The one I’m talking about has 300+ hours uptime. Not to be confused with the first one who was a blatant cheat.
Apologies, my bad. Sorry.
1 Like
I’ve played in only a few of the last 19 seasons, and not this one, so none of this is directly relevant to me.
Just wanted to say though if the current D3 team continues to feel it is a top priority to keep solo players from getting on an even playing field with group players, and to prevent UI customization, I am likely to continue missing seasons for the foreseeable future.
I really wish the team would focus on delivering casual fun to the millions of non-competitive players who bought this game with no interest whatsoever in leaderboards, and a lot of interest in playing solo, vs. optimizing everything around the 1% of the 1% who are competing for the top spots and who already enjoy the benefits of so many optimized mechanics that there is no way a regular player is ever going to achieve results like theirs anyway.
1 Like
Thank you Nev! I am liking the open communication against cheaters. Now… Time for some action 
1 Like
Since i’m a Diablo Player as well as a student of law i’d like to comment on this topic.
As i read the statement it seems as Blizzard does not understand the questions of legality involved.
There is a legal principle called “nulla poena sine lege” (lat.: no punishment without law).
Eggmans behaviour was never explicitly sanctioned.
When talking about a “group buff” i’m not even sure what you are reffering to. Surely enough not the seasonal theme which clearly does apply to solo play.
The developement team did implement a shortcut for seasonal players to progress faster than usual. They also implemented the way Grifts work in group play and in accordance to players declining Grift participation. Combining those two game mechanics Eggman found an even faster shortcut and used it.
He did not use third party addons, nor any kind of external alteration of the game. He merely just used the given mechanics.
You can state the outcome of the behaviour was unintended and delete any progress achieved that way. You can forbidde future behaviour like that and sanction it accordingly. But you can not penalize Eggman for rules that were not put in place and punishments not prospected by the time of the deed. That would be unjust and unreasonable.
Nulla poena sine lege.
It may take years of legal education to understand this question correctly and might be difficult to grasp for legal amateurs. That’s why i felt i had to weight in on this and tried my best putting it in layman’s terms.
Also pls let pets pick up mats. And we need more stash tabs. Thx!
2 Likes
Every player agreed to the End User License Agreement…
You agree that you will not, in whole or in part or under any circumstances, do the following:
ii Cheating: Create, use, offer, promote, advertise, make available and/or distribute the following or assist therein:
- cheats; i.e. methods not expressly authorized by Blizzard, influencing and/or facilitating the gameplay, including exploits of any in-game bugs, and thereby granting you and/or any other user an advantage over other players not using such methods;
5 Likes
Since you feel the need to chime in, with an opener like that, perhaps you should fully read the Terms of Service we all agreed to, upon creating an account here. Blizzard, at their own discretion can do exactly what they did, see below, since you wanted to put it in “simple lamans terms”, I’ll lay out exactly where you need to read.
Also
4 Likes
Diablo 3 isn’t a court of law it’s a video game. They can ban you for whatever reason they deem fit, and you agreed to let them do it.
2 Likes
I commend you. Continue your studies and best of luck on your bar exam. 
How long do you think Blizzard Entertainment has been in business? (Rhetorical question)
Blizzard Entertainment has never spared expenses when it came to developing games. It costs a ton of money to bring in all the people involved in making a computer game. Especially for artists, composers/musicians and voice actors; just to name a few.
You don’t think they spare expenses when hiring a legal team to represent them in litigation, if necessary, or drawing up legal documents, do you? (Another rhetorical question)
That may be the single, one true, accurate statement you made in your entire post.
I agree. However, some friendly advice for you:
- Put down the computer video games and spend more time studying law.
- Concentrate on preparing yourself for your bar exam.
- If and when you pass the bar, spend the time, you would be playing games, researching your clients’ case(s) to better represent them in court.
In the meantime, you might want to read through these documents.
Blizzard Legal
Maybe you’ll learn something that will help with your studies. 
1 Like
I dont post much, but that was hilarious what a retort OMG im dying from laughter.
1 Like
I contest the fact that the mechanic of the seasonal theme was a bug. Even if it could be subsumed under the according definition, there is enough room for an argument there to establish “reasonable doubt” (which i’m aware is not a principle of civil courts).
No they can not and no i/you/he did not. In fact if Eggmans account was suspended he could very well sue in civil court and i’d predict he’d win.
And of course D3 is not a court of law, but legal matters concerning D3 are as much opened up to the legal process as every other matter too.
That’s exactly what i meant and why i felt the urge to post my initial statement: it’s a complex matter which is difficult to grasp and it’s hard to differentiate all the correlating legal and substantive questions. None of you repliers fully understood it (some not at all) and i don’t blame you. Also it doesn’t matter. But i do hope that Blizzard get’s it right. I doubt that up to this point they consulted in depth with their legal department, but they certainly will and i’m looking forward to the outcome.
Sue for what?
Even if they had a winning case they’d spend more money in legal fees and get nothing in return. There was no monetary loss involved. Or, if there was, it’s more likely from sponsors and/or supporters of their Channel, because Blizzard Entertainment does not pay people to play their games. In which case, they’d be better off trying to sue Twitch.
Perhaps you should contact Eggman and see if they’ll let you represent them.
2 Likes
For suspending the suspension!?
I did not think THAT part was so hard to get…
Someone would actually pay $1,500 to $5,000 just to try and get their gaming account suspension removed? (Not to mention the time involved in filing the case and taking it to court).
1 Like
for a $60 game? (20 chars)
Pretty sure that the “preponderance of evidence” would suggest that it was cheating, even if you couldn’t establish it to “beyond reasonable doubt”. It’s clearly a bug. When you do GRs, you’re not supposed to be able to take buffs into them from outside of them.
It doesn’t matter if it was a bug or not. If it was a bug, then it is “included” in what they consider a cheat, but that does not mean that everything that they consider cheating comes from bugs. In other words, they are guarding against someone saying “but it was a bug, so I get to do it”. They can find you in violation for a lot of things and if one of them happens to be a bug, then the fact that it was a “bug” doesn’t exclude it from being in the class of things that violate the agreement.
I feel that what was exploited here is a bug, perhaps you don’t - but our opinions don’t matter because that is not the be-all and end-all of what is a cheat. So go ahead and contest that premise all you want because it doesn’t prevent them from declaring what was done here a violation.
The defining phrase is “methods not expressly authorized by Blizzard”. Never did they say you could do what that player was doing. They don’t need to classify it as a bug, they don’t need to even describe how it violates their sense of fairness. He must prove that they specifically said he could do A, then B, then C and play the game. He won’t be able to do that here. And if he can’t, then it can be classified as a violation.
It’s a theoretical argument underscoring the point that he’s in the right here. We are talking legalities not economics. Your talking point is no valid argument regarding the actual topic.
You are wrong.
Yes it does.
But yours does?
They put it in the game.
It’s actually the other way around. There are rarely any cases of burden of proof reversal in any laws where the accused has to prove anything.
Let me tell you a story. A while back there was exploit that allowed players to acquire all passive skills through Hellfire Amulets. It was an obvious exploit, people abusing it got banned.
But by your logic because “Blizzard put it the game”, it should should have stayed in game and no one should’ve been banned. People used an unintended feature to gain unfair advantage but it’s OK since Blizzard put it in the game. You have a weird logic, buddy.
This case is no different. People used other players and other means to gain buffs from the outside and bring them in a solo GR to gain unfair advantage. Oversights are no excuse to abuse cheats and to get away from doing so.
4 Likes
The cheaters got busted exploiting the game and are now sniveling and whining lol! All the creative justification and forum rants wont change this. YA GOT BUSTED! You thought you could get one over on the Diablo Devs and it backfired (insert maniacal LOLS). Lick your wounds, get up and start another character or account and quit being a spoiled sport. You got caught! Deal with it!
1 Like