LinkBack URL
About LinkBacksRead more."Because nobody likes playing with cheaters".
Read more."Because nobody likes playing with cheaters".
Yep. People who say stuff that game devs don't like will now be getting banned from the games they've paid to play. I can imagine Jim Sterling getting banned from playing a lot of games now.
I don't mind if they don't want cheaters on their servers or whatever, but they better be prepared to provide a refund.
Originally Posted by Agent
hmm.... this can't be abused in the slightest can it....but then this is another way for steam to cut back on costs etc
The only reason I support this is for CS:GO. Knowing people have been banned before through Overwatch will at least give me piece of mind that I wasn't delusional. I've already checked and 3 players from my games in the last 2 weeks were game banned.
Though I'm wary about indie game devs that are not happy with someone's mod or something. Or power-tripping devs that don't like getting bested at their own game.
Well, if used as described, to boot cheaters, I doubt anybody (except cheaters) will care. But will it be used that way, or abused?
I wouldn't hold your breath.
And that's a large part of why I refuse to use Steam. I'm not putting myself in that position in the first place, where having paid the money over, someone can pull access, effectively rendering my purchase(s) utterly valueless, for whatever THEY consider sufficient reason, and there's beggar all I can realistically do about it.
In all fairness, Battle.net has done the same thing for far longer than Steam, including dropping the ban hammer, and I can guarantee that there wasn't a single person that got a refund, regardless of location. Yes, people can rightly say that there are other options for Diablo (at least the first 2), but there are no other legal options for WoW, and I'm not sure that there are private server options for Starcraft/2. And in either case, there's always Hamachi/Tunngle, which I'm pretty sure are legal, or they would have been taken out by now.Well, if used as described, to boot cheaters, I doubt anybody (except cheaters) will care. But will it be used that way, or abused?
I wouldn't hold your breath.
And that's a large part of why I refuse to use Steam. I'm not putting myself in that position in the first place, where having paid the money over, someone can pull access, effectively rendering my purchase(s) utterly valueless, for whatever THEY consider sufficient reason, and there's beggar all I can realistically do about it.
Esse Quam Videri
Out on the road today I saw a Black Flag Sticker on a Cadillac...
Why should they give a refund to people that are banned for cheating in their games?
They don't give refunds to players that stop playing because they are unhappy with the number of cheats playing the game. The simple solution for people that want to play a game without getting banned for cheating is to play the game without cheating. Also, as I read it, the ban will only stop people from playing the multiplayer games, it suggests that one player campaign modes will not be affected by the bans.
While this seems like a good idea in theory, I can see this being abused to high hell for censoring criticism. One does not even need to consider what may happen if the developers of say Day One: Garry's Incident could have been TotalBiscuit's video for example before the devs got called out.
Ofcourse if all review sites and critics speak out saying how theyre banned from a game for some reason and dont know why, its going to achieve the same effect thankfully not to mention the critics have the money to buy it on an alternate account, the people who may really suffer are people leaving honest reviews on bad games etc and getting banned as a result of trying to honestly steer people away.
On the positive side, this should make cheat control easier for developers where previously they may have been reliant on solely VAC. Hey we might even see actual anticheat on pc call of duty (they still develop for PC right?). It could be used to ban repeated trolls too ofcourse, though once you get into banning antisocial behaviour its a very slippery slope of what qualifies for a ban and what doesnt.
How's that gonna work for things like the online-only Titanfall?
I'd rather see an Elite-type mechanism where you can 'Ignore' a problem player, but in a cheater's instance the player is set on 'Ignore' to everyone. They can then still run around in the game world, but they will only ever encounter NPCs/Bots.
Yeh that's the thing that worries me. If you leave a bad review for a game, you can now get banned from playing it. That's a terrible situation.
The developer has to inform valve of the player in question which I would assume would have to include details of which would be scrutinised and in turn I would hope evidence will need to be included. I don't think the system is as bad as it says on the tin or what people translate to thinking it means.
If the ban system was abused, I could imagine there would be liablous fallout on the developer.
The thing is this is Valve who have recently been taking a more and more liberal approach to their own platform. It wouldn't surprise me if as long as there was a decent writeup they'd pass it regardless. Maybe thats me being too critical of them but with the state of the store page and more recently their complete lack of interest in furthering the curator system past release etc, they seem willingly to implement systems but would prefer other people maintain it for them.
Remember that for EVERY ONLINE GAME OUTSIDE OF STEAM "devs wield the banhammer" is the norm. This is not some magical new power handed down by Valve to disrupt the status quo.
FFS why is literally everything nowadays instantly met with the downsides ? People are so OBSESSED with finding the bad in everything, it's like being happy about something isn't trendy...
Also, it is completely idiotic to think someone would get banned for criticizing a a game. It is one of the dumbest things I've ever heard, but not at all surprising. People just love coming up with scenarios that would outrage many, then act like it was a foregone conclusion. It needs to stop, seriously. No developer in their right mind would ban people for criticism, because the backlash would be immense and swift. But more importantly they wouldn't do it because that's the sort of thing a crazy person does.
Can we please for the love of god stop all trying to instantly think of the worst possible thing that could happen, at this point it's almost like a competition to see who can come up with it. I know it's awesome and all and it's a great way to get attention (because it's guaranteed to be talked about), but you're just ruining **** before it even starts
That's a fair point.
I know how you feel, and I feel the same a lot of the time. But, the way some indie devs (who are clearly just putting out cash grab crap with no intention of finishing it or making it any good) on steam early access have behaved towards people who have criticised their games, gives us some concern. I don't think many people assume that all/most game devs/publishers will be abusing this! It's only likely to be a small amount that will. But, now they can, we have to wait and see how it's all handled.
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote
