That's really cool. Good on Valve for doing that!<\/p><\/article>13 years ago<\/time><\/div><\/div><\/div><\/div><\/div><\/a>James0890<\/a><\/svg><\/i> Follow\n <\/a><\/div><\/header>71<\/p>Forum Posts<\/p><\/div>0<\/p>Wiki Points<\/p><\/div>0<\/p>Followers<\/p><\/div><\/section>Reviews:<\/span> 0<\/p>User Lists:<\/span> 0<\/p><\/section><\/div><\/div>\n Edited By James0890<\/a><\/div><\/div><\/span>@Shuborno:<\/strong>\u00a0\u00a0What's more worrying about this is that we wrong about how VAC works, from what people could surmise it looked like VAC was using full cheat\u00a0signature\u00a0flagging. This means that VAC would look for the complete memory\u00a0signature\u00a0of a known cheat in it's database. Using this method it's highly unlikely for VAC to be wrong, because it only looks for programs\u00a0confirmed\u00a0to be cheating utilities by VALVe. Obviously IW wouldn't push out a patch with a known cheat from VALVe's database so clearly VAC must work in another way.\u00a0\u00a0If it's using a method like heuristics then there could be far more false positives than VALVe cares to admit.\n <\/article>13 years ago<\/time><\/div><\/div><\/div><\/div><\/div><\/a>zitosilva<\/a><\/svg><\/i> Follow\n <\/a><\/div><\/header>1897<\/p>Forum Posts<\/p><\/div>805<\/p>Wiki Points<\/p><\/div>0<\/p>Followers<\/p><\/div><\/section>Reviews:<\/span> 1<\/p>User Lists:<\/span> 3<\/p><\/section><\/div><\/div>\n Edited By zitosilva<\/a><\/div><\/div>Here's hoping some friend of mine was banned, and has a extra copy of L4D2 now.<\/p><\/article>13 years ago<\/time><\/div><\/div><\/div><\/div><\/div><\/a>Shabs<\/a><\/svg><\/i> Follow\n <\/a><\/div><\/header>906<\/p>Forum Posts<\/p><\/div>312<\/p>Wiki Points<\/p><\/div>0<\/p>Followers<\/p><\/div><\/section>Reviews:<\/span> 2<\/p>User Lists:<\/span> 4<\/p><\/section><\/div><\/div>\n Edited By Shabs<\/a><\/div><\/div><\/span>@James0890<\/strong> said: \" <\/span>@Shuborno:<\/strong>\u00a0\u00a0What's more worrying about this is that we wrong about how VAC works, from what people could surmise it looked like VAC was using full cheat\u00a0signature\u00a0flagging. This means that VAC would look for the complete memory\u00a0signature\u00a0of a known cheat in it's database. Using this method it's highly unlikely for VAC to be wrong, because it only looks for programs\u00a0confirmed\u00a0to be cheating utilities by VALVe. Obviously IW wouldn't push out a patch with a known cheat from VALVe's database so clearly VAC must work in another way.\u00a0\u00a0If it's using a method like heuristics then there could be far more false positives than VALVe cares to admit. \"<\/blockquote>I certainly don't want or expect them to divulge how VAC works, because that will just lead to more cheating.\u00a0\u00a0I'm assuming the support costs for allowing appeals are high - assuming VAC bans are relatively accurate, Valve will have a ton of people who hack or cheat costing them money and taking up time their support team could be spending on \"real\" issues. \u00a0(You can be sure that 99% of people who get banned would try to appeal.) \u00a0I would think that's the real reason for not having an appeals process.\u00a0\u00a0However, Valve has always seemed to be a company oriented around what is best for the consumer. \u00a0They have relatively loose DRM around their own games, figure out the business details and costs behind perks like Steam Play and Steam Cloud, etc. \u00a0There is precedent to them spending money to keep their customers happy without an instantly obvious return on that investment.\u00a0I'm starting to become hesitant to buy VAC-secured stuff on their store because I don't want a false positive ban to hit me ever. \u00a0I have too much invested in my account.\n <\/article>13 years ago<\/time><\/div><\/div><\/div><\/div><\/div><\/a>James0890<\/a><\/svg><\/i> Follow\n <\/a><\/div><\/header>71<\/p>Forum Posts<\/p><\/div>0<\/p>Wiki Points<\/p><\/div>0<\/p>Followers<\/p><\/div><\/section>Reviews:<\/span> 0<\/p>User Lists:<\/span> 0<\/p><\/section><\/div><\/div>\n Edited By James0890<\/a><\/div><\/div><\/span>@Shuborno:<\/strong>\u00a0\u00a0Well VAC bans per-engine so you shouldn't be afraid of purchasing non-VALVe VAC games, the people who were banned from MW2 would still have been able to access their Source games since that is a different engine. However you are correct about games made with Source, then you are pretty much SOL.\n <\/article>13 years ago<\/time><\/div><\/div><\/div><\/div><\/div><\/a>Djeffers03<\/a><\/svg><\/i> Follow\n <\/a><\/div><\/header>2537<\/p>Forum Posts<\/p><\/div>753<\/p>Wiki Points<\/p><\/div>0<\/p>Followers<\/p><\/div><\/section>Reviews:<\/span> 0<\/p>User Lists:<\/span> 3<\/p><\/section><\/div><\/div>\n Edited By Djeffers03<\/a><\/div><\/div>Valve are awesome.<\/p><\/article>13 years ago<\/time><\/div><\/div><\/div><\/div><\/div><\/a>Animasta<\/a><\/svg><\/i> Follow\n <\/a><\/div><\/header>14948<\/p>Forum Posts<\/p><\/div>3563<\/p>Wiki Points<\/p><\/div>0<\/p>Followers<\/p><\/div><\/section>Reviews:<\/span> 4<\/p>User Lists:<\/span> 5<\/p><\/section><\/div><\/div>\n Edited By Animasta<\/a><\/div><\/div><\/span>@ITSSEXYTIME<\/strong> said: \" Hah, I love how Valve managed to turn this into good PR.<\/p><\/p>VAC's no appeals policy (Plus the policy of not actually telling you why you were banned) + Permanent banning is a joke. \u00a0Additionally, this serves s proof that there can be false-positives. \u00a0If the bans were temporary it'd be a mild annoyance, but you can lose quite a bit with a VAC ban. \u00a0If you get VAC banned in a Source engine game, you cannot play ANY source engine game on a VAC server. \u00a0That means no TF2, Hl2DM ,L4D, \u00a0L4D2, Portal 2, Alien Swarm, Counterstrike: Source, Day of Defeat Source or any mods. \u00a0(On secure servers, which if you've ever actually tried to play on an unsecured server before it can be a nightmare)<\/p><\/p>That's potentially hundreds of dollars of games that you can't play because VAC decides to permanently ban you with no way to appeal the ban. \u00a0Considering that most VAC bans are 13 year olds being stupid, the whole concept of a permanent ban on first offense is a bit harsh to begin with. \u00a0Zero tolerance policies are stupid no matter what it is because there's ALWAYS a context, and I wish Valve would change the way VAC handles bans. \u00a0(Why would they though? If you get banned, you just end up buying the games a second time and making them money)<\/p> \"<\/blockquote>wrong; they have different branches of source and lots of them are different; L4D and L4D2 are seperate, some others are seperate too (you can find a list on the steam forums somewhere)\n <\/article>13 years ago<\/time><\/div><\/div><\/div><\/div><\/div><\/a>Sanious<\/a>
<\/span>@Shuborno:<\/strong>\u00a0\u00a0What's more worrying about this is that we wrong about how VAC works, from what people could surmise it looked like VAC was using full cheat\u00a0signature\u00a0flagging. This means that VAC would look for the complete memory\u00a0signature\u00a0of a known cheat in it's database. Using this method it's highly unlikely for VAC to be wrong, because it only looks for programs\u00a0confirmed\u00a0to be cheating utilities by VALVe. Obviously IW wouldn't push out a patch with a known cheat from VALVe's database so clearly VAC must work in another way.\u00a0\u00a0If it's using a method like heuristics then there could be far more false positives than VALVe cares to admit.\n <\/article>13 years ago<\/time><\/div><\/div><\/div><\/div><\/div><\/a>zitosilva<\/a><\/svg><\/i> Follow\n <\/a><\/div><\/header>1897<\/p>Forum Posts<\/p><\/div>805<\/p>Wiki Points<\/p><\/div>0<\/p>Followers<\/p><\/div><\/section>Reviews:<\/span> 1<\/p>User Lists:<\/span> 3<\/p><\/section><\/div><\/div>\n Edited By zitosilva<\/a><\/div><\/div>Here's hoping some friend of mine was banned, and has a extra copy of L4D2 now.<\/p><\/article>13 years ago<\/time><\/div><\/div><\/div><\/div><\/div><\/a>Shabs<\/a><\/svg><\/i> Follow\n <\/a><\/div><\/header>906<\/p>Forum Posts<\/p><\/div>312<\/p>Wiki Points<\/p><\/div>0<\/p>Followers<\/p><\/div><\/section>Reviews:<\/span> 2<\/p>User Lists:<\/span> 4<\/p><\/section><\/div><\/div>\n Edited By Shabs<\/a><\/div><\/div><\/span>@James0890<\/strong> said: \" <\/span>@Shuborno:<\/strong>\u00a0\u00a0What's more worrying about this is that we wrong about how VAC works, from what people could surmise it looked like VAC was using full cheat\u00a0signature\u00a0flagging. This means that VAC would look for the complete memory\u00a0signature\u00a0of a known cheat in it's database. Using this method it's highly unlikely for VAC to be wrong, because it only looks for programs\u00a0confirmed\u00a0to be cheating utilities by VALVe. Obviously IW wouldn't push out a patch with a known cheat from VALVe's database so clearly VAC must work in another way.\u00a0\u00a0If it's using a method like heuristics then there could be far more false positives than VALVe cares to admit. \"<\/blockquote>I certainly don't want or expect them to divulge how VAC works, because that will just lead to more cheating.\u00a0\u00a0I'm assuming the support costs for allowing appeals are high - assuming VAC bans are relatively accurate, Valve will have a ton of people who hack or cheat costing them money and taking up time their support team could be spending on \"real\" issues. \u00a0(You can be sure that 99% of people who get banned would try to appeal.) \u00a0I would think that's the real reason for not having an appeals process.\u00a0\u00a0However, Valve has always seemed to be a company oriented around what is best for the consumer. \u00a0They have relatively loose DRM around their own games, figure out the business details and costs behind perks like Steam Play and Steam Cloud, etc. \u00a0There is precedent to them spending money to keep their customers happy without an instantly obvious return on that investment.\u00a0I'm starting to become hesitant to buy VAC-secured stuff on their store because I don't want a false positive ban to hit me ever. \u00a0I have too much invested in my account.\n <\/article>13 years ago<\/time><\/div><\/div><\/div><\/div><\/div><\/a>James0890<\/a><\/svg><\/i> Follow\n <\/a><\/div><\/header>71<\/p>Forum Posts<\/p><\/div>0<\/p>Wiki Points<\/p><\/div>0<\/p>Followers<\/p><\/div><\/section>Reviews:<\/span> 0<\/p>User Lists:<\/span> 0<\/p><\/section><\/div><\/div>\n Edited By James0890<\/a><\/div><\/div><\/span>@Shuborno:<\/strong>\u00a0\u00a0Well VAC bans per-engine so you shouldn't be afraid of purchasing non-VALVe VAC games, the people who were banned from MW2 would still have been able to access their Source games since that is a different engine. However you are correct about games made with Source, then you are pretty much SOL.\n <\/article>13 years ago<\/time><\/div><\/div><\/div><\/div><\/div><\/a>Djeffers03<\/a><\/svg><\/i> Follow\n <\/a><\/div><\/header>2537<\/p>Forum Posts<\/p><\/div>753<\/p>Wiki Points<\/p><\/div>0<\/p>Followers<\/p><\/div><\/section>Reviews:<\/span> 0<\/p>User Lists:<\/span> 3<\/p><\/section><\/div><\/div>\n Edited By Djeffers03<\/a><\/div><\/div>Valve are awesome.<\/p><\/article>13 years ago<\/time><\/div><\/div><\/div><\/div><\/div><\/a>Animasta<\/a><\/svg><\/i> Follow\n <\/a><\/div><\/header>14948<\/p>Forum Posts<\/p><\/div>3563<\/p>Wiki Points<\/p><\/div>0<\/p>Followers<\/p><\/div><\/section>Reviews:<\/span> 4<\/p>User Lists:<\/span> 5<\/p><\/section><\/div><\/div>\n Edited By Animasta<\/a><\/div><\/div><\/span>@ITSSEXYTIME<\/strong> said: \" Hah, I love how Valve managed to turn this into good PR.<\/p><\/p>VAC's no appeals policy (Plus the policy of not actually telling you why you were banned) + Permanent banning is a joke. \u00a0Additionally, this serves s proof that there can be false-positives. \u00a0If the bans were temporary it'd be a mild annoyance, but you can lose quite a bit with a VAC ban. \u00a0If you get VAC banned in a Source engine game, you cannot play ANY source engine game on a VAC server. \u00a0That means no TF2, Hl2DM ,L4D, \u00a0L4D2, Portal 2, Alien Swarm, Counterstrike: Source, Day of Defeat Source or any mods. \u00a0(On secure servers, which if you've ever actually tried to play on an unsecured server before it can be a nightmare)<\/p><\/p>That's potentially hundreds of dollars of games that you can't play because VAC decides to permanently ban you with no way to appeal the ban. \u00a0Considering that most VAC bans are 13 year olds being stupid, the whole concept of a permanent ban on first offense is a bit harsh to begin with. \u00a0Zero tolerance policies are stupid no matter what it is because there's ALWAYS a context, and I wish Valve would change the way VAC handles bans. \u00a0(Why would they though? If you get banned, you just end up buying the games a second time and making them money)<\/p> \"<\/blockquote>wrong; they have different branches of source and lots of them are different; L4D and L4D2 are seperate, some others are seperate too (you can find a list on the steam forums somewhere)\n <\/article>13 years ago<\/time><\/div><\/div><\/div><\/div><\/div><\/a>Sanious<\/a>
Here's hoping some friend of mine was banned, and has a extra copy of L4D2 now.<\/p><\/article>13 years ago<\/time><\/div><\/div><\/div><\/div><\/div><\/a>Shabs<\/a><\/svg><\/i> Follow\n <\/a><\/div><\/header>906<\/p>Forum Posts<\/p><\/div>312<\/p>Wiki Points<\/p><\/div>0<\/p>Followers<\/p><\/div><\/section>Reviews:<\/span> 2<\/p>User Lists:<\/span> 4<\/p><\/section><\/div><\/div>\n Edited By Shabs<\/a><\/div><\/div><\/span>@James0890<\/strong> said: \" <\/span>@Shuborno:<\/strong>\u00a0\u00a0What's more worrying about this is that we wrong about how VAC works, from what people could surmise it looked like VAC was using full cheat\u00a0signature\u00a0flagging. This means that VAC would look for the complete memory\u00a0signature\u00a0of a known cheat in it's database. Using this method it's highly unlikely for VAC to be wrong, because it only looks for programs\u00a0confirmed\u00a0to be cheating utilities by VALVe. Obviously IW wouldn't push out a patch with a known cheat from VALVe's database so clearly VAC must work in another way.\u00a0\u00a0If it's using a method like heuristics then there could be far more false positives than VALVe cares to admit. \"<\/blockquote>I certainly don't want or expect them to divulge how VAC works, because that will just lead to more cheating.\u00a0\u00a0I'm assuming the support costs for allowing appeals are high - assuming VAC bans are relatively accurate, Valve will have a ton of people who hack or cheat costing them money and taking up time their support team could be spending on \"real\" issues. \u00a0(You can be sure that 99% of people who get banned would try to appeal.) \u00a0I would think that's the real reason for not having an appeals process.\u00a0\u00a0However, Valve has always seemed to be a company oriented around what is best for the consumer. \u00a0They have relatively loose DRM around their own games, figure out the business details and costs behind perks like Steam Play and Steam Cloud, etc. \u00a0There is precedent to them spending money to keep their customers happy without an instantly obvious return on that investment.\u00a0I'm starting to become hesitant to buy VAC-secured stuff on their store because I don't want a false positive ban to hit me ever. \u00a0I have too much invested in my account.\n <\/article>13 years ago<\/time><\/div><\/div><\/div><\/div><\/div><\/a>James0890<\/a><\/svg><\/i> Follow\n <\/a><\/div><\/header>71<\/p>Forum Posts<\/p><\/div>0<\/p>Wiki Points<\/p><\/div>0<\/p>Followers<\/p><\/div><\/section>Reviews:<\/span> 0<\/p>User Lists:<\/span> 0<\/p><\/section><\/div><\/div>\n Edited By James0890<\/a><\/div><\/div><\/span>@Shuborno:<\/strong>\u00a0\u00a0Well VAC bans per-engine so you shouldn't be afraid of purchasing non-VALVe VAC games, the people who were banned from MW2 would still have been able to access their Source games since that is a different engine. However you are correct about games made with Source, then you are pretty much SOL.\n <\/article>13 years ago<\/time><\/div><\/div><\/div><\/div><\/div><\/a>Djeffers03<\/a><\/svg><\/i> Follow\n <\/a><\/div><\/header>2537<\/p>Forum Posts<\/p><\/div>753<\/p>Wiki Points<\/p><\/div>0<\/p>Followers<\/p><\/div><\/section>Reviews:<\/span> 0<\/p>User Lists:<\/span> 3<\/p><\/section><\/div><\/div>\n Edited By Djeffers03<\/a><\/div><\/div>Valve are awesome.<\/p><\/article>13 years ago<\/time><\/div><\/div><\/div><\/div><\/div><\/a>Animasta<\/a><\/svg><\/i> Follow\n <\/a><\/div><\/header>14948<\/p>Forum Posts<\/p><\/div>3563<\/p>Wiki Points<\/p><\/div>0<\/p>Followers<\/p><\/div><\/section>Reviews:<\/span> 4<\/p>User Lists:<\/span> 5<\/p><\/section><\/div><\/div>\n Edited By Animasta<\/a><\/div><\/div><\/span>@ITSSEXYTIME<\/strong> said: \" Hah, I love how Valve managed to turn this into good PR.<\/p><\/p>VAC's no appeals policy (Plus the policy of not actually telling you why you were banned) + Permanent banning is a joke. \u00a0Additionally, this serves s proof that there can be false-positives. \u00a0If the bans were temporary it'd be a mild annoyance, but you can lose quite a bit with a VAC ban. \u00a0If you get VAC banned in a Source engine game, you cannot play ANY source engine game on a VAC server. \u00a0That means no TF2, Hl2DM ,L4D, \u00a0L4D2, Portal 2, Alien Swarm, Counterstrike: Source, Day of Defeat Source or any mods. \u00a0(On secure servers, which if you've ever actually tried to play on an unsecured server before it can be a nightmare)<\/p><\/p>That's potentially hundreds of dollars of games that you can't play because VAC decides to permanently ban you with no way to appeal the ban. \u00a0Considering that most VAC bans are 13 year olds being stupid, the whole concept of a permanent ban on first offense is a bit harsh to begin with. \u00a0Zero tolerance policies are stupid no matter what it is because there's ALWAYS a context, and I wish Valve would change the way VAC handles bans. \u00a0(Why would they though? If you get banned, you just end up buying the games a second time and making them money)<\/p> \"<\/blockquote>wrong; they have different branches of source and lots of them are different; L4D and L4D2 are seperate, some others are seperate too (you can find a list on the steam forums somewhere)\n <\/article>13 years ago<\/time><\/div><\/div><\/div><\/div><\/div><\/a>Sanious<\/a>
<\/span>@James0890<\/strong> said: \" <\/span>@Shuborno:<\/strong>\u00a0\u00a0What's more worrying about this is that we wrong about how VAC works, from what people could surmise it looked like VAC was using full cheat\u00a0signature\u00a0flagging. This means that VAC would look for the complete memory\u00a0signature\u00a0of a known cheat in it's database. Using this method it's highly unlikely for VAC to be wrong, because it only looks for programs\u00a0confirmed\u00a0to be cheating utilities by VALVe. Obviously IW wouldn't push out a patch with a known cheat from VALVe's database so clearly VAC must work in another way.\u00a0\u00a0If it's using a method like heuristics then there could be far more false positives than VALVe cares to admit. \"<\/blockquote>I certainly don't want or expect them to divulge how VAC works, because that will just lead to more cheating.\u00a0\u00a0I'm assuming the support costs for allowing appeals are high - assuming VAC bans are relatively accurate, Valve will have a ton of people who hack or cheat costing them money and taking up time their support team could be spending on \"real\" issues. \u00a0(You can be sure that 99% of people who get banned would try to appeal.) \u00a0I would think that's the real reason for not having an appeals process.\u00a0\u00a0However, Valve has always seemed to be a company oriented around what is best for the consumer. \u00a0They have relatively loose DRM around their own games, figure out the business details and costs behind perks like Steam Play and Steam Cloud, etc. \u00a0There is precedent to them spending money to keep their customers happy without an instantly obvious return on that investment.\u00a0I'm starting to become hesitant to buy VAC-secured stuff on their store because I don't want a false positive ban to hit me ever. \u00a0I have too much invested in my account.\n <\/article>13 years ago<\/time><\/div><\/div><\/div><\/div><\/div><\/a>James0890<\/a><\/svg><\/i> Follow\n <\/a><\/div><\/header>71<\/p>Forum Posts<\/p><\/div>0<\/p>Wiki Points<\/p><\/div>0<\/p>Followers<\/p><\/div><\/section>Reviews:<\/span> 0<\/p>User Lists:<\/span> 0<\/p><\/section><\/div><\/div>\n Edited By James0890<\/a><\/div><\/div><\/span>@Shuborno:<\/strong>\u00a0\u00a0Well VAC bans per-engine so you shouldn't be afraid of purchasing non-VALVe VAC games, the people who were banned from MW2 would still have been able to access their Source games since that is a different engine. However you are correct about games made with Source, then you are pretty much SOL.\n <\/article>13 years ago<\/time><\/div><\/div><\/div><\/div><\/div><\/a>Djeffers03<\/a><\/svg><\/i> Follow\n <\/a><\/div><\/header>2537<\/p>Forum Posts<\/p><\/div>753<\/p>Wiki Points<\/p><\/div>0<\/p>Followers<\/p><\/div><\/section>Reviews:<\/span> 0<\/p>User Lists:<\/span> 3<\/p><\/section><\/div><\/div>\n Edited By Djeffers03<\/a><\/div><\/div>Valve are awesome.<\/p><\/article>13 years ago<\/time><\/div><\/div><\/div><\/div><\/div><\/a>Animasta<\/a><\/svg><\/i> Follow\n <\/a><\/div><\/header>14948<\/p>Forum Posts<\/p><\/div>3563<\/p>Wiki Points<\/p><\/div>0<\/p>Followers<\/p><\/div><\/section>Reviews:<\/span> 4<\/p>User Lists:<\/span> 5<\/p><\/section><\/div><\/div>\n Edited By Animasta<\/a><\/div><\/div><\/span>@ITSSEXYTIME<\/strong> said: \" Hah, I love how Valve managed to turn this into good PR.<\/p><\/p>VAC's no appeals policy (Plus the policy of not actually telling you why you were banned) + Permanent banning is a joke. \u00a0Additionally, this serves s proof that there can be false-positives. \u00a0If the bans were temporary it'd be a mild annoyance, but you can lose quite a bit with a VAC ban. \u00a0If you get VAC banned in a Source engine game, you cannot play ANY source engine game on a VAC server. \u00a0That means no TF2, Hl2DM ,L4D, \u00a0L4D2, Portal 2, Alien Swarm, Counterstrike: Source, Day of Defeat Source or any mods. \u00a0(On secure servers, which if you've ever actually tried to play on an unsecured server before it can be a nightmare)<\/p><\/p>That's potentially hundreds of dollars of games that you can't play because VAC decides to permanently ban you with no way to appeal the ban. \u00a0Considering that most VAC bans are 13 year olds being stupid, the whole concept of a permanent ban on first offense is a bit harsh to begin with. \u00a0Zero tolerance policies are stupid no matter what it is because there's ALWAYS a context, and I wish Valve would change the way VAC handles bans. \u00a0(Why would they though? If you get banned, you just end up buying the games a second time and making them money)<\/p> \"<\/blockquote>wrong; they have different branches of source and lots of them are different; L4D and L4D2 are seperate, some others are seperate too (you can find a list on the steam forums somewhere)\n <\/article>13 years ago<\/time><\/div><\/div><\/div><\/div><\/div><\/a>Sanious<\/a>
<\/span>@Shuborno:<\/strong>\u00a0\u00a0Well VAC bans per-engine so you shouldn't be afraid of purchasing non-VALVe VAC games, the people who were banned from MW2 would still have been able to access their Source games since that is a different engine. However you are correct about games made with Source, then you are pretty much SOL.\n <\/article>13 years ago<\/time><\/div><\/div><\/div><\/div><\/div><\/a>Djeffers03<\/a><\/svg><\/i> Follow\n <\/a><\/div><\/header>2537<\/p>Forum Posts<\/p><\/div>753<\/p>Wiki Points<\/p><\/div>0<\/p>Followers<\/p><\/div><\/section>Reviews:<\/span> 0<\/p>User Lists:<\/span> 3<\/p><\/section><\/div><\/div>\n Edited By Djeffers03<\/a><\/div><\/div>Valve are awesome.<\/p><\/article>13 years ago<\/time><\/div><\/div><\/div><\/div><\/div><\/a>Animasta<\/a><\/svg><\/i> Follow\n <\/a><\/div><\/header>14948<\/p>Forum Posts<\/p><\/div>3563<\/p>Wiki Points<\/p><\/div>0<\/p>Followers<\/p><\/div><\/section>Reviews:<\/span> 4<\/p>User Lists:<\/span> 5<\/p><\/section><\/div><\/div>\n Edited By Animasta<\/a><\/div><\/div><\/span>@ITSSEXYTIME<\/strong> said: \" Hah, I love how Valve managed to turn this into good PR.<\/p><\/p>VAC's no appeals policy (Plus the policy of not actually telling you why you were banned) + Permanent banning is a joke. \u00a0Additionally, this serves s proof that there can be false-positives. \u00a0If the bans were temporary it'd be a mild annoyance, but you can lose quite a bit with a VAC ban. \u00a0If you get VAC banned in a Source engine game, you cannot play ANY source engine game on a VAC server. \u00a0That means no TF2, Hl2DM ,L4D, \u00a0L4D2, Portal 2, Alien Swarm, Counterstrike: Source, Day of Defeat Source or any mods. \u00a0(On secure servers, which if you've ever actually tried to play on an unsecured server before it can be a nightmare)<\/p><\/p>That's potentially hundreds of dollars of games that you can't play because VAC decides to permanently ban you with no way to appeal the ban. \u00a0Considering that most VAC bans are 13 year olds being stupid, the whole concept of a permanent ban on first offense is a bit harsh to begin with. \u00a0Zero tolerance policies are stupid no matter what it is because there's ALWAYS a context, and I wish Valve would change the way VAC handles bans. \u00a0(Why would they though? If you get banned, you just end up buying the games a second time and making them money)<\/p> \"<\/blockquote>wrong; they have different branches of source and lots of them are different; L4D and L4D2 are seperate, some others are seperate too (you can find a list on the steam forums somewhere)\n <\/article>13 years ago<\/time><\/div><\/div><\/div><\/div><\/div><\/a>Sanious<\/a>
Valve are awesome.<\/p><\/article>13 years ago<\/time><\/div><\/div><\/div><\/div><\/div><\/a>Animasta<\/a><\/svg><\/i> Follow\n <\/a><\/div><\/header>14948<\/p>Forum Posts<\/p><\/div>3563<\/p>Wiki Points<\/p><\/div>0<\/p>Followers<\/p><\/div><\/section>Reviews:<\/span> 4<\/p>User Lists:<\/span> 5<\/p><\/section><\/div><\/div>\n Edited By Animasta<\/a><\/div><\/div><\/span>@ITSSEXYTIME<\/strong> said: \" Hah, I love how Valve managed to turn this into good PR.<\/p><\/p>VAC's no appeals policy (Plus the policy of not actually telling you why you were banned) + Permanent banning is a joke. \u00a0Additionally, this serves s proof that there can be false-positives. \u00a0If the bans were temporary it'd be a mild annoyance, but you can lose quite a bit with a VAC ban. \u00a0If you get VAC banned in a Source engine game, you cannot play ANY source engine game on a VAC server. \u00a0That means no TF2, Hl2DM ,L4D, \u00a0L4D2, Portal 2, Alien Swarm, Counterstrike: Source, Day of Defeat Source or any mods. \u00a0(On secure servers, which if you've ever actually tried to play on an unsecured server before it can be a nightmare)<\/p><\/p>That's potentially hundreds of dollars of games that you can't play because VAC decides to permanently ban you with no way to appeal the ban. \u00a0Considering that most VAC bans are 13 year olds being stupid, the whole concept of a permanent ban on first offense is a bit harsh to begin with. \u00a0Zero tolerance policies are stupid no matter what it is because there's ALWAYS a context, and I wish Valve would change the way VAC handles bans. \u00a0(Why would they though? If you get banned, you just end up buying the games a second time and making them money)<\/p> \"<\/blockquote>wrong; they have different branches of source and lots of them are different; L4D and L4D2 are seperate, some others are seperate too (you can find a list on the steam forums somewhere)\n <\/article>13 years ago<\/time><\/div><\/div><\/div><\/div><\/div><\/a>Sanious<\/a>
<\/span>@ITSSEXYTIME<\/strong> said: \" Hah, I love how Valve managed to turn this into good PR.<\/p><\/p>VAC's no appeals policy (Plus the policy of not actually telling you why you were banned) + Permanent banning is a joke. \u00a0Additionally, this serves s proof that there can be false-positives. \u00a0If the bans were temporary it'd be a mild annoyance, but you can lose quite a bit with a VAC ban. \u00a0If you get VAC banned in a Source engine game, you cannot play ANY source engine game on a VAC server. \u00a0That means no TF2, Hl2DM ,L4D, \u00a0L4D2, Portal 2, Alien Swarm, Counterstrike: Source, Day of Defeat Source or any mods. \u00a0(On secure servers, which if you've ever actually tried to play on an unsecured server before it can be a nightmare)<\/p><\/p>That's potentially hundreds of dollars of games that you can't play because VAC decides to permanently ban you with no way to appeal the ban. \u00a0Considering that most VAC bans are 13 year olds being stupid, the whole concept of a permanent ban on first offense is a bit harsh to begin with. \u00a0Zero tolerance policies are stupid no matter what it is because there's ALWAYS a context, and I wish Valve would change the way VAC handles bans. \u00a0(Why would they though? If you get banned, you just end up buying the games a second time and making them money)<\/p> \"<\/blockquote>wrong; they have different branches of source and lots of them are different; L4D and L4D2 are seperate, some others are seperate too (you can find a list on the steam forums somewhere)\n <\/article>13 years ago<\/time><\/div><\/div><\/div><\/div><\/div><\/a>Sanious<\/a>
93 Comments<\/h4>