4 ms·
I think the said the "solution is", it does not matter if the functionality exist today. Its more of how the gaming industry should handle these situations. Sim
by mbrumlow 9y ago
I think the said the "solution is", it does not matter if the functionality exist today. Its more of how the gaming industry should handle these situations. Simply blocking somebody should make it so you can't ever be matched with, or have to communicate with them again.
In some games that might be harder said then done, but you could at least make sure you are never on the same team, and that if the player becomes an opponent that its name is obfuscated and they can't chat back.
- always_good 9y agoNot very great for the community to make every single person play with a toxic player and then block them. You want to do the work for them. Would you say that's a solution for hackers, too? "Meh, just block them."
- mbrumlow 9y agoThe entire problem though is what is 'toxic' is subjective. Today we find this behavior okay, and tomorrow we don't. It could be simply having a MAGA hat on could be 'toxic'. You also have to worry about /toxic/ group behavior. The masses are not always right. So just because somebody has had a lot of people report them does not mean they are toxic. For any of this to work the very behavior that is not allowed must be defined to the T. But anyways, This is not my argument, I was merely trying to correct the assumptions of a post. And suggesting that because some feature does not exist today is not a very good reason why a suggested solution can't work or should not be considered.