Blizzard Gives Single Player StarCraft 2 Cheaters a Time-Out, Opens Can of Worms [UPDATED]

[Logan Westbrook]

Blizzard Gives Single Player StarCraft 2 Cheaters a Time-Out, Opens Can of Worms [UPDATED]

A website focused on cheating in games is up in arms as Blizzard cracks down on single player cheaters.

It's not just multiplayer cheaters and hackers that Blizzard is targeting in StarCraft 2 [http://www.amazon.com/Starcraft-II-Wings-Liberty-Pc/dp/B000ZKA0J6/ref=sr_1_1?s=videogames&ie=UTF8&qid=1286892816&sr=1-1], it's people cheating in single player as well. An article [http://www.cheathappens.com/article_blizzardbans.asp] posted on the Cheat Happens website said that a user had his account suspended for two weeks after using a trainer to modify the game, but only in single player modes and never online.

Blizzard justified the bans by saying that progress in the single player had some bearing on your multiplayer status, so by cheating in the campaign mode and in matches against the AI, players were effectively cheating in multiplayer as well. Understandably, Cheat Happens was unsatisfied with this response, saying that Blizzard is only after player's money, and the only effect that cheating in single player has is that the player gets a few achievements that they didn't earn.

But the Cheat Happens website also has a financial interest in the matter, as it sells subscriptions that allow access to the trainers that got its user suspended. The site may appear to be on the side of the little guy, and it's quite possible that that is at least part of its motivation, but when examining the response, it can't be ignored that Blizzard's actions are a threat to Cheat Happens' business.

StarCraft 2 already supports a number of official cheats, which disable achievements when activated, so it's hard to see the use of a trainer as anything other than a way to get achievements fraudulently. The achievements also unlock user pictures to be used in multiplayer games, and for those to have any of the value that Blizzard intended, they have to be difficult to obtain. The Cheat Happens site lists [http://www.cheathappens.com/show_cheat.asp?ID=28086] all the official cheats, but makes a point of saying that if you want to cheat and still get the achievements, you need to use one of its trainers.

Being suspended - because that's all the action actually was, a two week suspension - for cheating in a single player game is still a pretty new idea, but when you parse out the situation out it becomes much more understandable. The user was trying to give him or herself a level of prestige he or she didn't earn, just the same as if you tried to artificially inflate your gamerscore on Xbox Live or your trophy count on PSN. For those reward systems to have any value at all, they have to be earned fairly.

UPDATE: Blizzard has gotten in touch with us over the single player StarCraft bans, as it says there is some confusion about why they are happening. It says that the trainers that people get from sites like Cheat Happens often have multiplayer components to them, so to maintain the integrity of StarCraft 2's multiplayer competition, Blizzard is actively targeting anyone who uses them in any multiplayer mode, even if there are no human opponents present. Blizzard went on to say that people using third-party modifications in StarCraft 2 do so at their own risk, and that it takes cheating of any kind very seriously.

Source: Rock, Paper, Shotgun [http://www.rockpapershotgun.com/2010/10/11/blizzard-bans-single-player-scii-cheaters]










Permalink

 

[John Funk]

Essentially, all this crying comes off as people complaining about something they haven't taken the trouble to understand.

1.) Blizzard warned everyone back in September [http://www.escapistmagazine.com/news/view/103464-Blizzard-Warms-Up-Banhammer-for-StarCraft-II-Cheaters] that it would be banning anyone who was "cheating or using hacks or modifications in any form."

2.) This isn't even a permanent ban. It's a two-week suspension.

But even if 1.) and 2.) WEREN'T true... frankly, it'd still be pretty justified.

The way SC2 is set up, the major incentive reward (other than victory for victory's sake) is the different portraits you can unlock for your account. So that when someone sees you, they go "ooh, he's won 500 games as Zerg" or "ooh, he's done all the super-hard achievements on the super-hardest difficulty." If Blizzard has any vested interest in preserving the integrity of its system, as Microsoft does with its gamerscore, for instance - and it DOES - then it needs to take action on people who cheat it. Otherwise the people who earn said rewards fairly end up feeling like, "Well why did I try to do this when I could have just cheated?"

As I understand the matter, the only difference between the cheats that the people who got suspended were using and Blizzard's already-implemented in-game cheats is that the Blizzard cheats disable achievements and the third-party hack does not. Ergo, the only reason to use the third-party hack is... to get achievements. You wouldn't do it if that wasn't your entire goal in the first place.

This isn't about, "Oh, what if you just want to hack the game to make your units move really fast or play around with things?" You can do that in the offline Guest mode, which isn't attached to your profile (which means you can't get achievements). The fact that they were doing this logged in, with a trainer that specifically let you cheat to get achievements, shows that they went into this with a purpose.

They were trying to game the system, and Blizzard dropped the hammer - as it had explicitly warned people it would. This is completely justified.

You can cheat/hack the offline game as much as you want. They can't ever take your offline mode away from you. But the moment you start intentionally trying to mess with the entire multiplayer system of incentives and rewards, you get what's coming to you.

Edit: Oh, and Logan is totally right that the CheatHappens site has a vested financial interest in making this story seem like the Big Bad Wolf vs. the Valiant Underdog. They're selling hacks to the game, and they can't do that if Blizzard is banning people for it. Remember what happened the last time somebody did that [http://www.escapistmagazine.com/news/view/86562-Blizzard-Clobbers-Glider-Bot-Maker-In-Court]?

 

[CitySquirrel]

I support this.

 

[crotalidian]

When I saw the Headline I wanted to scream and Shout that this had Bobby K's stink all over it and it was more proof that Blizzard is becoming more like Activision....but after reading the article I think Blizzard have got the right idea here and fully support this decision. Maybe the punishment was even too Lenient

 

[DTWolfwood]

lolz Cheater got what coming to him indeed. He should be happy Blizzard didn't perma ban him!

The fact that the game comes with Built-In cheat codes (which more games need to have! especially skirmish enabled RTS's) kinda makes this case even more irksome to read. I say ban them all! Screw them whiny bitches! Learn to play the game properly (and use the built in cheats.)

p.s. Finally beat "In Utter Darkness" on BRUTAL!! Wooo the only mission to stand in the way of me earning the Kerrigan Portrait is behind me \o/ (granted i'll still use the Specter Portrait, since no1 seems to use it lol)

 

[Logan Westbrook]

Using trainers to get achievements is sad.

Paying for trainers to get achievements is even more sad.

Getting banned for using trainers you had to pay for to get achievements would be sad, if it weren't so pathetic.

 

[Irridium]

If xbox live proves anything, its that no one gives a damn about your achievements or gamer/profile pictures that you unlock due to those achievements.

Honestly, after giving it some thought and reading up on everything, I feel both sides are in the wrong. Blizzard is wrong for banning people for choosing to play the game however they want, Cheat Happens is wrong because, well they sell cheats and hacks, and I find that to be just stupid.

They bought the game, let them do whatever the hell they want with it(provided its not making and distributing copies).

Blizzard can ban you from your single player games. And everyone seems to be fine with it. Which makes me sad.

 

[Daft Ghosty]

@John

Quite a broad shot you are firing there. I used the same trainer day one. Not because I wanted achievements, but because I had a cheathappens acct from using their trainers on other games. I didn't even bother to look if the game had in game cheats, nor should I have to even care to try. I do NOT play SCII online. I could care less about the achievements either. Again my thoughts were not can I get insanely hard achievements, and fool a bunch of people I don't know or care about online. My thoughts were I want to play through the story, and this is the way I chose to do it. If anyone has a problem with it well they can get stuffed. If Blizzard wants to reward people with achievements that affect online games then they should implement those achievements in the online environment. Then they can suspend and ban away as people cheat. I too do not like playing against someone who cheats. But what that person does to their single player game is their own business.

 

[Hawksword192]

Personally I think it's wrong. Sucks people are getting banned when they are playing by themselves against AI. If the issue is achievements then just remove them. Achievements don't do anything than give a player a false sense of satisfaction so they keep playing (which itself is a psychological trap). Blizzard shouldn't penalize single player actions whatsoever.

 

[Loonerinoes]

If the achievements in question do not impact the single-player part of the game as well as the obvious e-peen multiplayer part...then yep, Blizzard was in the right.

But if the achievements happen to give bonuses to single-player parts of the game as well (such as for example what I saw the tiny bonuses in ME1 only for RTSes like...I dunno...lower production time on units or such) then frankly...Blizzard needs to do something other than just banhammer people with the thunderous voice of 'JUSTICE IS SERVED.'

Though as far as I see, yeah...real easy for this kind of thing to get spinned into 'OMG Blizzard is oppresin' singleplayer!' but if they genuinely provided their own cheats whose only effect is disabling non-gameplay affecting achievements...not much you can say against these bans once you think it through I think.

But once again, broadly bannhammering people is definitely something that will always wind up stepping on the toes of people who genuinely did not want to exploit this sort of thing and simply had pre-registered at cheathappens so...some freaking context please before playing the corporate-defense games, please? I've seen plenty of completely innocent friends get their accounts suspended on bogus claims and suspicions of botting within WoW, for whom I could be quite certain were wrong as I had spent most of their online time with them.

 

[John Funk]

@John

Quite a broad shot you are firing there. I used the same trainer day one. Not because I wanted achievements, but because I had a cheathappens acct from using their trainers on other games. I didn't even bother to look if the game had in game cheats, nor should I have to even care to try. I do NOT play SCII online. I could care less about the achievements either. Again my thoughts were not can I get insanely hard achievements, and fool a bunch of people I don't know or care about online. My thoughts were I want to play through the story, and this is the way I chose to do it. If anyone has a problem with it well they can get stuffed. If Blizzard wants to reward people with achievements that affect online games then they should implement those achievements in the online environment. Then they can suspend and ban away as people cheat. I too do not like playing against someone who cheats. But what that person does to their single player game is their own business.

The achievements are only in the online environment. If you play the game offline, you get no achievements.

The fact that they were intentionally playing online with these hacks active is evidence in itself. You can claim "Oh, but maybe they didn't KNOW about the in-game cheats," but that's immensely unlikely.

What a person does on the single-player offline game (as in, playing as Guest without logging in) IS their own business. These people were not playing the single-player offline game.

If xbox live proves anything, its that no one gives a damn about your achievements or gamer/profile pictures that you unlock due to those achievements.

Honestly, after giving it some thought and reading up on everything, I feel both sides are in the wrong. Blizzard is wrong for banning people for choosing to play the game however they want, Cheat Happens is wrong because, well they sell cheats and hacks, and I find that to be just stupid.

They bought the game, let them do whatever the hell they want with it(provided its not making and distributing copies).

Blizzard can ban you from your single player games. And everyone seems to be fine with it. Which makes me sad.

Again, you really don't seem to have the facts straight here. Blizzard did not ban anyone from a single-player game. Blizzard banned people from trying to improve their multiplayer prestige through the single-player game. They can still play the single-player game offline - they just won't be able to get any achievements (which, you argue, they never cared about in the first place).

Plus, this is a temporary suspension. A "Don't do this again" warning shot.

 

[tzimize]

Essentially, all this crying comes off as people complaining about something they haven't taken the trouble to understand.

The way SC2 is set up, the major incentive reward (other than victory for victory's sake) is the different portraits you can unlock for your account. So that when someone sees you, they go "ooh, he's won 500 games as Zerg" or "ooh, he's done all the super-hard achievements on the super-hardest difficulty." If Blizzard has any vested interest in preserving the integrity of its system, as Microsoft does with its gamerscore, for instance - and it DOES - then it needs to take action on people who cheat it. Otherwise the people who earn said rewards fairly end up feeling like, "Well why did I try to do this when I could have just cheated?"

I disagree. Personally I couldnt give less of a crap about what people think when they face me online (the few times I bother to play online). The achievements are for personal pleasure only. When I managed to kill 4 hatcheries on hard in a particular map in SC2 I was proud for my own sake, and felt good. But who cares what others think? I have actually had a friend of mine play some 1vs1 on my account so I could get a zergling portrait (as they are my favorite unit ever), and I think playing 1vs1 is the definition of boring/stress/not fun.

I could completely sympathize if people cheat in online matches vs people. Ban em. Permanently imo. And I could completely sympathize if your achievement score vs AI had ANY impact whatsoever on multiplayer, gave you better units, cheaper upgrades or SOMETHING, but it doesnt. So this to me, feels like police brutality (and for gods sake I know police brutality is a more serious matter so dont call me out on the comparison anyone........). Its a stupid and unnecessary move imo.

 

[Megacherv]

Essentially, all this crying comes off as people complaining about something they haven't taken the trouble to understand.

1.) Blizzard warned everyone back in September [http://www.escapistmagazine.com/news/view/103464-Blizzard-Warms-Up-Banhammer-for-StarCraft-II-Cheaters] that it would be banning anyone who was "cheating or using hacks or modifications in any form."

2.) This isn't even a permanent ban. It's a two-week suspension.

But even if 1.) and 2.) WEREN'T true... frankly, it'd still be pretty justified.

The way SC2 is set up, the major incentive reward (other than victory for victory's sake) is the different portraits you can unlock for your account. So that when someone sees you, they go "ooh, he's won 500 games as Zerg" or "ooh, he's done all the super-hard achievements on the super-hardest difficulty." If Blizzard has any vested interest in preserving the integrity of its system, as Microsoft does with its gamerscore, for instance - and it DOES - then it needs to take action on people who cheat it. Otherwise the people who earn said rewards fairly end up feeling like, "Well why did I try to do this when I could have just cheated?"

As I understand the matter, the only difference between the cheats that the people who got suspended were using and Blizzard's already-implemented in-game cheats is that the Blizzard cheats disable achievements and the third-party hack does not. Ergo, the only reason to use the third-party hack is... to get achievements. You wouldn't do it if that wasn't your entire goal in the first place.

This isn't about, "Oh, what if you just want to hack the game to make your units move really fast or play around with things?" You can do that in the offline Guest mode, which isn't attached to your profile (which means you can't get achievements). The fact that they were doing this logged in, with a trainer that specifically let you cheat to get achievements, shows that they went into this with a purpose.

They were trying to game the system, and Blizzard dropped the hammer - as it had explicitly warned people it would. This is completely justified.

You can cheat/hack the offline game as much as you want. They can't ever take your offline mode away from you. But the moment you start intentionally trying to mess with the entire multiplayer system of incentives and rewards, you get what's coming to you.

Edit: Oh, and Logan is totally right that the CheatHappens site has a vested financial interest in making this story seem like the Big Bad Wolf vs. the Valiant Underdog. They're selling hacks to the game, and they can't do that if Blizzard is banning people for it. Remember what happened the last time somebody did that [http://www.escapistmagazine.com/news/view/86562-Blizzard-Clobbers-Glider-Bot-Maker-In-Court]?

Essentially, all this crying comes off as people complaining about something they haven't taken the trouble to understand.

1.) Blizzard warned everyone back in September [http://www.escapistmagazine.com/news/view/103464-Blizzard-Warms-Up-Banhammer-for-StarCraft-II-Cheaters] that it would be banning anyone who was "cheating or using hacks or modifications in any form."

2.) This isn't even a permanent ban. It's a two-week suspension.

But even if 1.) and 2.) WEREN'T true... frankly, it'd still be pretty justified.

The way SC2 is set up, the major incentive reward (other than victory for victory's sake) is the different portraits you can unlock for your account. So that when someone sees you, they go "ooh, he's won 500 games as Zerg" or "ooh, he's done all the super-hard achievements on the super-hardest difficulty." If Blizzard has any vested interest in preserving the integrity of its system, as Microsoft does with its gamerscore, for instance - and it DOES - then it needs to take action on people who cheat it. Otherwise the people who earn said rewards fairly end up feeling like, "Well why did I try to do this when I could have just cheated?"

As I understand the matter, the only difference between the cheats that the people who got suspended were using and Blizzard's already-implemented in-game cheats is that the Blizzard cheats disable achievements and the third-party hack does not. Ergo, the only reason to use the third-party hack is... to get achievements. You wouldn't do it if that wasn't your entire goal in the first place.

This isn't about, "Oh, what if you just want to hack the game to make your units move really fast or play around with things?" You can do that in the offline Guest mode, which isn't attached to your profile (which means you can't get achievements). The fact that they were doing this logged in, with a trainer that specifically let you cheat to get achievements, shows that they went into this with a purpose.

They were trying to game the system, and Blizzard dropped the hammer - as it had explicitly warned people it would. This is completely justified.

You can cheat/hack the offline game as much as you want. They can't ever take your offline mode away from you. But the moment you start intentionally trying to mess with the entire multiplayer system of incentives and rewards, you get what's coming to you.

Edit: Oh, and Logan is totally right that the CheatHappens site has a vested financial interest in making this story seem like the Big Bad Wolf vs. the Valiant Underdog. They're selling hacks to the game, and they can't do that if Blizzard is banning people for it. Remember what happened the last time somebody did that [http://www.escapistmagazine.com/news/view/86562-Blizzard-Clobbers-Glider-Bot-Maker-In-Court]?

You see, this is why I regard you as 'The Starcraft Man' of the site

 

[John Funk]

Essentially, all this crying comes off as people complaining about something they haven't taken the trouble to understand.

The way SC2 is set up, the major incentive reward (other than victory for victory's sake) is the different portraits you can unlock for your account. So that when someone sees you, they go "ooh, he's won 500 games as Zerg" or "ooh, he's done all the super-hard achievements on the super-hardest difficulty." If Blizzard has any vested interest in preserving the integrity of its system, as Microsoft does with its gamerscore, for instance - and it DOES - then it needs to take action on people who cheat it. Otherwise the people who earn said rewards fairly end up feeling like, "Well why did I try to do this when I could have just cheated?"

I disagree. Personally I couldnt give less of a crap about what people think when they face me online (the few times I bother to play online). The achievements are for personal pleasure only. When I managed to kill 4 hatcheries on hard in a particular map in SC2 I was proud for my own sake, and felt good. But who cares what others think? I have actually had a friend of mine play some 1vs1 on my account so I could get a zergling portrait (as they are my favorite unit ever), and I think playing 1vs1 is the definition of boring/stress/not fun.

I could completely sympathize if people cheat in online matches vs people. Ban em. Permanently imo. And I could completely sympathize if your achievement score vs AI had ANY impact whatsoever on multiplayer, gave you better units, cheaper upgrades or SOMETHING, but it doesnt. So this to me, feels like police brutality (and for gods sake I know police brutality is a more serious matter so dont call me out on the comparison anyone........). Its a stupid and unnecessary move imo.

Okay, so you don't personally care about achievements (but you do care about unit portraits).

What about the people who do care? Can you really say that 100% of Blizzard's playerbase doesn't care about the prestige they get? If I really want to get Portrait X which is done by earning achievements A, B and C, and I work my ass off to do that so I can get Portrait X ... and then I find out that people can just CHEAT to get my same reward, and Blizzard does nothing about it - isn't that a bit of a slap in the face to me?

If Blizzard has any interest in preserving the integrity of its reward/incentive system, it needs to make sure it's legitimate. Because just because you don't care about your gamerscore/portraits/achievement score, that doesn't mean that nobody does.

 

[Irridium]

If xbox live proves anything, its that no one gives a damn about your achievements or gamer/profile pictures that you unlock due to those achievements.

Honestly, after giving it some thought and reading up on everything, I feel both sides are in the wrong. Blizzard is wrong for banning people for choosing to play the game however they want, Cheat Happens is wrong because, well they sell cheats and hacks, and I find that to be just stupid.

They bought the game, let them do whatever the hell they want with it(provided its not making and distributing copies).

Blizzard can ban you from your single player games. And everyone seems to be fine with it. Which makes me sad.

Again, you really don't seem to have the facts straight here. Blizzard did not ban anyone from a single-player game. Blizzard banned people from trying to improve their multiplayer prestige through the single-player game. They can still play the single-player game offline - they just won't be able to get any achievements (which, you argue, they never cared about in the first place).

Plus, this is a temporary suspension. A "Don't do this again" warning shot.

I though Starcraft 2 didn't have an offline mode. Huh...
Well that renders most of my arguments moot.

But still, why didn't they just instead wipe their achievements? They obviously can detect people who do this, so instead of outright banning them for two weeks, why not just wipe the achievements and take away their pictures for good? They can still earn ones they didn't unlock through this, but they can't earn back ones they cheated for.

 

[antidonkey]

All I see in that article is "Wah wah wah! I got caught doing something I was told not to do and I don't want to suffer the consequences".

 

[LawlessSquirrel]

I don't understand the problem...I know people who get pissed of when people do the same thing in CoD and it goes unpunished. And it's just a suspension, not anything that would force you to pay more money. If you cheat and get caught then maybe you should get punished. It's quite simple. If you just want to experience the game differently, there's in-game cheats or mods that work just fine without having the large potential for abuse.

Gotta side with Blizzard on this one, it's smart to get this sorted out early.

 

[standokan]

Good for blizzard, they really need the money so I respect there discision.

 

[John Funk]

If xbox live proves anything, its that no one gives a damn about your achievements or gamer/profile pictures that you unlock due to those achievements.

Honestly, after giving it some thought and reading up on everything, I feel both sides are in the wrong. Blizzard is wrong for banning people for choosing to play the game however they want, Cheat Happens is wrong because, well they sell cheats and hacks, and I find that to be just stupid.

They bought the game, let them do whatever the hell they want with it(provided its not making and distributing copies).

Blizzard can ban you from your single player games. And everyone seems to be fine with it. Which makes me sad.

Again, you really don't seem to have the facts straight here. Blizzard did not ban anyone from a single-player game. Blizzard banned people from trying to improve their multiplayer prestige through the single-player game. They can still play the single-player game offline - they just won't be able to get any achievements (which, you argue, they never cared about in the first place).

Plus, this is a temporary suspension. A "Don't do this again" warning shot.

I though Starcraft 2 didn't have an offline mode. Huh...
Well that renders most of my arguments moot.

But still, why didn't they just instead wipe their achievements? They obviously can detect people who do this, so instead of outright banning them for two weeks, why not just wipe the achievements and take away their pictures for good? They can still earn ones they didn't unlock through this, but they can't earn back ones they cheated for.

There is "play as Guest" mode. Which is essentially an offline profile where you can't earn achievements/whatever, but you can do all the single-player content.

Frankly, I think they banned them because they expressly warned people that they would be banning people who were using hacks. If you give that warning and don't follow through, well, it makes any further warnings seem much less intimidating.

 

[Jamash]

I think the problem with this is a symptom of the single player game being tied in with Battlenet and it's online components.

If you cheat on X-Box Live you'll either get your Gamerscore reset and be prevented from earning those achievements, or you'll get your Gamertag banned and lose access to all your DLC, or in the most extreme cases you'll get your console banned from X-Box Live completely.

However, you won't ever be prevented from playing your purchased game, you'll always be able to put your disc in your banned console and play the vanilla, un-patched single player game.

What Blizzard is doing is treating the single player game like DLC or a subscription and essentially rendering people's game discs completely worthless, in a way taking away their game that they paid money for.

Not that I condone cheating or feel much sympathy for the afflicted, since the writing was on the wall ever since Blizzard announced that SCII would always require Battlenet, but I can understand why some people are annoyed that they can't even play the offline, single player game that they purchased.

It's just another wake up call to gamers pointing out that, as per the EULA for every game, you don't actually own your game and only purchase temporary permission to use the software, permission that can be revoked by the IP's owners at any time they see fit.