Have you ever been trolling on purpose, from beginning of the game?
You see, trolling in comments or something like that is not harmful :D it actualy can be funny, but in games, when somebody really invests time in that... and it's group of people... ehh
Comment has been collapsed.
Oh I certainly agree. Some people are just assholes. I imagine these are also the same type of people who torture stray cats or vandalize for fun.
Comment has been collapsed.
Or talk in movie theaters, or loudly speaks through the phone in buses.... hate them :D
Comment has been collapsed.
Interesting fact: The thing that inhibits harming animals is the same thing that inhibits harming humans. The correlation between humans willing to injure animals for fun or recreation and those who will go out of their way to injure other humans [serial killers, terrorists, etc] is firmly and long-standingly verified. In short, you can say that such individuals lack empathy, which is what allows them to harm animals- and, if they feel they can get away with it, humans. In other words, if you know someone who harms animals for any reason other than sustenance, not only should you be wary, but you should report them to the FBI immediately (as they will track such individuals in preparation for their seemingly inevitable decline toward human-based crimes).
Likewise, another interesting, related fact is, that's actually the core reason why animal cruelty became accepted as a crime [within the United States]. Laws already existed preventing damage to animals as property, but there was little concern for the well-being of the animals for their own sake, with arguments to that effect being regularly dismissed.
Thus, from the 1820s onward, animal cruelty laws were heavily shaped around the understanding that such acts seemed to trend toward escalation (a theory which has since then been and reliably and consistently confirmed).
Initially, the societal concern about cruelty to animals contained mixed motives. While some did not believe moral duties were owed to animals, they did accept that cruelty to animals was potentially harmful to the human actor, as it might lead to cruel acts against humans. Thus, the concern was for the moral state of the human actor, rather than the suffering of the non-human animal.
In short, you're not calling them assholes, you're calling them psychopaths.
Given how rampant such behaviors are, I can only desperately hope that's not an accurate consideration. :S
Comment has been collapsed.
Well here's the interesting thing, from my point of view. I lack empathy, pretty much in everything(let's give it a number, say 90%), and I also score pretty highly on most "psychopath tests" however, I would never go out to ruin someone's enjoyment like that; the reason for this is simply that I wouldn't like someone to do it to me, so lack of empathy is pretty irrelevant in that respect.Oh, and it would make me a douchebag, and as a psychopath I tend to have a pretty high level of.....shall we call it, self-worth?
I am also, phew, not of the serial killing disposition. I have read quite a lot on this and, like a lot of experts(not saying I am one, obv.) I agree that "psychopath" is a particular personality type, and thus has a spectrum along which everyone sits with most being very low down on it. The problem seems to occur when people with this personality type have things happen to them, esp. around age 7-18, but not solely. This causes mental issues that, when coupled with the personality type, lead to the more commonly accepted "psychopath" definition or characterisation.
There's a decent book that describes this in relation to the ex-SAS soldier and successful author, Andy McNab. Check it out on Amazon: The Good Psychopath's Guide to Success.
As I had a pretty good, if uneventful childhood, I am your common or garden psychopath who does not want to strangle you Scottie or dismember you dachshund.
Sorry for carrying on this off-topic bit, but I think it's interesting....
As for trolls, I firmly believe that it's the internet's fault - when they made the internet they didn't install enough bridges for the trolls to live under, so now the homeless darlings have to wanted the internet forever....poor lambs.
Oh, and I only troll when I see someone posting something so ridiculous that before I even know my fingers are dancing across the keyboard, and I think that's the case with quite a few people, no matter their personality type.
Finally, I don't agree that all trolls are psychopaths....most are either doing it because the need and seek attention, or because they can and no-one can stop them, or know who they are; internet anonymity is essential and has a lot of good points, but this is definitely where it causes MOST of the issue.
TL:DR Psychopath=bad - is lazy and provably not true......in most cases.
Comment has been collapsed.
How do you feel about harming animals though?
Let's start with insects and move on to mammals.
Comment has been collapsed.
I have two cats...so that's more their territory than mine....AND they don't just kill them, they like to torture them and then slowly mutlilate them until they get bored, then they eat them!!!
Comment has been collapsed.
While the words "psychopath" and "sociopath" are often used interchangeably, or have definitions that differ by the individual philosophizing over them, you're what I've most commonly seen referred to as a sociopath. You're socially aware and capable of logical thought; you may be anti-social in some respects, but you don't have any urges toward aggression, destruction, or so forth, and your sense of self worth means you don't do anything that'd sabotage yourself, in the manner that a psychopath would.
In sum, the most common distinction between the labels is that psychopaths lack rationality and a conscience- that is, understanding of right and wrong- along with lacking empathy, while sociopaths only lack empathy.
Regardless of how easily you can get a clear label to apply to yourself, the general spectrum you're indicating does seem to actually be relatively common, as those things go. So, much like the distinction between autistic disorder and the wide range of autistic spectrum, it's not really something best suited for a single label.
Finally, I don't agree that all trolls are psychopaths
That was just doc making a joke. :P
Psychopath=bad - is lazy
Generally, in its common use as an insult, yes. But I wasn't intending it toward that use; psychopathy (as opposed to sociopathy) is always negative in connotation, within scientific application. Moreover, I wasn't defining a label, regardless of how consistently it is used for negative applications- I was detailing a clearly recognized connection between all forms of animal abuse, and then labeling that circumstance by the label I've always seen it receive.
Regardless of how you view psychopaths, the facts that were detailed have been validated over 200 years, and thus should be given careful consideration. So long as you don't have a desire to go around injuring animals, then it really doesn't matter what you call yourself or what others think of the labels, since you're clearly not within the framework in question.
In any case, in the meantime, you've the circumstance us on the autistic spectrum have- over better defined sub-labels, you've your own lump label of "antisocial personality disorder" to run with, lacking any of the confusions (and implications) inherent with the other labels. That's generally a safer term to argue over than trying to convince a consistent definition for psychopath and sociopath, given how varied their use has been up to this point. Though, if you are going to go that route, it may be more worthwhile to argue in favor of sociopath than psychopath, given the nature of their most common distinction.
Comment has been collapsed.
Firstly, apologies - in no way was I trying to argue with you. I was merely trying to add some interesting points to the discussion from my own POV.
As for sociopaths - I thought they were, to stereotype - not that smart. Ego running rampant here, but I am. As for what you say about me in para 1 of your reply, that's a fairly accurate summary.
Your liking it to the Autism spectrum is also true, and something I have read and have friends who have experience of that. I also have a friend who has what he likes to call "a touch of Aspberger's", which is also part of that spectrum, I believe....so I find that pretty interesting too.
As for my finally comment..I know it was a joke, honest, hence why I followed it up with my attempt at a joke with the "bridges".
And as for the animals connection - absolutely. That might be the strongest link between almost all dangerous psychopaths.
Anyway, thanks for the interesting reply.....
Comment has been collapsed.
As for sociopaths - I thought they were, to stereotype - not that smart.
To the contrary, I've seen them more often characterized as being above-average in intelligence, as they're expected to approach things through careful analysis of cost-benefit, rather than basing their decisions as heavily off of emotions, and they lack the irrationality characteristic of psychopaths.
The image I'm attaching below is a fairly recent example of usage of the word, and a very clear example of what a sociopath is generally associated with (and if you haven't, go give BBC's Sherlock a watch - as he says, he's high-functioning, so empathy is difficult rather than impossible for him, but he does indicate a lot of characteristics typically associated with the label [and, of course, rather significantly emphasizing the high degree of analytical skills typically associated with the label :P] ).
That might be the strongest link between almost all dangerous psychopaths.
It certainly does seem that way. Plus side, any excuse for limiting human bigotries is something to appreciate, even if the context contributing to such is a rather morbid one.
Comment has been collapsed.
Re your friend, you can look up Autism Spectrum Disorder, there's a lot of things there, and anything Autismy is not exactly a clinical definition, everybody is different etc. "A touch of" is of course also possible.
Comment has been collapsed.
Yes, I have a friend who has an Autistic son, so I have quite a lot of "knowledge" from her and from spending time with her son....he's a great lad.
Comment has been collapsed.
it feels like some kind cybernetic zombie issue.
yes, that's what it is.
How to understand trolling?
You don't
Comment has been collapsed.
I get trolling the enemy team, psychological warfare is effective.
Trolling your own team is just weird.. who enjoys losing? That's a massive waste of time to (possibly) create a new account, level it enough to play competitive matches, wait in queue.. then purposely lose while trolling your own team..
But it still happens >.>
Comment has been collapsed.
people get banned on sites of forums like this, but not on games
You can't just ban somebody from a game they paid $60 for like you can ban them from a forum. Well, if you don't want to refund them their loss of course.
(Depending on your ToS / EULA, which your player might or might not have agreed to, you might or might not have assigned yourself the right to ban them for to-be-defined misdemeanor, and all that might or might not be a binding legal contract between you and your player, depending on where they live and how they bought the game and so on.)
Comment has been collapsed.
Overwatch banned trolls and cheaters without a bat of an eye, spending money doesn't give someone the rights to ruin another 4 (not counting the enemy team) player's game who also paid the same 60$ :)
Comment has been collapsed.
Blizzard, Valve, Rockstar typically don't ban "without batting an eye", but rather do time-delayed ban waves that ensure the offender can keep cheating a bit before they have to buy a new account?
Comment has been collapsed.
without batting an eye
"show (or showing) no surprise or concern." it's not time releated, it just means that returning player, new player, doesn't matter.
Comment has been collapsed.
it's not the reason they do not ban straight away. Talking from personal experience - I used to run bot-farm in my WoW days, so can tell you how Blizzard handles these things ;p Thing of the matter is cheat/hack developers constantly upgrade their software to be undetectable by anti-cheat systems. The moment it's found out that some premium hack/bot/cheat is compromised and detected it's taken offline to minimize damage and they start working on upgrade that will make it undetectable again. Because of that banning straight away after you detect cheat is counter-effective, you spend a lot of time fighting cheat/hack - you want to make the biggest hit possible. That's why even after they start detecting cheat software they will not start sending bans - they will wait for some time, few weeks usually. In few weeks time most of people aho are using cheat will use it even once, this way they can gather almost all people using cheat, let's say 95%. If they started banning right away they would get a few % - because rest would be offline,m not playing/cheating this particular day, be in different time zone, and by the time rest of cheaters would cheat the program would already be taken offline. For the cost of letting cheaters roam freely for week or two longer they are able to ban almost all of them, otherwise they would end up banning only a few.
Comment has been collapsed.
That's not the problem, I've just got a guy that was just jumping off the map, over and over again, sometimes stoping to spam 'hello' command, so I was aware that he was literaly doing that by himself not by a bot
Comment has been collapsed.
It was actually short for:
"Hello cliff, my old friend.
I've come to jump off you once again.
Because a vision softly creeping
Left its seeds while I was sleeping
And the vision that was planted in my brain
Still remains
Within the sound of trolling"
Clearly, the individual was disturbed.
Comment has been collapsed.
And to the both of these, I can still say - original is better :D but appreaciate the creativity
Comment has been collapsed.
:points to attached image:
I credited the best version!
But, y'know, it was just a bit more of a challenge to make a pun off that one. :P
Comment has been collapsed.
Ah, I don't know why I didn't notice the image :D
Still, effect is cool :p
Comment has been collapsed.
I don't play multi-player games so I can't really say much - but it seems to me that simple trolling is more about attention-seeking from children whose parental units don't pay them enough attention. Sheesh, the other day I saw some middle-aged guy walking his dog while on his phone - yeah, that - we've become a race of human beings more attached to our devices than the human beings (and animals) around us. And our children are suffering as a result. Plus, just look at the US Orangutan President - heck, he can't stay away from Twitter. Need I say more?
Comment has been collapsed.
Yeah, I guess there's something about it... we have few politicians too that prove they should be banned from using twitter or facebook, because they're just too dangerous with it... maybe they just don't understand how it works
Comment has been collapsed.
Sheesh, the other day I saw some middle-aged guy walking his dog while on his phone
If this is your example of the sky falling we're probably good for a while yet :P
Comment has been collapsed.
I never said the sky is falling - but your response is the perfect example of "Let's see how uncivil I can be to another person".
Comment has been collapsed.
You reminded me why I dropped from playing semi-professionally in Dota 2 and switched to playing casual multiplayer with friends.
Not worth it to get mad over stupidity of others :3.
Comment has been collapsed.
Easy to say... but there's always a 10th or 20th game when it breaks you and you just have enough ;p
Comment has been collapsed.
It kinda depends on the game ... if its just some random pub games ... i dont mind trolls at all ... as long as there are no ranks or anything similar on the like ( take MMR in dota for example ) ... i couldnt care less .
Everyone find fun in their games in a different way .
Being a toxic piece of shit is one such way ...
Thats how i used to be in an MMO i played , everyone called me Troll3D ( play on my actual nickname there Bloom3D) , just cause i was doing everything humanly possible to mess around with everyone and everything .
There is massive difference between Trolling and Game ruining tho . Messing around and doing stupid stuff that doesnt contribute in any way to the objective of the game can be considered trolling ... however if you just kill your teammates , actively prevent them from doing such objectives , constantly feed yourself causing the enemy team to gain advantage cause of your actions ... thats game ruining :)
Comment has been collapsed.
That's the point, I don't get how you can get pleasure out of it, normaly I would think it's some kind of perv thing, or mental issue... but with THAT MANY players?
Comment has been collapsed.
As I understand it, when someone is very deeply unhappy with their own life, they can find it more enjoyable to make others unhappy, than to try and find happiness on their own. (ie, 'if my life sucks, so should yours', but in the pettiest possible implementation of that.)
Comment has been collapsed.
Thats indeed one take on it :)
Like for example i had 2 horrible games in a roll so im picking techies ... now i will have fun while 9 other people will suffer for about an hour to 3 >.>
Comment has been collapsed.
Well as i said everyone find enjoyment from their games in different ways :)
Some like being a toxic piece of shit :D
I dont play any form of FPS games cause i despise the genre to begin with so i dont have much experience with such players ... the only multiplayer thing i play recently its just dota tbh ... and there is not much room for trolling per se there ... Unless you are playing with friends , doing stupid stuff is almost always game losing , and thats why such players tend to be somewhat of a Rarity ...
Comment has been collapsed.
Good we have community here that when they feel something wrong they GIVE and that makes them feel better :) like in events Pay it forward or You're not alone
Comment has been collapsed.
People just like to do bad things if they know there are no consequences.
Ignore/mute anyone you can and try to enjoy the game. Trying to understand others will give you a headache :P
Comment has been collapsed.
Yeah, muting is one thing, but that's not always about talking, gameplay itself can be trolled, destroyed
Comment has been collapsed.
Yeah I know what you mean. I've stopped playing certain online games because no one would take it seriously and it would ruin the game.
I hope it gets better for you!
Comment has been collapsed.
A craving for attention?
I have no idea. I barely ever play multiplayer games.
Comment has been collapsed.
Rocket League [...] but for me it's just ridiculus, so are creators most of the time doing nothing about that, how can people get banned on sites of forums like this, but not on games generating hundreds of thousands of dolars?
I contacted RL's support department about the rampant toxicity, idle-farming, and trolling that has escalated over the past year and become the dominant feature of most matches. RL's team has constantly been informed by users about matching issues in ranked, the lack of matchmaking in casual, copious server issues, Rumble mode bugs, and more..
And they've nonstop dismissed all those- in the case of my own attempts to contact them, they made it clear they didn't care about fixing those things at all. Given Psyonix's reputation for not fixing things in their previous game, Nosgoth, it bodes pretty poorly for the game.. and it's to the point where I've uninstalled the game (technically for a second time, as I reinstalled it to play Dropshot).
The game is just a hot mess [for online play], and it's solely due to the developer's mismanagement of it, as the core components are some of the most enticing of any game I've ever played.
So, why do devs not care? Probably because they don't have to: Games these days have buy-in, micropurchases [cosmetics], esports, crates, and/or subscriptions. When a large portion of profits comes from micropurchases/esports/crates, for the simple-minded, profit-eager developer, these payment elements don't give them the motivation to go back and fix core elements- they're not getting paid to do so, by their thinking, and so all they need to do is focus on the approaches which are getting them continued payments. Focus on the core game? Nah, they've got their $20, screw the core players. More gaudy cosmetic crates, esports- that's where the money is at.
(It's basically similar to the DLC > core game approach some other games have.)
While I haven't played in months, Brawlhalla was the absolute worst in that regard- the game had become pretty profoundly unplayable, between server issues and toxicity and trolling (think less Rocket League and more inching toward the disrepute of Town of Salem's notorious "community"), and the devs solely cared about releasing more $5+ cosmetics and their competitive elements, rather than fixing any core issues.
And, yeah- Brawlhalla is a F2P game, so even as unpleasant as it got, it has some excuse [though there's probably no excuse for ToS, free or not- the developers regularly lied to us about things since beta, the game became unstable and ad-spammed, and the community became so toxic and cheat-prone that regardless of it functioning well for private matches, the game still can't really be excused :X]. But with Rocket League, it's both billed as an online game, and has a buy-in. Even putting aside community toxicity, there should be some degree of commitment to fixing game and server related elements (as that's what we presumably paid them for..).
In the end, I want to say I can't fathom why developers behave the way they do.. but, no, I think I can pin it down rather easily:
A lack of pride in their work, combined with a dedicated, simple-minded approach to pursuing profits above anything else.
Clearly, creativity doesn't necessarily go hand-in-hand with respectability.
Comment has been collapsed.
So... it's kinda our fault, we have vote as long as we don't have our copy and that vote are our money. We have chance to vote as long as we know nothing about it... So maybe f2p p2w system is an answer, get developers worry about their income to make them care, If some of they would start to disapear from the market due to lack of funds maybe few would appreaciate carring about their users.
Maybe piracy wouldn't be so bad if it could work on multiplayer games, but unfortunately it touches only small developers that creates single player games, mostly indie and tries to create as complex game as possible. because it is work of their lifes.
Comment has been collapsed.
The problem is how permissive we've become toward such attitudes. Everyone I know that used to play Brawlhalla- including over a hundred people that I met through the game itself- stopped playing it solely 'cause things kept escalating. Very few of them tried contacting Brawlhalla staff over it to complain.
With RL, I regularly see people excusing the developers for not updating the game, with nonsensical comments like 'but the game is so good! what if it has a few flaws!'. Yet, those same people seem to inevitably drift away from it over time due to those negative factors, as much as any other player I become familiar with.
Developers not fixing online games has become all too familiar a thing, and the normal response seems to have become 'eh, this is too much to deal with, on to the next game' rather than 'the developer should really put in some minimal fixes, what did I pay for'.
Meanwhile, griefers have become assured by this trend of developers ignoring them, confident that they'll never get into any trouble (and in each of the three games I mentioned, griefers openly bragging about the fact that they've done their behavior for extended periods of time without punishment is a normal occurrence). It has become a permissive social element, the same way using bigoted slurs or references to tragedy in casual ways is.
Think of it like Steam reviews, or Steam greenlight- because Valve never does anything, those continue to fester with negative elements, with recent greenlight releases actually actively violating Valve's ToS [in regards to content not primarily existing for the purpose of hate speech elements or concepts]. Hell, Valve isn't the only one- considering how many user game tags on Steam games are inaccurate (despite users being able to flag them as incorrect), it's hard to imagine people ever take the time to really complain all that hard to Valve over Valve's own obligations, if they're not even taking the time to follow up on their own. :X
So, in short? I guess the real responsibility lies with all of us, who don't take the time to stress our concerns, and accept negative behaviors as normal.
But hey- at least none of this is as bad as Rise of Mythos, where, when female players asked the developers to add in a block user function because males were stalking them in-game threatening to find where they lived, murder, and rape them, staff replied as follows: "Males will be males, it's not a woman's right to complain. We won't change things for such a stupid reason. Learn your place, and don't bother us with such nonsense again."
If we don't hold a developer accountable for that, then by gods, no wonder we don't hold them accountable for anything else..
Comment has been collapsed.
I couldn't agree more. The problem is, when you do complain, people around you think you're an entitled asshole. A friend had his bike "fixed" in a shop, the guy basically broke the bike, but my friend doesn't dare going back to the shop to ask for his money back, and even less to ask for the shop to pay for the bike. That wouldn't be a nice thing to do, you see, what would people think when you're telling an idiot he's an idiot, poor guy, he could loose his job, ... When I say that maybe he should loose his job and that would prevent other people from having their bike broken in the same way, I'm the grumpy guy. Go figure :)
Comment has been collapsed.
Oh wow, I played that game years ago when I was always on Kongregate. I had a theory about games like that one and their companies (Russian and Chinese mostly). Their microtransactions and super inflated prices for random loot are actually money laundering operations for stolen credit cards/funds that the "whales" use. It's been a while but I had found some suspicious connections to game developer purchases and bankruptcy filings acting as fronts and insurance/tax redemption in other countries like Germany by Changyou the owners of Gamefuse and Mythos to further obfuscate and clean funds. Sorry a bit off topic but I would love to take that company down even more after reading your post >:O
Comment has been collapsed.
I know about money laundering allegations with the streaming site Azubu, the site overall was so pointless that that seemed like the only explanation.
I suppose in Germany there might be special tax breaks? Dunno.
Comment has been collapsed.
Why do you call microtransactions micromanagement?
I think with RL the problem is that it's just impossibly successful. I found it mildly entertaining in the ~20 hours I played before it became a paid game, but I expected it to launch as F2P and already noted during the very long test phase that the developers barely did anything, and certainly put near-zero effort into matchmaking users in any fair or sane way.
Developers not fixing online games has become all too familiar a thing
If anyone wants to research this phenomenon, there's not only the obvious successful F2P and near-F2P titles, but also things like FIFA with its own pay2win mode that showcase that the more money a game makes, the less effort is invested into improving the player experience (or the gameplay for that matter).
content not primarily existing for the purpose of hate speech
I shouldn't ask, but what hate speech simulators exactly are dominating the Steam charts?
Comment has been collapsed.
Just like for hateful people in real life, as a player, you don't need to understand them but to protect yourself.
Just skip games that aren't effective at offering options to avoid exposure to toxic behaviors.
Comment has been collapsed.
Sounds like the perfect solution. Abandon everything that doesn't perfectly fit your own sensitivities :P
Comment has been collapsed.
There's your answer
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=efHCdKb5UWc
Comment has been collapsed.
"And... I don't get it, can really somebody explain to me, how it can feel good?" It isnt so much the throwing the game that feels good, its the reactions you get. A win is pretty common. Some guy thats throwing a temper tantrum is different, and might be more interesting than an actual win.
I wont lie, Ive been known to throw a game or two if someone is giving me the impression their reaction to lossing would be more interesting than actually winning (someone with an obvious short fuse, or being rude/cocky/pushy). But I should throw out there, I dont go around harassing anyone (or typing/speaking most of the time), so at the end of the day all youre losing is some of your time
edit: Should have added, I play League, not Overwatch, and I dont throw ranked/rated games.
Comment has been collapsed.
^This right here, they get bored of toying with the game, winning or losing loses meaning to them and why try a different thing when they already have something at their disposal. So they toy with people's reactions instead. Obviously they wouldn't answer you why they are doing it, because they are in their safe zone, they can do what they want and you can't touch them.
The developers can't really do anything to fix this problem as games are a venting thing, so if you put heavy restrictions there, these gamers would just find another source to express themself, or do you expect the developers to fund a project to teach these players about discipline and respect? What I'm trying to say is the problem is bigger at it's core and fixing the small things changes nothing
Usually at higher ranks you will find there aren't many trolls (due to throwing games not allowing them to climb), but there are still players with negative attitudes and flamers.
Comment has been collapsed.
I wont lie, Ive been known to throw a game or two if someone is giving me the impression their reaction to lossing would be more interesting than actually winning
That's just ... Wow. Ready to throw a game for 10 people just to toy with one of those, based on an impression that it might be funny ? I'd be curious to know how you could justify something like that outside of a "I just don't give sh*t about others" pitch ...
Comment has been collapsed.
You see, I get it, making bigger idiots out of idiots and making them mad for any reasons they deserve, I get it, talking to offensive, agressive people to make them understand how dumb they sound and give them part of their own stupidity to make them angry at themselves and their statements is like one of my favorite hobby IRL.
But never when it can hurt in any way people that happened to be in that time in that place and did nothing wrong. Like in OW there's group of 10 other people trying to enjoy the game, there's no reason to drag them into my personal crusade against proofs that Darwins evolution theory doesn't work on everybody. :P
Comment has been collapsed.
I probably should have mentioned I dont throw ranked/rated games (I play League instead of OW). So when Im in casual/normal games, and they arent losing ranks or rating, all theyre losing is some of their time, and I dont see wasting their time as hurting them.
Comment has been collapsed.
ah, that changes everything :) in Overwatch quick matches are just center of funny plays, jokes and weird actions, there's not too many people that takes QM seriously :p but it's really fun because of it
Comment has been collapsed.
It really depends on what you see as trolling. In league of legends, when playing a champion that isn't intended to be played on certain lanes, if you play them on those lanes you're labelled a troll.
If it's not ranked but only a normal, I personally don't understand why people get salty about that. Those games are for fun, and if those people wanna try out champs in a way that wasn't intended for that champ, I don't care - go for it!
Of course we're probably gonna lose, but sometimes losing a game while trying out something new is A LOT more fun than winning it the same boring way as always. Since it's only normal games, there isn't anything you gain from winning anyway.
On the other hand in ranked, I understand when such people are named as trolls. Don't try out new stuff in ranked games... take it serious!
In that case I've often crossed paths with people who had been trolled themselves and just wanted to pass on their anger to the next random people they get matched up with. They literally said stuff like "I just lost my promotion because of trolls, so you guys are gonna lose your rankeds because of trolls now, too"
Or people just really want to destroy other people's days, as ugly as that is. Some seem to get some weird satisfication from that, even though they'll never know if it actually worked.
Comment has been collapsed.
In that game particularly, trying out something new happens much less than picking something intentionally bad in the hope that your teammates quit before the game starts so you can get a new match and have the role you want, or similar :>
(After many years of having to agree on player roles on the fly with your matched teammates, a patch introduced free role selection instead, and then another semi-recent patch made it possible to be assigned a role you don't want to play. The newly-entitled playerbase gets so upset over this that they commonly intentionally sabotage their own team in protest.)
Comment has been collapsed.
that happens too, of course, but that's not the actual "trolling" that we're talking about in this post, in my eyes. They don't plan on playing that game in most cases. That mostly happens in ranked when they want someone else to lose lp for quitting, because they don't like their teammates or their picks.
Also commonly happens when their mums want them to come down for dinner. They just hope someone else quits the game, and that works in 80% of the cases.
What I meant was intentional picks for actually playing with that champs ^^ Like... in normal I play Teemo supp sometimes. He's not intended to be in that role, but it's a lot more fun than playing the champs I'm good at anyway in a game I'm not gonna gain anything from.
Many would label that as trolling, I wouldn't. Even though it's uncommon and I'd never do it in ranked, I play it with the full intention of winning, and it also works often because of the good vision and poke.
What I would rather label as trolling is the typical case I got a few days ago. ADC selects new champ as preffered champ. Teammates banned said champ, ADC goes Yasuo adc and runs into their tower, frequently dying on purpose. That guy did not want us to quit, he just wanted to mess up our rankeds because he didn't get his champ. Basically, I wouldn't mind a Yasuo ADC in normal. Normal is the place to try out whatever you want. I do mind Yasuo ADC feeding intentionally in ranked tho. (We won anyway)
As supp main luckily I cannot be assigned to a role I didn't want to play, but I'm still absolutely against implementing that possibility in the first place. I take rankeds very serious, and it would kill me inside if I lost a game because I was randomly selected to play a role I just can't play.
Comment has been collapsed.
Many would label that as trolling
So would I, at least if it's >= Gold level. In Bronze V it doesn't matter.
All other roles are fine IMO, I personally like jungle, but support just doesn't suit Satan.
he just wanted to mess up our rankeds because he didn't get his champ
You mean because you banned the champion he wanted to play? The person who bans a teammate's character choice is the initial offender, not the other way around. Considering how emotionally unstable the game's design makes its players, doing that to somebody else out of the blue borders on making them feed / int / troll. "Is it okay if we ban XY?" or "would you mind playing a different champion?" are good approaches; just banning what somebody else wants isn't, without profuse (and earnest) apologies.
We won anyway
Because ADCs are irrelevant in 2017? :D
As supp main luckily I cannot be assigned to a role I didn't want to play
Picking sup primary and fill second and being given a different position while somebody else didn't want support yet is given it is a feature. I've seen that happen quite a few times.
because I was randomly selected to play a role I just can't play.
In the old days, when the game was slightly less awful, you had to make do with what you got. Can only play one role? Don't play ranked. Can only play one champ? Don't play ranked. Etc.
Comment has been collapsed.
So would I, at least if it's >= Gold level. In Bronze V it doesn't matter.
As said, it's in normal. For me, Elo doesn't matter in normal. You can get matched with bronze, even if you're dia, and the other way around. I personally almost never play normal, but if I do, I do it for fun only ^^ as long as people play with the intention to do their best, I don't care what they pick where, no matter their elo. (And teemo supp really works great, even in normals on plat level :P)
You mean because you banned the champion he wanted to play?
I do understand people could rage there, but the champ came out just hours prior to that. Even tho I never ban champions that have been selected as preffered, I do think that he had it comming. New champs are usually permabanned for the first 2-3 days, it's close to a wonder if he actually gets them just hours after release in ranked.
Of course the people apologized after, but I don't think they even realized that guy had the champ locked. At the first day of a champ release, most people don't think about their bans for a second and just ban the new champ, because they don't want to see first times ^^
Because ADCs are irrelevant in 2017? :D
Because we didn't have an adc maybe :P yasuo janna bot seems to work up to plat, even if they feed through the first minutes xD the urge to ult on hurricanes is too irristable
Picking sup primary and fill second and being given a different position while somebody else didn't want support yet is given it is a feature. I've seen that happen quite a few times.
It absolutely is, but that's because it doesn't matter what your primary or secondary pick is. They count the same to the system. However, if you pick supp and another fixed role, you cannot get autofilled to a role you didn't want to play. That's what I meant ^^ Supports are autofill-protected and can only get one of their selected roles, because they already suffer enough by picking that unpopular role - in riots eyes.
In the old days, when the game was slightly less awful, you had to make do with what you got.
I've played league for years, and I witnessed those old days. It's ok if you're last pick and have to go a role you don't know, that's just how the game worked back then. If I got lastpick I just informed the team of my bad roles and we found a solution, easy as that.
But if you already get to pick your roles now, I think it would be common sense to actually get one of those then. I wouldn't mind waiting 2 hours for a matchmaking, if that secures I get a role I know.
Autofill is just a horrible system in my eyes. Either you give the players no choice, or you give them a choice. But don't give them a choice and then don't care about what they chose, that's just evil D:
Comment has been collapsed.
Supports are autofill-protected and can only get one of their selected roles
What I mean: If I play Top & Mid and I'm set to autofill the next game, the game can put me into Support and make a player who actually queued for Support play their secondary role. I guess the system is set up to make sure that you actually have to autofill sometimes "against your will".
P.S.: I find this system rewards limited champion and role knowledge too much -- when I played three man ranked in ~early 2016, we had a Dia level OTP who could only play Eve. Every other champ... he was hopelessly lost on. With the role selection, we could pretty much guarantee him his pick. It's a bit playing Starcraft but only knowing one single strategy. A bit too feast / famine.
Comment has been collapsed.
as long as people play with the intention to do their best
In my example, they are playing those uncommon champions with the intention of winning. As said, if I play Teemo support in a normal game, I do so because I believe you can win lanes and games like that c: If I wanna win for absolutely sure and don't care about enjoying the game, I'd pick one of my mains of course, but then I would also not play a normal game but would rather go for ranked ^^
Even if they play a champion on a lane it wasn't supposed to be played at, they don't break any rules and still play the game itself as it's supposed to be played ;)
if you go let's say graves jungle (what was judged as troll a while ago, but is quite common now) it's all fine as long as you still take smite and do the jungle camps and ganks as intended :)
but yeah, if they take jungle, no matter if a "normal" jungle champ or an uncommon one, and then go as second toplaner instead of doing the jungler job, in that case your picture would apply :P
Comment has been collapsed.
absolutely right, however normal games in League of Legends generally lack communication before the game.
In champselect of a ranked there's usually a lot of discussion about picks, counterpicks and the likes, while in normalgames usually most people are on facebook or 9gag and only switch into the window when it's their time to pick ^^
I, however, have never had a problem when picking a "troll champ" for normal. Most people I get matched with only play normal for trying out new stuff or for playing troll picks aswell, so as long as I'm confident in my ability to play the champ in that role, everyone is ok with it (so far) ^^
Comment has been collapsed.
Even if they play a champion on a lane it wasn't supposed to be played at, they don't break any rules and still play the game itself as it's supposed to be played ;)
Some banned users would like to disagree with you there.
Comment has been collapsed.
Huh, I've never even gotten a report warning. I'm sure those guys must've been rude as well. At least since last season (or probably the season before!?) you cannot report people for playing bad anymore
Comment has been collapsed.
Comment has been collapsed.
That all looks like they did other offenses though. First got reported for not communicating with team and the other took smite on support.
If you pick your champion with the best intention to win and talk with your teams if they're suspicious about it, nothing's gonna happen usually.
When someone considers reporting me for my pick, they'd usually tell me so before I lock it, and then I'm gonna talk to them and change my pick to something mainstream, if I have to ^^ But usually, since it's only normals, really no one cares about it after I told them I don't intend on trolling/inting c:
Comment has been collapsed.
What's wrong with taking Smite on support? I have used Smite, Teleport, Exhaust, Ghost, and I don't know what else on Support. It's not any worse than Support Teemo. Teleport Thresh is really good, IMO, at least on moderate Elo levels.
If you can carry ranked games with your pick, meta should not matter.
However, Riot thinks it's okay to ban people for strategies they don't like. I don't like having to play with a Vayne or Riven, and there's things like Lee Syndrome; should I report them for 'not communicating with the team' simply because they take a champion I don't like?
("not communicating with team" means "I don't like your champ / strategy", in the context of those players.)
Comment has been collapsed.
I played a little bit of LoL, and yeah community of that tbh was one of the most toxic and trolling in my experience (don't want to offend any of players here, of course it's not about everybody) and as I was starting with a game and learning characters (of course not at rankeds) I was under attacks of people that felt they already pro. But it were lowest lvls in a game, what did they expect?
After all this responses I have to consider 'people just really want to destroy other people's days, as ugly as that is' as the only one rational reason I guess
Comment has been collapsed.
I've seen that too. What you gotta know: Most low level players are smurfs, so secondary accounts of high levels. 80% of the low levels I came across have already had main accounts on level 30, so as sad as it is: if they meet another low level they expect them to be the same as them and already know the game.
Personally, even after playing league for several years, I still have a positive view of the community.
I met a lot of great people there and most people I get matched with want to win and are decent human beings, however, I've never been to bronze, I have heard that that is the place where the majority of toxic people is.
Of course I've met some, but to this day the postive experience with the league community is still bigger than the negative.
I'm guessing it really depends on which place/elo you're in in such games. I personally have had far worse experiences with the community in for example Battlerite, because I'm not as high ranked as in League. In higher ranks people tend to be more polite to ensure you don't ragequit ^^
Comment has been collapsed.
bronze, I have heard that that is the place where the majority of toxic people is.
Mid / low Plat is famous for being the worst place you can be in.
Comment has been collapsed.
I was low plat last year, and it was horrible compared to high gold, but it's still mainly nice people. But that might be because I was matched with high plat ^^ I could talk most people into at least trying to win the games, even though they had bad games :P
Comment has been collapsed.
Friends can get just as angry at each other as random strangers :D
Comment has been collapsed.
Is it possible they are part of a group who send trolls to the other side so their mates get better stats etc?
Comment has been collapsed.
Never played overwatch but I imagine it has some sort of rule about people leaving games? Like they get a cooldown or w/e. The problem probably lies over there, if one could leave games without a punishment he probably wouldn't troll.
Comment has been collapsed.
Yeah, there is,, there have to be because mad guys even with it still use to leave midgame leaving the team to loss, even in they had big chances
Comment has been collapsed.
Hi, experienced troll here.
I like to troll when my team is being toxic, they ruin the game for me when they are rude. I ignore them and start trolling, usually those kind of people care so much about winning and they don't know how to loose a game so I just give them what they want, a real reason to be toxic.
I could act like a mature person but that's how I deal with toxic players.
"Pharah you suck, change now" ≠ "Pharah change, it isn't working."
Comment has been collapsed.
I'll copy what I replied to Kamarae:
You see, I get it, making bigger idiots out of idiots and making them mad for any reasons they deserve, I get it, talking to offensive, agressive people to make them understand how dumb they sound and give them part of their own stupidity to make them angry at themselves and their statements is like one of my favorite hobby IRL.
But never when it can hurt in any way people that happened to be in that time in that place and did nothing wrong. Like in OW there's group of 10 other people trying to enjoy the game, there's no reason to drag them into my personal crusade against proofs that Darwins evolution theory doesn't work on everybody. :P
Comment has been collapsed.
Remember young kids can play, they are really really stupid and think what they do is funny.
Comment has been collapsed.
When and if possible, multiplayer and co-op games are much more enjoyable with Steam friends or people you know than with random players.
Comment has been collapsed.
Boxes!
Hm i don't know.
I only play the event co-op game :)
Comment has been collapsed.
Recently I'm playing more and more multiplayer/competetive games, Rocket League, Overwatch, which I sincerly love, I don't think I've ever liked any multiplayer game like OW and I'm playing more than any other game. But there's a problem, there's a bunch of people, which prefer to spend whole this time on destroying the game, ruining others pleasure of game and feeling real fight for the victory just by killing themselfs, doing nothing, or using exploits, cheating.
And... I don't get it, can really somebody explain to me, how it can feel good? Because for me ruining fun for about 10 other people is just sad. Every time I'm trying to talk to them and ask what's the problem,reason, explanation and why, but nobody wants to answer, it feels like some kind cybernetic zombie issue. Maybe I'm not experienced enough with multiplayer games, because I'm not playing that much (and for many years I didn't play anything) but for me it's just ridiculus, so are creators most of the time doing nothing about that, how can people get banned on sites of forums like this, but not on games generating hundreds of thousands of dolars?
Is there any explanation or am I just naive thinking that there's reason for everything?
Something to redeem that whole time somebody spent on reading my philosophical meditations about gaming :)
Here
Edit: btw, I don't like this whole calling that problems as 'cancer', using serious problem of so many good people, for calling some weird people, because they can't get better thing to do... nah
I see there's some 'yes' answers in the poll, of course its anonymous, but if somebody doesn't do this anymore,... can you tell why did you do it? :)
Edit: sorry if I didn't respond to all of you but there's so many answers and some my responses fit to few comments. Yours answers are so solid, wrote thoughtfully, that it takes time to consider all of them ;p but I did read them all, you can be sure about it.
And there is actually troll that felt offended by my thread apparently because I've got blacklisted :D
Comment has been collapsed.