Division punishing cheaters with threat of permanent bans

Hey, the situation in New York is bad enough without cheaters muddying the snow.

11

You may already know that patch 1.1 for The Division, due out on Tuesday, April 12, will add blueprint levels and gear modifications for the Dark Zone. More interesting, in a way, is news that Ubisoft will also roll out measures to punish cheaters... and they may never see the ban hammer coming.

"If you're cheating, you know what you're doing," Ubisoft community developer Yannick Banchereau told PC Gamer. Banchereau spoke in regards to the punishment cheaters face for their first offense: a three-day ban, no ifs, ands, or buts. Strike two? A permanent ban from the game.

Measures presented in next week's patch represent the latest salvo in Ubisoft's battle against cheaters in The Division. Banchereau went on to thank players who take the time to report offenders, and promised "better solutions coming in the future."

Long Reads Editor

David L. Craddock writes fiction, nonfiction, and grocery lists. He is the author of the Stay Awhile and Listen series, and the Gairden Chronicles series of fantasy novels for young adults. Outside of writing, he enjoys playing Mario, Zelda, and Dark Souls games, and will be happy to discuss at length the myriad reasons why Dark Souls 2 is the best in the series. Follow him online at davidlcraddock.com and @davidlcraddock.

From The Chatty
  • reply
    April 7, 2016 2:00 PM

    David Craddock posted a new article, Division punishing cheaters with threat of permanent bans

    • reply
      April 7, 2016 2:01 PM

      I don't even know why they bother with a 3 day ban. You're basically giving a warning to these assholes just to use another, possibly undetected cheat. Permaban all of them.

      • reply
        April 7, 2016 2:52 PM

        Permabans on 1st offense for a $60 game seems a bit harsh no?

        • reply
          April 7, 2016 2:56 PM

          If the person is definitely cheating, nope. Perma on first offense seems perfectly reasonable. If there is doubt then stick with the three day.

          • reply
            April 7, 2016 3:34 PM

            That's the thing though... there can always be doubt. No system is perfect. There is always the chance, however small for a false positive.

            I'd like to see them err on the side of caution.

            I would be extremely pissed to get burned on a $60 game.

        • reply
          April 7, 2016 2:56 PM

          Consider they wreck the game for everyone else and cheating isn't accidental, not at all.

          • reply
            April 7, 2016 2:58 PM

            Also not many (if at all) bother with second chances. WoW, Call of Duty, VAC enabled games, etc. I have no idea why they're even bothering with second chances. All it's doing is giving a warning to cheat developers to switch to something else because whatever they're using is being detected.

            • reply
              April 8, 2016 3:08 AM

              i suspect because they dont want to annihilate the player base too quickly

        • reply
          April 7, 2016 2:58 PM

          If they are just going off of player reports, first offense bans would be harsh, but I doubt that's the case. Like he said in the article, hackers know what they are doing. I have no problem with banning verified hackers.

        • reply
          April 7, 2016 3:25 PM

          I don't think so. You can always buy another game.

        • reply
          April 7, 2016 3:32 PM

          only if the false positive rate is high and the appeals process is bad. For the people that actually cheated? Nope, not harsh.

        • reply
          April 7, 2016 3:36 PM

          Cost of the game is irrelevant. "I spent money" is not a justification for breaking the rules and ruining the game for others. If it's not a false positive, I say terminate with extreme prejudice. Fuck those people.

        • reply
          April 7, 2016 4:35 PM

          Nope. Put it in the EULA then let the banhammer bring forth swift and permanent punishment. Fuck cheaters. Make then fear the worst.

        • reply
          April 7, 2016 5:58 PM

          1st offense of cheating in a multiplayer game? Not harsh at all. I'd support a permanent Steam ban, lose all your games, do not pass go, do not collect $200. Fuck cheaters.

          • reply
            April 7, 2016 7:09 PM

            Perhaps just losing the ability to play that one game online with others, which in The Devision's case is pretty much THE game.

        • reply
          April 7, 2016 6:06 PM

          Fuck no. You cheat you lose your toys. The easy solution for everyone is not to cheat... Or just make sure you never get caught.

        • reply
          April 7, 2016 6:20 PM

          Nope, you cheat you pay.

        • reply
          April 7, 2016 7:11 PM

          Cheating is a premeditated. Nobody accidentally cheats.

          It is knowingly breaking the rules to gain an advantage and/or to hurt others.

        • reply
          April 7, 2016 7:13 PM

          i hope they permaban them and any children they have or might have in the future

          • reply
            April 7, 2016 11:32 PM

            Down to seven generations. Biblical style.

        • reply
          April 7, 2016 11:38 PM

          Nope. Fuck cheaters.

        • reply
          April 8, 2016 3:11 AM

          You'd get kicked out of a concert or sporting event that you'd paid $60 for if you broke the rules, or out of a hotel - possibly without a refund for your entire booking.

          • reply
            April 8, 2016 9:26 AM

            That's not a good comparison though. Most concerts last between 2 to 4 hours,and a hotel stay is usually three days. The Division is trying to position itself to be a game that lasts hundreds,if not thousands of hours. So essentially what you would need to do is to not just ban people for that one concert or that one hotel stay. You would have to ban them from every single hotel of that particular chain,EVER,and that particular concert venue EVER.

            Also,I find it weird that they don't specify what cheat they are talking about. If you are talking about a PVP cheat,I would say a harsh punishment is deserved.If we are talking about strictly PVE,then it seems like way too severe of a punishment that really doesn't effect other players.Are they talking about straight up cheats or just an exploit?

            If it's an exploit,then they need to rethink the whole punishment thing,because just about every single MMO,and MMO type of game has one somewhere,so in essence,don't hate the player,hate the game.

        • reply
          April 8, 2016 3:22 AM

          [deleted]

        • reply
          April 8, 2016 3:51 AM

          If they are banned from playing the game, yes. If they are banned from playing with others then no.
          A $60 dollar fine for what could be called violent acts against others is cheap.

          And no, it's not just a computer game, it's real people playing a computer game.

    • reply
      April 7, 2016 3:41 PM

      I went with a Retroactive Self Pre-Ban. Which now seems entirely justified.

Hello, Meet Lola