But then they all get given a really long detention.fix-the-spade said:But it's a reward there! He finishes the cake, doesn't explode and everyone cheers (well... nearly everyone).getoffmycloud said:Clearly you have never seen matilda.
But then they all get given a really long detention.fix-the-spade said:But it's a reward there! He finishes the cake, doesn't explode and everyone cheers (well... nearly everyone).getoffmycloud said:Clearly you have never seen matilda.
Your knee jerk reaction fails to take into account the fact that too many in the case of their example is based on a constantly recalculated scoring percentage. So lets think about the math here:Das Boot said:That seems like it would be far to easy to abuse and far to hard to moderate. How do you decide what is being a douche? Do you decide that he was a douche because the guy was really good and a ton of people reported him for being better then them? How do you moderate it and prevent all of the false accusations?BreakfastMan said:I would start handing out bans for offenders, using a "3-strikes" system. People need to get the message that this stuff is just not okay, and will not be tolerated. Those who act like a douche online will receive a strike. They continue their actions, another. When they get to 3, they are banned from X-Box live Gold forever, unable to send messages to anyone but the people on their friends list, and their account will be marked with a "Banned for misappropriate behavior" message. Might be a bit... harsh, but that is my idea.TizzytheTormentor said:Well then, how would you deal with the problem? If people start acting immature online, I just block em and not all matches have total twats on them.
Wow those actually sound like really really bad ideas. It pretty much all goes against the very reason we have voice chat in the first place.Vrex360 said:Well, good for them I guess. I have to be honest I really think their solutions for cleaning the Xbox Live gutter was actually pretty good. Auto mute players who get muted too many times, don't allow them the right to speak with strangers until they reach a certain level, make it so you can only communicate with people on your friend's list etc.
It's admittedly very heavily dealt but if the games industry is truly committed to getting rid of the angry embittered misogynists of the online world then they might as well come down hard on them.
Actually their backlog is fine, it's on PATV and their YouTube channelSirBryghtside said:]
Legal wrangling everywhere, until EC finally wrestle their IP from The Escapist and leave permanently, all their backlog wiped (as neither party fully owns the rights to it any more), and the spare RocketHub donations going to setting up an organisation to help indie developers, which I... haven't heard from since. Huh.
Yeah it other than that that's the impression I got when I noticed what was happeningSirBryghtside said:Huh, thanks for clarifying that. As I said, I was away when it all went up, but I thought I at least had the gist of the whole ordeal.
Even reporting is a joke through the amount of crap that has to be filtered.tippy2k2 said:If the person harassing isn't worth clicking on a menu to push Report, they probably are not doing something wrong enough to be worth reporting. By making the Mute button the report button, you're going to get much more collateral damage to people who have done nothing wrong (maybe it would balance itself out as has been suggested by others but I disagree). While any system with player interaction is exploitable, making it a Report button takes away the random chance of someone getting punished who shouldn't be.funcooker11811 said:See, I have to disagree about the report system being more effective, because it would turn the mute button into a report button . Rather than having to go to the person's profile and a few menus to report them, which is both a hassle, and a waste on the resources needed to sort through the real reports from the fake ones, it would implement a system that wouldn't need anything other than someone clicking the mute button. It's something people do anyway, and since its based on averages, it would get rid of the need for people to go through them. Plus, it prevents bannings based on trash-talking, which I've always felt was a little too harsh, what with it preventing people from playing games online. Just taking away the thing they abused seems to make more sense to me.tippy2k2 said:snip
Again, they painted the earned communications as a red button, only to be used if all other options have been exhausted, and it does pretty much what you described. If you lose an account to verbal harassment, you have to start over from scratch. I'm not really seeing a difference between that and what you just described.
EDIT: Also, I'm guessing that the lack of party chat on those few games are a design choice, like how dark souls prevents you from chatting while playing online.
As for the "earn communication" thing, I don't see any acceptable way to do it. Treating your customers like scum and forcing them to prove otherwise is just not acceptable to me. If you implement it on players who are being shit-heads THAT badly that you have to remove their communication, they shouldn't be on the service at all.