not playing any riot games,Dont want them running a whole Surveillance camera("Anticheat") in my Windows NT Kernel.
that's what you get for playing corporate games.
In unrelated news Riot has faced allegations and lawsuits alleging a toxic workplace culture, including gender discrimination and sexual harassment. The company was criticized for its use of forced arbitration in response to these allegations.
A company who wants kernel level access to your system for "anti-cheat" is being run by psychopaths with no concept of personal boundaries
adds up
I'm devastated that League of Legends, TFT and the Netflix series Arcane are all related to this horrible company.
LoL is a terrible game, a shallow copy of the original concept.
I will die on this hill.
We die together comrade
HoN was the superior dota successor.
Which, funnily enough, I never got into.
Bought the game like 3 weeks before going F2P, yet it never clicked as much as LoL.
Thank god for Dota 2.
Also Avatar: The Last Airbender
... What?
Giancarlo Volpe, one of the writers for Avatar, works at Riot as a senior asshole.
For example, if a creator were to use hateful language or other misconduct during a stream, but did not do so in-game over chat or voice communication, a penalty can still be issued.
RIP Tyler1
Based. Toxic streamers are careful to stay away from chat, and are have a huge impact on the overall culture.
Beatings won't improve systemic problems with your genre.
There's a reason every MOBA is this toxic, and only MOBAs are this toxic. Every system is perfectly designed to produce its observed outcomes. You designed this problem.
What about the genre itself produces toxicity?
To add to other commenters - its also really hard, assuming you play solo, to focus on your own performance and not blame teammates. I've never been toxic, and tried to focus on my own gameplay, but I eventually realized its almost impossible. Even though I thought that I don't care about others, and even though I managed to never be toxic, it only ocurred to me when I switched to StarCraft, where you play 1v1 and there's no-one else to blame. It was so mentally taxing, queueing for another game when you know that you just suck and will loose again to some easy build. I lasted for two months of ranked StarCraft, before I had to quit due to mental health. I just wasn't able to play anymore and was dreading the next match.
Which is something that never happened to me in MOBAs, because even though I was sure I'm only focusing on myself, it became clear that wasn't true - otherwise, I'd have quickly had the same problem as with 1v1 games. I managed to not be toxic because I hate toxicity and am non-confrotational in general, but if you are someone with less self-control, blaming your teammates just come so, so naturally. And accepting your own mistakes is way harder than I thought, which surprised me by how much.
It's a zero-sum team project. Half the people playing will lose, and none of them will feel responsible. Even though they need to work together the entire time, to such a degree that any single person can ruin it for everybody... and one player quitting counts as ruining it for everybody. You're handcuffed to these people for an hour. If this was all silly fun-times then you'd laugh it off, but of course, no, it's a competitive sweatbox.
This is a formula for a stranger in Nebraska to blow out your headphones screaming obscenities because you clicked NPCs wrong twenty minutes ago.
Compare other hyper-competitive team games like Counter-Strike. One player can clutch a 1v5. Quitting is heavily discouraged, but is roughly balanced through numeric adjustments. And most importantly, games are quick. A round can happen in under a minute. Whole matches can be as long as a MOBA round, but being broken up into multiple phases - each one a separate win or loss - lets people feel that they did okay. Even if they stood no chance. Nobody invents a racial slur, mid-aneurysm, when they lose an aim-duel in silver.
One of the ex-devs for LoL or DotA said people should get kicked just for picking the wrong guy. If you can commit a bannable offense on the character select screen, maybe the game has intrinsic problems.
And you are more than likely to never play with the same people ever again forever. No community building, only community destruction.
Makes sense. I played Dota for some time and honestly that was one of the things I enjoyed about it, unreasonable people being furious with me while being totally helpless to do anything about it other than lose their shit. Although it's a dirty sort of enjoyment and makes things extremely awkward; on an emotional level what you want out of the match is for your teammates to fail, but you're obliged by the rules and a sense of sportsmanship not to throw, so even if you don't want to be dishonest about what you're doing it's hard to play seriously.
I think it would be cool if there was a moba that somehow formalizes the adversarial relationship you have with your team. Maybe like a Survivor esque battle royale setup; in the beginning it's 5v5, and you'll be advantaged by the success of your team, but ultimately you are going to have to betray them to win, and also the losers will have an opportunity to influence the outcome.
Inverting the PVP to be intra-team sounds brilliant. You're there to be the best on your side, at any cost... and then there's five other schmucks present. There'd still be a contest between teams, but it wouldn't really matter. That's the background noise for trying to steal kills from the other guy in your lane. One player can even be "the albatross," the worst loser on your side, motivated above-all-else to foist that label onto another player.
The simpler fix is to make rounds so fast and chaotic that people can't develop narratives about how so-and-so fucked them over. Let people win some rounds and lose some rounds, even if the outcome is a devastating three-and-eight loss. Make their catastrophic fuckups contained. Allow everyone the opportunity to clutch critical moments, by making more moments critical, without creating one continuous hour-long panic attack.
Key to any of this is scoring via bots. The game can snapshot any moment of gameplay, and run it back over and over, with AI substituting any given player. It's VORP. If you just got your ass handed to you - would any bot have done better? If not, then that failure shouldn't count against you. If this failure was caused by the game introducing randomness, then your bad karma can be made-up-for with better luck later on. But if you fumbled a fight that 99% of simulations survived, the game is free to laugh at you, and so are the other players.
Doesn't seem unreasonable, I wouldn't want to associate myself with misbehaviour either.
So in theory one could be banned for making a negative review video?
Vanguard was enough for me to nope out, but this just seems like more anti consumer bullshit to me.
In theory you could read the article?
Not reading the article is a bannable offence.
Sorry, new rules.
Oh God please let this happen
What if reading it counts as negative conduct?
Red State detected
The article focuses on streamers and doesn't unambiguously answer this question
The article is very vague, I agree. But they do say
For example, if a creator were to use hateful language
And it doesn't answer the question is because the question is irrelevant. But I do agree that the article is shit. One image of the said code of conduct shared on twitter was more informative than this article.
My point is just that it doesn't make sense to criticize the question for not reading the article if the article doesn't answer the question, and what's really needed to answer it is additional context. The broad scope of Riot's statement could be construed to mean they could do more than just ban streamers for using hateful language.
There was already another comment that added the relevant information so I didn't repeat it and no, riots statement is pretty concise.
Article and Riot's official documents refer to penalising toxic (flaming teammates/other people) behaviour during content creation with Riot' IPs. A negative review isn't toxic inherently
To capitalized G-amer clowns it is the same.
They have full legal rights to ban you for farting when the minute hand and hour hand aligned. This changes nothing in terms of what they "can" do. It's rather their public announcement about what they "will" do. If they really wanted to ban you for silly reasons, they don't even need these silly reasons, they can just ban you and are fully within their legal rights to do so.
Negative reviews are the least likely scenario for banning someone in game, as the person has already reviewed it and needs no further acesss on that account for their stream.
More likely they will punish people with an ever increasing range of 'inappropriate' that seems somewhat reasonable at first (hate speech) and end up with some minority group (LGBTQ+) being silenced through a chilling effect.
Video game news oriented community. No NanoUFO is not a bot :)
Posts.
Comments.
My goal is just to have a community where people can go and see what new game news is out for the day and comment on it.
Other communities: