You're making three too many assumptions here:

Seriously? You're still going about crushing heads and spines?

Oh? Three time's the magic limit for recklessly using a lethal weapon without any justification?

If someone puts a bowl of candy out on Halloween without any indication of how much to take, it doesn't matter what is implied. Should we base our society off of implications or should responsibility be shared among those responsible? It's the bowl owner's fault for not specifying how much candy to take as it is…

One of the guards said "you better watch yourself" and immediately after told the character to have a nice day.

Well that's you letting your biases about FPS games get in your way. RPGs started out as very turn based, very text heavy adventures. Do we let that get in the way of how we define RPGs now? No, now it's simply any game where you have some sort of in-depth progression of character.

What attention to detail? You can go around shooting things in front of the guards and they'll still tell you to have a good day and not move a muscle.

Wait, this is a stealth game where guard don't give a s*** that you're going around with a pistol and a sword blowing up lights?

Actually not true. Read more about what that prosthetic can do. Modern science has created plenty of prosthetics that can lift things heavier than a pebble. You missed my point in the first post; NO ONE HAS CREATED A PROSTHETIC THAT CAN WIELD A SWORD BECAUSE NO ONE GROUNDED IN REALITY WANTS ONE, and that's assuming…

Take a joke? You're insulting modern science while being completely ignorant about it. Have you even bothered to look up what modern prosthetics can do? They've developed prosthetics that connect directly to your nerves and are controlled by your mind for crying out loud, and "the field is barely better than it was…

Not true at all. It would be like if someone gave you the key to their apartment and said "take something" and you took more than they meant for you to. Legally, you'd have done nothing wrong.

Yes, yes, for the upteenth time, the analogy was bad.

Well now, you're just getting into semantics that can't be proven or accepted by everyone. I'm not trying to excuse anything, I'm just insisting that not everyone who used the code is the same as a pirate.

So? It's still not stealing and there's still a stark difference between someone who takes too much candy on Halloween and someone who regularly shoplifts candy from a store. With some people these two probably overlap but someone who just took too much candy from that bowl that one Halloween isn't a hypocrite for…

We don't need prosthetics that allow us to do battle with medieval weapons. What do we have? Prosthetics that allow people to compete in the Olympics, prosthetics that can be controlled by our nerves, prosthetics that are designed to make everyday tasks easier.

Implied purpose? Unless there was an agreement upon using the code that explicitly stated that you must only use this code once per person, then it doesn't matter what giving the code implied.

What now? I'm not talking about ease of access, I'm talking about the difference between the two acts. There are different severities of theft, different tendencies for it, different reasons for it, etc.

Agree. Annoying advertising like that doesn't make me pay attention to the ad, it makes me find every way to circumvent it.

To be fair, the Spec Ops devs didn't want multiplayer but it was forced on them by the publisher.

Not a good analogy. My point is that not all people who used the code are pirates and there can be a very big difference in mindset.