Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in
Your question
Closed

Blizzard Further Responds to Banning Linux Users in Diablo 3

Last response: in News comments
Share
July 5, 2012 2:23:55 AM

frozonicmeeeh... diablo 3 sucks, its an overated game

Troll spotted!
July 5, 2012 2:29:04 AM

amuffinTroll spotted!


Why? It's his opinion. I'm not a fan of it either. If you like it, great. Just as you're free to like it, I'm free to dislike it. Doesn't make me or anyone else a troll.
July 5, 2012 2:30:19 AM

Why does Blizzard/D3 get special news treatment from tom much more than other games?
July 5, 2012 2:35:00 AM

TomfreakWhy does Blizzard/D3 get special news treatment from tom much more than other games?

This is more of a PSA if anything. I appreciate these sorts of posts.

I'm not really sure I like Blizzard as a game company based on the way their support works and how they handle users. Therefore, they don't get any of my money. Simple as that.
July 5, 2012 2:36:39 AM

Well it was a very highly anticipated game after what, 10-12 years of waiting. Regardless of whether you or I like the game, there is quite a huge amount of people playing D3. At least Tom's reports the good along with the bad. Seems mostly bad with D3 between the DRM, bugs, and now possible bias against Linux users.
July 5, 2012 2:37:07 AM

TomfreakWhy does Blizzard/D3 get special news treatment from tom much more than other games?


Its not so much coverage of the game itself as it is coverage of the controversy surrounding the game.
July 5, 2012 2:46:47 AM

People can say what they want about Blizzard right now. Last Christmas, my battle.net account was hacked, and they fixed everything for me.
July 5, 2012 3:03:58 AM

Considering there isnt a giant outcry from wow and sc2 players claiming to be banned because of linux, im willing to side with bliz on this one.
July 5, 2012 3:19:28 AM

Yikes! I feel a need to defend linuz guys here... oz noes!
Anyways, using Wine on a linux build does nothing to the game.
Blizzard should come out and congratulate these guys for getting it to work on Wine, and be playable. Unlike the early attempts at getting WoW to work on wine(without graphics corruption)

Anyways, good work linux guys... Personally, I hate linux but meh, I have enough experience to know that getting this game to work with it was prolly a real pain in the a**...

Have fun!
July 5, 2012 3:20:07 AM

aftcometWhy? It's his opinion. I'm not a fan of it either. If you like it, great. Just as you're free to like it, I'm free to dislike it. Doesn't make me or anyone else a troll.

Basically he didn't contribute anything to the topic of linux users and just spewed the same meaningless "this game sucks lololol". And.... people upvote and defend him
July 5, 2012 3:21:31 AM

Oh yea, Blizzard does a great job recovering your account with them if it happens to get hacked, they even have some aspects of it automated now...
Unlike EA, who tells you to piss off, we got ur money now....
July 5, 2012 3:54:27 AM

After seeing what route Blizzard took with Diablo 3 overall. I wouldn't believe any crap they spew nowadays.
July 5, 2012 4:10:37 AM

boiler1990This is more of a PSA if anything. I appreciate these sorts of posts.I'm not really sure I like Blizzard as a game company based on the way their support works and how they handle users. Therefore, they don't get any of my money. Simple as that.


Its such a shame too. This is not the same Blizzard that existed before the Activision acquisition. Activision and EA only know one language $. If it doesn't make them more of it, they are not interested, and it has ruined more than a few good developers.
July 5, 2012 4:26:11 AM

So Activision claims . . . but probably will hide behind a privacy policy or that they don't want to leak possible hacking deatails in order to not release any proof of their claims.
July 5, 2012 4:50:02 AM

And if it is because they are running the game though wine then I do not see that as an issue anyway. The simple fact is it is not supported they new it and there for Blizzard is not responsible for any action taken because of it.
July 5, 2012 5:03:03 AM

Ok, I get that Diablo 3 is big and I do like the game. But must tom's follow every single update, and barely talk about any other game?
July 5, 2012 5:49:04 AM

Blizzard has take a different approach with Diablo 3. They do not allow any mods what so ever, while WoW has thousands if not 100's of thousands of mods which they allow. It's quite possible some of these Linux users are using some mods they didn't feel was cheating, but being a mod, Blizzard is banning them.
July 5, 2012 5:50:26 AM

I saw the warning from Blizzard about banning the use of any mods, which forced me to remove my 3D Vision mod. It's a shame they can't make 3D Vision work properly themselves.
July 5, 2012 5:59:47 AM

clivene09Its such a shame too. This is not the same Blizzard that existed before the Activision acquisition. Activision and EA only know one language $. If it doesn't make them more of it, they are not interested, and it has ruined more than a few good developers.

Technically Activision did not acquire Blizzard, Vivendi, which has owned Blizzard for years, acquired Activision from Bobby Kotick and merged the 2 companies to form Activision Blizzard while also keeping them as seperate companies under the newly merged holding and publishing company. They made Blizzard a wholly owned subsidiary of Activision Blizzard.

While it is understand why people say Activision ruined Blizzard, because Bobby Kotick who is just a menace to the gaming community and ruined Activision's reputation, is CEO of Activision Blizzard thus making him Blizzard's boss. But when people phrase it that way, it gives the blind fan kiddies oppurtunutity to lash out because of the flaw in the argument.
July 5, 2012 6:05:21 AM

memadmaxOh yea, Blizzard does a great job recovering your account with them if it happens to get hacked, they even have some aspects of it automated now...Unlike EA, who tells you to piss off, we got ur money now....

Don't give Blizzard to much praise on account security.

Just last year they crippled the effectiveness of the authenticator when they made it so if the system believes you are logging in from the usual location, it won't ask you for the authenticator. So instead of just being susceptible to man in the middle (MitM) attacks which are difficult to do, it made accounts susceptible to proxy based attacks which are a lot easier to do.

Blizzard was stupid for introducing this "feature". No one asked for it, there was no outcry. If someone didn't want to use an authenticator, they merely didn't get one or disabled it. Those who wanted an authenticator want to be asked EVERY time. It was bad enough that this "feature" was even implemented in the first place, but they made it the default setting, so if you wanted to be asked every time, you had to go into Account Management and manually set it to ask every time. When D3 was released, it reverted it again to not asking for an authenticator every time and once again you had to go in and change it.

So Blizzard actually introduced a security risk themselves needlessly.
July 5, 2012 7:43:28 AM

memadmaxOh yea, Blizzard does a great job recovering your account with them if it happens to get hacked, they even have some aspects of it automated now...Unlike EA, who tells you to piss off, we got ur money now....


But it's true none the less. The game sucks.
July 5, 2012 8:12:57 AM

get a windows 7 pc u 'dole bludging ppl with no moneys' and stfu
July 5, 2012 8:31:47 AM

Anyone who's played a blizzard game since WoW spawned will know this is a load of BS, as they never take responsibility for anything.
July 5, 2012 11:08:13 AM

billybobserAnyone who's played a blizzard game since WoW spawned will know this is a load of BS, as they never take responsibility for anything.


kind of like the people steal games and cheat so they can win at pvp never take responsibility when caught doing it....
July 5, 2012 11:11:19 AM

just another server sided hacked account game, with a company baming YOU, the user, once more. Though there are hundreds of idiots out there visiting fake sites that ask you to input your account info in order to make your account more "secure", though there are a lot of people using the same username and password in the game account as in the various sites/forums/legion-clan sites they register to, this is NOT always the case...... they will never of course admit to their own account database being hacked as that would be the end of them, but this is indeed the case.

Unfortunately they only thing they have failed to persuade/convince people is that the new DRM model would prevent account hacking - in game duping and hacking and the likes. Every mmo of any kind has had hacked/cracked elements. They are no different.

BTW one of the posters is right.... this site really unnecessarily updates info too often on THIS game.
July 5, 2012 11:30:22 AM

wildkittenDon't give Blizzard to much praise on account security.Just last year they crippled the effectiveness of the authenticator when they made it so if the system believes you are logging in from the usual location, it won't ask you for the authenticator. So instead of just being susceptible to man in the middle (MitM) attacks which are difficult to do, it made accounts susceptible to proxy based attacks which are a lot easier to do.Blizzard was stupid for introducing this "feature". No one asked for it, there was no outcry. If someone didn't want to use an authenticator, they merely didn't get one or disabled it. Those who wanted an authenticator want to be asked EVERY time. It was bad enough that this "feature" was even implemented in the first place, but they made it the default setting, so if you wanted to be asked every time, you had to go into Account Management and manually set it to ask every time. When D3 was released, it reverted it again to not asking for an authenticator every time and once again you had to go in and change it.So Blizzard actually introduced a security risk themselves needlessly.

Except that they provided an option to force authenticator on every login as you mentioned and added two additional security measures for all Battle.net accounts that you can use. So yeah, they INCREASED account security. Just like any security system you need to monitor and use it as the user. So please, less whining and more thinking before typing. It still stands that Battle.net accounts have more security features than everything else you use including your bank, home, computer, and email. Of those four and your Battle.net account which would cause the most financial harm to you? So not only does Battle.net have the highest security of all those it also has the best security to loss ratio by an even larger margin.
July 5, 2012 1:54:54 PM

I just don't like the fact that the software constantly scans my computer to see what other apps are running. I don't know how that will play out in the long run

Dry
July 5, 2012 2:19:03 PM

I remember an exploit in Unreal Tournament that used Linux. While not quite the same it did allow players to cheat. What one did was record their PC game to a network Linux share... A recorded game could be viewed back in real-time and "explored" as a spectator. So what peeps were doing was recording the game and running UT up on another box and playing back the file... Linux was allowing them to read from the file at the same time the other machine was writing which wasn't allowed under Windows. Therefore the 2nd machine could look at the current game as a spectator with only a second or 2 of delay... This allowed the player or a cohort to use the other pc and look for hiding spots, snipers, or even post a view above yourself to see when others were approaching.

One might say why not just load up another client and attach to the same game as a spectator... Well, not all servers allowed spectators and spectating the live server could be detected if both were coming from the same IP address...

The Linux method allowed an undetectable way to put eyes in the sky on multi-player giving a huge unfair advantage.

I'm not sure how using Linux would allow you to cheat in Diablo but methinks someone is always looking for ways around the system.
July 5, 2012 4:06:44 PM

wildkittenWhen D3 was released, it reverted it again to not asking for an authenticator every time and once again you had to go in and change it.So Blizzard actually introduced a security risk themselves needlessly.


Must not be true for everyone. I didn't have this happen to my account at all. My Authenticator has been active since I got got it activated more than 3 years ago.
July 5, 2012 5:21:29 PM

Now its a war of trust, with each side urging people to believe them.
July 5, 2012 6:42:00 PM

xyriinExcept that they provided an option to force authenticator on every login as you mentioned and added two additional security measures for all Battle.net accounts that you can use. So yeah, they INCREASED account security. Just like any security system you need to monitor and use it as the user. So please, less whining and more thinking before typing. It still stands that Battle.net accounts have more security features than everything else you use including your bank, home, computer, and email. Of those four and your Battle.net account which would cause the most financial harm to you? So not only does Battle.net have the highest security of all those it also has the best security to loss ratio by an even larger margin.


Please link one forum thread where an authenticator user asked for the authenticator not be used every time. The fact is, NO ONE asked for that "feature". It doesn't matter if they added in an option to ask for it every time, it was senseless and needless work to create this "feature" in the first place. It was also unconsciousionable that they made it not ask by default.

Do you remember all those rash of hacks when Diablo 3 was released even happening to people with authenticators? Blizzard denied it happened, but it seemed it was proxy based attack, in other words, the hackers were spoofing someones IP address tricking Blizzard's login servers, which is much easier for criminals to do than the MiTM attacks.

And no, Battle.net does NOT have more security than my bank or even my computer or email. For one thing, you can not make that claim without knowing what security there is server side, and I doubt any company run by Bobby Kotick who does not care one bit for the customer, or the employee, is going to go out of their way to have the best security. For another thing, I know on my side my bank web site is a LOT more secure just through what I can access, as is my computer and email which I am responsible for.
July 5, 2012 6:47:48 PM

strommMust not be true for everyone. I didn't have this happen to my account at all. My Authenticator has been active since I got got it activated more than 3 years ago.

http://us.battle.net/sc2/en/forum/topic/3657425931#1

From Daxxari...
"We appreciate that our players make use of their authenticators, and to help make them more convenient, we’ve introduced the authenticator by-pass. Those of you that have World of Warcraft accounts may already be familiar with how it works: when you log into a Blizzard game from the same location, you won’t always be prompted for an authentication code until you attempt to log in from a different location.

The authenticator bypass is active for StarCraft II, and is enabled by default. Those of you who wish to disable this feature can do so by opting out of the bypass on your Battle.net account management page. If you opt out of the by-pass, you will be prompted by Battle.net for an authentication code each time you log in."

If you look, you can see it the same for ALL Blizzard games that require battle.net login. The fact is, NO ONE asked for that "convenience". Those who got it wanted the additional security.
July 10, 2012 1:27:11 AM

I had an actual patch to play D3 in I686 the day it was released. Not a Wine (Windows Emulator) but an actual patch. Blizzard took it upon themselves to to patch my patch which took me all of 6 hours to write. I could have easily patched it again and made it a trojan and crashed every one of their POS Linden servers if I wanted to seek revenge. I hate Blizzard Entertainment and see them as being no different than Google, Microsquash, and Apple. Those 3 are all part of NSA and where funded by the Rockefeller Foundation through the Pentagon. They have more back doors and surveillance software built into the operating systems than you could ever imagine unlike Linux. You use any of those compaines products understand they can watch you through your webcam at anytime because its a 2 way street. I use Linux Mandriva in KDE and there arent 5 people on Earth that can hack me. I am an open source engineer that specializes in internet security and I make a living killing hackers.
July 11, 2012 10:30:15 PM

TomfreakWhy does Blizzard/D3 get special news treatment from tom much more than other games?

because Toms has a few writers that are communists leaning.
god forbid somebody patents something, the wrath of a few at Toms hardware staff will be upon them with claims of impeding innovation and free everything for all, yet claim hacking and piracy are evil.

i've played all 3 of the diablo games, D3 sucks the worst by far after a week or two of it you're bored.
it's definetely not as fun as the first 2.
an important but small part of that i blame on no LAN play and no pvp
too much WOW was incorporated, but generally speaking it feels too much like all activision games, very console/arcade style weak and limited and controlled.
!