Blizzard Attacks StarCraft II Cheat Developers

[Exort]

I didn't think that there were multiplayer hacks for Starcraft 2. I thought that the big problem recently was that people were cheating in the single player campaign (something I have ZERO problem with).

The only thing that I don't agree with is when people charge money for these things, especially cheat codes. I could easily see, and agree, with Blizzard having a problem with this.

There are and that is why they got banned then QQ about they are just using it in single player, but Blizzard argue that those hacks can be used in multiplayer as well.

 

[Imperioratorex Caprae]

I absolutely love this. The online experience is negatively impacted by cheaters. This in turn damages the brand of the online game and its developer (as people get the perception that "it's full of cheaters and hackers and assholes".)

That's material economic damage. And when you do material economic damage, that's exactly what the court system is there to redress.

Put 'em in rags and cardboard boxes, Blizzard. And let their homeless, broken souls serve as a brutal example for the others. Fuck cheaters.

This sir is for you... A cookie... cuz my interweb won't let me post images now...

 

[Mikester1290]

1
Well, that's just a thought of course.

EDIT:- Online cheaters - fuck you, you ruin it for everyone who fights fair, take my above coments aside from this.

 

[Exort]

Ever since Blizzard merged with Activision, they've become total dicks.
Banning is one thing, but a law-suit?
I'm as much against cheating in multiplayer as everyone else, but that's going a bit too far, much like all of Blizzard's recent law-suit.

I'm really not a moralist, but how is it fair to ruin someone's entire life because he ruined a few multiplayer matches in a video game? This is completely out of proportion.

They have a long history of sue hack maker before merging with Actvision. If you just ban people they will keep coming, you need to kill the source.

 

[Exort]

I think this needs some clarification:

Are these "hacks" the same singleplayer hacks that warranted all those recent bans or are we talking about different hacks specifically designed for multiplayer?

They are the same. Blizzard said they ban the single player hack becuase it works in multiplayer as well.

 

[Sunstrike]

Okay, so Blizzard, and Ubisoft games are off my list. Activision? Still undecided...

I can see now why Valve gets so much love.

Curious why you no longer want to buy blizzard games.

From my understanding, they are launching these lawsuits at people who create multiplayer hacks, IE maphacks, drop hacks. The sort of thing that gives the user an instant win/unfair advantage, making the game significantly less fun for their opponents.

Sure it might be going a bit overboard to actually sue them, but I don't see why that's a reason not to buy their products anymore.

 

[Exort]

I'm perfectly fine with banning multiplayer cheaters, as well as sueing the creators of the hacks (especially if they're charging people to download them), but the banning of single player cheaters was an absolute load of crap to me, especially since Blizz locked many people completely from the game, as in they couldnt even play the campaign/skirmish. I don't see myself ever buying Diablo 3, since modding the crap out of Diablo 2 is what keeps me playing it, and I dont want to loose my game just for trying to have fun in single player.

First it is a 14 day ban. Then those people claim got ban in single player didn't tell you the same hack works in multiplayer.

"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."

http://www.escapistmagazine.com/news/view/104294-Blizzard-Gives-Single-Player-StarCraft-2-Cheaters-a-Time-Out-Opens-Can-of-Worms-UPDATED

You really beleive those cheaters?

 

[Karathos]

What exactly aren't people getting here? You talk about Blizzard being bullies, and singleplayer cheats not affecting anything. The cheats people were banned for were BOUGHT. The people who made those programs made money off of Blizzard's game. What company wouldn't want to catch people that are illegally making money off of their game?

Come on people, sheesh. Get a grip. Everyone has to be the big hero sticking up for the underdog. Guess what? The "underdog" is the bad guy in this story. Accept it.

 

[Exort]

Lawsuits now? Are you fucking serious? For cheating in the SINGLE-PLAYER? How in the hell does that affect the online experience?

Because of leaderboards using single player data aswell as multiplayer.

Yes, it's about something as retarded as leaderboards, and Blizzard claim it will cost them sales due to word of mouth.

http://www.escapistmagazine.com/news/view/104294-Blizzard-Gives-Single-Player-StarCraft-2-Cheaters-a-Time-Out-Opens-Can-of-Worms-UPDATED

"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."

 

[Pebkac]

Critical yes, especially when they are wholly in the wrong. In this case they're enforcing something that they said they would enforce. Keeping their word as it is. If I said I was having a party at my house and that you couldn't bring drugs to the party or you will be banned, and you show up to the party with drugs, keeping my word and throwing you out is what integrity is all about.

That example is a bit of a stretch since most recreational drugs are illegal (in most countries), cheating in games isn't illegal in any country that I know of.

Also, when it comes to single-player games, it's really not your house.

Didn't steal anything? They had to hack the source code to get those 3rd party programs to work which constitutes reverse engineering, which is something that's protected by law (and has been previously enforced). Yes they might be editing memory addresses in the RAM space, but they wouldn't have a damn clue how to do that unless they'd hacked the source which is a violation of copyright law since the game is *not* open-source.

The source code isn't needed to modify them. You can hunt down memory locations by value:
Search for "5000" because you have 5000 vespene, results show tons of memory locations; collect 100 more vespene and search for "5100", now you have fewer possible memory locations. Keep searching and eventually you end up with a handful or even just 1 possible location.

Also reverse engineering is either a protected right or a crime depending on the circumstances.

AFAIK, in the US, reverse engineering copyright protection software is illegal (like DVD/Bluray keys), but reverse engineering any other kind of software isn't. In Canada and Peru, I'm pretty sure reverse engineering games is legal.

 

[Pebkac]

What exactly aren't people getting here? You talk about Blizzard being bullies, and singleplayer cheats not affecting anything. The cheats people were banned for were BOUGHT. The people who made those programs made money off of Blizzard's game. What company wouldn't want to catch people that are illegally making money off of their game?

Come on people, sheesh. Get a grip. Everyone has to be the big hero sticking up for the underdog. Guess what? The "underdog" is the bad guy in this story. Accept it.

You might want to read the thread and follow the link I posted about Galoob vs Nintendo. Galoob made and sold a device so people could cheat on games made for Nintendo's system. Nintendo said "That's not fair! *poutface* You're making money off of our stuff!", the courts said "Nintendo, STFU. YOU LOSE!"

This "precedence" thing is pretty important in U.S. law.

EDIT: What Activision/Bliz is trying to sue for is online cheaters making them look bad.

 

[Racecarlock]

Blizzard recently made headlines for banning used third-party cheat modifications [http://www.amazon.com/Starcraft-II-Wings-Liberty-Pc/dp/B000ZKA0J6/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1287256601&sr=8-1] in single-player games.

Note. SINGLE player games. They weren't using these hacks in competitive multi-player. They weren't even using them in custom fucking around multiplayer. Single player cheats. I guess rockstar should sue everyone using simple native trainer in GTA IV, and Microsoft should sue anyone using the Halo CE single player trainer. Now I know you guys sometime make fanboyish posts, but I wouldn't peg any escapist user as one who doesn't read entire posts.

 

[Arehexes]

I'm not really understanding how Blizzard has any justification suing a programmer for making hacks for Starcraft, single or multi player. The only way I can see it being justified is if they are charging for these hacks, then maybe, just maybe, Blizzard has a leg to stand on. This isn't like the WoW lawsuits, where you are dealing with hacking a paid service and the like (although I still find the decision against Glide to be more than a little questionable. All right, I find it outrageously stupid), this is a single player/multi player game that people aren't paying anything to access beyond the purchase of the initial game.

Go after the cheaters in multi-player, sure. But the programmers.... I don't see this having good results.

I don't see how charging for the cheats makes a difference. It's not like they are selling modified copies of the game without paying for it in the first place. They are selling code to modify the (presumably legitimately bought) game. From what I understand, this is how the US courts see it. Nintendo tried to sue the makers of Game Genie, and failed:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lewis_Galoob_Toys,_Inc._v._Nintendo_of_America,_Inc.

One of the critical differences when people cheat online is that they are playing on someone else's servers. They get to make the rules for those servers, and it's fair-game for them to say "cheaters and potty-mouths get banned".

I posted the same thing bout this in another thread on the subject. I mean i should be sued i guess since i hacked Cheetah men 2 to make it some what play-able with hex editors(like a GG). Modding is going to die if this keeps up. Companies will force online single player, so modders can't mod for sh!t.

 

[Dorian Cornelius Jasper]

yeahhhhhhh....fine by me to take out the guy making the cheats, but please leave me some singleplayer cheats! i seriously suck at some games, and i cheat because i'm never interested in gameplay at all, i treat games like books, and i only ever really want to know the story

They did, blizz gives you cheats just disables achievements like.... every game lol. People just cry about wanting to cheat and get points.

Pretty much. The guy obviously never heard of Gamefaqs.

 

[Paularius]

Wow... Hissy fit much blizzard?

 

[Arehexes]

Critical yes, especially when they are wholly in the wrong. In this case they're enforcing something that they said they would enforce. Keeping their word as it is. If I said I was having a party at my house and that you couldn't bring drugs to the party or you will be banned, and you show up to the party with drugs, keeping my word and throwing you out is what integrity is all about.

That example is a bit of a stretch since most recreational drugs are illegal (in most countries), cheating in games isn't illegal in any country that I know of.

Also, when it comes to single-player games, it's really not your house.

Didn't steal anything? They had to hack the source code to get those 3rd party programs to work which constitutes reverse engineering, which is something that's protected by law (and has been previously enforced). Yes they might be editing memory addresses in the RAM space, but they wouldn't have a damn clue how to do that unless they'd hacked the source which is a violation of copyright law since the game is *not* open-source.

The source code isn't needed to modify them. You can hunt down memory locations by value:
Search for "5000" because you have 5000 vespene, results show tons of memory locations; collect 100 more vespene and search for "5100", now you have fewer possible memory locations. Keep searching and eventually you end up with a handful or even just 1 possible location.

Also reverse engineering is either a protected right or a crime depending on the circumstances.

AFAIK, in the US, reverse engineering copyright protection software is illegal (like DVD/Bluray keys), but reverse engineering any other kind of software isn't. In Canada and Peru, I'm pretty sure reverse engineering games is legal.

I did the find the hex value thing with a COMPILED fan game(it was a metroid tetris type game). Compiled meaning a program outputed with no source code given. I don't know about you but I didn't do any reverse engineering to find the source code or steal it from the makers computer.

 

[Scout Tactical]

"That, in turn, causes users to grow dissatisfied with the game, lose interest in the game, and communicate that dissatisfaction, thereby resulting in lost sales of the game or 'add-on' packs and expansions thereto."

Sued for negative word of mouth advertising coming to a courtroom near you!

You completely missed the point. They aren't suing people who were dissatisfied with the game, they were suing because cheating causes dissatisfaction. L2 comprehensive reading.

 

[teqrevisited]

I wish they pursued gold sellers this aggressively. I'm sure if they wanted to they could easily get rid of them. "It's a conspiracy!" "They're in on it!" Et cetera.

 

[Something Amyss]

You breaks the rules, you takes your chances. You breaks the rules in a fashion that likely breaks the law, and you ups the stakes.

 

[Monster_user]

No I haven't read the last three pages.

Okay, so Blizzard, and Ubisoft games are off my list. Activision? Still undecided...

I can see now why Valve gets so much love.

Blizzard is off your list for... giving a fiscal middle finger to multiplayer cheaters?

Huh.

No, read the article again, as Iscin, and blakfayt pointed out on page one, those cheats are for single player games.

No I am do not a cheat in multiplayer, and I rarely cheat in single player. It is the principle of the thing. Also, first its single player cheats, then it is mods. If I cannot customize my game, the way I wish to, then what am I spending my money on?

This time it was Starcraft, next time the developer's content will not be enough.

In Jedi Knight II, there were several options for adding new saber techniques, and new costumes.

-----------------------------------------

Did the article mention selling the code? That is an interesting area... Do people sell plugins for Internet Explorer, or Microsoft Office?

Did the cheat programs use any proprietary code? If so, then Blizzard is justified.