4 ms·

>And honestly, the fact you think this "ultimately caters to a tiny fraction of gamers while worsening the experience for the majority" tells me you're part of

>And honestly, the fact you think this "ultimately caters to a tiny fraction of gamers while worsening the experience for the majority" tells me you're part of the problem; you're probably often toxic to other players (even if you don't notice it), get your account muted/locked out/whatever, and then think that you did nothing wrong and everyone's in the same boat as you. Sorry for having the wrong opinion, but personal attacks are uncalled for. Ironic. So, to illustrate my point, would you prefer that heavy handed mods step in to censor you according to their definition of toxicity, or would you rather have the freedom to continue this discussion to possibly reach some resolution? I prefer to put faith in peoples' ability to resolve conflict without vague rules regarding inconsistent notions of toxicity, especially in the context of gaming, where I can leave and join another game more or less any time.

deleted 9y ago
[deleted]
krageon 9y ago
If you prefer to put faith in people's abilities (at this point in time) you're being intentionally headstrong in the face of overwhelming proof that that doesn't work. It's been a very long time since the games in question have launched and they're filled with toxicity.
- allthenews 9y ago
  >overwhelming proof that that doesn't work. Like billions of dollars and probably billions of man hours worth of gaming in an industry that is only growing? Have you considered further that some degree of so called toxicity is inherent to the fun of gaming? Why stop there? Why not set standards for content as well? You're talking about games that simulate violence, killing, war in general, but you demand that the playerbase act in accordance to your personal sensibilities? What proof do you have that the majority of gamers aren't fine with the status quo? Why are you so convinced that arbitrary rules against toxicity don't lessen the experience for the majority?
  - openasocket 9y ago
    > Like billions of dollars and probably billions of man hours worth of gaming in an industry that is only growing? Post hoc ergo propter hoc: just because the industry is growing doesn't mean that people don't mind toxicity. It's possible the industry would be growing even faster if there was less toxicity, for example. > Have you considered further that some degree of so called toxicity is inherent to the fun of gaming? Maybe some people enjoy being called a faggot by randoms on Xbox, but I don't. I'd go so far as to say the majority of people prefer not to be called slurs by random strangers. Can't we do something to stop that? > Why stop there? Why not set standards for content as well? You're talking about games that simulate violence, killing, war in general, but you demand that the playerbase act in accordance to your personal sensibilities? Why is any attempt to prevent any form of toxicity a slippery slope that can only lead to some sort of Orwellian nightmare of censorship?
s73v3r_ 9y ago
And if you keep getting that toxicity thrown in your face game after game after game?
scrollaway 9y ago
> would you prefer that heavy handed mods step in to censor you according to their definition of toxicity Heavy handed modding has flagged me and even limited my ability to post in the past. I don't necessarily agree with it (although it was deserved a few times), but mods are the arbiters of the community, not me. They have the option of listening to user feedback in aggregate. It works the same in games. The studio is the arbiter of the community, not the players. The players give feedback to the studio. The studio has the option of listening. And players have been giving feedback in troves that toxicity sucks, that toxic players ruin other players' gaming experience, and that they want that gone. Studios are listening. If you're getting caught on the wrong end of this, try being nicer to people.

deleted 9y ago

[deleted]

krageon 9y ago

If you prefer to put faith in people's abilities (at this point in time) you're being intentionally headstrong in the face of overwhelming proof that that doesn't work. It's been a very long time since the games in question have launched and they're filled with toxicity.

allthenews 9y ago
>overwhelming proof that that doesn't work. Like billions of dollars and probably billions of man hours worth of gaming in an industry that is only growing? Have you considered further that some degree of so called toxicity is inherent to the fun of gaming? Why stop there? Why not set standards for content as well? You're talking about games that simulate violence, killing, war in general, but you demand that the playerbase act in accordance to your personal sensibilities? What proof do you have that the majority of gamers aren't fine with the status quo? Why are you so convinced that arbitrary rules against toxicity don't lessen the experience for the majority?
- openasocket 9y ago
  > Like billions of dollars and probably billions of man hours worth of gaming in an industry that is only growing? Post hoc ergo propter hoc: just because the industry is growing doesn't mean that people don't mind toxicity. It's possible the industry would be growing even faster if there was less toxicity, for example. > Have you considered further that some degree of so called toxicity is inherent to the fun of gaming? Maybe some people enjoy being called a faggot by randoms on Xbox, but I don't. I'd go so far as to say the majority of people prefer not to be called slurs by random strangers. Can't we do something to stop that? > Why stop there? Why not set standards for content as well? You're talking about games that simulate violence, killing, war in general, but you demand that the playerbase act in accordance to your personal sensibilities? Why is any attempt to prevent any form of toxicity a slippery slope that can only lead to some sort of Orwellian nightmare of censorship?

s73v3r_ 9y ago

And if you keep getting that toxicity thrown in your face game after game after game?

scrollaway 9y ago

> would you prefer that heavy handed mods step in to censor you according to their definition of toxicity Heavy handed modding has flagged me and even limited my ability to post in the past. I don't necessarily agree with it (although it was deserved a few times), but mods are the arbiters of the community, not me. They have the option of listening to user feedback in aggregate. It works the same in games. The studio is the arbiter of the community, not the players. The players give feedback to the studio. The studio has the option of listening. And players have been giving feedback in troves that toxicity sucks, that toxic players ruin other players' gaming experience, and that they want that gone. Studios are listening. If you're getting caught on the wrong end of this, try being nicer to people.