Blizzard Banning StarCraft II Single-Player Cheaters?

October 11, 2010 -

A story on the Cheat Happens website alleges that Blizzard is banning users who cheat in StarCraft 2 while playing the title’s single-player element.

The website hosts a variety of “trainers” for the Blizzard game, which can grant unlimited ammo and/or other special powers and attributes to players trying to advance through the title’s single player campaign. The site claims that some banned users had their Battle.net accounts suspended, while others saw their CD keys disabled.

One Cheat Happens user named gm0ney received a 14-day suspension for using an “unauthorized cheat program.” While he admitted he was “prepared for it,” gm0ney added, “I’m surprised they took such a blind step without doing some research into the games played.”

For its part, Blizzard had previously warned that “If you’re caught cheating in Starcraft 2, Blizzard, as per the terms in the EULA reserves the right to ban your battle.net account and/or CD key from ever playing again, online or off.”

An email from another Cheat Happens user pleading his case over a suspension received this reply from Blizzard, “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.”

A Cheat Happens spokesperson said, “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.”

Posted in

Comments

Re: Blizzard Banning StarCraft II Single-Player Cheaters?

This is the fascist direction that is turning me off of games and the reason why I have yet to buy SC2(copy protection? HA!).

 

You can play in offline mode but you have to dig in the menus to do it like most of the industry they need better menu/gui implementations to make it easier to switch from supervised tracked play and off the grid play. Of course the industry dose not want off the grid play... its going to be fun in 5-15 years when most media is streamed, think Steam on a a set top box with less bugs than Onlive.

 

Makes me wonder if they can build a set top box that has frimware adjustable chip set were the ram/cpu/gpu,ect can be easily upgraded, power would be 1000W or so so tis pretty much future proff, at least until a new mainbaord is needed. Which should last 5-8 year cycles, if you make the new mainboard support 1 or 2 older revisions/standards of ram/cpu/gpu it would be that much esier to slip it into the user base and slowly upgradeing stuff while trying to off set upgrades with one time fees under 20$ a pop..


I have a dream, break the chains of copy right oppression! http://zippydsmlee.wordpress.com/2010/05/21/cigital-disobedience/


Copyright infringement is nothing more than civil disobedience to a bad set of laws. Let's renegotiate them.

---

Patreon

Deviantart

Re: Blizzard Banning StarCraft II Single-Player Cheaters?

Blizzard being enormous dicks. Again.

That makes quite a lot of times in the last 3 years... Uh, since they were "bought" by Activision and started putting money over quality and gamer happiness. Coincidence?. Guess not.

Re: Blizzard Banning StarCraft II Single-Player Cheaters?

The bnetd suit was BEFORE the Activision purchase.

Re: Blizzard Banning StarCraft II Single-Player Cheaters?

In most cases, I agree you shouldn't ban people for cheating in single player. But in this case I feel its justified. Blizzard provides you with all the cheats you need in-game so why do people resort to 3rd party cheats? Because the ingame ones disable achievements. So the only reason in this case to go to 3rd Party Cheats is to game the achievement system which is why the punishments fit the crime.

There's nothing wrong to using cheats to get through a game and see the storyline/play the other missions, etc. Blizzard agrees with this by publicing providing the cheats. What they don't like is people screwing with the game using outside hacks to cheat the system.

Re: Blizzard Banning StarCraft II Single-Player Cheaters?

The problem I have is that single player and multiplayer shouldn't have any connection to each other. Such a disconnection would completely negate any reason for this. You want to earn achievements? Play online with others. Don't care about them? Play either one.

It's just so simple.

Re: Blizzard Banning StarCraft II Single-Player Cheaters?

“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.”

If Blizzard had merely wiped the cheaters' achievements, that would be a reasonable explanation.  But they didn't, and it is not.  This is a straight up dick move.  What gives them the right to dictate to you how you can play the game you bought, by yourself, and interfering with no one?

Imagine, if you will, a man sitting there playing Solitaire.  He has been playing draw-3, but has become stuck, and decides he will draw one, just to keep the game moving so maybe he can finish it.  Then, Edmund Hoyle rises from the grave, takes the deck of cards from the man and burns them, preaching to him the entire time about how he "ought" to play.

Does that sound reasonable to you?  If so, you might be an asshole Blizzard employee.

 

For the record, I don't even play SC2, but this kind of abuse just pisses me off.

Re: Blizzard Banning StarCraft II Single-Player Cheaters?

Why use a trainer, there are cheats already in the game like every other blizzard RTS. Seems like pointless risk to me. If you're really that desperate for achievements, learn to play the game without them. You'll be infinitely better than if you used them and learn to strategize better. After all, it is Real-Time STRATEGY.

----
Papa Midnight
http://www.thesupersoldiers.com

 

----
Papa Midnight

Re: Blizzard Banning StarCraft II Single-Player Cheaters?

People who obsess over achievements aren't interested in being better at a game, they're interested  in feeling like they're better than everyone else at life.

Re: Blizzard Banning StarCraft II Single-Player Cheaters?

What difference do achievements make? Aren't there already a whole bunch of games that explicitly disable them when cheats are used?

Re: Blizzard Banning StarCraft II Single-Player Cheaters?

Why don't they just play Offline then? That means no achievements. There's an option to play offline.

Re: Blizzard Banning StarCraft II Single-Player Cheaters?

How do you text wrap? I used <.pre> (minus the period), but shouldn't it auto wrap in the first place?

-------

"WARNING GUARANTEE: This post contains material which a truly free society would neither fear nor suppress."

Re: Blizzard Banning StarCraft II Single-Player Cheaters?

You shouldn't have to use the pre tag. You should just be able to type your comments into the text editor and it comes out formatted. If you are using the plain text editor, you should use the < p > tag rather than the pre tag.

E. Zachary Knight
Oklahoma City Chapter of the ECA
http://www.theeca.com/chapters_oklahoma

Re: Blizzard Banning StarCraft II Single-Player Cheaters?

This is what happens when you create a game where single-player and online multiplayer are allowed to mingle too much with one another. I mean, seriously, having single-player achievements carry over into the multiplayer experience? How stupid could you be? People cheat enough online as it is, now you're just asking for twice as much of it.

The solution to this is simple, and can be a total end to the issue: Disable any connections between playing offline by oneself and playing online with others. Cheat in the former, not in the latter, no problem. It's like if Bethesda were to make an Elder Scrolls MMO where players could journey around the continent of Tamriel, and all the Soul Trap glitching and Reverse Magnitude Enchantments that Morrowind players have been enjoying over the past eight years did them no good in it.

Sometimes I think Blizzard just gets off on the power to ban so many people, knowing that they'll always come back to suckle at the taint.

Re: Blizzard Banning StarCraft II Single-Player Cheaters?

Do my posts mean anything here?

Anyway, from .hack//A.I. Buster:

"In an offline game, a player can cheat all he wants and there are no consequences. It's no big deal because he's really only cheating himself out of the full game experience."

WHY is single player achievements connected to the multiplayer in the first place? It's like if you connected the single player of Half-Life with the multiplayer and then ban the player's account just because he wanted to start with the rocket launcher. It doesn't work.

 

------- Veni, vidi, vici, I came, I saw, I conquered.

-------

"WARNING GUARANTEE: This post contains material which a truly free society would neither fear nor suppress."

Re: Blizzard Banning StarCraft II Single-Player Cheaters?

Fixed the wrapping issue for you.

E. Zachary Knight
Oklahoma City Chapter of the ECA
http://www.theeca.com/chapters_oklahoma

Re: Blizzard Banning StarCraft II Single-Player Cheaters?

"Do my posts mean anything here?"

They might if the text wrapped.

Re: Blizzard Banning StarCraft II Single-Player Cheaters?

“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.”

I don't see a problem with someone cheating when playing their game in isolation, but if it allows players to manipulate their place in scoreboards, or unfairly unlock achievements that can be used in the multiplayer, then it is entirely understandable that Blizzard want to put a stop to it.

Re: Blizzard Banning StarCraft II Single-Player Cheaters?

Achievements can't be "used". They just sit there for bragging rights.

Re: Blizzard Banning StarCraft II Single-Player Cheaters?

Fair point, I said 'if' since I have never played StarCraft II. That being the case, it is even less of an issue for Blizzard to be involved in.

Re: Blizzard Banning StarCraft II Single-Player Cheaters?

The bragging rights are the crux of the issue - what's the point of bragging you did something when you didn't?

That being said, I don't see what they're crying about, since there were already single-player cheats built into the game.

---

With the first link, the chain is forged.

--- With the first link, the chain is forged.

Re: Blizzard Banning StarCraft II Single-Player Cheaters?

what's the point of bragging you did something when you didn't?

I ask myself a similar question whever I see some tool cruising down the street in a Chrysler 300M that's been tricked out with the painfully obvious intention of having everyone see it and go "Is that a Bentley?"

Apparently, online gaming is quite flooded with assclown's just like that, and it's one of the many things that keeps me away from it.

Re: Blizzard Banning StarCraft II Single-Player Cheaters?

 Hmmm. 

I suppose I can see their point that the achievements should be fairly earned, but would it be so difficult to just wipe their ill-gotten achievements from the system? Maybe if they made a deal with Cheat Happens to automatically disable achievements when the cheats are active? There have to be better ways to go about this.

Re: Blizzard Banning StarCraft II Single-Player Cheaters?

To further that.. I could see their argument if the achievements were opt-in.. but as I recall, you do not have much of a choice in StarCraft2.. you HAVE to register on-line and participate in their achievement system.

Re: Blizzard Banning StarCraft II Single-Player Cheaters?

"you HAVE to register on-line and participate in their achievement system."

No you don't. There's an offline mode you can use if you want to screw around with single-player and not have it affect your online profile. It's like the difference between playing with a local Xbox account and an Xbox Live account.

That said, they COULD just strip the achievements, but my guess is their system doesn't allow for that.
---
I'm not under the affluence of incohol as some thinkle peep I am. I'm not half as thunk as you might drink. I fool so feelish I don't know who is me, and the drunker I stand here, the longer I get.


---
I'm not under the affluence of incohol as some thinkle peep I am. I'm not half as thunk as you might drink. I fool so feelish I don't know who is me, and the drunker I stand here, the longer I get.

Re: Blizzard Banning StarCraft II Single-Player Cheaters?

That's just dumb, and quite honestly pretty dickish too, because Blizzard knows damn well that even players who aren't interested in ruining things for other players by cheating online, won't have any qualms about using various exploits in single player, because they're by their freakin' selves. Like I've said, disconnect the two modes, and you remove the problem completely, and have no reason to bother anyone's offline single-player experience.

Re: Blizzard Banning StarCraft II Single-Player Cheaters?

And the moral of the story is dont cheat.

"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."

What a bunch of bunk hackers, modders, and cheaters in general dont deserve to paly their games if they cheatespecially if it makes it unfun for others .

 

Never underestimate the power of idiots in large amounts.

Never underestimate the power of idiots in large amounts.

Re: Blizzard Banning StarCraft II Single-Player Cheaters?

SINGLE. PLAYER.

 

Dumbass

Re: Blizzard Banning StarCraft II Single-Player Cheaters?

And how are they making it unfun for others in SINGLE-PLAYER MODE?

Are you seriously telling me you've never used a cheat in a single-player game?  No iddqd?  No up-up-down-down-left-right-left-right-b-a-start?

You can use "hacker" as a pejorative if you like -- God knows the media does -- but there's a whole generation of people who have learned how computers work by hex editing save files (or even using hex code with a GameShark).

If people are using cheats in multiplayer games, then yeah, by all means, ban them.  And if you're really worried about achievements, okay, ban cheaters from the Achievements Board (or if you want to be good-natured about it, do what Progress Quest did and create a separate leaderboard that's just for cheaters).

But don't lock somebody out of a game for cheating in SINGLE-PLAYER.  That's ridiculous.

 
Forgot your password?
Username :
Password :

Shout box

You're not permitted to post shouts.
Goth_SkunkAnd at long last, I think I'm finally done.06/30/2015 - 3:08am
Goth_SkunkAnd if those progressive games fail to make any headway in the market, don't blame gamer culture for not being cultured enough to appreciate the product. Own up to the fact that the game either sucks, is not interesting, or both.06/30/2015 - 3:06am
Goth_Skunknor suggest that the games industry and culture is rife with toxicity because of it and needs to change for the good of the medium. There is room in the market for progressive games to co-exist with games like Hatred, not replace them outright.06/30/2015 - 3:04am
Goth_SkunkAnd if the overly violent content of most AAA games or the perceived mistreatment of women in such games bothers one, by all means criticize it, but do not under any circumstances suggest that it such content shouldn't exist or be promoted,06/30/2015 - 3:02am
Goth_SkunkGames, for the most part, let you do this! You can be the man or woman you're not. You can escape reality and immerse yourself in the experience. And that's wonderful! I play as female characters all the time in games I play, when the option is available.06/30/2015 - 2:59am
Goth_SkunkA choice that nature denied transgender people at birth! People don't undergo gender reassignment because they want to be transgender; they undergo gender reassignment because they want to be the gender they identify with!06/30/2015 - 2:52am
Goth_SkunkBut I think it gets silly when people start asking for the ability to play as a transgender protagonist. I mean, why would one do that? One usually has the option to create a character that's either a man or a woman, gay or straight. You have the choice!06/30/2015 - 2:50am
Goth_Skunkfirst two games, a move which was ultimately corrected in the 3rd game. By extension, Dragon Age has always had the option, and good on it!06/30/2015 - 2:45am
Goth_SkunkBut it certainly is good to see developers entertain the allowance of allowing the player to develop their protagonist to be homosexual if they want. The Mass Effect series was criticized rightly for not allowing a male homosexual romance plot in the06/30/2015 - 2:44am
Goth_Skunkand only just by the slimmest of margins. Homosexuality is sadly still a hot button controversy in the USA, which makes developing a noteworthy game with a hardcoded homosexual lead or theme a dangerous risk to take.06/30/2015 - 2:37am
Goth_SkunkThe United States is the largest single customer base for video games in the world, and it only just mandated by rule of its Supreme Court that marriage ought to be just as much an inalienable right for homosexuals as it is for heterosexuals,06/30/2015 - 2:35am
Goth_SkunkFor example, it would be difficult for a developer to produce a AAA quality game where the protagonist is hardcoded to be MtF transgender, and convince enough people to buy it in order to make it worth its production costs.06/30/2015 - 2:31am
Goth_SkunkNo Mecha, not woe unto those who ask for representation. By all means, ask and be represented. I don't have an issue with it, nor would I say anyone in GamerGate does either. But be reasonable about asking too.06/30/2015 - 2:27am
Goth_Skunkthat would've made Benedict Arnold raise a glass in toast.06/30/2015 - 2:25am
MechaCrashGamers are more than straight white men, but woe unto those who actually ask for representation!06/30/2015 - 2:24am
Goth_SkunkBut Games Journalism, who in the past has stood up for gamers and developers, when their hobby was under attack by idealogues and governments for being overly violent, suddenly switched sides in a move06/30/2015 - 2:24am
Goth_SkunkYet the media continues to push that narrative, and they will continue to do so until their medium dies out from obscelesence or when the old guard retires and is replaced by people who were raised by gamers, people who know the score.06/30/2015 - 2:20am
Goth_SkunkGamerGate, by my view, is far more diverse and inclusive that the purveying culture surrounding games journalism right now. The stereotypical gamer is a straight white male, but GamerGate has shown, time and time again, that this is not really the case.06/30/2015 - 2:18am
Goth_SkunkAfter all, you did just call it a "problem."06/30/2015 - 2:15am
Goth_SkunkAs opposed to setting the bar high, creating a culture clique that promotes exclusivity rather than inclusivity. Cronyism rather than diversity. Do you feel that inclusivity and diversity are just buzzwords to be used whenever convenient?06/30/2015 - 2:12am
 

Be Heard - Contact Your Politician