Well, much has been said about this already, so I'll just reaffirm the most disconcerting notion that this is a system ripe for abuse and that Valve appears to test the waters with such policies, which might be the foreshadowing for some more dubious attempts.
Valve screws up again. Developers now allowed to ban Steam users from playing their games.
Débuté par
Garryydde
, avril 30 2015 09:48
Retour en haut
#52
Posté 30 avril 2015 - 02:58
Cyonan
-
- Members
- 19 371 messages
Valve used to be half decent, but it seems they want to just throw away any good standing they had with gamers.
This is why I've been saying for a while now that Steam needed some real competition.
#54
Posté 30 avril 2015 - 03:06
ruggly
-
- Members
- 7 562 messages
TFW Origin is looking better than steam.
- SolVita aime ceci
#55
Posté 30 avril 2015 - 03:07
Jstatham1227
-
- Members
- 2 102 messages
this is going to be so abused, I can't help but laugh at it.
#56
Posté 30 avril 2015 - 03:14
Jehuty
-
- Members
- 3 148 messages
Attention steam users
We have made it so that in order for you to in order to use our services, you have to sell your body and soul to us. You will also send your children unto us so we can make them work at a sweat shop against their will, pumping out mods with a price tag.
In exchange you can play our games while we rule you with an iron fist and hit you with an iron d**K when we see fit.
With love
Valve.
- Silver Moone, Dio Demon et TheLittleBird aiment ceci
#57
Posté 30 avril 2015 - 03:19
Cainhurst Crow
-
- Members
- 11 374 messages
There's no system for bans being examined for legitimate cheating. There's no appeal process mentioned in this new policy. There's no mention of whether a refund will be issued after a ban for said game. There isn't even a rules and regulations section for what is and isn't a bannable offense.
Everything is up to the subjective whim of the devs, and valve does 0 research on the issue in their own words. Devs decide who should be banned, send the notice tl valve, who ban the user automatically.
If people can't see how thst system can be abused when you have devs like the one who made thst day z ripoff and claimed it was players fault that content promised to them at and before launch wasn't in the game, and banned anyone who criticized them, I honestly quedtion your sanity.
Remember, they get to keep your money after they ban you. They get everything they need tl keep in business up front with 0 system to return it to you.
Everything is up to the subjective whim of the devs, and valve does 0 research on the issue in their own words. Devs decide who should be banned, send the notice tl valve, who ban the user automatically.
If people can't see how thst system can be abused when you have devs like the one who made thst day z ripoff and claimed it was players fault that content promised to them at and before launch wasn't in the game, and banned anyone who criticized them, I honestly quedtion your sanity.
Remember, they get to keep your money after they ban you. They get everything they need tl keep in business up front with 0 system to return it to you.
- Dermain, BigEvil et Dark Helmet aiment ceci
#58
Posté 30 avril 2015 - 03:27
Jehuty
-
- Members
- 3 148 messages
There's no system for bans being examined for legitimate cheating. There's no appeal process mentioned in this new policy. There's no mention of whether a refund will be issued after a ban for said game. There isn't even a rules and regulations section for what is and isn't a bannable offense.
Everything is up to the subjective whim of the devs, and valve does 0 research on the issue in their own words. Devs decide who should be banned, send the notice tl valve, who ban the user automatically.
If people can't see how thst system can be abused when you have devs like the one who made thst day z ripoff and claimed it was players fault that content promised to them at and before launch wasn't in the game, and banned anyone who criticized them, I honestly quedtion your sanity.
Remember, they get to keep your money after they ban you. They get everything they need tl keep in business up front with 0 system to return it to you.
At least some devs, like Bungie take it like men. Others are crybabies that are too worried about their already shitty reputation and have to get payback for the slightest ounce of criticism.
But they play a certain little game... just read the second line on my sig and that's how they act.
- Silver Moone aime ceci
#59
Posté 30 avril 2015 - 03:27
The Devlish Redhead
-
- Members
- 2 770 messages
You know what?
If they do ban people and the ban is unfair they should give a refund for the game you can't use any more.
#60
Posté 30 avril 2015 - 03:29
Cyonan
-
- Members
- 19 371 messages
You know what?
If they do ban people and the ban is unfair they should give a refund for the game you can't use any more.
They should.
but they wont.
- Dermain aime ceci
#61
Posté 30 avril 2015 - 03:29
Jehuty
-
- Members
- 3 148 messages
You know what?
If they do ban people and the ban is unfair they should give a refund for the game you can't use any more.
They should kill themselves actually.
#62
Posté 30 avril 2015 - 03:33
Jstatham1227
-
- Members
- 2 102 messages
You know what?
If they do ban people and the ban is unfair they should give a refund for the game you can't use any more.
valve giving back money?
Might as well ask EA not to rush game production.
- Dermain, Silver Moone, BigEvil et 1 autre aiment ceci
#63
Posté 30 avril 2015 - 03:35
bmwcrazy
-
- Members
- 3 622 messages
They should kill themselves actually.
The people who are banned?
Yes, absolutely.
#64
Posté 30 avril 2015 - 03:37
Jehuty
-
- Members
- 3 148 messages
The people who are banned?
Yes, absolutely.
The people who banned others for the slightest ounce of criticism.
#65
Posté 30 avril 2015 - 03:40
Jstatham1227
-
- Members
- 2 102 messages
their will no longer be bad games, cause all those who played them and complained are banned. lel
- ObserverStatus, The Hierophant et Jehuty aiment ceci
#68
Guest_KnossosTNC_*
Posté 30 avril 2015 - 03:57
Guest_KnossosTNC_*
Guest_KnossosTNC_*
-
- Guests
Unlike the paid mods fiasco, I don't see anything wrong with this - as long as it is implemented to the letter of the original statement. If you read Valve's statement carefully, it describes a very specific process to deal with a very specific problem:
This is aimed at a very specific and real problem in multiplayer games: people using cheats, hacks and generally being disruptive while playing online. As the bolded part of the quote clearly states, this is aimed specifically at multiplayer games.
This measure is strictly aimed at in-game behaviour only. Forum posts and Steam Review ratings are not valid grounds for game banning. A game ban is specific to the access to that game, not account-wide, and not to access to other Steam features.
Game developers are now solely responsible for anti-cheating enforcement in their games. If your game is still ridden with cheaters and hackers, you can blame the developer, not Valve. If you feel like you've been falsely accused of cheating and banned from a multiplayer game, the game developer is responsible for your grievance, not Valve. You need to start a conversation with the developer about it.
Is it passing the buck? Yes. Can it be abused? Yes. But cheating in online games is a very real and widespread problem, and Valve, a company of only 300+ people dealing with a catalogue of over 5,000 games, can't solve this alone. They are simply enlisting help from game developers, and putting what is ultimately a customer service matter in the hands of those who should be responsible; the developers of the products themselves. If there is abuse, this makes it completely unambiguous as to who is to blame.
Look, I get it, after the paid mods debacle, trust in Valve and content creators are in low supply right now. However, cheating and hacking in games is a very real problem, and going by Valve's statement alone, this is a specific measure intended to tackle that specific problem, and nothing more.
Because nobody likes playing with cheaters.
Playing games should be fun. In order to ensure the best possible online multiplayer experience, Valve allows developers to implement their own systems that detect and permanently ban any disruptive players, such as those using cheats.
This is aimed at a very specific and real problem in multiplayer games: people using cheats, hacks and generally being disruptive while playing online. As the bolded part of the quote clearly states, this is aimed specifically at multiplayer games.
Game developers inform Valve when a disruptive player has been detected in their game, and Valve applies the game ban to the account.
This measure is strictly aimed at in-game behaviour only. Forum posts and Steam Review ratings are not valid grounds for game banning. A game ban is specific to the access to that game, not account-wide, and not to access to other Steam features.
The game developer is solely responsible for the decision to apply a game ban. Valve only enforces the game ban as instructed by the game developer.
For more information about a game ban in a specific game, please contact the developer of that game.
Game developers are now solely responsible for anti-cheating enforcement in their games. If your game is still ridden with cheaters and hackers, you can blame the developer, not Valve. If you feel like you've been falsely accused of cheating and banned from a multiplayer game, the game developer is responsible for your grievance, not Valve. You need to start a conversation with the developer about it.
Is it passing the buck? Yes. Can it be abused? Yes. But cheating in online games is a very real and widespread problem, and Valve, a company of only 300+ people dealing with a catalogue of over 5,000 games, can't solve this alone. They are simply enlisting help from game developers, and putting what is ultimately a customer service matter in the hands of those who should be responsible; the developers of the products themselves. If there is abuse, this makes it completely unambiguous as to who is to blame.
Look, I get it, after the paid mods debacle, trust in Valve and content creators are in low supply right now. However, cheating and hacking in games is a very real problem, and going by Valve's statement alone, this is a specific measure intended to tackle that specific problem, and nothing more.
#69
Posté 30 avril 2015 - 04:05
Jehuty
-
- Members
- 3 148 messages
Finally someone sheds some light. I'll take it with a grain of salt however.
#70
Posté 30 avril 2015 - 04:10
bmwcrazy
-
- Members
- 3 622 messages
Does this make Gaben more money?
Unfortunately, yes.
Most cheaters and hackers on Steam have many accounts. When they are banned by VAC (Valve Anti-Cheat System), they just make another Steam account, buy the game again, and keep cheating or hacking.
#71
Guest_KnossosTNC_*
Posté 30 avril 2015 - 04:14
Guest_KnossosTNC_*
Guest_KnossosTNC_*
-
- Guests
Finally someone sheds some light. I'll take it with a grain of salt however.
As you should. Now that developers are solely responsible for anti-cheating and anti-disruption measures, the quality and quantity of their enforcement will vary much more, and as I said, there is room for abuse. But now that the onus lie completely with the developers themselves, there can be no ambiguity about who we, as customers, should hold responsible, and hold them responsible we must.
#72
Posté 30 avril 2015 - 04:14
Cyonan
-
- Members
- 19 371 messages
Unlike the paid mods fiasco, I don't see anything wrong with this - as long as it's implemented to the letter of the original statement. If you read Valve's statement carefully, it describes a very specific process to deal with a very specific problem:
This is aimed at a very specific and real problem in multiplayer games: people using cheats, hacks and generally being disruptive while playing online. As the bolded part of the quote clearly states, this is aimed specifically at multiplayer games.
This measure is strictly aimed at in-game behaviour only. Forum posts and Steam Review ratings are not valid grounds for game banning. A game ban is specific to the access to that game, not account-wide, and not to access to other Steam features.
Game developers are now solely responsible for anti-cheating enforcement in their games. If your game is still ridden with cheaters and hackers, you can blame the developer, not Valve. If you feel like you've been falsely accused of cheating and banned from a multiplayer game, the game developer is responsible for your grievance, not Valve. You need to start a conversation with the developer about it.
Is it passing the buck? Yes. Can it be abused? Yes. But cheating in online games is a very real and widespread problem, and Valve, a company of only 300+ people dealing with a catalogue of over 5,000 games, can't solve this alone. They are simply enlisting help from game developers, and putting what is ultimately a customer service matter in the hands of those who should be responsible; the developers of the products themselves. If there is abuse, this makes it completely unambiguous as to who is to blame.
Look, I get it, after the paid mods debacle, trust in Valve and content creators are in low supply right now. However, cheating and hacking in games is a very real problem, and going by Valve's statement alone, this is a specific measure intended to tackle that specific problem, and nothing more.
It's not a bad idea in theory, but YouTube's copyright system wasn't a bad idea in theory either and a month can't go by without somebody abusing it to silence criticism against their works.
The main worry is the potential for abuse of the system coupled with the fact that historically Valve has not been very good at ensuring their systems aren't abused.
Good intentions aren't enough to make me have faith in this idea. At this point, Valve needs evidence to suggest that they'll do something to limit how badly the system can be abused.
- Dermain aime ceci
#73
Posté 30 avril 2015 - 04:22
Cainhurst Crow
-
- Members
- 11 374 messages
Not a bad idea in theory usually means terrible idea all around. Just look at the virtual boy or rng stores, in theory the ideas are great; one gets you a new level of immersion in games similar to an occulus rift and the other allows players the buy more stuff with in game currency or if grindings not their thing with real money.
Look at them in practice; a shitty plastic pair of red goggles that barely work, and "baby's first gambling addiction" with the systems for in-game currency earning being massively skewed against the player to incentivize them to buy packs again and again and again in order to get 1 item they want.
#74
Guest_KnossosTNC_*
Posté 30 avril 2015 - 04:36
Guest_KnossosTNC_*
Guest_KnossosTNC_*
-
- Guests
As I understand it, abuses of Youtube's copyright system applies specifically to content; users who post no content are not censored.It's not a bad idea in theory, but YouTube's copyright system wasn't a bad idea in theory either and a month can't go by without somebody abusing it to silence criticism against their works.
The main worry is the potential for abuse of the system coupled with the fact that historically Valve has not been very good at ensuring their systems aren't abused.
Good intentions aren't enough to make me have faith in this idea. At this point, Valve needs evidence to suggest that they'll do something to limit how badly the system can be abused.
So it's not quite the same, but I understand your point. If developers abuse the system to punish online players they don't like for petty reasons, we need to hold them accountable to their actions, now that we know a greater share of responsibility for our customer satisfaction hangs upon them.
So in that sense, this system does one thing right; it removes ambiguity about who we should start a torches and pitchforks mob against when our customer service expectations are not being fulfilled.
#75
Posté 30 avril 2015 - 04:40
Cainhurst Crow
-
- Members
- 11 374 messages
As I understand it, abuses of Youtube's copyright system applies specifically to content; users who post no content are not censored.
So it's not quite the same, but I understand your point. If developers abuse the system to punish online players they don't like for petty reasons, we need to hold them accountable to their actions, now that we know a greater share of responsibility for our customer satisfaction hangs upon them.
So in that sense, this system does one thing right; it removes ambiguity about who we should start a torches and pitchforks mob against when our customer service expectations are not being fulfilled.
No offense, but saying "users who post no content are not censored" is pretty meaningless to the discussion. People who don;t play games on steam aren't at risk for steams banning practices either. That doesn't make the issue any less important for all of us unfortunate enough to play games on steam.
- Dermain aime ceci
