Linux Users Accuse Blizzard of Unfair Bans

 Pages 1 2 NEXT
 

Linux Users Accuse Blizzard of Unfair Bans

image

Blizzard says it's not banning Linux users from Diablo 3 for using Wine, but because they're cheating.

The cry went up yesterday from Linux users far and wide, claiming that Blizzard is "banning Linux users for using Linux," or more precisely, for running Diablo 3 under Wine. Wine, for those not in the know, is software that allows Linux users to run Microsoft Windows programs.

According to the claims, Blizzard's cheat detection system is picking it up as a cheat, leading to bans and a refusal to issue refunds to those affected. It's impossible to say exactly what tripped the wire since Blizzard doesn't disclose that information in ban notices, but as one affected user pointed out, Blizzard has previously noted that running "unsupported hardware or software," including operating systems like Linux, could cause grief with its system survey program. It's not a huge leap to think that similar issues could arise with its anti-cheat systems.

Blizzard, however, is sticking to its guns, saying that no unrighteous bans have been handed out. "We've extensively tested for false positive situations, including replicating system setups for those who have posted claiming they were banned unfairly," Community Manager Micah "Bashiok" Whipple wrote. "We've not found any situations that could produce a false positive, have found that the circumstances for which they were banned were clear and accurate, and we are extremely confident in our findings."

"Playing the game on Linux, although not officially supported, will not get you banned - cheating will," he added. He also denied claims that the situation is similar to mistaken World of Warcraft bans in 2006, saying, "It's not a similar situation, but it's sure to be something to fuel the fire of doubt."

A number of Wine users have since spoken up to confirm that they're still playing without impediment, but that hasn't done much to mollify those who are banned or who like to think that Blizzard is inherently evil and/or incompetent. Who's right, who's wrong? The mystery, such as it is, isn't likely to be solved to everyone's satisfaction with anything less than a confession. "It's company policy not to discuss account actions with anyone but the account holder, or their legal guardian if applicable," Bashiok wrote. "It's an issue between us and them. Trust me, it'd be much easier on me to just post exactly what they did, but we feel it's important to honor the privacy of our customers."

Source: Blizzard forums, via Ubuntu Vibes

Permalink

Blizzard could have avoided a lot of its problems by allowing you to create and online character and an offline character.

The offline character could be modded and cheated as much as you wanted, while the online character would have access to all the online features.

Banning people from playing a game that they play themselves without a refund is unacceptable.

So they tried to run Diablo III on a computer that didn't meet the system requirements (by virtue of not using a supported OS) and then try to act like it's Blizzards fault when it doesn't run?

People will bitch and blame everything on Blizzard no matter what they do, so there's really no winning. Everyone just like to whine and hate on companies I guess.

Roll on the tedious and predictable I HATE BLIZZ AND DIABLO3 SUCKS posts. yawn.

Aeshi:
So they tried to run Diablo III on a computer that didn't meet the system requirements (by virtue of not using a supported OS) and then try to act like it's Blizzards fault when it doesn't run?

Not at all... it did run perfectly fine. Then they got banned.


I really hope this isn't because of Wine, and I really don't see why it would be after it's never been an issue for Starcraft II or WoW.

I doubt they'll get a refund. I've been in contact with Blizzard for about a month now about the game simply not working (meet all specs and using Windows 7). They acknowledge that it's their fault but they state that they don't have to follow EU trading laws.

Such an arrogant approach to their customers hopefully will come around to bite them in the rear.

People will claim anything to avoid being banned, there's an entire website dedicated to collecting e-mails sent to xbox LIVE staff in attempts to be un-banned.

happy_turtle:
I doubt they'll get a refund. I've been in contact with Blizzard for about a month now about the game simply not working (meet all specs and using Windows 7). They acknowledge that it's their fault but they state that they don't have to follow EU trading laws.

Such an arrogant approach to their customers hopefully will come around to bite them in the rear.

Now I like balance. I like to think that in general Blizz is a good company who try to make great games. On the other hand, the ALWAYSONLINE crap is just idiotic.
However, there is no way anyone can defend what's happening to you. They owe you you're money back, plain and simple.

These players must like Swiss cheese with their Wine, cause there seems to be a few holes in their claim.

I'd love to see then screw this "privacy for our users" with the banned ones. There surely is some tasty data proving the cheating.

darkszero:
I'd love to see then screw this "privacy for our users" with the banned ones. There surely is some tasty data proving the cheating.

It's more likely they don't want to give away how they're catching the cheating that is happening. If they say how they're catching the cheaters, the rest can adapt their methods. This is also a large part of the reason they don't ban people as soon as they have verification, and prefer to use mass ban waves - so you can't correlate your activities with what is getting you caught as easily.

"Protecting" user privacy doesn't quite stretch far enough to cover "These users were cheating via X method, and here's the anonymized proof/logs".

You know...even if they were cheating, it's still bullshit to be banned from something your purchased. If only there were some way to allow people to play their legitimately purchased software without having to worry about them cheating online!

Eh, Blizzard not caring about their costumers and gamers whining about stuff isn't really news anymore...

Varil:
You know...even if they were cheating, it's still bullshit to be banned from something your purchased. If only there were some way to allow people to play their legitimately purchased software without having to worry about them cheating online!

And that too.
Even if you get caught speeding drunk they don't take your car. You might lose the licence to use it in public but what you do with it on your private land is your own damn thing.

Agow95:
People will claim anything to avoid being banned, there's an entire website dedicated to collecting e-mails sent to xbox LIVE staff in attempts to be un-banned.

I am intrigued, pray tell me more.

Kross:
It's more likely they don't want to give away how they're catching the cheating that is happening. If they say how they're catching the cheaters, the rest can adapt their methods. This is also a large part of the reason they don't ban people as soon as they have verification, and prefer to use mass ban waves - so you can't correlate your activities with what is getting you caught as easily.

"Protecting" user privacy doesn't quite stretch far enough to cover "These users were cheating via X method, and here's the anonymized proof/logs".

I did a quick jump to one the diablo hacking sites, and they pretty much understand how the warden works, what it looks for and such. After all, it's a software running on your computer, you can't hide how it works.

Quaxar:
Eh, Blizzard not caring about their costumers and gamers whining about stuff isn't really news anymore...

Varil:
You know...even if they were cheating, it's still bullshit to be banned from something your purchased. If only there were some way to allow people to play their legitimately purchased software without having to worry about them cheating online!

And that too.
Even if you get caught speeding drunk they don't take your car. You might lose the licence to use it in public but what you do with it on your private land is your own damn thing.

Agow95:
People will claim anything to avoid being banned, there's an entire website dedicated to collecting e-mails sent to xbox LIVE staff in attempts to be un-banned.

I am intrigued, pray tell me more.

http://whywasibanned.com/
It's about 70 pages of people who don't know that the XBLPET team have files on why their accounts were banned, and thinking they can lie they're way out of it, or people who are stupid and don't understand why they get banned for having "SgtThroatReamer" as a gamertag, seriously, look:image

DVS BSTrD:
These players must like Swiss cheese with their Wine, cause there seems to be a few holes in their claim.

http://mirrors.rit.edu/instantCSI/

Couldnt resist... Resist All that is!

could we be questioning the dominance of Windows OS here? and the monopolisation of the industry that has forced other systems onto the fringes?

That said, I know one guy using Linux, and he's doing a maths degree. he gets everything he deserves.

NuclearShadow:
I am going to have to side with Blizzard on this one. Naturally there are going to be cheaters regardless of what OS they run. If this was a sudden mass ban on everyone running Linux then it would appear to be a error. But the fact is others are currently playing still without a problem shows it isn't false flagging them for that reason.

Aeshi:
So they tried to run Diablo III on a computer that didn't meet the system requirements (by virtue of not using a supported OS) and then try to act like it's Blizzards fault when it doesn't run?

Umm, how did you get to that conclusion? That is way far off from what happened.

Agow95:
People will claim anything to avoid being banned, there's an entire website dedicated to collecting e-mails sent to xbox LIVE staff in attempts to be un-banned. http://whywasibanned.com/
It's about 70 pages of people who don't know that the XBLPET team have files on why their accounts were banned,

Isn't this a possible violation of the privacy policy they have? Perhaps against the law as well, a company does not have the legal rights to just go and show anyone without good reason about any information regarding their clients unless given consent by the client. I really doubt Microsoft has hidden in the terms of agreement that any message sent to staff can be shared openly online.

I think the content comes from forums on the Xbox site, and the site isn't endorsed by microsoft anyway, nor does it contain private details, just account names, which anyone can see.

Oh, Blizzard, Blizzard...

You may be able to spit in the faces of your Mac/Windows costumers, but beware. YOU DO NOT MESS WITH LINUX USERS!! EVER!! They will find you and they will DDOSs the crap out of your severs.

Li Mu:
Roll on the tedious and predictable I HATE BLIZZ AND DIABLO3 SUCKS posts. yawn.

And a flood of "Gee, I'm glad I didn't buy this game'

NuclearShadow:

Aeshi:
So they tried to run Diablo III on a computer that didn't meet the system requirements (by virtue of not using a supported OS) and then try to act like it's Blizzards fault when it doesn't run?

Umm, how did you get to that conclusion? That is way far off from what happened.

Well I think the point is that those who are playing Diablo III on Linux are playing it on a system that is not officially supported and doesn't meet the printed system requirements, as such there is no reason for Blizzard to care whether it works or doesn't. In this case (according to Blizzard) those banned have been caught cheating; however, even if it were to turn out that they weren't they wouldn't be entitled to a refund as the game doesn't claim to work on their system.

DancePuppets:

Well I think the point is that those who are playing Diablo III on Linux are playing it on a system that is not officially supported and doesn't meet the printed system requirements, as such there is no reason for Blizzard to care whether it works or doesn't. In this case (according to Blizzard) those banned have been caught cheating; however, even if it were to turn out that they weren't they wouldn't be entitled to a refund as the game doesn't claim to work on their system.

This is what I meant, more-or-less.
.

Buretsu:

Li Mu:
Roll on the tedious and predictable I HATE BLIZZ AND DIABLO3 SUCKS posts. yawn.

And a flood of "Gee, I'm glad I didn't buy this game'

Don't forget the 'So glad I bought/am buying [generic Diablo II Clone]' mudslide!

Aeshi:
So they tried to run Diablo III on a computer that didn't meet the system requirements (by virtue of not using a supported OS) and then try to act like it's Blizzards fault when it doesn't run?

DancePuppets:
Well I think the point is that those who are playing Diablo III on Linux are playing it on a system that is not officially supported and doesn't meet the printed system requirements, as such there is no reason for Blizzard to care whether it works or doesn't. In this case (according to Blizzard) those banned have been caught cheating; however, even if it were to turn out that they weren't they wouldn't be entitled to a refund as the game doesn't claim to work on their system.

"Not supported" doesn't mean "ban your ass". It just means not supported. They may not be entitled to a refund, but they certainly wouldn't deserve to have their account banned. I can't help but feel Blizzard is serious when it says everyone who was banned was a cheater, but I've learned not to take companies at their word about things like that. Asking "why would they lie?" gets you into trouble too often. So I will never be 100% sure.

Rooster Cogburn:
snip

From my expirience: Consumers lie about 200 times more often than companies. They lie at every chance they can get, even if they are totally wrong. Why? Because they think "I am consumer so I am king and can do what I want". Companies on the other side rather tend not to tell the whole story.

May I also quote from the news: "A number of Wine users have since spoken up to confirm that they're still playing without impediment"

So yeah, I'd go that far to simply say: Those guys were cheater and try to lie their asses out on basis of a gullable community who takes every straw to shit on Blizz. Seen this way too often back then in WoW (was a active community poster in the GM part to help people with small problems due to day-long waiting times. Did it mostly for the laughs when the not-so-rare cases of lieing assholes appeared and got told by the blues with details what they did and why they got the ban / item taken / character renamed.)

Rooster Cogburn:

Aeshi:
So they tried to run Diablo III on a computer that didn't meet the system requirements (by virtue of not using a supported OS) and then try to act like it's Blizzards fault when it doesn't run?

DancePuppets:
Well I think the point is that those who are playing Diablo III on Linux are playing it on a system that is not officially supported and doesn't meet the printed system requirements, as such there is no reason for Blizzard to care whether it works or doesn't. In this case (according to Blizzard) those banned have been caught cheating; however, even if it were to turn out that they weren't they wouldn't be entitled to a refund as the game doesn't claim to work on their system.

"Not supported" doesn't mean "ban your ass". It just means not supported. They may not be entitled to a refund, but they certainly wouldn't deserve to have their account banned. I can't help but feel Blizzard is serious when it says everyone who was banned was a cheater, but I've learned not to take companies at their word about things like that. Asking "why would they lie?" gets you into trouble too often. So I will never be 100% sure.

However, if the reason they're being caught for cheating is because Blizzard's anti-cheat software has difficulty with Linux machines then Blizzard is under no obligation to sort it out as you don't meet the system requirements on the box.

SacremPyrobolum:
Blizzard could have avoided a lot of its problems by allowing you to create and online character and an offline character.

The offline character could be modded and cheated as much as you wanted, while the online character would have access to all the online features.

Banning people from playing a game that they play themselves without a refund is unacceptable.

I love how you completely make-up a false scenario just so you can have an excuse to bash on Blizzard. Unless you spoke to every one of the Linux users who were banned, you have no fucking idea how they were playing the game.

Quaxar:
And that too.
Even if you get caught speeding drunk they don't take your car. You might lose the licence to use it in public but what you do with it on your private land is your own damn thing.

Here, watch this:

Even if you get caught cheating on B.net, they don't take your PC. You might lose the license to use it on B.net, but what you do with it on the rest of the internet is your own damn thing.

So... yeah. Moral of the story? Don't drink and Diablo. Erm... wait... I think I got something mixed-up in there...

Moral of the story, don't buy Diablo III if you plan on using unsupported system specs. Or if you don't like the always on DRM. Or if you don't like Blizz in general.

WhiteTigerShiro:

SacremPyrobolum:
Blizzard could have avoided a lot of its problems by allowing you to create and online character and an offline character.

The offline character could be modded and cheated as much as you wanted, while the online character would have access to all the online features.

Banning people from playing a game that they play themselves without a refund is unacceptable.

I love how you completely make-up a false scenario just so you can have an excuse to bash on Blizzard. Unless you spoke to every one of the Linux users who were banned, you have no fucking idea how they were playing the game.

Quaxar:
And that too.
Even if you get caught speeding drunk they don't take your car. You might lose the licence to use it in public but what you do with it on your private land is your own damn thing.

Here, watch this:

Even if you get caught cheating on B.net, they don't take your PC. You might lose the license to use it on B.net, but what you do with it on the rest of the internet is your own damn thing.

So... yeah. Moral of the story? Don't drink and Diablo. Erm... wait... I think I got something mixed-up in there...

I am simply saying that by adding an offline single player feature that is completely independent of online features then everyone would be happy. People could cheat to thier hearts content, servers would not get overloaded and those who are running Linux could play the game without fault (If their is in fact a problem with Wine and the bans did not come from cheating)

ivc392:
Oh, Blizzard, Blizzard...

You may be able to spit in the faces of your Mac/Windows costumers, but beware. YOU DO NOT MESS WITH LINUX USERS!! EVER!! They will find you and they will DDOSs the crap out of your severs.

It's a good thing we're a rare breed then.
Because I've seen the amount of damage some pissed off Linux users can do.
*glares at Sony and last year's PSN debacle*

NuclearShadow:
I am going to have to side with Blizzard on this one. Naturally there are going to be cheaters regardless of what OS they run. If this was a sudden mass ban on everyone running Linux then it would appear to be a error. But the fact is others are currently playing still without a problem shows it isn't false flagging them for that reason.

Aeshi:
So they tried to run Diablo III on a computer that didn't meet the system requirements (by virtue of not using a supported OS) and then try to act like it's Blizzards fault when it doesn't run?

Umm, how did you get to that conclusion? That is way far off from what happened.

Agow95:
People will claim anything to avoid being banned, there's an entire website dedicated to collecting e-mails sent to xbox LIVE staff in attempts to be un-banned. http://whywasibanned.com/
It's about 70 pages of people who don't know that the XBLPET team have files on why their accounts were banned,

Isn't this a possible violation of the privacy policy they have? Perhaps against the law as well, a company does not have the legal rights to just go and show anyone without good reason about any information regarding their clients unless given consent by the client. I really doubt Microsoft has hidden in the terms of agreement that any message sent to staff can be shared openly online.

no it cannot violate privacy policy as they are all messages from the public forms.

TheKasp:
From my expirience: Consumers lie about 200 times more often than companies. They lie at every chance they can get, even if they are totally wrong. Why? Because they think "I am consumer so I am king and can do what I want". Companies on the other side rather tend not to tell the whole story.

May I also quote from the news: "A number of Wine users have since spoken up to confirm that they're still playing without impediment"

So yeah, I'd go that far to simply say: Those guys were cheater and try to lie their asses out on basis of a gullable community who take every straw to shit on Blizz. Seen this way too often back then in WoW (was a active community poster in the GM part to help people with small problems due to day-long waiting times. Did it mostly for the laughs when the not-so-rare cases of lieing assholes appeared and got told by the blues with details what they did and why they got the ban / item taken / character renamed.

That's why my gut feeling is Blizzard is telling the truth. I just have no basis for certainty. If Blizzard cannot prove it for practical reasons fine, it will remain unproven.

DancePuppets:
However, if the reason they're being caught for cheating is because Blizzard's anti-cheat software has difficulty with Linux machines then Blizzard is under no obligation to sort it out as you don't meet the system requirements on the box.

Of course they are. "Not supported" means it doesn't work on your machine. It doesn't mean your account gets banned. Suppose they start playing on Windows, leaving their account banned would be a really shitty thing to do. If I get banned because Blizzard's anti-cheat doesn't like the cut of my jib I hope they would fix it.

Atmos Duality:

It's a good thing we're a rare breed then.
Because I've seen the amount of damage some pissed off Linux users can do.
*glares at Sony and last year's PSN debacle*

Yep, I don't usually use Linux for gaming, but I'm having a hard time figuring out why the hell didn't Blizzard release D3 port for Linux. I mean, there is a Mac version for Christ sake.
At some point Blizzard is going to piss off the wrong people and their servers (and paying customers) are going to suffer for it.

Kross:

darkszero:
I'd love to see then screw this "privacy for our users" with the banned ones. There surely is some tasty data proving the cheating.

It's more likely they don't want to give away how they're catching the cheating that is happening. If they say how they're catching the cheaters, the rest can adapt their methods. This is also a large part of the reason they don't ban people as soon as they have verification, and prefer to use mass ban waves - so you can't correlate your activities with what is getting you caught as easily.

"Protecting" user privacy doesn't quite stretch far enough to cover "These users were cheating via X method, and here's the anonymized proof/logs".

Here's the element of this that's bugging me, though. The unwillingness to say "this is what they were doing" suggests that they cannot prevent cheating in that venue, and this isn't like codebreaking in intelligence, actual cheaters who are banned can report to one another that they were banned. So if a cheat is no longer undetectable, then that information will be distributed back to the community.

Now, I'm not a software security expert, but if there's a vulnerability they can't address, why the hell would I give these idiots money for a game I can only play when they feel like letting me?

I saw another article on this this morning and read through the forum posts where it began. It sounds like there were only 3 or 4 people that were actually banned. Whether or not they were actually cheating is between them and blizzard, but it looks like they were just butthurt about being banned and trolled the right places to make people go nuts over it.

This story is not new. You cheat. you get caught. You try making up any escuse you can think off to get unbanned because "it wasnt my fault" always has to work.
In this case, your attacking a touchy topic for people, and thus the drama.

In any way system requirements said windows so you cant complain to begin with.

Here's the element of this that's bugging me, though. The unwillingness to say "this is what they were doing" suggests that they cannot prevent cheating in that venue, and this isn't like codebreaking in intelligence, actual cheaters who are banned can report to one another that they were banned. So if a cheat is no longer undetectable, then that information will be distributed back to the community.

however if the cheat community does not know the method Blizzard uses it is far harder to become undetectable again than if they knew how they got caught. trust me, i been part of a bot community for a certain mmo for years and we been fighting detection all the time. and the worst part is you dont know how they detect it so you have to go though everything every time.

 Pages 1 2 NEXT

Reply to Thread

Log in or Register to Comment
Have an account? Login below:
With Facebook:Login With Facebook
or
Username:  
Password:  
  
Not registered? To sign up for an account with The Escapist:
Register With Facebook
Register With Facebook
or
Register for a free account here