Poll: Would this be ethical...

[Olas]

but the servers regularly crash and/or are taken down for maintenance, and when that happens, you can't play the game you paid for. It's a perfectly legitimate grievance. If they were going to implement an always-online thing, they should have the infrastructure in place so that their customers can play the game at any and every time, and that's really all there is to it.

The same can be said for most/all MMOs and I don't see bloodthirsty mobs forming to review bomb & scream about how they can't play whenever that happens (and I've seen MMOs that have far less MMO in them than Diablo III does.)

Yes, but MMOs have to be online since they are by definition multiplayer. Occasionally having servers going down is a necessary evil when playing online multiplayer games.
I don't know a whole lot about Diablo 3, but I know that it has a single player mode which really shouldn't require an internet connection to work. Basically you can't play the game because it's developers were idiots and didn't create an offline mode.

It's unethical that you're in this situation to begin with honestly.

 

[spartandude]

If you pirate the game, even after buying it, blizzard are going to add you (and the many who probably pirated for the same reason) to the justification of having you be connected to the internet to play their single player games.

and many people, pirates AND legitimate paying customers will add blizzard and various other companies who use always online DRM (and other forms which drasically limit consumer rights) to the justification for pirating it

I never said I agreed with blizzard and other companies who do this I merely said that pirating isn't going to solve a problem caused by pirating. What will solve the problem is simply not buying games that have DRM.

oh my bad misunderstood you

and i agree with your last point that these practices only continue because people continue to buy these products. i still say though that they shouldnt being having this DRM in the first place but people are just rolling over and letting it happen

 

[lacktheknack]

It's middle-road.

You gave them your money, you're not getting your product when you want it, so pretty much anyone would say "Why not acquire an illegal version that always works?" It's easy to justify, probably even to the company that made it.

On the other hand, you had plenty of warning that this problem would exist. Thus, the ethical high road is just suffer and wait.

 

[lacktheknack]

It doesn't really matter if its ethical, lets face it. Would 'ethics' stop you torrenting games if it was legal t do so?
[sub]Disclaimer 1: Not condoning piracy here kind mod, just pointing out that the ethics do nothing
Disclaimer two: Its 4am so sorry if my post came out in gibberish.[/sub]

Yes.

WHERE IS YOUR GOD NOW

(Seriously, yes. I'm in Canada, where torrenting games, music and movies is all technically legal, last I checked. Yet I'm staunchly anti-pirate.)

 

[Aeshi]

Yes, but MMOs have to be online since they are by definition multiplayer. Occasionally having servers going down is a necessary evil when playing online multiplayer games. I don't know a whole lot about Diablo 3, but I know that it has a single player mode which really shouldn't require an internet connection to work. Basically you can't play the game because it's developers were idiots and didn't create an offline mode.

Minions of Mirth has singleplayer* and it's still classified as an MMORPG.

*Not sure whether said singleplayer is online or not because it's been about a decade since I last played it.

 

[Eve Charm]

After reading the capcom threads about tekken vs street fighter a while ago I'm supprised everyone isn't telling you if you can only play the game when they say you can play the game.

as far as the question I kinda see it falling under the same basic of backups and roms, Do you own the oringal copy? is it only for your own use? then you can do it.

 

[ablac]

Youve bought the game so you can do what you wish with it. You arent harming anyone by playing a pirated copy of a game youve bought.

 

[Seives-Sliver]

Yeah it's ethical to do this, may not be legal, but making a game that's single player campaign can't work without an internet connection is a bad idea anyways, so yeah, I endorse the ethicalness [Real word, look it up <.<] of this, rather than the legality of it.

 

[ablac]

It's middle-road.

You gave them your money, you're not getting your product when you want it, so pretty much anyone would say "Why not acquire an illegal version that always works?" It's easy to justify, probably even to the company that made it.

On the other hand, you had plenty of warning that this problem would exist. Thus, the ethical high road is just suffer and wait.

I would disagree, in that the online always stuff is meant to stop piracy anyway. The piracy they are talking about is specifically people pirating rather than buying, since the OP has already bought the game then he shouldnt have to suffer from the anti piracy measures and pirating the game when he has bought it already isnt the kind of piracy they are trying to stop.

 

[NinjaDeathSlap]

You've already purchased a copy, in my book whatever you choose to do after that should be up to you, especially if it's Blizzard's fault that you can't play it on the copy you just bought.

 

[getoffmycloud]

Yes, it is still unethical. Everyone is acting like this is a giant slap in the face of gamers and they were blind-sided by this but you all KNEW that this was the case. I think my mother, who barely knows what my Wiistation 360 is, knew that Diablo 3 needed to be online to use. Now I haven't bought the game but if this "online-only" fact has evaded you, I would assume it's on the box somewhere.

People ***** and complain about this kind of practice and then they bend over and present themselves when a game they want comes out. You knew what bed you were getting into here, now you get to sleep in it.

I agree with you completely here if you don't like it why did you buy the game. Anyone who was interested enough in it to get it day one would know its got always on DRM and Blizzard even said there would be issues which gave people time to cancel there preorders if they wanted so stop bitching would bought it knowing what it would be like now live with it.

 

[tippy2k2]

snip

snip

That's part of the problem: Ethics really are not a "logical" thing, especially with a gray area like this.

I feel that piracy in any way, shape, or form is unethical. I don't believe that there is any excuse to pirate a copy of something. I'm a big believer in the "slippery slope" method of morality and by letting SOME piracy be justified, that means there is a line. Who gets to determine where that line should be? Why is THIS piracy OK but not THAT piracy?

I get it Agayek that online only DRM isn't a big deal to some people but server crashes are part of that package. People purchasing this game knew what they were purchasing.

Give me a second, let me grab my soap box that I brought from my high horse who lives in my ivory tower; feel free to implement any other cliched things that I may have missed...alright, I'm ready:

GAMERS! There is ONE vote that matters here and that's your $$$$. If you don't like companies forcing "online only" DRM (and let's face it, that's all this is) down your throat, there is only ONE way to make it go away: Don't buy the game. And no, this does not mean you get to pirate it, that means that you don't play the damn game. Gamers ***** about these "online only" DRM practices constantly and yet they throw their money at a developer who implements these practices. Alright...let me get down now.

Any-who, I'm not going to argue the ethics of this because it IS a gray area and no one is going to be able to "prove" their side right. I've given my piece and gotten my rant in so I'm going to bow out of this argument and let Daystar fight the good morally gray fight. Normally I'd consider sticking around but I'm going to be gone all day and don't really want to deal with an inbox full of quotes when I'm back around. Feel free to try to pick apart my argument but I may just not respond ever.

 

[lacktheknack]

It's middle-road.

You gave them your money, you're not getting your product when you want it, so pretty much anyone would say "Why not acquire an illegal version that always works?" It's easy to justify, probably even to the company that made it.

On the other hand, you had plenty of warning that this problem would exist. Thus, the ethical high road is just suffer and wait.

I would disagree, in that the online always stuff is meant to stop piracy anyway. The piracy they are talking about is specifically people pirating rather than buying, since the OP has already bought the game then he shouldnt have to suffer from the anti piracy measures and pirating the game when he has bought it already isnt the kind of piracy they are trying to stop.

Yes he does. EULA.

If he dislikes that, he shouldn't have bought the product. He was warned.

But again, it's arguably unethical on Blizzard's part to do this, which is why I label it middle-road ethics.

 

[Wintermoot]

you already have a license for it/payed for it you simply run a modified/improved version of the existing data.

 

[ablac]

It's middle-road.

You gave them your money, you're not getting your product when you want it, so pretty much anyone would say "Why not acquire an illegal version that always works?" It's easy to justify, probably even to the company that made it.

On the other hand, you had plenty of warning that this problem would exist. Thus, the ethical high road is just suffer and wait.

I would disagree, in that the online always stuff is meant to stop piracy anyway. The piracy they are talking about is specifically people pirating rather than buying, since the OP has already bought the game then he shouldnt have to suffer from the anti piracy measures and pirating the game when he has bought it already isnt the kind of piracy they are trying to stop.

Yes he does. EULA.

If he dislikes that, he shouldn't have bought the product. He was warned.

But again, it's arguably unethical on Blizzard's part to do this, which is why I label it middle-road ethics.

I spose breaking the EULA can be considered wrong, and for many parts it certainly is. However I dont think he should have to suffer unnecesarily because of this. I just view it that whilst piracy is wrong its only piracy if you arent paying for what you get, he has paid and so he hasnt done any harm in my eyes and therefore can do as he wishes. In this case he isnt partaking in the piracy its really intended to stop, like I said, so it shouldnt apply to him as he has already bought it. Blizzard lose nothing and he only gains so why not.

 

[Atmos Duality]

A EULA (notice that it's an 'agreement' and not a 'contract') has no legal standing, you did not sign it, hitting the 'accept' button is not the same as placing your physical signature on a document.
Most EULAs are pretty unethical anyway, they tend to amount to 'now we own your ass, you can't sue us even if we put ricin in the box,'

Yeah, we can talk all day long how they are not legally binding. As long as no one files a lawsuit against an EULA you can assume that it is enforceable. Also, hitting the "accept" buttton is the same as signing.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ProCD,_Inc._v._Zeidenberg

A case where a court enforced a shrink-wrap license, aka the situation we have here.

Shrink-wrap-licenses are not legally enforced everywhere (EU especially); even the United States has a fragmented, inconclusive track record of enforcement.

Though (in the US) most companies who are aware of this (and Blizzard most definitely is) will attempt to station their servers in states/districts that will rule favorably for them and attempt to move any sort of court cases to their jurisdiction (it's currently a messy process).

Enforcement is not guaranteed by, though I've no doubt Blizzard would just stonewall anyone who challenges them into a settlement on their terms anyway.

OT: For all practical purposes, there's nothing ethically wrong about trying to play the game you already paid money for. Legally, perhaps, but not ethically.

 

[gmaverick019_v1legacy]

Since the internet problem is not Blizzard's fault but yours(Well, actually your ISP's, but still) it would probably not be ethical. But you should do it anyway. Down with the system and all that.

this is the main problem i have with this game..it's involving a 3rd party MAKING it detrimental when it shouldn't be, as you can CLEARLY single player the entire game, or do co op if you wish (as alot of people online tend to do)

honestly it's quite aggravating, I have perfectly fine internet, but for a single player game that you clearly paid for (and not to mention the two prequels that played that way beforehand) you shouldn't be required to be online at all times.

OT: perfectly fine to me, no one is harmed and you paid for the product and you get to use it.

 

[malestrithe]

I would not because my ethics tells me this is wrong. But that's not my decision to make.

You have to decide what to do. You need to figure out what is the best course of action for yourself.

Just be prepared to accept the consequences of your actions if you get in trouble. You might feel its right, but the law tends to say otherwise.

 

[monkey_man]

I say pirating in this situation is like pirating when you lost a disc. You own the game, but for some reason you are unable to play. And you bought the damned game for a lot of money, you supported the devs enough, I say you may pirate it.

 

[BehattedWanderer]

You bought the game. You're playing the game you bought.

Where's the problem here?

Though, legally, you might catch some flack, since it's a game released both physically and digitally, which means the DMCA allowances for having a digital copy of an exclusively physically released media provided ownership of the physical media are going to be...delicate, to say the least. I imagine you would technically need to own the digital copy. But, this is an ethics discussion, and I find this to be morally justified.