Cheaters never prosper, although cheats can be useful, rather just use a walkthrough or find help for your problem in a blog, used sparingly this method avoids the taint that cheating makes on the game experience………..

Cheaters never prosper so the saying goes……..

I reserve my judgement though as I know a cheat can help in a rough spot. However I find much more useful (and does not leave the taint of cheating on your game experience) is to find a walkthrough for the game, try look for some help there,and off you go, used sparingly this leave the full game experience and sense of achievement intact.

well in my opinion cheats are a nice way to play a game when you looking to play a nice relatively easy game when you just want to sit back and play a game with little to worry about in the way of challenges. There are also people who play games mostly for the story and acutely don't mind using the cheats to get a good story. i believe they should put some cheats in some games and leave them out of others. I also believe that there will be cheats one way or the other either by trainers or built in cheats. On saying that i feel their is a saying that fits the computer gaming industry is, "If theirs a will, theirs a way."

Those are starcraft 1 cheats… they dont work in 2.

> Is it too early for players to have access to cheats? The game was only released today, can’t people at least try the game before resorting to cheating?

It's not too early. I won't buy Starcraft 2 if it doesn't have cheat codes because I don't yet know if I'll be able to complete the single player campaign. If I can't, I don't want to have wasted my money. I was fine with the original Starcraft, but if not for cheat codes I would've wasted my money on Brood War as I couldn't pass the first level. And, whether more skilled players like it or not, some people won't be very good at the game and might be forced into a position of getting the most out of it they can.

I was disappointed with Blizzard for not introducing more 'gentle' cheat codes in more recent games in recognition of this – a 'power-up' well below full invincibility, but which might make a level a player couldn't pass just about passable. I understand why it wouldn't be seen as important, but it would've been nice.

Enter “terribleterribledamage” to activate god mode.

rofl @ that retard above me…

you fail.

Cheats do ruin a game for me when used excessively, but if it weren't for cheats, I wouldn't even be playing Starcraft II. I was abysmal at RTS, and going full-blown cheater at the beginning of the first Starcraft kind of helped me. I eventually weaned myself off the cheats, and the day came when I was able to beat the AI in a multiplayer match without cheating. (Like I said, I'm REALLY bad.) However, for some games, it just takes all the magic out of it, especially "skip level" cheats. I'm just looking for a few things to help me get by in one of the levels that I'm really, really stuck on, and I'm starting to get aggravated.

lol I still remember these cheats: iddqd idkfa idspispopd

Fail at real-time strategies? Perhaps so – my skill level at such games is certainly lower than average. Nonetheless I enjoy them when they have a good story, even though I'm a casual gamer at most and I usually play role-playing games, turn-based strategies and first-person shooters more than real-time strategies. I don't mind games demanding quick reaction from me, but the 'micro' style of quick reaction that's required for real-time strategies is something I've never become decent at.

Fail in a more broad sense, as might – in theory – justify using the term 'retard' or the evident schadenfreude you enjoyed? Logically not, although Internet anonymity welcomes you, as it does many others, into the warm bosom of rudeness, enticing you into making offensively superior gibes: logic be damned. I understand of course that your comment was emotional masturbation, rather than being an attempt to offend. Rest assured that I'm not offended.

Most games (excepting some Japanese role-playing games, life-simulation games like The Sims, and a few other genres) exclude a small fraction of their players from experiencing the entire game. This might normally be less than 10%, but even if it's 5% that's still significant. Should Blizzard ignore 1 in 20 players? Common sense and capitalism both say no. Cheat codes are important – they allow a game to be fully experienced by everyone, even those who can't or don't develop the skill the games requires of them.

This is why for some, checking if Starcraft 2 has cheat codes is a prerequisite to buying the game, rather than something they might do after buying it and "giving the game a chance", as Jonathan Cordes suggested. There's no use searching for a safety net after spending your money – it might not be there.

As for the idea of more 'gentle' cheat codes, consider this: if a game becomes too challenging for a player but it has significant storyline still to be experienced, the player will want to experience the storyline whilst being challenged as much as they can take. No cheat codes leave them with only a fraction of a game; harsh cheat codes senselessly fail to give a true solution which retains at least some challenge. A good gentle cheat code might increase the damage and HP of your units by a chosen fraction, leaving the player with some (small) sense of accomplishment.

god mode cheat: terribleterribledamage

I only use for rough spots.

the only thing i say is that if people can pass a level whitout cheats its good but people that cant passa level whitout cheats they search for walkthrought it dose not work very much some levels but i only say you can be trapped ina level because a part you dont understand i will tell you something : one day i were trying warcraft with walkthrough because i get in trouble with all things then i think something special " this is a startegy game not a normal game " then i try it my self and i pass like 3 levels that was a miracle ! i get stucked in… in level 1 ! beccause i were always using walkthrough !!!! . because guys is a strategy game a normal game well use too much cheats you want but in a strategy game you are getting to hell if a friend discover that you get 0 friends except if they use chetas too .

Other codes are:

whysoserious – Get 5 billion credits for use in armory
realmendrilldeep – Receive 5,000 gas instantly
moredotsmoredots – Units no longer cost any resources to build

Taken from here

Gotta love the word/character limit on some of these sites… I'll break this down into three parts. If you don't have anything more intelligent to say than, "TL,DR", then I pity you. However, it's 'kay and I forgive you. ^-^b

Cheats, in and of themselves, can be useful. At that same time, that only applies to the "reveal map" or "disable fog of war" cheats. Why? Because in games such as this, which Blizzard is notorious for, there are a lot of "hidden" things behind the scenes that you can't readily see. I'm on a mission right now and can't find something and it's aggravating! Otherwise, cheats are just "easy mode" for you idiots (yes, idiots) out there who refuse to develop your potential. Everyone has the POTENTIAL to be good at something. Great? That might be pushing it, but everyone can be good. (By that, I mean at *least* decent.) Here's how you do it:

Stay away from money cheats of any kind. Use what the map gives you. Nine times out of ten, they give you more than enough to build up an army, send it to it's death, then repeat this process another three or four times. If you run out of money at your base, guess what! You can always soft abandon that base and take your workers and what-not to another resource node; there's usually a few of those on the map. Especially if you can get to an enemy place… they typically have more resources in general.

Invincibility cheats are a HUGE no-no. Yes, one Marine running around an enemy encampment, blasting everything that gets in his way to oblivion and (assuming that cheat is like WC3) taking damage but having him pop back up to full health is amusing, but that really defeats the purpose of the game: To build an army, march it across the field, and wage war.

Instant wins… Why? If you're playing single player, chances are you want at the story. Okay, things that happen during the mission add to the story. Especially so for Blizzard games.

Mission skips. See above.

Faster construction/training, spell/abilities cost nothing, disable victory/loss condition(s). These were all lumped together because these, as well as map cheats, mean nothing to me. Usually games have it set to where if it affects you, it affects them. I didn't include upgrade/research things here because that takes away from the resource management aspect, and no supply didn't make the cut because that takes away from the limitation aspect. This isn't Command & Conquer, yo.

If you simply believe you cannot beat a game in a specific genre without cheats, then you are lying to yourself. It doesn't matter how "casual" of a gamer you are; if my 50 year old mother can go from not playing any game in her life to picking up First Person Shooters and beating them, albeit with the help of a walkthrough, you can do it, too. It takes a bit of patience, but that's about it. Expect to not get it right the first time. Perhaps not even the first *dozen* times or more! If you still find you cannot beat the campaign, well, then perhaps that genre isn't for you. Period. Getting the game – especially one such as this where it REQUIRES you to link your copy to an online account and thus never be able to go, "Meh, this game isn't fit for me, I'll give it to (Bob)" – is a waste of money no matter how you slice it. You'll likely play it once, start a second go, get bored, and never pick it up again. Why? Multiplayer has no cheats, so that won't interest you, and typically "Use Map Settings" games are either one-sided, offer nothing in the way of fun, or are overly complicated for you.

Although, I have to say this… armati, that is an *extremely* holier-than-thou attitude you adopted there. Logic, in and of itself as known by the human race, is all based on one's individual perception. Science is all about logic, supposedly, yet there are conflicting theories on several subjects. Why is that? One person's logic does not dictate another's. Take me, for instance. I'm almost deathly afraid of thunder. Not lightning at all, just thunder. A friend of mine is constantly telling me, "It's just air." I'm well aware of this. Does it make me any less afraid of it? No. It just sounds like something bad, and that's all it takes for my mind to trigger a response. Take, for example, insects. Most of them are relatively harmless, but does that make them any less creepy in appearance to people? I know I'm not in the same boat there.

Take, for example, the above. That guy said you fail. I'm actually inclined to agree with him, but in a potentially different context. He didn't explain his reasoning as to why he called you a retard and how you fail. While I don't buy the "retard" part, I do believe you fail. Here's the context: You claim you're bad at RTS games. Alright. You demand cheats as a prereq for buying one, no matter how curious you are in experiencing, first-hand, the story. Fine. It doesn't matter how bad you are at anything, you CAN be better. It takes patience. You saying you CAN'T get better is bull. You're just lazy. Pure and simple: You do not want to train yourself to be better. Maybe not great, but decent.

StarCraft is not hard. By any stretch of the imagination. II even more-so. This is the scenario that played through my mind when the appauling realization that some people may have thought such a game difficult. You probably breezed by the first few missions in the Terran campaign – because, come on, if you cheated for them then perhaps you *are* retarded – then got to the first actual "hard" one where you have to defend a spaceport, tried it once or twice, then stomped off, in a fit, to the Internet and got cheats. Rabble-rabble-rabble!

You got your cheats. Invincible, 10,000 minerals and vespene at once, what have you. You whomped that mission. Probably went ahead and wiped out the Zerg while you were at it. Why? Because you're invincible with a gargantuan army at your fingertips. Why wouldn't you?!

Problem is you robbed yourself of a learning curve. Instead of being patient, thinking things over, and trying various things, you cried uncle and ran off to the Internet with your tail between your legs like you were just whipped.

Despite what you said in the above, you have to take into consideration that all genres do, indeed, alientate some of their players on way or another. You have to take into account an entire series, not just one or two games from it. Take, for instance, Final Fantasy. They kept the same formula up until FFX, with some minor variations here and there thoughout the series. Then XI… an MMO. Alright, not *really* an FF game, just has moogles, chocobo, and viera. Moving on. XII comes about and, what-ho! Everything is completely different. *I*, for one, wished they had left the combat system the same, not taken XI and made it single player. Face it, that's basically what they did. Random monsters that respawn, albeit based on your distance from their spawn as opposed to a timer, get beat by a boss go grind said monsters for more XP… No more "random encounters" where you can't choose what happens in them. You might get attacked from behind or from two sides! In XII, you can pick and choose your battles. Those that you try to skip and aggro by accident, you can most likely win without much difficulty. No matter how much you suck at those games.

The Sims, too. I liked the Sims 2… haven't played 3 yet… I stopped following the expansions, though, because "pets" just seemed like an excrutatingly lame idea. It's one thing to have to take care of your virtual people in their virtual day-to-day life, but to have your virtual people take care of virtual pets in their virtual day-to-day life? Yeah, one step too far for me.

Back to the matter at hand: Cheats should not give anyone, anywhere, for any reason a sense of accomplishment. At all. A few chuckles, perhaps, but if you feel accomplished by cheating at a game, look at it this way: What else will you feel you accomplished by cheating at other things? Perhaps even some real life things. They say one thing leads to another, after all. (I, personally, do not believe as such, but there has been evidence that it is true for some people.)

Anyone who has to consider the possibility of cheats for a game as a prerequisite of buying said game should not play it in my opinion. There's no other way around that. If you feel you cannot micromanage a base – which, come on, you can hotkey your buildings in this and any other Blizzard games so you don't have to go "clicking around your base" to produce stuff (and, an improvement on the original that WarCraft III has is that you can hotkey MULTIPLE buildings in SCII) – then perhaps you shouldn't play it at all. It's an RTS, not an RTCF (Real Time Cheat Fest). Especially those two that were singled out above, and the two that followed in the next box. The rest, while making it easier, should also be used in moderation. Perhaps when you have a situation like mine: Game tells you to find something, no matter how many times you play that map you cannot find it, desire the whole map revealed TO find said something.

Bottom line: Cheats bad for the most part, and the rest are bad but passable when used in moderation. If you have to use cheats to beat a game, then don't play the game. Especially if you say, "RTS's are too hard, but FPS's are not!" FPS's require micromanagement, too, just in a different way. Especially more modern ones with reload times and limited ammunition and what-not. Patience will win the day, but if you don't have it, then just go away from the game and let us who want to play the game, the REAL game, be. Cheats water it down, and no amount of you or anyone else denying it will change that.

Asking a question like, "Cheats: Good or bad?" is a great way to start a debate. Unfortunately, I've never heard of this site before. Only found it during my quest for a reveal map cheat. That's why it's likely a wasted opprotunity.

Regards,
~Vertria

if u can't beat level 1 then you're retarded

You don't know if you can complete the single player campaign? Play on easy then. Relying on cheats in RTS's is a poor habit to start, especially since you'll be worthless if you ever make the transition to playing online.

Played and beat single player. They have like 4 difficulty settings. If you can't even beat the first few levels on the easiest setting without cheating, you should throw your computer away and jump off a cliff, because there must be something seriously retarded about you.

You are my hero!
was just going to succomb to cheats and you reminded me how bad AoE 2 became after i started typing in;
/lumberjack,
/Cheese Steak Jimmy's,
/robin hood,
and /rock on…

great post lol.

short and sweet =]

I played for a few days, got a nasty virus, had to format my HD and reinstall SC. Im looking for level skipping cheats because I really cant bring my self to go through about 20 levels again that I already beat a few days ago.

cheats should be allowed in video games, but if any kind of record is made of the victory it should say that cheats were used. cheats do ruin a game if overdone, but thats the choice of the person using them. Hacking online on the other hand is a different story, as there is absolutely no method of countering them without resorting to hacking yourself, hacking in single player is fine as you are only affecting your own game experience, but hacking online is just wrong as it ruins your experience and the experience of the other players who want a fair game, I know this is all true cuz I've been on every side of the spectrum, the fair player online, the fair player in single player, the cheater in single player, and much to my regrets the hacker online.