Steamをインストール
ログイン
|
言語
简体中文（簡体字中国語）
繁體中文（繁体字中国語）
한국어 (韓国語)
ไทย (タイ語)
български (ブルガリア語)
Čeština（チェコ語）
Dansk (デンマーク語)
Deutsch (ドイツ語)
English (英語)
Español - España (スペイン語 - スペイン)
Español - Latinoamérica (スペイン語 - ラテンアメリカ)
Ελληνικά (ギリシャ語)
Français (フランス語)
Italiano (イタリア語)
Bahasa Indonesia（インドネシア語）
Magyar（ハンガリー語）
Nederlands (オランダ語)
Norsk (ノルウェー語)
Polski (ポーランド語)
Português（ポルトガル語－ポルトガル）
Português - Brasil (ポルトガル語 - ブラジル)
Română（ルーマニア語）
Русский (ロシア語)
Suomi (フィンランド語)
Svenska (スウェーデン語)
Türkçe (トルコ語)
Tiếng Việt (ベトナム語)
Українська (ウクライナ語)
翻訳の問題を報告
ルールとガイドライン
この投稿を報告する
Disable voice chat and text chat if you find you have too many problems with too many people, or stop engaging them and making matters worse.
nonsense, I can block whoever I want. If I have trusted source that can identify cheaters, I want them gone. For instance VAC banned/game banned users most of the case never turn their backs to cheats. One click, done, no risk taken. And it's a choice that I make when I block. There is also unblock feature implemented for special cases - which is almost never used for obvious reasons.
"Disable voice chat and text chat if you find you have too many problems with too many people, or stop engaging them and making matters worse."
I was never talking about having a problem on what they say, but that they play with cheats.
"One’s account being hijacked-then-banned placing that user in such a cul-de-sac could be problematic. "
Security is the user's responsibility. Steam provides two factor authentication as well. You can always set up a new profile if you have a problem with that. It's not mandatory to block ppl, but the special 0.01% is outweighed by the major cases, so - again user's responsibility - it's collateral damage. Plus imagine if the cheaters that actually got VAC/game ban so far would say this as excuse and would demand their "badge" to be removed.
Regardless, considering that phishing is frequent, any ban blocking one wholly from fair servers cross-platform seems an overreaction.
While you can block whoever you want, maybe you should start disabling voice and text chats instead.
Besides, even if someone made such a thing, it would likely have an API Key, and unguarded accounts would be logged into for those people to use your account to cheat and boom, you're suddenly banned and on the ever-growing list. It would be ironic.
Valve is not going to make this.
Or more server owners could implement the script that automatically bans anyone with a VAC or Game Ban.
Blocking them would do literally nothing, if they're not banned from the game you're playing, they can still play on the same server as you unless there's a script to remove such players with histories.
You also proposed
Some people just don't want others to have a choice.
The same people said there would NEVER be a block function on this forum. They were of course, wrong.
Sure, you can block whoever you want on a case by case basis. Ultimately a batch block system, importing lists of strangers for you to block, may sound great to you, and you may like it on whatever platforms you use that implement it. It may not be a suitable fit for every platform.
I don't think the idea is wrong. Although I'm not sure I can ignore how it can be weaponized too. I could certainly understand if Valve had an opinion that it's not a good fit for Steam. And maybe it's a non-issue, it's fine, most people won't be blocking people en masse, and the people who are, are just making a choice for themselves and there's not really anything wrong with that.
that's very unlikely, because I don't log into other websites with my steam login info. Not using same password anywhere, and I have 2FA as well. I'm working on server side programming and spent a lot of time caring about cyber security. Even in the worse case, you can create a new account, and batch block is still the choice of the individual. So when you press the button, you already know what it means. You can still unblock ppl u think you have no problem with as well. Again; security is the user's responsibility. You - Valve/Steam - as a company can't tell your users to manage their passwords properly, or store them safely, not use them more then once, how to recognize phishing emails, ect. It's the choice of the individual to stay in the dark and never know about the importance if they ignore the warnings.
"Valve is not going to make this."
I didn't ask Valve to make it. VAC/game ban is still implemented tho, so its already done.
"Or more server owners could implement the script that automatically bans anyone with a VAC or Game Ban."
I've seen some of these in action before actually and I think it has its uses. I'm more into the batch block tho, because the players I play with have the same knowledge on the exploits/cheats and can recognize them. So I know that there is 0 chance for false accusations, because they wont block someone just because the player has godlike voltaic grandmaster aim, but they can tell if the player was using speedhack, which are very obvious and no one can deny it.
"they're not banned from the game you're playing"
I'm l4d2 main, and you can't join to games where someone blocked you or you blocked someone and it's not the only source engine based game, other valve games has similar implementation methods.
Yet a lot of places do not have such things that allow multiple accounts. You're not giving a legitimate reason as to why this is "needed".
Always a dishonest deflection. People can still utilize the block function, they just can't have importing of block lists.
What people would that be, exactly? When I started using the forum they already had the blocking feature. Seems like you're just making up stuff now.
That's not going to have much effect in non-valve games or games not designed to disallow blocked people from joining, which is a huge amount of games. That is also why vote kick/kick functions exist for a fair amount of lobby-based multiplayer games.
1. For example, people block others for a wide variety of reasons. Cheating is just a small part of it. While I understand you would want to block people who are cheating / using illegal or unfair methods to gain advantage, there are other people who use the blocking functionality to get rid of offensive users or of those users who harass them.
Furthermore, scammers use the blocking functionality to block those people who they have scammed to avoid targeting the same user(s) twice. This also shows how bad the current system is (and I completely agree with the OP), because Steam support just gives small warnings or short temporary bans which are ineffective and will not stop the bad intentional users, tricksters, etc.
Importing a block list without seeing and looking at the details is pointless in my opinion. You can't know why those people have been blocked. You can never be sure. The only person who you can really trust is yourself. Other people may just use the blocking function impulsively. I know very few people who block the actual cheaters, but I often see people (among my friends too) who block others just because they don't meet their (social) requirements (or standards). For example, they would want to have valuable, meaningful conversations but the other person bombards them with video URLs or funny pictures. In such cases, the video/picture spammers often get blocked. I personally don't like being spammed and try to avoid big emotional dramas, swearing. So I would want to stay away from such people. I only showed you these examples so that you can see how subjective we are when we decide to block another account.
Have you ever considered the fact that the cheaters very often come back on alternative accounts? For example, CS GO cheaters often have 5-10-... accounts. They already consider the fact that they may get banned. Moreover, I often see they use smurf and trade accounts too. I don't know the exact reasons (I do not play CS GO), but they may want to separate their gaming and their trade accounts (and I won't go into the details why).
Last but not least, if you could simply just import a block list, that feature could be used in a bad way too. For example, it could lead to the appearance of "Cheater collector" websites which could give you a long user list that you can import to block those people. They could even sell their user list promising that Users who buy their list can block a lot of cheaters. Or promising that They will have a peaceful life and will only be able to play with fair players. I can imagine a lot of marketing techniques here so they can sell the "VAC banned list" for money. :( That would be very bad, in my opinion.
And think about privacy too. In my opinion, the fact that userX was banned should stay within Steam's boundaries. This information should not be available to any website. I know that we can currently see a line with red text about VAC and game bans, but this should really stay within the platform. I think it's important to provide this information to other steam users (for example, when a friend request is received) so that they can know what kind of friends they have. I think, Steam could even provide a lot more information with the incoming friend requests, for example, ban history (and the reason and severity of the bans), warning history (and the (VAC banned) alternative accounts that user has). It would be very useful to me to decide whether I want to accept or deny a friend request. :(
2. So, as you can see, the current system can really be improved. And I understand you are primarily interested in playing fairly and staying away from the cheaters. Undeniably, I completely agree with your goal, and I think most people here can understand it too.
You can look at the problem from a different perspective. There are cheaters who use undetected cheats and they never really get banned. And there are cheaters who use new (alternative) accounts so their accounts look clean. I just think you have to look at your issue from a different angle.
To my best knowledge, VAC banned players can still play on VAC insecure servers. Sadly, the system could be improved a lot, I agree with the OP that cheaters very rarely change. And if they cheat in gameX, they often continue doing the same in gameY. In this area, it would be a lot more efficient to actually ban them from all the online/multiplayer games, however, it sounds drastic. :(
Valve should also solve the issue of "alternative accounts", but this is more complex than it sounds to be. I personally believe there are always solutions, and we should really be limited to just one account per person. Then the bans would really have a meaning and people would think twice before trying to cheat.
I can agree with this. We could have such an option that would prevent VAC/game banned accounts from joining our game lobbies. I think this might also depend on the game developers and it is not theoretically impossible.
Finally, I agree with the OP and I also think the reporting system could be improved too. For example, it is often sad for me to see that cheaters are ruining the game because the VAC bans are delayed (I heard that in some cases it takes months to get banned). And after they've been banned, they already have another account on which they will continue playing (or cheating). So in this area, improvements would be necessary. :( It would be also important to provide actual feedback on our reports, not just Action has been taken on a report you submitted.
Lady Noire a.k.a. Lady Black Heart
Considering blocking people on Steam has 0 effect in game this is nothing more than a Karen knee jerk.