this post was submitted on 22 Sep 2023
46 points (77.4% liked)

Game Development

3425 readers
3 users here now

Welcome to the game development community! This is a place to talk about and post anything related to the field of game development.

Community Wiki

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
 

There are plenty of multiplayer games I adore. However, it seems like every community has these "brain dead", patronizing, or out right toxic elements that are just nasty. I'd rather debate politics than make suggestions in some gaming communities because the responses are just so ... annoying.

As an example, I once dared to suggest that a game developer implement a mode to prevent crouched status from rendering on death cams so that players that are bothered by t-bagging could avoid it (after a match where a friend rage quit because someone just kept head shotting him -- possibly with cheats -- and then t-bagging). This post got tons of hate, and like -50 upvotes on reddit because of course someone should be forced to watch someone t-bag them.

Another example on a official game forum... I made a forum post suggesting Bungie use Mastodon (or really just something else being my intent)... The response I got was some positivity but mostly just "lol nobody uses that sweetie" and other patronizing comments.

Meanwhile studios themselves often seem to be filled with developers that understand this stuff is a problem, and the lack of sportsmanship (or generally civilized attitudes) does push away players. It just doesn't make sense to me that no studio is saying "get lost" to these elements or implementing anti-toxicity features. I just want to play games with nice normal people, is that really so much to ask?

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] graphicsguy@programming.dev 10 points 1 year ago (2 children)

You're right that it's messy and imperfect and false positives can be really frustrating.

But the alternative - no efforts to maintain a safe space - is that vulnerable people are typically the target. Toxicity typically punches down.

I'll happily trade some clunky inconvenience so that those people can safely participate

[–] spicyemu@programming.dev 5 points 1 year ago

But the alternative - no efforts to maintain a safe space - is that vulnerable people are typically the target.

On the internet, nobody knows you're a dog.

[–] RealFknNito@lemmy.world 0 points 1 year ago (2 children)

It doesn't need to be all or nothing. We can do it in moderation. Remove slurs, don't over reach by going after every curse word, every bad phrase, every impolite slight. We don't need an internet with training wheels or water wings. Most of us are adults and I'd like to feel like one when I log on.

[–] Dark_Arc@lemmy.world 4 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

Most of us are adults and I'd like to feel like one when I log on.

I'd like to feel like it too. Adults shouldn't act like children.

[–] graphicsguy@programming.dev 3 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Ya fair enough. I'd put my "razor" at behaviour that targets vulnerable / minorities, which is probably broader / vaguer than just slurs, but it's going to be a spectrum of opinions and preferences

[–] RealFknNito@lemmy.world 1 points 1 year ago

We agree there then, protected groups is where it should start and stop. Slurs I think would cover the majority of that kind of behavior but the problem is the more you try to crack down on bad actors the more false positives you get. There's a term for it but it's escaping me.