I hope the developers are proactive about dealing with toxicity

Looking at this game, I see great potential like a lot of people do but I also see some potential pitfalls, and toxicity is one of them.

I once played EVE Online, which in many ways was and is a cool game, but the nullsec pvp metagame had a well-earned reputation for toxicity. It's gotten slightly better since, but it's still a problem. Racist and homophobic slurs were everywhere when I was playing, and it eventually made me leave the game (among other things).

It looks to me like Ashes of Creation will likely create a pvp metagame similar to EVE's. When I similar I mean faintly as they'll be two very different games in almost every other way, so the resemblance may not be obvious. But if there are limited resources (as it appears there will be), there'll likely at least some people who end up fighting over those resources, which will mean frustration on the part of the losers and (probably) some gloating on the part of the winners. These are the sorts of things that can spiral.

To me, a certain amount of mutual hostility and "meanness" (for lack of a better word) isn't necessarily toxic. However in mass PVP situations such as EVE, and to some extent ArcheAge and GW2 have had bits of this as well, toxicity can become a competitive advantage. That is, players will deliberately try to needle and demoralize their opponents, and many will be tempted or (or will take the excuse to) cross over into homophobia/racism/whatever they come up with next. Basically, they cross over from the fair-play sort of meanness into the actually-wrong sort.

In my experience the only proven-successful method of combating toxicity is to have actual active moderation. Any kind of automated system or self-reporting system will be gamed by the same people it's supposed to stop - IMO the only real way to do it is to have actual humans involved.

Find more posts tagged with

Comments

unknown

This content has been removed.

Mag7spy

Craiken wrote: »

I have no idea how the game will be moderated, but I must say that I'm surprised by the number of people who seem to believe that the concerns raised in this thread are a non-issue and that words should not have consequences. Here are some relevant passages from Interpid's terms of service:

We want to make sure that our Games and Website remain fun, healthy, and safe environments for you and your friends to enjoy. By accepting our Terms of Service and End User License Agreement, you understand that these Community Guidelines apply to your use of both the Website and our Games

You will NOT harass other users. Harassment includes but is not limited:

Disparaging, defaming, name-calling, or engaging in any form of discrimination against another member of the Community;

https://ashesofcreation.com/terms-and-conditions

You are defiantly missing the point. And those are standard in any forum. There is a difference between someone name calling and someone name calling as harassments. There is a difference between people having issues with each other and it spiraling to becoming a big toxic mess. Does that mean people need to be banned, or muted for a week for calling someone dumb. No that is silly.

People know int his thread what a issue is and will agree in serious cases (racisms, actual harassments not a one time comment, sexism, etc). Context and a pattern is important, so I'm a bit surprised you aren't understanding the context of what people are implying.

Does drama happen ina pvp game, of course. Does that mean you start banning people cause they aren't like gg i lost the castle after you back stabbed me but it was a good fight, no. If its extreme and someone causing a issue with a lot of people, should they be warned yes.

Dolyem

Hailee wrote: »

TheDarkSorcerer wrote: »

or ethnicity

Discrimination against ethnicity is mandatory. Tulnars aren't welcome.

Sylvanar

BigMouse wrote: »

Look at all you hit dogs hollering. Maybe I need to be more clear: if the playerbase is full of right-wing bullshit I'm not playing.

You are welcome to leave.
No on is asking you to play.
Nothing of value will be lost to the community.
You are likely to get a right hook talking all high and mighty, pretending you are not a toxic little snake yourself.

Noaani

Craiken wrote: »

I have no idea how the game will be moderated, but I must say that I'm surprised by the number of people who seem to believe that the concerns raised in this thread are a non-issue and that words should not have consequences.

My disagreeing with the OP does not mean I don't believe words should have consequences.

I personally think his words should have consequences.

Should someone that uses racial slurs be banned? Well, that depends on the racial slur. I remember a few years ago, Steven Adams got in trouble for misusing the word "monkey" . To him, it was simply a term used in his home country, it wasn't a racial slur at all. But to others it was the second worst thing he could say.

A slur isn't about specific words used, it is about intent. Look at English and Australian people - they will use the same word (that four letter word beginning with "C" that is one of only two words even *I* wouldn't dare to type on these forums). To people from these countries, that word is used as an affectionate term as much as it is anything else - the only way you can differentiate it is from the intent behind it.

Another example of this can be seen in streaming in China right now. It is against the rules for any streamer to show a banana on screen, and your stream will be pulled down immediately if one is seen. This is the extreme end of banning the word/object, rather than taking the intent in to consideration.

---

Any half educated baffoon would be able to string together a series of words that are offensive to any ordinary listener, without needing to resort to the use of that list of words many feel are offensive. They can do this simply by making use of intent.

By this logic, anyone using such language is either less than a half educated baffoon, or is not trying to be offensive. They may have bad taste, along with a lack of education, but bad taste is subjective. If they are not trying to be offensive, I fail to see why anyone would be offended by what they say.

To me, personally, anyone that would be offended (or claim to be offended is actually more realistic) at the sight of some specific words if there is no intent behind them is the person that should be removed from the game (if anyone is to be removed in this situation), not the person that used those words.

On the other hand, if there was intent behind what was said, even if none of that list of words is used, it is right and good for Intrepid to take some form of action against them.

CROW3

I had to look up the banana ban - just odd. 🫤

Noaani

Yeah, any attempt to control undesired behaviors without first fully understanding them usually ends up like that - just odd.

Craiken

Noaani wrote: »

My disagreeing with the OP does not mean I don't believe words should have consequences.

Sorry Noaani, I should have been more specific about which comments I was referencing. I was surprised by comments like, "People are gonna be toxic. The best solution for OP seems to me is to not play".

My point was that there absolutely are limits on how mean and nasty people are allowed to be. No one expects players to be perfect angels all the time, but I don't think the OP needs to be worried about getting bombarded by homophobia/racism while playing AoC (as that's clearly against the terms of service).

akabear

I hope there are sufficent mechanisms in game so the community can deal with issues within themselves .. nothing like a bit of drama or banter in a mmorpg.

However, for extreme issues then, yes have mechanics so GM can be notified and capacity to intervene.

Still like the idea of some stocks or hangman trusses in town for players to be held in suspension for all to see for things like multiple-day suspensions, minor offences

CROW3

Public flogging ftw.

Noaani

Craiken wrote: »

My point was that there absolutely are limits on how mean and nasty people are allowed to be. No one expects players to be perfect angels all the time, but I don't think the OP needs to be worried about getting bombarded by homophobia/racism while playing AoC (as that's clearly against the terms of service).

If it is directed at the OP, then I agree.

However, even if it is bad taste (which it is), words that many people would consider slurs are literally expressions of affection in other communities. You name a single word or term that some people find offensive, and there will be a group of people somewhere that use that as a positive thing.

The way the OP's post read to me is that other people in open chat channels were using words that the OP doesn't like. The OP has literally no grounds at all for being offended by that, and is simply making the choice to be (or pretend to be) offended by it.

To me, being offended by something that isn't even directed at you is literally the worst thing a person can do in relation to offensiveness. Being offended by something aimed at someone else, and then making that an issue, is tantamount to saying that the person that was the target of said abusive language can't stand up for them self.

If I was the target of that abusive language, and then the OP decided that they would take a stand against it, I would be more offended at the OP's assumption that I can't deal with it myself than I would be able the actual abusive language.

Hence my initial statement in reply to you that I agree that words should have consequences, including those of the OP.

Since the way the OP spoke in this thread made it seem like it was the simply presence of specific words that they found offensive, I agree with the people that say that if this is the case, the OP is better off not playing this game. Not because abuse and toxicity is ok, but because the OP seems to not understand context.

Sylvanar

Noaani wrote: »

To me, being offended by something that isn't even directed at you is literally the worst thing a person can do in relation to offensiveness. Being offended by something aimed at someone else, and then making that an issue, is tantamount to saying that the person that was the target of said abusive language can't stand up for them self.

This reminds me of the "Protect the casual: Gear" post.

HexologyNate

I think we need to abandon the word 'toxicity' as it seems to be used far to often to all-encompass human behavior that's not necessarily 'toxic'. I agree that things such as homophobic/racist/sexist slurs should definitely result in some form of punishment whether it be a ban/mute ETC, but general competitiveness and the resulting factors such as gloating/brooding is just part of the gaming experience, and in my mind it's part of the fun!

Noaani

Otr wrote: »

Noaani wrote: »

Craiken wrote: »

My point was that there absolutely are limits on how mean and nasty people are allowed to be. No one expects players to be perfect angels all the time, but I don't think the OP needs to be worried about getting bombarded by homophobia/racism while playing AoC (as that's clearly against the terms of service).

...
To me, being offended by something that isn't even directed at you is literally the worst thing a person can do in relation to offensiveness. Being offended by something aimed at someone else, and then making that an issue, is tantamount to saying that the person that was the target of said abusive language can't stand up for them self.

They are like those Bounty Hunters who should mind their bussiness too and let greens stand up for themselves

Not really.

That green has already shown their unwillingness to take up the fight. They wouldn't still be a green otherwise.

Additionally, the artificial systems that the game has specifically create a system where that bounty hunter has personal gain to be made by going after that corrupt player.

The only thing an outraged person like the OP has to gain from being offended at the contents of a conversation between two other people is a false sense of moral superiority - which is what this all boils down to.

NishUK

HexologyNate wrote: »

I think we need to abandon the word 'toxicity'

Now just hold on!....

How else are people going to look smart without it?

Sweatycup

There are always annoyances (Certain peoples) in online games. Especially in MMO's. I do think that directed racial slurs and true bullying behavior should be punished. Last thing we need is a news op about how little jimmy killed himself from being bullied. And it does happen online. Lets not forget stalkers online that can turn into fatal or life threatening events. These are absolutely real concerns. However beyond this the use of exploiting if you can even say that, game mechanics to make others life miserable i think it'd be better if people were given a in-game choice to punish the player. Like a court in a city. Archeage did this and i like the idea. We already know the corrupt/law system a tad and this should help prevent most cases of toxic players. You know, the guy top level trolling a new player zone, if repeated like a mentally unstable person should probably be punished beyond corruption, one way or another. They typically already have in most MMO's a way to filter bad language. Hopefully we will get ways to mute people in-game that spam nazi propaganda for example. It's only a serious issue in a pure pvp game when one player crosses a certain reasonable line. However whats reasonable to one is totally despotic to another. But i think a even balance could be achieved in such a pvp focused game by also using the player base of each territory to make choices about certain players to put them on trial or to have them always red in the territory or some sort of exiling or hanging(If not seen as too inappropriate) Whatever the case the procedure should be relatively quick because on both sides no gamer wants to sit around forever because they chose to grief a whole start zone. Star Citizen is kinda like that, go to prison, wait on timer or work it off mining to reduce prison time, only problem is alot of people stay away because these people don't like being punished/timed-out for what they see as "Essential Gameplay." I don't think of AoC as black or white but should be somewhere in the grey as a pvx mmo with high ordinance on pvp gameplay. There will be guilds, groups, players who choose to white knight but i honestly don't expect alot of people who own territory to do normal rounds around to make sure their kingdom is clean of chaotic people. This is a game after-all supposedly billed for its "Player Experience" but we will have to see what "Players" we get in-game.

Child Item