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
Canada9858 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. | ||
|
Crushgroove
United States793 Posts
Legally, Blizzard doesn't sell you the software, they simply license you to use it. They can pretty much revoke that license at any time, for any reason that has been enumerated to you as an end user. Sucks, but maybe don't cheat? | ||
|
figq
12519 Posts
On October 11 2010 20:03 kojinshugi wrote: Which reminds me to add, the main incentive for Blizzard is not to reduce cheating, but to increase sales (as always). They would love to ban *all* customer accounts if they could, gradually, just to get people to buy the game one more time. Go prove you were innocent. It's similar with electrical companies and other monopolists.Why IP ban when you can get them to pay you sixty more bucks? | ||
|
Cantankerous
114 Posts
On October 11 2010 16:33 Gifted wrote: I believe this article has many GLARING fallacies to it and does a great job of showing a one sided skewed opinion. I do feel the need to point out however that so do you - you're misrepresenting what I feel is the key issue here. 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. This is all true, but is that really all there is to the situation? First off, I'd like to remind you that I've seen EULAs upwards of a hundred pages of legalities and technicalities to protect the companies interest in any way imaginable. Quite frankly, I doubt anyone in here has read the entire EULA of a game before you play simply because you wanted to make sure you were on the same page as the company. It *is* unreasonable, but it's still forced on people as a legal agreement. The other side of this is that a company needs to lay out some rules, and if breaking those rules means the user forfeits his copy of the game he needs to be informed, and the EULA is invented. I'm not sure what can be done about that. 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. This is where I really disagree with you. Imagine if the EULA said something like that blizzard reserved the right to ban you if you are a republican. Would that be alright? Technically, you agreed to it in the EULA so you can't really complain. Would you say that you forfeited your right to play the game the moment you became a republican and then walk off with a jolly smile on your face? I'll assume your answer is no, but how about if they say you can be banned for playing too much and overloading the servers? or for not humming along to the terran soundtrack or for 6-pooling? I would think it's pretty apparent that while they did say so they would in the contract you accepted that does not mean it's in any way right, and *that* is what the discussion is about. Not about whether or not it actually says so in the EULA but whether it is acceptable that they do that. 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. If it's for getting online achievements easy I have no sympathy for anyone doing this, and I do think a suspension coupled with the removal of illegally gained achievements is well deserved (note that I believe this is justified on the grounds that they are essentially hacking to get the achievements without the work, thus cheapening it for other players - I do not think it's right just because it says so in the EULA). However, the few times in my life that I have used a trainer it's been for some specific function - I remember after a few playthroughs of some star wars FPS I was getting pretty bored but I wanted to try playing with unlimited jetpack fuel, but the ingame cheats only had stuff like god mode and unlimited ammo, so I got a trainer for it. I don't know what a trainer would give you in SC2 but if they're doing it in offline singleplayer they should be able to do whatever they want. 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. That depends on what kind of a purchase it is though - if you're renting the car, or even paying it off over a period of time so that it does not actually belong to you for a period of time then yeah - they would be in their right to demand the car back if you made unauthorized changes to it. After all, they're taking a risk by giving you the car before you've completed your payments, and they don't want you ruining it in case you don't pay up. If this were an actual straight up purchase that kind of deal would be outrageous, especially if you're the only company selling that particular product. Funnily enough though this reminds me of apple, but that's for another day. | ||
|
Cantankerous
114 Posts
On October 11 2010 17:12 Crushgroove wrote: A great many very good and valid points in the thread already... but I have always been of the opinion that if you violate TOS you are subject to the pains and penalties of said violation. Legally, Blizzard doesn't sell you the software, they simply license you to use it. They can pretty much revoke that license at any time, for any reason that has been enumerated to you as an end user. Sucks, but maybe don't cheat? I was going to respond negatively to your post but then I saw your signature and I laughed so hard that I'm in a ridiculously good mood now and don't feel like posting anything negative. Damn you Crushgroove, you are a worthy opponent! | ||
|
Almania
145 Posts
Imagine if the EULA said something like that blizzard reserved the right to ban you if you are a republican. Would that be alright? Technically, you agreed to it in the EULA so you can't really complain. Would you say that you forfeited your right to play the game the moment you became a republican and then walk off with a jolly smile on your face? I'll assume your answer is no, but how about if they say you can be banned for playing too much and overloading the servers? or for not humming along to the terran soundtrack or for 6-pooling? I would think it's pretty apparent that while they did say so they would in the contract you accepted that does not mean it's in any way right, and *that* is what the discussion is about. Not about whether or not it actually says so in the EULA but whether it is acceptable that they do that. Most of the above suggestions would fall under "unreasonable contract terms", and you'd possibly have legal recourse. I doubt any court in any country would deem that a EULA which has over 50% of it dedicated to what amounts to "you shall not reverse engineer or modify this game" as unreasonable though. Because it's perfectly common-place. Nothing in the EULA strikes me as the slightest bit evil or immoral. | ||
|
Sinensis
United States2513 Posts
If I created a hack that let me ladder continuously against a fake opponent in order to artificially inflate my score, I should be banned for it. Hacking to increase your achievements is no different. | ||
|
eu.exodus
South Africa1186 Posts
they say their cheats and trainers help people who dont have the reflexes or skill to beat the game vanilla. FUCKADATSHIT! Which one of blizzards own cheats wont make that possible? The people using trainers know very well what theys doing. They are going out of their way to bypass the use cheats and not get any achievements already built in to the game so they can flex their epeens online. If they are so innocent then why play online? They want the achievements but are too lazy or not going to bother trying to get them without the trainers. If you ask me blizzard should learn from tl and i.p ban them. They are after all breaching contract. Why anyone would want to use trainers or cheats anyway is beyond me. Half of the fun of playing any game is getting so frustrated that you want to break something and then finall getting it right after so many attempts. | ||
|
kojinshugi
Estonia2559 Posts
| ||
|
Gamjadori
Japan131 Posts
I have no clue what SC2 SP hacks are out there, but what could they possible offer that costum maps can't provide in a legit way save achievements? | ||
|
Noxie
United States2227 Posts
| ||
|
Vedic
United States582 Posts
On October 11 2010 17:59 Cantankerous wrote: This is all true, but is that really all there is to the situation? First off, I'd like to remind you that I've seen EULAs upwards of a hundred pages of legalities and technicalities to protect the companies interest in any way imaginable. Quite frankly, I doubt anyone in here has read the entire EULA of a game before you play simply because you wanted to make sure you were on the same page as the company. It *is* unreasonable, but it's still forced on people as a legal agreement. Yes, it is "all there is". You are presented with a contract, and you are not forced to accept. If you consider it too much trouble, you are entitled to a refund for declining the agreement. If you click accept/ok/etc and just hope for everything to be in order, you don't have justification for disagreeing with the terms that you accepted. Politicians do this every day - how is it working out for you? This is where I really disagree with you. Imagine if the EULA said something like that blizzard reserved the right to ban you if you are a republican. Would that be alright? I should hope that you would read the EULA beforehand, disagree with such terms, and request your refund. Regardless, no legal contract (USA anyway) can violate your rights - even if you agree to it. The EULA in question is specifically designed not to violate your rights, and the practice of EULA in general (specifically even with Blizzard) holds up in court. | ||
|
kojinshugi
Estonia2559 Posts
On October 11 2010 20:19 Gamjadori wrote: I have no clue what SC2 SP hacks are out there, but what could they possible offer that costume maps can't provide in a legit way save achievements? The bans are for hacking the client to award achievements with cheat codes on. | ||
|
garbanzo
United States4046 Posts
On October 11 2010 18:24 Almania wrote: Most of the above suggestions would fall under "unreasonable contract terms", and you'd possibly have legal recourse. I doubt any court in any country would deem that a EULA which has over 50% of it dedicated to what amounts to "you shall not reverse engineer or modify this game" as unreasonable though. Because it's perfectly common-place. Nothing in the EULA strikes me as the slightest bit evil or immoral. I agree. The reason those sorts of conditions would not be in any EULA is because they would be "outrageous." He said it himself in the car analogy: That depends on what kind of a purchase it is though - if you're renting the car, or even paying it off over a period of time so that it does not actually belong to you for a period of time then yeah - they would be in their right to demand the car back if you made unauthorized changes to it. After all, they're taking a risk by giving you the car before you've completed your payments, and they don't want you ruining it in case you don't pay up. If this were an actual straight up purchase that kind of deal would be outrageous, especially if you're the only company selling that particular product. Funnily enough though this reminds me of apple, but that's for another day. We all have our expectations of what is reasonable and unreasonable. It is up to you as the consumer to inform yourself of what your are signing up to. In the same way that nobody would ever buy a car with the clause that if you put a stereo on it they'd take it away, nobody would agree to the EULA of a game that would ban you for humming to Terran music. This is slightly off-topic though. I agree that anyone using any sort of hack (for single or multiplayer) should be banned from battle.net. I can't imagine why you would use it other than for getting achievements with no effort. | ||
|
xBillehx
United States1289 Posts
edit: Lol so I took a look around the site, and these people not only told users if they wanted achievements while cheating to use their trainer, but they actually charge for membership and access to it! I don't think Team Liquid would condone this kind of thing- ever. | ||
|
Sanguinarius
United States3427 Posts
There is no reason to cheat in single player..... there are already cheat codes for that. I think a 14 day ban is fine for a first time offense (only because they weren't using it in multiplayer), and probably just permanently ban for a 2nd offense. | ||
|
DX_4
Germany180 Posts
Blizzard is legally entitled to what they did. They made the rules, the customer accepts them and gets access to the game/service. If for whatever reason said customer decides to not care and instead applies his own rules he/she has to be aware that this can have consequences, up to and including revoking access rights. Simple as, there is indeed nothing more to it. I have no sympathy whatsoever for people acting all innocent to a degree that can only be described as "extremely naive and ignorant, borderline stupid". To illustrate that a bit, I'll quote parts of a comment for that article. It seems like Blizzard are a bunch of losers. I have legitimately bought SC2, and I use it only for single player campaign. I'm totally not intrested in online/multiplayer gaming, I have never done so and never will. I'm an occasional gamer, have a very busy life, and I don't have the time to spend hours of practicing or replaying all missions just to finish and enjoy the game. If I happen to choose the use of cheats/trainers, that is my personal choice and mine only. It is not up to Blizzard to tell me otherwise. I do not harm or otherwise inflict any damage to anyone else. I have paid good money to enjoy the game, and if Blizzard would shut me out of multiplayer games because I used a trainer in a single player campaign: well go ahead, I don't care!!! But let me enjoy my single player campaign my way! | ||
|
FuryX
Australia495 Posts
Blizzard has all the rights to ban people if they do shit like this. Well done Blizzard, i hope they won't cave into any outburst from cheater communities. This explains the people who are whining saying they never used 'maphack', these people used the trainer to get achievement points. Also remember, if the game is too hard, you can set the difficulty down or use Blizzards own cheatcodes and not earn achievement points. | ||
|
PlaGuE_R
France1151 Posts
| ||
|
ddengster
Singapore129 Posts
Thus, by banning single player hackers, they will be denied the chance to get themselves familiarized with sc2's engine, which in turn slows down the development of multiplayer hacks. | ||
|
rastaban
United States2294 Posts
| ||
|
Roblin
Sweden948 Posts
if it is then the EULA is all the warning that Blizz is required to give, and we all have agreed to them, havent we? as such, ALL PLAYERS ARE ALREADY WARNED THAT THIS WILL HAPPEN IF HE/SHE CHEATS, and if a player does cheat, how can he/she be surprised for getting banned? its perfectly legal and correct of Blizz to do this. | ||
|
hadoken5
Canada519 Posts
| ||
|
nihoh
Australia978 Posts
| ||
|
Amber[LighT]
United States5078 Posts
That article looked like a bunch of whining single player hackers (lol). Cheat Happens? Yah bans happen too. Get over it. | ||
|
uzas
Croatia52 Posts
| ||
|
Meldrath
United States620 Posts
| ||
|
BumsenDK
Denmark137 Posts
I will agree there is a slight difference between hacking in multiplayer and singleplayer, but i dont think thats important when you alter a program "or enhance the exsperience whatever you wanna call it" So basicly, you get shafted and ill cheer on blizzard meanwhile. and then i think about the missing chat, and im not cheering so much anymore  | ||
|
waxypants
United States479 Posts
| ||
|
2WeaK
Canada550 Posts
On October 11 2010 15:05 Pfhor wrote: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. It's not an achievement if you cheated for it. Some people do the achievements the legit way and deserve the achievement. Also, Blizzard thought of all that when they included cheats in their own game for the single player modes... Why not use those instead of 3rd party softwares? | ||
|
Ripense
Austria23 Posts
On October 12 2010 00:45 waxypants wrote: Ok. Nobody has ever gave a shit about cheating in a single player since the beginning of time. The only thing that makes this a little different is that achievements are broadcast online on your profile and so there is some sort of "competition" between people getting achievements. If achievements were entirely local, nobody would care at all about these cheaters. This distinction of competitive vs. local achievements isn't obvious to everyone. Some people just want to play the single player and get all of the achievements, they don't give a shit about competing with other people's achievements. So they are not trying to "cheat" and ruin the system like normal multiplayer cheaters. If Blizzard wants to keep their silly and pointless "Achievements System" pure, they should think of a better solution than robbing these players of 60 bucks. Give a warning and take away Achievements I guess. Just because nobody cared in other games doesn't give people the right to break the EULA terms (which they accepted for this particular game) without facing consequences. And as far as I read/heard people who just used a trainer for single player didn't get a permaban. | ||
|
Spawkuring
United States755 Posts
| ||
|
DraWx
Netherlands25 Posts
Everyone who uses any kind of cheat/hack should be perm banned, perioid. Go play doom or wolfenstein if u wanna use cheats etc. | ||
|
iounas
409 Posts
If anybody actually cares about achievements you are a fag and should go back to consoles.. Achievements are a playgu infesting modern games.. | ||
|
Pfhor
123 Posts
I've been playing PC games for a long time, and I've always seen people get creative with hacking singleplayer games. It's unfortunate Blizzard won't be encouraging that creativity, but perhaps it is unavoidable? | ||
|
Aphelion
United States2720 Posts
| ||
|
sylverfyre
United States8298 Posts
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. Really? Would love to see some proof about this statement. If this is true, then the people saying that Blizzard is just banning single player cheaters the same as they are multiplayer cheaters are wrong, and Blizzard isn't just doing this to increase revenue - they're warning the people who are doing the less impactful cheating and banning the ones cheating in multiplayer. Harsh warning, but fine by me. | ||
|
garbanzo
United States4046 Posts
On October 12 2010 02:31 Pfhor wrote: Interesting responses so far guys, and sorry the thread title is a bit misleading. I have never been interested in using trainers or anything, but I would like to know what type of "hacks" people are using for singleplayer. Maybe it's just silly things like making their marines fly, spawning hatcheries with guns, or making TERRATRON a playable unit in campaign. I can't imagine a lot of people are doing it solely to get achievements, or even to beat the game, it's an unfortunate byproduct of an "online" singleplayer. I've been playing PC games for a long time, and I've always seen people get creative with hacking singleplayer games. It's unfortunate Blizzard won't be encouraging that creativity, but perhaps it is unavoidable? Blizzard provided another creative outlet that isn't hacking their game; it's called the Galaxy Editor. All those things you say can be done with the editor. I don't even see how using a trainer/hack to do those things is creative. Cheating your way through a game by using an external program is far from being creative. | ||
|
Klive5ive
United Kingdom6056 Posts
Ban these fools. It's not like the singleplayer is hard anyway, wtf are they doing really?! | ||
|
dcemuser
United States3248 Posts
These aren't cheaters, these are hackers. Nobody has been perma-banned either as far as we know. It's kind of spreading misinformation, just like the article linked. | ||
|
Dirich
Italy101 Posts
On October 11 2010 15:05 Pfhor wrote: http://www.cheathappens.com/article_blizzardbans.asp 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. They do not want you to cheat and their user agreement policy specify it, so it is at your own risk that you do it. Imho legally they are doing nothing wrong. On why to be so strict even with single player (non-multiplayer games) all I can think about are achivements. Without them, you could say that no one cares if you cheat in single player, but with them there are people who care, because essentially you are getting credit where credit is not due. And btw, I'm with the "I don't care of achi" faction. Imho, they could let the single player mode chater be, but probably a company has no reason to spend more money (some of the employee work time) just to make sure that people can cheat through their game if they do it only in single player mode. | ||
|
Randomaccount#77123
United States5003 Posts
| ||
dyodyo
Philippines578 Posts
Ban those hackers. edit: Just reread the article linked in the op: “We will continue to produce cheats and trainers that work in single player games because we believe it is each person’s right to be able to fully enjoy what each game has to offer,” O’Rorke said of his website. “It may take extra time on our part to safely separate the trainer's functions so that they only work in single player modes, but we will not simply give up and deny our users the ability to cheat in a game that they have purchased just because Blizzard doesn't care about their customers. Blizzard is the real loser here. By lumping all cheaters into the same category and banning people for using single player cheats, they are losing the support of gamers around the world.” I loled. I would argue that they are doing this because they actually care about (some) of their customers. They should change the last sentence to "losing the support of hackers around the world". | ||
|
Undercroft
United Kingdom166 Posts
| ||
|
Klive5ive
United Kingdom6056 Posts
“We will continue to produce cheats and trainers that work in single player games because we believe it is each person’s right to be able to fully enjoy what each game has to offer,” O’Rorke said of his website. “It may take extra time on our part to safely separate the trainer's functions so that they only work in single player modes, but we will not simply give up and deny our users the ability to cheat in a game that they have purchased just because Blizzard doesn't care about their customers. Blizzard is the real loser here. By lumping all cheaters into the same category and banning people for using single player cheats, they are losing the support of gamers around the world.” And what he actually meant: "I'm pissed that Blizzard is undermining my illegal business. I liked making lots of monies hacking into SC2 and this is really annoying. I am the real loser here, since Blizzard doesn't care about a few losers who just undermine the real community. By lumping all the cheaters who come to websites like mine into one group, Blizzard is destroying the myth I like to push that we are just legitimately helping people enjoy the game more and not trying to sell cool hacks for noobs to abuse on the ladder, and thus gaining the respect of all the real gamers out there." | ||
|
Simberto
Germany11493 Posts
| ||
|
GreatFall
United States1061 Posts
| ||
|
whiteguycash
United States476 Posts
| ||
|
orcslayermac
United States138 Posts
Now, if the cheating nets absolutely no gains in achievement points or anything of that sort and the messing with game files and using 3rd party applications had nothing to do with any sort of online play (achievement points, multiplayer games etc) then I would consider the move extremely harsh. It however is Blizzard's game and these people did accept the EULA. | ||
|
DoubleReed
United States4130 Posts
After that, I don't see a problem with blizzard banning people who violate their ToS. I don't think you can blame blizzard for that. | ||
|
DX_4
Germany180 Posts
On October 12 2010 02:06 iounas wrote: Banning people for single player is retarded.. If anybody actually cares about achievements you are a fag and should go back to consoles.. Achievements are a playgu infesting modern games.. You are missing the point a bit. It is not so much about achievements as such, but more about Blizzard's general stance towards people who are not playing by the rules, a.k.a. the EULA/ToS. While the overall impact of this is debatable to a degree, I still fully agree with Blizzard's approach. They are simply going by their EULA/ToS, and those clearly state that modifying files puts your account at risk, regardless of singleplayer or multiplayer, period. As mentioned a couple of times, you are free to use the built-in codes to beat the game if you so wish. On a sidenote, arguments along the lines of "I don't like X, therefore anyone who likes X is a Y and should go bugger off to Z instead" don't really add anything to the discussion and are, frankly, narrowminded. You don't like achievements, that's fair enough. I am not a particular fan either; other people spend the majority of their SC2 time on getting them. Hardly a reason for insults. | ||
|
Karok
Netherlands142 Posts
The kid won't harm anyone with it, and any competitive player worth his salt wont give a shit about it either since it does not affect him in the slightest, while this is a different story if mr copper would hack his way into platinum and beat the guy with some hacks. Throwing the multiplayer and singleplayer cheaters on one pile is just a load of crap. | ||
| ||
