Question

I have written presumably some of the first code to modify the memory of a popular new MMORPG in such a way as to create a macro framework, allowing for advanced automated reactions, skill/level gain, large scale data retrieval, and botting.

It’s my supreme pleasure to automate tasks in this way, I can’t help but think of any manual approach as ‘broken’. In fact I find myself rather unable to complete even single player games before dissecting their mechanics and gaming them, in a specifically read-only (not cheats, per se) mouse and keyboard input only fashion. Supplementing my advancement toward a game related goal with my own programming knowledge seems natural, it’s really not fun otherwise, like ignoring your firearm in an FPS.

Since I love this form of reverse engineering I assume others do as well, they’d appreciate the end result at least. I tend to feel a project should somehow ‘ship’: be sold, open sourced, or freely distributed. ‘Happiness only real when shared.’ Otherwise it’s just me and my timesink.

The problem is that there are several moral stances involved with a project of this nature:

1. An evil is released upon the virtual world. Those with the program have an advantage, the game is unbalanced, you’ve got to use, simply to be on equal footing. It’s no longer about the game, but the tools, an arms race. It’s like every other MMORPG. Therefore, keep the code private.

2. The above is inevitable, so release a peremptory free distribution to give players equal access to the advantage and potentially deny someone else a more evil™ (e.g. elitist, commercial, etc.) release. Between evils the least is selected, though its necessity is disagreeable.

3. Sell the program, reap the benefit of your proclivity, it’s work for which you deserve recompensation, fair trade (and regardless of ToS violations). Follow the likes of WoWGlider. Is it better in fewer hands?

4. Keep the code private. Respect at least this much of the company’s Terms of Service you agreed to.

What is a morally defensible approach? What haven’t I considered? In my experience ToS agreements are a largely ineffective form of dissuasion, and the gaming of MMORPGs (and subsequently results described in #1) is indeed inevitable, but there’s something to be said in not pulling the trigger yourself – or is it not so bad?

---

I did a poor job on the original phrasing/titling of this question, I was really looking to see if there were special circumstances when it could be morally defensible, not whether or not it would normally be, in hope my code could have constructive purposes.

As a new user I didn’t realize 99% of the responses would be immediate, before my update. That said, I still received some very helpful answers regarding commercialization and the original question merited the answers provided, so: well done on that front.

I do have my answer: despite the inevitability of bots, don’t pull the trigger yourself! Be the change, etc. (#3 was never on the table for me personally, but elicited some brilliant answers.)

Answer 1

I’ve been building (but never selling) bots for online poker and chess for over a decade (insert promotional web link here) so this question caught my attention. I agree with @Simucal in that you need to tread lightly, especially where MMORPG’s are concerned. Blizzard in particular has a draconian stance towards automation.

4.5 million copies of EULA-compliant spyware

Then again, the idea that a private company’s TOS/EULA = LAW is a bit of herdthink. The moreso when that company markets to a worldwide audience across international borders. This introduces additional complexities into the TOS/EULA, which is already a vague piece of legalistic verbiage in the first place. The common practice is to structure the TOS/EULA to make it as aggressive, all-encompassing, and wide-reaching as possible. This is just good legal sense. It doesn’t necessarily mean that every line of the TOS is legally binding. A TOS is a deterrent and the company will insert whatever language they think they can get away with, and hope it holds up when/if it’s tested in court.

Nothing wrong with this.

At the same time, building a bot is, in and of itself, neither morally or ethically wrong. There’s a very strong and convincing argument to be made that provided your bot doesn’t actually ‘hack the servers’, you have every right to run whatever piece of software you like on your machine in the privacy of your home. This is especially the case when the servers are inundated with bots anyway, so by not running a bot you put yourself at a disadvantage. Everquest PVP (for example) has been dominated by botting pretty much since the beginning.

Anywhere, there are two important criteria to consider:

• Does the bot depend on information which other player’s don’t have?
• Does the bot enable superhuman reactions, stamina, or coordination?

This puts wallhacks (unfair information) and aimbots (superhuman reaction) firmly in the ‘unfair/cheating’ category. On the other hand, a simple farmbot is most probably NOT cheating, because the bot doesn’t have access to any insider information and it doesn’t allow you to do something you couldn’t otherwise have done. You could, if you wanted to, sit there for 10 hours a day and farm ore or roots or whatever. It’s not much fun, but you could easily do so.

This is a good acid test for whether your use of automation has crossed the line. Trying to cheat people is a bad idea. But writing a bot to essentially ward off carpal tunnel is understandable, and it can actually be a rewarding project.

But again, I wouldn’t advise actually selling a bot. Because if you make any money on it, you open yourself up to the sort of retaliation @simucal mentioned.