Yes, it uses Easy-Anti Cheat and not Valve Anti-Cheat. But, VAC is a service connected to the account, while EAC is connected to the game.

Iirc you don't get a VAC ban for EAC cheat detection, you get a game ban. You get VAC bans for VAC cheating.

Ergo VAC has nothing to do with this issue.

I know, just wanted to mention it anyway, since i wrote about bans in general on Steam.

Oh, OK. *thumbs up*

VAC - Welcome to People's Republic of Valve.


Maybe if you'd watched the video...

Haven't been on Steam in years so this might be out of date, but the way it used to work was you go to the support site, search your game, choose something like "I have an issue with this game" and then "I want to permanently remove this game from my account". As you mentioned, the wording is deceptive since the process is always reversible AFAIK.

I'm actually not sure if the game developer could even see you had "removed" the game, since it wasn't being refunded and just hidden. Now I'm wondering if Steam notifies developers that a game has been "removed" somehow.

Thanks for blowing that up a bit. My eyes aren't what they used to be; I couldn't make out the details on the video. ;)

Assuming that he provided that screenshot (he'd be silly not to), i'd still not be surprised Amazon didn't take it as proof because their staff are idiots and probably don't know what they were even looking at. They would probably argue that "the screenshot doesn't say HOW it was removed", just that he asked for it to be removed. Nothing short of an official email stating specifically what happened will likely satisfy them.

I'm not certain who is more to blame, Steam for inventing this ridiculous system they won't mediate within, or Amazon for being pricks and banning someone (apparently) innocent of breaching "the rules".

Right there with you on pesky eyes that refuse to work properly :)

Valve is to blame, no question about that, i mean, they've handed the house keys to Amazon and to a whole bunch of other companies that are considerably less than customer friendly - much like Valve itself.

Judging by replies he got from Amazon support he doesn't seem to be at fault since Amazon insists that it was a refund and that he should contact his bank to inquire about the chargeback - which apparently never happened. So, no way to appeal to anyone, to anyone that cares at least because Valve couldn't care less.

Valve also lets developers of games, ban you in specific game subforums. I couldn't ask in Steam the question i needed to solve, got two warnings and two bans across two different accounts. And single player ones!

Official Valve moderator also exclaimed: "Valve and personnel aren't responsible for any such action, issued at a subforum and has to be 100% with site rules" (avoiding also to examine whether or not it was)

You mean... people are surprised that companies do whatever the heck they please, within the extend allowed by the law, on THEIR servers?

I don't think they did anything wrong. In fact, I hope they exert the full extent of their legitimate authority and really get downright oppressive about it and really drive it home to the sheep who the wolf really is in the relationship, but then again they won't want to mess too much with a good thing right?

The few people who are affected by this and are unhappy about it have nobody but themselves to blame. You decided to make some corporation your daddy whose permission you need to ask to play and enjoy your games. You made your bed, now kindly lie in it.

The only thing coming from them should be "Oh daddy, I'll be better. I'm so sorry. I'll be a good boy from now on. Here's some money daddy... Can I please play my games now?". That attitude would be more consistent with the situation they decided to place themselves in and I can respect that to a degree (the ability to recognize and accept the legitimate consequences of your actions).

Meanwhile, I'll be playing my backed up collection without having to ask for anyone's blessing, thank you very much.

That sucks hard, although the guy probably ranted about it on twitch for many hours until someone at amazon had enough and kept him banned for good without even reviewing his following appeals. It wouldn't surprise me in case of a mmo, or corp like amazon. However only he knows the whole story, what he did and didn't do and I don't think we see the whole picture in that single video. Also in the vid's description, he seems to hate on everything. Either it's just an edgy joke, or he should take a break and find a different hobby for a while.

Game ban FAQ says that if the publisher abuses such behavior, their right to issue these bans might be revoked by valve. Should have happened already back when those false-positives in January resulted in mass banning of inactive players instead.

Thanks op, I'll keep avoiding mmos, freemiums, etc like a plague.

If what happened was true, that was very vindictive on Amazon's part. Unfortunately, something like this will likely happen again unless people make enough noise over increasingly anti-consumer practices, and if possible stop supporting the companies in question.

The cynic in me makes thinks it may be a long time, if ever, before any positive changes are made. Steam has a such a strong foothold in the PC market, and most people don't care until they are personally affected.

While I agree with you on this, I think we can bring a bit of nuance: I suspect that only a fraction of Steam users know what DRM is, a fraction of that fraction knows that DRM is not a fatality, that DRM-free games are a thing, and a tiny minority of them knows that DRM-free multiplayer is a thing too (on this last part, GOG customers are barely better informed, sadly).

So they agreed to a very anti-consumer contract, but most of them probably did it out of ignorance, not out of carelessness. In my opinion, only those who did it out of carelessness really deserve what you wrote ;)

That being said, I too like that Steam (and DRM/vendor lock-in actors more globally) show their true face more often. People need to understand what the true goal of DRM really is: that it is not related to piracy, but is all about corporate control over their customers.

Fair enough, I guess I was a little harsh in that assessment. Probably that a fair amount of people simply don't know any better as this issue isn't on their radar. Those people have my sympathies.