Support NeoGAF

[Tobor]

If people hack their way to achievements in Half-Life 2 single player, are they VAC banned? What about on 360 single player games? Are they banned from XBL? I'm pretty sure they would be, though I don't keep up with news. This isn't unprecedented.

Yeah, I'm not getting the uproar here.

 

[Pandaman]

The pomposity of this response is astounding. I do not care what you'll allow, bud.

what the point in talking with someone if the end result is always 'im right so nyah'?
finger exercise?

If you don't care for my opinion, don't read or respond to it.

That aside, single player mode is seperate from online multiplayer. A authentication check for anti-piracy does not mean your single player campaign exploits suddenly affect anybody else.

you are working under the assumption that the login requirement is solely an authentication check and serves no other purpose. There is a ton of data relevant to blizzards future marketing and development projects that can be mined by looking at the way people play the game.

allowing trainers that intentionally skew the numbers to their highest point would not be in the favour of that purpose and blizzard does have the right to set conditions like that when marketing a product.

 

[erpg]

Fuck Blizzard, never played their games before, and certainly never will now.

Is a 2 week ban really that bad? :lol

 

[syllogism]

Blizzard: Bricks people's games for using cheats in Single Player Campaign.

Valve: Actively ignores people using the Steam Achievement Manager to instantly "earn" achievements, mess with stats, and unlock new weapons. When cheats are detected online, VAC bans prevent that person from playing on VAC-enabled servers, but still grant full access to the single player and non-VAC multiplayer.

Fuck Blizzard, never played their games before, and certainly never will now.

It's a pretty pointless comparison given VAC isn't just for Valve games and Valve has gotten overzealous with VAC bans as well. Didn't Valve also ban for using TF2 idler? Regardless, I wouldn't mind at all if Valve banned for using the unlocker as long as they warned about it beforehand.

 

[Gravijah]

allowing trainers that intentionally skew the numbers to their highest point would not be in the favour of that purpose and blizzard does have the right to set conditions like that when marketing a product.

or you ignore unusually high and unusually low numbers

 

[Fallout-NL]

If this is related to achievements, then yes, it's entirely reasonable for Blizzard to ban these people.


(Personally though, I don't give a damn about achievements).

 

[Kinyou]

sooo... when will they announce that they ban everyone who played a cracked beta client vs the AI?

 

[balladofwindfishes]

It's a pretty pointless comparison given VAC isn't just for Valve games and Valve has gotten overzealous with VAC bans as well. Didn't Valve also ban for using TF2 idler? Regardless, I wouldn't mind at all if Valve banned for using the unlocker as long as they warned about it beforehand.

No, for using the idler, the people only lost their items and didn't get a halo.

 

[syllogism]

No, for using the idler, the people only lost their items and didn't get a halo.

There were some conflicting reports

 

[Syril]

nvm, posted already

 

[Pandaman]

or you ignore unusually high and unusually low numbers

but those are markets that blizzard could want to cator towards. especially the unusually low numbers if you look at sc2ranks. thats the biggest slice of the pie!

on the flipside, they don't want to do something specifically to cater to a perceived high number of serious 'high level' players when that market is actually being artificially inflated.
ex: map making decisions, priority of certain features in patches, balance content for the next game, etc.

blizzard doesnt want to say 'wow 20% of people got all the achievements within 4 months, we should make them harder nexttime to draw out playtimes for whatever reason we'd want to do that. and then find out their new hardmode achievements is a barrier to the actual honest achievement crowd.

 

[John]

god fucking damnit blizzard no one gives a shit about your arbitrary carrot and stick you twats

 

[WanderingWind]

what the point in talking with someone if the end result is always 'im right so nyah'?
finger exercise?

If you don't care for my opinion, don't read or respond to it.

you are working under the assumption that the login requirement is solely an authentication check and serves no other purpose. There is a ton of data relevant to blizzards future marketing and development projects that can be mined by looking at the way people play the game.

allowing trainers that intentionally skew the numbers to their highest point would not be in the favour of that purpose and blizzard does have the right to set conditions like that when marketing a product.

No, but you don't get to set the rules for what we are allowed to disagree upon.

Back on topic. I will take the side of the customer over the marketing department. Let's not forget, the people (many accounts were banned, not just one) bought the game.

 

[Painraze]

Blizzard: Bricks people's games for using cheats in Single Player Campaign.

Valve: Actively ignores people using the Steam Achievement Manager to instantly "earn" achievements, mess with stats, and unlock new weapons. When cheats are detected online, VAC bans prevent that person from playing on VAC-enabled servers, but still grant full access to the single player and non-VAC multiplayer.

Fuck Blizzard, never played their games before, and certainly never will now.

:lol :lol

Blizzard gave the guy a two week ban.

If you get VAC banned from Valve you are absolutely fucked and out a lot more than just the price of SC2. I can't even imagine playing a valve game on a non-VAC server at this point... dear god.

 

[plagiarize]

god fucking damnit blizzard no one gives a shit about your arbitrary carrot and stick you twats

people are PAYING for cheats with actual money to go after that carrot. if you were right, no one would have been banned and you'd have nothing to be angry about, so clearly you are basing your anger on something that isn't true.

you are thinking 'i don't care about achievements.' and 'i wouldn't want to be banned for using a trainer.' and projecting that onto someone who isn't you. would you pay for a trainer? if not, then you are not this guy and you can't project 'i don't care about achievements' onto him.

 

[Deleted member 17706]

Might have been posted already, but if you want to use trainers and the like, why not just play in offline mode? You are being monitored by playing the game online, so using anything but the built-in cheats is just not a good idea. As people have already stated, some people take the achievements very seriously, and Blizzard has to ensure the integrity of the achievement system.

With that said, outright banning accounts sounds like a bit of an overreaction. A warning + removing achievements would be better, but I don't know if Blizzard's system is that flexible.

 

[Liu Kang Baking A Pie]

To clarify, it's a 14 day ban. I think some people here are thinking it's permanent.

 

[Minsc]

so how many people are you playing against when you play through the campaign

Thanks to achievements, every last person who has a Battle.net profile. Your campaign is scored and ranked little different than any other online leaderboard.

:lol :lol

Blizzard gave the guy a two week ban.

If you get VAC banned from Valve you are absolutely fucked and out a lot more than just the price of SC2. I can't even imagine playing a valve game on a non-VAC server at this point... dear god.

I find Valve's stance of banning an entire account's access to 100s of games over a single game's payment (rather than just suspending the game in question) far more protest worthy than what Blizzard is doing here.

 

[BreakyBoy]

:lol :lol

Blizzard gave the guy a two week ban.

Not only that, but whoever said you can play offline for 30 days is right. I remember there being an issue at first, but a local friend here was playing offline on his laptop the other day when the cable was out. Offline mode, no problems.

Since the 30 day window is within the 14-day ban, there will be no interruption of single-player SC2 goodness for the player.

That being said, I'd think a more appropriate response would be to nuke his achievement score.

 

[peakish]

Just chiming in and saying that this is fucking bullshit, that Blizzard should be ashamed of themselves and that I agree completely with this:

It doesn't matter. There is absolutely no excuse in the world for a company to block you from playing your game. Kick him off the servers for multiplayer, fine. Nuke his achievements, fine. But block him from playing the game he bought? Fuck that. That's fucking intolerable.

That goes for Valve having the ability to lock you out of all your bought games for one little misstep in one game as well.

Fuck DRM shit like this.

Edit: Huh, so it's for 2 weeks only? That's kinda better, but still bullshit.

Initiating calm-down procedure, set levels to moderate.

 

[MrPliskin]

I don't see the issue. You agree to a TOS that states you can't do stuff like this.

Also, if you guy's don't care, then why post up in your furious rage :lol

"LOL I hate achievments they are teh dumbzorz, BUT WTH BLIZZORD HAHAHA YOU LOST IT BANNING ACHIEVEMENT PEOPLE I CARE NOT ABOUT LOL ME HA!"

It sounds like a madhouse in here of shit that absolutely doesn't make any sense. Just like you couldn't care less about achievements, why would you actually care that some joe snuffy get's banned because he wanted to show off his e-peen through hacking / cheating?

 

[Prisen]

people are PAYING for cheats with actual money to go after that carrot. if you were right, no one would have been banned and you'd have nothing to be angry about, so clearly you are basing your anger on something that isn't true.

you are thinking 'i don't care about achievements.' and 'i wouldn't want to be banned for using a trainer.' and projecting that onto someone who isn't you. would you pay for a trainer? if not, then you are not this guy and you can't project 'i don't care about achievements' onto him.

People were PAYING for cheats (game-genie) long before achievements.

 

[Pandaman]

No, but you don't get to set the rules for what we are allowed to disagree upon.

yes, i sort of do.
watch i'll do it again:
you say 'X is like Y'.
and i'll say 'no, Y is different'.

Really the biggest thing that sends discussions to frowntown is when people try to position their conclusion as an axiom and then say 'if x is y than x is y, i win'.

there a few things we must agree on for this discussion to have any real meaning, but the distinction between 'online only' and 'single player capable' is not one of them. hell, look at ubisoft pc games these days.

Back on topic. I will take the side of the customer over the marketing department. Let's not forget, the people (many accounts were banned, not just one) bought the game.

ofcourse, its logical for you to take the side of self interest. we dont want to buy things worth less than what we pay.

but you don't normally get to renegotiate terms after a sale, so these are decisions we as customers have to make before buying the game.

Not only that, but whoever said you can play offline for 30 days is right. I remember there being an issue at first, but a local friend here was playing offline on his laptop the other day when the cable was out. Offline mode, no problems.

Since the 30 day window is within the 14-day ban, there will be no interruption of single-player SC2 goodness for the player.

That being said, I'd think a more appropriate response would be to nuke his achievement score.

i just logged off of my laptop and i cannot access offline mode.
is it not possible that your friends laptop has just always been on or in sleep mode since the last time he accessed online?

 

[JWong]

Wow! Just reading a lot of the first page.

Everyone ragging on Blizzard for not allowing cheats? LOL!

I won't repeat whatever since I know someone already clarified it. Using trainers and hacks, even for singleplayer, is still bad since it is using a very dignified achievement system.

 

[Prisen]

but you don't normally get to renegotiate terms after a sale, so these are decisions we as customers have to make before buying the game.

A TOS/EULA that you don't sign before buying a game (like 100% of all sales of boxed games) is completely void in the entire EU.

 

[Open Source]

Looks like Blizzard's come down with another case of grosse tête. You know they are smoking nothing but the best stuff with the kind of money they are making.

 

[Painraze]

i just logged off of my laptop and i cannot access offline mode.
is it not possible that your friends laptop has just always been on or in sleep mode since the last time he accessed online?

there should be a guest login option that allows you to play offline. the guest login has to be reupped every 30 days.

 

[Deleted member 17706]

Just chiming in and saying that this is fucking bullshit, that Blizzard should be ashamed of themselves and that I agree completely with this:


That goes for Valve having the ability to lock you out of all your bought games for one little misstep in one game as well.

Fuck DRM shit like this.

Edit: Huh, so it's for 2 weeks only? That's kinda better, but still bullshit.

Initiating calm-down procedure, set levels to moderate.

Down with the man!!!

 

[plagiarize]

People were PAYING for cheats (game-genie) long before achievements.

game genies were approved and supported by the developers? of course not.

what happened to people who broke their game with a game-genie? they were shit out of luck and couldn't play it any more.

people caught using game-genie characters in pokemon tournaments? they were banned from tournaments.

people have been getting banned from stuff for using game genies etc for a long time.

using a game genie on Sonic 2 didn't get you banned from being connected to the internet while playing Sonic 2, but the reason for that is plainly obvious.

dig out a game genie. read the legalese in the manual.

 

[ElFly]

Achievements are the worst fucking thing about this gen.

Fucking pavlovian conditioning disguised as gameplay.

 

[robor]

every single packet of information that leaves your PC goes through your ISP. they know every single website you go to. they know all your deepest darkest secrets. that porn you downloaded? that software you stole? they know about it.

would you rather blizzard or comcast/verizon had all your deepest darkest secrets?

sorry to scare you, while you are not wrong, what you are missing is that it would take blizzard to hire a staff of hundreds of thousands just to monitor every single game.

I am totally aware of this, but it's a different situation. This is on a gaming level and it's the very reason why I don't like Blizzard games at all. I am also aware that it's not surveillance on a Big Brother level (governments would have trouble with such man power), but it is a level of surveillance that irks me the wrong way completely.

people are making money selling cheats to blizzards game. blizzards reaction here is to try and warn gamers off of buying those cheats. we can think achievements are stupid, but blizzard obviously didn't because they spent time and money building a system that these paid for cheats make meaningless (or even more meaningless).

people selling (and people willing to buy) such 'cheats' are directly hurting blizzard by making a bunch of manhours pointless and upsetting many of their gamers.

14 days in the sinbin seems reasonable to me.

Why are these people selling cheats in the first place? Just out of curiosity.

 

[Pandaman]

A TOS/EULA that you don't sign before buying a game (like 100% of all sales of boxed games) is completely void in the entire EU.

Smart.

How'd you pull that one off? do you give lessons?

 

[Somnid]

A TOS/EULA that you don't sign before buying a game (like 100% of all sales of boxed games) is completely void in the entire EU.

It's not the game's EULA. It's Battle.net's which is a service not a product.

 

[plagiarize]

Why are these people selling cheats in the first place? Just out of curiosity.

because people care enough about achievements to pay for them rather than 'working' for them.

that's the only reason i can think of given the map editor and long list of cheats built right into the game.

 

[Prisen]

game genies were approved and supported by the developers? of course not.

what happened to people who broke their game with a game-genie? they were shit out of luck and couldn't play it any more.

people caught using game-genie characters in pokemon tournaments? they were banned from tournaments.

people have been getting banned from stuff for using game genies for a long time.

using a game genie on Sonic 2 didn't get you banned from being connected to the internet while playing Sonic 2, but the reason for that is plainly obvious.

dig out a game genie. read the legalese in the manual.

Way to miss the point.

because people care enough about achievements to pay for them rather than 'working' for them.

that's the only reason i can think of given the map editor and long list of cheats built right into the game.

You really don't see how game-genies existing before achievements invalidates this argument?

Edit: There are (afaik) a lot of stuff that can be done with a trainer that can't be done with the built-in cheats. E.g. playing a mission as protoss instead of terra, dropping in extra units etc.

 

[plagiarize]

A TOS/EULA that you don't sign before buying a game (like 100% of all sales of boxed games) is completely void in the entire EU.

show me the law that says that blizzard HAVE to provide you service no matter what you do.

neither of you are legally bound to anything. you are not legally bound to complying with the EULA and blizzard are not legally bound to continue providing service indefinately.

 

[WanderingWind]

yes, i sort of do.
watch i'll do it again:
you say 'X is like Y'.
and i'll say 'no, Y is different'.

Really the biggest thing that sends discussions to frowntown is when people try to position their conclusion as an axiom and then say 'if x is y than x is y, i win'.

there a few things we must agree on for this discussion to have any real meaning, but the distinction between 'online only' and 'single player capable' is not one of them. hell, look at ubisoft pc games these days.

ofcourse, its logical for you to take the side of self interest. we dont want to buy things worth less than what we pay.

but you don't normally get to renegotiate terms after a sale, so these are decisions we as customers have to make before buying the game.


i just logged off of my laptop and i cannot access offline mode.
is it not possible that your friends laptop has just always been on or in sleep mode since the last time he accessed online?

Right...in order for the discussion to be meaningful, all I have to do is agree with you on the thing we disagree about. If you can't see how this is above egotistical, then I think we're done here.

 

[Pandaman]

there should be a guest login option that allows you to play offline. the guest login has to be reupped every 30 days.

i know of it, i use it whenever i dont have a wifi connection.
its telling me i have to login once to play as a guest, the last login i made on this computer was about 6 hours ago.

so if its a bug, they havent fixed it yet.

 

[plagiarize]

Way to miss the point.

then clearly make your point.

 

[Prisen]

show me the law that says that blizzard HAVE to provide you service no matter what you do.

neither of you are legally bound to anything. you are not legally bound to complying with the EULA and blizzard are not legally bound to continue providing service indefinately.

I'm betting they are, under European law. Of course, it's not really decided until it has been tried in court.

 

[Minsc]

You really don't see how game-genies existing before achievements invalidates this argument?

Game Genies were useful, because games were hard back then. Now you don't need to cheat to win, games practically play themselves today.

 

[Painraze]

i know of it, i use it whenever i dont have a wifi connection.
its telling me i have to login once to play as a guest, the last login i made on this computer was about 6 hours ago.

so if its a bug, they havent fixed it yet.

Ahh ok cool. I use it a lot too on my laptop.

 

[WanderingWind]

because people care enough about achievements to pay for them rather than 'working' for them.

that's the only reason i can think of given the map editor and long list of cheats built right into the game.

Many other examples have been given. Mods, conversions, skins, art, music....basically anything that changes the game gets you banned.

 

[Painraze]

Many other examples have been given. Mods, conversions, skins, art, music....basically anything that changes the game gets you banned.

Correct me if I'm wrong but I believe you can import new textures, models, sounds, etc into the SC2 map editor. You can pretty much make an all new game with that thing.

 

[Pandaman]

Right...in order for the discussion to be meaningful, all I have to do is agree with you on the thing we disagree about. If you can't see how this is above egotistical, then I think we're done here.

no, you just have to establish a meaningful difference. Or in your case, establish that there isn't a difference.

Did you learn how to talk at political rallies? typically it helps to do more than decree things at each other.

here I'll start.
my position: online only is a distinguishable limiting factor to single player access in some games that creates a distinction between offline play and single player play.

i present assassins creed (pc) as a primary example of an exclusively online single player game requiring persistent internet access for progression.
Furthermore, companies can place this limiting factors for reasons beyond piracy control.
i present the hypothetical example of a stat and completion tracking system for the purposes of market research outlined above.

using these two points i believe that a distinction should be made between single play and offline play on a case by case basis rather than accepting the equalization as a rule.

 

[plagiarize]

Many other examples have been given. Mods, conversions, skins, art, music....basically anything that changes the game gets you banned.

i'm not seeing any evidence of that. show me someone that got banned for doing any of the above and i'll gladly look at the facts and decide how i feel about it. this trainer doesn't offer any of those features.

if you've got the links then let me know.

the ones on the linked website even have this disclaimer.

'SINGLE PLAYER OFFLINE USE ONLY. USE AT OWN RISK.'

 

[Shito]

For the records...

Doesn't MS ban people who hack 360 games for achievements?

No, they don't.

 

[Merovin]

Pathetic. Single-player is for me and me alone, if I want a quick mess about, then I should be allowed one! Sure if it's effecting leaderboards and stuff, then revert that back, but ban? Seriously?

 

[plagiarize]

For the records...


No, they don't.

but they reserve the right to do so.
http://www.xbox.com/en-US/support/systemuse/xbox360/gamerprofile/gamerscorecheating.htm

About Gamerscore corrections
A gamerscore correction occurs on a player’s LIVE account when they gain achievements through avoiding game play and the use of external tools. LIVE is committed to keeping the service free of this type of behavior as it violates the LIVE Terms of Use.

I’ve heard of other players getting banned. Why don’t you just ban these gamertags?
We believe in players reforming themselves, which is why gamerscore correction only applies to previously earned achievements. This allows these players to earn achievements like other “fair” players without having to get banned from LIVE. However, any user who violates the LIVE Terms of Use is subject to having their gamertag banned.

 

[Minsc]

For the records...


No, they don't.

So they cheated on a single game, and then lost their points for every game they've ever played and MS disabled them from ever getting any achievement they ever had unlocked again? Ouch! That sounds 10x worse than a 2-week ban.