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
833 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
You have the option not to play the game though. It is not like they force anyone with a gun to install this rootkit.
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.
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.