#0 - Dec. 5, 2007, 8:50 p.m.
My intent here is not to write too long of an essay, but to point out how the stance towards the latter is flawed, from the perspective of someone who is actually in the business and has created bots and other scripts (for business automation purposes only, never to cheat in a game, as that violates my personal code of conduct).
First, to quote the EULA clauses in question (that we are expected to have carefully read!):
Q u o t e:
"You agree that you will not (i) modify or cause to be modified any files that are a part of the Program or the Service; (ii) create or use cheats, bots, "mods", and/or hacks, or any other third-party software designed to modify the World of Warcraft experience; or (iii) use any third-party software that intercepts, "mines", or otherwise collects information from or through the Program or the Service. Notwithstanding the foregoing, you may update the Program with authorized patches and updates distributed by Blizzard, and Blizzard may, at its sole and absolute discretion, allow the use of certain third party user interfaces."
The parts bolded are what I will focus on, but first, to explain a little bit about the process.
I am not attempting to call to light the ACT of dual or multiboxing, that is, the actual idea that a person can have multiple accounts, and have them active and open on the same machine (or networked machines). It is completely legitimate to have the program running on said accounts, and tab between the instances of the game, an activity that is likened to two instances of notepad or any other software open. What I am disputing is the act of players controlling multiple characters simultaneously, which is commonly seen as an act called "botting" (I will elaborate more on this in a bit).
The methods used are fairly simple. Get multiple copies of the game, get a machine that can handle them, and get key broadcasting software that will duplicate your personal actions between the multiple instances of the game. You will often see people doing this with two accounts, but some of the more showy of them will control 5 characters at once, performing tasks such as fighting with them all in concentrated effort in Battlegrounds, or even creating arena teams with them and competing in the 5v5 circuit.
First, where ii is violated: "create or use cheats, bots, "mods", and/or hacks, or any other third-party software designed to modify the World of Warcraft experience". The key broadcasting software is definitely third party software (or, in some cases, if the solution to broadcast the keys is a hardware device, then the firmware on that device is doing this). The software's original intent may have been benign enough, but in the context of the way it is being used by the user, is definitely being used to modify the experience of World of Warcraft (allowing a single human resource to control 5 characters).
Now, we get to the violation of iii: "use any third-party software that intercepts, "mines", or otherwise collects information from or through the Program or the Service". In this case, the key broadcasting software is intercepting the human input from one keyboard, and broadcasting it through other applications. You can view it as macroing, botting, or call it one of many terms, but there is one thing that you can not call it - human control. In the case of a single person controlling 5 characters, only one of them is legitimately controlling his character. The rest is computer controlled input being imposed into the game, and this is considered to be directly illegal as per the stated EULA clauses.
Many people argue that this is not botting, however, when you consider what's being done, it is a case of "six of one, half a dozen of the other". An article on botting reveals:
Q u o t e:
Internet bots, also known as web robots, WWW robots or simply bots, are software applications that run automated tasks over the Internet. Typically, bots perform tasks that are both simple and structurally repetitive, at a much higher rate than would be possible for a human editor alone. The largest use of bots is in web spidering, in which an automated script fetches, analyses and files information from web servers at many times the speed of a human. Each server can have a file called robots.txt, containing rules for the spidering of that server that the bot is supposed to obey.
In addition to their uses outlined above, bots may also be implemented where a response speed faster than that of humans is required (e.g., gaming bots and auction-site robots) or less commonly in situations where the emulation of human activity is required, for example chat bots.
The core of the bot is that it is used to automate actions, often with a desired speed faster than that of a human. For a player who wants to control 5 characters at once, it's not feasable to get five keyboards and quickly input the series of commands that are required to achieve this task. It's not even really feasable to get a single keyboard and repeat a single command 5 times (ie. if my key binding to lightning bolt was the letter C, I would have to hit C five times for each client to instruct each specific character to perform the action). They require software, in some form, to enable this for them.
Essentially:
The "bot" (which is illegal) is a product of a skilled gamer who understands how the game should be played, and has taken the time beforehand to create software that will emulate his play, decision making process, and ability in the game to use automatically at a later date.
The "multi-boxer" (which apparently is legal?) is a product of a skilled gamer who understands how the game should be played, and the idea behind the fact that "if it works with one, it should work with five", and has acquired or created software that will exactly emulate his play, decision making process, and ability in the game in real time, based on his input on one client, often with the foreknowledge that he is exploiting either a misunderstanding or a loophole in the EULA.
The difference between these two? Very little, simply different paths to achieve nearly the same result, the only hard difference is that the latter requires ONE active human's influence to fuel the additional bots.
What are the ramifications for allowing this kind of exploit of the game's mechanics to go unchecked?
Well, quite obviously, the economy of the game will be directly affected. It is no secret that there are people being paid to gather in-game resources for the illegal real life trade. Allowing this activity aids those people, because, while software and computer hardware is cheap enough, human resources are not. It is very enabling to these types of people to be able to have a single person control multiple characters for the purpose of gaining resources they could not if they were only a single entity. For example, what may be inefficient for one player to do, five could do with ease. Players that could only do so much solo, could farm content that is possible to do with 5 characters (not necessarily requiring 5 people. It is possible (though questionably probable) that this could spill over into PvE raiding, allowing a very small group of actual people to complete content (and reap rewards) intended for the efforts of larger groups of people.
There are also proven instances of players using this exploit to achieve arena ratings in brackets where it would be impossible for a single human to achieve (one example: http://files.filefront.com/Aelli+Quad+Boxing+Ele+Shaman+Arena/;8992870;/fileinfo.html). This has definite tangible value in the game. On my server, membership for one week on a S2 2k rated 5v5 team would cost you 500 gold. It is not reasonable usage of the game to allow one person (or two in this exact example) to achieve the rewards intended for the teamwork and coordination of five people.
There is also the impact on the play experience of the players who are directly affected by these exploits. In battlegrounds, where these players can be seen, the direct experience is usually one of being utterly annhiliated by 5 characters all performing one spell on you at once, providing you very little you can do as a player except wait until someone else steps forth as the sacrificial lamb, allowing you to attack them from a different angle. On the flip side, 5 characters being controlled by one person are always less competant than 5 players controlling 5 characters of equal competancy, so it is frustrating to the other players on the team in which they're drawn to be playing with less-than-optimal teammates, which can skew the result of the game negatively.
I would appreciate some feedback as to the reasoning behind the legitimacy of this activity when it is looked at for being what it is - amusement for one person, damaging for the rest of the game.
