http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/technology-21367852

Interesting to see non-gamer media's take on this. That is, that there is an issue of whether using a glitch like this is stealing (theft of service or otherwise) if the item is otherwise offered for sale as DLC.

Pfffff. Stealing? Are you kidding me?

It is not stealing, it is simply a clever use of game mechanics. Knowing how to effectively farm resources in a game doesn't make you a thief. The end.

In a competitive environment it makes you a fucking cheat though.

I'm not saying it's stealing or anything. I just thought it was interesting to see that considered. As a gamer, it's not something I would have thought of. To me, if you want to play a game in a way in which it breaks it, then that's your business. If it's a single player game, anything should go.

So to see an idea that somehow I shouldn't be allowed to obtain something that I can obtain in the game if it is otherwise sold as DLC is not even a path my mind would have wandered down. I don't think other gamers' would have entertained the notion either.

Fuck them, theyre stealing money from other people who choose to pay for those in game items.  Not like its costing them much.  

I mean, let me put it this way. If you aren't a gamer, this doesn't look all that different from what Aaron Swartz did.

The people who set this up say you should have to pay for this. But you've figured out how to get it for free and it's not like you're even taking anything away from anyone else. From a distance, it looks not very difference. But from up close, every gamer would say you're not breaking the law or any moral standard by getting these items.

@flippyandnod said:

I mean, let me put it this way. If you aren't a gamer, this doesn't look all that different from what Aaron Swartz did.

The people who set this up say you should have to pay for this. But you've figured out how to get it for free and it's not like you're even taking anything away from anyone else. From a distance, it looks not very difference. But from up close, every gamer would say you're not breaking the law or any moral standard by getting these items.

Well, let me put it this way.

The people that are posting this article are so uninformed that they think EA will potentially lose a lot of money over this. They don't understand that the people who would pay money for these kinds of things are not the people who are going to go on the internet and look up a walk through on how to do an exploit like this.

My point is that these people are so far away from understanding the situation, that who really cares what they think? These are probably the same sort of people who would often want a game like Dead Space out lawed because it's so violent anyways.

@big_jon said:

Combo!

Breaker!

Glitch my ass, all it involves is farming the same area over and over again which is neither a glitch nor is it cheating,thats the game being the game.

Is it weird that this glitch actually makes me want to play Dead Space 3, just so I can farm a ton of materials while shouting CRASH THE SYSTEM the entire time?

Hack the planet

@Jeff: Is not like people are scaming money out of EA ... like the one time were codes could be used over and over in Origin right?

This ought be good

That article was both informative and objective. Holy shit I'm impressed.

That lawyer they cited in the article is a fucking idiot. It isn't and never should be classified as theft. The items are already in the game and players are farming to get them at an accelerated rate. Players already paid for the game therefore they have also paid for any and all assets on that game disc. As for breaking the paywall that EA put in place, completely irrelevant. The developer has said that you don't need to buy anything, it's just that buying something will unlock it earlier but it can still be attained in time. So people are using game mechanics to accelerate the process. That does not mean that there is a loss in revenue because they might never have used the microtransaction system and it most certainly doesn't constitute any mention of the word theft.

It's a shame that they didn't name that solicitor. Either way they should be hit in the face with a brick.

This is the mainstream we're all so eager to be a part of.

Think on that.

@Jeff: Seems normal to me.

Did I just read a Twitter feed? It felt like I was reading notes, not the article itself.

@MattOnTheSite: Yeah, this article is terrible. All it is missing is STOP at the end of every sentence.

Theft? Really? Jeez, people outside the gaming industry sure make funny statements at times.

@Jeff said:

Is it weird that this glitch actually makes me want to play Dead Space 3, just so I can farm a ton of materials while shouting CRASH THE SYSTEM the entire time?

So you can float away on your golden parachute? 1% scum.

#occupy_microtransactions

Am I playing a different version of Dead Space 3 than everyone else? I basically had bought everything I could buy with resources at about the half way point of the game... cheating for faster resource gain is a minor shortcut at best.

This article, on top of being poorly written, is also sensationalist trash. No one, not even EA, would actually think that using game mechanics set up by the developer could be stealing in anyway shape or form based on the argument that it costs them potential micro transaction sales.

Using terms like 'stealing' is a bit much.

Wow, a lot of people getting really angry over an article which does not espouse a position, only spells out the controversy. Here's a article that among other things gives voice to complains of pay-2-win and many people can only find their way to being angry that it also covers the other side.

As to the article being choppy and feels like reading a summary, I agree with that.

@Jeff: Get into speedrunning. We can route Phantasy Star Online or Freedom Fighters together.

I think people are more pissed off about the lawyer saying that it can be constituted as theft when it clearly cannot. I don't live in the UK and I know that. The Theft Act of 1968 clearly defines theft in section 1 subsection 1 as;

(1)A person is guilty of theft if he dishonestly appropriates property belonging to another with the intention of permanently depriving the other of it; and “thief” and “steal” shall be construed accordingly.

You cannot steal an item if it is a digital item that can be obtained normally and replicates itself infinitely, with or without the glitch. That lawyer is a boob, and a moronic one at that. Anybody that calls themselves an "Intellectual Property Expert" should know better. There is no grey area here, it's just flat out wrong and being completely ignorant about the issue.