I think you might agree, I could be cheating myself?
I can't really speak to your perspective.
Personally, I cannot cheat myself.
The other bone of contention I would raise, is that of autopilot. This time last year, any form of autopilot was a no-no. Suddenly, FDev bring out their own automation saying it's all good and legal. Many of us, could have written that without FDev's help but we'd have been accused of cheating.
Plenty of actions that are cheating in some contexts are not cheating in others. Ultimately, FD dictates the rules for Elite: Dangerous (which is an online only, multiplayer only, experience, that requires a cohesive set of rules from a central authority to function). Before they implemented autopilot, running one would surely have been in violation of their prohibition against automation, and would have resulted in some degree of unfair advantage, and would thus have been a cheat.
This is not to negate the absolute definite cheat that is modifying memory etc. There are (in my mind) no two ways about it.
This would depend on the effect achieved and whether it can confer any advantage.
Hacking the game, even in an explicitly prohibited way that would righty get one banned immediately if discovered, is not cheating unless it also provides some form of edge.
Bottom line is; Until I hear differently, VA is legal and I'll use it any way I can.
You only need to read the ToS to hear differently.
Of course you are unlikely to be punished for most uses of VA or other automation tools, unless you go out of your way to do things that would be flagged as disruptive (spamming 'transactions' to manipulate the BGS, for example).
Sounds like cheating to me, and has always been called such.
If it was called that, it was a misnomer.
It just doesn't really matter because you're not cheating anyone else.
I'm not cheating anyone at all when I open up my text editor and load a bunch of
Baldur's Gate II 2DA files and correct all the mistakes the developers made in implementing the AD&D 2nd Edition rule set (such as the bonus priest spells for a high wisdom score, the table for which in BG2 is from an erroneous printing of the PHB); or if I want to play the game by the 1st edition rules (and thus edit all the armors in the game to make them wearable by multi-classed wizards); or change various monster abilities and behavior scripts to make them more reflective of the pen and paper games. I'm not even cheating if I decide to play through the game as vampire, or a Tanar'ri (a demon), and edit the character in my save to reflect this.
A single player game is played by a singular player, for the entertainment of that singular player, and the only one capable of dictating any rules in such a single player experience, is the player themselves.
Now, if someone were claiming to have accomplished some feat related to playing the game, under the pretense they were playing an unmodified game, but they ha then that could certainly be cheating...just at whatever contest (irrespective of degree of formality) was occuring, rather than at the game itself.
That's only related if everyone, I mean - everyone - would agree about using hacks and cheats. Certainly not the case here, rather the opposite as only the cheaters will agree.
Once everyone agrees to a set of rules, playing within them is not cheating.
That's the purpose the ToS serves in an online title...to get everyone on more or less the same page with regard to what the rules are. There may be certain, unwritten understandings that go beyond these rules, and the written terms may not always be strictly enforced, but no one should be taken off guard, or feel wronged, if and when they are.
