4 ms·

Email addresses aren't real-life identifiers, although they could be used that way. And on the inverse, I can buy a burner phone with cash and defeat Blizzard's

by branon 4y ago

Email addresses aren't real-life identifiers, although they could be used that way. And on the inverse, I can buy a burner phone with cash and defeat Blizzard's requirement easily. But it's pretty clear what Blizzard is going for here, since we know their platform is competitive and thus harsher on individuals viewed as bad actors. Blizzard knows full well that most people signing up to play only have one phone number, which is most certainly a real-life identifier for those players. My point is that if players feel compelled to self-censor their interactions online for fear of repercussions[0], then they are not playing a game. They are instead representing themselves as individuals on a social network with competitive/gamified attributes. Requiring phone numbers to play is just a method to gently reinforce this. To each their own - this might be exactly the type of game you like to play. But it departs pretty strongly from the classical definition of "video game" that I grew up with. [0] For example, your primary phone number being disallowed access to all Blizzard services. Maybe they go even further and request that 3rd party services ban you for off-platform violations. Moved this down to a footnote so as not to spread FUD, I'm sure they don't currently do this, nor do I expect them to. But cross-referencing phone numbers would make it very easy to start.

akerl_ 4y ago
Overwatch’s only social features are in-game voice/text chat, whose purpose is primarily coordinating with your team. If this helps censor the people who are interrupting the game to shout racist insults or read their manifestos, that seems like a win for gaming to me. Putting something in a footnote doesn’t make it it FUD, for what it’s worth.
- q-big 4y ago
  > If this helps censor the people who are interrupting the game to shout racist insults or read their manifestos, that seems like a win for gaming to me. Why not let stupid people shout stupid things ...
  - akerl_ 4y ago
    Because it’s disruptive to the rest of us trying to play the game?
    - q-big 4y ago
      Come on: also in real life stupid people say stupid things all the time.
      - akerl_ 4y ago
        Yes. Is that relevant here? In-game chat isn’t bound by any requirement to support everything that stupid people can do in real life.
        q-big 4y ago
        > In-game chat isn’t bound by any requirement to support everything that stupid people can do in real life. Do you seriously claim that "not preventing" already means "supporting"?!
        akerl_ 4y ago
        To be hopefully crystal clear: Overwatch voice chat is a privately hosted service that’s built to be used by players during overwatch games. Blizzard moderates the content of that chat to remove disruptive content, where disruptive means “chat that makes people not enjoy playing overwatch”. In general, that’s people shouting slurs at their teammates or rambling about nonsense. Changes like the phone number requirement are part of their approach to expand the preemptive blocking of this activity. And I am fully in favor of them doing this, because it improves the quality of the game.
        dbttdft 4y ago
        [flagged]
- branon 4y ago
  I mean the real-world social aspect of the game - from eSports tournaments to casual/competitive play. Even the conversation we're having now. How others interpret gaming as a whole. A social system is created where only certain kinds of behavior is acceptable, and disputes are arbitrated by the platform-holder. When those disputes are won or lost, the platform-holder presumably will attempt to take action against individuals - not IP addresses, emails, or usernames. We've already established that it's not really a game (seems more like a sport), so whether it's a win for video gaming or not is irrelevant to my thinking, though I do tend to agree with regards to the actual in-game communication mechanics. Footnotes are used to call attention to idiosyncrasies in written communication so I used one here, similar to how I described another sentence of mine as sarcastic in an earlier comment - just trying to be fair :)
- dbttdft 4y ago
  > that seems like a win for gaming to me Well, it isn't. What people are saying in chat has no bearing on the quality of the game. I'm not even playing devil's advocate like you are doing in this sub thread either, I literally could not care what people say in game chats. I take more issue to this obnoxious, cancerous, USA opinion that someone saying the N-word is the end of the world and requires me as an innocent bystander to bear the costs (such as having to use phone identification to play a game). You see the problem is not being racist itself, but the "solutions" you people propose.
  - akerl_ 4y ago
    This doesn’t seem coherent. The team voice chat is used by players coordinating to play the game. If somebody is shouting nonsense into their mic, they’re interfering with people playing the game, which makes the game less fun. If they’re shouting slurs at other players, they’re making the game less fun for those people. And blizzard wants the game to be fun, as do I.
    - dbttdft 4y ago
      Why are you arguing like a lawyer instead of coming up with a valid point for me to rebuke? Obviously I was referring to just the general notion of people saying racist stuff in chat. It's no the end of the world when that happens. Saying that you find the game less enjoyable when people say racist shit just makes you sound like an annoying person. The fact that you brought up racism and then used this strawman of "game being disrupted" is actually hilarious and shows what a thin spine you have.
      - akerl_ 4y ago
        My point feels pretty clear: Blizzard is doing this to raise the effort required for people to evade bans by making new accounts. People get banned for cheating, for being disruptive in chat, or for throwing games on purpose. I support this decision by Blizzard, because those things make the game less fun to play. No straw men here, and racism is only in the thread because it’s a common example of people being disruptive in chat.

by branon 4y ago

akerl_ 4y ago

Overwatch’s only social features are in-game voice/text chat, whose purpose is primarily coordinating with your team. If this helps censor the people who are interrupting the game to shout racist insults or read their manifestos, that seems like a win for gaming to me. Putting something in a footnote doesn’t make it it FUD, for what it’s worth.

q-big 4y ago
> If this helps censor the people who are interrupting the game to shout racist insults or read their manifestos, that seems like a win for gaming to me. Why not let stupid people shout stupid things ...
- akerl_ 4y ago
  Because it’s disruptive to the rest of us trying to play the game?
  - q-big 4y ago
    Come on: also in real life stupid people say stupid things all the time.
    - akerl_ 4y ago
      Yes. Is that relevant here? In-game chat isn’t bound by any requirement to support everything that stupid people can do in real life.
      - q-big 4y ago
        > In-game chat isn’t bound by any requirement to support everything that stupid people can do in real life. Do you seriously claim that "not preventing" already means "supporting"?!
        akerl_ 4y ago
        To be hopefully crystal clear: Overwatch voice chat is a privately hosted service that’s built to be used by players during overwatch games. Blizzard moderates the content of that chat to remove disruptive content, where disruptive means “chat that makes people not enjoy playing overwatch”. In general, that’s people shouting slurs at their teammates or rambling about nonsense. Changes like the phone number requirement are part of their approach to expand the preemptive blocking of this activity. And I am fully in favor of them doing this, because it improves the quality of the game.
        dbttdft 4y ago
        [flagged]
branon 4y ago
I mean the real-world social aspect of the game - from eSports tournaments to casual/competitive play. Even the conversation we're having now. How others interpret gaming as a whole. A social system is created where only certain kinds of behavior is acceptable, and disputes are arbitrated by the platform-holder. When those disputes are won or lost, the platform-holder presumably will attempt to take action against individuals - not IP addresses, emails, or usernames. We've already established that it's not really a game (seems more like a sport), so whether it's a win for video gaming or not is irrelevant to my thinking, though I do tend to agree with regards to the actual in-game communication mechanics. Footnotes are used to call attention to idiosyncrasies in written communication so I used one here, similar to how I described another sentence of mine as sarcastic in an earlier comment - just trying to be fair :)
dbttdft 4y ago
> that seems like a win for gaming to me Well, it isn't. What people are saying in chat has no bearing on the quality of the game. I'm not even playing devil's advocate like you are doing in this sub thread either, I literally could not care what people say in game chats. I take more issue to this obnoxious, cancerous, USA opinion that someone saying the N-word is the end of the world and requires me as an innocent bystander to bear the costs (such as having to use phone identification to play a game). You see the problem is not being racist itself, but the "solutions" you people propose.
- akerl_ 4y ago
  This doesn’t seem coherent. The team voice chat is used by players coordinating to play the game. If somebody is shouting nonsense into their mic, they’re interfering with people playing the game, which makes the game less fun. If they’re shouting slurs at other players, they’re making the game less fun for those people. And blizzard wants the game to be fun, as do I.
  - dbttdft 4y ago
    Why are you arguing like a lawyer instead of coming up with a valid point for me to rebuke? Obviously I was referring to just the general notion of people saying racist stuff in chat. It's no the end of the world when that happens. Saying that you find the game less enjoyable when people say racist shit just makes you sound like an annoying person. The fact that you brought up racism and then used this strawman of "game being disrupted" is actually hilarious and shows what a thin spine you have.
    - akerl_ 4y ago
      My point feels pretty clear: Blizzard is doing this to raise the effort required for people to evade bans by making new accounts. People get banned for cheating, for being disruptive in chat, or for throwing games on purpose. I support this decision by Blizzard, because those things make the game less fun to play. No straw men here, and racism is only in the thread because it’s a common example of people being disruptive in chat.