Which Games Issue HWID Bans? Publisher Policies Compared

This is a ledger of publisher statements checked on September 29, 2026, not a count of bans issued. A row marked Documented current has an official policy or rule that expressly describes a hardware restriction. Historical statement means a publisher said it used or introduced one in an older article; that article cannot by itself establish current criteria. Limited reference means a title-specific page mentions hardware bans but does not set out a full policy. Not established by checked sources says only what the cited pages allow us to conclude.

The labels matter because a policy covering an entire publisher, an older development post and a warning shown in one game answer different questions. For the underlying account and device distinction, read the ban definition.

Sources: [1][3]

Riot's support page says an HWID ban restricts access from a physical computer and is distinct from an account ban. It describes the restriction across Riot games and associates an active ban with VAN 152. That publisher-wide wording is relevant to VALORANT; it does not publish a game-by-game sanction rate. The VALORANT HWID spoofer comparison records provider listings separately from Riot's policy.

Embark's ARC Raiders Help Center states that hardware bans apply across Embark titles and prevent the specific PC from accessing its products. The page names ARC Raiders and THE FINALS. Activision's Call of Duty policy expressly defines hardware bans as device sanctions, says they can apply across franchise titles, and covers Call of Duty console and PC releases from Modern Warfare (2019) onward, including Warzone in its game list. The Warzone HWID spoofer comparison is a separate view of provider claims for that title. PUBG's current Rules of Conduct allow hardware-device access restrictions for specified unauthorized-program or device violations. These policies do not say every infraction receives a hardware restriction. The PUBG HWID spoofer comparison records product claims rather than PUBG penalty criteria.

Riot's May 31, 2026 support policy links an active HWID ban to VAN 152; Embark's October 29, 2025 page applies hardware bans across its titles. Activision's July 31, 2026 policy says device bans can apply across covered Call of Duty titles. PUBG's undated Rules of Conduct allow a hardware-device access restriction, subject to its penalty criteria. These are publisher policies, not results from CheatsMatch testing. A game comparison page lists market offerings separately from a publisher's enforcement rules. For broader product scope, the HWID spoofer hub collects provider-published listings separately from these publisher policies.

Sources: [1][2][3][4][7]

PUBG's August 2024 anti-cheat review says its team had introduced a method that issued temporary hardware bans in some circumstances and planned to refine its scope. Its March 2026 roadmap says the team would advance hardware-based re-entry blocks. Those sources document the method's history and plans; PUBG's current Rules of Conduct provide the present-day policy row above.

In an August 2021 Rainbow Six Siege developer Q&A, Ubisoft's team said hardware bans were a sanction it used. That statement is direct but old, so this table does not infer current triggers or duration. Fortnite's support page for a Hardware Identifiers Warning mentions hardware bans as context for the warning. It does not give a complete Fortnite hardware-ban policy.

PUBG's August 2, 2024 review describes a temporary hardware-ban method; its March 24, 2026 roadmap describes further hardware-based re-entry work as a plan. These older sources do not define the present-day penalty criteria. The Rainbow Six Siege HWID spoofer comparison and Fortnite HWID spoofer comparison are product pages; their existence does not prove a publisher's current sanction policy.

Sources: [5][6][8][9]

The checked Steam Support pages for Counter-Strike 2 describe game bans, competitive cooldowns and VAC bans. They do not establish a CS2 hardware-ban policy. That is a limit of the cited documentation, not proof that a hardware restriction is impossible or never used. It would also be misleading to relabel a VAC or account ban as an HWID ban because both limit game access.

If your concern is a particular CS2 notice, read its exact category in Steam Support. The absence of a hardware-ban statement on these two pages cannot settle an individual case.

Sources: [10][11]

This sample covers named publisher statements, not every PC game. None of the rows measures how often a sanction is issued or predicts what will happen to an individual account. Riot's publisher-wide policy, Embark's cross-title statement and Activision's “can apply” wording have different scopes. PUBG's current rules, its dated development posts and Siege's old team statement answer different questions; the older descriptions should not be substituted for a current rule.

A Windows Hardware IDs property is also a different subject from a publisher's private enforcement decision. The Windows definition guide explains the identifier terminology without pretending that a local device view can diagnose a game restriction.

Sources: [1][3][4]

Start with the wording of the publisher notice and its official support page. Riot associates VAN 152 with a device HWID restriction and offers a support request for review. Embark's page says its hardware bans are final and cannot be appealed. Activision directs players to its enforcement-status and appeal information, while its hardware-ban section says those sanctions are not eligible for appeal. Different publishers do not share one appeal process.

For a Riot code, the dedicated VAN 152 guide separates the error from an ordinary Vanguard connection or installation issue. Do not use a comparison listing as a substitute for an official sanction notice.

Sources: [1][2][3][4]

Each finding names the publisher's page date, if visible, and the September 29, 2026 check date. An undated support page stays undated. A newer plan does not silently turn an older statement into a current sanction rule. A later publisher policy change should trigger a new check of the affected row and its FAQ before the label changes.

The table is deliberately small. Adding a game requires a source that supports a precise title or publisher-level statement. Rumors, vendor listings and a game-specific product category do not meet that rule.