Update: Diablo 3 Cheater Purge Imminent

 Pages PREV 1 2 3 4
 

Lunncal:
Is that even legal? Do they get a refund?

It'd be understandable if they were banned from the multiplayer portion of the game, but if they can't log in to their Battle.net account they wouldn't be able to play the game at all, unless I've heard wrong. I think it's ridiculous that Blizzard can get away with something like this, but not surprising. Consumer rights don't seem to exist when it comes to video games, they were probably legislated out of existence by the mandatory post-purchase EULAs.

If it was in the agreement of the purchase then there's not much to be done. Perhaps they should have read the ToS etc more carefully.

So let me get this straight:

We can only play diablo 3, when Blizzard lets us, where blizzard lets us and only how blizzard wants us to play.

Huh. You know, I get the feeling people didn't "buy" Diablo 3 as much as enter into a long term lease agreement for the right to play diablo 3. any wonder I decided to skip this one. Though not for the obvious reasons. well not directly. I'm the kinda guy that likes to go back and play his older games ever once ina while. seriously I just plowed through doom last month. No cheats.

Point is, Diablo 3 can only be played for as long as Blizzard deems fit to keep the DIablo 3 servers up. so if Blizzard say in 3 years decided to pull the plug on it.....that'd leave me with a couple gigs of dead data that can never be used again.

I'm pretty happy to avoid Diablo 3... forever and ever. Any game whose selling point is that you can earn money playing this game, really worries me. On one hand, you're getting paid to do something you like to do simply to amuse yourself, but it also makes the game feel like nothing more than a job. Not to mention, it makes their company super duper irritable over every god damn little thing when people wanna cheat on their game that they rightfully own. I'm annoyed enough that they "have single-player" but you've gotta be online, and other people can barge into your game play and mess with you. I dunno... most of my issues are purely from what I've seen and read, and since I've never played it, I can't say if all of my fears and hatred for the game is even well-founded, but I stick with I believe. Then again, such things like cheater purges have been done before, I just hope that Blizzard could just let them keep the ability to play single-player and just not let them be able to access the multiplayer... :/ At least, let them still be able to play the game they paid their hard earned money on.

Hm. None of this is exactly news to me. The usual argument of trainer users back in SC2's early days was that they were playing alone. Following that logic, it was supposedly unfair of Warden to flag their copies as having been tampered with. I've known a few dupers and botters in D2 in my time, and most more or less fell back to the same logic.

"But I'm playing alone; how does that bother anyone? I never even set foot on Open Battle.net!"

Sure, you don't. Until you do.

Predictably enough, the D3 forums turned into a hateful morass as soon as the news broke out. If you're happy with the game, then you're a subhuman zealot and a sheep. If you're not, then it's your right as a customer to whine because you don't understand that free authenticator apps for smartphones are precisely that - FREE.

That really astounds me. Blizzard gives you everything you need to try and make your experience secure and reminds you of several basic Internet practices we should all be using anyway (such as rotating passwords and never using the same password for different services) and people throw up a shit-storm in response.

Keep in mind that this doesn't excuse anything like always-online DRM. In fact, if the game had an offline portion where characters from SP mode could be used in multiplayer, we'd be seeing a lot more than just hacked toons and excessively priced items in the auction houses. We'd be seeing overpowered builds decked out in gear lowbies shouldn't conceivably be able to get their hands on.

Between both scenarios, I'm honestly preferring what we've got now.

Lunncal:
Is that even legal? Do they get a refund?

It'd be understandable if they were banned from the multiplayer portion of the game, but if they can't log in to their Battle.net account they wouldn't be able to play the game at all, unless I've heard wrong. I think it's ridiculous that Blizzard can get away with something like this, but not surprising. Consumer rights don't seem to exist when it comes to video games, they were probably legislated out of existence by the mandatory post-purchase EULAs.

EA does this all the time, no one's sued them yet.

although they have a legal right to perma-ban users

I cant help but blizzard may be teetering on the cliff EA has plummeted off of

Pirates bypass DRM: Well they always get around it eventually, so clearly it was pointless and not worth trying ever again.

Hackers/Cheaters 'eventually get around' Security Measures (so clearly they were pointless and not worth trying ever again, according to the logic of the above): OMG Y U NO HAVE MORE SECURITY?! ADD MORE!!

Gamer Logic (I guess fights against somebody who will 'eventually get around' anything that gets sent their way seem like good ideas when you're the one who benefits from them.)

If you buy a car and get caught acting like a goon in it, you're not allowed to drive it. Simple as that. Same thing with this. You're caught being an idiot and cheating, botting, hacking, ect, you can't play. Easiest way to avoid this?
DON'T FUCKING CHEAT/MOD/HACK!

I enjoy the game, I find it entertaining and legitimately fun. The always online thing doesn't bother me, considering that I'm always online anyways. Plus I quite enjoy being able to have my friends hop in and play with me on a whim, not to mention that if I decide to do multiplayer I don't have to roll a new character and get thrust into a sea of players that are EXTREMELY over geared, but as another use said: because I'm happy with the product, I am going to be labeled a sheep for the company. Then so be it.

Why would it have been so bad to just delete all the offending account's characters and achievements? It would at least keep the accusations of Blizz stealing their money from cropping up.

The.Bard:
I'm confused. Wasn't the whole point of their always-online-uber-leet-DRM so that people COULDN'T hack and cheat at all?

So this means the online requirement successfully kept people from messing with it for... less than a month?

Good job all around.

It does not protet from BOTs (you know, the same as in any MMO), and tihs is their main attention of banhammer. removing them from being able to play the game for cheating is the best way to deal with it i think.

Lunncal:
Is that even legal? Do they get a refund?

It'd be understandable if they were banned from the multiplayer portion of the game, but if they can't log in to their Battle.net account they wouldn't be able to play the game at all, unless I've heard wrong. I think it's ridiculous that Blizzard can get away with something like this, but not surprising. Consumer rights don't seem to exist when it comes to video games, they were probably legislated out of existence by the mandatory post-purchase EULAs.

Ofc its legal. D3 is like a MMO. You hack in MMO you get banned, and you can say good bye to your account. To get new one you have to pay new subscription fee (nto counting free ones, D3 isnt a free one either). you lost whatever you had on the old one. You cheat - you get removed. it is you who is doing the illegal thing, not the company.

Happy for me ToS and that stuff doesn't hold up in my country. Its completly worthless and whenever i've a nice customersupport guy on the phone and mention it, they suddenly and instantly try to cooperate with you, so you're happy.

Sure, binding contracts AFTER i bought your product. That they thought anyone is that gullible in the first place, when they started to add these things.

So if I bought this game, played in in single player, and cheated in single player, does this mean I could get banned?

Hat Man:
So if I bought this game, played in in single player, and cheated in single player, does this mean I could get banned?

Yup!

The logic is that because it still is an online character, you could use those cheated items to sell on the AH.

One more reason why I didn't buy D3. Cheating gets more tempting once you've beat the game a few times and want some good gear to rush you through the first few areas.

Ahh. That's the way a-ha a-ha I like it. Dum dum dim dum.

There's not a penalty too harsh for cheaters.

Lunncal:
Is that even legal? Do they get a refund?

It'd be understandable if they were banned from the multiplayer portion of the game, but if they can't log in to their Battle.net account they wouldn't be able to play the game at all, unless I've heard wrong. I think it's ridiculous that Blizzard can get away with something like this, but not surprising. Consumer rights don't seem to exist when it comes to video games, they were probably legislated out of existence by the mandatory post-purchase EULAs.

If it's written in the terms of service (which I can only assume it is) then it's perfectly legal.

EA does something similar where if you get an Origin ban, you are locked out from accessing any game you might have in your Origin library for the duration of the ban. In the case of perma bans thats pretty horrible.

It doesn't make it right but a company as big as Blizzard no doubt has an small army of lawyers to ensure everything is on the up and up.

Lunncal:

RaikuFA:

Lunncal:
Is that even legal? Do they get a refund?

It'd be understandable if they were banned from the multiplayer portion of the game, but if they can't log in to their Battle.net account they wouldn't be able to play the game at all, unless I've heard wrong. I think it's ridiculous that Blizzard can get away with something like this, but not surprising. Consumer rights don't seem to exist when it comes to video games, they were probably legislated out of existence by the mandatory post-purchase EULAs.

Considering that they steal from peoples accounts, do you want them to still play?

"hacks, cheats, bots or mods"

Bots do not involve stealing from peoples' accounts, cheats do not involve stealing from peoples' accounts and mods do not involve stealing from peoples' accounts. Hacks may involve stealing from peoples' accounts sometimes. So... yeah, not sure what else to say. If it were just actual thieves who were affected it would be more understandable, but it isn't.

Well, when you get the game you have to accept to it's terms and conditions
Which in theirs must mention somewhere about doing such things results in instant bans without refund
I'm not too sure on the legal validity of the ol' 'click to verify all this junk you didn't read' but I'm sure someone trying to get a refund after hacking/botting wouldn't have a great case.

It probably *isn't* legal, but most people probably aren't willing to go through the legal hoops it'd take to fight it. EULAs and the like are contracts, in a sense, but you agree to them *after* you buy the service, which hurts their legal credibility.

Lunncal:

The difference is that software companies reserve the right to stop you from using their product, for literally any reason they want, even if you don't break their terms. The difference is also that they reserve the right to change the terms whenever they want without even notifying you. The difference is that those terms in that "contract" are incredibly unfair to the user and are formed in a way that is supposed to be illegal in my country (I don't know how it is in other places). The difference is that you only even get to see this contract after you've paid your money and lost the right to a refund.

I can even name and quote the most obvious law they seem to breaking. (This is UK law by the way, not sure how it is in other countries, but I assume they have equivalents)

Now, for some reason this law apparently doesn't apply when it's games or other software, but why shouldn't it? It applies to everyone else, it's there to protect consumers, but it doesn't apply here. If there is some legal reason why software doesn't "count" then why haven't we made a new law already? We clearly know these practices are wrong.

As for why I don't go to court, it's because I can't go to court. I don't have tons of money to buy expensive lawyers, and I don't know how I'd go about it even if I did. I just think it's messed up, and wish that more people would raise a fuss about such clearly unethical practices.

Fret not. Under UK (and European law in general) whenever the EULA contradicts consumer rights, consumer rights take precedence. They can say whatever they want in the EULA, the law trumps it.
As a matter of fact, in Spain, the fact that the EULA is introduced after money has already exchanged hands renders it null and void. Both parties still have to comply to several agreed terms, but it holds no legal sway in case of litigium.

Kyaahahahaha kero!

so as entirely suspected, all their talk of it improving security fell to nothing, and they're still having to purge the "offenders"

Hey blizzard, guess what? BETRAYL! you Betrayed your primarily offline fanbase as well as those in shaky internet areas, and like anyone could guess, your primary reason was pretty much an outright lie. we aren't ALL that stupid, y'know.

Remember the offline single player component of your other Diablo games? the one that sat alongside your Bnet Characters you could play on closed?

if you had simply applied that, you'd look a LOT more reasonable right now. not to mention you'd probably have more people willing to play if you just owned up to the fact you don't really have the right to tell us the game can be played alone or not. you would have gotten even more initial sales as well, even IF you couldn't use the same characters.

"people in our online section are hacking the game? they are banned from going online!"

See, done! not that it matters, they are to busy counting their money from the 200 dollar some items on the RMAH...

... ok, serious face time. I was screaming about this game a long time ago, and it WOULD be cathartic for me to see this, but I had a working eye and a brain then and I still do now. Blizzard has no hope of ever taming cheaters. you can't appease them, theyll do what they want. so why create a system that disenfranchises other members of your player base who have been loyal to you? why would you tell them the way they experienced your games doesn't even matter.

That potential years of playing their games don't matter, because it wasn't the way they expected. they had no right to treat the Diablo Fanbase that way. I argue we have the right to call them out on this, because if we don't reprimand them even a little, a lot less gets done, for both sides. the primary concern here is that the things AROUND the game are bad. im not at liberty to say the game itself actually is.

I also still argue, as i did back then, that this is going to speed up the slope we've been on. you know what? blizzard games in general have a good polish. where they mess up is in technical things, like servers and other, outside issues. the core gameplay is hardly EVER entirely dislikable.

Im still shuddering to think of other companies that will try to follow suit in diablo III's step with this terrible "always online for the sake of stopping cheaters". sorry, been playing MMO's for well over half my life, and it being online didn't stop a soul. we know that. id have given you more credit if you had just been honest.

that you wanted to keep everyone online to ensure people would view your RMAH. at least if you had admitted it we could just call you money grubbing scumbags. now that your intention has failed a month in, your essentially leaving us no choice to think of you as Money grubbing scumbags who also insulted a percentage of your own player base, and couldn't even be honest about it. its either that or assume that you haven't been paying attention to World of Warcraft aside from its dollar signs all these years and that your incredibly stupid/ Naieve to think this would work.

And this is the company that has fewer mechanical mess ups then most. ugh... I honestly wish i was at the meetings for this game so i could understand what was going through their heads. if you stop and think about it it just... just... mystifies me.

This may be my longest rambling yet, so im just going to stop here. *shuffles out*

 Pages PREV 1 2 3 4

Reply to Thread

Log in or Register to Comment
Have an account? Login below:
With Facebook:Login With Facebook
or
Username:  
Password:  
  
Not registered? To sign up for an account with The Escapist:
Register With Facebook
Register With Facebook
or
Register for a free account here