Poll: It's really time to stop supporting Blizzard

[SinisterGehe]

You broke the ToS or EULA you get punished. Welcome to the real world.
Beside, in SC2 your campaign achievements are shared with Multiplayer achievements... And getting them Is showingoff for your skills so cheating in there means you cheat the community.

 

[Dogstile]

Edit:

I found nothing wrong with cheating that way to get achievements. It makes some people happy, it has no effect on multiplayer gameplay. Let them do it. It's like banning people for using a third party program to mess around in saints row.

I disagree. The Achievements in SC2, and the rewards, represent the hard work and effort that people have put in to getting them. For example, I am currently using the Sarah Kerrigan portrait for my SC2 character, which I got for completing the single player campaign on the hardest difficulty. This portrait is not just some picture. It is a representation of my triumph over the game, and the fact I set it as my portrait shows people that I am damned proud of it. For some dude to get the same reward because he cheated with some trainer would undermine my accomplishment, as well as those of the other people who have gotten the achievements the hard way. I'll reiterate that their are cheats built into the game, and that anyone who found the game too hard or whatever could have used them, though naturally this prevents them from getting achievements. Since they did not do so, I assume they were deliberately cheating the system and trying to get the achievements with earning them. And that upsets me.

You've got to be kidding me. A cheater can have the same portrait as you, so you're upset? Do you have any idea how childish that sounds. Be proud of your achievement, you've done it, well done. Just because a cheater could have the same portrait as you doesn't make your achievement any less noteworthy.

That's like crying over saving up for a toy for 3 months then crying because another kids dad brought it for him instead of that kid saving up too.

It may indeed be immature and childish. But, as I tried to say, though not very well, it seems, the portraits and other rewards are about more than the rewards themselves. They are representations of the accomplishments I, and others, have accomplished. While I do not advocate banning a person from their game solely for cheating to get achievements, and instead think their achievements should instead be wiped and the offender given a stern warning for the first offence, achievements are important. Not to you, maybe. Not to them, either, perhaps. But they are to me. That portrait isn't just a picture. It is the culmination of dozens of hours of effort.

Ah right, you never mentioned not supporting the ban. In which case continue on your way good sir. I have no beef with you. Unless there's an awesome beef bar down the road. In which case I gladly will have beef with you.

 

[Estarc]

I disagree. The Achievements in SC2, and the rewards, represent the hard work and effort that people have put in to getting them. For example, I am currently using the Sarah Kerrigan portrait for my SC2 character, which I got for completing the single player campaign on the hardest difficulty. This portrait is not just some picture. It is a representation of my triumph over the game, and the fact I set it as my portrait shows people that I am damned proud of it. For some dude to get the same reward because he cheated with some trainer would undermine my accomplishment, as well as those of the other people who have gotten the achievements the hard way. I'll reiterate that their are cheats built into the game, and that anyone who found the game too hard or whatever could have used them, though naturally this prevents them from getting achievements. Since they did not do so, I assume they were deliberately cheating the system and trying to get the achievements with earning them. And that upsets me.

It's quite sad that in todays gaming world, the experience is less important than the rewards. It's even more sad that once you buy the game you still have to conform to the developers (or in this case publishers) will. Who gives a fuck that you completed the game on hard and got a portray? Does it really matter in the end? Is it justified to create such a closed environment like Bnet 2.0 "just" so that some arbitrary things like achievements can be put in?

Yes, cheats exist in the game but maybe that's not what I'm looking for. Maybe I need more out of the game than just simple cheats. It's MY game, MY single player experience and I want to play it how I want to play it and not how the developer tells me to. Achievements are a lame excuse for a ban. They're useless scores that you gain nothing from. Wait, sorry. You get some useless portray because as we all know, that's what's important about a game, the achievements and rewards.

This isn't even about cheating anymore. This is about doing what I want with my single player game. This is about playing how I want and not how someone else tells me. This is even more proof that Activision meddled where it shouldn't have meddled. Instead of say, rolling back the achievements Blizzard chooses to ban the account entirely. The ban was NOT justified.

Once the dude payed for the game Blizzard could give a flying shit about him and giving that the way StarCraft 2 works is like an MMO they can ban you from YOUR game entirely just because you modded it or used a trainer. It's insane. Is this how games will work from now on?

I made the mistake of buying StarCraft 2 and supporting this medieval system. I won't be doing the same mistake twice.

As you said, mate, the issue at hand isn't the issue for you anymore. It is true that, without battle.net, people could use trainers in their single player game as much as they want. But the reality is that battle.net is here to stay. And, since I am not a trainer-using-cheat (not to imply that you are, of course) I love it. It streamlines multiplayer, and the achievements have really added to my single player experience. Obtaining them was damn fun.

Anyway, I doubt you can understand this, since you obviously don't give two shits about achievements, but they are more than just "stupid portraits". They represent the hours of effort that have gone into earning them. If I spend twenty hours working to get one achievement, how is it fair for some dude to just come along and snap it up in a fraction of the time, with no effort thanks to his trainer?

 

[ENKC]

Boo hoo, Blizzard expects people to PLAY the game to unlock achievements instead of just hacking them. They deserve praise, not condemnation.

 

[Admiral Stukov]

The time to stop supporting Blizz was over a year ago, with thier horrendus Wrath of the Lich King expansion.
Besides SC2 already have cheats for SP that disable achievments, you don't deserve achievments if you cheat.
I think Blizzard is begining to shape up again.

 

[ParkourMcGhee]

That takes the piss considering that they have their own in game cheats - the only difference is the achievements - which in my opinion are worthless anyway.

Chill out Blizzard o0.

 

[Talvrae]

I always taught that Blizzard was overrated anyway

 

[Oliver Pink]

I do like Diablo, and I do like Starcraft...

I'll make my mind up when the time comes.

 

[AndyFromMonday]

As you said, mate, the issue at hand isn't the issue for you anymore. It is true that, without battle.net, people could use trainers in their single player game as much as they want.

I think you miss the point entirely. Battle.net takes control AWAY from the player and gives it to the developer. THAT'S my problem with the current system.

But the reality is that battle.net is here to stay.

That depends on how gamers treat it. I hope someday they will realize what Blizzard, or rather Kotick, is doing and will cease buying games made by Blizzard.

And, since I am not a trainer-using-cheat

And what's the problem with using trainers? Should I not play my single player the way I want to and the way I believe I'll have fun?

It streamlines multiplayer

How?

and the achievements have really added to my single player experience.

How? Isn't the experience worth a billion achievements? Isn't the experience more IMPORTANT than the achievements? Is it really necessary to fling your achievements in front of everyone? Isn't the ability to do what you want with your game worth more than arbitrary achievements?

Anyway, I doubt you can understand this, since you obviously don't give two shits about achievements

I don't. I find the experience more satisfying than the score I get from it. Just like when I go to bowling with my friends I don't care about the score but about the experience.

but they are more than just "stupid portraits".

No they're not.

They represent the hours of effort that have gone into earning them.

So that's how you view games? "Hours of effort" just so you can fling some digital score in front of someone? Are you really in that much need of gratification?

If I spend twenty hours working to get one achievement, how is it fair for some dude to just come along and snap it up in a fraction of the time, with no effort thanks to his trainer?

I'm going to answer that question with another. Why did you spend twenty hours getting an achievement? Achievements should be a bonus and not something to strive for. The experience will always be more valuable than the score.

 

[David Bray]

Ok, so fucking with single-players is a bit unfair, that i grant you, but boycott the most consistant game company out there? No thanks

 

[HellsingerAngel]

-snip-

To you they may mean nothing, but to others they're a badge of honour. What you're doing right now is detracting from the gratification he gets from playing the game his way, which is exactly what you're trying to demote. Stop being a hypocrit. Achievements mean more to some than others.

As for the game, single-player is still fully functional with your B.Net account banned. Looks like cheathappens.com just wants some press and is willing to create a shitstorm to get it.

 

[DSK-]

TLRidn't Care

The game comes with single player cheats built in that aren't any violation of the terms of use. Outside cheats, trainers or other such programs are violations of the terms of use. Don't be overly surprised if you gamble and lose when doing something that carries risk.

Outside cheats, heavy risk...

But the prize!

lol, sorry, couldn't resist.

I think I'm the only one who got that :>

 

[Kif]

I don't see the necessity to cheat in the first place...

BUT, if you absolutely have to the game has cheat codes Blizzard were good enough to build into it, I've just checked on GameFAQs. So why use a third party app and line yourself up for a ban? They probably cant tell what trainers or hacks exactly someone is using and whether they are single player only which means it's a risk to them to let any stay in use.

 

[The Mighty Thesaurus]

I will "boycott" them, but only because I don't actually like any of their games.

 

[AndyFromMonday]

To you they may mean nothing, but to others they're a badge of honour. What you're doing right now is detracting from the gratification he gets from playing the game his way, which is exactly what you're trying to demote. Stop being a hypocrit. Achievements mean more to some than others.

You failed to respond to all my questions. To quote myself: "Isn't the ability to do what you want with your game worth more than arbitrary achievements?"

By all means, add achievements. The moment they are used to limit the liberty I have with my game is the moment I will have a problem with the developer. You're basically telling me that I cannot enjoy my game the way I want to because you need some sort of gratification for killing that Brutalisk. You just admitted you are an attention whore. You want everyone to know you finished the campaign on hard and you want everyone to glare at your awesomeness. That's why you "want" achievements and through that you're forgetting that you're forcing others to conform. Gamers have been getting the same satisfaction you're getting for years without achievements. How come they have become so important now?

Achievements have been avoided in SP PC games for a reason. They are impossible to introduce correctly without the need to be constantly online. Are you seriously saying that for some small gratification you get we should all conform to the idea of having to be constantly online and having no liberties at all with our games?

As for the game, single-player is still fully functional with your B.Net account banned. Looks like cheathappens.com just wants some press and is willing to create a shitstorm to get it.

Yeah, as a guest. I am not a guest. I am the OWNER of that game. Even so, as a guest you can't mod the game files to your liking.

 

[Estarc]

I think you miss the point entirely. Battle.net takes control AWAY from the player and gives it to the developer. THAT'S my problem with the current system.

Indeed, this is not a trend I hope all developers follow. While I think it works, mostly, for StarCraft II, I don't want to see it being applied to all games.

That depends on how gamers treat it. I hope someday they will realize what Blizzard, or rather Kotick, is doing and will cease buying games made by Blizzard.

I personally do not believe Blizzard will ever remove Battle.net. They were willing to sacrifice LAN support for it, man. Misguided or not, they are firmly set on their course.

And what's the problem with using trainers? Should I not play my single player the way I want to and the way I believe I'll have fun?

Frankly, I don't care how other people play their single player game. But these trainers can be used to cheat in the online multiplayer, or so I gathered, and that is unacceptable. What makes trainers worth it, anyway? What do they give you that the cheats Blizzard put in the game don't?

How?

I never played online in the original StarCraft. But this system makes it so easy, and matches you up for the most part against players reasonably close to your own level. If the system was the same as that in the original StarCraft, I'd never go online.

How? Isn't the experience worth a billion achievements? Isn't the experience more IMPORTANT than the achievements? Is it really necessary to fling your achievements in front of everyone? Isn't the ability to do what you want with your game worth more than arbitrary achievements?

The achievements are part of the experience. For example, one achievement on the mission "The Dig" is to destroy 50 enemy buildings on what is essentially a defence map. The points I got for managing it are pointless, no pun intended. But the fact that the achievement was there drove me to strive to do just that. I had a lot of fun, and if not for the achievement would never have even tried doing that.

I don't. I find the experience more satisfying than the score I get from it. Just like when I go to bowling with my friends I don't care about the score but about the experience.

I view the achievements as part of the experience. I don't get them so I can claim my e-penis is bigger than anyone else's. I get them because I enjoy doing so.

No they're not.

Yes they are.

So that's how you view games? "Hours of effort" just so you can fling some digital score in front of someone? Are you really in that much need of gratification?

Don't presume to know anything about me. I have never "flung my digital score" in anyone's face. Not guys I meet on the internet, not my friends, no one. I play games for my own enjoyment. With one or two exceptions, I prefer single player games, like RPGs.

I'm going to answer that question with another. Why did you spend twenty hours getting an achievement? Achievements should be a bonus and not something to strive for. The experience will always be more valuable than the score.

That, my friend, is nothing more than your opinion. It is not a universal truth. It may be the truth for you, but not for me. The achievements are small things, it is true. There is no real difference beating the game on the hardest difficulty and getting an achievement, compared to doing the same on a game without them. But the achievement is what serves to motivate me. In other games, such as Bayonetta and Resident Evil 4, it is in game items. I prefer that method, but achievements get me motivated as well.

Anyway, ultimately I do not support banning people who use trainers from the game entirely. I think that a warning should be given for the first offence, along with a wipe of any earned achievements and stats. And repeat offenders should face a punishment no more severe than banning them from the multiplayer, while still giving them access to the single player.

 

[WilliamRLBaker]

The time to stop supporting Blizzard was 04.

or when they released starcraft...I've played it finally this year...and I just can't see how people were suckered in its single player wasn't very good bad story, bad characters, bad voice acting.

when has it ever been awesome to have a confederate empire in space with its generals speaking with southern accents? it wasn't cool on firefly...its not cool in starcraft.

Banning people from online play and even disabling them from playing the game completely in any form because of single player cheats? yeah.

Frankly, I don't care how other people play their single player game. But these trainers can be used to cheat in the online multiplayer, or so I gathered, and that is unacceptable. What makes trainers worth it, anyway? What do they give you that the cheats Blizzard put in the game don't?

actually quite a few of the trainers getting banned are only capable of single player cheats not multiplayer.

 

[Ch@Z]

I'm boycotting Blizzard for a different reason..... Region lock!! Also the fact that their games are 60$ not 50$.