4 ms·

The interesting thing to me is what exactly Blizzard Entertainment said that prompted the author of this blog post (a Google research lead) to decide not to rel

by declan 12y ago

The interesting thing to me is what exactly Blizzard Entertainment said that prompted the author of this blog post (a Google research lead) to decide not to release the utility that at Defcon he said he would. Excerpt: "Following Defcon we had a series of conversations with the Hearthstone team about our research... they were very concerned that our real time dashboard that can predict your opponent’s deck will break the game balance by giving that person (that is, whoever has the tool) an unfair advantage. They also expressed concern that such a tool..." There's no evidence his utility was derived from reverse engineering or a TOS violation. It appears to be based on evaluating a large number of Hearthstone matches and using those results to create a mathematical model that lets you find "undervalued" cards. One application of the model is a utility that can help to predict "what your opponent is going to play based on previous turns." https://www.elie.net/blog/hearthstone/how-to-appraise-hearthstone-card-values https://www.elie.net/blog/hearthstone/how-to-appraise-hearth... Blizzard has taken aggressive legal action before. As EFF tells it, Blizzard filed "a DMCA lawsuit against a group of volunteer game enthusiasts who created software that allowed owners of Blizzard games to play their games over the Internet. The software, called "bnetd," allowed gamers to set up their own alternative to Blizzard's own Battle.net service." https://www.eff.org/wp/unintended-consequences-under-dmca https://www.eff.org/wp/unintended-consequences-under-dmca This time, I wonder if the decision not to release the utility was prompted by a friendly query from a Blizzard developer or a C&D nastygram by a Blizzard attorney -- with a lawsuit threatened if he didn't comply.

pilif 12y ago
>This time, I wonder if the decision not to release the utility was prompted by a friendly query from a Blizzard developer or a C&D nastygram by a Blizzard attorney -- with a lawsuit threatened if he didn't comply. according to the article it was the former. And considering that the latter would be even better PR for the authors, I would assume the article to be true.
- declan 12y ago
  The article says only "Hearthstone team" and "they," which is ambiguous, especially given Blizzard's history in this area.
joshschreuder 12y ago
Seems a bit tin-foily, they state in the post: "...they were very concerned that our real time dashboard that can predict your opponent’s deck will break the game balance by giving that person (that is, whoever has the tool) an unfair advantage. They also expressed concern that such a tool makes the game less fun by taking away some of the decision-making from the player." Nothing in there indicates aggressive legal consequences for the author to me. It seems fair enough - it's a game, and anything that would ruin entertainment value for players is obviously not something that Blizzard would want released.
- declan 12y ago
  I've spent 10+ years paying close attention to lawyer nastygrams to security researchers and academics, and that's exactly the type of language they would use. But as you say, perhaps I'm being too cynical in this case.
- tks2103 12y ago
  If they want to avoid ruining entertainment value, they should make a game that is not so easily solved by a computer program. They deliberately avoided mechanics that introduce complexity when designing Hearthstone. I do not see why anyone other than Blizzard should be interested or required to cater to Blizzard's game design decisions.
  - minimaxir 12y ago
    > They deliberately avoided mechanics that introduce complexity when designing Hearthstone ...which is the exact reason it became so popular.
    - chongli 12y ago
      There are ways to add computational complexity to a game without making it more difficult for new players to learn. Witness arimaa[0] compared to chess. [0] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Computer_Arimaa#Computer_performance http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Computer_Arimaa#Computer_perfor...
ahomescu1 12y ago
It is quite possible that they asked him nicely, and he agreed out of professional courtesy (I'd probably do the same in this situation).
snowwrestler 12y ago
Look at the pros and cons from the researcher's perspective. Pro His professional and personal reputation is enhanced by his research findings, which do not depend on the dashboard. What does the researcher gain by releasing the dashboard? Not much. Con If he releases it, he potentially changes the character of the game if a lot of people start installing and using the dashboard. He makes life harder on the Hearthstone team, and Blizzard. Ultimately the risk is that the game see falling interest and support, and gets cancelled. So what does the researcher lose by releasing the dashboard? Possibly one or more aspects of a game he clearly likes. It was probably not hard to convince him not to release it.

by declan 12y ago

pilif 12y ago

>This time, I wonder if the decision not to release the utility was prompted by a friendly query from a Blizzard developer or a C&D nastygram by a Blizzard attorney -- with a lawsuit threatened if he didn't comply. according to the article it was the former. And considering that the latter would be even better PR for the authors, I would assume the article to be true.

declan 12y ago
The article says only "Hearthstone team" and "they," which is ambiguous, especially given Blizzard's history in this area.

joshschreuder 12y ago

Seems a bit tin-foily, they state in the post: "...they were very concerned that our real time dashboard that can predict your opponent’s deck will break the game balance by giving that person (that is, whoever has the tool) an unfair advantage. They also expressed concern that such a tool makes the game less fun by taking away some of the decision-making from the player." Nothing in there indicates aggressive legal consequences for the author to me. It seems fair enough - it's a game, and anything that would ruin entertainment value for players is obviously not something that Blizzard would want released.

declan 12y ago
I've spent 10+ years paying close attention to lawyer nastygrams to security researchers and academics, and that's exactly the type of language they would use. But as you say, perhaps I'm being too cynical in this case.
tks2103 12y ago
If they want to avoid ruining entertainment value, they should make a game that is not so easily solved by a computer program. They deliberately avoided mechanics that introduce complexity when designing Hearthstone. I do not see why anyone other than Blizzard should be interested or required to cater to Blizzard's game design decisions.
- minimaxir 12y ago
  > They deliberately avoided mechanics that introduce complexity when designing Hearthstone ...which is the exact reason it became so popular.
  - chongli 12y ago
    There are ways to add computational complexity to a game without making it more difficult for new players to learn. Witness arimaa[0] compared to chess. [0] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Computer_Arimaa#Computer_performance http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Computer_Arimaa#Computer_perfor...

ahomescu1 12y ago

It is quite possible that they asked him nicely, and he agreed out of professional courtesy (I'd probably do the same in this situation).

snowwrestler 12y ago

Look at the pros and cons from the researcher's perspective. Pro His professional and personal reputation is enhanced by his research findings, which do not depend on the dashboard. What does the researcher gain by releasing the dashboard? Not much. Con If he releases it, he potentially changes the character of the game if a lot of people start installing and using the dashboard. He makes life harder on the Hearthstone team, and Blizzard. Ultimately the risk is that the game see falling interest and support, and gets cancelled. So what does the researcher lose by releasing the dashboard? Possibly one or more aspects of a game he clearly likes. It was probably not hard to convince him not to release it.