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.

---

http://zippydsm.deviantart.com/

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.
Andrew EisenHence the "Uh, yeah. Obviously."09/02/2014 - 12:53am
SleakerI think Nintendo has proven over the last 2 years that it doesn't.09/02/2014 - 12:31am
Andrew EisenSleaker - Uh, yeah. Obviously.09/01/2014 - 8:20pm
Sleaker@AE - exclusives do not a console business make.09/01/2014 - 8:03pm
Papa MidnightI find it disappointing that, despite the presence of a snopes article and multiple articles countering it, people are still spreading a fake news story about a "SWATter" being sentenced to X (because the number seems to keep changing) years in prison.09/01/2014 - 5:08pm
Papa MidnightAnd resulting in PC gaming continuing to be held back by developer habits09/01/2014 - 5:07pm
Papa MidnightI find it disappointing that the current gen of consoles is representative of 2009-2010 in PC gaming, and will be the bar by which games are released over the next 8 years - resulting in more years of poor PC ports (if they're ever ported)09/01/2014 - 5:06pm
Andrew EisenMeanwhile, 6 of Wii U's top 12 are exclusive: Mario 3D World, Nintendo Land, Pikmin 3, Mario Kart 8, Wonderful 101, and ZombiU. (Wind Waker HD is on the list too but I didn't count it.)09/01/2014 - 4:36pm
Andrew EisenLikewise, only two of Xbox One's top 12 are exclusive: Dead Rising 3 and Ryse: Son of Rome (if you ignore a PC release later this year).09/01/2014 - 4:34pm
Andrew EisenNot to disrespect the current gen of consoles but I find it telling that of the "12 Best Games For The PS4" (per Kotaku), only two are exclusive to the system: Infamous: Second Son and Resogun.09/01/2014 - 4:30pm
MaskedPixelantehttp://www.joystiq.com/2014/09/01/beyond-two-souls-ps4-trophies-emerge-directors-cut-reported/ MMM MMM, nothing quire like reheated last gen games to make you appreciate the 400 bucks you spent on a new console.09/01/2014 - 4:24pm
Andrew EisenThat's actually a super depressing thought, that a bunch of retweeters are taking that pic as an illustration of the actual issue instead of an example of a complete misunderstanding of it.09/01/2014 - 4:20pm
Andrew EisenObviously, the picture was created by someone who doesn't understand what the issue actually is (or, possibly, someone trying to satire said misunderstanding).09/01/2014 - 4:10pm
Papa MidnightPeople fear and attack what they do not understand.09/01/2014 - 4:04pm
Papa MidnightWell, let's not forget. Someone held their hand in a peace sign a few weeks ago and people started claiming it was a gang sign. Or a police chief displayed the hand signal of their fraternity and was accused of the same.09/01/2014 - 4:04pm
SleakerEither people don't understand that what the picture is saying is true, or the picture was created out of a misunderstanding of what sexism is.09/01/2014 - 3:52pm
Sleaker@AE ok yah that's where the kind of confusion I'm getting. Your tweet can be taken to mean two different things.09/01/2014 - 3:51pm
Andrew EisenSleaker - No. No, not even remotely. The pic attached to my tweet was not made by me; it's not a statement I'm making. It's an illustration of the complete misunderstanding of the issue my tweet is referring to.09/01/2014 - 3:13pm
Papa MidnightIn other news, Netflix states why it paid Comcast: http://money.cnn.com/2014/08/29/technology/netflix-comcast/index.html?hpt=hp_t209/01/2014 - 3:10pm
Papa MidnightAndrew Eisen: Sites like Tumblr make things seem much bigger than they are. A vocal extreme minority start complaining and things go as they do.09/01/2014 - 3:09pm
 

Be Heard - Contact Your Politician