• papertowels@lemmy.one
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    2 months ago

    A well thought out and conveyed response to the concern about hackers. Valve should implement your plan pronto.

      • papertowels@lemmy.one
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        edit-2
        2 months ago

        Nor do I even have to be the one to come up with a plan.

        People that just complain without a better improvement in mind didn’t actually care to change anything, because they’ve haven’t shown that there’s a reasonable alternative. Those people don’t care if there’s a practical alternative, they’re just upset that it doesn’t meet their specific needs. They just want to “speak to the manager” and complain. “It’s not my job to fix it! Fix it!”. If that’s quote captures your stance, just lmk and it will save us both some time.

        I actually even already gave a simple plan and you ignored it.

        I didn’t ignore it, I asked how it would deal with a fundamental enforcement of rules that steam has always done and you’ve ignored that, lol. Are you here to just complain or do you actually want to see if there’s a better way forward? What’s a feasible alternative to handle hackers and provide quality of life improvements like family sharing?

        Your arguments that hackers are more important than a parent with a kid are selfish and stupid.

        I’d argue that hackers are more important to valve because they implemented VAC bans almost 20 years ago. They just now announced a family sharing feature and you’re pretending that steam was meant to be designed around the family to start, which is an uphill battle to argue.

        And force Valve to ruin it for the rest of us.

        First of all, it’s already implemented this way. You’re the one arguing for an alternative that could increase the number of hackers - if anyone is trying to force valve to ruin it “for the rest of us”, it’s you, since you’re arguing to change the status quo.

        Finally, don’t want valve to “ruin” it for you? Don’t use the brand new opt in feature. You have lost absolutely nothing - nothing has been “ruined”.

          • papertowels@lemmy.one
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            edit-2
            2 months ago

            Go do some research before claiming such things. It has been a thing for many many years.

            So that’s the thing… The bans have also worked this way for that long, which further solidifies the idea that valve prioritizes banning hackers over being forgiving of cheating relatives…

            Most people getting VAC bans are the stupid ones trying out free hacks.

            Are the ones using free hacks not hackers? Seems like bans on them for hacking makes sense.

            You keep asking for my solution, but my solutions are so obvious it would take a stupid person to not think of them. Hey here’s one: “investigate the main accounts manually”. I thought such ideas would not require a triple digit IQ to be considered obvious.

            I’m going to propose that this would probably take an infeasible number of hours when you scale it up to the full customer base for steam, which looks like 132 million monthly active users.. Otherwise, like you said, it’s so obvious, what else would prevent them from thinking of it and implementing it?

            They already had family sharing where a ban upon the main account could have been contested. You could at least ask them to consider the age or stupidity of the person or family member using your library.

            Hmm, I might be misunderstanding what you’re saying, but it doesn’t seem like the case. If a borrower got the main account banned, it was up to the borrower to successfully appeal.

            EDIT: here’s a proposed change that I like. It’s better than a blanket “you get 1 excused VAC ban”, because with that solution what happens when you have two unruly teenagers? n+1, children, for that matter. However this would still potentially double the amount of hackers, since they could get their first strike for free before truly losing access to the game, so it really falls to how much steam wants to weigh keeping hackers out of games vs allowing folks to share libraries.

              • papertowels@lemmy.one
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                1
                ·
                2 months ago

                I only see selfishness because you obviously get butthurt over hackers.

                You’re projecting a lot of the preferences and priorities onto me when I’ve shown that steam has chosen to operate this way for nearly a decade. It’s not what I want - it’s what steam wants.

                Steams job is to provide people with a good gaming experience, my guess is that hackers ruin that for others so they don’t like it and prioritize banning hackers.