Slashdot Mirror
Microsoft, Blizzard Crack Down On Piracy, Cheating
Microsoft has confirmed that they've been wielding the banhammer lately over modifications to the Xbox 360 which allow players to run pirated games. Xbox Live's Major Nelson said the action would also void the warranty on the offending console, and that Microsoft will "continue to employ and bolster anti-piracy security measures to counter piracy in the gaming industry and improve security in the Xbox LIVE community." Meanwhile, Blizzard dealt with 350,000 of their own problem users on Battle.net, saying simply that they wouldn't tolerate cheating. This is likely one of many steps to clean up the system before it gets revamped for use with StarCraft II.
I might be in the minority here, but both Microsofts and Blizzards views on piracy and cheating have been very clear to me for quite some time, and haven't drastically change as of late.
Microsofts die-hard attitude towards modded 360s is actually quite understandable. If I'm not mistaken, 360 games aren't areacoded, and there's really no huge homebrew-scene for it, so the only thing modchips are good for are "backups", which - let's face it - are an excuse to run pirated games...
Xboxs cost more to produce than they sell for so they only make money off games. They have to defend game sales or go out of business. Blizzard has to defend their service because it costs them money every month to maintain and the cheats are freeloading off the paying customers. Neither case is about defending freedoms and both companies are well within their rights.
I am a bit naive in this area also. However, I guess that it's similar to Windows Genuine Advantage (WGA). They could do a checksum or generate a hash on the binaries and on the hardware also. Anything that does not "match" could be flagged.
If the mod chip is in the hardware should it not be next to impossible for Microsoft to detect it?
I'm not sure that generating a checksum on hardware is all that different to doing it for software.
I don't have a Wii, but I am guessing (for the purpose of this reasoning) that it connects to the internet and checks 'things'. So, I don't really see it being "impossible" for MS to check for (sit behind a firewall and, yes, maybe...)
"Meanwhile, Blizzard dealt with 350,000 of their own problem users on Battle.net, saying simply that they wouldn't tolerate cheating."
The b.net that I play on sure seems to tolerate cheating. Or at least it has for a LONG time.
Diablo 1 had Auto PK, Auto Revive (and then PK again of course), Town kill, dupes, and I believe there was even a god mode.
Diablo 2 had Way Point PK traps. Now it has Map Hack, dupes, auto aim, far cast, pick-it, chicken (auto exit), dupes, Town-Portal PK triggers, town kill, and more dupes! It's nearly impossible to play in a public environment on their public server. Most solo in passworded games, or perhaps with a friend or two... almost never with strangers.
I was one of a hand full of Diablo 2 players who were NOT included in this recent ban, and I must say that it was great to see it come. It was vindicating to see so many cheaters get what they deserved. It would be wonderful if they continued to enforce it (though they never have in the past after mass bannings, so I see no reason why this time will be different).
But for them to say that "they simply [do not] tolerate cheating." Well that's a bit of a stretch people! In fact, I thought it was convenient how the bannings came so near to the release of WotLK. Suddenly there was 350,000 gamers who needed a new staple to play.
-hps
Something the summary missed somewhat in regard to Microsoft's bans is that they're not just for anti-piracy reasons but like Blizzards are also for anti-cheating reasons.
Apparently a rather major oversight was made in development of the 360 whereby the executables are verified for integrity, so you can't modify the executables to cheat on a console capable of running pirated discs.
What they didn't do is implement a method of ensuring integrity of game resources, presumably they figured developers knowing their executables were secure would check integrity of resources themselves which makes sense as every game has individual assets so what's meant by integrity maybe game specific.
The problem is some people have found in some games you can hack the game assetts to give yourself an advantage and cheat and this is one of the main reasons Microsoft is banning. It's also one of the reasons I don't mind paying for XBox live because when Microsoft ban cheaters and void their warranties (which is fair enough, they've modified their hardware) it acts as a great disincentive for people to cheat. That levels the playing field for the rest of us who like to play fair. One of things I hated about PC gaming is no matter how hard developers try, you can't stop cheating on the PC without using game design specific mechanisms limiting somewhat your game's design because the PC isn't a trusted platform whilst consoles can at least to some extent be seen as trusted platforms.
To me I'd rather keep things this way too- I don't want my PC to become a trusted platform and controlled by someone else, I want to retain control but I'm also happy to use consoles for gaming for the advantages of trusted computing. This setup offers the best of both worlds IMO as the only way PCs will ever become cheat free is if they become trusted platforms which likely means you wont be allowed to play MP3s and the like when big corporates get their way.
...but Microsoft and Blizzard are right in their regard against cheating. Most paying customers would prefer a cheat-free, level playing field to enjoy. And just as I feel very strongly about the notion of personal property rights of the end user, those rights end precisely where others begin. (Am I showing my Texas personality?) So while everyone should have the right to modify their consoles and their games, they shouldn't then turn that into an advantage in game play that reduces the quality that Microsoft and Blizzard deliver. (I hated saying that too.) I endorse Microsoft's and Blizzard's position on this as far as it supports the general fairness to all users. (Of course, I stop supporting the position where they identify false positives and unfairly lock out innocent users... does that happen? I can only assume it does since no technology from Microsoft has ever been perfect.)