EPTWhat do you think about this? The article is a bit biased, but assuming its accurate it seems pretty inexcusable. Why are people who use trainers any threat to multiplayer, why are cheated achievements worth banning people from a game they gave you money for, and might have bought those extra expansions too. This doesn't seem like a logical way to handle this from either an ethical or business standpoint, so what is Blizzard thinking.
Blizzard Banning Singleplayer Cheaters?
| Forum Index > Closed |
|
Pfhor
123 Posts
What do you think about this? The article is a bit biased, but assuming its accurate it seems pretty inexcusable. Why are people who use trainers any threat to multiplayer, why are cheated achievements worth banning people from a game they gave you money for, and might have bought those extra expansions too. This doesn't seem like a logical way to handle this from either an ethical or business standpoint, so what is Blizzard thinking. | ||
|
TheFinalWord
Australia790 Posts
| ||
|
FiWiFaKi
Canada9859 Posts
Let's just have an example, you have an iPod, and you download music illegally. So apple decides to disable your iPod by some trigger in the illegal songs code, is it fair? Possibly... They tell you not to do it! Do you care that music pirating is illegal? Probably not since you can get away with it. And I think bringing down the ban hammer on a select few is the way to go. I for one am happy they are taking such measures, it's their creation, and according to them your account is theirs, so if you decide to not abide by the rules and run third party programs such as those you deserve it. Should probably scare some hackers too! EDIT: I would just compare it to your mom or dad telling you something really stupid to do, that really won't change anything. You do it anyways, it doesn't harm you listening to them and doing as asked, and it's their house afterall. | ||
|
Slago
Canada726 Posts
| ||
|
kwate
8 Posts
| ||
|
Ftrunkz
Australia2474 Posts
| ||
|
.Aar
2177 Posts
On October 11 2010 15:35 Slago wrote: well this is stupid, I miss being able to make accounts when i please in BW No thanks. This singlehandedly made battle.net completely unplayable. There were hackers and trolls in every game before the concept of an internet troll was even forged and recognized. You might find the system unconvenient or unforgiving, but I for one think it is the single greatest change from BW. | ||
|
Mastermind
Canada7096 Posts
On October 11 2010 15:39 .Aar wrote: No thanks. This singlehandedly made battle.net completely unplayable. There were hackers and trolls in every game before the concept of an internet troll was even forged and recognized. You might find the system unconvenient or unforgiving, but I for one think it is the single greatest change from BW. The term 'troll' has been around has since the early 90s, before bnet existed. | ||
|
SchAmToo
United States1141 Posts
Quite frankly I don't get what people find so invigorating in the SP to play it this much and flip out this much that they can't cheat their way through it... I don't quite understand people. And I feel the people who got permanently banned not only hacked just to get highest achievement scores, but also hacked MP games too, I can't see blizz banning people permanently from SC2 for just hacking SP. | ||
|
Pfhor
123 Posts
A blizzard spokesperson defended the company and its actions, saying that the bannings were done in an effort to be fair to all users rather than for money. In an e-mail to a Cheat Happens user appealing their suspension, the company claims that single player Starcraft 2 games have an effect on multiplayer. “While single player games only appear to be you and a computer at first, your achievements and gamer score also carries weight and prestige for your online play,” read the email. It's pretty clear that Blizzard has the capability to distinguish singleplayer hacking from multiplayer hacking. I'm not too bright on the technical side of things, but I believe they are 2 different mods of the engine? | ||
|
SchAmToo
United States1141 Posts
Kinda weird situation, I'm not really on either side. | ||
|
Vedic
United States582 Posts
| ||
|
gokai
United States812 Posts
I don't mind that they want to keep achievements legit. But considering that most of the cheaters didn't know shit about this rule, the punishment is harsh. | ||
|
KingofHearts
Japan562 Posts
| ||
|
kojinshugi
Estonia2559 Posts
Achievements are a big selling point for less e-sports oriented players, and cheating to get them ahead of others cheapens the game for them. You're perfectly entitled to think the achievement score dick waving is for scrubs. But even these scrubs should have a fair and level playing field safe from people who break the Terms of Use. Note that these banned people can still play the campaign offline, they're just banned from Bnet and the achievement system. On October 11 2010 16:08 gokai wrote: I don't mind that they want to keep achievements legit. But considering that most of the cheaters didn't know shit about this rule, the punishment is harsh. My ass they didn't. And sorry, but if they really didn't realize "modifying the game client so as to trick Battle.net" is actionable, then consider that new copy of SC2 they buy a tax on stupidity. | ||
|
awu25
United States2003 Posts
sure, the immediate ban was pretty harsh, but it sounds like these guys don't even think hacking is wrong (in single player at least) | ||
|
Almania
145 Posts
What next, those that hack but still lose their games shouldn't be banned? Yes, they're not breaking multiplayer, but isn't that a bit besides the point? | ||
|
Almania
145 Posts
On October 11 2010 16:08 gokai wrote: Haha, this is pretty stupid. "Cheaters in single player will be ban", is not an obvious rule. It's just not intuitive. The players should have gotten a warning. I don't mind that they want to keep achievements legit. But considering that most of the cheaters didn't know shit about this rule, the punishment is harsh. Just for the record, cheater's aren't being banned. The thread title is misleading. There's plenty of Blizzard implemented cheat codes out there you can use to your heart's content. Blizzard is however banning -hackers-, ie those that are blatantly breaking ToS and absolutely 100% know they are. I guarantee you every hack site out there will have some form of "use at your own risk as Blizzard may ban you" spelt out all over the page, to say that a hacker is ignorant that they're breaking ToS is silly. | ||
|
midgettoes
Australia180 Posts
If it was just winning they wanted, they can use the BUILD IN cheats... I just googled "sc2 in game cheats" and found plenty they could have used. All the classics are there - instant win, god mode, etc. These players wanted to go further, and no doubt if they ever expanded to multiplayer their hacks would have followed. Glad they were banned for sure. | ||
|
Gifted
United States17 Posts
1. You click "Accept" to an EULA when you install the game and the article even touches on it in a slanted attempt to disillusion that it's looking at both sides. Like any agreement, it's up to the person who it's placed before to read it. If we should bring to a real life example (which the article does often to support it's point) would a person sign a legal document regarding purchasing a car without even looking at it in any way? Isn't it pretty much general knowledge that this is a stupid decision to make? Too many people do just that when they click "accept" to an EULA. 2. Unfortunately, by accepting the EULA a person also accepts the terms which they actually have purchased the game. The CD alone does jack crap, or the download file. To use it they have completely set in stone that you are purchasing the ability to play the game and not the game itself. This is so standard as it's in pretty much EVERY EULA ever created by a company with more than 2 games under it's belt. And I'm sure this point alone brings out the constant flow of people saying "But that's not right! I payed money for this game!" but you lose a lot of credibility when you "agree" to the terms and say later "I don't like the terms". You have full authority to say "Not Agree" and walk away from StarCraft II if your beliefs were so important to you. 3. I never understood the need to use a trainer or cheat program in StarCraft II single player when there is a FULL LIST of in game cheats to allow you to do all that you need. They give you the means to do all the silly stuff on your own, HELL, they even let you edit the maps themselves if you look at how to do it.. they are all right there in your folders. 4. When the article visited analogies regarding "purchasing a car that gets taken back" is also a poor fallacy. If you purchased the car and it said in the actual agreement "We will take back the car if you put a new stereo in it" and you "agree" to the terms.. you have ONLY yourself to blame when the car gets repossessed. I'm sorry guys... but when I read an article like this... I just see a public attempt to sway opinions to a self-motivated cause. This editorial is so full of holes I think I'm gonna make a swiss cheese sandwich. No matter the case with the article, I do feel for those people who got banned from using a hack on a single player game. But at the same time, I'm not going to point the finger at Blizzard and say "Bad!" cause it'd be completely unjustified. These are people who either didn't read a EULA that they agreed to... or they knew exactly what was coming and assumed there would be no concequences. I'm sorry, this is a lesson learned that companies are starting to take EULA's seriously, as people should to. EDIT: I am aware of 4 people who got caught using hacks in SP. They all received 14 day suspensions and not bans. I have since found out that one of my multiplayer friends used a hack for MP, he has received a permanant ban/CD-Key deactivation. This is as good a "warning" as I can see Blizzard providing for the two different cases. | ||
| ||
