Blizzard Says They'll Ban Cheaters

​

At least partly in response to our article last week about Hackers in the StarCraft Top 200, Blizzard released a statement this week concerning their attitude toward cheating in StarCraft 2. The statement clearly outlines that users caught hacking or cheating in any manner will have their Battle.net account banned from Battle.net.

Blizzard Entertainment has always taken cheating in any form in Blizzard games very seriously, and that's no different for StarCraft II. If a StarCraft II player is found to be cheating or using hacks or modifications in any form, then as outlined in our end user license agreement, that player can be permanently banned from the game. This means that the player will be permanently unable to log in to Battle.net to play StarCraft II with his or her account.

Playing StarCraft II legitimately means playing with an unaltered game client. Doing otherwise violates our policies for Battle.net, and it goes against the spirit of fair play that all of our games are based on. We strongly recommend that you avoid using any hacks, cheats, or exploits. Suspensions and bans of players that have used or start using cheats and hacks will begin in the near future.
​

Blizzard also asks that if you suspect a player of cheating and have some form of proof (usually a suspicious replay) you should immediately report the player to support@blizzard.com or via the Battle.net forums.


Unfortunately it still appears that Blizzard has refrained from taking action against cheaters at this time (a number of known cheaters are still playing games) and is continuing to wait for a retroactive ban-hammer session. It might be too late three months in ban thousands!


Source: Blizzard

 

And exactly what are you basing your claim on that it was partly in response to the article last week? Hopefully that is based on something solid, 'cause I'd hate to think you're taking journalism lessons from Fox News.

 

I think Blizzard is planning to a VAC style ban. Don't ban cheaters immediately but much later to ban a whole group of people using that chat because they thought it was safe. Far more effective I think

 

@ Khayman,

Based on the fact that they said they were issuing it because of questions I had raised?

 

Nothing in their statement references your article. I thought you might come respond along the lines that I'm reading your post too literally, but you seem to be actually defending it as fact, which is disconcerting.

But again, you might have a future at Fox News, where journalistic dishonesty is a plus on one's cv. In either case I don't really care much, I was just taken aback when I first saw it.

 

Khayman, your tasteless sarcasm really isn't going to help you being taken seriously.

 

I'd post the MSN conversations with the Blizzard reps but that would be violating my sources.

 

Not if you redact any identifying information, such as their names!

I've got a feeling it wouldn't change how I see it though, but it depends on exactly what they said.

 

KHaYMaN. We're literally the largest StarCraft II forum online (Link. We're so cool, out of the top five links, we're three of them). We raised questions concerning cheaters/hackers and their future playing the game. A few weeks later, Blizz comes out with a statement regarding cheaters/hackers.

A bit much for coincidence, no?

 

Maybe its those pesky social science courses I took in college, or the fact that the article was around the same time I saw replays confirming hacks, but no. Correlation sure, causation no. Without more it really is akin to watching Glenn Beck draw out connections on his chalkboard. I don't know, maybe that imagery is too harsh considering what a douche that guy is (and I think this is a great site), but it's what came to mind when I read it.

 

Doesn't really matter. That sentence in there is really meant more to point out our article more than anything. Whether you choose to believe me or not I suppose it up to you. But I did have extended conversations with Blizzard staff regarding the article and Blizzard's stance toward cheating. These e-mails were sent to all fansites.

 

I don't doubt that you talked to them, I just think it is a major leap to jump from there to the conclusion that their decision to make the announcement had anything to do with those conversations. I personally believe that if this site never existed and those conversations never took place you would have seen the same announcement from Blizzard.

And no, it doesn't matter. And I don't really care that much nor am I trying to be deliberately antagonistic. I visit here to pass the time a bit (web surfing idle time) and the statement took me aback, so it was something to discuss.

 

Your continued whining about it seems to suggest otherwise.

Anyway, Blizzard doesn't come out with these things just because they feel like it. When going with a ban system where you wait quietly, then ban a whole lot of players at once, you just don't tell the community more then needed. If the community raises (valid) questions, such as those originating from Jon's article, then Blizzard does respond to them. I don't really understand how you fail to see the logic behind this.

Maybe AtlasMech's way of thinking has rubbed off on some of our members?

 

Part of a much larger conversation, which included some e-mails...

Which led to the e-mailed cheating statement... Happy?
[/FONT]

 

Oh common Aurora, that's going a bit far, wouldn't you say? Although.... wait..... Jon posted 2 separate conversations with Blizzard... and this thread has 2 pages... and I have made one post on this thread! 2 separate, 1 different! Therefore overlords should be able to be made from the hatchery and have guns. IT ALL MAKES SENSE!
*In honor of AtlasMech* You won't be missed.

 

Actually, yes

But I think it would have been a lot more properly stated referencing the conversations/e-mails in the first place, rather than the article, if at all possible. I.e. even if you were asked not to share the details, referencing the fact that conversations about the topic had taken place.

ps. And if they haven't asked you to sit on the details/transcript I'm surprised you haven't shared them (or ignorant as to where to look), since I imagine a lot of people would find the interview itself very interesting.

@Kayhoff: I apparently missed some very interesting posts.

 

Because journalistic sources are private, not public. I only posted the very small snippets of the e-mails to prove they existed.

 

@KHaYMaN
Yes you did, unfortunately, all his threads have been deleted. Too bad, they were quite funny.

 

and Vnrock ?

In a previows post you wrote about this hacker Vnrock, was he banned now ?

 

I think I heared he was, yes. There was a video released of him on youtube looking at the opponent's army when he had no vision of it and preparing for it.