Blizzard bans more SC2 hackers

[Exort]

But that would involve reading them first, which I'm sure nobody does.

that is not a valid excuse...
Next time you might as well say "I didn't know I have to pay the credit card company back, not my fault I didn't read the agreement. It was too long."


For the people that says they just want to change a sound/Model file there is no way it can be mistaken as a hack.
Tons of people change those thing in WoW like the GreenFire mod for Warlock. Even though it is against the Term no one even got banned for it.
It is just those Hackers QQ about they got banned.

 

[Irridium]

It's against the Terms of Use policy. They brought this on themselves.

The same Terms of Use that show up when your installing the game? The terms that show up after you bought it, activated it on your account, and can't return it?

Yeah, because they're not divulged fully prior to purchase, they're pretty much meaningless.

Anyway, it seems most trainers can be used in multiplayer, and the trainers allow you to get achievements by doing next to nothing. Personally I feel that banning people who get achievements/special MP pictures is a bit harsh. Microsoft puts achievement bans on people who hack/cheat for achievements, wiping their gamerscore and not allowing them to re-gain any previous achievements.

Blizzard could have done the same thing.

This whole thing just seems so pointless to me. They're just pictures/achievements. Is banning someone over them really the right answer?

 

[Exort]

This whole thing just seems so pointless to me. They're just pictures/achievements. Is banning someone over them really the right answer?

The whole game is just pixels using your logic they should not ban anything at all.

 

[Irridium]

This whole thing just seems so pointless to me. They're just pictures/achievements. Is banning someone over them really the right answer?

The whole game is just pixels using you logic they should not ban anything at all.

No, thats just being obnoxious.

Using my logic, it would be silly to ban people from playing completely for cheating for some pictures/achievements. It would be better to just wipe their points/pictures and not let them re-earn them.

There is middle ground between "not banning anyone for anything" and "banning people completely for cheating for pictures/achievements".

 

[Exort]

Double posted.

 

[Exort]

This whole thing just seems so pointless to me. They're just pictures/achievements. Is banning someone over them really the right answer?

The whole game is just pixels using you logic they should not ban anything at all.

No, thats just being obnoxious.

Using my logic, it would be silly to ban people from playing completely for cheating for some pictures/achievements. It would be better to just wipe their points/pictures and not let them re-earn them.

There is middle ground between "not banning anyone for anything" and "banning people completely for cheating for pictures/achievements".

Ok, I get where you are getting at now. I thought you meant no punishment at all.
However, then there will be nothing to stop the hackers from doing it again.

Anyways, Blzzard claim the reason to ban them is because the Trainer is useable in Multiplayer. Not because of Achievements.

Actually in BLizzcon this year, the developers are talking about making acheivement earnable offline, because they aren't sure if it is safe from hack even now. So there is no point of using the online protection anymore.

 

[Irridium]

Ok, I get where you are getting at now. I thought you meant no punishment at all.
However, then there will be nothing to stop the hackers from doing it again.

Anyways, Blzzard claim the reason to ban them is because the Trainer is useable in Multiplayer. Not because of Achievements.

Actually in BLizzcon this year, the developers are talking about making acheivement earnable offline, because they aren't sure if it is safe from hack even now. So there is no point of using the online protection anymore.

Sucks when your post gets eaten, doesn't it?

Anyway, I feel as though these achievements/pictures seem to be causing more harm then good. And its why Starcraft 2 should have had a proper offline mode(haven't played the game. From what I've heard the only way to play in "offline mode" is to play as a guest). By proper offline mode I mean able to set up a separate account just for offline mode. That way people who want to use single player hacks/trainers can do it and whatever else they want. Plus it would mean that those doing it online will most likely be doing it for nefarious purposes.

Online protection is another can of worms I'd rather not get into right now. Suffice to say I find it bullshit since it screws people with slow/no internet over.

 

[Gindil]

Well this is trying to avoid such a similar shitstorm.

They've just made a new storm, just as stinky and about as much of a mess.

 

[bob1052]

Anyway, I feel as though these achievements/pictures seem to be causing more harm then good.

Not for people who play the game as was intended

And its why Starcraft 2 should have had a proper offline mode(haven't played the game. From what I've heard the only way to play in "offline mode" is to play as a guest). By proper offline mode I mean able to set up a separate account just for offline mode. That way people who want to use single player hacks/trainers can do it and whatever else they want. Plus it would mean that those doing it online will most likely be doing it for nefarious purposes.

There are already systems in place to allow cheating in a way intended by Blizzard, trainers (when online) are just unnecessary ways to use cheats without the logical restraints put in place.

Online protection is another can of worms I'd rather not get into right now. Suffice to say I find it bullshit since it screws people with slow/no internet over.

In this day and age this does not apply to many people.

Also if these people were not connected to the battle.net (using the given offline accounts), Blizzard would not have been able to ban them, no one impacted by this falls under the slow/no internet group.

 

[kickyourass]

While I do think this rule is kinda stupid, the players in question agreed to the Terms of Use set by Blizzard, and then they violeted those terms. If they got banned it's entirely their own fault.

It's against the Terms of Use policy. They brought this on themselves.

but the terms of use are silly.
thats like saying people in a dictatorship are brining the law uppon themselves.

No, it's not, you can't agree to a dictatorship if you don't like the Dictator it's sorta touch shit. With terms of Use you have to agree to them, if you dislike the terms for a certain game then DON'T AGREE TO THEM!! If YOU break rules that you fully agreed to, then as far as I'm concerned you don't have any valid reason to complain whan you get punished.

 

[Exort]

Ok, I get where you are getting at now. I thought you meant no punishment at all.
However, then there will be nothing to stop the hackers from doing it again.

Anyways, Blzzard claim the reason to ban them is because the Trainer is useable in Multiplayer. Not because of Achievements.

Actually in BLizzcon this year, the developers are talking about making acheivement earnable offline, because they aren't sure if it is safe from hack even now. So there is no point of using the online protection anymore.

Sucks when your post gets eaten, doesn't it?

Anyway, I feel as though these achievements/pictures seem to be causing more harm then good. And its why Starcraft 2 should have had a proper offline mode(haven't played the game. From what I've heard the only way to play in "offline mode" is to play as a guest). By proper offline mode I mean able to set up a separate account just for offline mode. That way people who want to use single player hacks/trainers can do it and whatever else they want. Plus it would mean that those doing it online will most likely be doing it for nefarious purposes.

Online protection is another can of worms I'd rather not get into right now. Suffice to say I find it bullshit since it screws people with slow/no internet over.

Sorry can you elaborate on offline account?

Currently you have three Offline Account named: Guest1, Guest2, Guest3, which is completely offline, since it is completely offline I don't see how Blizzard can moniter any activity at all, therefore no way of banning you.

I think you might be confused between Online Single player and Offline Single Player.
If you hack in Online Single Player you can get banned, but not Offline Single player, again because Blizzard can't moniter what you are doing.

By the way, Blizzard don't really ban people for using custom Skin or Sound file, in WoW it had been done for years, and I yet to hear a case of people getting banned for it. For example the GreenFire Mod for Warlock.

 

[technoted]

I say go on Blizzard, they've always had a strict policy when it comes to cheating on their games and so they should. If people don't feel like playing the game properly whether it's online or on single player by using hacks that go against the terms of service then they're bringing on themselves and should be banned for it. Most of the people I game with agree with me on this, play fair or don't play at all, the only reason people are complaining now is recently games companies don't really tend to care whether people cheat anymore and more and more people get acustomed to it and basically feel that it's fine and a legit tactic. And then you get people who jump on the bandwagon and say "Yeah banning people is wrong, they should do this and this instead of banning!" without fully understanding the argument. No one complains at the mass bannings they did on Starcraft 1, Warcraft 2 and Warcraft 3 or even on World of Warcraft when a player is caught cheating so why now all of a sudden in Starcraft 2?

Also, what would taking away their awards and ranking do, they'd just cheat it back up, banning shows that they're not going to take any shit and give people another chance to abuse the system.

 

[John Funk]

The trainers that people are being banned for are the ones that do the exact same thing that Blizzard's in-game cheats do, only they don't disable achievements. It's the same thing as hacking your gamerscore. And in both cases, you deserve the ban.

 

[Irridium]

Not for people who play the game as was intended
There are already systems in place to allow cheating in a way intended by Blizzard, trainers are just unnecessary ways to use cheats without the logical restraints put in place.

Playing and cheating the way it was intended(boy does that sound strange. "cheating the way its intended) is all well and good, but its fun to screw around with the game and change things. And plenty of fun is to be had by playing the game and experience it in way the developers never intended.

In this day and age this does not apply to many people. Also if these people were not connected to the battle.net, Blizzard would not have been able to ban them, no one impacted by this does not fall under the slow/no internet group.

Well, according to this piece [http://news.cnet.com/8301-1035_3-10454133-94.html], it appears that roughly 40% of people in the US don't have broadband(high speed) internet.

That is less then people with broadband, but its still a shit-load of people. And to just ignore all of them is just stupid.

 

[SL33TBL1ND]

It's against the Terms of Use policy. They brought this on themselves.

Modding files has always been a violation, and yet the PC has seen the growth of a strong modding culture.

No, it hasn't. Let's take a look at say, Unreal Tournament for example. All the maps and mods for that game are completely legal. The developers even released programs for those so inclined to do this sort of thing. The difference here is that Blizzard are stopping people who are changing game content without permission.

It's always been a violation in some games, then, and yet I doubt many games don't have some sort of third party mods for them, even when Devs went out of their way to make them unfriendly to modders.

It annoys me that Blizzard is cracking on single player cheats/hacks/whatever - if they're that worried about people being able to easily get medals and stuff, then let them run it offline or something - geez, it's not like their game is sacrosanct or something. They need to lighten the fuck up.

I cheated a lot (in single player, of course) when I was starting on PC games because I wasn't great at them and I found it fun. As I matured I came to relish the challenge of actually playing the game and pretty much never cheat, but I can easily understand the motives of those who do want to dominate the AI or mess around with something cosmetic or over powered or just plain silly. Banning these people is just stupid. If the only harm they have done is to gain some virtual awards illegitimately do a Bungie and take them away FFS.

There are already cheats within the game for people too use if they want to. Yes, only small harm has been done, but that doesn't change the fact that what these people have done is illegal.

Illegal? Does that mean the police should be involved? I dunno if the EULA is even legally enforcible, what with you actually having to purchase a non-refundable good before having the option of accepting it. As to the cheats in-game, these don't cover all the options possible, or give people the freedom to really fuck around. People want to have fun their way, not through some closeted, corporate supplied and limited means.

Long story short, I think Blizzard reacted incorrectly to this. Costing someone $60 for changing a unit's sound files it bullshit - a blanket response is a failed response to something so diverse as 'modding game files'. Take away their single player medals or whatever, not their bloody game!

I agree that EULA's are stupid, but that doesn't stop the fact that these people agree to this contract on installation. They've broken their end of the agreement so Blizzard is allowed to do whatever it says they can within said agreement.

It's against the Terms of Use policy. They brought this on themselves.

The same Terms of Use that show up when your installing the game? The terms that show up after you bought it, activated it on your account, and can't return it?

Yeah, because they're not divulged fully prior to purchase, they're pretty much meaningless.

Anyway, it seems most trainers can be used in multiplayer, and the trainers allow you to get achievements by doing next to nothing. Personally I feel that banning people who get achievements/special MP pictures is a bit harsh. Microsoft puts achievement bans on people who hack/cheat for achievements, wiping their gamerscore and not allowing them to re-gain any previous achievements.

Blizzard could have done the same thing.

This whole thing just seems so pointless to me. They're just pictures/achievements. Is banning someone over them really the right answer?

It says, on the box of the game that you'll need to agree to some form EULA and it even gives a url to said EULA. People can check this before they buy it.

 

[zehydra]

It's probably because of the idea, that if someone is using external programs for single player, they're one step away from using them for multiplayer. Despite this, as people before me have stated, it IS against the EULA.

Besides, if I'm correct about this, they can still player Single player while they're banned, right?

 

[Exort]

It's probably because of the idea, that if someone is using external programs for single player, they're one step away from using them for multiplayer. Despite this, as people before me have stated, it IS against the EULA.

Besides, if I'm correct about this, they can still player Single player while they're banned, right?

Yes, but I think only offline mode single player. Last time people only got banned for a week. I'm not sure about this time.

 

[Irridium]

Sorry can you elaborate on offline account?

Currently you have three Offline Account named: Guest1, Guest2, Guest3, which is completely offline, since it is completely offline I don't see how Blizzard can moniter any activity at all, therefore no way of banning you.

I think you might be confused between Online Single player and Offline Single Player.
If you hack in Online Single Player you can get banned, but not Offline Single player, again because Blizzard can't moniter what you are doing.

By the way, Blizzard don't really ban people for using custom Skin or Sound file, in WoW it had been done for years, and I yet to hear a case of people getting banned for it. For example the GreenFire Mod for Warlock.

Here's what I'm saying: Banning people from playing the game for hacking the single player online is stupid. But people hacking for achievements/pictures is also stupid, if not more-so. Just hack away offline.

I don't know what guest(offline) accounts can and can't do, I was just going off on a tangent and thinking out-loud with all that...

As for skin/sound files, I don't really have an opinion on those. So yeah...

Hopefully that clarified some things.

 

[SenseOfTumour]

Surely you buy the game, then pirate another copy, and do your offline single player cheaty nonsense on that, keeping your paid for copy pristine and clean

After all, you've bought it, you're just using a backup copy to protect your original...that's allowed legally, isn't it?

If so, glad to help. If not then of course I don't condone such irresponsible and illegal actions.

EULAs need to die however, once you've taken the plastic off, no store in the world is going to take that game back and refund you, whatever your customer rights are, and you can't read the EULA until you've unwrapped the game and half installed it.

Or, we force them all to print their EULAs in large print with every piece of software. See how much they can trim those buggers down when they realise it's cutting a couple of bucks per sale from the profits.

Personally I think it's a shame that this one isn't legally binding: 'In accepting this agreement, you agree to 1 - not be a dick, that is all. Should you be found to be being a dick, we reserve the right to drive a pickaxe thru your PC/console and game. and in extreme cases, a limb of our choice.'

 

[Ken Sapp]

It's against the Terms of Use policy. They brought this on themselves.

You mean the terms of use which you don't see until you have already purchased the game at the store, taken it home, removed the shrinkwrap(thus being unable to return the software in most stores) and begun installing?

This issue has already come up in court before and been shot down as non-binding since the terms of use are not readily available to be agreed to before the purchase takes place.