Ubisoft is not here for Rainbow Six Siege players’ toxic behavior

    
28

Remember last spring when Ubisoft said it was getting serious about cracking down on toxicity in Rainbow Six Siege? The company said it was improving upon its existing chat monitoring system to “ban players that use racial and homophobic slurs, or hate speech, in game,” booting players for at minimum two days and at maximum eternity for “language or content deemed illegal, dangerous, threatening, abusive, obscene, vulgar, defamatory, hateful, racist, sexist, ethically offensive or constituting harassment.”

In response to one player complaining he’d been banned for using a variation of the N-word, the Rainbow Six Siege twitter account replied, “Good. […] Games have rules, and we’re just asking you to follow them.” Of course, trolls then began responding to the Twitter thread with the same sorts of slurs and variations on the slurs intended to get around chat filters and slip past Twitter blockers. There are also plenty of folks thanking Ubisoft for cleaning up the game.

On Reddit, players have confirmed Ubisoft’s chat toxicity filter, arguing that it doesn’t actually stop most of the toxicity, like match-throwing and leavers, and that what’s needed is an Overwatch-style negative/posivitve rankings to encourage good behavior, not just weed out slurs.

Source: Twitter via Polygon. Thanks, Jack!
newest oldest most liked
Subscribe to:
Reader
Danny Smith

This is maybe the most obvious case of distraction PR i have seen in a good long time. Six mechanically is a fantastic game. Its problem however is not people saying mean things -because we can always mute an asshole- but the rampant team killing. I had over 2 dozen games in a row end in seconds to a tween turning on his team while screeching to ‘check out my epic youtube rage montages!’.

I dont’ know about you. But if someone starts screeching ‘nigger’ or ‘faggot’ then i mute them. I dont have to listen to that shit. But at least i can play a game. Siege’s team killing is so common and extreme that it effects the gameplay to such a degree everyone i know has dropped the game.
One of these you can ignore. Thats the one Ubisoft is trying to combat. Not the one that literally ruins the game, has been common knowledge since launch and they refuse to do anything about.

Is it good they want to make it less toxic? sure. But this is like a resturant expecting praise for removing a loud, drunken customer while the toilets upstairs are overflowing and dripping onto the other diners. Sure you did something but its not doing a damn thing about the actual thing driving business away.

Reader
Robert Mann

99.5 to 1 odds here that these bans tend to hit people doing that anyway…

Toxic and trollish behaviors tend to be done by the same people. Now, adding on that additional layer would be good too, but I just don’t think this is as pointless as people say.

Akufen
Reader
Akufen

Dedicated servers. Join servers with rules you like and mods who enforce them and this problem mostly goes away. Ah the good ole days.

laelgon
Reader
laelgon

I’m always amazed by the people who complain about bans for slurs.

It’s incredibly easy not to use them. See, I’ve written multiple sentences and not a slur in site. It’s almost like you have to try being racist or homophobic in order to write them…

It’s not being “too PC”, virtue signalling, being a snowflake, SJW, or too sensitive. It’s wanting some basic decency towards fellow people. Don’t let people devalue kindness and normalize intolerance.

Reader
Robert Mann

Indeed. Amazing that.

Reader
Castagere Shaikura

LOL trying to ban players from online FPS games is really funny. These guys make these kind of games then waste everyones time with post that they are going to fix it. These type of game attract these racist and sexist trash.

Reader
Kawaii Five-O

Their auto-ban list definitely needs some tuning. Certain racial slurs that are considered negative everywhere and very unlikely to by typed by accident–sure, ban away. However, in a game where frag grenades is an option to take as part of your kit, it’s pretty ridiculous to get auto temp banned for a word that could very easily be typo’d from “frag.” Context absolutely matters in that case.

Reader
Robert Mann

Or, if people are worried about it, they can type out fragment or fragmentation. Or even just use FG.

ihatevnecks
Reader
ihatevnecks

Or nade. Or grenade. Because the other grenades are typically referred to as things like “flash” and “smoke” and the like, rather than ” grenade.”

Alex Js.
Reader
Kickstarter Donor
Alex Js.

All that “toxicity” can be easily fixed in any game that uses matchmaking: just give people an option to “avoid this player”. Overwatch has finally re-added it, but having only 2 spots on that avoidance list is not enough. The list should allow at least 100 players to be added to it, with an automatic removal of players from such list if the players become inactive over a certain period of time.

Reader
Kickstarter Donor
Alex Willis

Outsourcing the entirety of moderation to the players is a cowardly move. I think the “Avoid” list should be a given for any game, but a company needs to take active steps on top of that.

Reader
Cosmic Cleric

Outsourcing the entirety of moderation to the players is a cowardly move.

It’s also a cost saving move.

Companies that create virtual spaces, need to police them, regardless of the costs involved. It’s their responsibility, as the owners of the space.

Alex Js.
Reader
Kickstarter Donor
Alex Js.

I’m not talking about the entirety – company should definitely ban the cheaters or people who use racial slurs and such. It’s just “avoid this player” will work much faster than any kind of manual reporting.

Reader
Robert Mann

My preference is server shifting. That is, servers where the toxic people can enjoy their own company leaving everyone else free to play. Oh, and if the developers want to make things less fun there, I really don’t care!

Forget 100 players, just have a reviewed reporting and send the people who cannot behave to their own little prison.

Reader
Kickstarter Donor
Patreon Donor
Loyal Patron
Ashfyn Ninegold

Finally. A company not afraid to say, “You’re banned? Good.”

Reader
Sunken Visions

Toxic games attract toxic players. Promoting anti-social behavior within a game and then chastising players for being terrible to everyone is hypocritical at best.

Reader
Kickstarter Donor
Alex Willis

Disagree. If you’re watching football and one player tackles another, it is not hypocritical to say to the audience in attendance, “don’t tackle each other.”

People are smart enough to distinguish Real from Not-Real in 99% of circumstances. If you can’t be a decent citizen of the world while consuming some entertainment that depicts something we aren’t normally allowed to do, then you’ve got deep problems.

Reader
Sunken Visions

You have absolutely no idea what I’m talking about. Toxic behavior isn’t remotely related to people confusing simulated violence with real violence. Read Lord of the Flies and maybe you’ll start to understand what leads to toxic behavior.

Reader
Kickstarter Donor
Alex Willis

A wildly condescending response PLUS a vague pre-internet lesson plan. I’m sure you are a lot of fun at parties.

ihatevnecks
Reader
ihatevnecks

Maybe that’s because you never actually said what you’re talking about? You were asked what anti-social behavior is being promoted by this cooperative team-based multiplayer online video game, and didn’t bother to answer.

But sure, be Mr. Pedestal over there.

Reader
Kickstarter Donor
Loyal Patron
Jack Pipsam

What anti-social behaviour do you think is being promoted within the game?

Reader
Arktouros

Toxicity is like slime. You can cover it up, but then it’s just got ooze out of the sides and come out in new ways. When you’re thinking of solutions to it you have to keep that slime fluid mindset. While this solution certainly works at removing the people who can’t help themselves, people will learn and adapt and it’ll come out in new ways.

My first thought at the solution would use data analysis to create behavior patterns (beyond just text but also in game self destructive behavior) and then pair those people up against each other in matchmaking. This way the slime congeals together creating a sort of “toxicity jail” style effect where those players are stuck playing with each other while your over all populace isn’t as affected.

Reader
Cosmic Cleric

My first thought at the solution would use data analysis to create behavior patterns (beyond just text but also in game self destructive behavior) and then pair those people up against each other in matchmaking. This way the slime congeals together creating a sort of “toxicity jail” style effect where those players are stuck playing with each other while your over all populace isn’t as affected.

Not necessarily disagreeing with you, but its been my observation that companies are VERY reluctant to split up the player base, as to not increase queue times. They’re more afraid of the bad p.r. and reputation of long queues, than of normal players being forced to play with toxic players. Unfortunately.

Reader
Arktouros

Would depend on the scale of the game, for sure, to even justify the cost of data analytics in the first place.

Reader
Cosmic Cleric

Yep. But I wasn’t speaking about justifying the costs to implement your idea. I was speaking more towards pure raw population numbers, and how long the queue times would be if a small population got split up even smaller, and the “stink” of having a low-pop game, for sales and rep.

Reader
Loyal Patron
Patreon Donor
Armsbend

It must be exhausting basing your business on gamers. There is a lot of money to be made – but is it really worth it to entertain the worst humanity has to offer?

Reader
Kickstarter Donor
Alex Willis

**gestures broadly at the internet**
A moderator, a moderator, my kingdom for a moderator.

Reader
Utakata

But, but, freeze peaches and toxicity in quotes! Game companies are becoming granny states! You can never wash slime away, why bother…

“…so Jessica Price?”

That’s different! Banhammer her away!

/bleh