Support NeoGAF

[hamchan]

The worst part is the implication for future modding.

Imagine if Planescape Torment used this system a decade ago. Today you'd have to play it in 4:3 800x600 without an old ass gui and maybe it wouldn't even work on your machine.

Hacking the exe file for modding purpose is a good thing over the lifetime of the product. If you get banned for using any 3rd party program changing the game contents...that's really going to suck.

Planescape Torment doesn't have some big online component that also ties into the SP though. If these guys really wanted to just screw around they would have used in game cheats or would have stayed off Battle.net. Anyways, I expect Diablo 3 to deal with this the same way.

 

[-COOLIO-]

The worst part is the implication for future modding.

Imagine if Planescape Torment used this system a decade ago. Today you'd have to play it in 4:3 800x600 without an old ass gui and maybe it wouldn't even work on your machine.

Hacking the exe file for modding purpose is a good thing over the lifetime of the product. If you get banned for using any 3rd party program changing the game contents...that's really going to suck.

its not like the guy was autobanned. a texture pack would probably be fine, if not just play it offline.

 

[dimb]

But I also strongly believe that SP is wholly separate from MP, and that my right as a gamer (especially a PC gamer!) is absolute, total control over the SP experience. If I want to hack that EXE file into oblivion, that's my perogative.

As long as you are connect to battle.net your SP is not a wholly separate experience from the MP. That's all there is to this.

It's nice to hope everyone will be innocent about game hacks, but cheating is so rampant it is just best to put your foot down where it begins.

 

[Minsc]

The worst part is the implication for future modding.

Imagine if Planescape Torment used this system a decade ago. Today you'd have to play it in 4:3 800x600 without an old ass gui and maybe it wouldn't even work on your machine.

Hacking the exe file for modding purpose is a good thing over the lifetime of the product. If you get banned for using any 3rd party program changing the game contents...that's really going to suck.

This has nothing to do with modding like you describe it, you're talking about single player games with no multi-player components. How can blizzard know what you've done to the .exe and allow it to be mixed in to their userbase or people expecting a normal gameplay experience?

You can hack the .exe all you want, and run as many mods as you can dream of as long as you don't do it on Blizzard's servers, those servers are for paying customers (yes, they are paying - Blizzard is hoping they purchase the expansions and wants to keep them happy).

 

[VibratingDonkey]

What if it has nothing to do with achievements? Maybe the guy in question used the trainer for that purpose, but what if it were a trainer that spammed malware links or disrupted battle.net's services?

When you're online with a closed community with a trainer, you should expect to get banned. I can't think of any instance where people with hacked exe's and modified game files (beyond portrait swaps and shit that you can do in config files as directed by the developer) don't get banned. When you pirate software or use cracks, you block network commands and add additional layers of cracks not to get caught because you'll be banned or locked out.

A response from Blizzard would then be unfortunate, but fair enough. There obviously is a risk involved with modified files.

But I'd wager the creator and users of the CheatHappens trainer had no malicious intent. From their point of view they're facing these ridiculously harsh punishments for cheating in single player.

This crap could all be circumvented if the game has an offline mode, which I assume is the case. Blizzard should perhaps inform users of this before banning them for life and whatnot. But I haven't followed anything Blizzard, so perhaps they have actually done that.

 

[AzureNightmare]

Achievements are the single most destructive thing that has happened to single player gaming. because sometimes you just seriously want to fuck with the game you own and just have fun with it. cheats enhance a game and extend its life if implemented correctly. The only people in this thread that I have a problem with are the achievement whores and corporate ballwashers that rubber stamp everything their favorite companies do. Just because a company can do something and actually does something, doesn't necessarily make it the good and right thing to do. It will do you and the world around you a lot of good if you think about things from outside your narrow perspective in the future.

 

[notworksafe]

If people want to use 3rd party cheats/trainers/whatever just sign in with a Guest account. That doesn't save any progress and doesn't track achievements.

 

[Minsc]

If people want to use 3rd party cheats/trainers/whatever just sign in with a Guest account. That doesn't save any progress and doesn't track achievements.

But what if they want to use cheats to get the achievements!

 

[notworksafe]

But what if they want to use cheats to get the achievements!

Too bad. MS doesn't let people do that either. Most games get achievements turned off when you use cheats (so does SC2) and MS bans/kills gamerscore of people who use hex editors to get achievements as well.

Cheating in a game and doing well isn't an achievement. It's just cheating.

 

[VibratingDonkey]

If people are cheating in the single-player by hacking the EXE while there already are in-game cheats, it's because they want easy achievements, not because they want to "play their game the way they want it." So I hope they stay banned.

With that said, I'm out of this thread. Having to deal with people white knighting cheaters, Blizzard haters, achievement haters and Valve fanboys in the same thread is just too much.

Trainers can do a lot more than you seem to think.

I'll use GTAIV as an example.
Developer cheats
Trainer

I bought GTAIV on PC for that trainer. Couldn't care less about easy achievements. Actually I disabled the Windows Live dll as it was being a pain in the ass.

 

[J-Rzez]

What the hell is this shit? Why are they going after this nonsense instead of going after all the people botting MP games where they leave the game in the first 10secs making the game suck for you just so they can go 200-6000 in record but get a pretty portrait?

Once again, Blizzard showing their inability to get their priorities straight. And yes, while this SP stuff is cheating, it was never a big deal in the past, then achievements came along, and they feel they have to be fair to those who actually do find them as "a measuring stick".

 

[Aquavelvaman]

Achievements are the single most destructive thing that has happened to single player gaming. because sometimes you just seriously want to fuck with the game you own and just have fun with it. cheats enhance a game and extend its life if implemented correctly. The only people in this thread that I have a problem with are the achievement whores and corporate ballwashers that rubber stamp everything their favorite companies do. Just because a company can do something and actually does something, doesn't necessarily make it the good and right thing to do. It will do you and the world around you a lot of good if you think about things from outside your narrow perspective in the future.

For the 50th time, you can fully cheat in the game and achievements will be disabled, or you can hack it up and play offline with no problems. The only achievement whore I see is the one in the story who paid for hacks to get achievements.

 

[clav]

Justified.

What other reason would you use a trainer when the game has built-in cheats?

From a programming standpoint, the cheat-scanning program works when you're connected online regardless what you're playing. Sucks that the guy used the trainer while he was online with his battle.net account. As people mentioned already, he should have used his guest account.

 

[ShogunX]

I really dont see what the problem is with this guy getting banned for two weeks. He made the choice and thus took the risk of using a trainer on Blizzards servers and got caught.

Oh and can we please stop with the horrible attitude of ''I dont care about achievements so nobody else should either'' - People put a lot of time and effort into games like this to unlock rewards so why should all that be undermined by people looking for quick and easy access?

You want that sweet new armour or portrait? Earn it.

 

[Liu Kang Baking A Pie]

A response from Blizzard would then be unfortunate, but fair enough. There obviously is a risk involved with modified files.

But I'd wager the creator and users of the CheatHappens trainer had no malicious intent. From their point of view they're facing these ridiculously harsh punishments for cheating in single player.

This crap could all be circumvented if the game has an offline mode, which I assume is the case. Blizzard should perhaps inform users of this before banning them for life and whatnot. But I haven't followed anything Blizzard, so perhaps they have actually done that.

It's a 14 day ban.

 

[VibratingDonkey]

It's a 14 day ban.

For some, their accounts were suspended and for others their CD keys were disabled and they were completely locked out of playing even campaign mode in their legally purchased game.
...
Blizzard’s actions have left many Cheat Happens users with a suspension or much worse, a lifetime ban, it also has many wondering - is it legal?

Am I somehow misinterpreting this or are they stating untruths?

 

[Minsc]

Am I somehow misinterpreting this or are they stating untruths?

If they had a user with a lifetime ban, they'd put his name first, not the guy with a 14-day ban. Make for a much better, sensational story. The lifetime ban user probably got caught with map hacks or something else, in addition to the trainer, that they don't want to mention. Unless you think Blizzard arbitrarily bans its users, which I doubt.

 

[faceless007]

There seems to be a lot of contradicting information going on. To clear up:

Does SC2 have an offline mode the user can enable at will (ala Steam) or is it persistently online? If you want to play single player do you have to sign in to bnet?

Was the guy banned from playing his copy of SC2 altogether or just online?


I actually just bought SC2 the other day but haven't opened it yet. Depending on what's actually true I'm thinking about just returning it.

And this...

Using trainers and hacks, even for singleplayer, is still bad since it is using a very dignified achievement system.

Oh dear God.

 

[Painraze]

There seems to be a lot of contradicting information going on. To clear up:

Does SC2 have an offline mode the user can enable at will (ala Steam) or is it persistently online? If you want to play single player do you have to sign in to bnet?

Was the guy banned from playing his copy of SC2 altogether or just online?


I actually just bought SC2 the other day but haven't opened it yet. Depending on what's actually true I'm thinking about just returning it.

And this...



Oh dear God.

You'd return it over this? Jesus...

To clarify:
- Hacker bought a 3rd party trainer hack for use in single player (but still logged in to bnet) battles in SC2, Blizzard banned him for 14 days.
- During those 14 days the hacker should be able to use an offline 'guest pass' to play the game. Guest passes have to be renewed every 30 days by logging into battle.net at least once.
- After 14 days he can go back to playing as normal with his account information and achievements intact.

"Bu bu does that mean no cheats or mods in SC2??? f u blizz!"
- there are cheats built into SC2 that, when enabled, disable the achievement system
- with the included SC2 map editor you can pretty much mod every single aspect of the game without the need for 3rd party hacks.

 

[X26]

blizzard has gotten way too big

 

[V_Arnold]

You'd return it over this? Jesus...

Some people are very eager to jump on the "I am offended" train, even when it comes to a GOTY-candidate like StarCraft II.

 

[Lostconfused]

Some people are very eager to jump on the "I am offended" train, even when it comes to a GOTY-candidate like StarCraft II.

Or you know people get very concerned when Blizzard might ban them over something that isn't any of their damn business.

 

[Minsc]

And this... (dignified achievement system)



Oh dear God.

Well to be fair, there's seemingly like 100 categories of achievements, all with dozens of achievements. You have the campaign, the online multi, skirmish, and all those have multiple categories, of which there's more categories and achievements, including multi-part achievements, and on top of all that you get rewards for completing them. They really held nothing back, and while for StarCraft 2, achievements don't really do all that much (for me), Diablo 3 will be a whole different story... reward-based achievements in Diablo 3 will be the end of me.

 

[dimb]

Or you know people get very concerned when Blizzard might ban them over something that isn't any of their damn business.

It is their business. Blizzard detected third party software in play.

There is nothing stopping someone using these trainers from jumping into multiplayer other than their good will. These are some of the last people I would trust to turn it off when changing game types.

 

[Liu Kang Baking A Pie]

Or you know people get very concerned when Blizzard might ban them over something that isn't any of their damn business.

I think it's completely their business if people log on to their online service with hacked exe's and shit. And I think the angry people in this thread would normally agree that any company is right to stop this. They're just reading the headline and feigning offense.

 

[Painraze]

Or you know people get very concerned when Blizzard might ban them over something that isn't any of their damn business.

Someone logging in to their online servers with hacked software is their business.

 

[notworksafe]

There seems to be a lot of contradicting information going on. To clear up:

Does SC2 have an offline mode the user can enable at will (ala Steam) or is it persistently online? If you want to play single player do you have to sign in to bnet?

Yes, it's called Guest Mode

Was the guy banned from playing his copy of SC2 altogether or just online?

Banned from playing SC with his BNet account for 14 days. That means no online and no single player for achievements. He can still play SP without the chance for achievements. In 14 days, he'll be back to normal.

 

[Dresden]

Achievements suck.

 

[dimb]

Achievements suck.

They actually open up a lot of interesting sub-objectives that make the Starcraft 2 missions at least somewhat fun.

Thanks for trying though.

 

[DR2K]

..are people actually defending a company remote-bricking your game for any reason at all?

Yeah, it's pretty scary that this is accepted at all especially by people that visit gaming forums.

 

[KaYotiX]

I think it's completely their business if people log on to their online service with hacked exe's and shit. And I think the angry people in this thread would normally agree that any company is right to stop this. They're just reading the headline and feigning offense.

agree!!!

 

[Aquavelvaman]

Yeah, it's pretty scary that this is accepted at all especially by people that visit gaming forums.

What is scarier is that there are so many people who can't briefly read any of the many posts in this thread explaining how the game in question wasn't "bricked" or how the temporary ban is justified.

 

[Minsc]

Yeah, it's pretty scary that this is accepted at all especially by people that visit gaming forums.

I don't know about you, but when I play online, I like to know my opponents are running hacked exes that let them easily cheat. Screw Blizzard.

 

[Nome]

They actually open up a lot of interesting sub-objectives that make the Starcraft 2 missions at least somewhat fun.

Thanks for trying though.

They don't really open up anything. You are free to do those objectives even without achievements. Secondary objectives have existed in games forever--achievements or not. A good game will make players want to perform those objectives for their own fun.

 

[Painraze]

Yeah, it's pretty scary that this is accepted at all especially by people that visit gaming forums.

Yeah man, lets read a heavily biased story, agree with it and rage about it on forums. Nevermind the site that wrote the story also sells the hacks that got the dude banned. :lol

 

[Aquavelvaman]

They don't really open up anything. You are free to do those objectives even without achievements. Secondary objectives have existed in games forever--achievements or not. A good game will make players want to perform those objectives for their own fun.

They don't really detract from anything either. The only difference is that with achievements you get a little badge that says "you did a thing! (without cheating)" under your name. Are we really having an argument about achievements in 2010?

 

[Majine]

It does seem like the people who are offended don't think playing SC2 truthfully is fun...

 

[V_Arnold]

Or you know people get very concerned when Blizzard might ban them over something that isn't any of their damn business.

The moment you modify exe files is the moment you might wanna start to worry. That is when you cross the line.

 

[plagiarize]

Yeah, it's pretty scary that this is accepted at all especially by people that visit gaming forums.

it's pretty scary to me that people like you aren't considering the source of this story.

 

[Minsc]

They don't really open up anything. You are free to do those objectives even without achievements. Secondary objectives have existed in games forever--achievements or not. A good game will make players want to perform those objectives for their own fun.

I'm having trouble thinking of a recent RTS where such things exist to the degree they do in SC2. I'm also curious how you'd put secondary objectives in to multi-player or skirmish.

 

[Lostconfused]

The moment you modify exe files is the moment you might wanna worry. That is when you cross the line.

I just think if some one is going to play single player they can do whatever the hell they want for all I care.

 

[plagiarize]

The moment you modify exe files is the moment you might wanna worry. That is when you cross the line.

to be a pedant, it's the moment you try to use the modified exe files online with your legitimate SC2 account tied to your cd key that you might want to worry.

 

[plagiarize]

I just think if some one is going to play single player they can do whatever the hell they want for all I care.

they can. so long as they're doing it offline. why should blizzard let people connect to their servers with modified exes?

 

[faceless007]

This might be a distinction without a difference, but do we know if the hack is a modified .exe, or a trainer that sits in RAM and modifies memory?

 

[Lostconfused]

they can. so long as they're doing it offline. why should blizzard let people connect to their servers with modified exes?

Because they tied their single player to online.

 

[isny]

It says in any form, but I suspect using trainers and the like.

They already had in-built cheats in warcraft 3 & starcraft. Blizzard have gone downhill in that regard.

The built in cheats stop you from getting achievements in SCII, so that's not what they're banning for. They put those in for you to be able to get through the campaign easily.

 

[V_Arnold]

to be a pedant, it's the moment you try to use the modified exe files online with your legitimate SC2 account tied to your cd key that you might want to worry.

True. People just need to realize they did not buy a 50$ / 60$ lego kit they can do whatever they want with, they bought a limited/unlimited (depending on subscription type and/or region) online access to a content, where they can play single player sessions and/or multiplayers. Hacking the interface they connect to that content means breaking the key to your new apartment. You are gonna need a new key. Or a new account, in this case.

 

[Painraze]

The built in cheats stop you from getting achievements in SCII, so that's not what they're banning for. They put those in for you to be able to get through the campaign easily.

it's as if 99% of the offended people in here have no idea what SC2 or battle.net actually include... feature wise.

just read the thread title and rage on acti-blizz. :lol

 

[Minsc]

Because they tied their single player to online.

Then use hacks that let you play offline, I'd be shocked if they didn't exist. Don't use cheap half-assed trainers/hacks that still connect you to battle.net. Unless of course, you couldn't because your intention was to use your trainer/hack online, which then, Blizzard would have every right to temporarily ban you.

 

[faceless007]

True. People just need to realize they did not buy a 50$ / 60$ lego kit they can do whatever they want with, they bought a limited/unlimited (depending on subscription type and/or region) online access to a content, where they can play single player sessions and/or multiplayers. Hacking the interface they connect to that content means breaking the key to your new apartment. You are gonna need a new key. Or a new account, in this case.

The fact that you, as a consumer, are OK with this radical shift in the way consumer rights have worked for centuries is deeply disturbing, to say the least.