11 replies to this topic

[IMG News]

Blizzard Entertainment recently made two security related announcements for the recently released action RPG, Diablo III. The company warned that it will soon begin suspending or banning players caught cheating in the game. Blizzard also announced that to make use of the Real Money Auction House players will be required to have a Battle.net Authenticator.

UPDATE: Blizzard Recently announced several thousand suspensions and bans for players in violation of the terms of use agreement.

Cheating:

Blizzard Entertainment has always taken cheating in any form in Blizzard games very seriously, and that's no different for Diablo® III. If a Diablo III player is found to be cheating or using hacks, bots, or modifications in any form, then as outlined in the Diablo III end user license agreement, that player can be permanently banned from the game. This means that the player will be permanently unable to log in to Battle.net® to play Diablo III with his or her account.

Cheating Update:

We recently issued a round of account suspensions and bans to several thousand Diablo® III players who were in violation of the Battle.net® Terms of Use for cheating and/or using botting or hacking programs while playing. In addition to undermining the spirit of fair play that’s essential to everyone’s enjoyment of the game, botting, hacking, and other such exploitive behavior can contribute to stability and performance issues with the Battle.net service. As always, maintaining a stable, safe, and fun online-gaming experience for legitimate players is a top priority for us, and we'll be continuing to keep watch on Battle.net and take action as needed.

Auction House:

With the introduction of the real-money auction house, account security will become more important than ever. To help ensure that players have a positive experience when using the real-money auction house, we’ve made some adjustments to how players can use and access their Battle.net Balance.

Starting today, in order to add to your Battle.net Balance, players will be required to have a Battle.net Authenticator or Battle.net Mobile Authenticator attached to their Battle.net account. For clarity, this means you’ll need to have an Authenticator to add to your balance via Battle.net Account Management or to send the proceeds of your real-money auction house sales to your Battle.net Balance.

Head over to the pages below for more information.

Return to Full Article - InsideMacGames News

[Thain Esh Kelch]

Heh, "Our diabolical DRM always-online system makes sure that there are no cheats present, and that you get a better experience!".

Good thing I didn't buy it yet.

[Jeyl]

Thain Esh Kelch, on 12 June 2012 - 07:03 AM, said:

Good thing I didn't buy it yet.

It gets better.


BLIZZARD:
We've recently added a limit to the number of games a player can create within a certain amount of time. Players who hit this limit will see the error: "Input limit reached. Please wait to perform more actions." After receiving this error, you will need to wait approximately 10 to 15 minutes before creating any additional games.

This change was made to help reduce server strain and improve overall game stability, and we'll continue to monitor the situation and make additional improvements as necessary. We're currently working to find a solution that allows most players who are playing normally to create games without encountering this error, but will still limit some of the more extreme cases of rapid game creation. We appreciate your patience as we make these adjustments.

Because always online gameplay will always get better, not worse.

[the Battle Cat]

We do what we must because we can. For the good of all of us. Except the ones who are dead.

[Matt Diamond]

Maybe we should set you guys up with your own forum? There you can congratulate each other for not buying Diablo 3, complain how Blizzard is evil either for policing their game or for not policing it enough, and talk about how much you are looking forward to playing Torchlight 2 on your next airplane ride.

Just a helpful suggestion. :-)

[Thain Esh Kelch]

Matt Diamond, on 13 June 2012 - 12:09 PM, said:

Maybe we should set you guys up with your own forum? There you can congratulate each other for not buying Diablo 3, complain how Blizzard is evil either for policing their game or for not policing it enough, and talk about how much you are looking forward to playing Torchlight 2 on your next airplane ride.

Just a helpful suggestion. :-)

You are already in it!

[Eric5h5]

There aren't any rules saying that topics about games must only mindlessly praise them.  (Otherwise, tBC wouldn't be able to go off on his usual rant every single time Eschalon II is mentioned.   )

--Eric

[The Liberator]

the Battle Cat, on 13 June 2012 - 08:40 AM, said:

We do what we must because we can. For the good of all of us. Except the ones who are dead banned.

There, fixed it for you.

Lib.

[Matt Diamond]

Eric5h5, on 13 June 2012 - 01:28 PM, said:

There aren't any rules saying that topics about games must only mindlessly praise them.

Are you implying that I'm mindless?!? :-)

Seriously though, of course you don't have to praise. It's just the predictability of certain complaints I see after every Blizzard press release.. I was just having a little fun with it.

Don't mind me. Carry on!

[Thain Esh Kelch]

Matt Diamond, on 17 June 2012 - 02:40 PM, said:

Are you implying that I'm mindless?!? :-)

Seriously though, of course you don't have to praise. It's just the predictability of certain complaints I see after every Blizzard press release.. I was just having a little fun with it.

It is not the PR itself, it is the mindless justification of their DRM.

[Matt Diamond]

Thain Esh Kelch, on 18 June 2012 - 05:52 AM, said:

It is not the PR itself, it is the mindless justification of their DRM.

There's that word again.

There is nothing "mindless" about my "justification" of their DRM. I am drawing on my long experience as a game developer, programmer, beta tester, and game reviewer.

Here is an explanation of my "mindless justification". Fact: the many problems and abuses with Diablo II multiplayer can only be prevents with a server-based solution. This is especially important if you want the objects to be persistent, tradeable and sellable.

Could Blizzard ALSO have made an offline mode? Sure. And it would have cost more money, and the objects/characters wouldn't have been compatible with multiplayer, and it might have exposed more of the server logic & weakened the multiplayer protections. So it's not a clear cut decision.

In my mind the question boils down to whether the main thing the DRM is meant to protect is Blizzard's right to sell the game (your contention) or the persistent player items. It is designed to do both functions, so we are speculating about motives when we say it's more one than the other.

There is plenty of room for debate here. I don't claim to have the only valid opinion on this. But you apparently do, which is why you use words like "mindless" and "justification". And that is my main beef with you people: it's okay that you are angry about a decision you disagree with, I understand why and even share some of your disappointment. But you folks keep being rude about it.

[The Liberator]

Matt Diamond, on 19 June 2012 - 05:38 AM, said:

…Could Blizzard ALSO have made an offline mode? Sure. And it would have cost more money, and the objects/characters wouldn't have been compatible with multiplayer, and it might have exposed more of the server logic & weakened the multiplayer protections. So it's not a clear cut decision…

That makes me think rather a lot of Dungeon Defenders; they have both offline and online. …being that connected with secure server browsing and whatnot and none…

Lib.