Epic: We Will Ban Those Who Spoiled Gears of War 3

While it might seem like a joke at first glance, apparently Epic Games is so pissed off at those who have shared information about Gears of War 3 online that it plans to ban those people in the future. Earlier this month Epic said it was keeping track of those who shared videos of Gears of War 3 and promised repercussions. We assume they mean that when these folks try to play online Epic will remember them and not allow them to play. How they could possibly facilitate such an action is beyond understanding.

"We're extremely diligent about getting that stuff taken down and issued a call to fans to not perpetuate it… and just keeping track of those who do," executive producer Rod Fergusson told Edge. "I don't think everybody's aware of the potential repercussions of those types of actions."

Speaking separately to Eurogamer on the issue, Fergusson further explained what "potential repercussions" really means.

"We have a banning system built into our stuff so we can go in and identify certain people," he said. "Some people aren't smart about what they do. They'll be disappointed on 20th September when they can't get in and can't play. They may be banned."

Fergusson added that those individuals who shared campaign spoiler videos were "going against everything we're trying to accomplish."

"We had one of my video chats and somebody went into the chat room and tried to yell all caps spoilers throughout the chat room to try to ruin the experience for the thousand people who were watching me. It's that kind of stuff that just drives me crazy. If you don't value this community, you don't value this experience, then we don't value you. I'd rather pick that one bad apple out of the pool so everybody else can have a better time."

Source: Eurogamer. Thanks to Bill from No High Scores

Tweet about this on TwitterShare on FacebookShare on Google+Share on RedditEmail this to someone


  1. 0
    vellocet says:

    In general, I agree with you.  Don't ban people for posting spoilers.  But in this case, they're spoilers from a product that they haven't even finished.

    I "have heard" that people at Epic are furious about the leak of the game.  I don't just mean mad, they are like "ruin the lives of those responsible" mad.

    I'm sure they wouldn't be doing this kind of thing if the game were already released.  It's akin to publicly revealing what they consider to be company secrets right now since nobody outside the company is supposed to know these things.

  2. 0
    katiekat says:

    Its one thing to go in to a forum or chat knowing what going on it is quite different wend sum prick jumps in a room or makes a fake tittel for a post on a site like gamefaqs.com and gives away major  plot points. Like for example I was not expecting the twist  in heavy rain  same  with infamous. And I was told the ending to the 6th seans before I saw it and when I did watch it the movie just did not see s good  because I already new the ending. There are thos out there that think its fun to do things like that and they should be banned because  imo it is just wrong..

  3. 0
    E. Zachary Knight says:

    Yes, things are different for different people. I for one fall into the category of those who don't mind spoilers and often seek them out.

    However, I don't think it is a good idea to have a policy of banning your biggest fans for daring to talk about your game/film/book/tv show. These people love it enough to talk about it.

    I can however understand policies to minimize spoilers in your own forums and such to prevent unwanted exposure for those wanting to remain "unspoiled" but banning those who do share spoilers will only lead to backlash against Epic.

    Which leads me to question this policy. Is it really a ban for spoiling the campaign mode of the game or are they using this as "evidence" of piracy and banning those they suspect of piracy only because they are sharing videos or talking about the game?

    E. Zachary Knight
    Divine Knight Gaming
    Oklahoma Game Development
    Rusty Outlook
    Random Tower
    My Patreon

  4. 0
    vellocet says:

    This whole argument of "it's free advertising" is ridiculous.  Advertising is by definition getting out a message that you want to get out.  Obviously Epic does not want this information disseminated.

    This at best can be called publicity.  And yes, there can be bad publicity… off the top of my head? Team Bondi's treatment of their developers.

  5. 0
    vellocet says:

    People who want spoilers will go find them.  Those people driving by a line of people lining up to buy the a Harry Potter book and shouting out the surprise ending should be punched in the face. Not just "not taken seriously".

    Also, because of the anonymity of the internet.  How do you know not to take someone seriously next time?

  6. 0
    Emberwake says:

    There's more at stake than just the spoilers. Spoilers are nothing much by themselves, but a player who deliberately spoils is a player who will grief and generally seek to make other players unhappy.

    I'm not sure if you read the same info I did, but the message I saw was that Epic was going after people who did more than just post a youtube video. These are people who went out of their way to ruin the story for as many people as possible.

    As far as "people don't take you seriously": apart from a cheap ad hominem against me, I'm not sure how this comment could have any relevance here. Certainly it's difficult to imagine this being any kind of meaningful consequence for someone who pops into an unrelated thread on Epic's forums and posts a spoiler. If you don't agree with the point I'm making, try using rational argument to demonstrate that it's incorrect.

    For the record, I don't believe Epic or any other game developer will bring in fans through banning players. That's clearly not how it works, and they are (I'm certain) quite aware of that already. But they can keep more of the fans they have by culling a small number of hostile, toxic, and antisocial fans.

  7. 0
    vellocet says:

    This is one of the problems with us gamers.  Even when things haven't been released we feel that we have some kind of right to it.  And that anything that we might do is going to be of benefit to the people making it whether they want us to or not.

  8. 0
    Vake Xeacons says:

    "Waa! We wanted to show off our game and these dorks beat us to it, so we're not going to let them play!"

    Get over it Epic; they advertised for you, for free. You're thanking them by banning them?

  9. 0
    E. Zachary Knight says:

    I know a lot of people who drool over any new footage of many things the love. People seek out set videos of movies and tv shows. They seek out previews of new songs from bands they love. They seek out gameplay footage of games they love.

    How is Epic differentiating between people who saw a video they thought was awesome and shared it with everyone vs someone who maliciously posted spoilers?

    E. Zachary Knight
    Divine Knight Gaming
    Oklahoma Game Development
    Rusty Outlook
    Random Tower
    My Patreon

  10. 0
    hellfire7885 says:

    I know I won't feel sorry since they had to be babies and have it now rather than be patient.

    I mean hell, despite how bad I want Saints Row: The Third I'm not looking for any leaked copies.

  11. 0
    SpaceGhost2K says:

    They're not banning their biggest fans because their biggest fans wouldn't do that. the people who are being dicks about this are the same people who are dicks in the game, and the real fans aren't going to miss them. I don't know what the repercussions will be regarding selling a game and then not allowing access to it. Maybe they have a cleverly written TOS.

  12. 0
    Emberwake says:

    I think you are missing the point, Zachary.

    When you have a fan who deliberately spoils the plot for others, it doesn't matter if more people enjoy spoilers than are bothered by them. The issue is that you have a customer who is getting their enjoyment from the act of ruining (or attempting to ruin) the enjoyment of others. Any such customer has the potential to turn away many others.

    I applaud the team at Epic for having the strength of character to make the right call here. Being a douchebag should have consequences, even on the internet.

  13. 0
    Papa Midnight says:

    I'm not, to be frank, Epic's biggest fan as I'm one of the PC gamers who got shafted when they decided to make Gears of War 2 and 3 available on 360 only due to "piracy concerns" (Yet, the Xbox 360 suffers from almost-if-not-the greatest amount of piracy out of all the three modern consoles (save for the Wii) – even at greater rates than the PC), then screwed us on the executable of Gears of War as it was so we had to wait for a third Title Update to correct that mis-hap.

    That said, I haven't paid any attention to the Gears of War series since the news that we PC gamers would be shown the door as the second-rate gamers we are in the eyes of publishers and developers, so I have no idea what has occurred since I killed General RAAM.

    But, I am admittedly curious to see just how Epic thinks they could even POSSIBLY pull this off, and what remote chance they have of succeeding.

    Now then, the popcorn is ready so I'm going to sit back, relax, and observe.

  14. 0
    Atrayo says:

    So while EPIC is pursuing those who breached their security and stole early footage of the game.

    Its also doing a "witch hunt" for those who are most aggressive in spreading virally the game footage in development?

    I call it a "witch hunt" because EPIC is spending resources that may hurt it public relations wise. This reminds me of the 1990's when Napster was at odds with the Music Recording Industry. When MP3's were trading like mad. The Record Industry went gestapo on Napster because what they were doing with file sharing of everyone's IP. (no matter that Napster became the father to "Peer to Peer" P2P file sharing) The Record Industry had in my opinion a wonderful opportunity presented to them on a golden platter by Napster. Instead of going the route of ITunes like Apple nearly so many years later. They went livid and attacked Napster like the bogeyman. EPIC's theft and ordeal of its IP is not entirely the same nor to the same scale. But's it's response is potentially the same in regards to how the Records Industry went after Napster.

    So is EPIC going to go Gestapo on only those that promote heavily something that is already in the public domain? The genie is already out of the bottle. I just hope the EPIC "drag net" doesn't catch anyone that is innocent. Where they have no recourse to appeal a banning as a customer. May EPIC have rigorous measures in place to know who is actually the wrong doer and not an a bystander lumping them both into the same boat.

    This has the potential to backfire on EPIC depending on how they conduct themselves. Let's see how above board and semi-transparent they are in the success of this initiative.

  15. 0
    Thomas McKenna says:

    The results of that study were far from conclusive enough to swing one way or the other, as for all but 1 or 2 cases the number of people who "liked" spoilers vs those who "did not like" were statistically inconclusive.  When you have overlapping error bars, then you're in the grey area.

  16. 0
    Kamendae says:

    That's what the headline says, sure.  Doesn't mean it's true for everyone.  Hell, even the study itself shows it to not be necessarily true for one of its twelve stories (meaning "people enjoyed this story more when unspoiled than when spoiled"), and the error bars for another six or seven of those stories overlap (meaning "There's a slight lean towards 'unspoiled' but statistically it could go the other way as well"). 

    But the headline grabs attention and gives everyone on the Internet free rein to spoil people.  Hooray.  :p

Leave a Reply