[Depends]

You are wrong on not being banned in a modded lobby. Explain why PB is god awful? It is so much easier to get around VAC hokey system than pbs.

[jonnymad]

Depends posted:

It is so much easier to get around VAC hokey system than pbs.

Do you know this from experience?

[Bumrang]

Depends posted:

You are wrong on not being banned in a modded lobby.

Nope, it's impossible.

Do you need me to explain what server-sided/client-sided is?

Depends posted:

Explain why PB is god awful? It is so much easier to get around VAC hokey system than pbs.

PB kicks for things like the Steam overlay, yet it doesn't actually do a good job in banning people who actually use hacks. I can't even count how many times I saw people hacking in the punkbuster server. It's an archaic anti-cheat that should be abandoned for something like VAC.

[Depends]

Bumrang posted:

Nope, it's impossible.

Do you need me to explain what server-sided/client-sided is?



PB kicks for things like the Steam overlay, yet it doesn't actually do a good job in banning people who actually use hacks. I can't even count how many times I saw people hacking in the punkbuster server. It's an archaic anti-cheat that should be abandoned for something like VAC.

Again you are wrong.
Glitching (1002) - Any player demonstrating 'game abuse' in the form of organizing cooperative or single game play for the purpose of gaining experience, prestige, score, weapon levels, icons, titles or other related in-game unlocks. Examples: Exploiting map holes, clan tag glitching, and participating in modded lobbies.


Offense
Consequence
1st With proper verification, user is banned for 48 hours and a stats reset.
2nd With proper verification, user is banned for 7 days with a stats reset.
3rd With proper verification, user is banned for 5000 days with a stats reset..

[Bumrang]

Depends posted:

Again you are wrong.
Glitching (1002) - Any player demonstrating 'game abuse' in the form of organizing cooperative or single game play for the purpose of gaining experience, prestige, score, weapon levels, icons, titles or other related in-game unlocks. Examples: Exploiting map holes, clan tag glitching, and participating in modded lobbies.


Offense
Consequence
1st With proper verification, user is banned for 48 hours and a stats reset.
2nd With proper verification, user is banned for 7 days with a stats reset.
3rd With proper verification, user is banned for 5000 days with a stats reset..

Uh, okay...?

I have no idea what you even posted rofl.

[Toxical]

How do you have no idea? That makes perfect sense what he just said lol.

That is directly from Activision's website.

[Depends]

jonnymad posted:

Do you know this from experience?

No, but you could easily use a redirect to force a scan on a set of clean game files on another drive locking access to the modded files you are actually playing off of which does work. Oh and if they are in fact scanning an entire computer for hot files such as aimbot.exe you could simply change that to MSW.exe. You could run "NEW NAME HERE".exe which would execute or inject to the locked directory with dirty files if correctly modded all the while they continue to scan clean files. There is always a way around.

[Bumrang]

Depends posted:

No, but you could easily use a redirect to force a scan on a set of clean game files on another drive locking access to the modded files you are actually playing off of which does work. Oh and if they are in fact scanning an entire computer for hot files such as aimbot.exe you could simply change that to MSW.exe. You could run "NEW NAME HERE".exe which would execute or inject to the locked directory with dirty files if correctly modded all the while they continue to scan clean files. There is always a way around.

Yeah, I know right? You could also just use a gui using visual basic to track the ip address!!

[Depends]

Bumrang posted:

Yeah, I know right? You could also just use a gui using visual basic to track the ip address!!

Ya I also never said how to do it I just said that it could be done. Visual basic LMFAO nice CSI reference. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hkDD03yeLnU

Edited:

Bumrang posted:

Yeah, I know right? You could also just use a gui using visual basic to track the ip address!!

A GUI interface using Visual Basic to track an IP Address


why is this?
You don't really need a GUI Interface to track an IP Address, but that's what the General Oppinion suggests. This application meets those demands nicely.

does it really do this?
Yes. This is a GUI application created using Visual Basic, that uses the PING command to track the killer's entered IP/domain name. Very advanced techniques are used to ensure the best possible experience, like showing hex output, flashy images, and success/failure counters.


runtime requirements
.Net Framework 2, you most likely have this already, ready to go!
click Downloads to get the win32 binary executable

or if you want to compile the code yourself:

compiling requirements
Visual Basic for Visual Studio 2005 or above. It should upgrade and compile fine in 2008 or 2010 too
The Source Code section has the latest files, happy compiling!
Here we prepare the killers IP address

Tracking in progress!!!!

Gotcha!!!!

[Handsome Matt]

Depends posted:

No, but you could easily use a redirect to force a scan on a set of clean game files on another drive locking access to the modded files you are actually playing off of which does work. Oh and if they are in fact scanning an entire computer for hot files such as aimbot.exe you could simply change that to MSW.exe. You could run "NEW NAME HERE".exe which would execute or inject to the locked directory with dirty files if correctly modded all the while they continue to scan clean files. There is always a way around.

hahahahahahaa, what the fuck are you talking about.

Edited:

Depends posted:

A GUI interface using Visual Basic to track an IP Address

why is this?
You don't really need a GUI Interface to track an IP Address, but that's what the General Oppinion suggests. This application meets those demands nicely.

stop you're killing me.

[Bumrang]

well i mean you could always just get a directx pipe and hook iptables into the modded array to make all the ints a string particle variable

see i just made a hack for vac, you're right its easy

[cra0kalo]

Depends posted:

Ya I also never said how to do it I just said that it could be done. Visual basic LMFAO nice CSI reference. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hkDD03yeLnU

Edited:





A GUI interface using Visual Basic to track an IP Address


why is this?
You don't really need a GUI Interface to track an IP Address, but that's what the General Oppinion suggests. This application meets those demands nicely.

does it really do this?
Yes. This is a GUI application created using Visual Basic, that uses the PING command to track the killer's entered IP/domain name. Very advanced techniques are used to ensure the best possible experience, like showing hex output, flashy images, and success/failure counters.


runtime requirements
.Net Framework 2, you most likely have this already, ready to go!
click Downloads to get the win32 binary executable

or if you want to compile the code yourself:

compiling requirements
Visual Basic for Visual Studio 2005 or above. It should upgrade and compile fine in 2008 or 2010 too
The Source Code section has the latest files, happy compiling!
Here we prepare the killers IP address

Tracking in progress!!!!

Gotcha!!!!

You can prob redirect the packet location buffer to another server that compiles the visual basic scripts and code the gui to work with some refernces. Maybe Ping the vac servers localhost port and traceback its location to the mainhub where valve employees are hard at work coding VAC.
Also you can't copy the hard drive without overriding the virtual AGP protocol, use the haptic ADP protocol, then you can back up the online matrix. Try to override the EXE application, maybe it will compress the bluetooth capacitor.

Here is some sample code for you

		<DllImport("kernel32.dll", EntryPoint := "CloseHandle")> _
		Private Shared Function _CloseHandle(ByVal hObject As IntPtr) As Boolean
		End Function
		<DllImport("kernel32.dll", EntryPoint := "CreateRemoteThread")> _
		Private Shared Function _CreateRemoteThread(ByVal hProcess As IntPtr, ByVal lpThreadAttributes As IntPtr, ByVal dwStackSize As UInteger, ByVal lpStartAddress As UIntPtr, ByVal lpParameter As UIntPtr, ByVal dwCreationFlags As UInteger, ByVal lpThreadId As IntPtr) As IntPtr
		End Function
		<DllImport("user32.dll", EntryPoint := "FindWindow")> _
		Private Shared Function _FindWindow(ByVal classname As String, ByVal windowtitle As String) As IntPtr
		End Function
		<DllImport("kernel32.dll", EntryPoint := "GetExitCodeThread")> _
		Private Shared Function _GetExitCodeThread(ByVal hThread As IntPtr, ByRef dwExitCode As UInteger) As Boolean
		End Function
		<DllImport("kernel32.dll", EntryPoint := "GetModuleHandle")> _
		Private Shared Function _GetModuleHandle(ByVal lpModuleName As String) As IntPtr
		End Function
		<DllImport("kernel32.dll", EntryPoint := "GetProcAddress")> _
		Private Shared Function _GetProcAddress(ByVal hModule As IntPtr, ByVal procName As String) As UIntPtr
		End Function
		<DllImport("user32.dll", EntryPoint := "GetWindowText")> _
		Private Shared Function _GetWindowText(ByVal hWnd As IntPtr, ByVal buf As StringBuilder, ByVal nMaxCount As Integer) As Integer
		End Function
		<DllImport("kernel32.dll", EntryPoint := "ReadProcessMemory")> _
		Private Shared Function ReadProcessMemory(ByVal hProcess As IntPtr, ByVal lpBaseAddress As UIntPtr, <Out()> ByVal lpBuffer() As Byte, ByVal nSize As UIntPtr, ByVal lpNumberOfBytesRead As IntPtr) As Boolean
		End Function
		<DllImport("kernel32.dll", EntryPoint := "ReadProcessMemory")> _
		Private Shared Function ReadProcessMemory(ByVal hProcess As IntPtr, ByVal lpBaseAddress As UIntPtr, <Out()> ByVal lpBuffer As IntPtr, ByVal nSize As UIntPtr, ByVal lpNumberOfBytesRead As IntPtr) As Boolean
		End Function
		<DllImport("kernel32.dll", EntryPoint := "ResetEvent")> _
		Private Shared Function _ResetEvent(ByVal hEvent As IntPtr) As Boolean
		End Function
		<DllImport("kernel32.dll", EntryPoint := "SetEvent")> _
		Private Shared Function _SetEvent(ByVal hEvent As IntPtr) As Boolean
		End Function
		<DllImport("kernel32.dll", EntryPoint := "TerminateThread")> _
		Private Shared Function _TerminateThread(ByVal hThread As IntPtr, ByVal dwExitCode As UInteger) As Boolean
		End Function
		<DllImport("kernel32.dll", EntryPoint := "WaitForSingleObject", SetLastError := True)> _
		Private Shared Function _WaitForSingleObject(ByVal hObject As IntPtr, ByVal milliseconds As UInteger) As Integer
		End Function
		<DllImport("kernel32.dll", EntryPoint := "VirtualAllocEx")> _
		Private Shared Function _VirtualAllocEx(ByVal hProcess As IntPtr, ByVal lpAddress As IntPtr, ByVal dwSize As UInteger, ByVal flAllocationType As UInteger, ByVal flProtect As UInteger) As UIntPtr
		End Function
		<DllImport("kernel32.dll", EntryPoint := "VirtualFreeEx")> _
		Private Shared Function _VirtualFreeEx(ByVal hProcess As IntPtr, ByVal lpAddress As UIntPtr, ByVal dwSize As UInteger, ByVal dwFreeType As UInteger) As Boolean
		End Function

Happy hacking

[Depends]

My point was simple, nothing is impossible aside from stapling jello to a tree and that VAC does ban for being in a modded lobby which would mod your game files which would make you a party to the crime whether you wanted to be or not. It is in their code of conduct.

[cra0kalo]

Depends posted:

My point was simple, nothing is impossible aside from stapling jello to a tree and that VAC does ban for being in a modded lobby which would mod your game files which would make you a party to the crime whether you wanted to be or not. It is in their code of conduct.

can you provide code to explain what you mean?

[Toxical]

Depends posted:

My point was simple, nothing is impossible aside from stapling jello to a tree and that VAC does ban for being in a modded lobby which would mod your game files which would make you a party to the crime whether you wanted to be or not. It is in their code of conduct.

I would have to agree with Depends, all he did was speak his mind on VAC and gave the fact but now 2 or 3 posters as I haven't read this whole mumbo jumbo of forum posts have over complicated the forum and in my sense have spammed it technically with their shenangians.

Me being a forum administrator for other websites would have locked this and archived it.

[Depends]

cra0kalo posted:

can you provide code to explain what you mean?

Again I gave a quick example of how you could get around VAC. If you want source go on MPGH or something.

[Bumrang]

cra0kalo posted:

can you provide code to explain what you mean?

its easy really, you just need to program the hard drive, then you can get the SQL capacitor through the online THX application

[cra0kalo]

Depends posted:

Again I gave a quick example of how you could get around VAC. If you want source go on MPGH or something.

Well clearly you have no idea what your talking about if your not providing a basis for your information you have given us. It's only right to provide the source information to your findings.

Bumrang posted:

its easy really, you just need to program the hard drive, then you can get the SQL capacitor through the online THX application

Really? but I always thought that would produce a buffer overflow on the ALU registers creating a vertexbuffer grimlock shown by the stack?

[Bumrang]

cra0kalo posted:

Well clearly you have no idea what your talking about if your not providing a basis for your information you have given us. It's only right to provide the source information to your findings.



Really? but I always thought that would produce a buffer overflow on the ALU registers creating a vertexbuffer grimlock shown by the stack?

No, you can't hack the bus without generating the solid state XML card.

[Depends]

(User was banned for this post ("image macro" - MaxOfS2D))

(User was permabanned for this post ("extended, made even more alts." - postal))

[Bad HAL 9000]

Depends posted:

Again I gave a quick example of how you could get around VAC. If you want source go on MPGH or something.

You have no idea what you're talking about. Unless you actually have experience with the internals then don't go spouting off crap you know nothing about.

Depends posted:

My point was simple, nothing is impossible aside from stapling jello to a tree and that VAC does ban for being in a modded lobby which would mod your game files which would make you a party to the crime whether you wanted to be or not. It is in their code of conduct.

Put jello in ziplock bag. Staple bag to tree. Impossible done.

Stupidity aside.

Can VAC be bypassed? Yes. Can PB be bypassed? Yes. Is one better than the other? That depends, they operate very differently. VAC is run and operated by Valve only. Devs can choose which areas they want protected by VAC and then Valve handles the rest. But overall, VAC is not a rootkit, it only scans memory within the game itself (and any external linked libraries it can find) and the game files on the hard drive. VAC is only running while the game is running.

PB is a bit different but also the same. PB is a rootkit unlike VAC. It always runs on your computer, it has the capability to look through all of your memory (open browsers, text documents, pictures, etc), it can force screenshots to be taken and be viewed by admins.


BOTH operate like an antivirus. They scan for KNOWN cheats and they scan for specific areas of memory that if tampered with they can assume the person is cheating because there is no legitimate reason for that memory to be modified.


Both have their merits, both have their downsides.

[Aggripa]

I have a VAC ban and its from bhop scripts, I would never think about using hacks such as aimbots or wall hacks, because that effects other peoples gameplay, Bhop scripts really don't especially in a bhop server. I think it would be unfair due to those who were wrongly banned, or banned for minor things. I payed for the game theirs not reason I shouldnt be able to play it.

[Bad HAL 9000]

Aggripa posted:

I have a VAC ban and its from bhop scripts, I would never think about using hacks such as aimbots or wall hacks, because that effects other peoples gameplay, Bhop scripts really don't especially in a bhop server. I think it would be unfair due to those who were wrongly banned, or banned for minor things

No, you don't have a VAC ban from a bhop script.

[Aggripa]

Bad HAL 9000 posted:

No, you don't have a VAC ban from a bhop script.

are you sure? I don't know to much about them but I heard something about bhop script or cfg files or something are bannable on css, Otherwise I wouldn't have ben banned unless it was wrongly for something I didn't do. Is their a way I can find out why I was banned? If it was aimbots or wall hacks I wouldn't hide it because I don't really have a reason to.

[Bad HAL 9000]

Aggripa posted:

are you sure? I don't know to much about them but I heard something about bhop script or cfg files or something are bannable on css, Otherwise I wouldn't have ben banned unless it was wrongly for something I didn't do. Is their a way I can find out why I was banned? If it was aimbots or wall hacks I wouldn't hide it because I don't really have a reason to.

Yes, I'm sure. It doesn't ban for scripts, cfg files or anything like that.

You don't need to find out why you were banned, you were banned for using a cheat. That's how you got a VAC ban. That's what VAC bans for. It doesn't ban for speaking the queens english or farting rainbows. It bans you for cheating.

This is the mentality that gets all these other people in an uproar. You're fueling the misinformation about VAC, bans, and cheats.



VAC does not wrongly ban people, you were banned for cheating. It really is that simple.


So, lets speed this process up and go through all the various lines you would use now that you have been called out.


Your next excuse will be: "Well, VAC makes mistakes so who do I complain to?"
VAC itself does not make mistakes. The employees at Valve had a bug in VAC that was giving false positives (this was several years ago if memory serves correctly). They removed ALL of those bans and apologized to those involved. No permanent damage done to anyones account. If you got banned for not cheating, then everyone else would be too. So, you're still cheating....

Your next excuse is going to be "Well, I let a friend use my account before, maybe he/she/it used a cheat/hack"

Then it's your responsibility since you loaned out your account. You're not supposed to loan out your account anyways, it is against the EULA. Make your friend buy you a new account.

[Aggripa]

Idk, I mean i have nothing against VAC I think they're great but I honestly don't know why I was banned, im not really worried about it because i'm unbanned now and I know I dont hack, Heck I logged about 400-500 hours on css after i was unbanned, it was over a year ago, I just hope they don't implement something like this where if you were banned for some reason you cant play games you payed for, I don't Think VAC is perfect or any other anti cheat but im sure there were some people wrongly banned.

[Bad HAL 9000]

Aggripa posted:

Idk, I mean i have nothing against VAC I think they're great but I honestly don't know why I was banned, im not really worried about it because i'm unbanned now and I know I dont hack, Heck I logged about 400-500 hours on css after i was unbanned, it was over a year ago, I just hope they don't implement something like this where if you were banned for some reason you cant play games you payed for, I don't Think VAC is perfect or any other anti cheat but im sure there were some people wrongly banned.

I think you're confusing a VAC ban with a server ban. VAC doesn't unban you, ever.

Most likely the admin of the server banned you saying 'bhop script' or whatever nonsense he could come up with. You are only banned from playing on that one server then.

[Aggripa]

Bad HAL 9000 posted:

Yes, I'm sure. It doesn't ban for scripts, cfg files or anything like that.

You don't need to find out why you were banned, you were banned for using a cheat. That's how you got a VAC ban. That's what VAC bans for. It doesn't ban for speaking the queens english or farting rainbows. It bans you for cheating.

This is the mentality that gets all these other people in an uproar. You're fueling the misinformation about VAC, bans, and cheats.



VAC does not wrongly ban people, you were banned for cheating. It really is that simple.


So, lets speed this process up and go through all the various lines you would use now that you have been called out.


Your next excuse will be: "Well, VAC makes mistakes so who do I complain to?"
VAC itself does not make mistakes. The employees at Valve had a bug in VAC that was giving false positives (this was several years ago if memory serves correctly). They removed ALL of those bans and apologized to those involved. No permanent damage done to anyones account. If you got banned for not cheating, then everyone else would be too. So, you're still cheating....

Your next excuse is going to be "Well, I let a friend use my account before, maybe he/she/it used a cheat/hack"

Then it's your responsibility since you loaned out your account. You're not supposed to loan out your account anyways, it is against the EULA. Make your friend buy you a new account.

I really dont know why you're getting mad lol I did not use any of those excuses, I don't think anything is wrong with VAC they're great and do their job well. If i was really so worried about me being a hacker I wouldn't have said it because why would I care what other people think? It's a game.
And i'm not still cheating or I wouldn't have logged over 500 hours since my ban over a year ago. I'm not trying to get anyone in an uproar im just stating how I feel, im sorry.

[HERE'S JOHNNY]

Bumrang posted:

Can I have a link to a source about this?

The case was never made public due to the fear of losing the account permanently because of the suspension. (The account had hundreds of games on it).
He still has the email correspondence though.

[Bad HAL 9000]

HERE'S JOHNNY posted:

The case was never made public due to the fear of losing the account permanently because of the suspension. (The account had hundreds of games on it).
He still has the email correspondence though.

Sounds made up to me.

[Impos]

why this guy with 2vac bans playing on UK4..with aim and dupe c4
http://steamcommunity.com/id/351235152
2 min ago he destroyed some house killed them like x5 times and used x50+ c4 wtf?
do something? ban him? this game need some admins at last for official server for BAN dupers and aimers..like this guy.

[Necrodion]

They should make 2 groups of players...
1)NOT VAC ban players:Servers that accepts only non VAC ban players
2)VAC ban players:Servers that accepts only VAC ban players

That would be my solution ...

[luck^eh]

Tmaxx posted:

op's probably not getting aimbotted at all, he's just huttburt that he's terrible and keeps dying.

http://play.esea.net/users/200250

statistically in FPS terms I have pretty good aim. not cal-i, but, above average to say the least. =( And no, there are definitely 100% aimbotters galore in the servers. Running up the side of the mountain in pitch black, double headshot m4 long range... I know the difference between a lucky shot, a good shot, and pure hack.

Look all this dialogue is great, I understand now that sometimes there are false positives with VAC, but you guys aren't suggesting anything else to help keep the servers closer to hack-free in the alpha phase when there isn't as much security / observation capability by admins / auto-banning for aimbotting, etc. Most certainly it would be ignorant to state all people with VAC bans are cheaters. It is not ignorant to state that almost all people that I personally have noticed hacking in this game have prior VAC bans.

[bcksht]

Regarding VAC bans, I think Valve should really think about global bans on Steam Accounts based on a certain amount of VAC bans. In a decade of gaming I've learned that most people who cheat in one game will at least consider cheating in another game of the same kind. So it's pretty much "once a cheater, always a cheater". Doesn't matter to me at all if someone's got 100+ games on his account, if he gets banned on f.e. 3 different games his account should be gone entirely. Cheaters need to suffer since cheating absolutely destroys the purpose of multiplayer games and I really hate to see great games like Rust and DayZ SA now being overrun with ESPers and aimbots, especially in early development. The whole thing needs to stop at some point, so why not let Valve introduce global bans? It would be a first step in the right direction.

[MorbidWolfess]

bcksht posted:

Regarding VAC bans, I think Valve should really think about global bans on Steam Accounts based on a certain amount of VAC bans. In a decade of gaming I've learned that most people who cheat in one game will at least consider cheating in another game of the same kind. So it's pretty much "once a cheater, always a cheater". Doesn't matter to me at all if someone's got 100+ games on his account, if he gets banned on f.e. 3 different games his account should be gone entirely. Cheaters need to suffer since cheating absolutely destroys the purpose of multiplayer games and I really hate to see great games like Rust and DayZ SA now being overrun with ESPers and aimbots, especially in early development. The whole thing needs to stop at some point, so why not let Valve introduce global bans? It would be a first step in the right direction.

Because it violates consumer rights. Valve needs to tread carefully when it comes to banning from games. Just because cheaters violate one "terms of service" doesn't mean they violated them all. It's also tasty for a judge because if that cheater has over 40 games on steam, and he cheated on three of them, he's violating about 37 rights of purchase. I think.
I don't know for sure, that's just what I'm assuming. I do know that they've done it before, and that they apparently got in legal trouble from it. But that's word of mouth with no viable sources.
Have $.02! Go back in time and buy a candy bar!

[TheWoozle]

luck^eh posted:

http://play.esea.net/users/200250

statistically in FPS terms I have pretty good aim. not cal-i, but, above average to say the least. =( And no, there are definitely 100% aimbotters galore in the servers. Running up the side of the mountain in pitch black, double headshot m4 long range... I know the difference between a lucky shot, a good shot, and pure hack.

Look all this dialogue is great, I understand now that sometimes there are false positives with VAC, but you guys aren't suggesting anything else to help keep the servers closer to hack-free in the alpha phase when there isn't as much security / observation capability by admins / auto-banning for aimbotting, etc. Most certainly it would be ignorant to state all people with VAC bans are cheaters. It is not ignorant to state that almost all people that I personally have noticed hacking in this game have prior VAC bans.

I see you've been blocked on ESEA by someone. You should never be allowed to participate in ESEA games again, and your account should remain in premium paid status.

[Sifer_uk]

jonnymad posted:

Could be, all I know is that he doesn't cheat.

You just seem to spew out a bunch of assumptions which are all wrong xD

[bcksht]

MorbidWolfess posted:

Because it violates consumer rights. Valve needs to tread carefully when it comes to banning from games. Just because cheaters violate one "terms of service" doesn't mean they violated them all. It's also tasty for a judge because if that cheater has over 40 games on steam, and he cheated on three of them, he's violating about 37 rights of purchase. I think.
I don't know for sure, that's just what I'm assuming. I do know that they've done it before, and that they apparently got in legal trouble from it. But that's word of mouth with no viable sources.
Have $.02! Go back in time and buy a candy bar!

Yeah, the legal aspect is always cheater's first defense. Consumer rights, such a lovely word when it its applied to cheaters who are in no way consumers that need to be protected with special rights. But nevermind.

Ever thought about allowing to Valve to change their ToS? Like any game provided on Steam being 3rd party services in which any violation would be ultimately judged by VAC/Valve? I wouldn't mind putting that much trust in Valve, for me it's one of the most reliable companies in the whole gaming business.

// Oh btw I noticed a bunch of people are hitting the "dumb" button as soon as someone argues against cheating... you guys must have some serious mental issues.

[MorbidWolfess]

bcksht posted:

Yeah, the legal aspect is always cheater's first defense. Consumer rights, such a lovely word when it its applied to cheaters who are in no way consumers that need to be protected with special rights. But nevermind.

Ever thought about allowing to Valve to change their ToS? Like any game provided on Steam being 3rd party services in which any violation would be ultimately judged by VAC/Valve? I wouldn't mind putting that much trust in Valve, for me it's one of the most reliable companies in the whole gaming business.

// Oh btw I noticed a bunch of people are hitting the "dumb" button as soon as someone argues against cheating... you guys must have some serious mental issues.

Yes. Consumer rights is a big one. I think I'd trust Valve in changing their ToS, but at the same time it'd probably spark a lot of drama that I think they would want to avoid, thus I don't honestly recommend it.

I think it's amusing that the Dumb button exists, and it's a box. Not a dunce hat.
Or a spiky bat.

[Phrit]

What about FairFight? It would add another layer of protection and it's free (or at least it used to be (I think)).