Valve Officially Condemns Steam Item Gambling

[Vigormortis]

They might've, but if you lose that frequently it's probably punishment enough.

I'll let myself be the one who determines if I've been punished enough by my own stupidity, thank you very much!

[double post]

Don't think I'm not onto you and your attempts to impersonate said friend in order to beat me and get free things!

It's a conspiracy!

What? No! I would never! I have no idea what you're talking about!

<.<

Also: Thanks for making me a liar and dragging me back into the thread.

Responding to snarky sarcasm is one of my weaknesses.

 

[Vigormortis]

A few years back when some steam accounts were put on ban due to forum posts that got my attention, it is one thing to ban them from posting but entirely another to ban their access to the games they paid for.

Sorry, what? When was this? Do you have a link I can follow to follow up on that story?

I mean, there's a drastic different between, say, a Steam ban and an account closure. Most people confuse them. You can be Steam banned but still access your library of games. You can even download them again from the Steam servers. You just lose access to the Storefront and Community services.

To actually have your account locked and lose access to redownloads of your games requires either some really egregious, illegal activity (like stealing other accounts) or contacting Valve and requesting they close the account.

I've yet to come across a single story where someone had their account closed because they posted some stupid comments on a forum. If you can point me to where this sort of thing actually happened, I'd really appreciate it because, if true, that's bullshit.

 

[weirdee]

While this issue certainly is a problem, the bigger problem is that all they're doing to stop it won't be enough, and will just drive this activity to even shadier methods to maintain business.

 

[Frankster]

Kibeth41 point is you get *something* basically that you can put up a slot machine if it is guaranteed to at least hand out cracker jack prizes every time. (even if the only reason anyone is actually playing is the 1/100000 chance of getting a big pile of money) As long as you can look the other way and say "Oh yeah, they are paying a dollar for some stickers, 87 times in a row" you are in the clear.

I'm starting to understand how Pachinko games can get away with not being gambling somehow..

So really what those CS:GO betting sites need to do is offer a complimentary gift of some sort worth 0.00000000000000001$ (since this is CS:GO, let's say they compensate you with one of the most common and worthless items in the game) if you lose as a consolation prize and they wouldn't be gambling sites anymore according to the technical definitions.

 

[Jburton9]

A few years back when some steam accounts were put on ban due to forum posts that got my attention, it is one thing to ban them from posting but entirely another to ban their access to the games they paid for.

Sorry, what? When was this? Do you have a link I can follow to follow up on that story?

I mean, there's a drastic different between, say, a Steam ban and an account closure. Most people confuse them. You can be Steam banned but still access your library of games. You can even download them again from the Steam servers. You just lose access to the Storefront and Community services.

To actually have your account locked and lose access to redownloads of your games requires either some really egregious, illegal activity (like stealing other accounts) or contacting Valve and requesting they close the account.

I've yet to come across a single story where someone had their account closed because they posted some stupid comments on a forum. If you can point me to where this sort of thing actually happened, I'd really appreciate it because, if true, that's bullshit.

Hi, for a quick example:
http://www.geek.com/games/steam-proves-we-dont-own-the-games-we-buy-1464093/

The one I spoke of made the news about six or so years ago, it shocked a lot of people how player accounts were perma ban due to Valve moderation response for some forum posts - yes it was some very toxic trolling and they deserved a forum ban but not an account ban. Valve changed their minds once it hit the media and reopened the players accounts. Also as of a year or so ago Developers can ban you from their games anytime they wish through Valves Steam service.

http://store.steampowered.com/subscriber_agreement/

"Valve may terminate your Account or a particular Subscription for any conduct or activity that Valve believes is illegal, constitutes a Cheat, or otherwise negatively affects the enjoyment of Steam by other Subscribers. You acknowledge that Valve is not required to provide you notice before terminating your Subscriptions(s) and/or Account, but it may choose to do so."

http://store.steampowered.com/online_conduct/

Both above items give them full action to basically do whatever they want. They can even refuse to give you a reason why and simply respond with "case closed" we do not discuss the reasons for account bans.

Like the article and the case in the link, the only reason Valve actually responded properly was strictly due to gaining negative media attention.

 

[Vigormortis]

Hi, for a quick example:
http://www.geek.com/games/steam-proves-we-dont-own-the-games-we-buy-1464093/

The one I spoke of made the news about six or so years ago, it shocked a lot of people how player accounts were perma ban due to Valve moderation response for some forum posts - yes it was some very toxic trolling and they deserved a forum ban but not an account ban. Valve changed their minds once it hit the media and reopened the players accounts. Also as of a year or so ago Developers can ban you from their games anytime they wish through Valves Steam service.

But the link you provided here doesn't sync up with the story you keep mentioning. The one you linked was about some guy whose account was temporarily banned but later reinstated. It says nothing about multiple users and forum trolling.

Do you have a link that backs up that story? The one linked is questionable, but the article provides very few details (and no verifiable information, save for his word) so I can't make a judgement call on the events one way or another.

http://store.steampowered.com/subscriber_agreement/

"Valve may terminate your Account or a particular Subscription for any conduct or activity that Valve believes is illegal, constitutes a Cheat, or otherwise negatively affects the enjoyment of Steam by other Subscribers. You acknowledge that Valve is not required to provide you notice before terminating your Subscriptions(s) and/or Account, but it may choose to do so."

http://store.steampowered.com/online_conduct/

Both above items give them full action to basically do whatever they want. They can even refuse to give you a reason why and simply respond with "case closed" we do not discuss the reasons for account bans.

Except, they can't remove any files you've downloaded to your hardrive(s). This is why, whenever I purchase a game on Steam, the first thing I do is download the game files and create backups. Just buying the games and leaving them on the Steam servers is akin to buying a game disc at Gamestop and then expecting them to keep the disc for you indefinitely. It's just irresponsible.

As for the rest, why is it shocking that Valve reserves the right to deny access to their services to people who've committed illegal acts? Losing access to the Steam servers (i.e. an account ban) doesn't magically make the client side of the program stop working. It still functions in offline mode, allowing you to play whatever games you have installed that require Steamworks. And games that don't require Steamworks function without the client open anyway.

 

[Infernal Lawyer]

Kibeth41 point is you get *something* basically that you can put up a slot machine if it is guaranteed to at least hand out cracker jack prizes every time. (even if the only reason anyone is actually playing is the 1/100000 chance of getting a big pile of money) As long as you can look the other way and say "Oh yeah, they are paying a dollar for some stickers, 87 times in a row" you are in the clear.

I'm starting to understand how Pachinko games can get away with not being gambling somehow..

So really what those CS:GO betting sites need to do is offer a complimentary gift of some sort worth 0.00000000000000001$ (since this is CS:GO, let's say they compensate you with one of the most common and worthless items in the game) if you lose as a consolation prize and they wouldn't be gambling sites anymore according to the technical definitions.

Most common and worthless item in the game, you say?

Losing all your stuff in a dumb bet is bad enough, but getting a crate in return would be like rubbing demonic salt into the wound.

 

[RedRockRun]

Yet paying 2.49 USD for a pull of a slot machine is okay.

 

[Strazdas]

So they have condemned their own system? Oh, thats about those gambling scam sites, i though for a second somone finally took crate gambling seriously. I guess we will have to wait for the lawyers there too!

 

[Jburton9]

Hi, for a quick example:
http://www.geek.com/games/steam-proves-we-dont-own-the-games-we-buy-1464093/

The one I spoke of made the news about six or so years ago, it shocked a lot of people how player accounts were perma ban due to Valve moderation response for some forum posts - yes it was some very toxic trolling and they deserved a forum ban but not an account ban. Valve changed their minds once it hit the media and reopened the players accounts. Also as of a year or so ago Developers can ban you from their games anytime they wish through Valves Steam service.

But the link you provided here doesn't sync up with the story you keep mentioning. The one you linked was about some guy whose account was temporarily banned but later reinstated. It says nothing about multiple users and forum trolling.

Do you have a link that backs up that story? The one linked is questionable, but the article provides very few details (and no verifiable information, save for his word) so I can't make a judgement call on the events one way or another.

http://store.steampowered.com/subscriber_agreement/

"Valve may terminate your Account or a particular Subscription for any conduct or activity that Valve believes is illegal, constitutes a Cheat, or otherwise negatively affects the enjoyment of Steam by other Subscribers. You acknowledge that Valve is not required to provide you notice before terminating your Subscriptions(s) and/or Account, but it may choose to do so."

http://store.steampowered.com/online_conduct/

Both above items give them full action to basically do whatever they want. They can even refuse to give you a reason why and simply respond with "case closed" we do not discuss the reasons for account bans.

Except, they can't remove any files you've downloaded to your hardrive(s). This is why, whenever I purchase a game on Steam, the first thing I do is download the game files and create backups. Just buying the games and leaving them on the Steam servers is akin to buying a game disc at Gamestop and then expecting them to keep the disc for you indefinitely. It's just irresponsible.

As for the rest, why is it shocking that Valve reserves the right to deny access to their services to people who've committed illegal acts? Losing access to the Steam servers (i.e. an account ban) doesn't magically make the client side of the program stop working. It still functions in offline mode, allowing you to play whatever games you have installed that require Steamworks. And games that don't require Steamworks function without the client open anyway.

I offered a more recent example. My original post is in my opinion for what is reasoning for myself in moving away from steam. I am not here to try to sway your opinion nor am I obligated to do so.

 

[Vigormortis]

I offered a more recent example.

I understand that, but you keep mentioning the other story in your reasoning. I was only asking if you could cite that story as, if true, it's a pretty egregious example of Valve making a really bad judgement call. If not true, then your use of the story in your reasoning seems...odd.

My original post is in my opinion for what is reasoning for myself in moving away from steam.

Fair enough, but I wasn't trying to convince you to go back to Steam. I was only asking for verification of the basis of your reasoning. It's up to us to be the watchdogs of Valve and its decision making. As such, I'm always interested in (verifiable) stories of their missteps.

I am not here to try to sway your opinion nor am I obligated to do so.

I wasn't demanding anything of you. I was only asking if you would be kind enough to link me to a 'citeable' source for the story you kept mentioning. But based on this comment I take it you either can't or simply wish not to.

Either is fine. If the story is true, I'm sure I'll hear of it elsewhere. If it's not, well...your reasoning is questionable, but it's yours to have. Who am I to say otherwise?

 

[Arnoxthe1]

I offered a more recent example.

I understand that, but you keep mentioning the other story in your reasoning. I was only asking if you could cite that story as, if true, it's a pretty egregious example of Valve making a really bad judgement call. If not true, then your use of the story in your reasoning seems...odd.

My original post is in my opinion for what is reasoning for myself in moving away from steam.

Fair enough, but I wasn't trying to convince you to go back to Steam. I was only asking for verification of the basis of your reasoning. It's up to us to be the watchdogs of Valve and its decision making. As such, I'm always interested in (verifiable) stories of their missteps.

I am not here to try to sway your opinion nor am I obligated to do so.

I wasn't demanding anything of you. I was only asking if you would be kind enough to link me to a 'citeable' source for the story you kept mentioning. But based on this comment I take it you either can't or simply wish not to.

Either is fine. If the story is true, I'm sure I'll hear of it elsewhere. If it's not, well...your reasoning is questionable, but it's yours to have. Who am I to say otherwise?

I'm with you. There seems to be a lot of ill will towards Valve as of late. And honestly, I like their general hands-off approach. People think they want more restrictions but they really really don't. Or at least shouldn't.

 

[Vigormortis]

I'm with you. There seems to be a lot of ill will towards Valve as of late. And honestly, I like their general hands-off approach. People think they want more restrictions but they really really don't. Or at least shouldn't.

It's not even like Valve is beyond reproach. They are far from infallible. But with the many legitimate reasons to criticize the company I simply do not understand why we, as a community, keep inventing and fabricating criticisms that have very little, if any, basis in reality. What purpose does it serve to just...make shit up to complain about? If we spend all of our time whining about things that are either untrue or inconsequential then the real issues, the real problems, get buried under a deluge of nonsense. And when that happens, it becomes very hard to zero in on the issues and suss out solutions for them.