Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Bungie Wields the Banhammer

Posted by Zonk on from the banhammer-my-favorite-game-journo-shorthand dept.

Gamespot reports that an update to Halo 2 via Xbox live has dropped the hammer on cheaters who have been warned in previous weeks to cease their malicious ways. From the article: "These undefeatable foes aren't some new alien species that have invaded the ruckus created by Bungie. These are the work of hackers and modders, gamers who spend time improving their stats with cheats at the expense of others. As with any high-profile title, cheaters will run rampant in an effort to 'pwn n00bs' and generally frustrate those who play fairly. Bungie has not taken kindly to these folk."

56 comments

  1. About Time by kilocomp · · Score: 3, Insightful

    As an H2 player I have seen a number of different cheats over time. We should have a small grace period of minimal cheating until new cheats are found. Hopefully bungie keeps up with the updates or else this game will be unplayable for myself and many others.

    PS.
    Does anyone know why people on Team Slayer sometimes kill themselves the whole game?

    1. Re:About Time by czarangelus · · Score: 3, Funny

      I agree. Bungie for the most part has been like a kinder, gentler claw on the hand of Microsoft Satan.

      --
      When a true genius appears, you can know him by this sign: that all the dunces are in a confederacy against him.
    2. Re:About Time by Momoru · · Score: 1

      That is why I hate playing any team games anymore on Halo 2 unless i know everyone on the team...waaaay too frustrating otherwise. And even if everyone on your team is nice, the other team will quit if losing. If they need to fix anything in halo 2, its the wussy quitters...it takes like 5 games to have one full game without cheating or quitting, i swear.

    3. Re:About Time by Jtheletter · · Score: 1
      If they need to fix anything in halo 2, its the wussy quitters...it takes like 5 games to have one full game without cheating or quitting, i swear.

      I agree, people who quit during the game have been a much larger headache for me than any griefers or cheaters. A lot of the time it seems to be the poorer players who quit, although it makes little sense to me. Do people not know that they are automatically ranked last when they quit during a game? Do they really think they'll get better by ducking out of games where they are outclassed? Now granted, if you've ever been on the wrong side of a fantastic sinper it can be frustrating, but most of the games I see this happening in are rather evenly matched until that person quits.

      And I also understand from time to time shit happens - the dog needs to go out, their parental unit demands it's time for homework/bed (another reason I hate playing before 10pm, gorram kids), bad connection, etc. but that doesn't explain why game after game these days people quit left and right.

      I have a headset and I've taken up the habit - usually after losing from quitters a few times - of informing everyone up front that I leave feedback for anyone who quits early as either 'cheating' or 'threats and harrassment' and not just for my team - unbalancing either side is unfair and less fun. Most others seem to agree with me when I say this and it seems to have an actual effect on people quitting that round. Personally I think bungie should add a 'Quit early' option to the feedback to track repeat offenders.

      --
      -- I'm not a pessimist, I'm a realist. It's not my fault that life sucks so much. --
    4. Re:About Time by hunterx11 · · Score: 4, Informative

      Feedback is not handled by Bungie at all, however; it is handled by the Xbox Live Team. People banned based on feedback are banned from Live, not from any particular game. Quitting early, unfortunately, is not against the XBL Terms of Service. In fact, not even team-killing is.

      --
      English is easier said than done.
    5. Re:About Time by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      I have a headset and I've taken up the habit - usually after losing from quitters a few times - of informing everyone up front that I leave feedback for anyone who quits early as either 'cheating' or 'threats and harrassment' and not just for my team - unbalancing either side is unfair and less fun.

      THAT WAS YOU?!?!?!?

      You FUCKING PRICK! My GODDAMN connection died and was out for two days until fucking Comcast got their heads out of their ass.

      Then I log back into Live and I have bad feedback.

      Thanks a fucking lot, you asshole. I hope you rot in hell.

    6. Re:About Time by tacroy · · Score: 4, Informative

      Actaully its not griefing in this case. It's called de-leveling. Its what people do when they want to be jerks and destroy people that arnt as good as they are. So they play for a while....start loosing..then de-level so that they can play not as skilled people in order to "pwn" them.

    7. Re:About Time by Saige · · Score: 1

      It's called play on a team with friends, and let the idiots bug the other teams. :) Friends lists are the only way that anything other than the rumble playlists are really playable.

      (BTW, my gt is "PMS GibGirl" if you need more folks for your friends list... just make sure to include a voice message)

      --
      "You know your god is man-made when he hates all the same people you do."
    8. Re:About Time by buffer-overflowed · · Score: 1

      That's precisely how you play any online game. I thought live was supposed to be a service that let you not have to do that, but I guess it isn't.

      --
      The key to the enjoyment of pop music is to replace any instance of "love" with "C.H.U.D."
    9. Re:About Time by Saige · · Score: 1

      It makes it a lot easier to play with your friends... you don't have to talk over IM and figure out a server, only to find out there's not space for everyone, or deal with all that. It's also simpler to just add someone to your friends list there, and you can see what they're playing.

      It's not like it's set up to automatically match you up with friends. It would be nice to have an option to do that though...

      --
      "You know your god is man-made when he hates all the same people you do."
    10. Re:About Time by buffer-overflowed · · Score: 1

      I use XFire, which does mostly the same thing. A little bit tougher to add people to the friends list, but other than that, it's pretty much identical.

      --
      The key to the enjoyment of pop music is to replace any instance of "love" with "C.H.U.D."
    11. Re:About Time by JonathanBoyd · · Score: 1

      Actually, repeated betraying and suiciding was classed a cheating I tihnk in one of the Weekly What's Updates. I certainly report as cheating the few times I see it. At least you can boot team killers.

    12. Re:About Time by rhuntley12 · · Score: 1

      That's why when people do that you leave them screaming feedback, or threatening/harassment or whatever it is.

    13. Re:About Time by Mycroft_VIII · · Score: 1

      I can understand you're not likeing it when people quit, but best as I can tell threatening them for it is a violation of the rules, but quiting isn't.
      Also what about when someones net connection goes down? Or thier young child suddenly needs help, or thier parent intervenes and shuts down thier game?
      I'll also point out that if you are in a game that's very lopsided then no one gets noticebly better, the poorer player has no real chance and dies repeatedly with little to no chance learn anything (unless the better player is tutoring him/her, different story entirely there) and the better player isn't challenged at all.

      Mycroft

      --
      https://signup.leagueoflegends.com/?ref=4c3ed6600b6ea
    14. Re:About Time by Jtheletter · · Score: 1
      I can understand you're not likeing it when people quit, but best as I can tell threatening them for it is a violation of the rules, but quiting isn't.
      Well here's the thing, I consider quitting a form of cheating, because you're essentially giving the other team the upper hand. Its even conceivable that an odd-numbered party (say 5 players) can artificially inflate some of their ranks by joinging a 4 on 4 game and then whoever gets put on the opposing team quits, giving their teammates an advantage. Wash, rinse, repeat. Perhaps not the most likely scenario, but the fact remains, by starting and quitting you have almost guaranteed that anyone assigned to your team will now go down in rank when they lose. Some game types are completely unwinable when unbalanced, such as Territories - once you have less people than there are territories to capture the other team can always hold at least one more than you and have someone left over to assualt your team.

      Also what about when someones net connection goes down? Or thier young child suddenly needs help, or thier parent intervenes and shuts down thier game?
      I addressed this in my original post, but I'll add to it here. This is not like an argument against capital punishment, because I don't care if some innocents are harmed by the process I use (although they really aren't as I'll get to in a minute*). And I fully acknowledge that sometimes quitting early is unavoidable for many reasons and it happens to me as well. I would also point out though that I try to be fair by doing the same for quitters from both teams, by telling people up front so they know, and if someone has a headset and tells the team 'dude I have to go to dinner with the folks now, sorry' then I obviously make an exception. A lot of the time though what you see is the game starts and people decide they don't like the map or the gametype and just quit to go find another game as quick as possible, which is extremely selfish. Also, it has been my experience that there are notably fewer instances of people quitting early when I tell everyone upfront, seriously. I've had days where 5 games in a row people would quit from one side or both, but after announcing my policy (and usually others saying that's a good idea and they will do the same) suddenly no one quits in any game after.

      I'll also point out that if you are in a game that's very lopsided then no one gets noticebly better, the poorer player has no real chance and dies repeatedly with little to no chance learn anything (unless the better player is tutoring him/her, different story entirely there) and the better player isn't challenged at all.
      Also true, but not as much of an issue in larger multiplayer games. Now if you're playing 2 on 2, sure you're screwed. But there's a lot to learn from being outclassed, even if all you learn is where the good hiding places are, or it makes you really think of how to deal with that sniper other than just hoping another teammate will take care of him. The other problem with quitting relates to this point as well - the fact that one is ranked last when quitting, and so the last to quit is the one who is ranked lowest. So now you have a scenario (4v4) where let's say 1 guy quits, frustrating the other so-so player who quits. Now it's 2 on 4, the other guy decides he's not gonna tough it out and quits. So now you're last, with basically zero real chance against 4 other players, but if you quit at that point you're guaranteed to get the worst ranking out of everyone. Does that seem fair to the player who was going by the book? Not at all. So I'm really not concerned about the unfairness of my attitude towards quitters when they clearly don't care about their action and how it affects me in-game.

      *Now here's where the system balances things out. Xbox Live - which is responsible for enforcing the feedback policy - has been doing so quite well for 2 years, you don't hear a lot of complaints on the web about unfair practices re that. So if

      --
      -- I'm not a pessimist, I'm a realist. It's not my fault that life sucks so much. --
    15. Re:About Time by Mycroft_VIII · · Score: 1

      I'm a pc gammer mostly so I don't do live, it just looked like a good way for someone to be deprived of something they're paying for based on what's fun for them vs what's fun for you. I'm certainly not trying to do more than post an outsiders take on what you said.
      I appretiate you giving more info also.
      You may not like people who bail on games mid-stream, and are likely in the majority on that, but that doesn't mean they like being stuck playing what looks to be a boring game to them. And the rules of the system are on thier side at the moment. If I was someone who couldn't stand getting stuck in a bad game (however I defined it) and rules said it was o.k. to quit and got bad feedback that could cost me what I'd paid good money for I'd definately complain. Now I'd not stay for the start of the game if Beforehand I was warned the other players didn't like quitters, I'd not subject them to MY preferences eigther.
      And it does look like you warn in advance the only concern I'd have there is that if they bother ed to record your message they would have solid evidence of you threatening them.

      It seems to me there is a better fix available, Live just needs a 'reliability' stat. Just show some sort of indicator as to how likely a player is to bail durring the game.
      Might also have a way so that if 3/4ths of the player agree a game is 'spoiled' (by quiters, lag, game bugs, etc.) it could be ended with no penalaty or gain to anyone.
      My suggestion in the meantime would be to simply tell everyone you don't like quitters and suggest your tactic as a house rule for the game your playing or some such and pressuring Live to adopt some sort of metric or mechanism for dealing with the different outlooks on quiting for better match ups.
      Hopefully they fix things for you, but you'll probably need to get a goodly number of people to convince them of the need so they can justify the costs.
      FWIW I like the slower games that take time to play, a couple of my friends don't. If it's not mindless repetition of the FPS of the week they won't play for very long. Especially the one guy who's got a nack for FPS's. But take a game that's slower paced and they'll quit before finishing. The last such time was when one of them rented Outlaw Golf (two I think, not shure of ver number though). They got bored and quit about hole 6 or 7 I think. They also tend to get tired of fighting games (though alot less on MK) awfull quick (something about looser passes and me almost never having to pass:) So I'm not completely unsympathetic, just trying to show the other side and why it's probably better not to use such tactics unilateraly.

      Mycroft

      --
      https://signup.leagueoflegends.com/?ref=4c3ed6600b6ea
  2. Does that mean I'll be banned... by kaptron · · Score: 0

    for using the Halo 2 "Flaming Tea" mod that allows me to cyber with my online gf?

    1. Re:Does that mean I'll be banned... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Funny

      You WILL provide me with full details about that "mod" that "hackers" are using to "cybersexual" with people. I will not stop until my countrymen are free to play video games without encountering sex of any sort.

      Sincerely,
      Hillary Rodham Clinton
      Senator

    2. Re:Does that mean I'll be banned... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Hillary,
      if you answered my emails, i could show you everything about this "cybersexual" thing.

      Forever Yours,
      Bill.

    3. Re:Does that mean I'll be banned... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      modded down 'overrated', what does that even mean?

    4. Re:Does that mean I'll be banned... by stanmann · · Score: 1

      If you used voice chat you'd be disturbed by how deep "her" voice was.

      --
      Food not Bombs is a nice platitude but it breaks down when you notice that the Bombees are usually well fed
  3. Now if only BZFlag would do this... by Picass0 · · Score: 0, Offtopic

    ... it might be fun to play again.

    1. Re:Now if only BZFlag would do this... by FLAGGR · · Score: 1

      Bungie has the advantage of being on xbox live, a controlled service. PC games with internet play have it much tougher.

    2. Re:Now if only BZFlag would do this... by RealityMogul · · Score: 3, Interesting

      Halo for PC isn't that bad though. Since its fairly easy to run a modded map, the people that like to do weird stuff play those maps. Regular people play the other maps.

      The ones that get out of line can usually be taken care of with a little social engineering. If they're relatively new to the game, having somebody tell them to "press Alt F4 for the mod list" sometimes works. Other times you can just annoy them until they leave. For example, follow them around and keep walking in front of them. This usually has the effect of making them TK you. 6 of those and you're banned from the server.

      So there are ways of dealing with jerks online, you just have to know how to handle yourself most importantly.

    3. Re:Now if only BZFlag would do this... by BlackCobra43 · · Score: 1

      An eye for an eye leaves everyone blind - the solution to griefing shouldn't be griefing (your "handling") the griefers.

      --
      I never spellcheck and I freely admit it. Save your karma for more worthwhile "lol erorrs" replies
    4. Re:Now if only BZFlag would do this... by RealityMogul · · Score: 1

      No, it "shouldn't" be the solution, but in the case of a dedicated server where the host isn't available to kick a player out, you have to come up with your own methods. The only other solution you have in that scenario is to leave the game yourself. I'd much rather get the problem players to leave.

    5. Re:Now if only BZFlag would do this... by hunterx11 · · Score: 1

      Halo for PC uses server-authoritative netcode, however. It is very hard to cheat, but at the same time you have to aim 10 feet in front of players in order to hit them because of the inescapable lag.

      --
      English is easier said than done.
    6. Re:Now if only BZFlag would do this... by FLAGGR · · Score: 1

      BZFlag is also open source, and more popular than HaloPC.

    7. Re:Now if only BZFlag would do this... by RealityMogul · · Score: 1

      The only "cheat" I've found is for detecting invisible people. Although many people have video cards that don't handle cube mapping which gives the same results. So I guess it can't really be called a cheat.

      Lag is lag, I can't really imagine xbox live as being any better. I'm not familiar with how the xbox version works though.

    8. Re:Now if only BZFlag would do this... by hunterx11 · · Score: 2, Informative

      Halo 2 uses predictive netcode, as does basically every other internet FPS today. It also uses things like simplified physics and event priority to ensure that the game is as playable as possible. Lag is lag, but in most games, you can at least aim directly at your target. The problem is that Halo 1 was never written with internet games in mind.

      --
      English is easier said than done.
    9. Re:Now if only BZFlag would do this... by buffer-overflowed · · Score: 1

      Nahhh. You do the same thing with guilds and various services and programs. The difference is, those of us in PC land don't have to pay for it.

      You play with your friends. You use things like XFire to keep in contact with your friends. You join guilds/clans and play guild/clan matches where cheating/griefing will get you banned.

      Drop out of losing matches frequently? Banned from that server. Cheat? Punkbuster will ban you from numerous servers.

      Within a few days of playing a new game you have your lists of servers you like, and probably quite a few new friends. Plus all the friends you've been gaming with for years if they picked up the game.

      It's pretty much the only system that works because it's not really a system. Play with those you know or take the risk that stranger jim is an asshole. As long as the players have control of the servers, it works.

      --
      The key to the enjoyment of pop music is to replace any instance of "love" with "C.H.U.D."
    10. Re:Now if only BZFlag would do this... by FLAGGR · · Score: 1

      Managing a community is not BZFlag's problem. BZFlag can't issue a patch that bans people who use modified content, because the program is open source and over the internet. If for example, md5sum checks of files is done and then sent to the server, someone could just modify the source to pretend it got the right sums. Trivial. On the internet, there is no central server that you can ban people from. Sure, you can use your approach, but thats a different subject, and almost completly irrelevant to the BZFlag code.

    11. Re:Now if only BZFlag would do this... by buffer-overflowed · · Score: 1

      I wasn't talking about BZFlag just the difference between Live and our nice little patchwork of PC programs.

      --
      The key to the enjoyment of pop music is to replace any instance of "love" with "C.H.U.D."
  4. Because they're assholes. by Adapt+or+Die · · Score: 2, Informative

    It's called griefing. They ruin their own teams chances of winning by -1 suiciding themselves over and over again.

  5. OK... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Informative

    Why don't you just link the bungie.net article? News sites just continue a pointless cycle of linking.
    http://www.bungie.net/News/TopStory.aspx?story=aut oupdate4&p=4040317/

    1. Re:OK... by linzeal · · Score: 1

      Because their forums suck. Gamespot at least has stable forums to talk on and are far less likely to censor opinion.

      --
      An Education is the Font of All Liberty
    2. Re:OK... by dootbran · · Score: 1

      Bungie's forums are like an ecosystem. They know that they are going to get a bunch of crap post by 8 year olds all asking how much you love bungie or which map is the best or how cheaters suck and we should all reply to the post to convince bungie to ban one guy that cheated in the game they just played.

      Yeah, that would suck if that was all you saw. So they didn't add a search function so you those pointless posts would be intermingled with relevent questions that have been asked and answered 142 times already.

      Its got its faults, and the increased traffic definitely causes some stability problems but they really didn't have a choice.

    3. Re:OK... by linzeal · · Score: 1

      That is why a forum like slashdot with moderation is so important to freedom of speech because it makes posts valued on a basis besides the time the post was made.

      --
      An Education is the Font of All Liberty
  6. The inner conflict by Miros · · Score: 0

    Part of me says "Yes! Finally they're cracking down on those SOBs who ruin so many good online games." Yet, another part of me is saying "Ya know, I wish they diddnt have the power to do that. I mean, sure, they're cheaters, but they bought the game and now bungie gets to tell them how to play it?" I guess i'd say my problem with the whole "buy a license" concept that software is built on is that the user gets no ownership rights besides the ones the licensor decides to give up, which usually arnt many (have you read the steam license?).

    1. Re:The inner conflict by TheBrownShow · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Yet, another part of me is saying "Ya know, I wish they diddnt have the power to do that. I mean, sure, they're cheaters, but they bought the game and now bungie gets to tell them how to play it?

      They're not telling people how to play it, they're telling people how to play it on their servers (Xbox Live). If you had read TFA, you'd see that people are still able to play with their mods via system link. It's one thing if you hack the game for your own personal enjoyment, but completely wrecking their matchmaking service by unbalancing the game through cheating? C'mon, that's not even a fair comparison. It has absolutely nothing to do with your issue with software licenses.

    2. Re:The inner conflict by dootbran · · Score: 4, Insightful

      You can play the game any way you want to. You just can't cheat while playing on bungie's service. Seems fair to me.

      If you went to play a game of pickup b-ball at the gym and proceeded to take the ball and run around screaming "my ball baby!! my ball!!" and not actually playing the game, do you think you'd be alowed to continue to play there even if you payed to get in? I doubt it, you'd be harming the experience that other people payed for too!

      Now, you can go home and play with a basketball anyway you want. But as soon as you enter a public arena that you don't control you have to learn to play well with others.

    3. Re:The inner conflict by vertinox · · Score: 2, Funny

      But as soon as you enter a public arena that you don't control you have to learn to play well with others.

      Unless you play on the NBA. Then it's called "yelling the ref" until he gives you a good call.

      --
      "I am the king of the Romans, and am superior to rules of grammar!"
      -Sigismund, Holy Roman Emperor (1368-1437)
    4. Re:The inner conflict by EggyToast · · Score: 1
      They're just banning them from matchmaking. All those modders can still play custom games together.

      The problem, of course, is that modders get bored just playing against one another when you're all flying across the map. It's less fun w/o the element of surprise. Compare that to going up against 4 or 8 people that aren't modding and don't now what's up, and you can kill them without retribution and win easily. Clearly modders and cheaters will head into matchmaking.

      After all, cheating against people you actually know just isn't fun ;D

      But yeah, it's just matchmaking, not Live overall. So if you have other games that are Live enabled, it doesn't affect them at all.

  7. Boot The Noob by SeekerDarksteel · · Score: 0

    Pff, killing yourself is for noobie griefers. Real griefers play boot-the-noob. :D

    --
    The laws of probability forbid it!
  8. Patent Time! by Psmylie · · Score: 2, Funny
    That headline gives me a great idea for a new invention... the bungie hammer! Simply hold the hammer over the nail you want pounded in and let go. Gravity does all the work! This could be a fun and exciting way to do some of those household repairs that you've been putting off because a regular hammer is just too boring. Think of all the excitement that will come of never knowing where the hammer will bounce to next! Will it hit the nail, or will it simply crush your foot, crack your kneecap, and bruise up your shin? And (most importantly) will it miss the crotch on its way back up?!

    This is quite possibly the worst idea I've ever had!

    --

    psmylie's dictionary: Godzillion (noun) Any number large enough to destroy Tokyo

  9. Uhhhhh by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    If You Mod Down, Post a Reply - Tell Why

    You can't post and mod within the same thread. Go read the /. FAQ ya noob.

    1. Re:Uhhhhh by RM6f9 · · Score: 1

      Whoosh! went the somewhat humorous attempt at avoiding remaining negatively modded, although... a non-logged in AC may post a reply to the post modded down - personally I wish more people had the nerve to log in and leave an email address available so that any discussion concerning negatively moddable issues need not disturb the entire thread.

      --
      Take the 90-Day Challenge! http://rwmurker.bodybyvi.com/
    2. Re:Uhhhhh by PeelBoy · · Score: 1

      Wow that really goes over your head doesn't it. I think the whole point is to undo the modding down of the post.

  10. Slashvertizement by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Because GameSpot paid for the front page link, Bungie.net didn't.

  11. Important question by Geoffreyerffoeg · · Score: 2, Interesting

    Has anyone gotten banned for having non-Halo 2 mods on their Xbox, e.g., disablable modchips, software mods, cheats for other games, installed Linux? I think I have the font exploit somewhere (not that it worked for me) and I know I have the "Emergency Linux" MechAssault hack - will Bungie bother me about these, or does it only look for Halo 2 hacks?

    1. Re:Important question by __aaxtnf2500 · · Score: 0, Offtopic

      http://www.xbox-linux.org/wiki/Getting_Started#8
      check www.xbox-linux.org but i believe that in order to use the mechassault bootstrap, you have to have an older xbox.
      putting such an xbox onto live will stealthily load new firmware onto the xbox,
      disabling the ability to bootstrap linux through mechassault or through a bootcd...
      (why i won't play halo2 online w/my xbox).
      installing a modchip w/the cromwell bios is a way around this.
      as i understand it the only reprecussion for this is the disabling of linux, i don't think microsoft will take legal action (fair use?).

    2. Re:Important question by Geoffreyerffoeg · · Score: 1

      Almost right..except that MechAssault bootstrap still works on my newer Xbox (which doesn't support the MechAssault installation). I've played Live a bunch and I've booted from the "Emergency Linux" savegame in MechAssault. If it doesn't work for you then your Mechassault CD is too new, not your Xbox.

      Anyway, it's not so much the disabling of Linux that I'm worried about (I can always reformat), but Frankie's statement last week that "I would delete anything on my Xbox that shouldn't be there, and I would do that today." He says "anything", not "any Halo 2 files". (Of course in TFA he mentions Halo 2 files by name, but it's not absolutely clear that non-Halo 2 files don't trigger the Banhammer.)

    3. Re:Important question by __aaxtnf2500 · · Score: 0, Offtopic

      Can you still boot linux from dashboard and bootcd after running Live?

  12. Stupid stupid Bungie. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Really, this is the most ridiculous thing I've heard come out of a Microsoft-owned studio in years.

    There are a few fundamental principles in online gaming designed to allow users to enjoy what they've paid for, while at the same time preventing cheating.

    One of these is known as a "Pure Server". It's a wonderful little concept that's been around since.... ohhh, 1996 or so (?), that allows people to keep modified content for their own edification without getting instantly banned from all online play, forever.

    Honestly, the XBox is a PC. Halo is essentially a PC game. Why does Bungie have to go to such extremes? I see no real reason, except to piss off all the hardcore gamers that may occasionally like to play on a new non-official map.

    I recommend everyone ditch XBox Live (it's a POS anyway :) and go download Halo: Custom Edition (google it).

    It's a wonderful, free (assuming you have a cd-key for the PC version of Halo) official fork of Halo PC specifically designed for modding and custom maps. Not written by Bungie, of course, because those guys couldn't tell a gaming community if they ran into one at 80mph :)

  13. De-leveling? by emarkp · · Score: 1

    You don't need to invent a new term. There's already a word for this: sandbagging.