Himass and TanVuu cry on VTVcab, declare they won't return to PUBG even if ban lifted

In an interview on VTVcab, two professional PUBG players Himass and TanVuu could not hide their emotions. They cried, recounted the days after being banned for life by KRAFTON, and made a shocking statement: even if the ban is lifted, neither will return to professional PUBG. The incident originated from an event at PUBG Asia Stars 2026. According to what was shared, Himass was then on Anyone's Legend (AL), while TanVuu played for The Expendables (TE). After the incident, KRAFTON - the PUBG publisher - issued a global competition ban. Both players are no longer eligible for any international PUBG tournament. In a battle royale title like PUBG, a global ban effectively ends a top-level competitive career. PUBG Asia Stars 2026 is a regional tournament organized by KRAFTON, gathering strong teams from Asia. The incident at this tournament not only affected standings but also triggered a cross-border investigation. VTVcab, a sports channel with a large Vietnamese audience, broadcast the interview. Immediately after airing, the clip spread on social media. Notably, the reaction of the managing organizations drew attention. Himass said that as soon as the incident occurred, Anyone's Legend asked him not to speak out or intervene on his own and to let the organization handle it. For TanVuu, The Expendables submitted an appeal with information intended to protect the player. But according to what was shared in the interview, TE did not receive the response it expected. Afterwards, The Expendables decided to disband its PUBG roster. That decision meant TanVuu also lost his professional home. The shock did not come only from the ban. Both Himass and TanVuu had international stage experience. They were names expected by the Vietnamese PUBG community. Himass once said he planned to compete with Taikonn until the end of this year before considering retirement. TanVuu wanted to stay for about two more years to enjoy the remaining time with esports. The lifetime ban cut those plans short. In the interview, both admitted they had broken down. Himass said if everything ended, he would switch to driving Grab to make a living. TanVuu planned to move into business and online selling. Those are fallback plans for people who once stood on the international stage, now facing an uncertain future. The biggest question remains: if exonerated, would they return? Both gave a decisive answer: no. They no longer have the desire for the arena that hurt them. Instead, they thanked PewPew - a veteran figure in the Vietnamese gaming community - and the fans who stood by them. PewPew is seen as a predecessor in Vietnamese PUBG. Himass and TanVuu mentioning him as a spiritual support shows the role of veteran figures during a crisis. The case quickly exceeded the personal scope. A signature campaign received more than 4.1 million signatures, demanding justice for Himass and TanVuu. The number shows the PUBG community was not silent. They raised questions about the transparency of the handling process. For comparison, community campaigns in esports rarely exceed a few hundred thousand signatures. The 4.1 million figure shows an exceptional level of concern. It also puts KRAFTON in a position of having to weigh keeping the ban against calming public opinion. Notably, the Korean Game Users Association spoke up. The organization asked the PUBG PC publisher to explain the handling process of the incident at PUBG Asia Stars 2026. This is a rare move, because the Korean player advocacy group rarely intervenes in disputes involving foreign players. The case therefore has regional, even global, implications. From a governance perspective, KRAFTON's appeal process is being questioned. Both AL and TE submitted appeals, but no positive response was publicly announced. This leads to two hypotheses: either the evidence against the players is overwhelming, or the appeal process lacks transparency. The public has not been given access to information to judge for itself. On the organizations' side, reactions were opposite. AL maintained PUBG operations, while TE disbanded its roster. This difference reflects many factors: financial capacity, belief in the players, or strategic calculation for the future. For TE, disbanding its PUBG team means withdrawing from the game, at least for now. For TanVuu, the loss is double: losing his competitive career and losing his managing organization. For Himass, AL kept its apparatus but he was still banned from competing. Both fell into a state where they could not return to their old path. In terms of career assets, the ban wiped out the value they had accumulated. International experience, skills, relationships - all became meaningless if they could not compete. No rehabilitation path was announced. There is no mechanism for them to prove their innocence, if they are truly innocent. The story also raises the issue of player rights in competitive integrity cases. When a publisher issues a ban, do players have the right to see all evidence? Do they have the right to appeal before an independent body? The current process seems to give no satisfactory answer. Legally, PUBG is a privately published game, and KRAFTON has the right to set participation terms. However, when a ban affects players' livelihoods, the question of due process becomes urgent. International esports organizations are also watching the case as a precedent. The ripple effect does not stop at two individuals. The case could discourage young Vietnamese PUBG players from pursuing a professional path. If a ban can come without clear cause, and with no effective appeal, then career risk is too high. This directly affects the health of the Vietnamese PUBG ecosystem. On the community side, more than 4.1 million signatures is a strong signal. Fans not only sympathize with the two players; they also want a transparent answer. The involvement of the Korean Game Users Association further shows the case is no longer an internal Vietnamese PUBG story. Whatever the final outcome, Himass and TanVuu's declaration of no return has closed a chapter. If the ban is lifted, they still choose to leave. If the ban stands, they have even less reason to return. This is the strongest refusal a player can send to a publisher. In the short term, the fate of Himass and TanVuu has been decided by their own statement. In the long term, how KRAFTON handles the aftermath will determine the Vietnamese PUBG community's trust. What remains is the question of the future: how will KRAFTON reform its handling process? Will organizations dare to protect players to the end? And can the Vietnamese PUBG community turn 4.1 million signatures into real pressure for change? Those questions still have no answers.