Work that would be 100% worthless if not for someone else's work that they use without permission.

 

The same goes to the music example - I'm not sure how the law works here, and frankly I don't really care. Using someone else's work without their permission to gain money should be illegal.

[Fresi]

People make money off of the work of others all of the time; we just have it in more acceptable forms. Take music loops, for instance - someone else created that 5-second loop of some random sound, and yet artists are putting it into their work and making insane amounts of cash. It goes up from there; some artists borrow or take clips from other songs outright and use them as their own. (Some modern for-instances: J Cole - "Workout" vs. Kanye West - "The New Workout Plan and Paula Abdul - Straight Up"; Lil' Wayne - 6 Foot 7 Foot vs. Day-O). But that's not a bad thing; it's actually acceptable in our modern culture.

Today' date=' most mainstream acts obtain prior authorization to use samples, a process known as "clearing" (gaining permission to use the sample and, usually, paying an up-front fee and/or a cut of the royalties to the original artist). Independent bands, lacking the funds and legal assistance to clear samples, are at a disadvantage - unless they seek the services of a professional sample replay company or producer.[/quote']

sure its wikipedia, they get everything wrong.. right? I should prob have spent more time finding a source, but I don't feel the need to dig any further to tell you that sampling is not accepted by the modern culture unless you got permission to do so.

If you go out big with a song that has clear sampling without permission, you can count on having to pay up.

A exception is work that has been licensed under Creative Commons by the creator.

Next time you come with this sort of claims, "it's actually acceptable in our modern culture", try and actually read up on it and get your facts right.

If jagex had given the bot creators permission, there would not be a discussion, but as it is, as far as i know jagex has not permitted anyone to create any program that uses runescape. Jagex might choose not to sue small programs that simply help players doing stuff, but clearly they choose to go after the bots, and they have the law on their side.

Spending a great amount of time to doing something bad, dose not give you the right to the gain of that wrongdoing, it might actually just cost you more.

[Makoto_the_Phoenix]

sure its wikipedia, they get everything wrong.. right? I should prob have spent more time finding a source, but I don't feel the need to dig any further to tell you that sampling is not accepted by the modern culture unless you got permission to do so.

If you go out big with a song that has clear sampling without permission, you can count on having to pay up.

A exception is work that has been licensed under Creative Commons by the creator.

Next time you come with this sort of claims, "it's actually acceptable in our modern culture", try and actually read up on it and get your facts right.

If jagex had given the bot creators permission, there would not be a discussion, but as it is, as far as i know jagex has not permitted anyone to create any program that uses runescape. Jagex might choose not to sue small programs that simply help players doing stuff, but clearly they choose to go after the bots, and they have the law on their side.

Spending a great amount of time to doing something bad, dose not give you the right to the gain of that wrongdoing, it might actually just cost you more.

 

You should probably dig further. In general, the whole culture of Hip-Hop and Rap was started based on mixing and sampling other artists and fellow rapper's work. The same applies heavily for Jazz. Back in the day, you didn't get permission for mixing or using someone else's beat or tempo or key - and many artists profited heavily from it. As a whole, society has come to appreciate, let alone accept this development in the music industry, since it means that we [the consumer] can get a new, exciting flavor on an old beat or tune that we thought was long since dead. I mean, I don't have problems with artists doing what they do. It makes music awesome.

 

But that's not my point.

 

My point is that there are culturally acceptable forms of someone building off of someone else's work for profit - and it can occur without their permission. Whether or not it's illegal depends how the law is written.

 

Make no mistake, I don't advocate botting in RS, nor do I think that it's a moral action to do. But the legality of it is still up in the air - one court case doesn't exactly mean that it's 100% and totally against the law. This is why I feel that, while botters should be punished severely, the way to curb the bot makers is to adjust the game in a way that makes botting pointless.

[Logdotzip]

Botting will never be pointless as long as it's still possible to goldfarm while you sleep with bots

 

More people bot just for money than is accredited

[Fresi]

My point is that there are culturally acceptable forms of someone building off of someone else's work for profit - and it can occur without their permission. Whether or not it's illegal depends how the law is written.

 

It can be done with out permission, but in that case the owner to the songs decided not to sue, they could if they wanted to. posting some links to a few articles dose not prove that sampling is culturally accepted, no need to put such a wide perspective on this, the fact that some accept it dose not make it so. Like with all laws, there are those who like it and those who do not, I can go out and find several articles telling you the o posit of anything you bring here, but we are talking about laws that where set down by a MAJORITY of ppl that we have selected to make laws for us, if you have problems with how the law system works, this is not the topic for that.

And we are talking about jagex here, its their game, and they do not accept how bots use runescape, If we are to compare that to the music industry, where as someone is sampling music against the owner of the original songs will, they can get sued, and are most likely to lose.

 

But the legality of it is still up in the air - one court case doesn't exactly mean that it's 100% and totally against the law.

 

The fact that jagex won that court case, makes it more likely they will win the next one, and this time probably faster. In general when something new hits the courts, the first case will be long, but it often sets the guidelines for future cases similar to it.

[Makoto_the_Phoenix]

Fresi, you're still missing my point (and arguing that which I acknowledged as off-topic - hence the "that's not my point" statement). Let me clear it up for you.

 

There are culturally acceptable forms of using another person's work for profit and fame. Depending on the market or the material, it can occur with or without their permission.

I say this now, and encourage you to listen to some music. Start from the 50's and work your way up to the modern day. Then read a few novels from back in 1920 and compare them with some modern novels. Compare fashions from 100 years ago to now. Food from 100 years ago to now. Methods of hygiene from 1,000 years ago to now. There really are culturally acceptable forms of using another person's work for profit and fame. Also consider that, back in the day, the entertainment industry didn't have the ridiculous extended copyright provisions that they do now. But if you want to debate that part, we'll have to take it to PM.

 

Remixing happens. That's my point in a nutshell.

 

But the legality of it is still up in the air - one court case doesn't exactly mean that it's 100% and totally against the law.

 

The fact that jagex won that court case, makes it more likely they will win the next one, and this time probably faster. In general when something new hits the courts, the first case will be long, but it often sets the guidelines for future cases similar to it.

 

The court case sets precedence over another court case, which may or may not work in Jagex's favor. Take, for instance, if someone were daring enough to program something that could perform OCR on their product with 99% success. First, it'd be an achievement in computers and language recognition. Second, if Jagex were to sue on DMCA grounds, then that would effectively make OCR programs such as ABBYY Fine Reader and Nuance OmniPage in violation of the DMCA - despite those programs having a very, very legitimate and legal reason for being.

 

One court case doesn't put a firm end to the legal issues. It merely means that the bot makers use another legal avenue (legal loosely defined here as one not covered by DMCA or copyright law) to bring Jagex back to court again.

 

And that is a waste of time and resources.

[n64jive]

Jagex won in court. Doesn't mean the person was wrong for what he did. There is a huge job market for Computer Science and Engineering jobs. If kids get interested from cheating in video games...then sue them I guess (literally)...

 

Did you know that Jagex originally lost in court on the claims that they later won? http://www.scribd.com/full/36934197?access_key=key-51wmklfh7anl258olb8. Basically, what this entire document states is that Jagex hadn't went through the proper filings in order for the content to be 1. Copyright infrindgement 2. Violation of the DMCA and 3. Violation of the CFAA.

 

Basically, this meant Jagex had to do some paperwork, and then refile a suit. So up until about the middle of 2011, bot makers were not violating any laws with their work. But yes, now it is against the law to interface with Jagex's code...

 

Copyright law is weird, and it's getting even weirder with the progession in technology. There are lawyers all over the place that just love getting involved in these cases (commonly known as patent trolls or Copyright trolls)...

 

Did you know there are all sorts of things you likely use every day that are patented. The best example I can think of is the hyperlink. The follwoing hyperlink (which I am violoating patent laws by using) shows an instance where a company was sued by another company for giving exposue to their company... http://news.cnet.com/2100-1030_3-6145744.html

 

But then another judge rules it's ok.

 

All this on an entirely different point, again the problem is with the game mechanics. Runescape isn't going to last forever, and the game will likely notice a steady decline. I would argue to death that bots supplemented Jagex's income more than it hurt it, as it was clear that a large percentage of players online at any given time were bots (nearly 50%, if not more)...

[Radicap]

There's a museum that OWNS the Mona Lisa. I can take photos of it all day and I'm not stealing a damn thing. Hell, they can lock up the painting and refuse to show it to the public, as is their right, but I can post and sell all the copies I want. I'm not stealing. I have to actually take or destroy the Mona Lisa to be charged with theft. Property is very clear in this matter.

 

The difference is that the Louvre gives visitors permission to bring cameras or recorders and take photographs of the exhibits. The movie studios don't give online pirates permission to make copies of their work, and Jagex does not give permission to players to cheat at their game. It goes back to agreement of the terms of purchase. It should also be pointed out that while the Louvre owns the Mona Lisa, the French government owns the Louvre, making it public property.

Wow, talk about missing the point. Ok, let's say the Louvre or even the French government proclaims "Since we own the original, selling photos of the Mona Lisa is illegal". In your childish view of the world, is it now illegal to sell photos of the Mona Lisa in any country? Is the French government RIGHT to make such a law? If your only distinction between right and wrong is that some law exists, you've got a naive view of the world. Laws are made by men. As such, some laws are just and some are corrupt. What we as noble persons should do is strive to do the right thing regardless of the law. When what is the law and what is right do not intersect, it is incumbent upon the noble persons to try to change the law back to what is right and just.

 

Now, is it right and just for what Jagex is demanding about it's game? For the most part, yes. However, they make some idiotic judgements at times. Something stupid like "Playing Runescape while playing the XBox is AFK and is a bannable offense". On the other hand, I don't think it's right how a program just removes the need for a player to be present. In the middle is this happy medium where a majority of players wouldn't bat an eye at the gameplay one way or another. Again, this isn't about what Jagex or the law of whatever country says, this is about what's right and wrong in a massive online role playing game.

 

I haven't missed your point, I'm just not articulating mine very clearly. It's hard to do without derailing the thread. To keep it on topic, suffice to say that because Jagex doesn't give players permission to cheat botting is immoral. In an ideal society with objectively defined and rationally applied laws, it would be illegal. With that, I'll stop the artistic tangent before it goes too far.

[n64jive]

There's a museum that OWNS the Mona Lisa. I can take photos of it all day and I'm not stealing a damn thing. Hell, they can lock up the painting and refuse to show it to the public, as is their right, but I can post and sell all the copies I want. I'm not stealing. I have to actually take or destroy the Mona Lisa to be charged with theft. Property is very clear in this matter.

 

The difference is that the Louvre gives visitors permission to bring cameras or recorders and take photographs of the exhibits. The movie studios don't give online pirates permission to make copies of their work, and Jagex does not give permission to players to cheat at their game. It goes back to agreement of the terms of purchase. It should also be pointed out that while the Louvre owns the Mona Lisa, the French government owns the Louvre, making it public property.

Wow, talk about missing the point. Ok, let's say the Louvre or even the French government proclaims "Since we own the original, selling photos of the Mona Lisa is illegal". In your childish view of the world, is it now illegal to sell photos of the Mona Lisa in any country? Is the French government RIGHT to make such a law? If your only distinction between right and wrong is that some law exists, you've got a naive view of the world. Laws are made by men. As such, some laws are just and some are corrupt. What we as noble persons should do is strive to do the right thing regardless of the law. When what is the law and what is right do not intersect, it is incumbent upon the noble persons to try to change the law back to what is right and just.

 

Now, is it right and just for what Jagex is demanding about it's game? For the most part, yes. However, they make some idiotic judgements at times. Something stupid like "Playing Runescape while playing the XBox is AFK and is a bannable offense". On the other hand, I don't think it's right how a program just removes the need for a player to be present. In the middle is this happy medium where a majority of players wouldn't bat an eye at the gameplay one way or another. Again, this isn't about what Jagex or the law of whatever country says, this is about what's right and wrong in a massive online role playing game.

 

I haven't missed your point, I'm just not articulating mine very clearly. It's hard to do without derailing the thread. To keep it on topic, suffice to say that because Jagex doesn't give players permission to cheat botting is immoral. In an ideal society with objectively defined and rationally applied laws, it would be illegal. With that, I'll stop the artistic tangent before it goes too far.

 

In terms of runescape...yeah, botting is immoral, as it's against the rules. In terms of the greater well being of humanity...I would say runescape is immoral. You don't realize it until you quit...but this game is like crack for kids. You play it for a couple of hours...bored out of your mind, but something keeps you playing it. You quit play for a little while..and you sit there, wondering, what the hell did I enjoy about that...

 

But sure as shit...a few hours later, you have the itch to play it again.

 

I went through that for over 7 years of my life...7 years!

 

And at the time, I didn't know any better...

[Guest jrhairychest]

 

Did you forget the Mark Snellmen Case which legally states it isnt ok in RS (OrTradeMe Post 567)? Who gives a damn how many hours you put into your cheating mechanisms? Just because you can it doesnt mean its legal or moral. Jagex and the fair playing community do not want it. The law backs them up. You have no rational argument that justifies doing this.

 

Time might even tell on companies like Gameshark if playing communities/game developers get ticked off with cheats or mechanisms to do so. Like the Snellmen case, it only takes one lawsuit.

 

Did you read the whole case?

It would be helpful if you stated your point?

[TheAncient]

I find it hard to construct a moral case as to why botting is bad.

 

Is it an unfair advantage? No, because you can choose to bot if you wanted. Everyone incurs the same risks and benefits by botting.

Does it harm other players? Not directly. In fact, one can argue that it's actually economically beneficial for bots to provide goods.

Does it devalue other players' accomplishments by making accomplishments easier? Yes. but isn't that true of many supplements to the game? Accomplishments naturally become less impressive as the game matures and makes old training methods irrelevant.

 

It's bad for the future of the game, since if botting were allowed, many game mechanics would become obsolete. But that's a problem for Jagex and not players.

 

The best solution for Jagex is to orient skilling and moneymaking towards less grindy mechanics. That way, there is less need to bot. I don't see a Kiln or Nex bot, and I don't see (good) DG bots.

[Stev]

Does it devalue other players' accomplishments by making accomplishments easier? Yes. but isn't that true of many supplements to the game? Accomplishments naturally become less impressive as the game matures and makes old training methods irrelevant.

This. This. This.

 

It's not only their skilling accomplishments. Look at the Squeal update. Free Divines and things to players of all levels? Jagex devalues each players' accomplishments with each update.

[Jonanananas]

I find it hard to construct a moral case as to why botting is bad.

 

Is it an unfair advantage? No, because you can choose to bot if you wanted. Everyone incurs the same risks and benefits by botting.

Does it harm other players? Not directly. In fact, one can argue that it's actually economically beneficial for bots to provide goods.

Does it devalue other players' accomplishments by making accomplishments easier? Yes. but isn't that true of many supplements to the game? Accomplishments naturally become less impressive as the game matures and makes old training methods irrelevant.

 

It's bad for the future of the game, since if botting were allowed, many game mechanics would become obsolete. But that's a problem for Jagex and not players.

 

The best solution for Jagex is to orient skilling and moneymaking towards less grindy mechanics. That way, there is less need to bot. I don't see a Kiln or Nex bot, and I don't see (good) DG bots.

 

To your second point: Yes of course it harms other players. I still can't believe there are people around who don't believe this.

And updates making stuff easier doesn't mean that bots are entitled to do the same - especially as updates at the same time (usually) improve the game where bots deteriorate it.

[TheAncient]

What evidence do you have to suggest that bots are directly harmful to normal players?

 

Why do you say updates improve the game but bots do not? Effigy nerf and wheel update were detrimental to the game in significant ways. Bxp "cheapens" accomplishments.

 

I'd say bots hurt the longevity of the game, but that's a problem that affects jagex more and lies on jagexs end of responsibility

[Jonanananas]

First of all...bots steal other player's resource spots. Should be pretty obvious. They also cheapen any goods produced through something that can be botted, making players that can't do the more complex stuff(aka bosshunting) earn less. And besides that - a lot of people don't like seeing bots, it makes them angry and the game less enjoyable (even if that dislike wasn't based on rational reasons)