4 ms·
marketing around half-baked features that get you VAC banned is not really ideal, no. kinda gives the impression that the marketing was given more focus than t
by paulmd 3y ago
marketing around half-baked features that get you VAC banned is not really ideal, no. kinda gives the impression that the marketing was given more focus than the product.
it's also a very rookie mistake, like, you have to think it's either someone brand new they hired in, or someone more experienced really dropped the ball on devrel/etc. This is a situation where they absolutely should have known that they should talk to the gamedevs in advance.
- whalesalad 3y agoAt some point you gotta do the thing and ruffle feathers and get/force buy in. I don't see anything inherently wrong with this approach. Shoot first, ask questions later. It's a successful strategy most of the time. Wrangling all game developers is arguably an impossible task. Building a one size fits all solution is not. Just because it flagged by some anticheat doesn't mean it's failed.
- deleted 3y ago[deleted]
- bragr 3y agoThe people whos entire steam collections are worthless with a lifetime VAC ban are just justifiable collateral in the name of a better future? Valve says they'll roll them all back but still
- ziddoap 3y agoI don't have a particular opinion either way on AMDs approach here (yet), but I'm not sure your comment is making the point that I think you're trying to make. You start off with: >The people whos entire steam collections are worthless with a lifetime VAC ban are just justifiable collateral in the name of a better future? But end with the exact opposite conclusion: >Valve says they'll roll them all back So... In the end, no steam libraries are worthless and no one got a VAC ban because of it. It seems like the shoot first and ask questions later approach was somewhat successful again.