I don’t know that that’s true. Some games may be worse than others but I don’t think there are any specific games, or for that matter places online in general, where some form of harassment is not an issue. If you want to avoid it entirely then you need to avoid people entirely and that’s not really a teneble solution.
I’m not a lawyer but it is my understanding of US law that something like what you see in the video does not meet the legal definition of a threat. There is no indication that the offender knows the real identity or location of the person they are speaking to, both of which are required to establish the intent necessary to define something as a threat in the legal sense of the word. Furthermore, the person speaking appears to be from another country, likely the UK or Australia, both of which have different laws than the US. Is Riot supposed to evaluate this situation based on the laws of the country in which they have their corporate HQ, the country the speaker resides in, or the country in which the listener resides? I don’t think a lawyer in any of those three countries would advise this streamer to press charges based on the content of this video alone which would indicate that this kind of behavior is not illegal. Perhaps it should be, but that’s another matter entirely.
To reiterate, none of this is meant to be interpreted as a defense of what that guy said. It’s just to illustrate the point that moderation is not a simple thing to enforce even in situations where a surface level evaluation seems like it should be. It’s much simpler to mute this guy or leave the lobby or whatever else you feel like you need to do to protect yourself. The unfortunate reality remains that people like this will always be around no matter what system is in place to minimize their impact. That’s not to say that no steps should be taken with that goal in mind, just that when all is said and done you will always bear some responsibility in protecting yourself from content or behavior you don’t want to be exposed to.
Why do game makers need to be the responsible party? I’ve never played a game that didn’t let you block and/or mute people you’re playing with. That doesn’t make assholes disappear but it stops the problem from impacting you. Why add a middleman to the equation? Taking care of it yourself is much faster and doesn’t depend on convincing someone else that what’s happening needs to be dealt with. You can block people for having the wrong favorite color if you want to.
There’s too much inconsistency in what people perceive to be inappropriate behavior for a central authority to have the final say on the matter. Moderator action should be reserved for situations that explicitly violate the law, and even that varies significantly based on location and interpretation. It’s much simpler to let players decide what they will tolerate on their own.
People do need thicker skin though. So much internet drama is magnified beyond reason by people who can’t just ignore assholes. That’s not excusing the fact that they’re being assholes. Obviously if they would stop being assholes that would be the ideal solution. However, we all know that will never happen. No amount of legislation, moderation, or punishment will ever remove that tendency from people. It is fundamental human nature. Stop fighting a losing battle. Learn how to block people and move on with your life. If you stop engaging they’ll get bored and leave you alone. They thrive on your reaction so stop giving them one.
At the end of the day it’s your job to protect yourself in all aspects of life, including online. Stop trying to outsource it to software developers. They gave you all the tools you need decades ago.
Except most people don’t give a shit about Dolby. Even audophiles mostly don’t care about them as a company or the fact that they’re involved beyond the games ability to support high end output devices. Put that garbage on the box or in the credits at the end of the game where it belongs
They’re so pointless too. What are they even expecting forcing them in our faces to accomplish? You either care about audio or you don’t. Seeing your logo isn’t going to change that
I don’t have anything better to do. I happily acknowledge that. My life is going pretty great all things considered, but then I’m not the one pretending to be an oppressed victim fighting a corrupt system via complaints about stuff I don’t need to buy. That’s what you’re doing.
Also, Lemmy defaults to upvoting posts you make. That’s something you should probably know before you criticize people for not going out of their way to downvote themselves. It makes you look kind of dumb to say stuff like that since you could have figured that out for yourself if you thought about it for more than two seconds, which now that I think about it is a pretty good summary of the rest of the things that you’ve said in this conversation.
I agree that the way they’ve been implemented in many other titles is annoying so I choose not to engage with them in that form. This implementation doesn’t impact anything so why would you be annoyed by it much less take the time to complain about it?
Making up something dumb to complain about is not the same as telling you to shut up about said dumb thing but I know you don’t really believe that anyway. You’re just trying to get a smug jab in and that’s the best you can come up with.
You’re free to call it what you wish. Complaining about voluntary purchases in a video game you also don’t need to buy is a vapid pursuit only engaged in by those with an excess of time and money and a lack of real world problems. If you want to waste your time debating the ethics of such a system existing then be my guest but don’t pretend you’re engaging in some lofty moral exercise. You’re just bored and looking for something to occupy your time so you chose to bitch about something inconsequential on the internet.
I don’t own this game nor have I ever completed a microtransaction in a major title. My spending habits don’t support the concept in any form. You know what my point is and you’re trying to high-horse your way past it. If you want to take a stand refund the game and vote with your wallet. No one wants to hear complaints about the price of cosmetics and getting in game currency quicker. It’s the most first world problem imaginable.
Gamers throw a fit when content is locked behind a paywall because it is somehow unfair. Gamers are currently throwing a fit about content not being locked behind a paywall because that is also somehow unfair. Does that make sense to you?
It seems to me that this publisher heard the complaints about the way microtransactions were being implemented and decided to give people what they were asking for and now they’re getting crucified for it. Gamers got what they wanted. If that wasn’t what they really wanted they should have been asking for something else.
They should just collectively say no. My company tried to bring everyone back to the office two years ago and people just didn’t show up. They’re not going to fire everyone. Now we have 100% remote as an official option for those who want it.
The smaller the company the easier this is to organize but sometimes that’s not even necessary. No one told us to do that but enough of us decided to on our own that it might as well have been organized. We’re talking thousands of employees here. That collective response instilled more company pride in me than any corporate initiative ever has.