Sections

Diablo III ban hammer to strike “in the near future”

Tuesday, 12th June 2012 07:09 GMT By Brenna Hillier

Blizzard would like to remind cheaters that you can be permanently banned from the game if you get caught – and since we’re talking always-on DRM, that is a serious threat.

It’s not clear what sparked the sudden irate post on the game’s blog, but the message is clear: don’t cheat.

“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,” the developer warned.

“Playing Diablo III legitimately means playing with an unaltered game client. Doing otherwise violates our policies for Battle.net and Diablo III, and it goes against the spirit of fair play that all of our games are based on. We strongly recommend that you avoid using any hacks, cheats, bots, or exploits. Suspensions and bans of players that have used or start using cheats and hacks will begin in the near future.”

Consider yourself fully informed and don’t come crying to us.

Latest

23 Comments

  1. JimFear-666

    probably because there is some video now on youtube to show you how to cheat on diablo3.

    #1 3 years ago
  2. Erthazus

    In the near future?

    God damn, there are Channels full of spammers.

    In the near future. Blizzard oh Blizzard.

    #2 3 years ago
  3. sh4dow

    So not only do people who have been charged fully for a game HAVE to be online to play, not only are they screwed if there are server issues, they can also have the product they bought taken away from them?!

    I hope all those who will be banned will band together for one hell of a lawsuit. Although considering that at least in the US, it seems to be legal to basically sign away ANY of your rights and customers have done so according to the description above, it might be tough.
    One can only hope that people will get them in countries with a saner legal system.

    #3 3 years ago
  4. absolutezero

    Banned from the game for using Mods.

    Mods are a hugely nebulous term that could possibly describe anything from a trainer to the Dark3 filter.

    Keep on keeping on Blizz.

    #4 3 years ago
  5. Ireland Michael

    You choose to sign away those rights when you sign the EULA.

    That is your personal choice. You agree to it then complain when they enforce the rules.

    If you don’t like it, don’t play the game. It’s called “voting with your wallet.”

    #5 3 years ago
  6. DSB

    @5 Yup.

    But it doesn’t really help the image that Blizzard favors a monetized AH over something like mod support, and then comes out making draconian statements that are apparently aimed at “altered game clients” instead of simply “cheaters”.

    The vast majority of altered game clients are likely to be cheaters, but absolutezero still has a point.

    #6 3 years ago
  7. TheWulf

    Forever full of shit – Blizzard.

    I really don’t agree with this. I mean, I can understand banning online hacking, but if a person is doing it to enhance their single-player experience, then it’s just not on. It’s really just about controlling what people can do. It’s bizarrely fascist in its own way.

    I say let people do what they want to do with their single player games. But this is why I support Torchlight II, it gives you the freedom to do what you want. I think that’s important.

    #7 3 years ago
  8. TheWulf

    @5

    Man. I did that. I’m glad I did because it means no buyer’s remorse for me.

    But I’m aware of Blizzard’s past shenanigans. Yeah? I know what they’re prone to doing. Not everyone does, so for some people they’ll get suckered into this and… well, I can’t help but feel a little bad for them.

    Maybe this is just a lesson? You buy a Blizzard product, you get burned.

    Learn from it, people.

    #8 3 years ago
  9. OlderGamer

    Ironic when you consider what a big part of World Of Wars AddOns have become. I know people that couldn’t even play the game if not for them.

    #9 3 years ago
  10. Phoenixblight

    @9

    With all the updates and Blizzard using the most influential add ons as a basis for their updates through the game. I have found no need to use Add ons anymore. I suspect the next MMO won’t be allowing Mods either.

    #10 3 years ago
  11. ManuOtaku

    Please advise LOLSHOCK and all his variations, he is just a giant magneto for all ban hammer related things

    #11 3 years ago
  12. DuckOfDestiny

    Another reason why the constant online connection sucks.

    #12 3 years ago
  13. sh4dow

    @5

    Some choices, people shouldn’t have. Because many people are morons (AND/OR contracts are so bloated and incomprehensible to a laymen that the average person doesn’t even bother to read what they’re signing – which I wouldn’t call moronic but reasonable behavior). That is also why that “voting with your wallet” is very nice in theory but simply doesn’t work in practice.

    Not only because people will for various reasons usually vote against their own interest but also if you have a market place that is filled with junk, there is no way you can vote. Unless you choose not to buy any product of that category AT ALL. In some cases that might mean having to exclude yourself from society or having to live without basic necessities. Nobody should have to choose something like that.

    #13 3 years ago
  14. DSB

    @14 Making peoples choices for them doesn’t work in practice either.

    And games aren’t a basic neccesity. They’re very much a luxury. I don’t see a lot of people dying because they can’t play Call of Duty.

    The fact that others choose differently and prioritize differently than you is a bitch, but it’s something you learn to live with.

    Oppressing or coercing people would certainly make for a fine society (as it always has) but I still think you should sleep on that.

    #14 3 years ago
  15. Ireland Michael

    @14 I honestly have no ide what your point is meant to be, and I’m not saying that as an offence either.

    You chose to buy the game, install it, and click the “Agree” button in the EULA. Nobody made you get the game, nobody made you agree to the terms and conditions, and nobody is making you play it either.

    I can’t even begin to comprehend your sentence about “voting with your wallet” not being simple in practise. I’ll break down the reasons why.

    “Not only because people will for various reasons usually vote against their own interest.”

    The whole point of voting with your wallet is to go against your own interests for the sake of a personal belief or moral standpoint. I don’t support draconian DRM, therefore I don’t buy games that use it, even if I like the game itself. It’s fairly simple.

    “but also if you have a market place that is filled with junk, there is no way you can vote.”

    How does one even relate to the other? Crap games stop you from not buying something on a moral basic… why?

    “Unless you choose not to buy any product of that category AT ALL. In some cases that might mean having to exclude yourself from society or having to live without basic necessities”

    I fail to see how this is even relevant. Diablo 3 is neither a “necessity” nor something that will “exclude you from society” if you don’t buy it.

    “Nobody should have to choose something like that.”

    Businesses don’t care what you want. You have to make those choices for yourself. Welcome to that realisation.

    #15 3 years ago
  16. sh4dow

    To all people with a narrow point of view: I did not ONLY talk about Diablo III in my comment. It was a mixture of this specific case as well as general concepts.

    @15

    “Oppressing or coercing people”… yes… if one argues that companies should be restrained from taking advantage of people, they’re poor oppressed entities. Oh actually… according to US law, they’re people too. And these people should be able to do whatever they want. You have the right not to support them, after all.

    Except of course it doesn’t work like that, as I’ve already pointed out. E.g. had YOU not bought gas at a BP station but at… oh, let’s say Shell – would that really have prevented the oil spill? For which nobody has gone to prison, by the way…

    So, if companies are allowed to pretty much do what they want with impunity AND that is actually good (Your argument is that companies like Blizzard should keep being unrestrained and able to ask customers for whatever they feel like, right? Hell, if they ask for a kidney in exchange for a very special item, wouldn’t that be kind of cool?) – why not apply that same logic to actual humans? Why not let them steal, rape and kill freely? You have the right to defend yourself, after all. Let the “free market” decide whether it prefers people with a conscience or serial killers…

    @16

    “Businesses don’t care what you want.”

    That’s why in some countries, there is something called “consumer protection”. So that you CAN’T sign away important rights. Or… you can… but if it ever gets in front of court, the contract would be declared void and the consumer would win.

    “You have to make those choices for yourself.”

    It doesn’t always work like that. I already wrote about that though.

    #16 3 years ago
  17. Talkar

    @15
    For the majority of people, i absolutely agree, games are a luxury. But it isn’t for everyone. Some people need it to get food on their table, i’m talking about progamers such as DongRaeGu. Of course he could get a degree in some other field and start working there, but until then he still relies on what he earns playing computer.

    #17 3 years ago
  18. DSB

    @17 So who is forcing you to buy games, again?

    A lot of criminal offenses are considered criminal, because they infringe on the inalienably rights of others.

    If you kill someone, you’re committing a pretty definitive violation of that person.

    If you offer a game for sale, then… You violate people how, exactly?

    There’s a difference between being deprived of your basic rights, and simply not getting everything the way you want it.

    You don’t have to sell me on the notion that the US is fucked up, I spend quite a bit of time here, but I’m yet to be forced to buy anything against my will.

    #18 3 years ago
  19. sh4dow

    @19

    “If you offer a game for sale, then… You violate people how, exactly?”

    In this case, their right to use a product they paid for is violated.

    “There’s a difference between basic rights, and not getting everything the way you want it”

    Right… “everything”. Because introducing a trend where it’s possible for a consumer to have access to a product he bought cut off is just a little detail.

    “but I’m yet to be forced to buy anything against my will.”

    That’s the beauty of the system we have in our “first world” countries. Nobody is really FORCED to do pretty much anything. Just manipulated and in some cases somewhat coerced.
    You are presented with choices and it is said you are free to choose but often you aren’t really. Maybe because of social pressures or because of manipulation through advertising or because of a lack of alternatives or because you couldn’t afford those alternatives, etc.

    #19 3 years ago
  20. sh4dow

    An example just popped into my head where the whole “voting with your wallet” thing didn’t work – and it’s even gaming-related.

    DLC.

    I remember the debates in the beginning. Most people were pretty upset and said it’s outrageous how companies basically increase the prices of games in a stealthy manner that way. And that they wouldn’t support it.

    Well…
    Most discussions I have read since then went something like “I don’t really think it’s fair, it should have been in the original game already but… I still bought it”. Which is basically the whole point about manipulating people and partly social pressures (depending on the type of DLC).
    Voting with your wallet could only work if ALL people made informed decisions, guided by strong principles. But in real life, that is maybe the case for what… 5% of the population?

    #20 3 years ago
  21. Ireland Michael

    @20 They can deny you access to their servers if you break their rules. It really is that simple.

    #21 3 years ago
  22. sh4dow

    @22

    Yes it is. But it is still bullshit. Because it doesn’t matter if you break the rules if you play single player.

    #22 3 years ago
  23. back_up

    PC gamers at it best

    #23 3 years ago

Comments are now closed on this article.