Blizzard Banning Single Player Cheaters?

Recommended Videos

zombiesinc

One day, we'll wake the zombies
Mar 29, 2010
2,508
0
0
I actually just replied to this (more or less) in a very similar thread;

Though I'm surprised people have been banned for cheating in single-player, especially without any sort of warning, I can understand, to at least some extent.

Although some people don't care about achievements or unlockables, a lot of people do. And it certainly ruins the experience for other users when someone has unlocked or achieved everything in an extremely short period of time, or entirely through cheats. The main reason users dedicate extra time and energy into a game is to achieve or unlock things. They can then feel a sense of accomplishment once they're rewarded.

I feel it's a lot similar to MW2. You can't play the game for more than ten minutes without getting a message saying "Hosting a tenth prestige lobby for 800 MS points" (Yes, I'm referring to the 360 version) which in itself is entirely annoying, but also quite discouraging if you're someone who actually wants to reach the tenth prestige. It sucks to know people are paying for, or cheating to get the 'ultimate' or final achievement(s) in a game. And the more cheaters that go unpunished, the less some people will want to play, especially when it comes to online gameplay.
This entire step may feel a bit excessive to some, but I wish steps like these were taken by other companies within their games, more particularly within the online portion.
 

TriGGeR_HaPPy

Another Regular. ^_^
May 22, 2008
1,039
0
0
John Funk said:
CoreKrogoth said:
For all of this I'm going to assume that multiplayer game play isn't ACTUALLY affected by achievements.
It is if Blizzard wants their presentation to have any integrity. If they want the special player icon that you get for doing every achievement on the hardest difficulty to be special, rare and unique, then that is their right. If they want to be able to say to the players who do it legitimately, "This is your reward for being super-awesome, you get to show it off to everyone," then they need to enforce that integrity.

Except it's not the same thing as steam. The major difference being that VAC can be enabled or disabled in games. (it gets trickier with games that they didn't make, but the principle is the same)The way Steam handles it is by disabling achievements when you cheat, which is much better than banning people for wanting a little "achieved" icon to show up on their profile that doesn't affecting game play whatsoever. It is also clear when VAC is enabled or disabled.
And when you activate the actual in-game cheats in SC2, it disables any achievements.

There's really no ambiguity here. As I understand it, the only difference between the third-party trainers they were actually using and Blizzard's built-in in-game cheats, is that the official cheats disable achievements and the trainers do not. They were only cheating to get the achievements/profile icons, which, as I've said before, Blizzard has a vested interest in preserving the integrity.

It's understandable that we aren't the only people on the planet. That's not the issue. The issue is that it's a decision between taking money from people who (knowing the evil Kotick) weren't informed that cheating to get achievements in single player would take their game from them.
There was a press release about a month or so back where Blizzard clearly warned people that cheating in any mode of the game would qualify you for a ban. Multiplayer and single player.

What more can they do other than issue a warning, and then follow through?

So Funk or anybody else, do you still think the problem is just snap solved by logging in as guest assuming that the banned persons weren't informed that using a 3rd party cheat in single player and only used it in single player, would ban their account? Let's now add the assumption that some of them were using the trainer not for achievements, but because the cheats that were built into the game didn't do something they wanted to be able to do (such as make your units go MUCH faster) just for laughs. Do these people also deserve to have their game removed?
Yes. That solves it completely. If you want to cheat/hack the game/do whatever, do it while you aren't logged in, and playing as Guest. But when you're logged in and playing under the Bnet system, Blizzard is well within its rights to preserve the integrity of its system and do whatever it wants.

As to the wide reaching implications of this see Gregori's posts, he's got it down, but just because people seem to read one thing and it goes in one eye and out the other here it is again. The fact that they CAN legally punish people for modding (in courts intent is often disregarded, particularly in cases like these) their product has horrible implications for modders. This means that if they so wanted Exort, they could come after you for making that mod because YOU TOO, by making that mod, violated their copy right. Or am I just wrong in assuming that you didn't get written permission from the developers AND Kotick himself before making that mod?
Are you ignoring the mod tools that Blizzard provides for both WoW and SC2? Modding the game is different from hacking it. Or would you like to refer to Blizzard's successful lawsuit against the WoW botting program?
This.
Just... This.

This single post sums up everything I think. Seriously.

(Also, if you're going to read it, read the whole thing. And thanks to John for the comprehensive response. :p )
 

Ickorus

New member
Mar 9, 2009
2,886
0
0
Personally I think bans for cheating in single player is over the top; I think they should have instead wiped the achievements and such off of any characters caught using such third party cheats with a warning that if they get caught doing it again they will recieve a permanent ban.

That said, if Blizzard warned people they would do this for cheating in any game mode I think they're well within their rights, I mean that just comes down to the player at fault, not the business.
 

Footinbox

New member
Oct 28, 2009
30
0
0
I completely agree with banning them. Maybe not permanently but for a day at least. As others have said, there are already cheats for people who are so bad they shouldn't be playing anyway, so they don't deserve the achievements. I like Blizzard's stand here b/c very few games/companies stand up to those who cheat.
 

HellsingerAngel

New member
Jul 6, 2008
602
0
0
Banning your B.Net account does not limit your ability to play the single-player campaign. All function that came with the disk are still useable, just not under your B.Net ID name.

What Blizzard did was effectively ban them from achievements and multiplayer forever. That is it!
 

Delusibeta

Reachin' out...
Mar 7, 2010
2,591
0
0
HellsingerAngel said:
Banning your B.Net account does not limit your ability to play the single-player campaign. All function that came with the disk are still useable, just not under your B.Net ID name.

What Blizzard did was effectively ban them from achievements and multiplayer forever. That is it!
And skirmish. Which for some people is 99% of the game.
 

Kif

New member
Jun 2, 2009
692
0
0
It's the right thing to do.

If you're really that terrible you can use the built in cheats... if you're using a tool to cheat then you are clearly trying to get round something, most likely the achievement block for using built in cheats.
 

frago roc

New member
Aug 13, 2009
205
0
0
Garak73 said:
frago roc said:
using trainers is a violation of the EULA, who's to tell that a cheat that modifies game code couldn't easily do so for multiplayer.
Who's to say that your car won't be used to kill someone?
The rules of the road? Speed limits, no DUIs, and other things you agree too by getting a license?
 

gl1koz3

New member
May 24, 2010
930
0
0
Garak73 said:
gl1koz3 said:
What the. Last time I checked, I do what I want with my single player game. Because it's SINGLE PLAYER.

The fuck acheivements are doing there... or even have weight for my silly experience with the computer... I don't get.
Game developers would like to control how you interact with a game. Nintendo tried it when the Game Genie came to market and got shot down and now Blizzard is using technology to do it.

I just can't believe that so many people support this kind of nonsense.
Blizzard had no game of interest to me anyway, so I can see it as a win-win. (The amount of supporters is still silly.)
 

Zer_

Rocket Scientist
Feb 7, 2008
2,682
0
0
Garak73 said:
MetallicaRulez0 said:
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.
If you don't care about achievements, then why do you even care about this? I have yet to see an SC2 trainer that does what the in-game cheats can't in some way. Surely, you not caring about achievements means that it's just much easier for you to use in-game cheats instead.
 

Exort

New member
Oct 11, 2010
647
0
0
Garak73 said:
gl1koz3 said:
What the. Last time I checked, I do what I want with my single player game. Because it's SINGLE PLAYER.

The fuck acheivements are doing there... or even have weight for my silly experience with the computer... I don't get.
Game developers would like to control how you interact with a game. Nintendo tried it when the Game Genie came to market and got shot down and now Blizzard is using technology to do it.

I just can't believe that so many people support this kind of nonsense.
With the amount of mod support Blizzard put up they definly want to contrul us all.
 

HellsingerAngel

New member
Jul 6, 2008
602
0
0
Delusibeta said:
HellsingerAngel said:
Banning your B.Net account does not limit your ability to play the single-player campaign. All function that came with the disk are still useable, just not under your B.Net ID name.

What Blizzard did was effectively ban them from achievements and multiplayer forever. That is it!
And skirmish. Which for some people is 99% of the game.
I'm not sure if you're agreeing with me here, saying that people have the content they want, or are trying to say that skirmmish mode is blocked as a Guest sign-in. For the former I'm glad to have support in this extremely stupid argument of Blizzard now being the bad guy because someone cheated to get online e-peen and feel cheated because they're now banned. For the latter, I say to you, any single-player features of the game are open to use with a Guest sign-in. Campaign, Skirmish and Challenge are all open and cannot be taken away. That is the single-player experience so Blizz has effectively just destroyed your online presence.
 

spartan231490

New member
Jan 14, 2010
5,184
0
0
they cheated. end of story. blizzard is correct. single player affects multiplayer through gamerscore. A permenant ban might be a bit much, but a) it's blizzard's right, and b) they shouldn't have been cheating.
 

spartan231490

New member
Jan 14, 2010
5,184
0
0
Why do I care said:
...Really?

It's just single player damn it! It's not like I'm going online and spamming on how much Blizzard sucks anyway.

It's really simple. TURN OFF THE DAMN ACHIEVEMENTS! IT DOES NOT TAKE 50 SCIENTISTS TO DO IT!

Look, what I do with my single player, MY damn buisness. What I do online, Blizzard monitors it. But if I want to use cheats that are built-in to the game and use them for single player, I WILL.
the cheats they used weren't built in to the game, they were external hacks.
 

HellsingerAngel

New member
Jul 6, 2008
602
0
0
Just like to shed some further light on this issue...

http://www.cheathappens.com/show_download.asp?ID=28339 said:
Instant Cooldowns(built-in), Unlock Research(built-in), Unlimited Credits(built-in), Minerals(built-in), Gas(built-in), Troops(built-in), Kill Enemy Resources(map editor), Reveal Map(built-in), Instant Build(built-in), Instant Units(built-in), God Mode(built-in), Super Damage(built-in), Unlimited Unit Energy(built-in), Heal Unit/Structures(built-in), Drain Unit/Structures(map editor), Add Kills(map editor), Save/Load Position (Teleport)(built-in), Speed up/Slow Down Units(map editor), Increase/Decrease Fire Rate(map editor), Increase/Decrease Unit Range(map editor), Instant Control of Entire Map(map editor), Control Enemy Units(map editor), Increase/Decrease Mission Timer(map editor).
So everything here can be done within the parameters Blizzard has set. I see no reason to fuss about not using trainers. BUT WAIT! There's more to this an meets the eye...

http://www.cheathappens.com/show_download.asp?ID=28339 said:
Made exclusively for Cheat Happens. WRITTEN FOR THE PATCHED (1.1.0.16561) RETAIL VERSION OF THE GAME. May not work with all versions. Read the included readme file with Notepad for important instructions on using the trainer. This trainer features customizable hotkeys. SINGLE PLAYER OFFLINE USE ONLY. USE AT OWN RISK.
So they had a warning up, on Spetember 28th (the release date of this trainer) to not use it online, which is exactly what these people are getting their B.Net accounts banned for. They even had warnings on the August 24th update. This is not news to cheathappens.com people. They're willingly lying to the community about this entire fiasco, trying to place blame on Blizzard for banning people using their programs. Why, you may ask?

http://www.cheathappens.com/cheat_index.asp?titleID=13225 said:
Ultimate Trainer 1.1.1.16605 UNLIMITED MEMBERS ONLY!
To fill their own pockets. These trainers are usable only by paying customers to the cheathappens.com site. This is causing frustration within the player base that have paid good money for a product that is recognised as illegal to be online with. So what does cheathappens.com do? Why, point the finger at Blizzard, of course! Anything to muddle the heart of the matter so that people keep paying for their service for other titles. This website recognizes the dangers, they know that work arounds and proper ways to use said trainers without attaching it to your B.Net acocunt, but feel that just blaming Blizzard is easier because then they don't get the flak for something they did wrong.

The article first posted in this thread is a down right lie, as they're telling people they've been banned from playing the single-player game! This isn't true, as that's what Guest sign-in is there for: to circumvent having to register online and not having to authenticate your actions to Battle.Net. Overall, cheathappens.com seems to be the bad guy here and have gotten away with it thus far because the other side happens to be a large corperation. People, get your facts straight and stand up for the one who's in the right here! Support Blizzard like you know you should, because they are morally correct. They've done what needed to be done in the face of cheaters within the online community and cheathappens.com is lying about it.
 

HellsingerAngel

New member
Jul 6, 2008
602
0
0
Garak73 said:
I am not a pirate and I care about this. I care about this because internet access is something that the average consumer can't control. You can pay for it but when it goes out, you can't do a thing about it.

When the server on the authentication end goes down it's also out of your control. I think that depending on the internet to play a game is bad. I don't want to see the game industry go in that direction, so I care.
I'm not sure where you're getting your information from but StarCraft has no dependancy with an online connection save for registering the product. Even when the Blizzard servers are down I can still play StarCraft 2, I just don't gain achievements because they have to be authenticated by Battle.Net. You can play the enitre game offline if you so choose. I can understand where you're coming from, not wanting single player to be dependant on multiplayer aspects (like having to be online) but Blizzard has not done this so I'm not sure why you're all up in arms about it. Cheathappens.com lied about this, or at least omitted it and worded their article in a way to make you believe this is fact, which I still think is lying. They were not honest and Blizzard has done nothing wrong. They've protected the integrity of online play by banning B.Net acocunts, something you don't own in the first place.

For further insight, check out this post: http://www.escapistmagazine.com/forums/jump/9.237974.8540298
 

spartan231490

New member
Jan 14, 2010
5,184
0
0
Garak73 said:
spartan231490 said:
they cheated. end of story. blizzard is correct. single player affects multiplayer through gamerscore. A permenant ban might be a bit much, but a) it's blizzard's right, and b) they shouldn't have been cheating.
Why is single player tied into multiplayer?
gamerscore. I said that. Blizzard said that.
 

HellsingerAngel

New member
Jul 6, 2008
602
0
0
Garak73 said:
Did you know that you have to check in every 30 days?
DID YOU KNOW THAT?

That's only in the case if you want to play online, which apparently these people do not and is why they're using trainers. If you ignore that 30 days, the only thing that happens is your account becomes deactivated and you have to reactivate it, because now with the new way Battle.Net registers games it's stuck to one account instead of five seperate accounts for each game you own, thus, Blizzard no longer has to delete the account but rather suspend it from being activate if you don't go online. This doesn't affect offline single player in the slightest.

NOW YOU KNOW!