Rockstar Has Explained Its Banning Of GTA V PC Players Affiliated With FiveM

Rockstar has explained its banning of GTA V PC players affiliated with the FiveM multiplayer service, saying that it contains "code designed to facilitate piracy." The full statement is below.

The FiveM project is an unauthorised alternate multiplayer service that contains code designed to facilitate piracy. Our policy on such violations of our terms of service are clear, and the individuals involved in its creation have had their Social Club accounts suspended.

Previously we had written that the modmakers were banned from all Rockstar games.


    Doesn't FiveM still need to be logged in to RSSC to work?

      It's murky there. In old quotes yes, since the story broke no.
      The creator is focusing more on the people who were banned for affiliation and plans to contact R*

      The future of the mod looks bad, they tried to create a stand alone game using R* property, tried to split it from the main game and run it on dedicated servers. Donations were taken.

      "You agree not to: reverse engineer, decompile, disassemble, display, perform, prepare derivative works based on, or otherwise modify the Software, in whole or in part"
      It was never going to end well no matter how people are spinning it.

      Meanwhile the debate rages on. Yes to mods and yes to possibly dedicated servers in the future, but this mod was not the poster child people are painting it as.
      It damages perception and divides the community, so like every ban wave before, it will die out with no progress.

      Last edited 12/08/15 12:33 pm

        It damages perception and divides the community

        That's all Rockstars/Take-Twos fault:
        1)They created an unsatisfactory system. It's encouraging people to break or 'fix' it.
        2)Assuming that different player bases will all play the same (Not just console vs. PC, but also differing PC players.
        3)All this gaff is negative publicity against them, and not the modders.

        Nobody was going to think worse of Rockstar should they have done nothing.
        Well.. maybe you're right somewhat; those pesky shareholders might have cared. Boo hoo.

          1: It doesn't matter, that doesn't stand up in the real world. They have rules.
          2: PC games not allowing or supporting mods or dedicated servers is nothing new, online games not allowing mods etc is nothing new, there will always be games that do and don't. Bumping heads isn't the way to get it.
          3: It hurts both sides and both sides are at fault, the community is divided.
          The fault of people equating cheating to modding is the fault of both modders and R*.
          R* will get some bad press but like last time it will die to background noise because they aren't the ones who have done anything wrong, those who were banned sunk their own damn ship and the profile of modding too.

          Last edited 12/08/15 1:38 pm

            So they have rules? Rules are sacrosanct? Nobody ever makes systems that don't work for everyone? Heck I'm not even just referring to modding now, there's countless examples of bureaucratic and corporate systems that failed to function adequately without the end-user breaking it.
            But I'll stick to modding where it's really damn obvious that a great deal of quality modding we remember fondly today, was a direct result of breaking the rules.

            PC games not allowing or supporting mods or dedicated servers is nothing new, online games not allowing mods etc is nothing new

            Yes it is. I mentioned it in the last article. Tonnes of Source, GoldSRC, Unreal, Unity and more multiplayer games have allowed mods. Only in the last 10 years has PC multiplayer moved so strongly against player-run dedicated servers and thus required full control from the devs with no mods allowed. In fact you seem to be confused in assuming that if a game allows multiplayer mods at all, then it's allowed on every server - wrong: Every specific server will have these parameters allowed for whatever maps, mods, mutators, game modes etc are allowed. This was easy with dedicated servers. In this case these modders have provided a safe space for multiplayer mods to be enjoyed with no interference with ordinary players.

            No it won't 'divide the community', in fact what the fuck is wrong with that? Players are not just some homogeneous being; why not let the players who want mods go to their servers and players who don't can stick to theirs. It's a lot better than lumping the whole frickin' lot into one big map and have them all complain that they're having no fun.

            R* will get some bad press but like last time it will die to background noise because they aren't the ones who have done anything wrong, those who were banned sunk their own damn ship and the profile of modding too.

            Wow. The hot coffee fiaso is background noise? That was a big deal still remembered today. Yeah it'll die down only because consoles (with less modding ability) are the major market and Rockstar have made it clear they don't care about the PC community much. Of course since modding is a hobby pursuit for most, well they'll just keep on trucking. There's no may this has brought down the profile of modding; these guys have only done exactly what modders have always been doing.

              The rules aren't sacrosanct, but they can be enforced, which they were. If you are willing to break the rules the consequences won't always be a hero's call, that's the risk.

              Game does function, just not the way some people want it to, which isn't a right to anything.

              Yes, I know games have moved away dedicated servers and mods, but just as many are there to fill the gap, the modding community will go on just fine and prob R* too.
              Many games survive quite happily without mods or dedicated servers, R* isn't some special case so I have no idea why people keep placing it up on stool.

              It has divided the community, there are just as many people defending the move from R* for reasons already stated.
              The game is doing well, there are constantly people playing, so not everyone is complaining about not having fun.

              No, the modding debate is background noise. Sharkcards, GTA online, RSSC, no modding support were no secret before the game came out and then PC had two years to accept this.
              When the first ban waves hit and R* repeated it's stance, this same debate raged, but it died down, and nothing happened.
              This will die down too, the game will move on and modding will have gotten nowhere in GTAV.

              All I have said is bumping heads with developer isn't always the best way to get what you want, how is that untrue.
              People seem to think this view is anti mod and bombard me with all the positives and other subjects, I get it man.

              Last edited 12/08/15 3:07 pm

                I understand that you're just telling it like it is and that it's coming across as anti-mod, when it's not necessarily. Also this stuff gets me unreasonably mad.

                To me it's like the "it's business" excuse for stupid company policy or lacking product. We all have to acknowledge it, but we don't ever have to accept it. When it comes to the greater discussion of this issue, I'm more than happy to argue and make a stink for that reason alone.

                It'll die down yeah. There's no way some bullcrap like this will actually overtake ordinary consumers desire to play regular GTAV.

          The system wasn't that unsatisfactory till the other modders started ruining online play for everybody.

          It's a bit of a chicken and the egg situation.

            Full disagreement here.
            Forget cheaters, that's an issue for any multiplayer game.

            Regular GTAV online is already retarded:
            -integrated systems with single-player instead of separate client
            -the entire reason for online login for single-player
            -no official user-run dedicated servers
            -unnecessary money system
            -microtransactions w/ pay to win style
            -stupid rules (you are punished for blowing up my car!)

            Modded in multiplayer pre-GTA4 was better than this.

              "-integrated systems with single-player instead of separate client" "-the entire reason for online login for single-player" I and most people who don't want to mod their game find it convenient to be able to swap between SP/MP so easily.

              "-no official user-run dedicated servers" Everybody loves dedi servers but lets face it for the majority of games that originate on consoles it's just not going to happen.

              "-unnecessary money system" "-microtransactions w/ pay to win style" All you need is a few friends and you can earn tons of money per hour and it's not pay to win. You can't gain an advantage by buy shark cards (not that I would) you simply save time and fund the development of more content.

              "-stupid rules (you are punished for blowing up my car!)" Place a bounty on the player first and you don't pay a thing if someone is being a dick. If you do blow up someone's car by accident why shouldn't you pay the recovery costs? Seem unfair they should be financially responsible for your carelessness.

              Last edited 13/08/15 2:15 am

                Thanks for trying but that straight up on paper sounds terrible.

                1. You may like integrated MP/SP but as one of the many people who haven't bought Destiny for that exact reason - yeah all those players miss out. It may provide some convenience but it's undeniable that making a game this way forces the hand of the designers. Articles like these make it clear that there's entire things that can and can't be done by players solely because of this. Rockstar may have apologised for banning some single-player modders but the fact that it could even happen is just bullshit.

                2. Not even an excuse. It's just lazy reasoning in this day and age to claim that it's not worth making dedicated servers when that's what everyone could do back in 2003. Not to mention this debate is hardly relevant to consoles as the manufacturers have paywalled multiplayer and blocked mods completely. These kinds of policies are stupid in the realm of PC gaming.

                3."play it my way and it's fine" NO. I'm not going to excuse shitty practises like this just because some players have been able to worm their way around it. Also don't try the 'it supports the developers' hand-waive; it's never an excuse to make poor gameplay decisions. In this case it's full on nickel and diming on a game that made a nice $2B+ in sales in its first month.

                4. I can't believe that their even is a economy system in a GTA multiplayer mode where this kind of rules system has to exist. It's dumb. Nobody who blows up a car in this should be considered 'a dick'. Everybody should be blowing up everything, players shouldn't be punished and the system shouldn't make it possible for the victim to feel great loss. All of this shit is just to incentivise the purchase of microtransactions. Do I have to put a bounty on the head of the guy who shot me in Counter-Strike?

                  Point 1, the modders that have created mods that only work single player have not in fact been banned. The people that have been banned are those that use supposedly "single player" mods that work in mutiplayer too.

                  Point 2. I a would also love dedicated servers, I'm just noting going to spank R* for doing what ever single console port does. You issue here is more with the entire industry and a single developer.

                  Point 3. People like unlocking stuff, and almost every game mutiplayer game has some form of it whether it's Battlefield and Cod with the levelling system for years now and no one blinks and eye. I fail to see how this is really any different other than the fact you get to chose what you get rather than being locked into a liner progression system.

                  Point 4. If there was enough demand maybe R* could implement a "chaos" lobby where absolutely anything goes and passive mode is disabled, that would please all parties.
                  Just letting griefers run around in the base MP game blowing up everyone's cars without consequence only supports a single play style and severely limits the options of the player base as a whole.

                  That's not what the other article said:
                  Recent updates to GTAV PC had an unintended effect of making unplayable certain single player modifications.
                  The fact that this can even happen is a cause for concern. At least that's my opinion.

                  Yes the dedicated server issue is a problem with the whole industry, of which Rockstar is a part of. The fact that people modding this capability in got banned wholeheartedly shines a spotlight on Rockstar in light of this issue.

                  Because these new microtransactions and piecemeal dlc systems change it from being those games where it's fun to unlock things, into a shop where it's "fun" to buy them with real money. And there's no doubt in my mind that the 'grind' has been tweaked ever so exactly to make buying things that much more attractive. I can't condone business messing with gameplay.

                  We'll just have to disagree on the last point. With the exception of actually instanced modes where people join a deathmatch or a team game or whatever; multiplayer in these kinds of games should be a free-for-all, as that aligns perfectly with the gameplay systems GTA is founded on. More to the point, nobody would give a crap that their car was blown up if getting a new one was a click of a button, instead of a ridiculous grind.

        "Donations were taken". For code they stole. They are lucky banned accounts is all they got.

    "The FiveM project is an unauthorised alternate multiplayer service that contains code designed to facilitate piracy."

    Riiiiiiiiggggghhhhhhtttt. "piracy"

      Yes, piracy. I mentioned this in the last thread, the server doesn't do validation checks on connecting clients, mainly because it can't (only Rockstar can validate keys). That exact thing was one of several court rulings against bnetd years back.

    I love their logic. Make it so the only way the guys can play the game is by pirating it, to avoid piracy.


      Yeah this is like comedy hour! Red herrings abound!

      It so amazing that these companies still don't realise that most software that facilitates piracy also facilitates an better perfoming/easier/more convenient/fun experience, whereas fully legitimate files don't.

      Sorry Rockstar, we're not falling for it. You can't hide the fact that you made an impressive multiplayer mode that everyone wants to play, but then fucked it up!

      They weren't banned to prevent piracy, they were banned punitively for breaking the rules. Seizing control of the project and/or getting an injunction are the parts that would affect piracy, things I presume Rockstar is also pursuing.

        Yes, because punitive actions for the sake of rules resulting in something that runs counter to the reason those rules were created in the first place is soooo much better.

          The rules were created in the first place to make sure people playing online have a fun, fair and officially managed experience. I don't see how banning these three guys adversely affects anyone else's experience.

            It sure adversely affected the guys who were banned, and anyone who was hoping to make use of the mod for dedicated servers and the benefits those bring.

            And let's flip it: I don't see how not banning them would've adversely affected anyone else's experience.

              Sure it does. Confidence that the company will enforce its own rules suffers when they choose not to. It emboldens others to also break the rules because apparently Rockstar doesn't care, and that affects everyone's experience.

              If you break the rules, you get punished. I don't see what's difficult about that. If you agree to the rules and then break them, you have no grounds to complain when you get punished for it. Not liking the rules or thinking they're unfair isn't a free pass on breaking them.

                Oh no. Rules were broken. In a video game.

                  Your sarcasm would work better if it wasn't how everything works. Even this website has rules that if you don't follow them, you get banned.


                  This websites not a video game. Video games are for fun. Literally the only rules worth enforcing in a video is stopping a few cheaters in multiplayer. Which game companies will have to deal with whether they allow mods or not.

                  Sure I could break this websites rules and get banned, but it's just stupid that everyone is so happy to step in line. Just like me not liking the rules is not a free pass to break them; me acknowledging the rules is not a reason be me to shut up and obey them.

                  If you use the service or play the game, you don't just acknowledge the rules, you agree to them. If you don't want to agree to them, don't use the service or play the game. You can choose to break them, but you don't get to be surprised or play the victim when you get caught.

                  Yeah nah.

                  I can completely accept the idea of playing by the rules, having fun and not cheating.
                  What else I do with the game? Making mods The companies can take their service agreements and shove it up their ass.

                  That's your choice, and you have no grounds to complain if you get banned. You knew the rules, just because you wanted to have a tantrum about them doesn't make them go away.

    Rockstar has done the right thing. They know that all PC players are pirates, thieves, and cheats.

Join the discussion!

Trending Stories Right Now