Permanent Bans For Cheating In The Division

relapse808 said:
Maybe you dont let your 3 year old play a mature rated game. Simple fix.

I agree that if you cheat period the PC should be banned kind of how Overwatch has approached this issue. I'm tired of excuses like the one in quotes.
Click to expand...

Only a moron would think a 3 year old would be playing that. It was a reference to when he is older in his teens.

I just think it's a given people will cheat online as it's been happening since there was online play. If they can fix that more power to them.
 
JayteeBates said:
Only a moron would think a 3 year old would be playing that. It was a reference to when he is older in his teens.

I just think it's a given people will cheat online as it's been happening since there was online play. If they can fix that more power to them.
Click to expand...

It's definitely ridiculous that he even thought a 3 year old would be playing a PC game online, not to mention looking up and then running cheats. However, it doesn't change that kids can definitely do things to cause headaches for parents. You know what your job is to do? Discipline them appropriately. If you get banned because your kid crapped up the gaming experience of other players, so what? Other players shouldn't have to put up with it at all. It's the same thing as getting kicked out of a restaurant or theater because people are tired of putting up with someone else's misbehaving child. Your job as a parent is to deal with it, not subject everyone else to it.
 
Last edited:
I wish they can get their cheating policy implemented into R6 Siege.
 
I propose an incendiary device in each console that would blow up in the face of the ones caught cheating.
 
Merc1138 said:
Actually, they did update the code of conduct for r6 siege(I think they actually announced it for r6 before the division) Code of Conduct Update: Up to Permanent Ban for First Offense Cheaters | Rainbow Six® Siege Game News & Updates | Ubisoft® (US)



I honestly hate that excuse. It may be their first game of this type, but it's not their first PC multiplayer game, and they've had plenty of examples over the years of what happens when you let cheaters run rampant. The fact is that they did nothing for months(till their community managers finally started getting 1 shotted by AKs from across the map live on stream), while letting it blow out of control.

The same "it's their first game of this type" excuse was given for the horrid loot system, as if they had no other examples over the years to look at well before release and see what happens when people get fed up with a stingy loot system in a loot game. The only reason the loot was so scarce is that they had a bunch of developers from pay-will ridden mobile games on board. They could have seen "loot 2.0" and how it affected the Diablo 3 community in a positive way ages ago while the division was still in development, but ignored it.
Click to expand...
Agree. A better way to put it would be: what they have is a fuck up on that part and it could be excused at a lower severity, but what happened is simply an oversight (unlikely) and most likely they had to focus resources on other areas of the game instead.

I genuinely liked the game through the SP and a little after in the DZ, teaming up withpeople and so on. For me it was the first "next gen" game that felt like it and made me wanna play. After about 70-80 hours of game play I felt the game become more of a grind than fun and after about 100 hours stopped playing.

I think the issue also stems from people wanting to constantly play it and the whole obsession with mp in today's gaming culture. A few years ago you had a game that you liked, played it through and had great memories of it, even replaying the campaign if you really liked it. I get that the genre of the game lends itself to being played longer, but the SP was great and the DZ was definitely atfun and new experience. To me at least.

I think people overlook the initial creation and alway want "more more more". I know that's an oversimplification, but you get the gist. New content is great, if it's of the same quality as the main story, but let's appreciate what the game did in the first place.
 
Nah, I don't believe the major problems in the division were oversights. If anything it was an ego problem of "well, Blizzard, Bungie, and others didn't get it right at first and relented to the masses, but our vision will work!". At best the DZ was an interesting social experiment, they just forgot things like PvP damage normalization(it doesn't matter if I can get 200k HP and 60% dmg mitigation after a 30% PvP dmg nerf, if the other guy still does 1.5 million damage with a headshot). It gets more ridiculous when you look at some of the bugs though, like "protection from elites" actually doing the opposite and increasing the damage players took, at that point how do you trust any stats on items in a loot game? Theorycrafting is one thing, but the community shouldn't have to test every individual stat to at least make sure they aren't doing the opposite of the claimed effect.

Regarding the SP campaign... go back and put some serious thought into it. There were a dozen missions, it was a "Tom Clancy" game where you run around with realistic looking weapons yet everything is a bigger bullet sponge than the typical game that doesn't have a "realistic" scenario. The main storyline of civil unrest and everything going to hell after a plague on Black Friday is fine, but then the good guys are secret government agents that only answer to the president who run around playing Judge Dredd, with the end-boss being helicopter that you shoot at with small arms fire till it eventually crashes. Their end-game content was an APC sitting stationary in a room that occasionally used a big AoE attack while waves of soldiers just ran at you that in reality had less going on for it than most of the missions you could run co-op(their latest being 2 outdoor "rooms" with waves, an enemy that does the same AoE attack, and the same bomb planting mechanic just used on a different object).

The best thing ubisoft could do right now? Announce a zero tolerance cheating policy for Ghost Recon: Wildlands before it launches.
 
Well, I don't have to put thought into it. I liked the game a lot and there is nothing more to it. This for once was a "next gen" game that felt engaging to play and the environments and attention to detail really took it to the next level.
 
Merc1138 said:
They did, check the link earlier in the thread.
Click to expand...

They can change their policies all they want... bottomline is that the cheating goes on and it will continue to do so with their crappy anti-cheat system. Supposedly they are going to implement a client side anti cheat soon.
 
G_Sup said:
They can change their policies all they want... bottomline is that the cheating goes on and it will continue to do so with their crappy anti-cheat system. Supposedly they are going to implement a client side anti cheat soon.
Click to expand...
You said you wished they would change their policy, they did. Now you don't care if they change their policy?

Even if they were to implement some sort of cheat detection, the fact is that they need a policy indicating that they'll do something about it. The problem is that unless they go as far as blizzard seemingly has with overwatch(the reports of cheaters with multiple accounts finding themselves banned over and over), it still won't accomplish much. The game is already down to $26 or so on third party key sales sites and will only continue to get cheaper. If it gets cheap enough, the cheaters simply won't care if they get banned once a week because they still got to screw with everyone else for a few hours. Games need to launch with these strict anti-cheating policies in place to hopefully make a difference, rather than hoping 6 months later the community still hasn't fallen apart.
 
Merc1138 said:
You said you wished they would change their policy, they did. Now you don't care if they change their policy?

Even if they were to implement some sort of cheat detection, the fact is that they need a policy indicating that they'll do something about it. The problem is that unless they go as far as blizzard seemingly has with overwatch(the reports of cheaters with multiple accounts finding themselves banned over and over), it still won't accomplish much. The game is already down to $26 or so on third party key sales sites and will only continue to get cheaper. If it gets cheap enough, the cheaters simply won't care if they get banned once a week because they still got to screw with everyone else for a few hours. Games need to launch with these strict anti-cheating policies in place to hopefully make a difference, rather than hoping 6 months later the community still hasn't fallen apart.
Click to expand...

Dude, you can talk your lame politics all you want. Bottomline is that the game is infested with cheaters. Blah Blah Blah your policies.... the game is being raped by cheaters. You play at all?
 
G_Sup said:
Dude, you can talk your lame politics all you want. Bottomline is that the game is infested with cheaters. Blah Blah Blah your policies.... the game is being raped by cheaters. You play at all?
Click to expand...
wtf are you talking about? Did you read the thread? If so, you'd know what games I've discussed having owned and played. Politics? There's nothing about politics in that post. Yes, the game is infested with cheaters, thanks for agreeing with me? Do you even understand what a "policy" is? You're complaining about me pointing out that the policy changed so they would actually ban cheaters(assuming they can detect them but that's a separate matter), why? Because you're a cheater? If you're not a cheater, then why the hell are you complaining? You realize that without changing their policy to actually ban the cheaters, nothing would happen at all, right? And even if they did have the best cheat detection on the planet, it wouldn't accomplish anything if the policy wasn't to ban the cheaters once detected(There have been other games where cheaters get detected but aren't banned, and no I'm not saying they should do that here).

It's like you didn't bother to actually read, picked out a couple of words, and posted just for the sake of arguing.
 
Rustynuts said:
This is why I only play single player games.
Click to expand...

It's pretty much why multiplayer is dead to me. When I game my 3-4 hours/month I don't have time to figure out whos cheating & who is simply a teenager that plays 16 hrs/day in mom's basement.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top