south pacific islander Posted May 16, 2011 Share Posted May 16, 2011 Are you kind of a dick online? Do you worry if the populous likes you or not? I'm certian most of you have already said " Are you kidding me?" Or straight out laughed at the thought of caring about what other people think. Yet the almighty Dave o Steam seems to say that is so. Escapist seems to sum it up. http://www.escapistmagazine.com/news/view/110056-Valve-Discusses-Charging-Customers-Based-on-Popularity And a link the original interview, the topic are at the bottom of the page. http://www.develop-online.net/features/1192/Gabe-Newell-on-Valve Now a lot of us use steam, including myself. This not an announcement but just and idea. Yet is it a good idea? I personally think that it could turn into a 1984 for online gaming despite getting rid of trolls we have a few peoplee who do act trollish but are pretty decent most of the time. I personally think it's a form of ethical slavery that would go against Gabe's intention. But I rant, what are your thoughts if such a model was put into existence? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gollgagh Posted May 16, 2011 Share Posted May 16, 2011 that is a straight-up, godam, awful idea who the fuck thought this shit up Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
zircon Posted May 16, 2011 Share Posted May 16, 2011 I think it's a great idea. I can't stand people who act like asses just because they're playing games online. They deserve to be punished. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Toadofsky Posted May 16, 2011 Share Posted May 16, 2011 As much as I hate dealing with jerks on the internet, this is not a good idea. After all, what will stop people from giving each other bad ratings in an effort to get back at losing to someone? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
OceansAndrew Posted May 16, 2011 Share Posted May 16, 2011 Instead of punishing assholes, just make the players who are fun to play with get rewarded. How that can be measured isn't terribly easy, but it's good to see some thinking outside of the box in terms of these sort of things. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thylacine Posted May 16, 2011 Share Posted May 16, 2011 As long as a system exists, there will be someone who tries to abuse it. I don't know if I like this, even though I think the motivation behind it is fantastic and would solve the #1 problem of online multiplayer games. I can see someone getting ostracized unjustly because (s)he is a good player and people would want to eliminate that person from the game. It just seems to be giving power to ragequitters rather than the legitimate players. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
captaineegee Posted May 16, 2011 Share Posted May 16, 2011 I for one am curious about this. The fact that online gaming spawns such horrid behavior from people because of anonymity negatively effects what should be an enjoyable activity. I think this is a step in the right direction to show people who behave like ass-hats that there are consequences to their actions. Of course, I can also see this system being abused. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kenogu Labz Posted May 16, 2011 Share Posted May 16, 2011 You have to be very careful in designing these systems. The major problem is that the same trouble-makers they're trying to deal with are the same ones that tend to throw wrenches in little things such as, say, popularity and rating systems. Go see any site with a public rating structure and it'll be quite obvious that it rarely works if the ratings are publicly available to vote on. If they have some tricks up their sleeve, I'm all for it. Maybe they can bring some machine learning mechanics to bear, which may help weight honest users over rabid trolls, but not sure how such a system would be implemented. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cecilff2 Posted May 16, 2011 Share Posted May 16, 2011 Don't think it's a good idea. ability to neg/pos rep people online. Loser neg reps opposing team. Troll neg reps everyone. Only ability to pos rep. Steam groups dedicated to pos rep. System becomes meaningless. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ramaniscence Posted May 16, 2011 Share Posted May 16, 2011 Instead of punishing assholes, just make the players who are fun to play with get rewarded. How that can be measured isn't terribly easy, but it's good to see some thinking outside of the box in terms of these sort of things. That actually sounds like what's going on in the article, not the opposite: So, in practice, a really likable person in our community should get Dota 2 for free, because of past behaviour in Team Fortress 2. Now, a real jerk that annoys everyone, they can still play, but a game is full price and they have to pay an extra hundred dollars if they want voice. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BardicKnowledge Posted May 16, 2011 Share Posted May 16, 2011 I am all for the concept of rewarding polite, mature players. Zircon and I would still be playing HoN now if the community weren't largely made up of total jerks -- let's find a way to fix this before DotA 2, please. Edit: Related to this topic is how attitude affects e-sports: http://www.toptiertactics.com/2011/05/the-real-reason-e-sports-cant-go-mainstream-anytime-soon/ Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Upthorn Posted May 16, 2011 Share Posted May 16, 2011 As much as I hate dealing with jerks on the internet, this is not a good idea. After all, what will stop people from giving each other bad ratings in an effort to get back at losing to someone? Don't think it's a good idea.ability to neg/pos rep people online. Loser neg reps opposing team. Troll neg reps everyone. Only ability to pos rep. Steam groups dedicated to pos rep. System becomes meaningless. If you read the original interview, that is not what was proposed. The proposal was that valve looks for patterns in server population associated with particular users, so, if one guy logs on, and he attracts 30 people to the server because they want to play with him, he is rewarded for that. Meanwhile, if one guy logs on, and five people immediately disconnect because he is a spiteful jerk, he loses voice chat priveleges... This method of analysis is self balancing, because users don't have direct control over other players' reputations, and the guy who would get upset and want to downrep someone in revenge for being beaten is the one who other people are less likely to play with. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
big giant circles Posted May 16, 2011 Share Posted May 16, 2011 I can't say that the idea in effect will be a good idea, but as an idea, I think it's great. Seriously, charge $100 for the obnoxious 14 year olds who are abusing chat to actually have access to voice chat? Who wouldn't want to see that? Offering a feedback system for individual players is intuitive and innovative. There's kinks to work out, and implementing it would be experimental so that a good system could be set in place to keep things fair and prevent abuse, but I'm actually pretty thrilled to hear that an idea like this is even being discussed. And by Valve, no less. Pretty much every single thing Valve has thought up or put out there has benefit the industry. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Arek the Absolute Posted May 17, 2011 Share Posted May 17, 2011 I am all for the concept of rewarding polite, mature players. Zircon and I would still be playing HoN now if the community weren't largely made up of total jerks -- let's find a way to fix this before DotA 2, please.Edit: Related to this topic is how attitude affects e-sports: http://www.toptiertactics.com/2011/05/the-real-reason-e-sports-cant-go-mainstream-anytime-soon/ dota has the worst community in the world never goin to happen on topic: it will be interesting to see how this is implemented. this sounds like it will flop, but who knows. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Souliarc Posted May 17, 2011 Share Posted May 17, 2011 "Awful" is relative. Sure, you have the extremes, but where do you draw the line? How many people with a slight "edge" are going to miss out on rewards (which is a negative punishment)? Like in real life, you just have to deal with assholes. It just so happens that anonymity (like tinted windows for a person driving their car) let's people be more of an aggressive asshole. Interesting idea, but short of "stripping the tint" and exposing people's identities, I don't think there is much that can be done. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gollgagh Posted May 17, 2011 Share Posted May 17, 2011 It just so happens that anonymity (like tinted windows for a person driving their car) let's people be more of an aggressive asshole. I'm not entirely sure that I believe this in the first place I deal with a lot of assholes offline Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Souliarc Posted May 17, 2011 Share Posted May 17, 2011 I can't speak for everyone, but I have definitely encountered significantly more assholes, on average, online. It only seems natural that people tend to be more brash when their actions aren't paired with their identity. I have been guilty of this myself. But I feel you though. There are still plenty of assholes offline, which is makes it even more stunning. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
big giant circles Posted May 17, 2011 Share Posted May 17, 2011 I'm not entirely sure that I believe this in the first placeI deal with a lot of assholes offline I agree with Travis's sentiment though. People can and will be assholes whether public or anonymous, but in public, there are factors that tend to hinder people from being douchebags just for the hell of it, or for fun. It will still happen, sure, but the moment people are able to hide behind hundreds/thousands of miles of electrical signals and don't have to worry so much about getting arrested or having their asses kicked or being publicly shamed, they're going to put on their douche-hats without any need to think twice about it. Even if this idea gets tried out and turns out to be a horrible failure, I will forever FOREVER applaud Valve for having the balls to not tolerate blatant inconsideration and rudeness from the trash of the gaming community and trying to actually do something about it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Souliarc Posted May 17, 2011 Share Posted May 17, 2011 Even if this idea gets tried out and turns out to be a horrible failure, I will forever FOREVER applaud Valve for having the balls to not tolerate blatant inconsideration and rudeness from the trash of the gaming community and trying to actually do something about it. Word, brother Jimmy. Let the possible failure of this idea be a martyr for successful ones. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Brandon Strader Posted May 17, 2011 Share Posted May 17, 2011 Valve tries this idea 1 month later Profits down 1,000% Good people pay less, "bad" people don't pay Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Upthorn Posted May 17, 2011 Share Posted May 17, 2011 The theory is that a community full of jerks drives off a greater number of potential customers than the number of actual jerks in the community. The other theory is that a community full of people who are fun to play with can work as a selling point, causing more sales than the discounts provided. This can actually be ensured by making the discounts work like small percentage comission on the number of customers a player brings in. It is not that complicated, but it seems like a lot of people in this thread either just didn't get it, or aren't really concerned with knowing what they're actually talking about before speaking. (I'm hoping it is the former.) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Toadofsky Posted May 17, 2011 Share Posted May 17, 2011 The theory is that a community full of jerks drives off a greater number of potential customers than the number of actual jerks in the community.The other theory is that a community full of people who are fun to play with can work as a selling point, causing more sales than the discounts provided. This can actually be ensured by making the discounts work like small percentage comission on the number of customers a player brings in. It is not that complicated, but it seems like a lot of people in this thread either just didn't get it, or aren't really concerned with knowing what they're actually talking about before speaking. (I'm hoping it is the former.) No, I can get my head around it, I just still don't think it's a good idea. But I guess it's all in the implementation... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cecilff2 Posted May 17, 2011 Share Posted May 17, 2011 If you read the original interview, that is not what was proposed.The proposal was that valve looks for patterns in server population associated with particular users, so, if one guy logs on, and he attracts 30 people to the server because they want to play with him, he is rewarded for that. Meanwhile, if one guy logs on, and five people immediately disconnect because he is a spiteful jerk, he loses voice chat priveleges... This method of analysis is self balancing, because users don't have direct control over other players' reputations, and the guy who would get upset and want to downrep someone in revenge for being beaten is the one who other people are less likely to play with. I play L4D2 now and then. Do you know how often one team will ragequit because the other team outclasses them completely? And the better players will lose voicechat because of it? How does that make any sense? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lazygecko Posted May 17, 2011 Share Posted May 17, 2011 The theory is that a community full of jerks drives off a greater number of potential customers than the number of actual jerks in the community. After hearing about what the DotA community is like, and given that Valve is working on DotA2, I think I can understand their reasoning. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PriZm Posted May 17, 2011 Share Posted May 17, 2011 so my friend and I get a lot of heat online because we speak French on the mic. I can see how people who don't speak the language would not want to play with us, so I guess with this system I would be considered an asshole Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.