Planetside 2: Removing the ability to crouch over corspes to prevent "sexually assaulting a corpse".

[DrOswald]

Removing the ability for people to be massive asses in online games is a good thing. But that change should never come at the possible expense of gameplay.

 

[Qizx]

If people are getting so upset with someone online crouching over their dead avatar they must have a PHENOMENAL real life if that's what can cause outrage. Seriously people, it's not causing anyone any real problems.

Captcha: Last Straw well I guess that does raise a point, what if it's the final straw that makes a person go crazy and start slapping people silly?

 

[Promethax]

I am now one hundred percent convinced that there is no greater threat to our society and culture than teabagging in first person shooter games.

Will someone please think of the children?

 

[Starbird]

Yeah, and this is where I sigh when gamers complain about having a negative image.

The only reason 'uncivil' comes with the territory is that it has been allowed to come with the territory for so long. And while the whole 'Violence in games makes people violent IRL' is nonsense, I do think that the 'standard' interaction in certain games has gone a long way towards the current 'if you don't like someone online it's okay to send death threats to their family' mindset.

This mindset is incredibly outdated and devs are starting to catch onto this. Riot for example took one of the most toxic communities in the world and hit them with the tribunal - leading to an impossible animal (a Moba where the community is mostly at least civil) coming into existence.

I haven't had direct experience with the tribunal but from the stories I've heard it's exceedingly unfair and generally run by people who hate fun.

I think that is because the stories you hear are from the ass hats that end up receiving the wrath of the tribunal. Every once in a while you get a thread on the LoL forums in which people complain that they were banned unfairly, and inevitably when the chat logs are presented it turns out they were banned for graphic descriptions of exactly how they were going to rape their support's sister or something along those lines. If anything, the LoL punishment process falls well into benefit of the doubt territory.

There have been false positives. All of the 'real' ones I've seen (maybe...2?) have been dealt with quickly and compensation given. The system is still very, very, very good.

It made me especially happy when a few progamers ate tournament bans for abusing people in their games. This is the crap esports needs if it's ever going to be taken seriously outside of Asia.

Actually that's another good point. Aside from a few outliers, most of the sportsmen and women over here, whether it be esports or regular tend to conduct themselves with a lot of grace.

Removing the ability for people to be massive asses in online games is a good thing. But that change should never come at the possible expense of gameplay.

Yup. Which is why the Teabagging thing here is silly, if it's negatively affecting people's ability to play the game.

On the other hand, there are unfortunately certain 'This Is Why We Can't Have Nice Things' moments where cool stuff is taken out or altered because of abuse.

If people are getting so upset with someone online crouching over their dead avatar they must have a PHENOMENAL real life if that's what can cause outrage. Seriously people, it's not causing anyone any real problems.

Captcha: Last Straw well I guess that does raise a point, what if it's the straw that breaks the camel's back and makes a person go crazy and start slapping people silly?

Eh, 'offensive' is always a grey area. Teabagging - meh. Not bothered personally. 'GG EASY' postgame from a winning team? Yup, that's obnoxious. Which is why I think that the community of a game should have some input on the rules (including the largely silent good natured majority). LoL was an excellent example of this.

 

[Kukakkau]

With all this talk about interfering with gameplay, can someone actually tell me how long bodies stay on the ground after death? From Youtube videos I'm watching, corpses only seem to last a couple seconds and despawn way too quickly to create the scenario that OP is proposing. I will fully admit that I played maybe two hours of the game a long time ago and can't remember much about the body mechanics, but I do remember that crouching is rarely used outside of snipping or cresting hills, so I doubt this mechanic is going to hurt gameplay much.. Still seems like a silly thing to do, but I'm unsure what the actual effects on the game itself will be.

They last until you get revived/respawn I think so they can last a while.

With battles of hundreds vs hundreds taking place there's going to be a lot of areas in a firefight you can't crouch. Whoever thought this mechanic was a good idea is taking the piss, especially if it counts teammates bodies.

 

[EternallyBored]

With all this talk about interfering with gameplay, can someone actually tell me how long bodies stay on the ground after death? From Youtube videos I'm watching, corpses only seem to last a couple seconds and despawn way too quickly to create the scenario that OP is proposing. I will fully admit that I played maybe two hours of the game a long time ago and can't remember much about the body mechanics, but I do remember that crouching is rarely used outside of snipping or cresting hills, so I doubt this mechanic is going to hurt gameplay much.. Still seems like a silly thing to do, but I'm unsure what the actual effects on the game itself will be.

They last until you get revived/respawn I think so they can last a while.

With battles of hundreds vs hundreds taking place there's going to be a lot of areas in a firefight you can't crouch. Whoever thought this mechanic was a good idea is taking the piss, especially if it counts teammates bodies.

While the edit was easily missed, the OP corrected himself in the final line after my post pointing out that this isn't an actual mechanic, it was apparently a collision detection bug that prevented players from crouching near corpses. Thus causing the internet to react in its usual hysterical manner and read into something that wasn't there, and overreacted by blaming people for things that aren't true.

Which is good, because it seemed like an intensely silly thing to do, and I doubt a the company that makes a game as large as planetside would ever implement a gameplay feature like that.

 

[Windcaler]

I was talking to a couple of friends last night and I brought this change up since we all play BF4 on occassion. My friend Shawn made the observation that teabagging could be seen as a form of sexual harrassment. I was quick to look up the actual definition because sexual harrassment is something that gets diluted in its actual meaning. Here's what I found

harassment (typically of a woman) in a workplace, or other professional or social situation, involving the making of unwanted sexual advances or obscene remarks.

Gaming being a social setting/situation unwanted sexual advances seems to apply to something like teabagging. For many players its clearly unwanted and like it or not there is a sexual tone to the act. Now Im not a lawer, nor a judge, nor anyone that works within our broken legal system but I am curious about a point here. If a kid can be tried and convicted for making a bomb threat on wow can a person teabagging then be put on trial for sexual harrasment? Its a thought that scares the hell out of me but with the state of our current legal system I think the idea may have merit

 

[Weaver]

Honestly people aren't going to stop doing it though so this is the only logical way to stop it, i

Why does it need to be stopped?

Why does it need to exist?.

It needs to exist because the ability to crouch tends to be important. Like the OP pointed out, if you try to go into cover where someone previously died you can't crouch there, making you screwed. I think gameplay necessity overrides childishness.

I agree. I also think people who think this is a good idea have, perhaps, not actually played a huge several hundred person battle in PlanetSide 2. There are corpses everywhere and they all linger for 10 seconds because of the ability to revive players in that grace period. So if you take out 7 guys behind some crates with a grenade you just have to stand there watching as a medic revives them because you can't run behind cover they were just behind and claim ground until the corpses despawn.

This sounds like a real problem to be honest.

 

[gabeg1]

I literally laughed out loud when I read this thread title. I rarely ever do this because I don't think it is all that funny and it frequently leaves me vulnerable. But, if you don't find it funny, then don't laugh. That is the appropriate response to a bad joke. Affecting gameplay and denying others the ability to do this benign thing so you are spared a few seconds oh-so-traumatic tea-bagging seems like the pinnacle of conceit.

In the spirit of compromise though, why not go with Kain's idea of allowing people to crouch but putting some sort of rate limit on it since I really doubt there is ever a practical need to repeatedly crouching.

 

[Abb Tighe]

Slightly off topic, but I remember a fun little browser fps called Offensive Combat, where teabagging/dancing on corpse's was rewarded with extra cred's and xp. Ah the good old days

 

[Dragonbums]

I literally can't give a shit. Teabagging is dead. It was a dumb thing anyway, that only bad sports did just to rub salt in the wound even more to the person that was killed.

Boohoo?

 

[The Lunatic]

Anybody else think its sad cynically hilarious how people are now using the "donotlink" method for anything regarding anything they slightly disapprove of, even if its from a relatively objective article? Seriously, whenever I see somebody do that, not only do I go find a version that they can make revenue off of, I click all over the place to give them extra revenue off myself. Can't help myself when I see somebody doing something so brainless.

Additionally, its a bug, apparently. Not that I'd mind them removing tea-bagging, the same way many games remove slurs and profanity in chat through filters. The OP should be updated as such:

Whilst, being insulting won't get you anywhere, I will address your point.


I put the URL behind a single piece of text saying "Here". As such, clicking on it could link you to anywhere, and thus, in doing so, you would be supporting a site based on the word "Here".

Instead, I provide you with the option. And it is your right to promote sites as you wish, however, it is not something I will force upon you.

If you'd actually read the OP, you'd see that what you're telling me to add has been there all along.

 

[Dragonbums]

Just please tell me that no one seriously believes this is the work of SJWs.

Tea-bagging is probably the second most divisive thing in Gaming Culture after camping.

Camping I can understand...but teabagging is a divisive thing? I just thought it was a stupid feature.


CAPTCHA: Holy crap myspace is still alive?

 

[Netrigan]

Just please tell me that no one seriously believes this is the work of SJWs.

Tea-bagging is probably the second most divisive thing in Gaming Culture after camping.

Camping I can understand...but teabagging is a divisive thing? I just thought it was a stupid feature.


CAPTCHA: Holy crap myspace is still alive?

Maybe divisive is too strong of a word, but it is one of the most complained about (or mocked) practices of multi-player since at least the first Halo.

 

[LetalisK]

Why does it need to be stopped?

Why does it need to exist?.

You both make excellent points. I'm having difficulty figuring out why this is a big deal either way. In such cases, I defer to the developers.

It's not. Not at all.

I still have a problem with people acting like being an a-hole in online gaming is something noble and essential to the community.

I do believe my post reflected that I don't see being an a-hole as noble or essential, so I'm not sure why this is directed at me. In fact, I implied the exact opposite by claiming "Why does it need to exist?" as a good point nor does recognizing the other comment as a good point imply that it is noble or essential.

 

[johnnybleu]

Yes, trying to cull the (perhaps) excessive behavior of online players might be a good idea. But generally, the toxic players are a minority, and the fact is that there are jerks everywhere. You just can't go around silencing and banning jerks (unless they clearly violate some agreed-upon terms of use, for example). That's totalitarianism.

And as for your right to enjoy the game, I'm afraid that's not a right. I have the right to go to a movie theater and watch whatever movie I'm legally allowed to watch, but if there's a douchebag in the audience who wont shut up, that's where my rights end (unless, again, he does something illegal, etc.). Moreover, if there's something in the movie I find offensive, I don't have any right to make anyone change the movie, or stop it from being played. Not being offended or annoyed simply isn't a right.

The movie being offensive isn't anything close to associated with this argument so not going to touch that.

Actually, at least where I live, you are mistaken. If I am in a movie theater or a restaurant and someone is yelling slurs and acting like an idiot, they will be warned once by an usher or a manager and then removed from the premises.

Most games have some sort of 'don't be a gigantic a-hole' clause in their CoC or TOU. The problem is that until now these were seldom if ever enforced.

And yes, you can go around banning jerks from games, so long as you the company want to. How is it totalitarianism?

Fair points. I think the discussion is more about whether or not something like teabagging is really "offensive" or synonymous to hurling insults or hate-speech. It's not really harassment or abuse. I mean, anyone could start using any of the game mechanics to gloat over the corpse of their enemies, or do anything that some might view as unsportsmanlike. It's a blurred line, and any developer who would attempt to quell any childish (but ultimately harmless) behavior because of perceived affronts might be jumping the gun.

Not that anyone actually did such a thing. Yet.

 

[m19]

LOL. Introducing a potentially annoying limitation to the game mechanics over this nonsense. SJW freakshow.

 

[johnnybleu]

I was talking to a couple of friends last night and I brought this change up since we all play BF4 on occassion. My friend Shawn made the observation that teabagging could be seen as a form of sexual harrassment. I was quick to look up the actual definition because sexual harrassment is something that gets diluted in its actual meaning. Here's what I found

harassment (typically of a woman) in a workplace, or other professional or social situation, involving the making of unwanted sexual advances or obscene remarks.

Gaming being a social setting/situation unwanted sexual advances seems to apply to something like teabagging. For many players its clearly unwanted and like it or not there is a sexual tone to the act. Now Im not a lawer, nor a judge, nor anyone that works within our broken legal system but I am curious about a point here. If a kid can be tried and convicted for making a bomb threat on wow can a person teabagging then be put on trial for sexual harrasment? Its a thought that scares the hell out of me but with the state of our current legal system I think the idea may have merit

I can't conceive of any reality where my virtual character touching your virtual character in any way could be considered sexual abuse. Even if there was a "grope" animation. If teabagging was enough to get someone convicted of sexual assault in real life, then we'd all serve multiple life sentences for the countless murders committed online. I mean, the act was clearly unwanted and there was a violent tone to the act.