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

Will Code Avarice's Paranautical Activity make its way back onto Steam?:

Shout box

You're not permitted to post shouts.
Andrew EisenWhen I write about these massacres, I don't use the shooter's name or picture. I'm not saying everyone has to play it that way but that's how I prefer to do it.10/25/2014 - 12:44am
Andrew EisenYep, it's why the news media stopped spotlighting numbnuts who run out on the field during sporting events.10/25/2014 - 12:01am
Matthew Wilsonin media research its called the copycat effect. it simply says that if the news covers one mass shooting shooter, it increases the likelihood of another person going on a mass shooting.10/25/2014 - 12:00am
Andrew EisenAgreed. It bugs me that I know the names, faces and personal histories of a bunch of mass shooters but I couldn't tell you the name of or recognize a photo of a single one of their victims.10/24/2014 - 11:51pm
AvalongodAgree with Quiknkold. @Mecha...if that worked we would have figured out how to prevent these long ago.10/24/2014 - 11:32pm
MechaCrashUnfortunately, you have to focus on the perpetrator to figure out the whys so you can try to prevent it from happening again.10/24/2014 - 10:55pm
quiknkoldpoor girl. poor victims. rather focus on them then the shooter. giving too much thought to the monster takes away from the victims.10/24/2014 - 10:15pm
Andrew EisenFor what it's worth, early reports are painting the motive as "he was pissed that a particular girl wouldn't date him."10/24/2014 - 10:12pm
quiknkoldwell then I suck as a man cause I ask for help when necessary :P10/24/2014 - 10:07pm
Technogeek(That said, mostly I was making the smartass evopsych comment because your post seemed like the kind of just-so story that has come to dominate 99% of its usage.)10/24/2014 - 10:04pm
TechnogeekHell, Liam Neeson built his modern career around it. Cultural factors likely play a far greater role than you appear willing to admit.10/24/2014 - 10:03pm
TechnogeekSeriously, though, the idea of "because women are protectors and that's why they never commit school shootings" is, at best, grossly overreductive. There's nothing inherently feminine about being willing to kill in order to protect one's offspring.10/24/2014 - 10:03pm
MechaCrashThe "toxic masculinity" thing refers to how you have to SUCK IT UP AND BE A MAN because seeking help is seen as weakness, which means you suck at manliness, so it builds and builds and builds until something finally snaps.10/24/2014 - 10:01pm
quiknkoldthere, I'm done. And thats what Christmas is all about, Charlie Brown10/24/2014 - 9:54pm
quiknkoldand I am not spouting Evopsych, technogeek. tbh I never heard the phrase till you said it. I'm going off my observations.10/24/2014 - 9:54pm
quiknkoldmoreover, the guy who did this isnt even white. He was native american according to the news report I read. Also that he went for a specific target. That's a much different picture than a certain Sandy Hook guy who will not be named10/24/2014 - 9:53pm
quiknkoldbut I am also certain nobody in their right mind is committing these shootings singing the Machoman song. these are sick individuals who have given up on life10/24/2014 - 9:51pm
Technogeekevopsych lol10/24/2014 - 9:49pm
quiknkoldWhen you suffer from mental illness, youre more likely to go by instinct. yes. I came off as sexist.10/24/2014 - 9:46pm
quiknkoldmore on somthing they are fixated on. Post Partum Depression is an example. This is why a woman is less likely to go off on a rampage.10/24/2014 - 9:44pm
 

Be Heard - Contact Your Politician