ga-ben?
i dont like it because you know someone will abuse it, o you dont like my game? bam banned from steam.
Comment has been collapsed.
I think you're banned from that specific game..not the entirety of Steam.
Comment has been collapsed.
oh, looks like that might be the case, sry took 2 reads xD
Comment has been collapsed.
i was thinking more in the lines of those terrible early-access games, but losing one of thouse from your accoutn might be actually good. So yeah all for it.
Comment has been collapsed.
Regardless, if I've purchased a game but am not allowed to play it because the developer didn't like my review (or something similar), I'd expect a refund then, though that then opens a big box of problems too.
Not sure exactly whether or not this is entirely good or bad, but depending on how the ban works, it could have some major potential problems.
Comment has been collapsed.
Who cares steam support is shit, no one will get banned.
Comment has been collapsed.
its all in communitys hand, just blacklist the abusing devs and its all good
if that wont work that means you are wrong and theres nothing wrong with the dev and you are just raging in the game :)
i dont cheat, im not that much into with messing with others while playing so i dont see a danger to me, maybe im wrong, we will see
Comment has been collapsed.
Vac is an automated system that is OPT IN for devs and applies to online MP servers ONLY. This allows devs to simply submit a report/list of accounts and the players will be bared, from what I interpret, MP entirely. So things like P2P, official/unofficial servers, and perhapes lan/offline depending on the game's implementation. Something like terraria would require a complete game ban since the game code doesnt differentiate between a single player instance and an online instance.
This, of course, opens an entirely huge can of worms in instances where devs get a chip on their shoulder, or, even worse, trolls submit "reports" to devs to have others banned.
Comment has been collapsed.
It will probably be used more to ban grumblers and people who are being inquisitive and not fanboyz than actual cheaters.
Comment has been collapsed.
Not keen on this simply because Steam has some crappy game devs who have over reacted to criticism in the past. I can see this being abused.
Edit - After some consideration this is probably punishment for complaining about paid mods on Skyrim. Gaben is now asserting his authority by giving devs the ability to ban people from games for posting bad reviews.
Comment has been collapsed.
^ exactly this, as it read:
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.
I'm not ok with this :I Dev abuse is quite consistent, look at the steam forums :I
Comment has been collapsed.
I will only say one thing: Look at what almost happened with Battlefield 3 and that innocent mod that made the game look 1000% more beautiful.
Comment has been collapsed.
i wanted to tell this. damn, i'm 7 hours 7 minutes late.
Comment has been collapsed.
Very much this.
Valve is in the business of implementing some outrageously shitty ideas these days. It could also have some very interesting consequences in terms of consumer rights...
I think Gaben has recently been possessed by a demonic dung beetle, and is intent on turning everything he touches into DELICIOUS FOOD...
Comment has been collapsed.
ye, there's not much of an info here. I believe this will only be applied to games which uses valve's matchmaking API (like chivalry, sniper elite games, ). i don't see how steam will be able to integrate/apply the game ban on multiplayer games that use their own servers.
Comment has been collapsed.
The thing is that VAC-bans take time and operate through technical measures, such as detecting things related to subscription cheats or flagging people on statistical issues (100% headshots over 60 bullets in a 1 minute period? Flagged~). VAC is good at catching people who are clumsy or consistent, but I don't think it really considers the human element.
The trouble is that not all games are VAC enabled, and indie releases don't always have robust anti-cheat measures in place. Consider how infuriating it would be to create a game, be witness to a blatant cheater regularly ruining people's experience of your game, but being utterly unable to do anything about it? Game bans aren't necessarily a bad thing in base, it's just that the potential for abuse by devs with wobbly morality is an undeniable threat. At least with a VAC ban, cheaters are still able to play any singleplayer content or join non-VAC servers, which I think is a really cool thing to do even if cheaters are douchebags.
A VITAL piece of information missing here, is whether a dev game-ban only prevents them from taking part in multiplayer, or whether it locks them out of the whole product, which would be akin to rescinding someone's purchase without a refund (and legally dubious). Provided there was a good dispute system in case of childish or manipulative devs, it wouldn't be so bad. The trouble is that all companies tend to err on the side of the profit-partner rather than the consumer, at least in the digital / game industry, plus the initial frustrations of waiting through the default auto-responders in steam support.
In one hand, the quality of multiplayer in non-VAC games would be better maintained (at the cost of a few bad eggs being assholes towards innocent people). In the other, we assure nobody can be targetted by certain bottom-feeder devs, but unprepared games will be permanently stuck with any regular cheaters they accrue.
Comment has been collapsed.
A VITAL piece of information missing here, is whether a dev game-ban only prevents them from taking part in multiplayer, or whether it locks them out of the whole product, which would be akin to rescinding someone's purchase without a refund (and legally dubious). Provided there was a good dispute system in case of childish or manipulative devs, it wouldn't be so bad. The trouble is that all companies tend to err on the side of the profit-partner rather than the consumer, at least in the digital / game industry, plus the initial frustrations of waiting through the default auto-responders in steam support.
This happened with Origin and forum bans. People were banned and they couldnt open or play the entire game, reguardless of MP or SP status. Even a dictatorship can be a positive if they are kind and just, problem is of course, once you give someone a stick, they will end up using it more and more for lesser and lesser offenses.
Comment has been collapsed.
Every content maker (games/games-related stuff) will be loved, protected and offered many privileges to put his content on Steam.
While the consumer is being stripped away from his rights and freedom with every new law that Valve decides to enforce..
Comment has been collapsed.
A terrible idea which will give developers the power to ban anyone they please, including those who leave negative reviews. Watch this get abused and Valve do nothing about it.
This isn't a matter of "if" it will be abused. It's a matter of when. Without any checks or balances, or even any preventative measures, someone will abuse this. Worse yet, Valve won't stop it.
Comment has been collapsed.
It doesn't change the fact dev can even force game to crash every 5 minutes if you're playing it. Because game always know you by SteamID. Valve won't even see anything wrong and will blame your computer.
Yet no shitty dev did anything like this (afaik).
Comment has been collapsed.
Do you really think any person or company in the world really cares that much about what you do?
Maybe some shitty indie title developer, pissed by the 90% negative reviews may try to abuse this system (if their game is a competitive game, anyway, on single player you can do whatever you want to do) but I really doubt you'd lose anything if that even happens.
Comment has been collapsed.
i remember some time ago someone complained steam support took some of this guy gifts and trade banned him explaining only he was involved in trading stolen gifts. When he asked for details they replied they wont discuss it with him and he 100% deserve it so gtfo.
Valve doesn't need to explain anything. They made eula that way. Everyone just sits quiet because they don't want to lose their games.
Comment has been collapsed.
Funny, but sarcastically true if they keep this up.
Comment has been collapsed.
Negative review = ban? I guess that's just the way that it'll be...
Comment has been collapsed.
Never give developers this much power, they're soulless demons
Comment has been collapsed.
What is a Game Ban?
Banned by Game Developer (Game Ban)
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.
Game developers inform Valve when a disruptive player has been detected in their game, and Valve applies the game ban to the account. 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.
Comment has been collapsed.
As long as they guarantee that devs won't abuse it, it's good.
I hate cheaters, they all should die. I'd lock cheaters Steam accounts so they lose all their games IF I HAD THE POWER TO DO SO. There is nothing I hate more than cheaters in gaming.
Comment has been collapsed.
If I had the power, I'd lock the accounts of anyone who's so adamantly anti-cheating. :) I'm obviously against it in serious competitive multiplayer or leaderboards, or when it's used for griefing, but single player (non-leaderboard) cheating, and some forms of respectful multiplayer cheating (either consensual, or done without malicious intent) are things that used to be generally welcomed, and in some cases even encouraged. While I believe devs should have some say in how their games are treated by players (as long as those rules are made clear before purchase), and it's a complicated area with many things to consider, the prevailing attitude against cheating as a whole (or some kinds of modding which blur the line) disappoints me.
Comment has been collapsed.
Competitive cheating is clearly bad. But the differences between competitive cheating and cosmetic modding are sometimes blurry. Non-competitive cheating is fine I guess unless people are getting achievements that give marketable or competitive advantages. Or maybe it is just bad if it unlocks achievements that other people put lots of work into and then they feel like they have wasted their time.
I don't know, it gets kinda complicated and I don't think I trust a bunch of the shady devs on Steam. I think the best thing is for me to decide who should get banned because I know I'm impartial. Except when I think people are being dicks. But they would totally deserve it so that would be fine.
Comment has been collapsed.
43 Comments - Last post 1 minute ago by valdrak3
86 Comments - Last post 31 minutes ago by MeguminShiro
643 Comments - Last post 1 hour ago by Yorickmeister
62 Comments - Last post 2 hours ago by OneManArmyStar
177 Comments - Last post 3 hours ago by wigglenose
286 Comments - Last post 6 hours ago by hbouma
864 Comments - Last post 7 hours ago by Ashtart
24 Comments - Last post 4 minutes ago by rinachi
63 Comments - Last post 10 minutes ago by LordBaal
100 Comments - Last post 11 minutes ago by SilentGuy
80 Comments - Last post 13 minutes ago by robocub
32 Comments - Last post 14 minutes ago by schmoan
171 Comments - Last post 25 minutes ago by Fyoll
17,007 Comments - Last post 37 minutes ago by MjrPITA
Comment has been collapsed.