Slashdot Mirror


Blizzard Backs Down On Real Names For Forums

Ashe Tyrael writes "Earlier this week, Blizzard announced that they were going to be implementing changes in their official forums (for StarCraft II when it launched, and for WoW prior to Cataclysm) that would require users to post under their real names, as part of the Real ID system. After perusing nearly 14,000 European and 50,000 US forum posts, the majority of which decried this move with various levels of vehemence, it looks like Blizzard has given in to the pressure. From the official statement: 'We've been constantly monitoring the feedback you've given us, as well as internally discussing your concerns about the use of real names on our forums. As a result of those discussions, we've decided at this time that real names will not be required for posting on official Blizzard forums.' Not that this doesn't leave room for them to re-implement this at a later date, but that's a pretty definite 'no.' It was clear they were going to take criticism, but the size of the backlash was impressive. It seems likely Blizzard simply wasn't expecting that level of antipathy toward their new policy.

31 of 432 comments (clear)

  1. Pretty Obvious Reasoning by eldavojohn · · Score: 4, Insightful
    I'm no insider, I don't use the forums all that much but I did play WoW for two years. But you know there were some real jerks in WoW. And it's pretty simple to imagine that you have some really active jerks on the forums that are truly only maybe a few percentage points of the gaming population. It's well known that a pseudonym enables people to be complete assholes. Complete. And I'd bet that the moderators of these forums were sick and tired of seeing cases where this happened. Either someone said something really inflammatory or got under the skin of a beginner -- turning them off to the game. Some people are sensitive and even Mr. Rogers won't undo what a bully can do.

    So Blizzard probably estimated that 90% of those jerks would stop being jerks if their name appeared by their asshole posts. So what if 1% of the population complains about RealID? But in doing so, Blizzard totally ignored the other 98% of the populations enjoyment of privacy. And in doing so once they decided this would be mandatory for the betterment of the community, the rest of the community interjected and seemed to prefer the assholes and their privacy to the converse where the assholes now know who you are. To many of us, this isn't really a surprise.

    Not that this doesn't leave room for them to re-implement this at a later date, but that's a pretty definite 'no.'

    I disagree. I see Blizzard still chasing this dream of moderation through identity and drastically reducing their moderation. I would bet we shortly see a scheme where RealID is opt in with the catch being that if you aren't using RealID then each of your posts has to be read by a moderator before it is approved as viewable by anyone else. Community regulation can be a difficult and touchy subject with gamers and I suspect this is only the beginning of a very long trial run where Blizzard tries to find the happy medium between anonymity and self regulation.

    --
    My work here is dung.
    1. Re:Pretty Obvious Reasoning by NormalVisual · · Score: 4, Interesting

      I see Blizzard still chasing this dream of moderation through identity and drastically reducing their moderation.

      This is what annoys me. Blizzard *already* is not providing an adequate level of customer service IMO - you gotta love waiting 3 days to have a ticket answered in WoW, only to be given the same "disable your add-ons, and clear your Cache, Interface, and WTF folders" canned response. They've got bugs in the game that have been there for *years*, and often don't appear to put any kind of real QA effort into their releases (witness the fiasco a few months ago for the "Love is in the Air" event that had their servers down for *days*). They're pulling in roughly $150 million *per month* from the damn game, and they're still trying to reduce the level of service even further.

      --
      Please stand clear of the doors, por favor mantenganse alejado de las puertas
    2. Re:Pretty Obvious Reasoning by Ephemeriis · · Score: 4, Insightful

      It's well known that a pseudonym enables people to be complete assholes. Complete. And I'd bet that the moderators of these forums were sick and tired of seeing cases where this happened. Either someone said something really inflammatory or got under the skin of a beginner -- turning them off to the game. Some people are sensitive and even Mr. Rogers won't undo what a bully can do.

      So Blizzard probably estimated that 90% of those jerks would stop being jerks if their name appeared by their asshole posts.

      I agree that anonymity allows people to be the kind of jerks that you wouldn't want to be if your reputation was at stake. But I don't believe that you necessarily have to reveal somebody's real name to counteract that.

      In-game, you develop a reputation. If you're enough of an asshole (lootwhore, n00b, whatever) in-game, folks won't want to play with you. They'll put you on their ignore list. You'll be ostracized.

      Right now, you can roll up a new character easily enough and shrug off the reputation of your old character. Or create a character specifically for the purpose of being an asshole. You can log in as "Joe the Night Elf" and be a nice guy and go on all the raids... And then you can log in as "Ed the Dwarf" and be a complete asshole... And nobody knows it's the same person. Ed's bad reputation does not affect Joe at all.

      All you have to do is make it clear that those two characters are owned by the same account. Then if everybody hates Ed because he's an asshole, they know that Joe is also that same asshole, and they can hate him too.

      Associating these characters with your real name is not necessary. And, in fact, I think it creates the potential for some real abuse. Folks will happily harass you to the greatest extent they can for some really stupid shit. They'll post random garbage on the forums, spam you in-game, email you, whatever they can. If you give them enough personal information, they'll happily harass you in the real world as well.

      --
      "Work is the curse of the drinking classes." -Oscar Wilde
    3. Re:Pretty Obvious Reasoning by mcgrew · · Score: 4, Insightful

      But you know there were some real jerks in WoW.

      There are some real jerks on the highway, in line at the grocery store, and at your workplace. These are the same people who post GNAA trolls and goatse links.

      So Blizzard probably estimated that 90% of those jerks would stop being jerks if their name appeared by their asshole posts.

      Their estimates were 100% wrong. Assholes will be assholes no matter what.

    4. Re:Pretty Obvious Reasoning by ZerothAngel · · Score: 3, Informative

      Right now, you can roll up a new character easily enough and shrug off the reputation of your old character. Or create a character specifically for the purpose of being an asshole. You can log in as "Joe the Night Elf" and be a nice guy and go on all the raids... And then you can log in as "Ed the Dwarf" and be a complete asshole... And nobody knows it's the same person. Ed's bad reputation does not affect Joe at all.

      All you have to do is make it clear that those two characters are owned by the same account. Then if everybody hates Ed because he's an asshole, they know that Joe is also that same asshole, and they can hate him too.

      Love them or hate them, this is a great feature of Cryptic's games. Every account has a 1:1 mapping to a "handle" (aka "display name" aka "forum name"). When you create a character (for example, "Joe"), in-game, you appear as "Joe," but when you speak in chat, you appear as "Joe@YourHandle." When you right-click or otherwise inspect another character, you also see their handle. And if seeing handles in chat are an immersion-breaker for you, you can easily turn them off -- hovering your mouse over their name in chat will show their full name.

      And one of the great things about this system is that when you friend or ignore someone, you do it based on their handle. So ignoring someone will ignore all their alts and likewise, friending someone will show them online no matter what alt they're on. (Though there has been whining about the latter being a breach of privacy...)

      Although the primary reason I like this system is that it avoids the name land-rush. I can name my characters any name I want (within the rules :P), regardless if it's a dupe. I wish more MMO companies would adopt something similar. Who knows, maybe Real ID (hopefully sans real names) will get there in the future.

    5. Re:Pretty Obvious Reasoning by quantumplacet · · Score: 3, Funny

      I've never been standing on line at a grocery store and had someone tap me on the shoulder and then scream FAGGOT and show me a picture of an overextended asshole when I turn around. You might want to think about shopping somewhere else.

    6. Re:Pretty Obvious Reasoning by tophermeyer · · Score: 3, Insightful

      The fact is that there are many nasty people that troll the internet for kicks. It stands to reason that many of those people also play WoW and hang out on the Blizzard boards.

      "reasons" does not inherently imply legitimate. If that is what you meant, you should have said that. In fact it is incredibly ironic that while your posts are riddled with spelling and grammatical garbage, you are implying that this other person is lacking a high school education.

      B) Blizzards gas crap for moderators.

      What does this even mean? I can't even deduce what you were trying say.

      zomg srsly lrn 2 spl?

      C) If they had enough moderators, then there wouldn't be a problem on the forums.

      Clearly this is false. Slashdot has about 2 million user ID's, most of us moderate on a semi-regular basis. Yet still garbage like this has been up for hours and has not been modded to oblivion. The problem on internet forums isn't moderators, it's human asshats.

    7. Re:Pretty Obvious Reasoning by D'Sphitz · · Score: 4, Insightful

      "Here is a novel thought. If you don't like the service, just stop playing and forking over your money. Wow what a concept."

      This stupid response is barfed all over the WoW forums repeatedly every time someone has any sort of complaint. Ever think that maybe some people enjoy the game, despite objecting to some of Blizzard's decisions?

      If a customer service rep from AT&T is rude to you, do you cancel your service and just live without a phone? Oh, you don't like Comcast? Well cancel your cable and live without internet or TV, what a concept!

  2. Facebook slippery slope by SquarePixel · · Score: 5, Interesting

    we've decided at this time that real names will not be required

    It only means that Facebook brainwashing has not fully worked yet. Expect them to try this again in an year, along with many other websites, when people have got more used to it ("well these other websites already do the same so what's the big deal")

    1. Re:Facebook slippery slope by AdmiralXyz · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Are you familiar with the saying, "Never attribute to malice what can be explained by stupidity"? If you read their post announcing the turn-around, they say very clearly, "We did this because we thought it would improve the quality of the forums, and having heard your reaction, we're not going to do it." They thought they were acting in the best of their customers. Yeah, it was an appallingly stupid idea, but one with good intentions.

      You can call me naive if you want, but ask yourself: what the hell does Blizzard gain from you posting your real name on their forums? They already know it from your subscription info, it's not like you're giving them new data. It makes no difference to them whatsoever. That's the problem with conspiracy theories: people come up with them before realizing that the conspiracy would not provide any benefit to the alleged conspirators if true

      This was just a lousy call by well-meaning individuals, and the fact that they did such a complete turnarond is a positive sign that Blizzard does care about their customers.

      --
      Dislike the Electoral College? Lobby your state to join the National Popular Vote Interstate Compact.
  3. It all comes down to $ by butterflysrage · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Don't think that this had anything to do with privacy, or "feedback", it was simply that when the accounting department saw just how many hits they were going to lose and the kneecapping their advertising income was about to take, the called the higer ups and put a dollar figure to this kind of bone-head move and it was called off.

    --
    the preceding post was not spell checked... suck it.
    1. Re:It all comes down to $ by Burnhard · · Score: 4, Interesting

      But even so, isn't it rumpsmackingly amazing that the suits aren't capable of anticipating obvious objections from the community about this. I would love to have been a fly on the wall (holding a bullshit bingo card, obviously) in the meeting where it was decided that doing this was a good idea in the first place.

    2. Re:It all comes down to $ by 0123456 · · Score: 4, Insightful

      because you never make mistakes, right?

      There's a difference between making a mistake and doing something that anyone with more than a room temperature IQ should immediatley understand to be an insanely stupid idea.

      And I'm talking room temperature in Celcius, not Kelvin.

    3. Re:It all comes down to $ by gurps_npc · · Score: 4, Insightful
      In other words, they are normal human beings. I always laugh at people that do this kind of argument. It's cynical, rather short sighted, totally lacking in understanding of morality and rules. Ethics are not there just to be there, they are there because they make business sense. Yes - it does in fact make business sense to respect privacy, that is one of the reasons why we value it.

      Look, everyone wants money. That is NOT a bad thing. The fact that they had to do the math and realizing X is bad as opposed to blindly accepting the fact that X is bad with evidence does NOT mean they are evil or bone headed or stupid. Instead it means.

      1. The management of a for-profit company is not composed of moral philosophers that care more about their beliefs than about making money.

      2. The management of a for-profit company is smart enough to consider solutions to things that annoy their customers.

      3. The management was not smart enough to realize their propoosed solution was worse all by themselves.

      4. The management WAS smart enough to learn from their mistake before they actually enacted it.

      You seem to be surpirsed, nay SHOCKED I say, SHOCKED to learn these first three obvious facts and are totally discounting #4.

      Me, maybe I'm cynical, but in my experience, the first three are common and the only surprusing thing is #4, which you seem to think is a horrible thing. I am gladdened to discover that Blizzard appears to be FAR more ethical and intelligent than many other companies, such as Facebook.

      I would trust Blizzard far more than I would trust some one that thinks profit is a dirty word.

      --
      excitingthingstodo.blogspot.com
  4. Not surprised by Pojut · · Score: 4, Insightful

    I haven't played WoW in a LONG time, but for a while I was a devout player (closed beta, open beta, from launch until two years later), and if there is one thing I saw during my time, it was Blizzard listening to the masses.

  5. Popularity by Translation+Error · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Hmm... The company with some of the most popular computer games in the world listen to customer feedback and reconsider their decisions based on it. You don't suppose there could be some sort of correlation, do you?

    --
    When someone says, "Any fool can see ..." they're usually exactly right.
    1. Re:Popularity by phishtahko · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Yeah, that's why SC2 an D3 have LAN support. O, wait...

    2. Re:Popularity by LambdaWolf · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Playing a multiplayer game with someone in the same room as you without using/needing Internet bandwidth is functionality.

      --
      "This algorithm runs in constant time. Come on, 2,147,483,648 is a constant..."
    3. Re:Popularity by G00F · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Only a handful? There are 252,781 last I checked who signed the petition. Me and my friends vowed to never purchase a game unless we can play LAN.

      I played SC2 beta with a friend in my network, behind the same firewall the performance was dismal!! And that was just two, I can't imagine 8 people! My network is gig, My firewall is a Linux based one with 4ghz, 1GB ram, Dual Gig,

      Another thing that pisses me off is these gaming tycoons saying LAN is obsolete. A gig LAN(or even 100mb) is far superior to anything I can get from Comcast. Not to mention having friends in the same room (what do you think made halo on xbox so popular)

      Taking away LAN does remove functionality. LAN is the ultimate multi-player gaming experience.

      --
      The spirit of resistance to government is so valuable on certain occasions that I wish it to be always kept alive
  6. Another WoW killer passes by BlkRb0t · · Score: 5, Funny

    I thought we had a WoW killer in Real ID this time, but like always the developers don't keep up to their promise.

  7. We're not retreating.... by AutumnLeaf · · Score: 4, Interesting

    We're rapidly advancing in a different direction.

    The pros and cons on both sides of this debate are compelling. Blizzard's time, money, and "quality of product (the forums)" versus people's privacy.

    Not sure why it had to be "either/or". I think they should have rolled out Real-ID-only forums in parallel and let people choose for themselves.

    In the end I think Blizzard waited too long. "Serious" WoW-related discourse doesn't happen on Blizzard's forums anymore. Most serious players know to start at elitistjerks.com. Not that their forums are perfect, but if I want good info on class mechanics, gear, talents, rotations... that's where I go.

    1. Re:We're not retreating.... by Nathanbp · · Score: 4, Interesting

      It's pretty clear that Blizzard either doesn't think they can or is not willing to do the level of moderating that is required to get forums of the quality found at Elitist Jerks. It's also clear that this proposed change had nothing to do with reducing forum trolling.

  8. They could make it really easy to track trolls... by CFBMoo1 · · Score: 4, Interesting

    Click on the posters name and you see a list of characters and what servers they're on. Now that level 1 anonymous troll isn't so anonymous while the rest of the populations privacy is still intact. Problem solved without as big an uproar, couple that with a new feature to ignore by account without actually giving out the account name to help ease any stalking fears and your set.

    --
    ~~ Behold the flying cow with a rail gun! ~~
  9. Trouble with user registration by PPH · · Score: 3, Funny

    The system couldn't handle so many people named Cowboy Neal.

    --
    Have gnu, will travel.
  10. Re:They learned why it's a bard idea the hard way. by Zironic · · Score: 3, Interesting

    Do you know what makes you rather pathetic? That you haven't bothered to find out that info was not actually the right Micah Whipple lives in the opposite side of California.

    That utter failure of a copy pasted investigation is probably the least of the reasons they decided to change policy.

  11. Re:They learned why it's a bard idea the hard way. by PitaBred · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Actually, that's part of the problem. What if someone who is completely unconnected to WoW but happens to have the same name as someone who does play? And THEY are the one who gets griefed IRL by some maniac who takes a game too damn seriously?

  12. Vindication! by Drakkenmensch · · Score: 5, Funny

    Never underestimate the power of nerdrage. We may be an army of cats, but stirr us up sufficiently and we become a pride of lions.

  13. Not real names, but tied to accounts by Todd+Knarr · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Blizzard should simply tie forum names to accounts in an opaque manner. You can only create a forum name if you have an account, and you can only create one per account and only if you have a game key activated on that account. The forum name can't be the same as the account username (to prevent disclosure), and once created you can't change it (CS can change it for you, but you have to give them a good reason to). That solves most of the problem without requiring real names anywhere.

    Basically for the purposes Blizzard claims to need to address, real identities aren't needed. What's needed is only two things:

    • Users need to be sure that the person behind a forum name today is the same person as was behind it last week. Usually referred to as "continuity of identity". They don't need to know who the person is, just that it's the same person.
    • Users need to be reasonably sure that a single person can't quickly and easily create multiple new identities to hide behind, so a new forum name almost always does represent a real new person.

    Neither of those requires disclosing real identities.

  14. Removing My Posts by tomakaan · · Score: 3, Interesting

    Although they reverted this change, I'm still pretty weary of the direction that Real ID is going. Personally, I've opted to delete all official WoW forum posts using a GreaseMonkey script I've found: http://userscripts.org/scripts/show/81103

  15. The End of GLBT by Nom+du+Keyboard · · Score: 3, Interesting

    Posting real names would have ended all honest GLBT discussions in an instant. That's immediately a great reason not to post them.

    --
    "It's the height of ridiculousness to say for those 9 lines you get hundreds of millions."
  16. Re:My question is why? by Nadaka · · Score: 3, Insightful

    He is stating that there are several people harassed, physically assaulted, and even murdered because some asshat took an internet argument into the real world.

    The Real ID change would make doing so much, much easier.