Blizzard Banning Single Player Cheaters?

[NezumiiroKitsune]

If the only reason for these mods is to bypass the security that prevents single player games where cheats are used to affect the gamer score and online achievements, I agree with Blizzards decision to block these people. Especially since Microsoft are in talks with games retailers to make the gamerscore and achievements mean something, similarly with Playstation's trophies. Abusing the game to cheat ANY online aspect unless, like in DoW, you are specifically given the option TO allow cheats, is inherently unethical, and damaging to the developers and the unfair to players who put the effort in. Or otherwise chastise them, removing the ill gotten achievements or suspension. I support their decision to take action against them at least.

If they start getting zealous about mods that don't affect any online factors, then that I'd contest, it's up to the player what they do with game (with the exception of decompiling, reverse engineering etc...).

The achievement only affect online factors because Blizzard designed it that way. Think about it.

I must point out that Oblivion had built in cheats (PC version only I think) but most people who play the PC version mod the shit out of it. How should Bethesda react?

Bethesda released the Elder Scrolls Creation Kit with every copy of the game, if they didn't intend that to be used to mod the game, I don't know what they were thinking.

So what you are saying is that you can only mod a game if the developer says it's ok?

It is very difficult to mod a game (without sanctioned modding tools) without breaking the license agreement, in that it would require you manipulating the games code directly, which since as far back as I remember has been illegal. What this means is, anyone who does modify a game without any tools sanctioned by the developer or compatible with the engine (i.e. Aurora), then they're unlikely to be doing it for ethical reasons. So not exactly, what I was at first saying is that any manipulations to the game that affect any online aspect, especially gamerscore and PS levels in this case, should be cause for action being taken against them, since I have it on good authority that these things won't merely be boasting rights for the terminally house bound. If however, you want to mod a game without the aid of any sanctioned modding tools, such as decompilers, you are at risk of more than being banned.

tl;dr? Yeah, it's up the developer what you're allowed to do.

If it were up to the developer what you were allowed to do then Galoob would have lost the case Nintendo brought against them.

You do know how cheating devices work right? They modify the RAM at runtime. That's what mods do as well. Neither overwrites the original game code.

Remind me again who bought the RAM in my computer?

It does supplement or in this case bypass routines in the orginal code. As I said in my edit, if you're not breaking any online regulations, mod however you like. Also it doesn't modify the RAM, it modifies the data stored in the RAM, and that data is the intellectual property of the developer.

Then maybe you can tell me why Galoob won that case? What did the Game Genie do differently than a trainer?

Have better lawyers than Nintendo? I don't know, I've never even heard of the case.

I linked to it in this thread, I don't wanna go find the link again but:

Basically Nintendo didn't want players cheating with their games (NES era) by using the Game Genie so they took Galoob (maker of GG) to court. It was ruled that the Game Genie is legal because it is not infringing on Nintendo's copyrights because it only temporarily modifies the code and doesn't overwrite it. It was also ruled that it falls under "fair use" laws for consumers. IMO, the game cartridge (where the code resides), the NES (where the RAM resides) and the Game Genie (alters the code in RAM) all were bought, not rented by the consumer.

If this is still the case, then maybe there is nothing wrong with it as long as it doesn't bypass security measures, like serial codes. I'm personally okay with it legal or not if all we're doing is making mods to supplement and enhance the game, or even cheat as long as it's not affecting any online features.

I see them as having altered the EULA since then to secure themselves against a wider range of hacks and mods that would compromise the integrity of the game and the rights of the developers. I'd have to read the EULA that comes with Starcraft 2. If they haven't since then, I'd be frankly very surprised, but also pleased.

 

[AnAngryMoose]

The thing is. Starcraft 2 has its own inbuilt cheats. However, if you use SC2's cheats, your singleplayer achievements for that campaign are disabled. Using external tools means circumventing Blizzard's rules, not to mention they wouldn't accept 3rd party apps in the first place whatever their purpose.

This. Hit the nail right on the head.

 

[kouriichi]

Cheating is cheating. Offline or online :/
I dont care so much if its offline. But if its online, you need to get banned.
Because the singleplayer for starcraft has online achivements, cheating in it should get you banned quickly. The idea of a "Victimless crime" is pointless one, because crime has to have a victim to be one.

now i play Modern Warfare 2, and i rented Reach, and there are boosters in both. And boosting litterally breaks the Matchmaking in halo. Everyone who honestly earned theyer achivements and unlocks is chuncked in with the cheaters. :/ i know 3 people who legitimately hit 10th Prestige, and they were all called boosters or cheats. Even though they worked for theyer titles and unlocks.

To exploit is to show a clear lack of morals and commitment, and it should be an offence that will get you banned. you didnt earn your work, so you dont desever it. Plain and Simple.

 

[NezumiiroKitsune]

If the only reason for these mods is to bypass the security that prevents single player games where cheats are used to affect the gamer score and online achievements, I agree with Blizzards decision to block these people. Especially since Microsoft are in talks with games retailers to make the gamerscore and achievements mean something, similarly with Playstation's trophies. Abusing the game to cheat ANY online aspect unless, like in DoW, you are specifically given the option TO allow cheats, is inherently unethical, and damaging to the developers and the unfair to players who put the effort in. Or otherwise chastise them, removing the ill gotten achievements or suspension. I support their decision to take action against them at least.

If they start getting zealous about mods that don't affect any online factors, then that I'd contest, it's up to the player what they do with game (with the exception of decompiling, reverse engineering etc...).

The achievement only affect online factors because Blizzard designed it that way. Think about it.

I must point out that Oblivion had built in cheats (PC version only I think) but most people who play the PC version mod the shit out of it. How should Bethesda react?

Bethesda released the Elder Scrolls Creation Kit with every copy of the game, if they didn't intend that to be used to mod the game, I don't know what they were thinking.

So what you are saying is that you can only mod a game if the developer says it's ok?

It is very difficult to mod a game (without sanctioned modding tools) without breaking the license agreement, in that it would require you manipulating the games code directly, which since as far back as I remember has been illegal. What this means is, anyone who does modify a game without any tools sanctioned by the developer or compatible with the engine (i.e. Aurora), then they're unlikely to be doing it for ethical reasons. So not exactly, what I was at first saying is that any manipulations to the game that affect any online aspect, especially gamerscore and PS levels in this case, should be cause for action being taken against them, since I have it on good authority that these things won't merely be boasting rights for the terminally house bound. If however, you want to mod a game without the aid of any sanctioned modding tools, such as decompilers, you are at risk of more than being banned.

tl;dr? Yeah, it's up the developer what you're allowed to do.

If it were up to the developer what you were allowed to do then Galoob would have lost the case Nintendo brought against them.

You do know how cheating devices work right? They modify the RAM at runtime. That's what mods do as well. Neither overwrites the original game code.

Remind me again who bought the RAM in my computer?

It does supplement or in this case bypass routines in the orginal code. As I said in my edit, if you're not breaking any online regulations, mod however you like. Also it doesn't modify the RAM, it modifies the data stored in the RAM, and that data is the intellectual property of the developer.

Then maybe you can tell me why Galoob won that case? What did the Game Genie do differently than a trainer?

Have better lawyers than Nintendo? I don't know, I've never even heard of the case.

I linked to it in this thread, I don't wanna go find the link again but:

Basically Nintendo didn't want players cheating with their games (NES era) by using the Game Genie so they took Galoob (maker of GG) to court. It was ruled that the Game Genie is legal because it is not infringing on Nintendo's copyrights because it only temporarily modifies the code and doesn't overwrite it. It was also ruled that it falls under "fair use" laws for consumers. IMO, the game cartridge (where the code resides), the NES (where the RAM resides) and the Game Genie (alters the code in RAM) all were bought, not rented by the consumer.

If this is still the case, then maybe there is nothing wrong with it as long as it doesn't bypass security measures, like serial codes. I'm personally okay with it legal or not if all we're doing is making mods to supplement and enhance the game, or even cheat as long as it's not affecting any online features.

I see them as having altered the EULA since then to secure themselves against a wider range of hacks and mods that would compromise the integrity of the game and the rights of the developers. I'd have to read the EULA that comes with Starcraft 2. If they haven't since then, I'd be frankly very surprised, but also pleased.

What the EULA says is irrelevant since it isn't legally binding.

Let me put it this way, what if Nintendo had started printing something like this in their manuals: "Use of the Game Genie with this cartridge will render your right to play this game null and void". Would that have changed anything? Would Nintendo have been able to send someone to your house to remove the cartridge from you since that is the only way they could prevent you from playing (Blizzard is just using a different method, the internet to achieve the same goal).

I think I see what you're saying about Blizzard. I don't think they gave the game single player achievements TO prevent people from modding, I think they discovered this was possible after release and had to take action. Though it might have been more vindictive and castrating, this is true. If the mods don't affect online at all, would they take action then? Future modders should seek to avoid allowing mods to affect anything but their experience, or a shared mutual experience (such as LAN), and Blizzard should work on releasing a patch that, rather than making it difficult for modders to avoid affecting online, make it difficult for mods to affect any online play. Then as long as nothing else is being infringed, both parties should be happy.

If Nintendo wanted to do that, I expect they'd flash the memory rather than take the cartridge off you.

Also the DMCA and the EUCD were only passed in 1998 and 2001, so copyright law has since changed.

 

[kouriichi]

snip

*sigh*
Except that unlike in Halo or Modern Warfare, the achievements in SC2 mean nothing. Null. Not even for the players. Nor does the way the guy acquired them in any way harm anyone else. If you do not believe in the term 'victimless crime', then this is not a crime at all. It's just laziness.

:/ and what about all those people who earned theyer achivements? ((im not one of them))
your saying everyone who accually works for theyer achivements deserve to be lumped in with the cheater?
Why would you even be going for the achievements in the game if they mean nothing? Your cheating for nothing?
xD So your saying, cheating for something that does nothing for you if ok because theres no point in cheating for it to begin with?

 

[deth2munkies]

I have 0 sympathy for idiots that cheat in single player with 3rd party programs. There's no bloody reason for it, the game is rather simple on easier settings, has cheat codes built in that do everything a trainer would, and has no fucking point other than to make it less fun.

Do you also feel that same about people who use mods for other PC games or cheating devices like Gameshark, Action Replay, etc...?

There's a difference: AR/Gameshark are cheats that aren't already in the game and can't help you in multiplayer (no matter what you say, you feel a lot worse going against someone with a Kerrigan icon than one that hasn't even beaten the campaign on normal). Mods are a completely different thing, violating the ToS should always result in a ban, but here's the main kicker:

None of those games have integrated support and online multiplayer like battle.net and SC2. If you use a trainer on a Steam game, you'll probably get banned if you're caught as well, and that's the main difference.

 

[kouriichi]

Cheating is cheating. Offline or online :/
I dont care so much if its offline. But if its online, you need to get banned.
Because the singleplayer for starcraft has online achivements, cheating in it should get you banned quickly. The idea of a "Victimless crime" is pointless one, because crime has to have a victim to be one.

now i play Modern Warfare 2, and i rented Reach, and there are boosters in both. And boosting litterally breaks the Matchmaking in halo. Everyone who honestly earned theyer achivements and unlocks is chuncked in with the cheaters. :/ i know 3 people who legitimately hit 10th Prestige, and they were all called boosters or cheats. Even though they worked for theyer titles and unlocks.

To exploit is to show a clear lack of morals and commitment, and it should be an offence that will get you banned. you didnt earn your work, so you dont desever it. Plain and Simple.

There is nothing wrong with cheating in single player mode, people have been doing it for years and they hurt no one. That Blizzard chose to tie single player achievements into multiplayer mode is the real problem and the only people to blame are Blizzard.

People should get banned for cheating in mutliplayer mode I agree but cheating in single player should be allowed.

But thats the thing about it though. The single player before WASNT TRACKED ONLINE. ((not anger caps, just pointing it out))

Times change. This game is tracked online. Whatever you unlock is followed online. Earn it.
Theyer ACHIEVEMENTS. You much ACHIEVE them. If you dont, you dont deserve them. Plain and simple.

 

[John Funk]

Add this to another reason why achievements are bullshit.

Its a damn single player game, and people who do cheat don't give a shit about achievements. They don't carry any weight or prestige in any game. No one gives a shit.

This is just ridiculous, and Blizzard is basically doing this because they can.

Its their damn game. They can do whatever the hell they want with it/to it so long as its not copying it and giving it away.

The EULA says otherwise, but those don't carry any credence at all since they're only shown during installation. After you bought the thing.

This is straight up bullshit. Fuck achievements.

Except, from what I understand, they were specifically cheating to get the achievements / profile icons. So, that kind of torpedoes your theory that they didn't care about it, because that was their entire goal in the first place. Pretty much any other cheat you can think of is already in the game, and it disables your achievements/icon earning.

Everyone saying "blar blar they didn't care about achievements" is arguing an uphill battle when it appears as if they were trying to get the prestigious achievements / profile icons in the first place.

And if we accept that Blizzard does not want this to happen, the solution "wipe their achievements/icons" really won't fly, because what's to stop them from cheating to get it again?

 

[Knusper]

I know Blizzard doesn't do the Total: War series, but if it spreads to other game developers, how am I ever going to complete a long Grand Campaign?! They are just too hard without the odd money cheat.

(Yeah, I know I suck at the logistics and economics of that game - just keep on making troops until I run out of money! )

 

[MetallicaRulez0]

Cheating is cheating. Whether it's cheating in online multiplayer (an offense punishable by death in my opinion) or just cheating to artificially boost your gamerscore, it's still cheating. There's a reason the official SC2 cheat codes automatically disable achievements when you use them.

Cheating is cheating.

 

[kouriichi]

snip

People who earned their achievements get the satisfaction of actually earning them. Also, nobody is getting lumped with anybody because nobody cares about their own achievements, much less other people's. Some people do care about achievements, but it only goes to the extent of murmuring to yourself "I have this, I am so cool." There literally isn't even anybody to compare your e-peen points with. If this were not true, maybe, maybe it would be more than harmless fun on the side of the hackers, but as it is, it's just that.

By the way, I already said, twice, that what had to be done here was have the perpetrators' achievement points wiped to zero. Banning them is straight up over kill, which will no doubt gain points with the Blizzard apologetics, which is, I guess, what they're shooting for here; and, of course, a few more possible sales.

:/ no it isnt. They broke the rules. They cheated. They broke the TOS.
They should be banned. Saying "oh no, they shouldent be banned because they didnt hurt anybody" doesnt help the arguement. They broke the rules. Breaking the rules gets you banned.

And alot of these achivements take real skill. And those with that skil should be shown above those who dont. I only have 780 achivement points for SC2. My friend has over 1500. Which one of us is better?

Theyer there for a reason. So you can see what people are best at. To keep track of your ACHIEVEMENTs. When you cheat you arnt only breaking the rules, but you arnt ACHIEVING anything.

So basically, your not only breaking the rules, your doing it for a stupid reason :/ which is, as you pointed out, no reason.

 

[kouriichi]

Cheating is cheating. Whether it's cheating in online multiplayer (an offense punishable by death in my opinion) or just cheating to artificially boost your gamerscore, it's still cheating. There's a reason the official SC2 cheat codes automatically disable achievements when you use them.

Cheating is cheating.

Do you drop a guy out of school because he cheated at a test? No, that's probably too soft. You throw him off a cliff, right?

No, you throw him into detention for 30 days and force him to do a makeup test.

 

[Exort]

Huh, used to be that when you bought a game, you owned that game and could enjoy it's content in whatever manner you saw fit. Now apparently you're somehow insulting the developer's artistic sensibilities if you cheat or mod the single-player aspects of the game, and they can take away your right to use a product which you legally purchased.

I'm sorry, but to me that seems a lot like bullshit. There is a clearly defined rationale behind banning people who cheat in multiplayer - they are giving themselves and unfair advantage in a competitive environment. That doesn't apply to single-player, even achievements for actions completed within single-player. When servers and matchmaking are provided by the developer, the developer has the right to enforce it's own rules on players who choose to engage in the multiplayer aspect of the game. However, the idea that because the developer requires an arbitrary connection to a server in order to play the single-player game, they should also be able to prevent people from playing that game? Nope.

Just another reason to pirate games, well done Blizzard, you've leapt willingly on to the bandwagon that's ruining your own industry.

You never really own a game you buy, by owning it it means you have the right to distribute it. The problem with this is there is built-in cheats, people that use trainers means they are going for the achivment. It doesn't matter if YOU care for achivment or not, you aren't the only person in the world. Blizzard have a long history igroning fan made MOD as long it is not cheating. Ton of diablo 2 mods that techically is illegal but blizzard never cared because it is not used for cheating, rather adding new content. There is even a Starcraft 2 mod (in beta testing, when editor is not released) that change the game to starcraft: broodwar (with better graphics) and the Blizzard said they loved it and send a copy to all developers. By the way, every piece of single player content is preload in the editor if you want to play the game your way. Anyway I don't think they ban people using trainers in offline mode single player (no way to detect it).

 

[Irridium]

Add this to another reason why achievements are bullshit.

Its a damn single player game, and people who do cheat don't give a shit about achievements. They don't carry any weight or prestige in any game. No one gives a shit.

This is just ridiculous, and Blizzard is basically doing this because they can.

Its their damn game. They can do whatever the hell they want with it/to it so long as its not copying it and giving it away.

The EULA says otherwise, but those don't carry any credence at all since they're only shown during installation. After you bought the thing.

This is straight up bullshit. Fuck achievements.

Except, from what I understand, they were specifically cheating to get the achievements / profile icons. So, that kind of torpedoes your theory that they didn't care about it, because that was their entire goal in the first place.

This happens on the 360 as well. But instead of outright banning the players, their achievements are simply wiped and they can't earn them again. Why didn't Blizzard just do this?

The achievements do nothing to affect online play. And if Xbox Live is any indication, no one gives a damn about what achievements you have. Hell I didn't even know Starcraft 2 had achievements until now.

 

[migo]

Are they banning single player cheaters from multiplayer or straight up preventing them from playing the game period? If it's the former it's not a big deal.

 

[Delusibeta]

And if we accept that Blizzard does not want this to happen, the solution "wipe their achievements/icons" really won't fly, because what's to stop them from cheating to get it again?

Simple: block them from gaining achievements. Not nuking their entire copy and making them have to pay another $60 just to play the single player again. I mean, not even VAC is that bad.

Are they banning single player cheaters from multiplayer or straight up preventing them from playing the game period? If it's the former it's not a big deal.

Various, but some cases it appears to be the latter.

 

[JerrytheBullfrog]

Cheating is cheating. Whether it's cheating in online multiplayer (an offense punishable by death in my opinion) or just cheating to artificially boost your gamerscore, it's still cheating. There's a reason the official SC2 cheat codes automatically disable achievements when you use them.

Cheating is cheating.

Single player cheating is acceptable to most people because it affect no one else. The only reason it affects anyone in this case is because Blizzard designed their game that way.

Cheating is cheating. Whether it's cheating in online multiplayer (an offense punishable by death in my opinion) or just cheating to artificially boost your gamerscore, it's still cheating. There's a reason the official SC2 cheat codes automatically disable achievements when you use them.

Cheating is cheating.

Do you drop a guy out of school because he cheated at a test? No, that's probably too soft. You throw him off a cliff, right?

So what I'm really getting from this is that you guys don't understand what happened, and so you're going to keep arguing with completely incidental facts either way. Great, glad to know I don't have to pay any attention to this

Seriously, folks. How can you say they don't care about achievements when they were cheating to get the achievements?

Not to mention Blizzard has talked in the past about giving you a "Blizzard score" for your achievements through all of your games and perhaps having it actually mean something, so... yeah, the achievements actually matter. And you know what? This doesn't even prevent people from playing the game offline. They can still play the game. It just prevents them from logging on to... earn achievements and play multiplayer!

Which you're arguing they didn't want to do anyway. Herp derp.

Can we actually have some understanding of the facts before we whine about things, people?

 

[JerrytheBullfrog]

Cheating is cheating. Whether it's cheating in online multiplayer (an offense punishable by death in my opinion) or just cheating to artificially boost your gamerscore, it's still cheating. There's a reason the official SC2 cheat codes automatically disable achievements when you use them.

Cheating is cheating.

Single player cheating is acceptable to most people because it affect no one else. The only reason it affects anyone in this case is because Blizzard designed their game that way.

Cheating is cheating. Whether it's cheating in online multiplayer (an offense punishable by death in my opinion) or just cheating to artificially boost your gamerscore, it's still cheating. There's a reason the official SC2 cheat codes automatically disable achievements when you use them.

Cheating is cheating.

Do you drop a guy out of school because he cheated at a test? No, that's probably too soft. You throw him off a cliff, right?

So what I'm really getting from this is that you guys don't understand what happened, and so you're going to keep arguing with completely incidental facts either way. Great, glad to know I don't have to pay any attention to this

Seriously, folks. How can you say they don't care about achievements when they were cheating to get the achievements?

Not to mention Blizzard has talked in the past about giving you a "Blizzard score" for your achievements through all of your games and perhaps having it actually mean something, so... yeah, the achievements actually matter. And you know what? This doesn't even prevent people from playing the game offline. They can still play the game. It just prevents them from logging on to... earn achievements and play multiplayer!

Which you're arguing they didn't want to do anyway. Herp derp.

Can we actually have some understanding of the facts before we whine about things, people?

Which MIGHT be fine if Blizzard had included LAN. SC2 is developed in a way to be dependent on Bnet.

The bottom line is that developers are getting too much control over how you play a game that you purchased and this is just a little demonstration of the direction things are heading.

So you are saying that because SC2 is developed in a way to be dependent on Bnet--acknowledging that what you do/earn in single-player affects the multiplayer--that this somehow...makes it okay for people to cheat in the single-player, because they don't care about the multiplayer?

Sorry, it doesn't work both ways like that.

You can't argue that A.) the people cheating don't care about multiplayer if they just want to play singleplayer, and so what they earn with the cheats don't affect others and then B.) say that it's unfair to ban them from the multiplayer service because it's so integral to Bnet. That's self contradictory.

Either they don't care about their multiplayer status (in which case they can just play offline with all the cheats they want and, as such, have not lost a thing), or they do care about their multiplayer status and were cheating to boost it (in which case Blizzard's banning of them was completely justified). Which are you arguing?

 

[JerrytheBullfrog]

snip

I'm arguing that none of the other people actually give a shit if you have 9990 achievement points or 300, therefore you're not really ruining the fun for anybody, way to miss the point. Also, I'm arguing that if anything, this is not something that should be banned for. Wipe their achievements? Sure, I'm all for it. Maybe even give a suspension, sure.

By the way, keep that they can still play the game crap to yourself. Starcraft 2 is useless without the multi-player. U-S-E-L-E-S-S. You can use it as an imaginary paperweight on your imaginary papers on your desktop if you're banned from B.net.

See above. Do they care about the multiplayer, or do they not? (And btw the single-player campaign is excellently designed from a gameplay perspective, even if the story is, as expected from Blizzard, shit). If not, then there's no problem. If so, then they were deservedly banned. Herp derp logic is hard.

 

[Lonan]

I agree with Blizzard. There's already a cheat code, it's called casual difficultly. I can't use my left arm right now for extended periods (It'll probably hurt after typing this, broken collarbone) but I could still do every mission on normal with little difficulty, even though I was using only my mouse and a brain with a mild concussion. Or, if they aren't in it for achievements, they could cheat in offline mode, as a guest. Otherwise they are either ignorant or in it for achievements.