3 ms·

>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? H

>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?