If there’s one thing that ruins an online game more than having a terrible internet connection or a lack of proximity to the game’s servers, it’s cheaters. People who use external software, or in some cases external hardware to make the game less fun for everyone else deserve a special place in the ninth circle of hell.
Recently, we’ve seen some companies take a pretty hard stance when it comes to cheaters. Overwatch, as one example, is perma-banning cheaters on the first offense. While that may seem like it’s a harsh penalty, it’s a great way to prevent cheating from happening.
And now, Ubisoft is doing the same with Rainbow Six Siege. Anyone caught cheating in the tactical (supremely tense) tactical shooter could be shown the door, permanently – even if it’s their first offense.
“The presence of cheating in the game is something we take very seriously, and is a priority on the development team,” the company said. “This update is one step among many that we are working on to better engage with the community on this issue.”
According to Ubisoft, this is the sort of stuff their systems will be looking for:
“Cheating/Modding/Hacking: Player is running a modified or otherwise unauthorized version of the game client or a third party software which provides any sort of unfair advantage (wallhacks, aimhacks…) or causing detriment to other players’ experience: Maximum penalty is permanent ban on first offense.”
The wording there is pretty open to interpretation, and Ubisoft may dole out lesser bans for smaller offenses, but beyond that it seems pretty clear cut. Don’t cheat, or you will get booted.
I don’t (think) I’ve encountered many cheaters on the Xbox One version of the game – and instead, when I do play my experience is instead ruined by teamkillers and Leroy Jenkinses.
The timing of the new code of conduct is fortuitous; the recently unveiled $15 “lite” Starter Edition of Rainbow Six Siege on PC means the game should see a relative influx of new players – who hopefully shouldn’t be cheating their way to victory. To see why you should give the game a decent go, read our review here. Now if only Ubisoft could do the same for The Division.
Last Updated: June 8, 2016
Ottokie
June 8, 2016 at 09:52
Maybe they can save what remains of the division if they actually implement the same strict rules there. But as far as I know they don’t have proper anti cheat systems in place apart from investigating user reports ¯_(?)_/¯.
Alien Emperor Trevor
June 8, 2016 at 09:56
They seem to be a lot stricter on the esport hopeful titles than the not.
Hammersteyn_hates_Raid0
June 8, 2016 at 09:58
Ubisoft when they heard about all the hacking…
http://i.memeful.com/media/post/0MApZOw_700wa_0.gif
Kromas GG
June 8, 2016 at 10:02
Oh look Overwatch is praised for their zero tolerance policies on cheating. Let’s also do that.
Not that it is a bad thing to take from Overwatch mind you.
Admiral Chief Maximum Effort
June 8, 2016 at 10:03
Good
Strawman Jim
June 8, 2016 at 10:20
Cheaters…. I have only the following to say “GTFO or GIT GUD!”
Raptor Rants
June 8, 2016 at 11:25
Just a point of interest. Services like MSI Afterburner OSD often are picked up as cheating as it hooks DirectX calls to determine FPS/GFX load etc. So they need to be careful for just imparting first time bans without proper investigation.
We all know developers aren’t afraid of running batch bans and then innocents get caught in the crossfire
HairyEwok
June 8, 2016 at 11:43
Wanted to check the price of Siege on steam last night and it would seem it has been taken off.
Darren Peach
June 8, 2016 at 23:57
Yeah, Perma ban after they got your money ? I sense a potential lawsuit. Not advocating cheating in any way. But while cheaters should be held accountable for unsavory actions that ruin a experience, I also think that accepting money from someone and subsequently banning them is questionable. The onus should be on the service provider to provide a environment that is secure and immune to cheating in the first place. The consumer has rights and when a company targets individuals that have very little recourse comparitively speaking, there is a fundamental flaw in the ethics of what that company is doing. The Division and Ubisoft serves to be a good example of a company that made severe mistakes by virtue of the fact that their product was flawed and open to exploitation.
We need to get away from the kind of thinking that serves to penalise, demonise and isolate that which we deem beyond our help. I think there is value in a system that embraces a method of rehabilitation and investment of goodwill. The topic of this article serves to be a extention of the inherent need for humanity to resort to extreme measures to resolve problems as opposed to investing time and intellect into a more measured reaction.
If we always ask ourselves for better soloutions, surely we would be better off for doing so ?