Blizzard Clarifies SC II Single-Player Bannings

October 14, 2010 -

In response to a story from earlier in the week that Blizzard was banning players from StarCraft 2 who used trainers or cheats in the game’s single-player component, the company issued a clarification.

The web site Cheat Happens had claimed that gamers who used its trainers, which grants users unlimited ammo or other cheats, in SC 2's single-player element resulted in users having their Battle.net accounts suspended, or their CD keys disabled.

In an article on IGN, Blizzard stated that they are not banning players just for cheating StarCraft 2’s single player, but that it was banning for hacks installed which affected both the single player and multiplayer parts of the game:

It's important to point out first, that many of the 3rd-party hacks and cheats developed for StarCraft II contain both single and multiplayer functionality.

In order to protect the integrity of multiplayer competition, we are actively detecting cheat programs used in multiplayer modes whether there are human opponents or not.

The company stated that “any players who opt to use any type of 3rd party hacks do so at their own risk,” adding that “there are already built-in cheat codes for StarCraft II single-player that can be used safely.”

Cheat Happens, responding to the Blizzard statement, said that the newly issued proclamation “completely contradicts” earlier correspondence it had receive from Blizzard support.


Comments

Re: Blizzard Clarifies SC II Single-Player Bannings

Dick move is dicky..... at least show that they broken the online rules..... Mr fife....


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 Clarifies SC II Single-Player Bannings

so wait, if i finish the game and decide to screw around with a trainer in SP or skirmish mode alone i get banned?

thank god i don't care for B.Net anyways since i quit post SC1's hackfest of MP.

and before someone says "well its a lot better now!" after reading thing i don't really care much...

its like saying i can play the game once, get bored, and i'm no longer allowed to do anything new in the game just for giggles. If i want an RTS thats like that i'll go play Halo Wars some more.

Re: Blizzard Clarifies SC II Single-Player Bannings

All blizz says is to use their built in cheats and to not use 3rd party hacks.

You can screw around in single player all you please and all the tools to do so are already provided in game.

Re: Blizzard Clarifies SC II Single-Player Bannings

Then why do single player 3rd party 'cheating' applications exist then?   That seems like a lot of work for someone to go through if the equivelent tools are already in game.

Re: Blizzard Clarifies SC II Single-Player Bannings

You got tons and tons of special custom maps that work very differently for doing different things.

Re: Blizzard Clarifies SC II Single-Player Bannings

Well, I'm not sure which side to believe here, but to be honest, I'm leaning towards Blizzard, for the simple fact that previously released statements from Cheat Happens have clearly misled me.

Not to mention that I'm a little reluctant to trust most sites dedicated to making hacks and cheat available for games that are already full of cheats, especially online multiplayer games.

And if this is truly a case of people using cheats specifically designed for use in single and multiplayer, then I retract my previous comments about flaws in the game's system.

Re: Blizzard Clarifies SC II Single-Player Bannings

Cheathappens trainers are specifically designed not to function in multiplayer. In some cases, the trainer even blocks the multiplayer connection if someone makes an attempt. Unfortunately, other trainer makers just slap together theirs and don't care that they can be used in MP, or even design ones to be specifically used for MP games.

The real problem comes from the Warden program that is used to catch the trainers. It's running so long as the game is and doesn't differentiate between online play or offline play (and given the setup for SC2, the campaign and skirmish mode even qualify as 'multiplayer modes with no other human opponents'). So it just tags any program that might affect the game (yes, it has tagged antivirus programs as well) and reports it.

 
Forgot your password?
Username :
Password :

Poll

How do you usually divide up your Humble Bundle payments?:

Shout box

You're not permitted to post shouts.
Matthew Wilsonthe lose of nn would not be good for us, but it will not be good for verizion/comcast/att in the long run ether.04/24/2014 - 2:16pm
Matthew Wilsonsadly yes. it would take another sopa day to achieve it.04/24/2014 - 2:13pm
NeenekoI am also confused. Are you saying NN would only become law if Google/Netflix pushed the issue (against their own interests)?04/24/2014 - 2:10pm
E. Zachary KnightMatthew, you are saying a lot of things but I am still unclear on your point. Are you saying that the loss of Net Neutrality will be good in the long run?04/24/2014 - 2:06pm
Matthew WilsonOfcourse it does I never said it did not.though over time the death of NN will make backbone providers like Google, level3 and others stronger becouse most isps including the big ones can not provid internet without them. they can peer with smaller isps04/24/2014 - 1:54pm
E. Zachary KnightMatthew, and that still plays in Google's favor over their smaller rivals who don't have the muscle to stand up to ISPs.04/24/2014 - 1:45pm
Matthew Wilsongoogle wont pay becouse they control a large part of the backbone that all isps depend on. if verizon blocks their data, google does the same. the effect is Verizon loses access to 40% of the internet, and can not serve some areas at all.04/24/2014 - 1:14pm
Neenekolack of NN is in google and netflix interest. It is another tool for squeezing out smaller companies since they can afford to 'play'04/24/2014 - 12:57pm
Matthew WilsonI have said it before net nutrality will not be made in to law until Google or Netflix is blocked, or they do what they did for sopa and pull their sites down in protest.04/23/2014 - 8:02pm
Andrew EisenGee, I guess putting a former cable industry lobbyist as the Chairman of the FCC wasn't that great of an idea. http://www.nytimes.com/2014/04/24/technology/fcc-new-net-neutrality-rules.html?_r=204/23/2014 - 7:26pm
Andrew EisenIanC - I assume what he's getting at is the fact that once PS3/360 development ceases, there will be no more "For Everything But Wii U" games.04/23/2014 - 5:49pm
Andrew EisenMatthew - Yes, obviously developers will eventually move on from the PS3 and 360 but the phrase will continue to mean exactly what it means.04/23/2014 - 5:45pm
IanCAnd how does that equal his annoying phrase being meaningless?04/23/2014 - 5:09pm
Matthew Wilson@Andrew Eisen the phrase everything but wiiu will be meaningless afer this year becouse devs will drop 360/ps3 support.04/23/2014 - 4:43pm
Andrew EisenFor Everything But... 360? Huh, not many games can claim that title. Only three others that I know of.04/23/2014 - 3:45pm
MaskedPixelantehttp://www.joystiq.com/2014/04/23/another-world-rated-for-current-consoles-handhelds-in-germany/ Another World fulfills legal obligations of being on every gaming system under the sun.04/23/2014 - 12:34pm
Matthew Wilsonhttp://arstechnica.com/gaming/2014/04/steam-gauge-do-strong-reviews-lead-to-stronger-sales-on-steam/?comments=1 Here is another data driven article using sales data from steam to figure out if reviews effect sales. It is stats heavy like the last one.04/23/2014 - 11:33am
Andrew EisenI love RPGs but I didn't much care for Tales of Symphonia. I didn't bother with its sequel.04/23/2014 - 11:21am
InfophileIt had great RPGs because MS wanted to use them to break into Japan. (Which had the side-effect of screwing NA PS3 owners out of Tales of Vesperia. No, I'm not bitter, why do you ask?)04/23/2014 - 10:52am
RedMageI'm still disappointed the 360 never broke into Japan either. It had a bevy of great RPGs in the late 2000s.04/23/2014 - 9:48am
 

Be Heard - Contact Your Politician