Over the past year, Iāve found myself in an unexpected and relentless battle, not in the digital arenas of Call of Duty, but against an unseen, unyielding opponent: a false permanent ban. This isnāt just my story; itās a glimpse into a widespread issue that has quietly affected thousands of players. It started with a simple misstep by an anti-cheat system and spiraled into a complex ordeal that questions the balance between vigilance against cheating and the rights of innocent gamers.
In the following account, Iāll take you through the twists and turns of my efforts to seek justice, the broader implications for the community, and the pressing need for accountability and change in Activisionās approach to fair play. Finally, Iāll share my optimism that new owner Microsoft can rise to the occasion and fix this ongoing issue.
TL;DR
Over the past year, I ā and likely tens of thousands of fellow gamers ā have struggled with false permanent bans in Activisionās Call of Duty, facing challenges in getting the company to acknowledge, resolve, or even respond to the issue. My personal integrity and history contrast sharply with the accusation of cheating. The broader context includes flawed anti-cheat software, the impact on the gaming community, and ineffective communication channels. Despite various efforts to address the problem, including reaching out to Activision executives and proposing solutions, there has been little progress, though the recent acquisition by Microsoft provides some hope. The article highlights the need for transparency, fairness, and better handling of these cases.
Introduction
You may find it helpful to review my (slightly rant-y) December 2022 post, Activisionās Faulty Anti-Cheat Software. That post marks the beginning of my journey and provides important background and context for what I write here.
This is a long article. Iāve tried to include all relevant details, because itās nearly impossible to share this information elsewhere (for reasons that will become clear). I hope it can serve as a central reference for others who encounter this issue.
If you do nothing else, please share this article with anyone who might be able to help (Activision, Microsoft, press, bloggers, influencers, gamers, etc.). Thank you in advance!
Analogy
Imagine a scenario familiar to many, yet distinctly parallel to the ordeal faced by falsely banned players in Call of Duty. Picture yourself as a member of a popular sports facility, one where youāve paid a yearly membership fee. This facility is not just a gym; itās a community hub where youāve spent countless hours over many years, honing your skills in a particular sport, say tennis (go with me here). Youāve always played by the rules, respected the facility, and maintained a spotless record. Your dedication and sportsmanship are known to all, and youāve become a respected figure among the regulars.
One day, without warning or explanation, you find your access revoked. Youāre informed that youāve been banned for misconduct in a basketball game ā a sport youāve never played at this facility. The shock is palpable. You try to reason with the management, but theyāre unyielding, offering no evidence or details of the alleged infraction.
They keep your membership fee, and your attempts to clarify or appeal the decision are met with silence or generic responses. The ban not only bars you from your beloved tennis courts but also stains your reputation. Fellow members, unaware of the specifics, begin to view you with suspicion. Youāre shunned from a community where you once held a place of esteem.
This bewildering scenario mirrors the situation with Call of Duty players who are hit by a false ban. The sports facility represents the game, and the tennis court is your chosen mode of play. The baseless basketball game accusation reflects the unfounded cheating allegations in a multiplayer context youāve never engaged in (at least in my case). Your unblemished history and commitment to the sport are disregarded in an instant, leaving you ostracized and helpless.
The analogy underscores the absurdity of the situation ā being punished for something youāve never done, in a setting youāve never ventured into, without any chance to defend yourself. Itās a sobering reflection of the arbitrary and unjust nature of these bans, underscoring the need for a more equitable and transparent system that respects the tenure and integrity of its members.
Me
Most of you donāt know me, but as you may already understand, the quality of my character ā specifically as it relates to integrity and cheating ā is tantamount to my defense. Unfortunately, Activision does not provide any proof when it issues a permanent ban, and there is no evidence that I can provide of my innocence. Someone on Reddit used this analogy: āItās like when you order food, donāt get it, and the support form says: take a picture of the missing food.ā Indeed.
So, am I an honest person? Am I trustworthy? While I donāt have the ability to call character witnesses to this article, I will don my bragging hat for just a moment and share a couple of relevant items (and God, I hate the bragging hatā¦please forgive me).
I received a perfect 5.0 review score at Microsoft where I spent 12 fantastic years (theyāve since changed the review scale). This score is a measure of both performance and personal character. So few of these scores were given that many employees have never met anyone who received a 5.0. And when this fact came up during a manager training workshop, none of my fellow attendees could believe it; talk about this mythical score monopolized the rest of our session. Most of my friends and colleagues donāt (well, didnāt) even know this.
I was also recognized with a Distinguished Alumni award by my hometown school district, and I flew home to accept the honor and give an acceptance speech. The selection criteria include someone who āexhibits inspirational leadership, character, and service.ā I am proud of this award, and I aspire each day to remain worthy of it.
As far as Call of Duty is concerned, Iāve bought every PC release since the series debut in 2003. According to the release list, thatās nearly 20 titles over that many years. A quick review of my gaming history would show that my CoD record isnāt just good, itās spotless. No warnings. No violations. No bans.
Now I am anything but perfect! Personal character is important to me, and I spend a lot of time on self-improvement. Still, there is no way for me to prove to you or Activision that I have never used cheat-related software or somehow manipulated the game to improve my score. Sadly, this is what I call a ātrust meā defense. The only time Iāve knowingly cheated in a game was to enable āgod modeā in Quake when I couldnāt beat a final boss in the single-player campaign. That was in 1996. So long ago.
While I grew up on video games and first-person shooters, I am now a casual player. I donāt play for hours on end, and the inability to play Call of Duty has no direct impact on my social life. Look, Iām not happy that the $70 I spent on the game is now worthless, but it wonāt lead to financial ruin. Even after this year-long struggle, Iād prefer to have the ban lifted so I can continue to play rather than get a refund.
Cheaters
After my original post received some traction, I heard from cheat software developers who offered to explain how Activisionās anti-cheat software, RICOCHET, actually works behind-the-scenes (including the kernel-level driver that monitors your system during game play). They claimed to have reverse-engineered the logic and already understood how the software could erroneously detect āunauthorized softwareā or āmanipulation of game data.ā Iāll admit that ā as a software developer myself ā I was curious. But I politely declined their offer, because I do not consort with cheaters.
I despise cheaters, and so does everyone else. They ruin the game. As stated in my original post, I havenāt played even one multiplayer game with humans in this release (only bots), but Iāve spent the past year talking to affected players and taking part in the community. Even without my own first-hand experience, one thing is perfectly clear: multiplayer Call of Duty has a massive and chronic cheating problem.
Against this proliferation of cheaters, itās easy to understand why most players are frustrated and mad that Activision canāt seem to keep them out of their multiplayer games. It only makes sense that anyone who might be a cheater is treated like one. From a playerās perspective, if Iāve been permanently banned by RICOCHETās perfect AI (and dare to admit it), I must be cheater, and therefore, part of the problem!
Iāve spent countless hours over the past year replying to tweets, Discord messages, YouTube comments, and Reddit posts about false bans. In each of those replies, Iāve tried to provide some solace and the sense that the banned player is not alone. Iāve also linked to posts and articles about the situation, including a false ban Discord server with thousands of members that is run by another wrongly accused player.
People inevitably respond to posts about bans with comments like āshut up cheaterā or āyouāre part of the problemā (or much worse and more vulgar), and the posts are immediately downvoted. It is extremely demotivating, and there is no way to have a meaningful conversation. The thought that a player might be innocent, and that Activisionās anti-cheat software might be wrong, is neverā¦everā¦up for consideration. As far as theyāre concerned, there is no such thing as being innocent until proven guilty. You are 100% guilty. End of story.
Well, at least until it turns around and happens to you. Karma, anyone?
Never mind the fact that Iāve come out and admitted to being banned. Or that most cheaters (Iāve come to learn) just set up a brand-new account and continue to play. Or that they use a method to circumvent so-called hardware ID bans that prevent using the game on the same machine. They generally donāt bother to post about the issue, send people to Discord servers, or spend a full year trying to remedy the situation. They just move on.
I have a whole new appreciation for people who are wrongly accused. The opportunity to be taken seriously ā for even a moment ā is a distant dream. Itās no wonder that people give up or remain silent. If someone has wrongly accused you of anything in your past, I now see you, and I apologize on their behalf.
So What?
I agree that among the many things to worry about in this world, being banned from Call of Duty probably doesnāt rank near the top of the list. As stated earlier, Iām an older casual player who can afford to lose $70, and I donāt play against other humans. So why have I spent so much time and energy on this?
- I care a lot about my personal character and take umbrage at being labeled a cheater.
- I spent $70 for a game that I can no longer launch (not even single player). Others have spent a whole lot more on deluxe editions, Battle Passes, and digital content from the in-game store.
- I am a man of principle, and itās wrong that Activision is allowed to continue this user-hostile behavior.
- While itās impossible to know exactly, there are thousands of members who have found their way to the false ban Discord and thousands more who have reported false bans on places like X/Twitter, and Reddit. If we speculate that only 10% of affected players have shared publicly, that makes tens of thousands that have gone unreported.
- I have bought every Call of Duty PC game since 2003, and Iād like to continue playing. Other players have also bought this game year after year.
- Many players use a Call of Duty release as a reason to upgrade their computers or consoles, often to the tune of hundreds or thousands of dollars.
- Some players, to avoid a false hardware ID ban, have purchased a completely different system just so they can continue to play! Thatās real dedication.
- For many, online multiplayer is an opportunity to spend time with friends. Itās an important part of their social circle. A ban can have a negative effect on their ability to socialize.
- A false ban is a kind of scarlet letter among fellow players that creates a stigma that is extremely difficult to overcome. Like being shunned.
- Playing Call of Duty after work or school can serve as stress relief. For someone who has invested significant time and energy to build up an in-game character, losing this activity can have a big impact.
- Though this article focuses mostly on my efforts, many unjustly banned players have taken similar steps, and the collective time that has been wasted is incalculable.
- I continue ā perhaps naively ā to believe that anyone (including Activision) who takes the time to fully understand this issue will agree that it absolutely needs to be fixed. To-date, 100% of the people who listen express shock that this behavior continues. This is my eternal optimism at work.
Because of my original post and almost daily involvement, Iāve inadvertently become a spokesperson for this issue. And because Iām a determined and persistent individual, I continue to press for a resolution.
The Bans
If you recall from my first post, I am banned for āusing unauthorized software and manipulation of game data.ā You may also recall that Activision states that āto preserve the integrity of our security systems and detection methods, this is the only information our policy allows us to share regarding your case.ā
In other words, it is impossible to know what software is considered unauthorized by Activision. Some have speculated that it might be triggered by RGB control software, MSI Afterburner, or even Discord. But then, many players have used that same software for years with no issue. Whatever it is, itās probably something that is being detected incorrectly by RICOCHET. Unfortunately, thereās really no way to know. My offers to allow an Activision employee to remotely connect to my PC to debug this issue have been met with silence.
Letās pretend for a moment that I was running something unauthorized. Perhaps Microsoft Excel. According to the official Call of Duty Security and Enforcement Policy document that was in effect at the time, for my first offense, āUser may be permanently suspended from playing the game online.ā They list the same penalty under the section titled, Decompiling or Reverse Engineering of Game Data.
While Iāve done neither of these things, I have not just been āpermanently suspended from playing the game online.ā Iāve been prevented from starting the game at all. So, despite agreeing to the policy, I canāt even play the single-player gameā¦the only version of the game Iāve ever played.
Some users have reported that Activision permanently banned them before starting the single-player campaign, almost right after their purchase! Many more have reported being banned within the first few minutes or hours of the campaign, again, having never launched a multiplayer game. Some are banned before firing a shot or joining a server. Still others report being banned after months of not playing the game at all. A couple of recent comments on Discord illustrate the point:
- āBought the game today, not played a COD in 3 or 4 years, turns out im banned appeal deniedā
- āsame thing with me. first cod in years, brand new to playing. now im $70 down with no playable account and they denied the ban appealā
Naysayers often state that this āsupposedā issue only happens on PC. In fact, a survey organized by the false ban Discord server (with 625 responses as of this post) shows that players are banned on PC, Xbox, and PlayStation. Posts on X/Twitter and Reddit tell the same story. Activision has also banned console players for āusing unauthorized software and manipulation of game data.ā Iām not even sure that itās technically possible for an average user to run unauthorized software or manipulate game data on a console.
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare III is 2023ās recent release, and anyone banned in MW2 is already pre-banned in MW3. Congratulations! Unless youāve read about these pre-bans in an article like mine, nobody will inform you in advance. In fact, Iām told that you can visit the store, buy the game, install it, and then discover your ban when you try to launch the game.
Those of us who follow these issues have noticed a significant uptick in the number of false bans being reported over the past couple of weeks (including a possible ban for clicking on an event link inside the game). Iām guessing that the bump is related to new or returning players who have purchased MW3.
Shadow Bans
Iād be remiss if I neglected to mention other ban-related issues experienced by fellow gamers. I donāt have first-hand experience with these, because ā if you havenāt heard ā I am under a permanent ban and donāt play multiplayer. As such, I canāt provide as much detail.
One issue that has seen an increase over the past year is the problem of unjustified shadow bans. According to players, the anti-cheat system is issuing bans in response to opponents who spam the system with false reports (among other unverifiable theories). While these bans are temporary, many gamers find themselves in a shadow ban loop. That is, once a temporary shadow ban is lifted, they find themselves banned again, then again, unable to play on normal servers with legitimate players. Shadow bans are a frequent topic on the Discord server, and the problem has been covered by gaming sites.
There are also reports of players being banned for foul language even though theyāve never used the voice chat feature. You can find similar stories for bans related to inappropriate or offensive player names, even though their names are seemingly innocuous and inoffensive.
Five Stages
Nearly all permanently banned players go through the same process, like the five stages of grief:
- Denial: āThat canāt be rightā¦Iāve never cheated in my life! It must be a mistake.ā
- Anger: After realizing that they canāt even launch the game, they visit Activisionās ban appeal page, where they fill out the details of their false ban. Theyāre confident in their success because they know they didnāt cheat. Mere hours later, though, the appeal is automatically denied, supposedly having been reviewed by the security team. For what itās worth, I have yet to hear from any permanently banned player whose appeal has been successful; and Iāve heard from hundreds, if not thousands, of players. Does that sound like a legitimate appeal process to you?
- Bargaining: Depending on the resourcefulness of the player, some will then try to reach out to Activision support. Any mention of a ban elicits a response like this (an actual reply): āSorry, but I am limited in support, since the decisions that are made in the Security Team are not shared with us, so we cannot appeal them.ā Conveniently, āWe also cannot communicate with the Security Team, because they do not have a contact form.ā Why do I imagine the Security Team locked inside of an impenetrable vault with no external access? I hope they get food and water! This phase can also involve reaching out to the Better Business Bureau (where Activision replies with a similar response) or filing an issue with the United States Federal Trade Commission.
- Depression: After exhausting the steps in the bargaining phase, players start to feel hopeless. āHow am I supposed to play with my friends?ā or āI just uninstalled CoDā¦Iām never going to buy an Activision game ever again!ā
- Acceptance: Players just give up. While they may accept the situation, itās not necessarily a happy or satisfied feeling. āThis is probably good for me anyway. I was spending too many hours playing CoD.ā
Awareness
A common rebuttal to these issues is: āif false bans are a real problem, why donāt I see lots of articles online or stories in the press?ā This is a fantastic question! It also forces me to reveal that Iām stuck squarely in the middle of that bargaining phase I mentioned earlier; I just wonāt give up.
The Socials
Like a lot of affected players, I started by venting my frustration anywhere and everywhere. I tweeted, posted in CoD-related subreddits, commented on YouTube videos, and wrote messages to MW2 Facebook groups. Tweets directed at Activision and related companies are ignored. Posts to CoD-related subreddits about bans are 1) not approved by moderators in the first place, or 2) summarily deleted immediately after posting. The same moderation-and-delete cycle happens on Facebook.
It doesnāt take too much of an imagination to understand why forums quash this topic. First, many of them depend on the good graces ā and perhaps the advertising revenue ā from Activision. Second, because the game is riddled with cheaters, moderators are loath to help these perceived cheaters air their complaints. As a result, visits to these forums give no indication whatsoever that false bans exist, let alone are a genuine issue.
The singular forum that ā until recently ā allowed ban-related posts is Redditās /r/activision. While it shares the companyās name, I donāt believe that it is an officially sanctioned subreddit. In early November 2023, the mods created an Activision Account and Ban Issues Mega Thread and implemented a new rule stating that they will remove ban-related posts outside of that thread. Sadly, is seems that some posts to that thread are also being removed by the moderators.
Still, a historical search of that subreddit reveals many posts on the topic. Yes, I understand that not everyone who claims to be the victim of a false ban is always being 100% truthful, but I encourage you to read through a few of the posts to form your own opinion (keeping in mind that itās impossible to show evidence of a playerās innocence).
The Press
Besides online forums, I have reached out to a very long list of reporters and publications. Iād like to thank Ted Litchfield at PC Gamer for his December 15, 2022 article, It looks like Call of Dutyās anti-cheat is permabanning innocent players. PC Gamer is the only online publication to date that has written a story about this issue, and itās a frequently shared post.
For the record, the end of the PC Gamer article incorrectly states that I am āattempting to organize claimants for a class action lawsuit against Activision Blizzard via Discord.ā This is not true. In fact, the Discord server is run by another affected player, and he has long since repurposed it as a discussion forum for people who are affected by false bans. I recently e-mailed the editors of PC Gamer to gauge interest in a follow-up article, but unfortunately, I have yet to receive a response.
As to the other reporters and publications, there are too many to list (some very high-profile), and Iām not here to shame them. Like online communities, though, these publications depend on advertising revenue. They also need to maintain a good relationship with their Activision counterparts. And oh yeahā¦I almost forgotā¦I sound like a cheater with all this talk about false bans. Some politely decline, a few have followed-up with moderate interest, but most have simply ignored my inquiry. Disappointing, but not completely unexpected.
So, āif false bans are a real problem, why donāt I see lots of articles online or stories in the press?ā Simply, because Activision is a huge and influential company, false bans are bad news, and Call of Duty is a juggernaut.
Desperation
Put yourself in my situation. Youāve been permanently banned from a favorite $70 game. You didnāt do anything wrong, and youāve been labeled a cheater. You followed the appeals process, were denied, and support (via web, e-mail, and twitter) wonāt respond to any of your requests. You canāt find anything about the issue online, and when you ask for help, your posts are never approved, or theyāre deleted. What do you do?
Youāre convinced that anyone who considers the issue seriously for even a few minutes will agree that something is wrong, so you decide to contact the powers-that-be at Activision. Thatās exactly what I did.
Activision Contacts
Over time, Iāve sent personal appeals to Activisionās CEO, COO, their PR department, their Senior Director of Communications, a VP of Business and Application Security, the legal affairs department, and their Senior Legal Counsel. Iāve also e-mailed some heads of community engagement and even a few employees who have publicly shared their contact details or engaged directly with the public.
Each of these contacts heard from me more than once, and all the messages were friendly, respectful, and an attempt to help resolve the situation for all falsely banned customers (not just my own personal tech support). None of the e-mails bounced back as undeliverable. Would you like to guess how many responses Iāve received to date? Thatās rightā¦exactly zero. Iām convinced that there must be a ādonāt talk about bansā dictate across the whole company.
Now put yourself back into my situation. Youāve spent weeks trying to alert anyone at Activision, offering to help debug this issue, all for naught. Nobody will respond. Whatās next?
Someone made an ill-advised trip to an Activision office. I remember initially reading this article and wondering what kind of person would go to such lengths. After my own permanent ban and stonewalling by Activision, I found myself a little more empathetic. Still, I would never encourage that kind of behavior, even if I understand his frustration. Donāt do this.
Just Cheat?
Itās at this point, dear reader, that Iām reminded of a quote by Tim Robbinsā character, Andy Dufresne, in 1994ās Shawshank Redemption where he states, āI had to come to prison to be a crook.ā
Having spent so much time in the Call of Duty community talking to affected players and hearing from self-admitted cheaters who see permanent bans as a mere speed bump, I will admit to being briefly tempted by the siren song of their devious methods. I suspect that many frustrated players at the end of their rope take this proverbial off-ramp and never look back. Me? See that prior section on personal character. Thereās no way Iād do that to myself.
But isnāt it ironic to think that many of Activisionās most passionate and loyal customers end up being driven to cheat precisely because of a false permanent ban and inaction by the company? Itās disheartening.
EULA
An almost universal comment comes up at this point: āwe need to file a class action lawsuit!ā Now Iām not a lawyer, I donāt play one on TV, and Iām not giving anyone legal advice. That said, I have read and written my fair share of legal documents, and I have been more involved than Iād like in professional legal matters in the past (often from a big company perspective).
Everyone who plays Call of Duty is required to agree to an end-user license agreement (EULA). While the language in the EULA has changed over time, the version from November 2022 includes a provision that residents in North America agree to binding arbitration by an Activision-selected third-party and a waiver that explicitly prevents class action lawsuits. Yep, you read that right. Customers opt out of class action activity as soon as they agree to the EULA. As you can read in this blog entry about Epic Games and Fortniteās EULA, these provisions are nearly impossible to overcome.
Iāve learned that language like this appears in almost any modern consumer agreement, including agreements with internet companies, cell phone providers, and other common services. In fact, Iāve even reached out to Sen. Richard Blumenthalās office regarding The Forced Arbitration Injustice Repeal (FAIR) Act he co-authored with Rep. Hank Johnson. If passed, āinstead of forcing arbitration, the FAIR Act would allow consumers and workers to choose between arbitration and the Court system after a dispute occurs.ā The bill has been re-introduced, and while itās been passed by the House, it hasnāt passed the Senate. So we wait.
The Call of Duty EULA includes a 30 Day Right to Opt Out clause that requires players to send an e-mail to Activision within 30 days of the gameās purchase to ānot be bound by the arbitration agreement and class action waiver provisions.ā Sadly, because almost nobody reads the EULA (āI just want to play my game!ā), by the time someone considers legal action, the time to opt out has likely passed.
Itās important to note that non-U.S. countries have different laws about forced arbitration and class action lawsuits, so again, please donāt take anything Iāve written in this section as legal advice. As always, consult with your own attorney.
For completeness, I have also sent a summary of this issue to Lena Khan at the Federal Trade Commission and submitted a case to an FTC Open Meeting. While I have not yet received a response, Iām also not surprised, especially given the FTCās involvement in Microsoftās recently closed $69 billion Activision acquisition.
Microsoft
The ever-pending status of Microsoftās Activision acquisition over the past year has made it difficult to get reporters, the press, the FTC, and others to engage with this issue. The $69 billion deal was always looming in the background, making a relatively minor false ban problem seem irrelevant in comparison. Some reporters even recommended that I hold off talking to them until the acquisition was complete, citing the sheer volume of distracting Activision- and Microsoft-related coverage.
As I mentioned at the beginning of this article, I was a proud Microsoft employee for 12 years from 2000 through 2012. I eventually ended up as a Senior Director in our Developer and Platform Evangelism organization, primarily responsible for our big technical events: PDC, MIX, and the first BUILD conference. For those who arenāt familiar with these conferences, think of them like Appleās WWDC or Google I/O. Basically thousands of tech folks in a big convention center.
In that role, I spent much of my time working on keynotes and messaging with our senior executives and their respective teams. Driving from building to building on campus introduced me to people from across the company, and I remain in close contact with many of them to this day. Because of these relationships, and because of the good people I know at the company, I am optimistic that this problem can now be resolved.
However, since the deal closed on October 13, 2023, I have had great difficulty reaching anyone at Microsoft who can address this issue. I was sure that my initial round of e-mail would garner at least one useful response, if not only because of my twelve-year alumni-in-good-standing status. The minimal responses I have received were from my second round, and unfortunately, none of those former colleagues are in a position to assist. Additionally, because gaming has always been a separate activity within Microsoft, most of my contacts donāt know anyone in the gaming organization, so they canāt even forward my message.
Regarding the Activision acquisition, President Brad Smith stated that it āwill benefit players and the gaming industry worldwide.ā I really hope that addressing Call of Dutyās false ban problem is one of the first player benefits. This is Microsoftās opportunity to step in and do the right thing.
Remediation
As Teddy Roosevelt once said, ācomplaining about a problem without posing a solution is called whining.ā And in that spirit, Iāve spent a lot of time thinking about solutions and remedies for the false ban issue. I present them here for your consideration.
Public Recognition
Activision should issue a public statement acknowledging the problem. This statement should detail the issues with the RICOCHET system (without revealing sensitive IP) that led to false bans and express a commitment to rectify the situation. By publicly addressing the issue, the company can provide vindication to those who are falsely banned and encourage them to return to the game.
In the interest of transparency, Activision should provide regular updates on the measures being taken to address the issue, just like the anti-cheat improvements they cover on their blog. This transparency would build trust and demonstrate accountability.
Unbanning
Activision should implement a thorough review process for all bans issued since the integration of the RICOCHET system. This process should be transparent and expedited to restore access to wrongfully banned players. If a clear determination cannot be made, the account should be unbanned by default. As mentioned earlier, cheaters have likely moved on to new accounts anyway.
Consider compensating affected players. This could include in-game credits, extensions of subscription services, or other forms of restitution to acknowledge the inconvenience and distress caused. Remember that these are innocent and passionate players who want to continue playing Call of Duty. They never cheated in the first place, yet theyāve been shunned by the community and unable to play for up to a full year.
System Improvements
Activision should review and modify the RICOCHET anti-cheat system to reduce false positives. This could involve refining the algorithms, incorporating more nuanced detection mechanisms, and regular system audits to ensure fairness and effectiveness.
Create a structured system for players to report concerns and feedback about the gameās anti-cheat measures. This could include dedicated forums, regular surveys, and community Q&A sessions. Review feedback and reporting systems from other games and borrow best practices.
Before rolling out new updates or changes to the anti-cheat system, conduct better beta testing with community involvement. Feedback from these tests should be used to fine-tune the system.
Improve customer service channels to address ban disputes. This could involve setting up a dedicated support team to handle ban-related issues, ensuring that playersā concerns are heard and addressed promptly. As it stands today, customers feel stonewalled by the lack of reasonable or useful responses.
Provide clear and updated information about what constitutes cheating and the processes in place for detecting and penalizing such actions. The terms of use are already out-of-sync with the penalties, and improved information can help set clear expectations and reduce misunderstandings. Include a list of unauthorized software (even if itās a partial list) so that players know what to avoid.
Reputation
In the spirit of fairness and recognizing the dedication of long-standing community members, I propose that Activision incorporates a playerās reputation and history into their decision-making process. This approach acknowledges the value of those who have been part of the Call of Duty community for years, maintaining a solid record. A playerās longevity and history should weigh in their favor when assessing ban disputes.
Itās unjust to equate a decades-long loyal player, with no prior incidents, to someone whoās new or has a questionable history. This system would not only incentivize good behavior but also demonstrate a level of respect and appreciation for the communityās most steadfast members. After all, a consistent record of fair play over several years should count for something significant in situations where a playerās integrity is under question.
By implementing these remedies, Activision can take significant steps towards resolving the current crisis and rebuild trust with falsely banned Call of Duty players. Such actions would not only rectify the immediate issue but also set a positive precedent for how the company can responsively and ethically manage their own player communities.
Conclusion
As I conclude this recount of my year-long struggle with a wrongful ban in Call of Duty, itās clear that this issue extends far beyond my individual case. Itās a reflection of a larger problem with a flawed anti-cheat system that can ensnare innocent players. Throughout this journey, Iāve encountered others who share my frustration and the realization that our voices often go unheard.
However, this experience has also highlighted the importance of perseverance and the need for greater transparency. Itās a call to Activision (and Microsoft) to recognize and rectify these issues, ensuring that a cheat-free environment does not come at the cost of unjustly penalizing honest players. In the end, this isnāt just about a game; itās about standing up for fairness and integrity, values that should always be at the core of our gaming experience.
How You Can Help
If youāre an Activision or Microsoft employee (or if you know one) and youāre frustrated ā even angry ā about this situation, thank you for your humanity! I firmly believe that the system is broken, not the people. But itās the people who can ultimately make a difference.
If you know anybody who can help to raise awareness of this issue, please share this story with them. The solution to this problem starts with open communication, and I would go to almost any length to meet or talk with the right person.
Thank you for your time and consideration.
Update on 11/28/2023: Added TL;DR section. Also, for another perspective on this issue, check out Huang Fang Longās post: Almost 9 months after launch, Activisionās Ricochet system is still banning innocent players in Call of Duty: Modern Warfare II and the new Warzone.
Update on 12/2/2023: As this article notes, āRICOCHET has had problems with misconstruing software applicationsā and has falsely banned thousands of Call of Duty players using the NVIDIA GeForce Now service: 3 Call of Duty titles joined NVIDIA GeForce Now yesterday, but some gamers are claiming to be banned after playing on the cloud. Sounds familiar.
Update on 12/5/2023: Many Sony PlayStation accounts were recently suspended for ostensibly violating the terms of service, even though players claim that they havenāt done anything wrong. Hmmm. At least in this case, it sounds like some accounts have been restored: PlayStation Permanently Suspends Online Accounts for No Clear Reason
Leave a Reply