Suggestion - Require games to post if Anti Cheat Software is required.

[Deric Carter]

This is becoming a bigger problem than one would hope or expect. Anti Cheat Software being required in games and no information on the store page unless the publishers post it.

This should be required. Why purchase a game and it be assumed we also want the Anti Cheat garbage to go with it.

It's intrusive to one's system, and with the recent scandal with Chinese based companies, we should be aware of what software is required to play a game on the Steam platform.

Steam to me has always been a safe haven so to speak, I am very selective of what games i play and buy. I grudgingly accepted BattleEye, I'm currently rethinking my relationship with them.

However, from a business point of view, The hardware specs required are provided in the details, why aren't the software requirements short of O.S. Talk about false advertisement.

My recent example would be Rising Storm 2 which requires people to use their product to have EAC installed. EAC is created by Epic Games, Epic games is 40% owned by a Chinese company Tencent. Never mind the fact that the Chinese government owns their companies and companies are required to provide information to the Chinese government on demand. (Never mind that.)

But, Epic Games and Riot Games have been compromised numerous times affording talented hackers the ability to infiltrate people's personal computers for their own reasons. Converting personal computers into bitcoin miners, proxy for illegal activities, spoofing for scam calls, collecting sensitive information, etc.

I'm not asking anything drastic like removing games affiliated. I'm merely suggesting steam dodge a potential bullet, Let the players know what software is required to play a game. Mandate the publishers of these games to be transparent.

It saves steam on returns, it helps people be informed. And I can't see it being a very hard task for anyone to simply cite, "This game requires XYZ to run." As you already have in the Hardware selection. Win win for everyone.

[crunchyfrog]

Gambit-3 původně napsal:

crunchyfrog původně napsal:

I think that's largely where the line appears to be drawn. That they are obliged to notify that there IS something there, but they can be vague about it.

All this is from what I've sen on store over the years.

All I meant was that I don't think, from my legal experience, that Valve could force this issue much and insist on such detail being given as that might be something a publisher could rightly say "hey, we're not divulging that much because it might give away certain secrets or provide benefit to hackers". All I'm getting at is the pitfalls I see in doing such a thing.

So, Valve insisting it as part of a contract? Nah, unlikely for the reasons I've already said.

I have a sneaking suspicion that the basic vague mention - the "third party DRM" message is possibly down to some sort of legal requirement in some regions anyway.

I know from my experience in Consumer Law here in Britain that could easily fall under part of the Consumer Rights Act and the previous Sale of Goods Act before it.

To be clear, I wasn't suggesting what specifically could be enforced or couldn't, and my comment wasn't directed at you per-se. It was more a general question in regard to multiple statements saying Valve has literally no control over what publishers put on the store page and that they can't require disclosures of anything at all. So I was simply asking if that's true of the current DRM and Third Party Account notifications as I did think those were required.

Don't worry I wasn't referring directly to you either. Just generally.

As for the current stuff? I can't say. As I said the notifications as they stand could well fall under the Consumer Rights Act here, so they most likely include it for all regions just for convenience.

That's abotu as much as I can say. I see the reasons for potnetially including the vague message, but much more than that starts to dwell into the range of what they can do under contract, and that's where it gets a bit messy. Ergo, I doubt they could enforce publishers and devs to do more.

[Tito Shivan]

crunchyfrog původně napsal:

I don't see how they could possibly make it mandatory.

One thing to factor is making something compulsory doesn't necessarily translate into the desired outcome.
The Google Play store has mandatory update notices, you can't push an update without an update notice of what's changed. That doesn't stop a lot of developers to simply state 'Minor bug fixes' in their update notices. Which is as informative as nothing.

[crunchyfrog]

Tito Shivan původně napsal:

crunchyfrog původně napsal:

I don't see how they could possibly make it mandatory.

One thing to factor is making something compulsory doesn't necessarily translate into the desired outcome.
The Google Play store has mandatory update notices, you can't push an update without an update notice of what's changed. That doesn't stop a lot of developers to simply state 'Minor bug fixes' in their update notices. Which is as informative as nothing.

Yup, exactly right.

I term it like the analogy I often use in town planning -where architects love to make lovely flowing footpaths across an area of land, and then build them, and EVERY SINGLE TIME the public will simply cut straight across the middle ignoring the paving and kill the grass in a straight line.

There's probably a suitable phrase for it, but I don't know what it is.

[Deric Carter]

Well, the US hasn't gone full blown Socialism yet. The consumers still drive most of the business' decisions Which is why Steam will never die. As long as the US is involved in Steam, China will be right behind us also involved.

So for a private company that is based out of the US they can set the standards as to what games are allowed on it's platform. And not to sound rude about this, No one can do anything about it. Even in the TOS to developers and publishers of content, they have the disclaimer that the game can be removed without notice for any reason.

It's Valves platform, they own it. And most of the publishers have come to rely on Steam for their own product creations. Since the bigger Game Publishers don't need steam. EA only puts games on steam because of public interest, Minor marketing advantages like exposure and they can buy Steam's data and see what people are interested in. It's cheaper than testing the waters from a R&D standpoint.

Who it may hurt, (And hurt as in: They have to toggle one more box...) is the little publishers that don't have the resources to simply change anything. However, I can tell you from my experience with about 9 different E-commerce platforms, They send out notices all the time either reducing restrictions or increasing restrictions.

And letting people being aware of WHAT requirements are in addition to the product they are buying is something that From all the EU players I've spoke too, would absolutely love because they don't generally like being blind sided by additional crap.

Me personally, I would not purchase a game that has additional software installed on my system, Unless it was directly from Windows / Mac / or Android. in cases like NetFramework 2.0 - 3.5 which generally isn't preloaded on a PC. Believe it or not some Multi-player games still require this.

Blizzard/Activision has most of their Anti-cheat imbedded in the game itself, it runs off the resources of the computer and specs of running the game are included. It doesn't continue running when the service (E.g. Game) is off. I turn off OverWatch or WOW and it's off. It's 1 with the game. No need to post additional information or "Third Party" use.

Rising Storm2 which seems like a interesting game, (A Game I would absolutely NOT want hackers running a muck in.) So sure have Anti Cheat software, But, I want to know which Anti Cheat prior to buying it. EAC is too intrusive, So if I had known that prior to purchasing I would not have bought it. And then risk Steam saying "Sucks to be you, you can't return it." If it had BattleEye or VAC I wouldn't like it either, but I'd be a hell of alot more tolerant and even willing to buy it since I already have BE and VAC on my system, and they strictly stay within the boundries of the game.

So, it's a practice that every game publisher uses in one form of another. EA has their Ram Sniffing Tool for hacking, A bit intrusive, but they also have it imbedded in their software and it strictly runs while the game is on. They don't even advertise what it's name is, a Google Search tells you "EA's Anti Cheat System" Like can you get more Generic. But, when I install EA's Games I don't get bombarded with additional 3rd party software.

And Both EA and Actuvision are the demon we know and get a ton of public media coverage, US player base is very quick to punish them if we feel they are abusing their player base and I know many EU players that'll do the same. But, by the standing logic, by not requiring publishers to cite their third party software requirements Do we really know what back yard deal their making with any company really? a Malicious entity could flip a switch brand themselves a Business entity, hire on developers to make an intrusive software, market it to a game producer and bam cram it down our throats and expect us to take it without question? I'm sorry, Maybe the American Stubburnness, or the Arrogance, but I don't take anything just because someone says it's fun. And I'd appreciate Steam taking some level of interest in what we the user of their platform care to have on our computer.

Many companies won't go through steam, "Star Citizen." Looks like a fun game, My kind of game, Ain't no way in hell I'm investing any money into it. Not on Steam? Activision, Uplay, EA I'm just not gonna do business with you. Steam is the only platform I have / use that exposes me to more than the Big publishers. So if anything, They are the ones I'm more willing to stop doing business with if they don't respect the Hardware I worked my ass off for and invested my own money in. 2 Alienware Laptops and 2 Personal Custom Machines. over $15000 dollars worth of equipment, I'd much rather not have them being compromised because of some company using Steam to facilitate their malicious deeds.

[Schud]

That's totally valid.

I've been purchasing some of the online games I want to play in Xbox just so that I don't have to worry about thirt party anticheat software installed in my pc.

I wish steam set as mandatory to described ALL thrid party apps that need to be installed alongside the game if they come as a separate thing (which is not the case for Call of Duty for example), that includes launchers, anti cheat, screen shot (yeah, I've seen that once) or any other ♥♥♥♥♥♥♥, like vcredist or else.

[cSg|mc-Hotsauce]

Schud původně napsal:

That's totally valid.

I've been purchasing some of the online games I want to play in Xbox just so that I don't have to worry about thirt party anticheat software installed in my pc.

I wish steam set as mandatory to described ALL thrid party apps that need to be installed alongside the game if they come as a separate thing (which is not the case for Call of Duty for example), that includes launchers, anti cheat, screen shot (yeah, I've seen that once) or any other ♥♥♥♥♥♥♥, like vcredist or else.

MWII was announced to have Ricochet anti-cheat long before the game was even revealed to the world on June 8, 2022. Ricochet was announced Oct 13, 2021 for use in all new titles starting with Warzone 1 and Vanguard.

[StickyPawz]

crunchyfrog původně napsal:

Yup, exactly right.

I term it like the analogy I often use in town planning -where architects love to make lovely flowing footpaths across an area of land, and then build them, and EVERY SINGLE TIME the public will simply cut straight across the middle ignoring the paving and kill the grass in a straight line.

There's probably a suitable phrase for it, but I don't know what it is.

It's called a Desire path[en.m.wikipedia.org] ... I remember my university having lots of these shortcuts between buildings.

[Katie]

This thread was quite old before the recent post, so we're locking it to prevent confusion.