Forums » Suggestions
This issue has been growing for some years, and I've admittedly been unsure how to handle it. To be perfectly honest, it's gotten worse everywhere online, and no one in my entire industry is quite sure what to do; this includes places like Blizzard and Riot, the latter of which is also pouring epic amounts of cash into trying to solve things with machine learning.
Obviously, we have a lot more limitations. I can't even "afford" someone to be a regular in-game community manager, and none of our volunteer Guides really have time to be in-game that often anymore.
For the developer's part, there's no way we can also monitor the game all the time. We do take action on Tickets, but the reports and actions are clearly insufficient to change the tenor of the game.
Identifying the Problem
There have always been some toxic individuals in the game, sometimes; but prior to a couple of years ago we managed to achieve a much better average balance.
We've always hewed towards a "loose" interpretation of "hey, a little combative trash-talk is okay", while also trying to quietly shut things down when they got out of hand.
This has led some to believe that we "never enforce the Rules of Conduct" (RoC), but that isn't true. We just usually do it quietly behind the scenes, to lessen visible drama, and while also giving people some degree of leeway in expressing themselves, before stepping in and being authoritarian.
But, that all being said, things have changed. For one thing, there are the obvious personal attacks and generally bad behaviour, which have become far too commonplace, and those definitely need a way to be addressed more quickly.
However, with the more insidious issues, the "problem" isn't traditional, outright toxicity and direct personal attacks. It's more of:
1) General and constant negativity, about the game and.. everything else. Guild politics? Life? Basically, a lot of chat on 100 has become "normalized" to being salty, grumpy, angsty and embittered. Which is just exhausting to read.
2) Somewhat subtle trolling and manipulative behaviour designed to "get a rise" out of targeted people and rile them up.
It's challenging to come up with rule structures that address these issues. What do I do? Outlaw "being angsty"?
For example, I've never been one to knock anyone for complaining about the game itself, or our development, but it gets to a point where people just rant on-and-on for hours; people actually start to file tickets about "negativity" on 100, and how they've chosen to leave 100.
Ironically, as soon as people start to leave 100 in larger numbers, the channel gets quieter, and then the same grumpy people complain that "obviously" no one is online, even if the actual player-count hasn't changed. But, most importantly, it breaks the sense of community, and it breaks a lot of things that were good about the game for a very long time.
It may be even more challenging to address #2. We've had several people who take great pleasure in trolling other players, whenever possible, and will do so in as subtle a way as needed to achieve their aims, while trying to adhere to the strict letter of the RoC. They're bored of "Vendetta Online The Game" and would rather play the game of "Annoy X Player(s)". But it's pretty hard to "outlaw" this kind of behaviour either, even if I could easily enforce it, because it can be pretty vague and subjective. Someone having a bad day will think everyone is trolling them.
Mitigating the Problem
This issue started to crop up in earnest about two years ago, and was raised on Suggestions, by the player-base at that time. Back then, I thought it might just ba a temporary cyclical issue, we tried to have a bit more administrative oversight and action in-game, and see how that worked out.
Obviously, it was not enough, and things only devolved over time. Clearly, I wish I had taken more action back then; in my defense, 2017 ended up being a pretty difficult year for us, and I had a lot more pressing "distractions". Regardless, I think a lot of good points were made by the player-base at that time, and blended with a few ideas of my own, I've come up with the following potential course of action:
1) Make Channel 100 into Game-related Content Only, and Channel 1 to Help-only. This comes from Pizzasgood and Smittens, via Suggestions. People can still make other discussion channels, but at least the newbie-facing channels will be driven entirely by Game discussion and content.
2) Replace "vote mute" functionality, with "/report" functionality. When you "/report" someone, you have to pick a reason why, and then pick a line of their recent chat that is an example of your reasoning for the report. This is then included, all as one package, when your report is submitted. The report will also automatically include a lot of other previous chat from around the time, so the administrator can use that to determine context. But, that way it'll be much easier for whomever reads the Reports (realistically, me) to determine if they're deserved or not.
This then drastically shortens the time of "administrative reaction". I can't tell you how time-consuming it is for me to go through copious logs right now, trying to figure out who did what to whom.
Reports will also automatically contact the person who has action taken against them, and clearly state why the action was taken, so developers don't have to manually contact everyone.
3) Certain "/report" Categories can still have Mute-like functionality. For instance, if you mute someone with "spam" as the reason, it could use the current "vote" style behaviours to engage a 30-minute Mute against the individual, if there are sufficient other reports around the same time. This would still be helpful for the occasional obnoxious spammy newbie.
Beyond this, though, just having to pick a "Report" topic, and choose a real line of text from the recent history, should effectively remove anyone using "report" to vindictively silence other players. People who send undeserved or erroneous reports will quickly have their Report ability stripped away.
4) New permanent muting status for Public Channels. Have you gotten a lot of "/reports" filed against you, that were administratively validated? No more chatting on 1 or 100! You can read it all you want, but you can't speak anymore. And it's permanent, unless you open a ticket and make a really strong apology for whatever behaviour you did. This may default to an automated escalation that's described in the automated emails (like 3 validated Reports per unit time, or whatever), although that doesn't rule out my manually applying this to people, particularly based on past behaviour.
This is a lot easier middle-ground than our current (exhausting) process of "admonishing via email" and threatening with long-term mutes and bans, and directly engaging with the accused. No more. You just lose public chat. Some truly toxic or disturbing people, who target specific people with racist or sexual content, will need harsher treatment, but the goal here is predominately to "improve 100". Escalating on the occasional creeper or hard-core racist is, in many ways, a simpler issue.
5) No Real-Life Political Discussions (or thinly disguised "RP" analogues) In The Game, On The Forums, Discord, or any other official VO discussion medium. EVE implemented this, years ago, and it's probably not a bad idea. I personally have strongly-held and nuanced political views, but you've never seen me write about them, because Vendetta Online is supposed to be an escape for people from reality, especially really combative topics like that.
It's been one of the most common ways for people to "troll" others in the game, and it's a way to make sure if there's a "new sort-of public channel", like 42 or some such, that emerges.. it doesn't become a haven for the same kinds of toxicity.
Someone, somewhere, will yell something about "free speech" at this point. But, seriously, this is a game intended to provide an entertaining escape into a futuristic sci-fi world. If people want to blast each other over their political beliefs, there are a lot of effective social-media services out there that seem to be crafted for that exact purpose. Not Vendetta Online.
Mitigation is Not Absolute Solution
People sometimes castigate me via tickets or emails for not exercising absolutist control over the in-game chat, and forcing it to adhere to the letter of the RoC. Those people usually miss the point of the RoC.
Laws are created for the purpose of solving problems, and not for the purpose of pushing all human behaviour through a specific and absolute cookie-cutter. In the USA, we have really vague laws against concepts like "disturbing the peace" and "disorderly conduct", which exist specifically to give law enforcement a means to deal with a would-be criminal in the immediate moment, with their best judgement.
The ultimate guilt or innocence of the individual is determined later by a judge, or sometimes by a jury, but ideally an individual or group who applies impartial rationality to the situation and acts as a mitigating factor against abuse of law enforcement authority. You can look at that "judgement" role as, basically: Me. I determine if the "accusation" has merit.
At the same time, the law enforcement is (usually) not running around, constantly arresting everyone for "Disturbing the Peace". Just because a "rule" exists, and because behaviour in one situation requires action, doesn't mean that all behaviours require the same action. That intervening "mess" of subjectivity and opinion is the process of "Law", which is always going to be as inhernetly flawed as the people who make it.
Thus, the RoC is never going to be an "absolute" indicator of administrative response. After all, what does it mean to "harass" another player? Some people file tickets that someone blew up their ship! Obviously, that is not harassment in and of itself; but these are all subjective concepts, which is why someone's "judgement" is required later. If someone is also yelling racial epithets, while blowing up your ship, that's clearly a different situation.
In past years, the greater VO community has had a fairly reasonable idea of acceptable behaviour, and I'm hopeful that with a revamped set of tools, and easier (and faster) administrative response, something like this could really help the situation.
It may not be an absolute "fix", but perhaps it could Help, to a point where it makes the game more fun for veterans, as well as more accessible to newbies. We do, after all, have significant Release / Expansion plans for 2019 (mentioned in the past Newsletters), and it would be a bummer to ship a lot of new content, and bring in a ton of new people, only to blast them with a lot of salty angst.
Implementation Timing
We added simpler administrative tools to "remove vote muting ability" last year, due to some problematic players. The concept of an additional "muted only on 1 and 100" is pretty easy.
The whole "report" system, administrative tools, and log-cropping mechanics, database interaction and contact system are more involved, but I think are necessary, as I suspect the rest of this won't be "effective" without it. Our current administrative situation is really terrible, and greatly weakens our ability to respond in the limited time we have available.
I hope (?) this is only on the order of maybe a week to implement. But, unexpected issues can crop up and make stuff more complicated. Plus, we keep having much more serious problems crop up out of no-where (without diminishing this issue at all). If we can minimize "other shoes dropping" for a bit, we can probably get this done sometime before "Soon(tm)", heh.
I'd like to see it happen in Q1, if at all possible.
Feedback is Welcome
Obviously, keep it civil, please :).
Obviously, we have a lot more limitations. I can't even "afford" someone to be a regular in-game community manager, and none of our volunteer Guides really have time to be in-game that often anymore.
For the developer's part, there's no way we can also monitor the game all the time. We do take action on Tickets, but the reports and actions are clearly insufficient to change the tenor of the game.
Identifying the Problem
There have always been some toxic individuals in the game, sometimes; but prior to a couple of years ago we managed to achieve a much better average balance.
We've always hewed towards a "loose" interpretation of "hey, a little combative trash-talk is okay", while also trying to quietly shut things down when they got out of hand.
This has led some to believe that we "never enforce the Rules of Conduct" (RoC), but that isn't true. We just usually do it quietly behind the scenes, to lessen visible drama, and while also giving people some degree of leeway in expressing themselves, before stepping in and being authoritarian.
But, that all being said, things have changed. For one thing, there are the obvious personal attacks and generally bad behaviour, which have become far too commonplace, and those definitely need a way to be addressed more quickly.
However, with the more insidious issues, the "problem" isn't traditional, outright toxicity and direct personal attacks. It's more of:
1) General and constant negativity, about the game and.. everything else. Guild politics? Life? Basically, a lot of chat on 100 has become "normalized" to being salty, grumpy, angsty and embittered. Which is just exhausting to read.
2) Somewhat subtle trolling and manipulative behaviour designed to "get a rise" out of targeted people and rile them up.
It's challenging to come up with rule structures that address these issues. What do I do? Outlaw "being angsty"?
For example, I've never been one to knock anyone for complaining about the game itself, or our development, but it gets to a point where people just rant on-and-on for hours; people actually start to file tickets about "negativity" on 100, and how they've chosen to leave 100.
Ironically, as soon as people start to leave 100 in larger numbers, the channel gets quieter, and then the same grumpy people complain that "obviously" no one is online, even if the actual player-count hasn't changed. But, most importantly, it breaks the sense of community, and it breaks a lot of things that were good about the game for a very long time.
It may be even more challenging to address #2. We've had several people who take great pleasure in trolling other players, whenever possible, and will do so in as subtle a way as needed to achieve their aims, while trying to adhere to the strict letter of the RoC. They're bored of "Vendetta Online The Game" and would rather play the game of "Annoy X Player(s)". But it's pretty hard to "outlaw" this kind of behaviour either, even if I could easily enforce it, because it can be pretty vague and subjective. Someone having a bad day will think everyone is trolling them.
Mitigating the Problem
This issue started to crop up in earnest about two years ago, and was raised on Suggestions, by the player-base at that time. Back then, I thought it might just ba a temporary cyclical issue, we tried to have a bit more administrative oversight and action in-game, and see how that worked out.
Obviously, it was not enough, and things only devolved over time. Clearly, I wish I had taken more action back then; in my defense, 2017 ended up being a pretty difficult year for us, and I had a lot more pressing "distractions". Regardless, I think a lot of good points were made by the player-base at that time, and blended with a few ideas of my own, I've come up with the following potential course of action:
1) Make Channel 100 into Game-related Content Only, and Channel 1 to Help-only. This comes from Pizzasgood and Smittens, via Suggestions. People can still make other discussion channels, but at least the newbie-facing channels will be driven entirely by Game discussion and content.
2) Replace "vote mute" functionality, with "/report" functionality. When you "/report" someone, you have to pick a reason why, and then pick a line of their recent chat that is an example of your reasoning for the report. This is then included, all as one package, when your report is submitted. The report will also automatically include a lot of other previous chat from around the time, so the administrator can use that to determine context. But, that way it'll be much easier for whomever reads the Reports (realistically, me) to determine if they're deserved or not.
This then drastically shortens the time of "administrative reaction". I can't tell you how time-consuming it is for me to go through copious logs right now, trying to figure out who did what to whom.
Reports will also automatically contact the person who has action taken against them, and clearly state why the action was taken, so developers don't have to manually contact everyone.
3) Certain "/report" Categories can still have Mute-like functionality. For instance, if you mute someone with "spam" as the reason, it could use the current "vote" style behaviours to engage a 30-minute Mute against the individual, if there are sufficient other reports around the same time. This would still be helpful for the occasional obnoxious spammy newbie.
Beyond this, though, just having to pick a "Report" topic, and choose a real line of text from the recent history, should effectively remove anyone using "report" to vindictively silence other players. People who send undeserved or erroneous reports will quickly have their Report ability stripped away.
4) New permanent muting status for Public Channels. Have you gotten a lot of "/reports" filed against you, that were administratively validated? No more chatting on 1 or 100! You can read it all you want, but you can't speak anymore. And it's permanent, unless you open a ticket and make a really strong apology for whatever behaviour you did. This may default to an automated escalation that's described in the automated emails (like 3 validated Reports per unit time, or whatever), although that doesn't rule out my manually applying this to people, particularly based on past behaviour.
This is a lot easier middle-ground than our current (exhausting) process of "admonishing via email" and threatening with long-term mutes and bans, and directly engaging with the accused. No more. You just lose public chat. Some truly toxic or disturbing people, who target specific people with racist or sexual content, will need harsher treatment, but the goal here is predominately to "improve 100". Escalating on the occasional creeper or hard-core racist is, in many ways, a simpler issue.
5) No Real-Life Political Discussions (or thinly disguised "RP" analogues) In The Game, On The Forums, Discord, or any other official VO discussion medium. EVE implemented this, years ago, and it's probably not a bad idea. I personally have strongly-held and nuanced political views, but you've never seen me write about them, because Vendetta Online is supposed to be an escape for people from reality, especially really combative topics like that.
It's been one of the most common ways for people to "troll" others in the game, and it's a way to make sure if there's a "new sort-of public channel", like 42 or some such, that emerges.. it doesn't become a haven for the same kinds of toxicity.
Someone, somewhere, will yell something about "free speech" at this point. But, seriously, this is a game intended to provide an entertaining escape into a futuristic sci-fi world. If people want to blast each other over their political beliefs, there are a lot of effective social-media services out there that seem to be crafted for that exact purpose. Not Vendetta Online.
Mitigation is Not Absolute Solution
People sometimes castigate me via tickets or emails for not exercising absolutist control over the in-game chat, and forcing it to adhere to the letter of the RoC. Those people usually miss the point of the RoC.
Laws are created for the purpose of solving problems, and not for the purpose of pushing all human behaviour through a specific and absolute cookie-cutter. In the USA, we have really vague laws against concepts like "disturbing the peace" and "disorderly conduct", which exist specifically to give law enforcement a means to deal with a would-be criminal in the immediate moment, with their best judgement.
The ultimate guilt or innocence of the individual is determined later by a judge, or sometimes by a jury, but ideally an individual or group who applies impartial rationality to the situation and acts as a mitigating factor against abuse of law enforcement authority. You can look at that "judgement" role as, basically: Me. I determine if the "accusation" has merit.
At the same time, the law enforcement is (usually) not running around, constantly arresting everyone for "Disturbing the Peace". Just because a "rule" exists, and because behaviour in one situation requires action, doesn't mean that all behaviours require the same action. That intervening "mess" of subjectivity and opinion is the process of "Law", which is always going to be as inhernetly flawed as the people who make it.
Thus, the RoC is never going to be an "absolute" indicator of administrative response. After all, what does it mean to "harass" another player? Some people file tickets that someone blew up their ship! Obviously, that is not harassment in and of itself; but these are all subjective concepts, which is why someone's "judgement" is required later. If someone is also yelling racial epithets, while blowing up your ship, that's clearly a different situation.
In past years, the greater VO community has had a fairly reasonable idea of acceptable behaviour, and I'm hopeful that with a revamped set of tools, and easier (and faster) administrative response, something like this could really help the situation.
It may not be an absolute "fix", but perhaps it could Help, to a point where it makes the game more fun for veterans, as well as more accessible to newbies. We do, after all, have significant Release / Expansion plans for 2019 (mentioned in the past Newsletters), and it would be a bummer to ship a lot of new content, and bring in a ton of new people, only to blast them with a lot of salty angst.
Implementation Timing
We added simpler administrative tools to "remove vote muting ability" last year, due to some problematic players. The concept of an additional "muted only on 1 and 100" is pretty easy.
The whole "report" system, administrative tools, and log-cropping mechanics, database interaction and contact system are more involved, but I think are necessary, as I suspect the rest of this won't be "effective" without it. Our current administrative situation is really terrible, and greatly weakens our ability to respond in the limited time we have available.
I hope (?) this is only on the order of maybe a week to implement. But, unexpected issues can crop up and make stuff more complicated. Plus, we keep having much more serious problems crop up out of no-where (without diminishing this issue at all). If we can minimize "other shoes dropping" for a bit, we can probably get this done sometime before "Soon(tm)", heh.
I'd like to see it happen in Q1, if at all possible.
Feedback is Welcome
Obviously, keep it civil, please :).
4) No Real-Life Political Discussions (or thinly disguised "RP" analogues) In The Game, On The Forums, Discord, or any other official VO discussion medium. EVE implemented this, years ago, and it's probably not a bad idea. I personally have strongly-held and nuanced political views, but you've never seen me write about them, because Vendetta Online is supposed to be an escape for people from reality, especially really combative topics like that.
^^^ This. VO for me is an escape. I don't want to read about whats going on in the RL while I nerd out in a space game. I know people tell me to /ignore those peeps, and I do. But its still frustating. The only politics i want to read about are VO role played ones.
Also, It would be nice if people stopped with public alt outing campaigns. That kind of behavior grinds on me.
^^^ This. VO for me is an escape. I don't want to read about whats going on in the RL while I nerd out in a space game. I know people tell me to /ignore those peeps, and I do. But its still frustating. The only politics i want to read about are VO role played ones.
Also, It would be nice if people stopped with public alt outing campaigns. That kind of behavior grinds on me.
1) It is too easy to dodge any current punishments, the threat of a mute may calm the tits of some PC players, but why would a mobile user care when they can just start over? Especially if they are just trolling. I mean, do not get me wrong, I troll with the best of them, but I do tend to do more than just sit in stations chatting bubbles. Bumcheese, Cro-bo Yoman, femum to name a few (ya'll got trolled, especially you dilan, muhahaha - yes, you think you can befriend the best? fool) - all these characters had administrative action taken against them, it really did not stop "the game" as the main game was to be hated and hunted and then kill these pathetic descendants of monkey because they have no idea.
Anyway, I am rambling, the point being that while "F2P" accounts are so easy to get, and punishments being nothing more than an inconvenience to those of us who are "bored of space quake" - yeah, I don't think any punishments you bring in will change this while throw away accounts are so easy to do. Could perhaps linking accounts to gmail/apple ids be a thing? Right now you do not even need an email address to create said accounts. This may make it easier for new players to jump aboard, but as you probably know by now, it makes any kind of user base administration a nightmare.
2) Stop hand-holding people - it has been done since the dawn of the loonyverse - people have got away with all sorts of crap in the name of RP. Because it has been this way for so long, some players may feel upset if this changes and you start handing out punishments for things that have gone on RP forum in the past, or handing out PROPER punishments for things that do go against the ROC. Screw them.
If you are posting this, and I (yes me) am agreeing with you then you know this HAS to happen. If someone robs a guild and you can see proof that this has happened? Ban hammer the IP/account for a week. If someone is involved with a malicious plugin (use of third party software and account sharing are both covered by this) that attempts to use subterfuge to take credits from another player, do not make them into a guide, instead, ban hammer the IP/account for a week. If someone creates alts with the sole purpose of pissing people off in the name of trolling, and this also comes to light? That's right, ban the IP/account.
Talk to them after the ban if you feel you need to, obviously if they continue to be dicks then you can extend this, there are ways around this for the determined but it is more of a threat than "oh you will get muted!" People may initially be upset, but screw them. Next time they might just think twice before starting a rant on 100 that lasts for 6 hours of mom jokes - I know I would.
3) ...
4) PROFIT!
[edit for wally]
The sad thing is, it is the paying customers that you have had since 2004 that will suffer the most but it is also this core group of people that cause a lot of this trouble, so screw us too!
Anyway, I am rambling, the point being that while "F2P" accounts are so easy to get, and punishments being nothing more than an inconvenience to those of us who are "bored of space quake" - yeah, I don't think any punishments you bring in will change this while throw away accounts are so easy to do. Could perhaps linking accounts to gmail/apple ids be a thing? Right now you do not even need an email address to create said accounts. This may make it easier for new players to jump aboard, but as you probably know by now, it makes any kind of user base administration a nightmare.
2) Stop hand-holding people - it has been done since the dawn of the loonyverse - people have got away with all sorts of crap in the name of RP. Because it has been this way for so long, some players may feel upset if this changes and you start handing out punishments for things that have gone on RP forum in the past, or handing out PROPER punishments for things that do go against the ROC. Screw them.
If you are posting this, and I (yes me) am agreeing with you then you know this HAS to happen. If someone robs a guild and you can see proof that this has happened? Ban hammer the IP/account for a week. If someone is involved with a malicious plugin (use of third party software and account sharing are both covered by this) that attempts to use subterfuge to take credits from another player, do not make them into a guide, instead, ban hammer the IP/account for a week. If someone creates alts with the sole purpose of pissing people off in the name of trolling, and this also comes to light? That's right, ban the IP/account.
Talk to them after the ban if you feel you need to, obviously if they continue to be dicks then you can extend this, there are ways around this for the determined but it is more of a threat than "oh you will get muted!" People may initially be upset, but screw them. Next time they might just think twice before starting a rant on 100 that lasts for 6 hours of mom jokes - I know I would.
3) ...
4) PROFIT!
[edit for wally]
The sad thing is, it is the paying customers that you have had since 2004 that will suffer the most but it is also this core group of people that cause a lot of this trouble, so screw us too!
The only thing I can say is take a day to look at chat, see what needs changed yourself. There is no "permanent fix" for this that I see. Also, you don't need to pay people to regulate. Hell, I know me and others would do it for free.
I really like the idea of having 1 for help only, and 100 for game-related content only. A player was bringing current, politically-related events into 100 a few weeks past and I quipped "that happened like 2,000 years ago".
Vendetta is an escape.
As a guide, it's really hard to deal with off-topic or inappropriate chat quietly, behind the scenes, especially when it's often the same players repeating the same type of chat behavior over and over. I'd much rather simply zot someone and move on, especially when I'm just trying to enjoy the game after a long day of work (I'm not exactly born to Guide). More distributed community tools would certainly be helpful.
Vendetta is an escape.
As a guide, it's really hard to deal with off-topic or inappropriate chat quietly, behind the scenes, especially when it's often the same players repeating the same type of chat behavior over and over. I'd much rather simply zot someone and move on, especially when I'm just trying to enjoy the game after a long day of work (I'm not exactly born to Guide). More distributed community tools would certainly be helpful.
I fully admit to being part of this problem in the past and have made conscious efforts to stop.
I agree 95% with what yoda has said above ( I think getting to a position of being able to steal a guild bank is just game play risk).
Handing out more frequent bans on primary accounts people have invested a lot of time in and the possibility of perm ban being a much more looming action would put huge deterrent on Fully subbed accounts breaking the rules. I know you are not a supporter of public shaming but I think that if an account earns the permanent ban status it should be made public (i.e. "This characters account has been banned" ) so players will think twice and those reporting will not feel they are being ignored.
To yoda's point on mobile accounts being so easily attainable I agree 100%. With the ease of changing IPs and VPNs in the current day IP/Account bans are to easily circumvented. I honestly don't have a viable solution for this. Maybe a clientID created by the game when it is installed on a specific piece of hardware that will always be the same for that device thus preventing endless account log in or uninstalling/reinstalling, just throwing stuff out.
In summary its going to take 1 or 2 all out accounts bans before a real change is going to happen but I look forward to seeing this improve.
I agree 95% with what yoda has said above ( I think getting to a position of being able to steal a guild bank is just game play risk).
Handing out more frequent bans on primary accounts people have invested a lot of time in and the possibility of perm ban being a much more looming action would put huge deterrent on Fully subbed accounts breaking the rules. I know you are not a supporter of public shaming but I think that if an account earns the permanent ban status it should be made public (i.e. "This characters account has been banned" ) so players will think twice and those reporting will not feel they are being ignored.
To yoda's point on mobile accounts being so easily attainable I agree 100%. With the ease of changing IPs and VPNs in the current day IP/Account bans are to easily circumvented. I honestly don't have a viable solution for this. Maybe a clientID created by the game when it is installed on a specific piece of hardware that will always be the same for that device thus preventing endless account log in or uninstalling/reinstalling, just throwing stuff out.
In summary its going to take 1 or 2 all out accounts bans before a real change is going to happen but I look forward to seeing this improve.
+1 For /report
I play almost every day, for a few years now. Please let me know if I can help the developers in any way.
Galactica Actual
I play almost every day, for a few years now. Please let me know if I can help the developers in any way.
Galactica Actual
So, an anecdote regarding 'publicity'; in the game Counter Strike about a month past a player was hurling racial epithets over voice comms. I (and others, I assume) reported him, and he was quietly dropped from the game. A few weeks later I received a notice on logging back in saying 'thanks for reporting so-and-so, with the help of your report this player has been prosecuted for <x> and been banned'.
Admittedly, Counter Strike is unlike a persistent-world MMORPG, but I was impressed with how the corrective action wasn't a huge public drama and I still was made aware that my action made a difference.
Admittedly, Counter Strike is unlike a persistent-world MMORPG, but I was impressed with how the corrective action wasn't a huge public drama and I still was made aware that my action made a difference.
+1 Phaserlight, that is great
I agree 95% with what yoda has said above ( I think getting to a position of being able to steal a guild bank is just game play risk).
Yeah, I was just trying to bring up something (other than the trolling of course) that I have been involved in that I actually expected more punishment for. I mean to give credit where credit is due the person that I robbed was happy for it to be RP'ed away the first time and didn't even report it (as far as I know), but the second.. and the third, then the .... yeah they were pretty pissed at me the last couple of times, and I only gave the credits back as I expected some kind of administrative action. Knowing what I know now? Damn, me and Niki should be a lot richer...
Anyway, I suppose you got the main point.
Yeah, I was just trying to bring up something (other than the trolling of course) that I have been involved in that I actually expected more punishment for. I mean to give credit where credit is due the person that I robbed was happy for it to be RP'ed away the first time and didn't even report it (as far as I know), but the second.. and the third, then the .... yeah they were pretty pissed at me the last couple of times, and I only gave the credits back as I expected some kind of administrative action. Knowing what I know now? Damn, me and Niki should be a lot richer...
Anyway, I suppose you got the main point.
I am so pleased to know that the developers are taking the level of toxicity in this game seriously. It has become so difficult to use 100 when it is constantly filled with complaints about how dead the game is, with real-world bullshit, and personal attacks. I fully support channel 100 becoming "game-related" content only. Pirates want to trash talk about me always running away - fine. Player-who-shall-not-be-named wants to give a speech on 100 about how mobile is trash and PC is the only way to "git good" at this game - go away.
If only I could get more people to /join 300 and RP with me! It's always dead, which is sad because I want to get away from the meta game and just enjoy the escape.
If only I could get more people to /join 300 and RP with me! It's always dead, which is sad because I want to get away from the meta game and just enjoy the escape.
Given that vo is a "chat room with with space simulator attached [sic]" (as you acknowledged), the considerably lengthy amount of grind required to achieve anything worthwhile and the resulting zombie-state boredom it induces, and the admitted lack of resources being able to commit to any kind of active moderation, I'd say your best shot at reducing toxicity is permanently banning (say, after one final warning) all the vets who have exhibited this "angst" -- cause that's all it is, just the vets who have long since spent their reserves of patience and restraint. Not only ban them, but delete their entire account(s). I think that will go a long way towards reducing this persistent toxicity (both on the forums and in game).
Your suggestions regarding refining administrative action are probably good to do as well, going forward, to help mitigate the normal expected trolling of racist, homophobic and otherwise harassing speak that pervades the anonymous-o-sphere of the internet. But angst? That's from vets. Just say "no more" or you lose your account and the problem will correct itself by self regulation or by account deletion / banning. I will personally say that, despite understanding what you said above regarding not being able to always enforce your rules, your historical reluctance to banhammer people for consistent bad behavior spanning YEARS and YEARS has contributed to the angst. So it's good that you are finally seeing the value in tightening things up.
I think banning RL political public chat is risky, given that, again, this is a chat room game, and from time to time lengthy discussions about any number of topics are going to naturally occur. I think its unrealistic to play an MMORPG and expect RL discussions to be absent. If you don't want other human interaction you shouldn't be playing an MMORPG.
[appreciate that edit yoda]
Your suggestions regarding refining administrative action are probably good to do as well, going forward, to help mitigate the normal expected trolling of racist, homophobic and otherwise harassing speak that pervades the anonymous-o-sphere of the internet. But angst? That's from vets. Just say "no more" or you lose your account and the problem will correct itself by self regulation or by account deletion / banning. I will personally say that, despite understanding what you said above regarding not being able to always enforce your rules, your historical reluctance to banhammer people for consistent bad behavior spanning YEARS and YEARS has contributed to the angst. So it's good that you are finally seeing the value in tightening things up.
I think banning RL political public chat is risky, given that, again, this is a chat room game, and from time to time lengthy discussions about any number of topics are going to naturally occur. I think its unrealistic to play an MMORPG and expect RL discussions to be absent. If you don't want other human interaction you shouldn't be playing an MMORPG.
[appreciate that edit yoda]
I, too, would like to see channel 100 reserved for in-game content only. It would greatly simplify moderation by decreasing some of the judgement calls necessary, and by decreasing time spent waiting for a discussion to inevitably deteriorate to the point of violating the existing RoC.
I'd like a way to have the rules easily accessible within the game, and clearly numbered/lettered so I can simply tell somebody who has transgressed "Yes, it is a rule. Please see 7a." It might also be useful to get player input into the wording of all of the rules so that they are clear and meaningful. We have some excellent critical thinkers here who are able to instantly identify loopholes.
I'd like a way to have the rules easily accessible within the game, and clearly numbered/lettered so I can simply tell somebody who has transgressed "Yes, it is a rule. Please see 7a." It might also be useful to get player input into the wording of all of the rules so that they are clear and meaningful. We have some excellent critical thinkers here who are able to instantly identify loopholes.
Taken from VODR [100]
[100] [Itan] <Kaizoku> Hi -Wash-, while we can still use 100 to talk about not-game related topics I would like to take this chance to make a brief comment about the recent suggestion thread Incarnate posted. As of the last few years, there has been great animosity between several players and groups of players, admittedly I have personally partaken in such tribal and underhanded speech in public, and I would like to take the chance to publically apologize for anything hostile related to real life I may have said. Perhaps we can move forward and work towards a better community, without resorting to underhanded tactics to personally target each other via Real life politics, name calling, empty claims, and so forth. This extends to not only wash, but the entire community. While I completely disagree that curtailing speech as a solution for Guild Software refusing to do the legwork to reverse the polarization that has occured over the last decade and a half, I think it will be much more effective if it begins with us. I take this moment to extend an olive branch to any and all, let us interact hand in hand, it has been done in the past. If we cannot, Vendetta Onlines landscape is at risk of being altered beyond repair, and the game we all love will be gone forever. I have confronted a large subsection of the community with these ideals, well before Incarnates suggestion thread with great success and progress in unification between the splintered sections of the community, it would be outstanding if we had your and everyone elses support. as you experienced last night, with the destruction of your Trident Type M, -Wash-, In the matter of 24-48 hours, a dozen+ pilots who normally are enemies, and refused to subscribe or interact with the community have subscribed and unified without the threat of violence, political alienation, and so forth. Allow us, the old, to set a better example for the new.[100] [Itan] <Kaizoku> What do you say?
[100] [Itan] <Kaizoku> Hi -Wash-, while we can still use 100 to talk about not-game related topics I would like to take this chance to make a brief comment about the recent suggestion thread Incarnate posted. As of the last few years, there has been great animosity between several players and groups of players, admittedly I have personally partaken in such tribal and underhanded speech in public, and I would like to take the chance to publically apologize for anything hostile related to real life I may have said. Perhaps we can move forward and work towards a better community, without resorting to underhanded tactics to personally target each other via Real life politics, name calling, empty claims, and so forth. This extends to not only wash, but the entire community. While I completely disagree that curtailing speech as a solution for Guild Software refusing to do the legwork to reverse the polarization that has occured over the last decade and a half, I think it will be much more effective if it begins with us. I take this moment to extend an olive branch to any and all, let us interact hand in hand, it has been done in the past. If we cannot, Vendetta Onlines landscape is at risk of being altered beyond repair, and the game we all love will be gone forever. I have confronted a large subsection of the community with these ideals, well before Incarnates suggestion thread with great success and progress in unification between the splintered sections of the community, it would be outstanding if we had your and everyone elses support. as you experienced last night, with the destruction of your Trident Type M, -Wash-, In the matter of 24-48 hours, a dozen+ pilots who normally are enemies, and refused to subscribe or interact with the community have subscribed and unified without the threat of violence, political alienation, and so forth. Allow us, the old, to set a better example for the new.[100] [Itan] <Kaizoku> What do you say?
Echoing the general sentiment, here are a few relevant minutes from a Jeff Vogel GDC talk.
In response to the "no real life politics chat allowed" thing in particular:
This sounds, to me, an awful lot like some unnecessary "there are some fine people on both sides" mental gymnastics.
If you don't like racists in your chat, ban some racists.
If you don't like people talking about the joys of star trek utopia communism we would live in once Bernie gets elected, ban them too.
Don't equivocate the two into one group by banning both sets for "real life politics chat."
Edit:
Almost forgot a quote I've been saving for this thread since December!
Never believe that anti-Semites are completely unaware of the absurdity of their replies. They know that their remarks are frivolous, open to challenge. But they are amusing themselves, for it is their adversary who is obliged to use words responsibly, since he believes in words. The anti-Semites have the right to play. They even like to play with discourse for, by giving ridiculous reasons, they discredit the seriousness of their interlocutors. They delight in acting in bad faith, since they seek not to persuade by sound argument but to intimidate and disconcert. If you press them too closely, they will abruptly fall silent, loftily indicating by some phrase that the time for argument is past.
- Jean Paul-Sartre
In response to the "no real life politics chat allowed" thing in particular:
This sounds, to me, an awful lot like some unnecessary "there are some fine people on both sides" mental gymnastics.
If you don't like racists in your chat, ban some racists.
If you don't like people talking about the joys of star trek utopia communism we would live in once Bernie gets elected, ban them too.
Don't equivocate the two into one group by banning both sets for "real life politics chat."
Edit:
Almost forgot a quote I've been saving for this thread since December!
Never believe that anti-Semites are completely unaware of the absurdity of their replies. They know that their remarks are frivolous, open to challenge. But they are amusing themselves, for it is their adversary who is obliged to use words responsibly, since he believes in words. The anti-Semites have the right to play. They even like to play with discourse for, by giving ridiculous reasons, they discredit the seriousness of their interlocutors. They delight in acting in bad faith, since they seek not to persuade by sound argument but to intimidate and disconcert. If you press them too closely, they will abruptly fall silent, loftily indicating by some phrase that the time for argument is past.
- Jean Paul-Sartre
[Yes, there are grammar errors, apologies in advance -- I wrote this on a mobile device. I blame autocorrect for all errors. Stupid autocorrect.]
Incarnate,
I debated about whether I would reply to your thread, and became very conflicted. The reason being twofold: First, I’m a relative newbie to the game (account created in 2011, but not an active player until ~3-4 months ago); Second, I’m worried that my opinion and any information I disclose may result in “pissing some people off” in game, and I’d become a permanent grief target.
In full disclosure, I finally decided to reply because I’m a paying (subbed) player and I’d like for VO to be a fun place for me to be now, and in the future. I feel that the only way to do that is to contribute to important discussions. I also decided that since my second reason for hesitation, ironically(?), was centered around the reason for your post in the first place, I should "grow a pair."
DISCLAIMER: this post contains my OPINION(S) and I may present “facts” not in evidence. I’m also going to propose some OPINION based suggestions on how I think this toxicity could be moderated or guided toward positive community interaction and game-play features. By no means am I an authority on VO.
In “Identifying the problem” you stated that there used to be a “better average balance” between toxic and (I presume) non-toxic individuals in the game. I wonder though if that balance is a perceived balance or a real balance. Without statistics which you, understandably, keep close to the vest, there’s no way to do any analysis.
However, based on my interactions with people in the game, a large portion of the non-toxic population have likely: 1) left public channels altogether; 2) ignore public channels; 3) choose not to interact on public channels. I have asked in Guild chat if people see what’s being said on 100, the answer I generally get back from the (nicer) more senior members of the guild is “I left 100 years ago.”
This is a problem, and shameful! How is it that senior members/players chosen to not monitor, guide, mentor, and uplift new players? Yes I’m calling out my guild leaders (don’t hate!) because they miss prime opportunities to recruit excellent players with great attitudes and aptitude because they ignore the primary/default communication channel for the entire game!
Never fear, I’m not going to just reinforce your arguments… I’m also going to offer some suggestions:
Suggestion #1: Any Guild Commander/Lieutenant or Council Member must be on all public channels at all times. Period. As terms of guild ownership/leadership, they should be required to to assist with and ensure general rules of good behavior and good sportsmanship are being followed on public channels by their guild members. Give the leaders advanced control (and anonymous visibility) to /mute or /report actions that have been taken against their members, and log the leader’s responses. Abuse of authority or position, along with ignoring issues, should end in punitive action of de-throning, fines, or loss of capital assets. If a guild leader is being reported, justice should administered by the Devs and should be swift and brutal. Treat guild ownership and leadership as a privilege and a responsibility, not an entitlement.
Note #1.1: In general, guilds are too easy to create with little or no responsibility taken by leaders.
Suggestion #2: Address all (or as many as) possible means of circumvention of muting/reporting action. People get muted, they move to VODR, or an alt. Muting someone on chat should result in VODR muting as well as muting of all known alts. Muting someone should result in their inability to see the channel as well as talking on the channel. Seeing but not being able to respond only serves to wind the muted individual up even more.
Note #2.1: People are wayyyyy too sensitive.
Suggestion #3: Restricted chat channels. Channel 1 = Newbies and guides/helpers, Channel 100 = general audience, Channel 1000 = Player level 3 and up, Channel 5000 = Players over 4/4/4/4/4.
Add a “helper” tag, and let anyone that you see actually helping have it as a reward. Make it similar to Mentor. It’s very hard to mentor, because it’s a huge commitment -- I’m willing to mentor people and help them, especially newbies. Heck, I give away free gear in Itani space to newbies! But I don’t have the time to commit full-time. So I don’t ask people to /mentor invite me. Do away with the mentor system, or expand it to be something less obnoxiously commitment based. Maybe give “helpful points” rather than “good/bad” ratings?
Note #3.1: Sorry, but I’m only going to take people on 5000 seriously.
Note #3.1.1: You don’t sub? Honestly, your opinion doesn’t matter to me.
Note #3.2: Guides aren’t present. Fire them all. I didn’t even know we had guides???
I am concerned, because your email about toxicity was primarily communication channel based (in-game 100) vs. Forum usage, general game-play interactions, suggestions, bugs, etc. While 100 comes across as overly toxic at times, it’s actually a pretty fun channel most of the time. I have a good time talking to people, even teasing the self-titled “pirates” (youse pais for my fleas, or youse diez!) (which, double parenthetically, may be offensive to actual Ethiopian Princes, as I’ve been told that’s what they are pretending to be… but, I’m not the moral police, so… I will stop digressing...)
I’d like to address a couple of big-ticket items that I’ve noted, as a new player:
The Forum
The Forum is a great attempt to build community and to give people a (forum?) means to present issues, suggestions, ideas, or even bugs reports, but (IMHO), it’s failing to do all of those things. It is a hot-bed of debate and venting that never ends in resolution or productive results. I’ve now seen you lock threads (rightfully so, at times), ban people, and shut down grousing on more than one occasion. I’ve also seen you vent your frustration with the players, and air concerns where (opinion remember?) I would have advised maybe a little less transparency.
Bug Tracking
There are some bugs that just should not be made known. There are systems that track bugs a lot better than a forum can. People submit bugs without relevant use cases.
Game Play
You, and the other Devs, through the evolution of the game, have introduced changes to the system that directly impacts the way certain people play and their expectations for the game. Stating that the game would function a certain way, or fits into a specific niche sets a certain expectation. Evolving the game from that expectation upsets them. Most notably to myself, mining and trade are not twitch based gaming. I like to Mine and I like to Trade. I am capable of fighting, but it just isn’t my thing. I was “instructed” that this was a “twitch based combat game” and that I better “get used to it, because this isn’t a mining game.”
You introduced Capital Ships, which I think is a glorious idea! (I want one!) However, that impacts the (twitch based) expectation that a single combatant should be able to kill another single combatant. The fact that a Capital Ship is being flown by a single pilot and it’s perceived as a fighter that depends more on weapons-load-out vs. PvP “twitch skill” to take-down, seems to be at issue. You’ve adequately explained (for me, anyway) that you are working on bridging the gap with fighter weapons that will be released at some point in the future, but to those people, you’ve fundamentally changed their expected game play. I perceive that those individuals see their “years of subscribing” as an (if you’ll pardon my use of the term) investment in the game, and as an investor, you aren’t addressing their desires.
These people, (reminder, opinion) seem to suffer from False Consensus Bias. They utilize the forum to express “everyone’s” opinion that you messed up the game and when not “everyone” agrees, it’s upsetting to them.
You will never satisfy the expectations of these players, if you wish to continue developing the game in the direction that you seem to want to take it.
So-called "Griefing" and Piracy
When I first started, I was killed. Repeatedly. By the same individual. (Don’t worry, we’ve come to terms and we’re OK now. Until he reads this post, perhaps… hmm… :-) ) Was this griefing? I don’t know. But what I do know is that there aren’t enough “protections” to make certain game play “fun”. Again, maybe I should repeat to myself that “it’s not a mining game...”
Certain players are exercising what I can only call “loop-holes” which I can not adequately explain. These “loop-holes” allow them to kill other players in protected space. Without repercussions, and without the ability to defend ones-self.
Among the people I generally associate with, pirates are seen as “negative players” by non-pirate individuals. In my casual conversation, the only people that I know that actually think the pirates are cool are -- yep, you guessed it -- alts characters of a pirate.
Again, problems without suggestions? Not likely. Here are my suggestions:
Suggestion #4: Actively participate in the Forums. People suggest good ideas, and bad ones. If you really want to encourage dialog, don’t ignore them, even if all you say is “Thanks for the suggestion, we’ll look into it.”
I believe that the majority of people only ever read posts that you have replied to or started. Personally, I do not always read posts that you consider insignificant or not worthy of your time. You not responding means it won’t impact me or my game play. If you have responded, it means something might change.
As circumstantial proof, look at the number of replies to threads you are participating in vs. the ones you don’t. Not attacking, but let's be honest, you're super busy and lately you seem to reply to the threads that are going pear shaped more than those that are not. Bring some focus to the positive suggestions, no matter how stupid they are. :-)
Note #4.1: This is quite likely my problem and not pervasive.
Suggestion #5: Get a real bug tracking system, use it and expose it. Bugzilla? (or see suggestion #6)
Suggestion #6: Get a product road-mapping solution and use it. There are products that I have used in the past, and am currently using at work that are fantastic tools to engage with your customer base and help to guide the development of your product(s). One such tool allows people to suggest ideas, and the community can vote them up or down based on how they feel about them. You can also publish your public road-map, and people can comment and paying customers can help to guide development based on real-world input and feedback. I don’t work for any of these companies, nor do I recommend one over another, but if you want a few product names, reach out to me directly.
Note #6.1: This also helps do away with False Consensus Bias, as consensus is scored!
Note #6.2: Several of these products actually have bug tracking and submission
Note #6.3: Several of these products have more modern forum capability
Suggestion #7: Protected space should be better protected. Persons flagged as “known pirates” should not be able to fly past station guards without repercussions. Give them a “KoS ok” flag if they’ve declared themselves as pirates, or their actions represent that of piracy, and don’t afford them the protections of not being shot down just because their alignment is PoS or close to it. They’re pirates, how can they get PoS of any faction? Yes. Extortion of funds for protection, or Extortion of funds or death, or outright killing of others (especially newbies) is piracy.
Create a Pirate Faction, that doesn’t have assigned sectors. Assign “areas” within each of the Faction space. Maybe make pirates and Unrats get along?
Note #7.1: now, privateers… that’s another thought.
Note #7.1: Wormhole sectors between systems aren’t policed against piracy?
Note #7.1.1: Really? What nation doesn't patrol their borders?! :-)
In closing, I want to reiterate for those of you that just got pissed off by my suggestions -- this post was/is purely opinion, which I am willing to reconsider, given a halfway decent argument. Also, while I am a relative newbie to VO, I am not a newbie to 1) “the industry”, 2) supporting a (very) broad base of customers and products 3) how systems, services, and infrastructures are deployed, supported, and evolved.
Inc, thanks for the post and showing that you care. Your post actually indicates you are concerned about not only the perception of the community, but the reality of the community’s viability and its interactions.
I look forward to where the game is taking us!
Incarnate,
I debated about whether I would reply to your thread, and became very conflicted. The reason being twofold: First, I’m a relative newbie to the game (account created in 2011, but not an active player until ~3-4 months ago); Second, I’m worried that my opinion and any information I disclose may result in “pissing some people off” in game, and I’d become a permanent grief target.
In full disclosure, I finally decided to reply because I’m a paying (subbed) player and I’d like for VO to be a fun place for me to be now, and in the future. I feel that the only way to do that is to contribute to important discussions. I also decided that since my second reason for hesitation, ironically(?), was centered around the reason for your post in the first place, I should "grow a pair."
DISCLAIMER: this post contains my OPINION(S) and I may present “facts” not in evidence. I’m also going to propose some OPINION based suggestions on how I think this toxicity could be moderated or guided toward positive community interaction and game-play features. By no means am I an authority on VO.
In “Identifying the problem” you stated that there used to be a “better average balance” between toxic and (I presume) non-toxic individuals in the game. I wonder though if that balance is a perceived balance or a real balance. Without statistics which you, understandably, keep close to the vest, there’s no way to do any analysis.
However, based on my interactions with people in the game, a large portion of the non-toxic population have likely: 1) left public channels altogether; 2) ignore public channels; 3) choose not to interact on public channels. I have asked in Guild chat if people see what’s being said on 100, the answer I generally get back from the (nicer) more senior members of the guild is “I left 100 years ago.”
This is a problem, and shameful! How is it that senior members/players chosen to not monitor, guide, mentor, and uplift new players? Yes I’m calling out my guild leaders (don’t hate!) because they miss prime opportunities to recruit excellent players with great attitudes and aptitude because they ignore the primary/default communication channel for the entire game!
Never fear, I’m not going to just reinforce your arguments… I’m also going to offer some suggestions:
Suggestion #1: Any Guild Commander/Lieutenant or Council Member must be on all public channels at all times. Period. As terms of guild ownership/leadership, they should be required to to assist with and ensure general rules of good behavior and good sportsmanship are being followed on public channels by their guild members. Give the leaders advanced control (and anonymous visibility) to /mute or /report actions that have been taken against their members, and log the leader’s responses. Abuse of authority or position, along with ignoring issues, should end in punitive action of de-throning, fines, or loss of capital assets. If a guild leader is being reported, justice should administered by the Devs and should be swift and brutal. Treat guild ownership and leadership as a privilege and a responsibility, not an entitlement.
Note #1.1: In general, guilds are too easy to create with little or no responsibility taken by leaders.
Suggestion #2: Address all (or as many as) possible means of circumvention of muting/reporting action. People get muted, they move to VODR, or an alt. Muting someone on chat should result in VODR muting as well as muting of all known alts. Muting someone should result in their inability to see the channel as well as talking on the channel. Seeing but not being able to respond only serves to wind the muted individual up even more.
Note #2.1: People are wayyyyy too sensitive.
Suggestion #3: Restricted chat channels. Channel 1 = Newbies and guides/helpers, Channel 100 = general audience, Channel 1000 = Player level 3 and up, Channel 5000 = Players over 4/4/4/4/4.
Add a “helper” tag, and let anyone that you see actually helping have it as a reward. Make it similar to Mentor. It’s very hard to mentor, because it’s a huge commitment -- I’m willing to mentor people and help them, especially newbies. Heck, I give away free gear in Itani space to newbies! But I don’t have the time to commit full-time. So I don’t ask people to /mentor invite me. Do away with the mentor system, or expand it to be something less obnoxiously commitment based. Maybe give “helpful points” rather than “good/bad” ratings?
Note #3.1: Sorry, but I’m only going to take people on 5000 seriously.
Note #3.1.1: You don’t sub? Honestly, your opinion doesn’t matter to me.
Note #3.2: Guides aren’t present. Fire them all. I didn’t even know we had guides???
I am concerned, because your email about toxicity was primarily communication channel based (in-game 100) vs. Forum usage, general game-play interactions, suggestions, bugs, etc. While 100 comes across as overly toxic at times, it’s actually a pretty fun channel most of the time. I have a good time talking to people, even teasing the self-titled “pirates” (youse pais for my fleas, or youse diez!) (which, double parenthetically, may be offensive to actual Ethiopian Princes, as I’ve been told that’s what they are pretending to be… but, I’m not the moral police, so… I will stop digressing...)
I’d like to address a couple of big-ticket items that I’ve noted, as a new player:
The Forum
The Forum is a great attempt to build community and to give people a (forum?) means to present issues, suggestions, ideas, or even bugs reports, but (IMHO), it’s failing to do all of those things. It is a hot-bed of debate and venting that never ends in resolution or productive results. I’ve now seen you lock threads (rightfully so, at times), ban people, and shut down grousing on more than one occasion. I’ve also seen you vent your frustration with the players, and air concerns where (opinion remember?) I would have advised maybe a little less transparency.
Bug Tracking
There are some bugs that just should not be made known. There are systems that track bugs a lot better than a forum can. People submit bugs without relevant use cases.
Game Play
You, and the other Devs, through the evolution of the game, have introduced changes to the system that directly impacts the way certain people play and their expectations for the game. Stating that the game would function a certain way, or fits into a specific niche sets a certain expectation. Evolving the game from that expectation upsets them. Most notably to myself, mining and trade are not twitch based gaming. I like to Mine and I like to Trade. I am capable of fighting, but it just isn’t my thing. I was “instructed” that this was a “twitch based combat game” and that I better “get used to it, because this isn’t a mining game.”
You introduced Capital Ships, which I think is a glorious idea! (I want one!) However, that impacts the (twitch based) expectation that a single combatant should be able to kill another single combatant. The fact that a Capital Ship is being flown by a single pilot and it’s perceived as a fighter that depends more on weapons-load-out vs. PvP “twitch skill” to take-down, seems to be at issue. You’ve adequately explained (for me, anyway) that you are working on bridging the gap with fighter weapons that will be released at some point in the future, but to those people, you’ve fundamentally changed their expected game play. I perceive that those individuals see their “years of subscribing” as an (if you’ll pardon my use of the term) investment in the game, and as an investor, you aren’t addressing their desires.
These people, (reminder, opinion) seem to suffer from False Consensus Bias. They utilize the forum to express “everyone’s” opinion that you messed up the game and when not “everyone” agrees, it’s upsetting to them.
You will never satisfy the expectations of these players, if you wish to continue developing the game in the direction that you seem to want to take it.
So-called "Griefing" and Piracy
When I first started, I was killed. Repeatedly. By the same individual. (Don’t worry, we’ve come to terms and we’re OK now. Until he reads this post, perhaps… hmm… :-) ) Was this griefing? I don’t know. But what I do know is that there aren’t enough “protections” to make certain game play “fun”. Again, maybe I should repeat to myself that “it’s not a mining game...”
Certain players are exercising what I can only call “loop-holes” which I can not adequately explain. These “loop-holes” allow them to kill other players in protected space. Without repercussions, and without the ability to defend ones-self.
Among the people I generally associate with, pirates are seen as “negative players” by non-pirate individuals. In my casual conversation, the only people that I know that actually think the pirates are cool are -- yep, you guessed it -- alts characters of a pirate.
Again, problems without suggestions? Not likely. Here are my suggestions:
Suggestion #4: Actively participate in the Forums. People suggest good ideas, and bad ones. If you really want to encourage dialog, don’t ignore them, even if all you say is “Thanks for the suggestion, we’ll look into it.”
I believe that the majority of people only ever read posts that you have replied to or started. Personally, I do not always read posts that you consider insignificant or not worthy of your time. You not responding means it won’t impact me or my game play. If you have responded, it means something might change.
As circumstantial proof, look at the number of replies to threads you are participating in vs. the ones you don’t. Not attacking, but let's be honest, you're super busy and lately you seem to reply to the threads that are going pear shaped more than those that are not. Bring some focus to the positive suggestions, no matter how stupid they are. :-)
Note #4.1: This is quite likely my problem and not pervasive.
Suggestion #5: Get a real bug tracking system, use it and expose it. Bugzilla? (or see suggestion #6)
Suggestion #6: Get a product road-mapping solution and use it. There are products that I have used in the past, and am currently using at work that are fantastic tools to engage with your customer base and help to guide the development of your product(s). One such tool allows people to suggest ideas, and the community can vote them up or down based on how they feel about them. You can also publish your public road-map, and people can comment and paying customers can help to guide development based on real-world input and feedback. I don’t work for any of these companies, nor do I recommend one over another, but if you want a few product names, reach out to me directly.
Note #6.1: This also helps do away with False Consensus Bias, as consensus is scored!
Note #6.2: Several of these products actually have bug tracking and submission
Note #6.3: Several of these products have more modern forum capability
Suggestion #7: Protected space should be better protected. Persons flagged as “known pirates” should not be able to fly past station guards without repercussions. Give them a “KoS ok” flag if they’ve declared themselves as pirates, or their actions represent that of piracy, and don’t afford them the protections of not being shot down just because their alignment is PoS or close to it. They’re pirates, how can they get PoS of any faction? Yes. Extortion of funds for protection, or Extortion of funds or death, or outright killing of others (especially newbies) is piracy.
Create a Pirate Faction, that doesn’t have assigned sectors. Assign “areas” within each of the Faction space. Maybe make pirates and Unrats get along?
Note #7.1: now, privateers… that’s another thought.
Note #7.1: Wormhole sectors between systems aren’t policed against piracy?
Note #7.1.1: Really? What nation doesn't patrol their borders?! :-)
In closing, I want to reiterate for those of you that just got pissed off by my suggestions -- this post was/is purely opinion, which I am willing to reconsider, given a halfway decent argument. Also, while I am a relative newbie to VO, I am not a newbie to 1) “the industry”, 2) supporting a (very) broad base of customers and products 3) how systems, services, and infrastructures are deployed, supported, and evolved.
Inc, thanks for the post and showing that you care. Your post actually indicates you are concerned about not only the perception of the community, but the reality of the community’s viability and its interactions.
I look forward to where the game is taking us!
1) It is too easy to dodge any current punishments, the threat of a mute may calm the tits of some PC players, but why would a mobile user care when they can just start over?
I know you're trying to call out issues you think may become a problem, but let's just say we thought a lot about this long before we ever shipped a Freemium or Mobile version, and we're aware of many options to help mitigate this. Let's not burn too much of the thread on this topic.
2) Stop hand-holding people - it has been done since the dawn of the loonyverse (Plus other people commenting on the lack of bans)
I agree with this, and again it's historically been an issue, but not lately. I never want to ban anyone, especially people who are clearly passionate about the game. But, times have changed, and I've banned people quite a lot in the last six months or so. The point is no longer whether I'm willing to ban people, but rather the extreme time-burn required for me to make the case for banning them. Tracking who has been warned, searching logs for what's historically been done. Once that's simplified, it's a lot easier to ban people (or, for that matter, just let the system itself ban people).
If someone robs a guild and you can see proof that this has happened?
So, I fundamentally disagree with this. I don't think espionage or theft, within the context of the game, is necessarily wrong. One might as well outlaw in-game piracy. Pretending to be someone else is super common in real-life as well. Obviously other games famously have this as well. I acknowledge that these issues can create a degree of inter-guild political toxicity that doesn't really improve chat. But, this issue is still tangential to chat, which is the main topic here.
I'd say your best shot at reducing toxicity is permanently banning (say, after one final warning) all the vets who have exhibited this "angst"
Well, that's the point of having the no-public-chat setting, to have some step between Banning and just not having to hear the constant drumbeat of embittered angst. Banning may eventually prove necessary, but it's a relatively easy step to be able to remove their public behaviour.
In response to the "no real life politics chat allowed" thing in particular: This sounds, to me, an awful lot like some unnecessary "there are some fine people on both sides" mental gymnastics.
I understand the natural tendency to frame things in the context of the USA, but I'm thinking a lot further ahead than that. I think EVE banned political discussions in large part because of their substantial Russian player base, and the vocal issues of anti-Putin vs pro-Putin groups (both from within Russia). We're looking at localizing the game in due course, and launching more thoroughly in other regions. There are a lot of different kinds of politics, in a lot of different places. The upcoming EU elections may be no less divisive than those in the USA. The point here is to remove the entire subject from the discussion, so VO can be a bit of a sanctuary from all of that. It's supposed to be entertainment.
Remen wrote a whole lot of stuff..
I appreciate the time it took to write all that out, especially on a mobile device, and I appreciate the feedback. Please understand, that a lot of your points are way beyond the scope of the current discussion, of simply trying to improve the tenor of in-game chat. But, many of your suggestions are sound, and many more of them are actually things we've either tried to do, or are still trying to do (like, for instance, our historical intent to use a public Trac, to show intended goals, is well-known). So, anyway, thanks, as always we have a lot more ideas than we have available resources to implement them. As for my Suggestion responses, someone should probably take a look at those threads that have actually been directly added into the game. I've rarely ever responded, before posting that they were added.
Let's try to keep this on-topic: We're just discussing improving IN-GAME CHAT.
I know you're trying to call out issues you think may become a problem, but let's just say we thought a lot about this long before we ever shipped a Freemium or Mobile version, and we're aware of many options to help mitigate this. Let's not burn too much of the thread on this topic.
2) Stop hand-holding people - it has been done since the dawn of the loonyverse (Plus other people commenting on the lack of bans)
I agree with this, and again it's historically been an issue, but not lately. I never want to ban anyone, especially people who are clearly passionate about the game. But, times have changed, and I've banned people quite a lot in the last six months or so. The point is no longer whether I'm willing to ban people, but rather the extreme time-burn required for me to make the case for banning them. Tracking who has been warned, searching logs for what's historically been done. Once that's simplified, it's a lot easier to ban people (or, for that matter, just let the system itself ban people).
If someone robs a guild and you can see proof that this has happened?
So, I fundamentally disagree with this. I don't think espionage or theft, within the context of the game, is necessarily wrong. One might as well outlaw in-game piracy. Pretending to be someone else is super common in real-life as well. Obviously other games famously have this as well. I acknowledge that these issues can create a degree of inter-guild political toxicity that doesn't really improve chat. But, this issue is still tangential to chat, which is the main topic here.
I'd say your best shot at reducing toxicity is permanently banning (say, after one final warning) all the vets who have exhibited this "angst"
Well, that's the point of having the no-public-chat setting, to have some step between Banning and just not having to hear the constant drumbeat of embittered angst. Banning may eventually prove necessary, but it's a relatively easy step to be able to remove their public behaviour.
In response to the "no real life politics chat allowed" thing in particular: This sounds, to me, an awful lot like some unnecessary "there are some fine people on both sides" mental gymnastics.
I understand the natural tendency to frame things in the context of the USA, but I'm thinking a lot further ahead than that. I think EVE banned political discussions in large part because of their substantial Russian player base, and the vocal issues of anti-Putin vs pro-Putin groups (both from within Russia). We're looking at localizing the game in due course, and launching more thoroughly in other regions. There are a lot of different kinds of politics, in a lot of different places. The upcoming EU elections may be no less divisive than those in the USA. The point here is to remove the entire subject from the discussion, so VO can be a bit of a sanctuary from all of that. It's supposed to be entertainment.
Remen wrote a whole lot of stuff..
I appreciate the time it took to write all that out, especially on a mobile device, and I appreciate the feedback. Please understand, that a lot of your points are way beyond the scope of the current discussion, of simply trying to improve the tenor of in-game chat. But, many of your suggestions are sound, and many more of them are actually things we've either tried to do, or are still trying to do (like, for instance, our historical intent to use a public Trac, to show intended goals, is well-known). So, anyway, thanks, as always we have a lot more ideas than we have available resources to implement them. As for my Suggestion responses, someone should probably take a look at those threads that have actually been directly added into the game. I've rarely ever responded, before posting that they were added.
Let's try to keep this on-topic: We're just discussing improving IN-GAME CHAT.
Understood. I merely intended to point out that "toxicity" isn't just chat. Chat is a symptom and a delivery mechanism utilized by a few toxic individuals.
In light of your suggestion to focus on chat, I stand by my suggestion that Guild leaders own some responsibility for those that fall under their wing. Give them access to the tools you are already going to develop, and hold them accountable for moderating the actions of their members. What's the point of leadership if they aren't leading by (or setting the) example, and advising proper behavior?
In light of your suggestion to focus on chat, I stand by my suggestion that Guild leaders own some responsibility for those that fall under their wing. Give them access to the tools you are already going to develop, and hold them accountable for moderating the actions of their members. What's the point of leadership if they aren't leading by (or setting the) example, and advising proper behavior?
I have mixed feelings on the total removal of politics. Yes, the game is an escape, but people who want to escape real-life shouldn't be on the off-topic channels anyway. So my vote would be to go forward with all the rest of it, but hold off on banning political discussion on public off-topic channels for a bit to see if it ends up actually being a problem. Maybe the improved moderation tools and channel segregation will suffice. If not, then politics can still be banned at that time. (Banning political discussion on the forum is fine by me. I'm just talking about in-game stuff.) But I understand if you'd rather just not bother.
I do, however, strongly feel that political discussion should be permitted via /msg, group, and guild chat. Those are scenarios where communication is basically private, voluntary, and usually between friends, so strict moderation is both unnecessary and harmful. Say I have a friend who's some sort of oppressed minority. They should feel welcome to talk about their situation with me over private messages or guild chat, even if it involves controversial politics. Especially if they're coming to VO because it's the one place that really feels like home to them or whatever -- which is exactly what will happen for some people if VO has a strong, healthy community. I understand and accept it if we cannot get things to a state where public political discussion can be allowed, but I see no reason to suppress it in private channels.
I do, however, strongly feel that political discussion should be permitted via /msg, group, and guild chat. Those are scenarios where communication is basically private, voluntary, and usually between friends, so strict moderation is both unnecessary and harmful. Say I have a friend who's some sort of oppressed minority. They should feel welcome to talk about their situation with me over private messages or guild chat, even if it involves controversial politics. Especially if they're coming to VO because it's the one place that really feels like home to them or whatever -- which is exactly what will happen for some people if VO has a strong, healthy community. I understand and accept it if we cannot get things to a state where public political discussion can be allowed, but I see no reason to suppress it in private channels.
I do, however, strongly feel that political discussion should be permitted via /msg, group, and guild chat.
Yeah, I'm just talking about publicly-accessible channels, forums and other systems.
Yeah, I'm just talking about publicly-accessible channels, forums and other systems.