Should people lose access to a game because of how they act?

Fireaxe

New member
Sep 30, 2013
300
0
0
I like the decentralised server model of a TF2 or Counterstrike where viable.

Alternately, can always just chop away chat functionality.
 

DerangedHobo

New member
Jan 11, 2012
231
0
0
KF2 devs can go fuck themselves with a chainsaw. "Moderate private servers"? Get fucked, you're going to shut down the servers that keep your game alive because they don't live up to your standards? Tripwire alone has lost faith in me as a consumer due to the "Oh, we're an established company with a highly successful game series, let's release a fucking game in Early Access!", let alone the fact that it had like a 1/3 of the content from the first one.

As for the matter at hand? Mute them if they are truly that toxic. I prefer shit to be handled from server to server. If they're outright hacking then sure, VAC ban them but apart from that you should really just give them some good ol' mod/admin justice.
 

Bat Vader

New member
Mar 11, 2009
4,996
0
0
DerangedHobo said:
KF2 devs can go fuck themselves with a chainsaw. "Moderate private servers"? Get fucked, you're going to shut down the servers that keep your game alive because they don't live up to your standards? Tripwire alone has lost faith in me as a consumer due to the "Oh, we're an established company with a highly successful game series, let's release a fucking game in Early Access!", let alone the fact that it had like a 1/3 of the content from the first one.

As for the matter at hand? Mute them if they are truly that toxic. I prefer shit to be handled from server to server. If they're outright hacking then sure, VAC ban them but apart from that you should really just give them some good ol' mod/admin justice.
I agree. I say ban them from the official servers but they should still have access to make their own and play on public servers. If I made a server and some player was being a jerk I would ban them.
 

nightmare_gorilla

New member
Jan 22, 2008
461
0
0
As a general rule of thumb i think it's pretty crappy to lose something you paid money for without any kind of refund or recourse. I understand you need a way to police behavior and keep the overall community a fun place to be for the majority and that some people are absolute twat waffles you don't want ruining that but it doesn't change the fact that a company can flip the off switch and you lose a product you paid money for is really shitty.

I like the solutions proposed so far, banning multi-player access, Confining the problem childs to their own server, or forcing them to host their own server so only people playing with them are people who specifically choose to play with that person. I've heard the recommendation for other services like xbox live that keep track of your "reputation" that if your rep falls below a certain point you are just auto muted in all online games, if people want to risk it, they can unmute you but you would have to earn back the right to talk automatically to everyone. but that can only really combat foul language not poor playstyles.

I've also personally seen abuse of the "report" option in some games to punish people who play poorly or ask too many "dumb" questions. I love the community on Marvel Heroes seriously nicest group of online gamers i've ever stumbled across, but even there I watched some people collaborate to report a kid for "spamming" when he asked for help 1 too many times. no matter the system abuse will happen so there must be a review or appeals process even post serious ban.

Maybe a good solution would be to allow players to "share" rep, someone gets booted for playing like a jack ass then another player could vouch for them and invite them to participate in a game with other people, if the behavior continues, both of their reps take the hit. peer pressure seems to be the most effective way to get people in line sometimes. sure you could have trolls teaming up but they could only do it two at a time and certainly not for very long.
 

Comic Sans

DOWN YOU GO!
Oct 15, 2008
598
2
23
Country
United States
I can't say I can get behind this. When one pays money for a game they should have access to it. There can be some measures in place, like removing from matchmaking for a certain amount of time or something, but total banning? No. I have been on the receiving end on a ban that I should not have received that makes me anxious about this. I was banned from playing Smite without warning or appeal because their anti-cheat detected something it thought was a cheating program. I have no such thing on my laptop, and have no idea what the system picked up. I tried to explain this, but to no avail. The $40ish dollars I spent on the hero pack and a few skins now is totally worthless. It's an awful system with too much room for failure.
 

cthulhuspawn82

New member
Oct 16, 2011
321
0
0
The movie theater analogy shows why games are terrible and why we shouldn't pay for them. The analogy highlights the ridiculous fact that we dont own our games. A DVD is something you own, a movie in a theater is a service you buy temporary access to. Video games used to be like DVDs, now they are like movie theaters. I'm disgusted by the idea that I dont own anything I have purchased.

And why cant they have both monitored and unregulated servers, with the unregulated ones being "enter at your own risk" or, in other words, "only for grown adults who can handle themselves and dont need big brother protecting them"
 

Bat Vader

New member
Mar 11, 2009
4,996
0
0
cthulhuspawn82 said:
The movie theater analogy shows why games are terrible and why we shouldn't pay for them. The analogy highlights the ridiculous fact that we dont own our games. A DVD is something you own, a movie in a theater is a service you buy temporary access to. Video games used to be like DVDs, now they are like movie theaters. I'm disgusted by the idea that I dont own anything I have purchased.

And why cant they have both monitored and unregulated servers, with the unregulated ones being "enter at your own risk" or, in other words, "only for grown adults who can handle themselves and dont need big brother protecting them"
I have always felt that is what public servers are for. It's not about people being able to handle themselves so much as it is punishing players that are there only to cause trouble. I don't think they should lose access to their game but a ban from the official servers is a good punishment. If unregulated servers did exist I couldn't really see them being used except by the people that want to cause trouble.

When I play a game online I don't want a teammate that is there just to cause trouble. I don't want a griefer or troll on my team. I want someone that is going to take the game seriously but still have fun.
 

Foehunter82

New member
Jun 25, 2014
80
0
0
Mutant1988 said:
No.

They should however lose the ability to play the game with people that aren't assholes. A rating system that allows them to be matched with other jerks or restrict them to private games only in a server browser system.

For a limited time, of course, unless they keep getting bad behaviour reports.

Still, the only sure fire way to keep assholes out of your game is to be the host and remove them as you encounter them.
I agree completely with this. Frankly, the permaban from a game that a player (even griefers/trolls/etc.) paid for, assuming it isn't cheating, is a quick way to end up with some lawsuits for refunds. If this sort of extreme measure occurs, I'm fairly certain the lawsuits will happen. It's better for developers to give players the dedicated server tools to monitor and filter out problem players on their own. That really is the best way to take care of the problem.
 

Karadalis

New member
Apr 26, 2011
1,065
0
0
Sanderpower said:
Well if people actually decided to read the terms and agreement of the games they bought (which lets face it, nobody ever does) they would realize that game companies are completely in their rights to do it. When you click that "accept" button, you're entering into a contract with those game developers. So if in the Terms and Agreement they say they can ban you for being abusive in games and you agree to those terms, then they are completely justified in their actions.
Nope nope and nope...

Atleast not in europe.

They would have needed to present you a TOS, EULA etc. BEFORE you bought the product. You cannot demand special rights just insert special rights for yourselfe as a company after you sold something atleast in europe... so the EULAs arent worth the bits and bytes that they where written with.

In theory that is...

Ofcourse... who would actually sue a small gaming company? Usually asshats dont have the spare money to duke it out with a company from another country, and courts are slow as hell anyways... much cheaper to just buy another copy.

Also its not big enough a problem that consumer advocate groups would focus on it... yet. They have bigger whales to hunt (steam amongst them)
 

Dragonbums

Indulge in it's whiffy sensation
May 9, 2013
3,307
0
0
Assholes should not lose all of their rights to play the game they bought. However if you can't keep your potty mouth to yourself and make the game fun for the other people who paid the same amount of money for the game, then you should most definitely lose your online privileges. At least, lose the ability to voice chat or type in text commands.
 

Zhukov

The Laughing Arsehole
Dec 29, 2009
13,769
5
43
If I misbehave in a pub, I get kicked out, no matter how many drinks I paid for.

If someone doesn't have the basic fucking maturity and self control to get through a round of Killing Floor without acting like a turd then fuck them and fuck their thirty dollars. Lock 'em out and make the game a better place. Let them play solo mode. Or throw them in a cesspit server with the other screeching deadbeats.
 

TZO2K12

New member
Mar 31, 2012
11
0
0
Perma-Ban them, and give them a choice;
A: Never play with others, while still having access to their game.
Or....
B: Never play with others, while barring access to their game including a full refund of the game's retail price, regardless of the deal/discount that they paid.

...It's much better solution than mine, which is to murder their PCs and ban their ISPs.. >8^|
 

Tatsuya Hiroki

New member
May 11, 2015
4
0
0
I really really dont see the point of it, in this current form at least.
Then again (as far as I remember) they clarified things a bit and its safe to say that the average user wouldnt get banned from the game he/she bought over a few insults or something (despite the common belief that it would lead to such)
 

Tatsuya Hiroki

New member
May 11, 2015
4
0
0
Zhukov said:
If I misbehave in a pub, I get kicked out, no matter how many drinks I paid for.

If someone doesn't have the basic fucking maturity and self control to get through a round of Killing Floor without acting like a turd then fuck them and fuck their thirty dollars. Lock 'em out and make the game a better place. Let them play solo mode. Or throw them in a cesspit server with the other screeching deadbeats.
making jerks and other misbehaving people play against each other the way they did with Max Payne 3 and GTA 5 would indeed make much more sense if they are so keen to get out their way to globally punish people