Poll: It's really time to stop supporting Blizzard

[dementis]

I think it's pretty out of order doing that, they're not hurting anyone by cheating on single player so just leave 'em alone.

 

[AndyFromMonday]

Exactly. And if no one cares then you shouldn't be banned for doing so.

Except that they do care because SCII is largely multiplayer. Or did you skim over that part?

Yet there is a single player portion in that game, is there not?

Technically speaking, yes. But considering that the game is clearly grounded in the multiplayer aspects. I consider the campaign mode to be little more than an extensive tutorial.

Blizzard themselves stated that the Single Player is in no way a tutorial.

 

[faspxina]

I think it's pretty out of order doing that, they're not hurting anyone by cheating on single player so just leave 'em alone.

You can cheat all you want (the cheat codes are provided by the game developers) they just don't want you to use hacks.

 

[Atmos Duality]

People are still talking about this? Geez.
Fine. I've got a moment to kill.

These bans are the result (in the grand scheme of things) of two policies being enforced:
1) People who willingly abused Blizzard's online systems before for profit. (Diablo 2, WoW)
2) People who willingly pirated software (in the industry as a whole, not just Blizzard) to the point where Blizzard was forced to please their investors by forcing Bnet 2.0 (an entire online system that functions as DRM) on us. This decision probably came up late in development, and probably from someone high up in the company.

The culmination of those two factors gave birth to the system policy Blizzard uses today, and recently enforced.

And people are still surprised by this...somehow.

I'm not happy with it, but that's how we got here.

 

[shintakie10]

Hmm, better look here for the whole story...
http://www.escapistmagazine.com/news/view/104294-Blizzard-Gives-Single-Player-StarCraft-2-Cheaters-a-Time-Out-Opens-Can-of-Worms

As far as I'm concerned this is now a dead issue. No one has been perma-banned at all, instead these first-offenders got a 14-day suspension. And the majority of the uproar is coming from the site that sells these "trainer" hack programs, which is clearly a conflict of interests.

Moderator, please lock this topic. [small]And make the bed and change the towels?[/small]

Well, if it's a conflict of interest that this site that sells cheats is complaining, then it is also a conflict of interest that Blizzard is banning people for 14 days because their single player DRM is causing problems.

...That has to be the worst logic I've seen in a while. How do those two have absolutely anythin in common with each other?

 

[HellsingerAngel]

You failed to respond to all my questions. To quote myself: "Isn't the ability to do what you want with your game worth more than arbitrary achievements?"

Yes. However, in this case you can have your cake and eat it too. Don't want to play fair? Use cheat codes. Want to mod the game? Use the map editor which has every single tool Blizz uses to create the gameplay, just wrapped up in a tidy GUI. If you honestly feel that you still need to use a trianer after that, sign-in to a Guest account and play offline where you can't harm anyone else. I'm not sure why this isn't sinking in for you or the other warmongers that feel cheated because they cheated and are getting punished for it.

By all means, add achievements. The moment they are used to limit the liberty I have with my game is the moment I will have a problem with the developer. You're basically telling me that I cannot enjoy my game the way I want to because you need some sort of gratification for killing that Brutalisk. You just admitted you are an attention whore. You want everyone to know you finished the campaign on hard and you want everyone to glare at your awesomeness. That's why you "want" achievements and through that you're forgetting that you're forcing others to conform. Gamers have been getting the same satisfaction you're getting for years without achievements. How come they have become so important now?

We do. That is besides the point, however. How is Blizzard limiting your ability to edit this game? Please, do tell. They gave every customer the entire set of tools they used to create the game to mod as they please, in a legal manner. They installed cheat codes so that those who just want an easy victory can achieve said means by typing in a phrase. Why do you need a trainer? Unless you can answer that question, your point is unsubstantiated because Blizzard has already given you the tools to do what you please with the entire game. If you can tell me one thing that the trainer gives that the cheat codes and the map editor combined cannot do, then you will have a fair argument, you won't look like you're grasping at straws and may possibly be the first person in here with a valid argument worth discussing.

Achievements have been avoided in SP PC games for a reason. They are impossible to introduce correctly without the need to be constantly online. Are you seriously saying that for some small gratification you get we should all conform to the idea of having to be constantly online and having no liberties at all with our games?

Actually, PC games haven't had achievements because that concept is relatively new. This generation is the only generation to which gamer score has been given. However, achievement is no stranger to the gaming world. A game within itself is a test of achievement; to reach the end by surmounting progressively difficult scenarios. There have been easter eggs within games for years and those could be considered much like achievements, if only because you typically need to go out of your way to find them and achieve seeing them. Putting a tag of 50 points for doing so is a new concept, one where the community can quantify your success within a game. Is that not your cup of tea? Fine, all the power to you. Cheat all you like but do so so that people within the multiplayer community are not harmed. This means that a trainer, or rather signing into the online community while using one, is automatically out of the question. This is exactly what these people did and I have no remorse for them. If you care to argue this point, please find something justifiable instead of saying you should be able to play however you want. Again, what can a trainer do that the cheat codes and the map editor cannot?

Yeah, as a guest. I am not a guest. I am the OWNER of that game. Even so, as a guest you can't mod the game files to your liking.

Now, I just had to touch on this, because it is easily the most laughable argument you've put out there. Seriously, you honestly think that's a huge problem? You can mod as the guest account because the trainer activates on your current game and is not dependant on what account you're using. So, even if you wanted to use illegal software editing, you can go right ahead when you're completely offline. Then compound that with the fact that you say achievements are frivilous things and online identity doesn't matter to you because you only play Campaign, Skirmish and Challenge, it just smacks of hypocricy when you spout garbage like that. What does it matter if you sign-in under Guest1 if you don't care about the online community. Are you somehow missing single-player content because of this? No! Can you mod to your heart's content? Yes! Whether that's right or not is up to the individual.

 

[loremazd]

People are still talking about this? Geez.
Fine. I've got a moment to kill.

These bans are the result (in the grand scheme of things) of two policies being enforced:
1) People who willingly abused Blizzard's online systems before for profit. (Diablo 2, WoW)
2) People who willingly pirated software (in the industry as a whole, not just Blizzard) to the point where Blizzard was forced to please their investors by forcing Bnet 2.0 (an entire online system that functions as DRM) on us. This decision probably came up late in development, and probably from someone high up in the company.

The culmination of those two factors gave birth to the system policy Blizzard uses today, and recently enforced.

And people are still surprised by this...somehow.

I'm not happy with it, but that's how we got here.

Adding DRM to single player is on Blizzards plate, not the players.

Stop being a whiny brat, you can play offline, and the people who got temp banned can too. All they did was keep them from getting achievements for 14 days. Quit whining.

 

[Professor Putricide]

I had a good laugh over this thread.

 

[Dogstile]

http://www.cheathappens.com/article_blizzardbans.asp
I'm sure you all have seen this by now but for those of you who haven't get a look at what those bastards are trying to get away with now. I'm calling for an escapist wide boycott on everything Blizzard.

Now, WHO'S WITH ME!!!

I don't cheat. I don't even play Blizzards games anymore. This is about trying to preserve people single player freedoms. If we let them get away with this they'll just want more and more.

By agreeing to the ELUA, which you have to before playing any game, you agree to play within the limits given.

To bad you have to spend money for them to tell you that right?

 

[Exort]

Hmm, better look here for the whole story...
http://www.escapistmagazine.com/news/view/104294-Blizzard-Gives-Single-Player-StarCraft-2-Cheaters-a-Time-Out-Opens-Can-of-Worms

As far as I'm concerned this is now a dead issue. No one has been perma-banned at all, instead these first-offenders got a 14-day suspension. And the majority of the uproar is coming from the site that sells these "trainer" hack programs, which is clearly a conflict of interests.

Moderator, please lock this topic. [small]And make the bed and change the towels?[/small]

Well, if it's a conflict of interest that this site that sells cheats is complaining, then it is also a conflict of interest that Blizzard is banning people for 14 days because their single player DRM is causing problems.

How is banning people for 14 day in their interest except people cheat less?

 

[shintakie10]

The reason this is even an issue at all is because Blizzard tied single and multiplayer together as a form of DRM. When things went wrong (like people doing what they have been doing for years without incident) Blizzard starts banning people instead of dealing with the real problem, the DRM.

You didnt answer what the crud those two have to do with each other. Blizzard stated that if people cheat they can get banned. People cheated, they got slapped with a two week suspsension from the multiplayer part of the game. The cheaters can still play the friggin game and even use their blasted trainers durin this suspension by loggin in as a guest and they wont have to fear reprisal from Blizzard. Huzzah.

 

[Atmos Duality]

Adding DRM to single player is on Blizzards plate, not the players.

Then prove your claim. Tell me why they did it.

For these purposes, I don't care about the ethics of the DRM (I hate it, you hate it, we agree to hate it, ok?), tell me what motivates Blizzard.

And please don't just say "They want more money". That's a non-argument.

That's like asking "Why is the sky blue." and getting "Because it is. Deal with it."
I already know Blizzard is a for-profit company. That's firmly established.
There are hundreds of for-profit companies out there. They all still make their own decisions.

Blizzard (nor any other company) wouldn't add DRM to a game without a reason; especially if it creates a negative backlash. Because that impacts sales.
It could be an evil reason, sure. But I still need one.

So please, tell me how it's strictly on Blizzard's plate.

 

[Exort]

The reason this is even an issue at all is because Blizzard tied single and multiplayer together as a form of DRM. When things went wrong (like people doing what they have been doing for years without incident) Blizzard starts banning people instead of dealing with the real problem, the DRM.

1.) Why is DRM wrong? Do you get payed for your job?
2.) You can play offline or use build-in cheat. People hack for acheivement and get themself ban, now blame everything? Will the next be the parents didn't taught them well, and should ban parents?

 

[astrav1]

http://www.cheathappens.com/article_blizzardbans.asp
I'm sure you all have seen this by now but for those of you who haven't get a look at what those bastards are trying to get away with now. I'm calling for an escapist wide boycott on everything Blizzard.

Now, WHO'S WITH ME!!!

I don't cheat. I don't even play Blizzards games anymore. This is about trying to preserve people single player freedoms. If we let them get away with this they'll just want more and more.

your pretty late to the party mah good friend, this happen about 3-4 days ago...which is like 2 weeks in internet time, like you said "i dont even play blizzard games anymore" which begs the question...why do you care, its not as if their doing harm to you, im sure since you dont play, your account wasent banned or anything. stop complaining about things that dont effect your life, everyones gonna think your just trolling

You know who else people didn't complain about because he wasn't affecting them? Hitler. (And yes I am saying that with a great amount of snide)

 

[Exort]

Right because nobody EVER uses mods or anything like that.

You do realize this is going after people cheating only the single player.

It's such a disgusting move.

DO you realize they cheat to get online achievement?

There are build-in cheats.

It is such a disgusting move.

 

[shintakie10]

Right because nobody EVER uses mods or anything like that.

You do realize this is going after people cheating only the single player.

It's such a disgusting move.

Its been pointed out multiple times already how this logic doesnt work in this case. Every single offender that got suspended was online durin the time of their trainers bein active. Blizzard has stated over and over again that if you cheat while online you can and will be banned without notice. Whether you played multiplayer or not as long as you are logged onto your battle.net account you are online and any hacks or trainers you use can and as shown will get you at least suspended. If you want to cheat while online, use the galaxy editor or the built in cheat codes. If those are not sufficient for your cheatin needs, sign in as a guest and go offline and cheat to your hearts content.

 

[Exort]

The problem is the tying together of single and multiplayer in a very useless way but just enough to cause problems. The single player achievements affect prestige, nothing more, they do not affect online matches but it's enough to justify Blizzard having complete control over the single player experience. You wanna use cheats? Only Blizzard approved cheats may be used. Wanna use mods? Same thing.

So instead of seeing the problem for what it is, the DRM. The ban players.

Now let me ask ya, is this the direction you want to the game industry go?

Player's prestige is a big thing to a lot of people. They censor two type of mod cheat and one's that is not protected by free speech (I don't think you want to know what it is). I see no problem with that unless you mod is for cheating or you know that kind of stuff.

 

[TheEggplant]

B, b, b, but, I need my Diablo fix. Sorry, I generally play on a PC that isn't even connected to the internet. I'd love to see them try and lock me out of that.

And I'd love to see you try to play Diablo III without activating it first.

OT: I agree I think I'm done with Blizzard. REAL ID, recurring activation, dumping true LAN and multiplayer spawning, seriously a company this suddenly abusive needs to be taken down a few ego pegs.

You only need the internet to activate it once. Every time after that he can do whatever the fuck he pleases and they can't se him.

Starcraft II requires re-activation every 30 days. I would be very surprised if Diablo III was any different.

 

[Adventurer2626]

I voted no. I don't want that many more people unemployed. There are more than enough as it is.

 

[Exort]

1) DRM and me getting paid for my job are not comparable.
2) What?

1.) Guess where gamedeveloper get their money....... No they don't fall down from sky, I can tell you that.
2.) What?