228
No one should have to “grow a thicker skin”: Valorant studio commit to harsh penalties for harassment
(www.rockpapershotgun.com)
this post was submitted on 02 Jun 2024
228 points (94.2% liked)
Games
16630 readers
958 users here now
Video game news oriented community. No NanoUFO is not a bot :)
Posts.
- News oriented content (general reviews, previews or retrospectives allowed).
- Broad discussion posts (preferably not only about a specific game).
- No humor/memes etc..
- No affiliate links
- No advertising.
- No clickbait, editorialized, sensational titles. State the game in question in the title. No all caps.
- No self promotion.
- No duplicate posts, newer post will be deleted unless there is more discussion in one of the posts.
- No politics.
Comments.
- No personal attacks.
- Obey instance rules.
- No low effort comments(one or two words, emoji etc..)
- Please use spoiler tags for spoilers.
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:
founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
I'm all for banning toxic players and cheaters, but the fact that they make you install a rootkit on your system to enable this is too much.
You have the option not to play the game though. It is not like they force anyone with a gun to install this rootkit.
Nobody is forced with a gun to play a game with a toxic community either, does that mean it's not worth complaining about? Perhaps the article should mention the supposed tradeoffs required to police such a community. I say supposed because I've played far less toxic games than Vallorant and League that don't require such invasive software. Perhaps Riot should do some introspection and ask why the games they make foster such bad behavior instead of harming nontoxic players with their policing methods.
Toxicity is not only in riot games. Broaden your view a bit, perhaps.
You're kinda being toxic right now by purposefully misconstruing what I said so you can hit me with a cheap comeback.
It is not.
If someone doesn't know what a rootkit is or why it's bad, then they can't give informed consent to it. It's not a free choice for 90% of players.
I didn't downvote you, but you pretty much are repeating what OP said.
"I won't play this game!"
"Well, nobody is forcing you."
Yep, that's pretty much the same thing.
It's ok, downvote means nothing. even on Reddit.
Sometimes people don't understand that the fact Valorant (or other F2P) is a free game doesn't mean they're entitled to whine and bitch non stop.
That’s not how things work at all. Just because something’s free means you can’t criticize it? Where is that written?
Yea, beggar cannot choose. Take it or leave it. Free market will dictate it. People don't like this harrasment approach? Valorant will die by itself.
So many entitled brats, you cant even offer suggestions. Just criticism for the sake of it.
Or you could see it as it is. A community that's passionate about the game, and games in general, giving feedback to the developer about why their game might die so that this game or future games might be more consumer friendly. Only someone who is overly critical/cynical assumes any and every feedback is whining and complaining.
This one is whining. No alternative, just complaining.
“Choosing beggars” is someone who wants more or better than what they were offered. Criticizing the offering for flaws and problems is not.
IOW - I get a free chicken sandwich. I demand better toppings, a free drink and chips on the side. There’s a roast beef available, how come I didn’t get that? That’s a choosing beggar.
The chicken sandwich is undercooked, the bread is dry. That’s what’s happening here. Criticism.
Complaining about free chicken sandwich.... What a moron.
I mean... I don't disagree with your original point (within reason) but the guy complaining about the free chicken sandwich kinda sucks too? Idk about yall but I would never say that to someone who gave me free food. Think it's just a rough metaphor for this situation, where Valorant is still trying to make money from in game purchases.
So if someone gave you a free sandwich but then also offered the exclusive place to sell mayonnaise, seasonings, and pickles, you're fairly entitled to say "eh, this base product is kinda lacking and doesn't entice me to come here".
Is it your opinion that free things can't be criticized? I dont understand the position, especially these days when free often comes with conditions. Not sure if true free exists.
What conditions? Please tell.
You download, you play, for free.
I dont consider something free if I am paying for it with my data.
Lol the bullshit as usual. You go to internet, your data is out already
Its not impossible to avoid shitty companies and software you know.
Spoken like caveman.
Uh, did you forget the rootkit?
Dont install. You see, easy? Too hard for you?
He was just sharing his opinion, I think he understands that Riot won't/shouldn't care.
I find it to be a pretty tired talking point. Especially on this thread where it has nothing to do with technical aspects of Valorant at all, it still needs to be interjected for some reason. Anyone on this forum already knows about riot anti cheating software, it's just beating a dead horse now.
It's relevant because the article acts like strictness is a unimodal thing. Riot decides how far they want to push it and some people will fall on one side and believe chat is overly sanitized while others will fall on the opposite side and believe that chat is overly toxic.
This makes it sound like the only reason someone could take issue with Riot being zealous with their policing is because that person wants to see these toxic behaviors in their game. The article quickly mentions hardware bans like they are magic, even though something like harder to spoof hardware is one of the reasons Riot would give for requiring invasive software.
And similar to how I won't accept a game requiring such invasive measures I also won't accept an article glossing over these things. Just like there are many players who see no problem with toxic behavior there are also many players who don't see any problem with Riot's measures or are simply uninformed, and the article should be more informative.
I just learned about it from this post. Your perspective isnt the only one, not sure why shut down the conversation.
Dont have to play it? You didnt have to reply to their post either.