Blizzard Banning Single Player Cheaters?

[Lucane]

Maybe they have copies of them on thier or some website somewhere or another.

That still isn't acceptable. If you're going to buy a product that has a contract, the person selling you the item needs to provide the contract at the point of sale. If they don't do that, the contract is null and void.

*EDIT* In other words, it's like buying a phone on contract, but the company offering the phone doesn't tell you that you only get 500 free minutes until after you've gone over that.

Well actually it's fine for what your actually buying.Your buying the box(disc,manual,case,etc)like buying a pre-paid phone (case,phone,charger,etc)you bought a phsyical object not the service it provides(which should have what is required to operate/access it on the packaging like internet access and/or a contact phone number.) It's not there fault Stores don't honor full/partial returns on certin opened products like PC games/music discs/DVDs/Blu-rays. Since the data could have been damaged/tampered with/copied with no way to verify if any copies of a specific disc exsist in a way that could be tracked properly without being illegal.

A pre-paid phone doesn't have a contract with it. A pay-monthly phone does, as do video games now. If something has a contract, they NEED to show you up front what is in the contract, so you know exactly what you are buying, and so you can agree to the terms of the contract. If that wasn't a legal requirement, then they could add all sorts of shit to the contract afterwards, and you wouldn't be able to do anything about because you bought the product and you agreed to the contract (you never actually saw).

This is the reason there is very little chance the EULA will hold up in court.

Well Starcraft 2 isn't monthly though, anyway just becuase I buy a copy of SC2 doesn't mean I'm the intended user they'd have to verify that at time of purchase like when you buy a contract phone(fill out/sign the contract at time of purchase) so you could buy a dozen copies of SC2 and keep them yourself or give them away (doing that with a contracted monthly phone would likely be a breach of contract.)

 

[Lucane]

using trainers is a violation of the EULA, who's to tell that a cheat that modifies game code couldn't easily do so for multiplayer.

Who's to say that your car won't be used to kill someone?

I don't think Car companies care if you want to use thier vehicle for man-slaughter it's already illegal.

It doesn't matter if they care, it matters what they do and if they took away your keys....

My point is, if you aren't cheating in multiplayer, then banning you on the assumption that you might is wrong.

It's more like you bought a car and punched someone working in the car-lot and they ban you buying there again or just entering the area (as yourself if you go in desguise[different account] who's to know it's you.)

 

[NezumiiroKitsune]

It does supplement or in this case bypass routines in the orginal code. As I said in my edit, if you're not breaking any online regulations, mod however you like. Also it doesn't modify the RAM, it modifies the data stored in the RAM, and that data is the intellectual property of the developer.

The design of chair also have a intellectual property owner but no one can fault me for breaking it and using the piece as firewood.

There are no laws protecting how chairs are used, probably because thousands of jobs and millions of (insert currency) aren't at stake. Much of agreement isn't directly intended for the player, but to prevent other companies reusing code, or stealing the engine, but the law can't apply to some people and not others. Anyone who can open manipulate how a game operates at start-up has the power to distribute open copies of the game. If you somehow stole the design secrets of the carpenter by taking the chair apart, and then tried to sell those ideas as your own, he/she would likely have a case against you there.

 

[sosolidshoe]

First, everyone saying that they "own" the product needs to look up software licensing. You don't own shit.

Secondly, read what this guy says.

Even cheating in single-player using 3rd party methods rather than the usual built-in codes is still using 3rd party software to hack, modify and abuse the game. Wether used in multiplayer or not, I can imagine Blizzard might take issue with people screwing with their magnum opus.

Allowing use of third-party tools to modify their product is a slippery slope. You want to cheat, use the cheats. If you want achievements, don't cheat. I don't see how this is complex.

- J

Don't know about your nation chief, but here we have consumer protection laws, and under those laws once I have purchased a product sold in a commercial retail premises, I own it. A company can include a licensed agreement for services, however there is no way you could justify classing the single-player portion of a game as a service, it's a product. Hence, why they can ban people from multiplayer for breaching a license agreement, as they use Blizzard's servers, but why I am pretty certain it's illegal for them to do so for the singleplayer, because that is entirely present on the disc which was bought over the counter.

I might edit in more here once I catch up with the thread. And now I continue:

EULAs are not legally binding. You can argue this until you're blue in the face, but it's simply fact. They can claim anything they want in the EULA, and you are free to click "accept" without any worries, because if it ever comes to court you will walk out laughing, and they will have nothing to show for it beyond a huge lawyer's bill. Yelling "EULA! EULA!" will not change the fact that Blizzard cannot ban someone from using a product which they payed for, because it is no longer their property, and thus they no longer retain control over it in a legal context.

They CAN ban people for multiplayer cheating, because it is a service which they provide, and a company can define rules for use of a service, and withdraw it at their discretion. I really hope one of the players they banned over this contacts the EFF and takes it to court, we need a legal precedent set so companies stop pulling shit like this.

 

[NezumiiroKitsune]

If the only reason for these mods is to bypass the security that prevents single player games where cheats are used to affect the gamer score and online achievements, I agree with Blizzards decision to block these people. Especially since Microsoft are in talks with games retailers to make the gamerscore and achievements mean something, similarly with Playstation's trophies. Abusing the game to cheat ANY online aspect unless, like in DoW, you are specifically given the option TO allow cheats, is inherently unethical, and damaging to the developers and the unfair to players who put the effort in. Or otherwise chastise them, removing the ill gotten achievements or suspension. I support their decision to take action against them at least.

If they start getting zealous about mods that don't affect any online factors, then that I'd contest, it's up to the player what they do with game (with the exception of decompiling, reverse engineering etc...).

The achievement only affect online factors because Blizzard designed it that way. Think about it.

I must point out that Oblivion had built in cheats (PC version only I think) but most people who play the PC version mod the shit out of it. How should Bethesda react?

Bethesda released the Elder Scrolls Creation Kit with every copy of the game, if they didn't intend that to be used to mod the game, I don't know what they were thinking.

So what you are saying is that you can only mod a game if the developer says it's ok?

It is very difficult to mod a game (without sanctioned modding tools) without breaking the license agreement, in that it would require you manipulating the games code directly, which since as far back as I remember has been illegal. What this means is, anyone who does modify a game without any tools sanctioned by the developer or compatible with the engine (i.e. Aurora), then they're unlikely to be doing it for ethical reasons. So not exactly, what I was at first saying is that any manipulations to the game that affect any online aspect, especially gamerscore and PS levels in this case, should be cause for action being taken against them, since I have it on good authority that these things won't merely be boasting rights for the terminally house bound. If however, you want to mod a game without the aid of any sanctioned modding tools, such as decompilers, you are at risk of more than being banned.

tl;dr? Yeah, it's up the developer what you're allowed to do.

If it were up to the developer what you were allowed to do then Galoob would have lost the case Nintendo brought against them.

You do know how cheating devices work right? They modify the RAM at runtime. That's what mods do as well. Neither overwrites the original game code.

Remind me again who bought the RAM in my computer?

It does supplement or in this case bypass routines in the orginal code. As I said in my edit, if you're not breaking any online regulations, mod however you like. Also it doesn't modify the RAM, it modifies the data stored in the RAM, and that data is the intellectual property of the developer.

Then maybe you can tell me why Galoob won that case? What did the Game Genie do differently than a trainer?

Have better lawyers than Nintendo? I don't know, I've never even heard of the case.

 

[NezumiiroKitsune]

If the only reason for these mods is to bypass the security that prevents single player games where cheats are used to affect the gamer score and online achievements, I agree with Blizzards decision to block these people. Especially since Microsoft are in talks with games retailers to make the gamerscore and achievements mean something, similarly with Playstation's trophies. Abusing the game to cheat ANY online aspect unless, like in DoW, you are specifically given the option TO allow cheats, is inherently unethical, and damaging to the developers and the unfair to players who put the effort in. Or otherwise chastise them, removing the ill gotten achievements or suspension. I support their decision to take action against them at least.

If they start getting zealous about mods that don't affect any online factors, then that I'd contest, it's up to the player what they do with game (with the exception of decompiling, reverse engineering etc...).

The achievement only affect online factors because Blizzard designed it that way. Think about it.

I must point out that Oblivion had built in cheats (PC version only I think) but most people who play the PC version mod the shit out of it. How should Bethesda react?

Bethesda released the Elder Scrolls Creation Kit with every copy of the game, if they didn't intend that to be used to mod the game, I don't know what they were thinking.

So what you are saying is that you can only mod a game if the developer says it's ok?

It is very difficult to mod a game (without sanctioned modding tools) without breaking the license agreement, in that it would require you manipulating the games code directly, which since as far back as I remember has been illegal. What this means is, anyone who does modify a game without any tools sanctioned by the developer or compatible with the engine (i.e. Aurora), then they're unlikely to be doing it for ethical reasons. So not exactly, what I was at first saying is that any manipulations to the game that affect any online aspect, especially gamerscore and PS levels in this case, should be cause for action being taken against them, since I have it on good authority that these things won't merely be boasting rights for the terminally house bound. If however, you want to mod a game without the aid of any sanctioned modding tools, such as decompilers, you are at risk of more than being banned.

tl;dr? Yeah, it's up the developer what you're allowed to do.

If it were up to the developer what you were allowed to do then Galoob would have lost the case Nintendo brought against them.

You do know how cheating devices work right? They modify the RAM at runtime. That's what mods do as well. Neither overwrites the original game code.

Remind me again who bought the RAM in my computer?

It does supplement or in this case bypass routines in the orginal code. As I said in my edit, if you're not breaking any online regulations, mod however you like. Also it doesn't modify the RAM, it modifies the data stored in the RAM, and that data is the intellectual property of the developer.

Then maybe you can tell me why Galoob won that case? What did the Game Genie do differently than a trainer?

Have better lawyers than Nintendo? I don't know, I've never even heard of the case.

I linked to it in this thread, I don't wanna go find the link again but:

Basically Nintendo didn't want players cheating with their games (NES era) by using the Game Genie so they took Galoob (maker of GG) to court. It was ruled that the Game Genie is legal because it is not infringing on Nintendo's copyrights because it only temporarily modifies the code and doesn't overwrite it. It was also ruled that it falls under "fair use" laws for consumers. IMO, the game cartridge (where the code resides), the NES (where the RAM resides) and the Game Genie (alters the code in RAM) all were bought, not rented by the consumer.

If this is still the case, then maybe there is nothing wrong with it as long as it doesn't bypass security measures, like serial codes. I'm personally okay with it legal or not if all we're doing is making mods to supplement and enhance the game, or even cheat as long as it's not affecting any online features.

I see them as having altered the EULA since then to secure themselves against a wider range of hacks and mods that would compromise the integrity of the game and the rights of the developers. I'd have to read the EULA that comes with Starcraft 2. If they haven't since then, I'd be frankly very surprised, but also pleased.

 

[AnAngryMoose]

The thing is. Starcraft 2 has its own inbuilt cheats. However, if you use SC2's cheats, your singleplayer achievements for that campaign are disabled. Using external tools means circumventing Blizzard's rules, not to mention they wouldn't accept 3rd party apps in the first place whatever their purpose.

This. Hit the nail right on the head.

 

[kouriichi]

Cheating is cheating. Offline or online :/
I dont care so much if its offline. But if its online, you need to get banned.
Because the singleplayer for starcraft has online achivements, cheating in it should get you banned quickly. The idea of a "Victimless crime" is pointless one, because crime has to have a victim to be one.

now i play Modern Warfare 2, and i rented Reach, and there are boosters in both. And boosting litterally breaks the Matchmaking in halo. Everyone who honestly earned theyer achivements and unlocks is chuncked in with the cheaters. :/ i know 3 people who legitimately hit 10th Prestige, and they were all called boosters or cheats. Even though they worked for theyer titles and unlocks.

To exploit is to show a clear lack of morals and commitment, and it should be an offence that will get you banned. you didnt earn your work, so you dont desever it. Plain and Simple.

 

[NezumiiroKitsune]

If the only reason for these mods is to bypass the security that prevents single player games where cheats are used to affect the gamer score and online achievements, I agree with Blizzards decision to block these people. Especially since Microsoft are in talks with games retailers to make the gamerscore and achievements mean something, similarly with Playstation's trophies. Abusing the game to cheat ANY online aspect unless, like in DoW, you are specifically given the option TO allow cheats, is inherently unethical, and damaging to the developers and the unfair to players who put the effort in. Or otherwise chastise them, removing the ill gotten achievements or suspension. I support their decision to take action against them at least.

If they start getting zealous about mods that don't affect any online factors, then that I'd contest, it's up to the player what they do with game (with the exception of decompiling, reverse engineering etc...).

The achievement only affect online factors because Blizzard designed it that way. Think about it.

I must point out that Oblivion had built in cheats (PC version only I think) but most people who play the PC version mod the shit out of it. How should Bethesda react?

Bethesda released the Elder Scrolls Creation Kit with every copy of the game, if they didn't intend that to be used to mod the game, I don't know what they were thinking.

So what you are saying is that you can only mod a game if the developer says it's ok?

It is very difficult to mod a game (without sanctioned modding tools) without breaking the license agreement, in that it would require you manipulating the games code directly, which since as far back as I remember has been illegal. What this means is, anyone who does modify a game without any tools sanctioned by the developer or compatible with the engine (i.e. Aurora), then they're unlikely to be doing it for ethical reasons. So not exactly, what I was at first saying is that any manipulations to the game that affect any online aspect, especially gamerscore and PS levels in this case, should be cause for action being taken against them, since I have it on good authority that these things won't merely be boasting rights for the terminally house bound. If however, you want to mod a game without the aid of any sanctioned modding tools, such as decompilers, you are at risk of more than being banned.

tl;dr? Yeah, it's up the developer what you're allowed to do.

If it were up to the developer what you were allowed to do then Galoob would have lost the case Nintendo brought against them.

You do know how cheating devices work right? They modify the RAM at runtime. That's what mods do as well. Neither overwrites the original game code.

Remind me again who bought the RAM in my computer?

It does supplement or in this case bypass routines in the orginal code. As I said in my edit, if you're not breaking any online regulations, mod however you like. Also it doesn't modify the RAM, it modifies the data stored in the RAM, and that data is the intellectual property of the developer.

Then maybe you can tell me why Galoob won that case? What did the Game Genie do differently than a trainer?

Have better lawyers than Nintendo? I don't know, I've never even heard of the case.

I linked to it in this thread, I don't wanna go find the link again but:

Basically Nintendo didn't want players cheating with their games (NES era) by using the Game Genie so they took Galoob (maker of GG) to court. It was ruled that the Game Genie is legal because it is not infringing on Nintendo's copyrights because it only temporarily modifies the code and doesn't overwrite it. It was also ruled that it falls under "fair use" laws for consumers. IMO, the game cartridge (where the code resides), the NES (where the RAM resides) and the Game Genie (alters the code in RAM) all were bought, not rented by the consumer.

If this is still the case, then maybe there is nothing wrong with it as long as it doesn't bypass security measures, like serial codes. I'm personally okay with it legal or not if all we're doing is making mods to supplement and enhance the game, or even cheat as long as it's not affecting any online features.

I see them as having altered the EULA since then to secure themselves against a wider range of hacks and mods that would compromise the integrity of the game and the rights of the developers. I'd have to read the EULA that comes with Starcraft 2. If they haven't since then, I'd be frankly very surprised, but also pleased.

What the EULA says is irrelevant since it isn't legally binding.

Let me put it this way, what if Nintendo had started printing something like this in their manuals: "Use of the Game Genie with this cartridge will render your right to play this game null and void". Would that have changed anything? Would Nintendo have been able to send someone to your house to remove the cartridge from you since that is the only way they could prevent you from playing (Blizzard is just using a different method, the internet to achieve the same goal).

I think I see what you're saying about Blizzard. I don't think they gave the game single player achievements TO prevent people from modding, I think they discovered this was possible after release and had to take action. Though it might have been more vindictive and castrating, this is true. If the mods don't affect online at all, would they take action then? Future modders should seek to avoid allowing mods to affect anything but their experience, or a shared mutual experience (such as LAN), and Blizzard should work on releasing a patch that, rather than making it difficult for modders to avoid affecting online, make it difficult for mods to affect any online play. Then as long as nothing else is being infringed, both parties should be happy.

If Nintendo wanted to do that, I expect they'd flash the memory rather than take the cartridge off you.

Also the DMCA and the EUCD were only passed in 1998 and 2001, so copyright law has since changed.

 

[kouriichi]

snip

*sigh*
Except that unlike in Halo or Modern Warfare, the achievements in SC2 mean nothing. Null. Not even for the players. Nor does the way the guy acquired them in any way harm anyone else. If you do not believe in the term 'victimless crime', then this is not a crime at all. It's just laziness.

:/ and what about all those people who earned theyer achivements? ((im not one of them))
your saying everyone who accually works for theyer achivements deserve to be lumped in with the cheater?
Why would you even be going for the achievements in the game if they mean nothing? Your cheating for nothing?
xD So your saying, cheating for something that does nothing for you if ok because theres no point in cheating for it to begin with?