But you can cheat without any trainers or hacks, there are tons of coded in cheats which give you tons of new toys. But activating them disables achievements (which is just another form of online leader-board) so that you are never at risk. There should be no need for trainers and hack and such and even if you wanted to cheat in a way not previously conceived by the developers you could code the hack to disable achievements or use the hacks offline. But that not what these hackers are doing. They are doing it intentionally to dupe the system. This isn't about a modding community or trying to have more fun with the game. These are people fully aware that they are doing something wrong and intentionally code the trainer to give them extra achievements and prestige in multiplayer. There is no way that the score you got from your cheating session will get uploaded unless you intentionally hack the game to do so.Arehexes said:No the mass effect 1 game would have a DRM feature were you have to be online to play it and if your not it would not work (just like AS2). But people in the military complained about how they couldn't be online to play when they are on the field. Which like you said is abusive DRM. But let me ask this from gamer to gamer, if you play a RPG (Tales of Verperia is my example) with no multiplayer (outside of DLC which is just to give you money and items and levels, and local in battle co-op). And you wanted to hack just so you can beat up every boss who gave you nightmares with petty revenge (which is fun, I'll never forget making the Ultima Weapon boss in FF6 my *****). And it uploaded your score to the leaderboard (which it does have) should you be banned for hacking even though you didn't do it for scores or achievements? The problem we are trying to say is, that single player games are being integrated with some weird online gimmick that isn't needed, just so you have to follow their rules to the tee or your banned. But that's not all, a few games have had their start from mods, like counter strike and team fortress (both were mods of other games). And Glaboo who made Game Gennie was even sued by nintendo for the same thing this is about here. And Glaboo won.Spencer Petersen said:I thought you were saying they wanted to add an online feature to Mass Effect, which I would support, but they were wanting to add a Ubisoft-style single player server system?! That's just shit, EA just dropped a point for even thinking about that. Abusive DRM is bad, I agree, but if I'm going to be playing against other people in what is supposed to be a fair and balanced environment I'd rather take the one that stops hackers than the one who lets them run rampant.Garak73 said:More DRM is not a feature that helps gamers, it is a restriction.Spencer Petersen said:And we all know, removing features is better than adding them!Arehexes said:Well EA was going to make mass effect online only but didn't because people complained about how some can't be online all the time.Spencer Petersen said:We need to stop EA now before they release their virus to turn our computers to Decepticons.Garak73 said:After it's done is a terrible time to object but if you want to wait till then, we'll be talking about this in a year or two.Spencer Petersen said:Did I miss some big announcement saying that Blizzard was planning to axe offline singleplayer? Or are people just pulling conspiracies out of thin air?Arehexes said:Offline single player games are going to be gone with PC games, look at Assassin Creed II, if you can't log into the Ubisoft server you can't play it AT ALL. And it's Single Player online ONLY so yeah. If companies start attaching "leader boards" to single player games (which some single player RPGs do now), they can claim the same thing Blizzard is doing. Now if I wanted to cheat in my copy of Tales of Vesperia for the fun of it should I be banned because it keeps the score on the leader boards and "ruins the online experience of the other players"(which I don't even want to be a part of). Think about it, single player for everything but the leader boards so it still has a "online" component, which Namco could use to ban cheaters.Spencer Petersen said:Why do you seem so keen on jumping to the aid of people who honestly just care about their achievement points and online prestige? Actual multiplayer hacks do exist and are being produced by companies like this with the sole intent of fucking everyone who plays this game. I'm sorry if I don't support people whose sole intent is to invalidate any work I or anyone put into the harder achievements for their own self serving intent. Not to mention there is no need for these hacks in a single player environment anyway due to there being cheat codes already embedded in the game.Garak73 said:Yeah cause suing people is the ONLY way to ensure that the multiplayer experience isn't ruined.Spencer Petersen said:Its the lesser of two evils, either allow hackers to run rampant on your game or take a hard stance with them, and I think this is the better option. I'd rather a couple greedy fucks lose their game and right to illegally alter a multiplayer system they have to ruin for all of us, than let the entire multiplayer experience turn into a cesspool of hackers because the developers refused to take any action.
Here's what we've learned. If you tie single player to multiplayer (in even the smallest of ways) you can maintain complete control over your game and gamers will support you.
The future is looking bright where true single player gameplay all but disappears and is replaced by "always online" single player.
You also keep making the point of single-player online. My answer, play in offline mode, simple, effective, and solves all your problems, now stop trying to ruin it for everyone else. And if you plan on quoting this I want you to give a definitive answer on why offline single player doesn't work for you.
And yes I agree that Ubisoft's DRM policy is the embodiment of Satan, but in my experience Blizzard is a bit more rational than them, so I doubt Heart of the Swarm or Legacy of the Void are going to have single player servers. If they did I would be pissed, but until then I'm going to keep calm about this.
After its done will be a terrible time to object, but if you want to wait well be talking about this in a year or two.
We all know the signs are pointing to it.
(See? I can claim to see the future too)
Digital Restrictions Management is what DRM really stands for. Maybe one day that will be clear to you.
And SC2 has a massive modding community. Tons of custom maps are being made and they use all sorts of new multiplayer methods, and the best are being featured by Blizzard. An old WC3 mod is now going to be released as a full game by Valve eventually and we may see some SC2 mods gain popularity. And these custom games feature tons of cheats and the like (although facing a godmode opponent isn't very fun) and are fully supported by Blizzard. The modding community isn't really at risk here, its just people trying to hack it for their own personal greed.