Pay Less If You're a Nice Person: Valve's Freemium Model For DOTA 2

Canazza writes "In a podcast interview with Seven Day Cooldown, summarized by Develop, Valve Boss Gabe Newell discusses the payment model for upcoming strategy game DOTA 2. 'The issue that we're struggling with quite a bit is something I've kind of talked about before, which is: how do you properly value people's contributions to a community? ... An example is – and this is something as an industry we should be doing better – is charging customers based on how much fun they are to play with. ... “So, in practice, a really likable person in our community should get DOTA 2 for free, because of past behavior 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.'"

Comments

I like this

[GoodNewsJimDotCom]

DOTA jerks are the reason I quit HON. I just wonder what the metics involved in figuring if someone is a jerk or not.

Re:I like this

[Samantha Wright]

Five zorkmids says it's a function of how many Secret Saxton gifts they've given. (No, Valve, I'm not cynical about your monetization strategies at all!)

Re:I like this

[Anonymous Coward]

I'm a DOTA noob that has spent a little time in the DOTA 2 beta.

This community is not noob friendly at all. DOTA is complicated, and there is *TONS* of stuff that there is no way a noob will know.

Yet it seems like 10 - 25% of the community is verbally abusive towards noobs.

This is a HUGE problem if Valve wants DOTA2 to be a successful game. New people need to be able to come in and learn the game without being abused by assholes that think they are better people because they do nothing but play DOTA.

If every new person quits the game after being yelled at, there won't be much of a "community" left.

Re:I like this

[Paul Slocum]

It seems like it would be pretty easy to tie it to certain stats and community feedback. If the developers compare the stats of a bunch of good players and bad players, it probably wouldn't be hard to spot recognizable trends that would be hard to fake. Start everybody at the same price, but great players start to get a discount over time. Sounds like a really smart idea.

Re:I like this

[19thNervousBreakdown]

I don't like this. What if I want to surround myself with jerks?

That's a completely serious question. I actually prefer to talk to, and be surrounded by, people who are assholes. I think they're more fun, and I couldn't give less of a fuck about being insulted by some random dipshit on the internet. Or in person, really. Hell, I feel slightly uncomfortable when somebody doesn't take a shot at me that I know they could have. A community of "nice" people? Gag me with a spoon, that sounds like an incredibly dull place, and stressful too, where you have to worry every second about hurting somebody's feelings. Verbally knocking people around (and being knocked around) is half the fun, making this community sound like a great place if you like playing football with a bunch of grandmothers with osteoporosis.

Besides which, the true assholes out there are the ones that make the "community" turning on their target just another part of the making-them-feel-like-shit process. Can't wait to see what the trolls do with the new game (that game being the new pricing model, not DotA).

Re:I like this

[ArhcAngel]

Maybe something like George Carlin proposed for driving. Give everybody a dart gun when they get their drivers license and when they see somebody driving badly shoot the trunk. When there are enough darts the police pull you over.

Re:I like this

[Artraze]

The problem with any good justice system is that it has to balance a number of factors. Would you suggest that everyone that, I dunno, J-walks get the death penalty? Not only would the punishment be exorbitant, but now you'd be encouraging J-walkers to carry weapons and dispose of witnesses, as doing so doesn't really make the punishment worse, but could let you avoid it entirely.

Valve is trying to make an effective deterrent to being a jerk. The problem with simply banning is that it gives users no ability to reform, and really ups the burden of proof as the ability to appeal a ban is basically nil (and pricy for Valve if it's not). Also, banned players can usually just get a new account and continue to be an ass until they're banned again, but this time around they aren't going to care half as much as they've already lost everything tied to their original account.

So they have to set the punishment at something that is reasonable in the face of unreliable justice and the cost of creating a new account. Allowing players to play on probation (no voice) or charging them $100 seems like a decent balance to me.

> So you think that someone should not have to behave nice if he is a rich?

Rich? lol. I think that if you combine the demographics of "jerk" and "has $100 to blow" you'll find more basement dwelling trolls than rich people, who usually do other things to do with their time besides being a jerk on online games. A hundred dallors just ain't that much in this day... It won't even buy you two new games.

> Does it not make far more sense to charge everyone the same and ban the jerks?
> Is it really worth it to Valve to decrease their multiplayer experience for everyone for as little as $100 jerk tax?

I for one, think it's fine, as you can sit back and laugh at jerks, knowing that they heavily subsidized you copy. Also, I still expect that there will be normal bans if they're really so bad.

Re:I like this

[Anonymous Coward]

Yes, let's make computer game prices a popularity contest. We all really enjoyed that in high school, didn't we? And the nice people were always the most popular, weren't they? People who bubble up to the top of communities are always borderline sociopathic types, "politicians" if you will. They play the people, not the game. Most people will think these people are nice, until they learn their true nature when they find themselves in disagreement or antagonized for some mundane reason.

A game operator needs to make sure that a game is fun regardless of jerks being in it. Trying to keep the community "nice" is doomed to failure.

Re:I like this

[Anonymous Coward]

It's a really shitty ban when you're able to complain about it in every other goddamned thread

Re:I like this

[Anonymous Coward]

By far the biggest tragedy is that it's obvious that you actually believe the things you're saying. One can only hope that some day you'll get a glimpse of reality.

Re:I like this

[Man On Pink Corner]

This is exactly the same problem that was faced in Ultima Online when it became obvious that some people enjoyed whacking new and otherwise defenseless players. They introduced PvP flags and zones to get around it, and I don't see why a similar approach wouldn't work here.

Each player could start out with their "Protection from assholes" flag set by default. If they either behave abusively (according to whatever flawed metric Valve uses to make that call) or turn the flag off intentionally, they will lose the ability to communicate with people who still have the flag set.

Offering monetary discounts for playing nice is just going to create a metagame, which will be exploited. Valve should instead apply a policy of "strict scrutiny," where only the smallest, least invasive steps necessary are taken to solve the problem.

Re:I like this

[Local ID10T]

I don't like this. What if I want to surround myself with jerks?

That's a completely serious question. I actually prefer to talk to, and be surrounded by, people who are assholes. I think they're more fun, and I couldn't give less of a fuck about being insulted by some random dipshit on the internet. Or in person, really. Hell, I feel slightly uncomfortable when somebody doesn't take a shot at me that I know they could have. A community of "nice" people? Gag me with a spoon, that sounds like an incredibly dull place, and stressful too, where you have to worry every second about hurting somebody's feelings. Verbally knocking people around (and being knocked around) is half the fun, making this community sound like a great place if you like playing football with a bunch of grandmothers with osteoporosis.

Besides which, the true assholes out there are the ones that make the "community" turning on their target just another part of the making-them-feel-like-shit process. Can't wait to see what the trolls do with the new game (that game being the new pricing model, not DotA).

Enjoy paying the "jerk tax" then... or get tired of it and move on to something else. Either way, Valve wins.

Re:I like this

[Anonymous Coward]

That is the question.

League of Legends uses player-based feedback combined with employee oversight, and that might be the only realistic way to do this.

Players from the match report someone as an asshole. This relies on people reporting assholes (all too likely), and relies on not reporting people who are assholes (all too likely - if four assholes queue up together and decide to be a dick to the last guy, it's more than plausible that all four will report the innocent non-friend as an asshole).

Other players then review the chat / game logs of players who get reported too many times. This relies on people taking the time to review the cases (likely, since it's a way to weed assholes out of the game, but offer small in-game incentives to those who review just the same), and relies on people not trolling the system and voting the opposite of the way they should (less likely, really, especially if it takes five votes out of nine to "convict", but it could still happen).

Finally, an employee from the company might actually review any cases that results in a short term (possibly), long term (probably), or permanent (definitely review) ban, ensuring that the system wasn't subverted by trolls / assholes.

The same thing could work for Valve and DotA2, but it will basically require a lot of effort from players, company, and coders alike.

Re:I like this

[Anonymous Coward]

Exactly. The terrible thing here is not that he behaves like this, but that he fails to realize that theses are not, as they are in his mind, the kind of behaviors that anyone desires, respects, or tolerates. It's like a criminal telling the judge at trial that if anything he should be paid for committing crimes because he's actually doing society a favor.

Re:I like this

[Vintermann]

I actually prefer to talk to, and be surrounded by, people who are assholes. I think they're more fun, and I couldn't give less of a fuck about being insulted by some random dipshit on the internet.

Well, fuck you and what you want, freak.

Re:I like this

[KingMotley]

We all really enjoyed that in high school, didn't we?

Yes.

Re:I like this

[19thNervousBreakdown]

Each player could start out with their "Protection from assholes" flag set by default. If they either behave abusively (according to whatever flawed metric Valve uses to make that call) or turn the flag off intentionally, they will lose the ability to communicate with people who still have the flag set.

See, now that sounds fine to me. I'd turn that flag off and happily exclude myself from the milquetoast masses. The very first thing I do anywhere it's available is turn off the profanity filter, and turn on the PvP flag.

I'm not out to actually ruin anyone's day. Hell, I don't even want to make dipshits like the post above yours feel bad just because they can't tell the difference between a troll and somebody who prefers a more honest interaction style between their peers. I just want to call you a fucking moron when you do something stupid and have you be mildly embarrassed and have that mild embarrassment be a motivator to fix your behavior in the future instead of going, "uh, gee, golly gosh, you know it's actually more effective..." and then have somebody mash "UNLIKEABLE" because I didn't make them feel like a perfect snowflake.

And I want the same thing back. I don't want language couched in fifteen layers of inoffensiveness, just tell me what I did wrong, feel free to throw a curse or two in for emphasis if you think it's warranted. I'll sort out if I'm actually a dipshit on my own.

Re:I like this

[PopeRatzo]

The stickers, fish, [H], and [A] should already tell them do do that.

I vote for the "ribbon" stickers. People with little ribbon decals all over their rear bumper are automatically considered assholes. I don't care how worthy of support the charity is, if you have a ribbon, what you're really saying is "look at me, I'm a charitable person!" which makes you an asshole.

I've been watching carefully lately, and I'm pretty sure I've got that right. Oh, and "I support the troops" ribbons are especially foul if the owner of the car is in their 20's and healthy. You might as well have a sticker that says, "I am such a good person".

Dad taught me to never, ever look for recognition when you do something good, or it wipes out the heavenly coupons you would have gotten. The old man wouldn't even take a tax write-off for charitable donation, saying, "I don't need the government to subsidize my generosity".

Re:I like this

[interkin3tic]

This does seem to be the actual mentality of tight-knit online communities, and not just trolling. Hazing, and some misguided notion that you have to prove yourself beyond paying money for the game to enjoy it.

However, the cyber-frat-boys should be capable of understanding that most potential customers deal with enough assholes in real life and aren't going to be interested in paying money to deal with more in their leisure time. Thus, everyone besides that little band of bros has an interest in getting rid of that crowd. And I suspect Valve is actually capable of dealing with you lot since you're endangering their product.

You could get over yourselves and stop being pointlessly rude to people, or you could continue in your misguided attempt to toughen up the n00bs, and find yourself continually marginalized.

Re:I like this

[CanHasDIY]

Spoken like a true douche-nozzle.

Re:I like this

[19thNervousBreakdown]

Oh yeah. You're the nice guy.

Re:I like this

[Pubstar]

As one of the better known 'hackers' of MW2, MW3, BF3, L4D2, etc. etc., I never found a reason to be a total prick to newbie players. Sure, it means I have to play harder to win, but there is something to be said about growing the community. The more good players there are out there, the better of a chance I get to hone my skills.

On the other hand, I can't stand DOTA/DOTA2/LoL due to people smurfing and basically raping people who haven't the slightest clue to play the game. It keeps the community to a select assholes who have nothing better to do than troll newbies and talk shit. To use the car analogy (barely) - its like some professional driver challenging a newbie to a race on open track days, then talking shit to them for not being able to keep up.

Re:I like this

[cyber-vandal]

Oh stop crying already.

Re:I like this

[crashumbc]

And this is why it will probably fail, all you need is a fair group of people to work together.

Black mail

extortion

"protection" fees.

Re:I like this

[Anonymous Coward]

Not trying to be a dick or anything, but if you get the tax credit, you can be even more generous if you want.

Re:I like this

[Anonymous Coward]

I think your mommy's calling -- she said something about taking the garbage out...

Re:I like this

[Anonymous Coward]

I love this news. I'm going to organize a clan of jerks in DOTA 2. We will flag each other as nice players, and flag everyone else as jerks.
I can easily get 100 people to buy the game and follow me into this project, and with a bit of advertising on the webz I can easily get 1000 people. I'm sure we'll have no trouble becoming a majority of the playerbase or big enough at least that we can control the voting system.

Thanks Valve for making a game where us griefers can have fun. Meta-griefing is also the best griefing! Love you guys xoxox !!!!

Re:I like this

[Danny Rathjens]

That was Gallagher, not Carlin. But it is indeed a great idea.

Re:I like this

[Svartalf]

Then you'll pay more for the priviege to be an asshole and surround yourself with your fellow assholes. Simple.

Re:I like this

[Baloroth]

This is the current system Valve are more or less using in the beta. Players who get reported often or who leave games early (team game, so that ruins it for the other players) get shoved into the "low priority queue." Basically, that is where the ragers, jerks, and assholes end up. It isn't perfect yet, but it does help some. And of course it really is low-priority, so it takes a while to find a game (creating the incentive not to end up there).

Re:I like this

[Mike Mentalist]

You seem to have trouble dealing in anything other than absolutes.

Re:I like this

[Diabolus777]

Don't worry, they will bring in a league system with matchmaking when it's final. The elitist assholes will be able to bitch at each other while noobs play friendly in the brown leagues.

Re:I like this

[Elbereth]

If you talk to a real-life sociopath, you'll actually hear this from them, sometimes.

In a normal personal, the psychological gymnastics necessary to rationalize your behavior in this way would be truly amazing. In sociopaths, it seems to come naturally.

Re:I like this

[idontgno]

Nonsense. The true assholes aren't the hardcore elitists, they're the mildly-skilled ganking trolls that deliberately matchmake in the n00b brackets to score easy victories and much humiliation lulz. There's no margin in playing the game where you run the risk of someone else actually beating you. If tards like this could play pick-up streetball games against 8-year-olds, you know they would, and then mock the poor kids into tears.

Re:I like this

[19thNervousBreakdown]

I won't say I've never used absolutes, but what about the post you replied to indicated that? Did you interpret my hyperbole used to highlight a point as actual beliefs? And where did you learn to make personality judgments based on short posts on the internet? That seems like an amazingly useful skill.

Re:I like this

[19thNervousBreakdown]

Woah, full-on internet toughguy. Sure, I'm the bully, because I singled you out and started calling you names for expressing your opinion. Thanks for showing us all what a nice guy really is.

Re:I like this

[Idarubicin]

Not trying to be a dick or anything, but if you get the tax credit, you can be even more generous if you want.

Playing devil's advocate for a moment, though--that strategy means that he would be choosing to fund his own preferred charities at the expense of other people funding the government services (from which he would still benefit...).

Re:I like this

[TimothyDavis]

One system that seen and liked is to mute a person by default when too many others have muted said person. This helps reduce the number of verbal jackasses a player has to deal with.

Re:I like this

[Mike Mentalist]

Ah yes, the problem is with everyone else.

Not you.

Oh no.

Re:I like this

[19thNervousBreakdown]

What problem?

Re:I like this

[tibman]

Except for the part where the other million players always mark you as a troll during games and eventually you can only join games with other trolls.

Re:I like this

[19thNervousBreakdown]

No, I didn't say that nice guys are morons, I never even implied it. Your imagining of that literal insult perfectly illustrates how over-sensitive you are. Even if I did say that word (which, I will re-iterate, I never did, you put words into my mouth), I wouldn't mean it in the way you're obviously taking the word you just pretended I said so that you could get angry at me.

There's a difference between being an asshole and being an abusive psychopath. If you could tell the difference you wouldn't be so offended when I call you a shit-for-brains for running the wrong play in a game. If your definition of "griefer" includes that, well, count yourself lucky because you haven't dealt with a real griefer.

I also take issue with you calling it "your" ecosystem, and excluding me because you have a problem taking criticism. Oh, sure, you can fall back on the might-makes-right arguments so prevalent in your mindset, where there's more of you and therefore my preferences are worthless, but how exactly does that make you nice? I mean, you just said, knowing practically nothing about me other than that I like to talk to people like adults instead of children, that if I'm unhappy all is right with the world. Meanwhile, all I want to do is be able to curse and give frank assessments of your skill.

Re:I like this

[tibman]

Even if you are right, it would scale. Everyone would be a jerk but some would be a lot more than others.

Re:I like this

[Mike Mentalist]

Meanwhile, all I want to do is be able to curse and give frank assessments of your skill.

Both of which can be done quite easily without being an arsehole.

Re:I like this

[19thNervousBreakdown]

I actually thought it was pretty good. He didn't spoil the joke with that stupid ~ symbol or a retarded smiley or anything. Alternatively, if he was serious, who cares what he thinks, he's an asshole! I'm an asshole, you're an asshole, we're all assholes!

This has been Lessons in Having a Thick Skin 101.

Re:I like this

[19thNervousBreakdown]

Fair enough, then other than the whole putting words in my mouth thing and being glad that other people are miserable, we're in agreement.

Re:I like this

[AngryDeuce]

Look out, guys, we've got a real internet tough guy over here...

Re:I like this

[PopeRatzo]

Not trying to be a dick or anything, but if you get the tax credit, you can be even more generous if you want.

The way I see it, if I take a tax credit for donating money to the Civic Opera (for which I get a nice seat at the opera), and then declare it on my income tax as a charitable donation to get the credit, that means some other poor schlub has to pick up part of my end of the bill for living in a nice society with running water and Internets and all the stuff that government is good for. I have noticed in my half-century, that the more money I make, the more I get to benefit from the Commons.

I live in a high tax city (Chicago) in a high tax state (Illinois) and I've got no beef about paying for it. I wouldn't have been able to do nearly as well if I'd lived somewhere like South Carolina, where taxes are low and they get more money from the federal government than they pay in taxes. I don't even mind paying a little extra so the people in South Carolina can pretend they're all about individual responsibility and put yellow ribbon decals on their cars and think they're patriotic because they kept the unions out. They need all the help they can get.

Re:I like this

[Omestes]

I feel the same way about LoL, I really enjoyed it, but it is impossible to actually learn not to such without being screamed at during every match. Also the learning curve is artificially obscene, thanks to 600000 fan made terms that I'm supposed to somehow has an a priori grasp on before even playing it. I quit LoL after a week, even if I really enjoyed it, and thus the devs lost whatever money I'd have thrown at them (and Tribes Ascend's devs are that much richer...).

I'm in my 30s, I don't have time for morons, and I have no desire to be in a 1337 in-group anymore.

Re:I like this

[Anonymous Coward]

I dunno dude. Judging from the comments you've made in this article alone- you are sounding an awful lot like the many pricks and griefers I've had to boot off my various game servers over the years. Who knows- maybe you aren't. I find context matters so much in judging these kinds of things.

Personally I've never really found it necessary insult people to help them improve their game. If they are open to improving, they'll listen. In my experience, just the opposite works. Offering friendly advise/pointers trains them up faster than shutting them down with name calling.

The reasoning for your insulting language does sound pretty similar to some of the rationals griefers or just run-of-the-mill antisocial types throw out right before I ban them. They almost always whine how it isn't fair either even though I've posted clearly posted server rules.

Re:I like this

[PopeRatzo]

"Dad taught ME"

Come on, you're getting up and saying others bad, me good. Don't retreat into "what the meaning of is is" language.

He also taught me not to drive without a seat belt. That doesn't mean I do it.

What I said was that "Dad taught me to never, ever look for recognition when you do something good". You don't have to engage in semiotics to know that all that means is that if I should ever do something good, I don't plan to expect special benefit.

I guess you could say that having learned that lesson does make me a better person, say, than you, but that wasn't the point of my post, nor is it a very high threshold of accomplishment.

Re:I like this

[geminidomino]

I'm seem to remember Carlin's suggestions were James Bond-style machine guns behind the headlights, and slamming into reverse when some asshole with his high beams on is riding your ass.

Re:I like this

[koan]

There are 2 females here? /me combs hair

Re:I like this

[grumbel]

And this is why it will probably fail, all you need is a fair group of people to work together.

One interesting aspect of such a system is that it doesn't have to be bulletproof to work, as the goal isn't to get a perfectly reliable rating of the player, but to encourage nice behaviors. So even if some people are gaming the system, as long as the rest of people actually start to behave a little bit better as somebody is now keeping track of their behavior it might work exactly as intended. On top of that Steam accounts aren't easy to sockpuppet, as people invest actual money into them (in the form of buying games), so telling a real account from an automatically created one is pretty trivial.

Re:I like this

[thejynxed]

Yes, but games like LoL are catching on to this, and starting to use behavior pattern matching to figure out when this is going on, and implement appropriate penalties. At least in ladder matches. Believe it or not, it's not exactly difficult to figure out when a normally high-bracket player is trolling the low-ranks (for one thing, they tend to keep on using their high-bracket strategies that "new" players won't know).

Re:I like this

[drfreak]

And we'll enjoy it even more when the jock who beat us up in HS is now working graveyard at the gas station and can't even afford to talk to us online even though he sits at the station with his laptop all night waiting to make change for what is now mostly a credit-card based operation. I'm not rich, but I don't mind paying $100 to be a dick!

Re:I like this

[ghostdoc]

I agree, mostly, except that it's going to give a certain amount of justification to the jerks.

"Hey I paid $100 so I can come on here and behave like an asshat. Quit telling me to stop being an asshat or give me my $100 back!"

Re:I like this

[ghostdoc]

I don't if it's the same in the sates, but in the UK and Australia, it's hats.

Anyone wearing a hat, of any description, while driving a car, is a godawful driver. Old men in flat caps, young guys in baseball caps, girls in those weird sunshade-visor-things.

Re:I like this

[LordLucless]

Welcome, mister false dichotomy. If you don't want to be sworn at by illiterate morons when you don't execute a strategy perfectly because it's your second time playing the game, you must of necessity be a milquetoast attempting to censor everybody else into bland niceness because you can't take criticism.

Re:I like this

[ghostdoc]

So I'm a n00b. I've been playing games for ever, but when I start a new game, I'm a n00b. I don't have any skill. I don't mind that I don't have any skill, because I'm new at this this and learning.

Then I run into someone like you who calls me a dickhead and gives me a frank assessment of my skill.

I realise this makes you feel better about yourself, as you clearly have more skill than me (that's OK, I'm new at this). How does it make me feel? Am I likely to want to carry on learning this game?

That depends on the kind of person I am. If I'm a nice guy (which I am) probably not because learning this game means spending time with dickheads like you, and there are plenty of other games. If I'm a dickhead myself, I'll quit this session because I'm getting yelled at by some dickhead, I'm not winning and I like winning, and I don't care about anyone else.

So the culture of the game evolves to a point where no individual game lasts longer than 2 minutes because as soon as someone makes any kind of mistake they get yelled at, so they quit, so their team folds because they're obviously going to lose. The game stops being about whatever the designers made it to be, and starts being about who gets to yell abuse at who first.

So please stop cursing and giving frank assessment of skills, because it's ruining online gaming.

Re:I like this

[deniable]

Then you can brag about your standing in the Troll League. I'd almost want video of that league in action.

Re:I like this

[GoodNewsJimDotCom]

What is there was "Jerk hell" Everyone can mod people like or dislike. And when searching for games, the people with a high ratio of dislikes get all bundled together. That'd make for some halarity

Re:I like this

[shutdown -p now]

I don't know anything about DOTA, but in e.g. L4D the community is very elitist largely because it's a team game - if a newbie player ends up on your team, it's not just that you have to take an effort teaching them, but you directly suffer until their performance is improved. It doesn't matter much in random pub games when everyone's chilled out; but when people play competitively (which also happens in pubs), they are much less tolerable of newbies and low skill players in general. In fact, I've regularly seen people kicked, and have myself been kicked, for making a single stupid mistake, even if it's something entirely accidental.

Re:I like this

[mandelbr0t]

Ah yes, the "I'm better than you because I have thick skin" argument. True, life is better if you're a bit resilient, and it's unreasonable to expect that everyone will play nice. Your language suggests that you have an equally strong reaction to people who want a functional and supportive community. What about that bothers you? I suspect that you, like any other human, have a desire to belong. Since people don't want to be around you (I can't imagine why), you adopt this anti-social attitude and delude yourself into thinking you're a better person for it.

I'm quite capable of dealing with people like you, and I don't even have to ignore you. I don't resort to name-calling or promoting myself at the expense of others. As a result, I get along with people, and get the sense of community I need. You might want to try some steps in that direction, before you kill yourself or someone else.

Re:I like this

[Andtalath]

Or you know, if I have to chose between things like hanging out with my wife, friends or playing games.
The games better be a nice place to hang out or there is no reason for me to play.

I'm not a loser who needs to full time with arguments over a bloody game.
And I play lots of games still, I love playing.
But when people treat a game like something which is worth bullying people about, they've missed the point entirely.

So, what you are saying is quite simply that you are a lonely fuck who's only percieved value is your gaming skill.
And seriously, I just feel sad at the number of people I see who are exactly like that.

Re:I like this

[Andtalath]

Try abusing people on the street on mistakes they make.
See their reaction.

Humans don't respond well to negatively toned criticism even IF the purpose is constructive.

Besides, as an avid LoL player, I know, with not a single shred of doubt that when people start whining, you lose.
Every single non-constructive word is time wazted from playing, I've seen people wonder why they have 20% less resources than the opposition and then try to explain to them that if they stand around typing 5% of the time, the snowball effect makes it so that the opposite team has already won.

So, yeah, no.
You are quite simply wrong.

Abusive talks works when you play with friends since then you have a certain repertoire, this does not translate well to strangers.

Re:I like this

[thatbloke83]

Unfortunately this problem isn't just limited to DOTA2 - This sort of attitude is prevalent in a LOT of games now - even games that have not necessarily been around for long...

Re:I like this

[thatbloke83]

I just want to call you a fucking moron when you do something stupid and have you be mildly embarrassed and have that mild embarrassment be a motivator to fix your behavior in the future instead of going, "uh, gee, golly gosh, you know it's actually more effective..." and then have somebody mash "UNLIKEABLE" because I didn't make them feel like a perfect snowflake.

And that attitude is precisely the problem.

If I'm doing something stupid/wrong/whatever, I have NO PROBLEM at all with this, if the person additionally tells me, in a NON-OFFENSIVE manner, what I am doing wrong, WHY they think I am doing it wrong, and WHAT I could do differently so that I don't fuck up in the future.

The problem is that people with that sort of attitude are rare, and now people will just call you a stupid fucking noob and tell you to go read some wiki guide and watch 3 hours of youtube guides that teach you precisely fuck all because you aren't actually learning anything when watching said videos. Then they initiate a votekick and kick you from their game for being stupid. Meaning you learn precisely sod all, decide that you instead do not like playing with the sort of people that play the game, and then don't play again.

Re:I like this

[msobkow]

The problem I see is in the definition of "jerk". Had someone from the general public joined one of our LAN parties years ago and heard us yelling and cursing each other out, they would have thought us rude, boorish, and nasty people.

But we weren't nasty. We were friends having fun, complete with the insults and slams that go on in my circle of friends. People who joined us occasionally knew that and didn't take offense at our behaviour, but the general public would have.

Now mind you, when we played on public servers instead of the office server, we shut our traps and stopped insulting everyone. We understood the difference between playing in public and playing in private.

Re:I like this

[PopeRatzo]

My child is on the Autism spectrum. I have an Autism Awareness "ribbon" magnet on my car.

Has it helped?

Re:I like this

[myowntrueself]

Lowtax thanks you for the :10bux:

Re:I like this

[Ginger Unicorn]

And guess what? Slashdot are free to ban pointless verbal abuse from their comments.

Instead of whining about how mean everybody is, why don't you learn the ropes and grow a pair...I mean, sheesh...it's online! You're not getting shoved into the sidewalk or having sand kicked in your face! That's life. Deal with it.

Yes, exactly.

Re:I like this

[coolsnowmen]

Please don't patent this- this idea would make my LoL experiences much better

Re:I like this

[eugene ts wong]

If they are going to do that, then the game makers should go a step further, and try to make the silenced trolls respond in an Elize-like way.

After all, if I try to communicate with somebody, and then he responds to me a in canned, but humourous way, then I might get a chuckle out of it.

Re:I like this

[thePowerOfGrayskull]

In a truck I used to have, I had wired up my reverse lights to an external switch. When an asshat tailgated, I'd flip them on and watch the ensuing mayhem.

I probably wouldn't do that now - in retrospect the asshats' often unpredictable reactions created a hazard worse than tailgating - but *damn* was it funny to watch them at the time.

Re:I like this

[Pubstar]

Most of the time I'm rolling with a group of 2-3 people, we usually dont boot the pubs unless they specifically do really stupid shit over and over again that we've advised against doing... or if they are just being annoying. I just never got why people take pub matches so seriously. If it was a scrim/tourney, yeah, I get uptight about it... but definitely not in pubs.

Then again, I like playing with a handicap, it balances out the game for me. Had a friend last night tell me Im no fun to play against because I skeeted 7 hunters and jockeys in a row with an HR. One might say I'm a... Pubstar /points to user name.

Re:I like this

[shutdown -p now]

You describe L4D2; that's somewhat different, largely due to a more forgiving scoring system. In the original, small mistakes can be amplified a lot due to the way score is computed, so tolerance for them is that much less as a result...

Re:I like this

[Pubstar]

I never played L4D1. I know about the scoring system, and I used to run a server with the old style score system. I think it makes the game a bit more interesting.

Re:I like this

[eZtaR]

Actually you're not far off, currently in the beta, after a match you can choose to commend players within four categories: Friendly, Forgiving, Teaching and Leadership. This also shows up on your public profile. Furthermore you can report players within these categories: Intentional feeding, voice abuse, text abuse and intentional ability abuse. I imagine this is going to be the basis for their new pricing system.

Re:I like this

[PopeRatzo]

Illinois is going to need all the help it can get:

And yet, old Left-wing, Socialist Illinois is #3 in job creation according to Bloomberg News, and Wisconsin, who has a Right-wing, Koch-sponsored governor and legislature, is losing more jobs than any other state in the US, and they continue to lose jobs even as all the states surrounding them (including Illinois) are gaining new jobs, new businesses). Despite what you would hear from the Right-wing media, since Scott Walker took office, more Wisconsin businesses moved to Illinois than the other way around. You won't hear that story, though, because it doesn't fit the narrative of the Republican Governor's Association, which by the way has just gotten another $2million check from David Koch.

Even better, Scott Walker has spend the past 10 days here in Illinois, lecturing us on how we need to do things his way.

Re:I like this

[LittleImp]

That is obviously not a problem looking at how many people play Dota. The game is really not that complex. Just play a couple of games against bots and you are good to go.

Re:I like this

[dontPanik]

"Hacker?" You keep using this word, I do not think it means what you think it means.

Re:I like this

[Archangel Michael]

I'm the same way in real life as I am on the "internet". I find having multiple personalities difficult to manage. I'm a nice guy, because I don't try to be an asshole. But I can be when needed.

Re:I like this

[Pubstar]

There is a reason why 'hacker' is in quotes. In case you have never played a PC game online, I'll give you the rundown of what it means in the gaming world - Anyone who cheats at the game by using aimbots/wallhacks/ESP/ etc. Players of low skill level tend to brand those of high skill level as hackers, since they don't believe anyone could be better at the game than they are.

Its along the same lines that a Producer in the music world is someone who oversees the work being done, but in the electronic music scene, it means someone who is making music. Its both the game 'hacker' and EDM 'producers' are misnomers when it comes down to what they really mean, but they are use this way in their own scenes. Thank you though for 'correcting' my mistake. It was much appreciated.

Re:I like this

[hairyfeet]

In the states its old men in hats and blue haired ladies that can't get their head above the steering wheel, you'll just see the 'do and a pair of white hands..funny that you should bring that up as just the other day the local tobacco shop had the front of their building covered in fiberboard, like someone had driven through the front of the shop. I walked in an said "Blue haired lady or old guy in a hat?" and he said "guy in a hat, how did you know that?" because it is ALWAYS a blue haired lady or an old guy in a hat, always. Say what you want about teen drivers but I have yet to see them drive into a building, yet that had happened no less than 4 times in the past 5 years here and ALL of the incidents were blue haired of old guy hat wearers.

Good Model

[Frankie70]

Basically, Valve is going to tell a paying customer that he is a jerk (indirectly by offering him a higher price than others). Great business model.

Next release, they can tell a paying customer if he is a moron or not - i.e. if a customer paid for a valve game even after being indirectly being told by Valve that he is a jerk, that means he is a moron.

Re:Good Model

[timeOday]

Basically, Valve is going to tell a paying customer that he is a jerk (indirectly by offering him a higher price than others). Great business model.

Were you about to make some argument either way, or is that it?

Re:Good Model

[Anonymous Coward]

Sometimes it is right to fire the customer. Or in this case just charge the pain in the ass customers more until they hopefully leave.

Re:Good Model

[N0Man74]

Basically, Valve is going to tell a paying customer that he is a jerk (indirectly by offering him a higher price than others). Great business model.

Next release, they can tell a paying customer if he is a moron or not - i.e. if a customer paid for a valve game even after being indirectly being told by Valve that he is a jerk, that means he is a moron.

I see nothing wrong with that, when a small number of unpleasant players can ruin the perception and experience of many people. I have quit subscription games in the past because of briefing and anti-social players. For them to tolerate jerks, just because they are paying customers, is shooting themselves in the foot a lot more than making a small number of people, who are ruining the game pay, extra.

Re:Good Model

[myrdos2]

If it removes the 5% of players who ruin the game for everyone else, then I would expect more people to play the game. Alas, most jerks do seem to be morons as well, so we might only be rid of 1-2% of them.

Re:Good Model

[Desler]

Boohoo. Contrary to the popular saying, the customer is not always right. Wise companies know when it's time to cut ties to those customers who aren't worth doing business with.

Re:Good Model

[Fjandr]

No, they're going to tell certain people that they like them, by giving them discounts.

No discount doesn't mean you're a jerk, it just means you haven't made enough of the right impression to get a discount. Those are two very different things. You'd think the people who get off on being insensitive won't care, and those who really do care might change their behavior.

Re:Good Model

[Cenan]

I wonder how long it would take for the "Troll Only" servers to form little bands of mercenaries that will take your money to positively moderate you back into the main stream server queues?

More Importantly

[eldavojohn]

More importantly, why wouldn't the jerks just start new accounts and buy the game at the entry level pricing instead of the jerk pricing?

Re:More Importantly

[Talderas]

A new account means you don't get all your previously earned cheevios linked to it.

Re:More Importantly

[tepples]

Basically only people with a good reputation will get any discount

Then how does one build a reputation in the first place? By the time some people can afford games ("bargain bin" pricing or its Steam counterpart), the publisher has already turned off the online matchmaking servers.

Re:More Importantly

[Anonymous Coward]

By the time some people can afford games

"NEWSFLASH! Stunning discovery made: poor people have less options! Film at 11."

Save up and pay full price for a few games to build a reputation. Duh.

Re:More Importantly

[slimjim8094]

To be fair, Valve hasn't ever turned off the matchmaking servers. I think Sierra's WON servers may have been turned off, but Steam-based versions of CS and TF(1) work just fine. Valve doesn't host servers, and they've never given any indication of giving up on their older games. GoldSrc games even (occasionally, to be fair) still get patches

Re:More Importantly

[rubeldonarmanseo]

i don't understand

Re:More Importantly

[Zencyde]

It sounds like it's the other way around. The jerk pricing is the entry level pricing and you get discounts as you get confirmed as a nice person.

Re:More Importantly

[Drinking Bleach]

Only Counter-Strike really gets patches, which is still insanely popular. As far as that goes, that really makes sense; they are making significant profit off of it, they better keep the game running as smoothly and secure as possible. I'm sure Half-Life 1 gets a trickle of sales, but nobody plays multiplayer HL1 anymore and the game hasn't had an update since 2006; the single-player experience isn't affected by multiplayer cheats.

Re:More Importantly

[Anonymous Coward]

Valve doesn't care about poor people!

Re:More Importantly

[IKnwThePiecesFt]

Though, also to be fair, 2006 is what, 7 years after HL1 came out, and several years after HL2? I think by that point the game had long been in the bargain bin that spurred this topic.

Re:More Importantly

[Anonymous Coward]

I think Sierra's WON servers may have been turned off, but Steam-based versions of CS and TF(1) work just fine.

Do you mean Team Fortress Classic? Team Fortress 1 was a Quake mod.

Re:More Importantly

[tibman]

i'm pretty sure TF2 is free?

Re:More Importantly

[LurkerXXX]

Valve has excellent reduced pricing a while after release, and regular sales that make it nice for poorer folks to buy games. This thing is just a good way to filter out the griefers a bit.

Re:More Importantly

[DarwinSurvivor]

It just recently (a few months back) became free-to-play. You can still pay to get upgrades and weapons faster (which makes starting as a free player nearly impossible).

Re:More Importantly

[Omestes]

Huh? The default weapons are very viable in TF2, I've been playing for years and I still generally stick with the defaults (except for the Medic). TF2 is probably the best example of F2P not being pay-to-win. Yes, there are a couple unbalanced weapons out there, but they aren't really game breaking, especially against a skilled player (TF2 is around 90% skill, if you do badly odds are you're just not playing well enough).

Maybe things have changed in the last couple months (haven't really touched it since it when F2P, too many kids now, and hats... damn hats), but last time I played for any length it seemed as balanced as ever.

Re:More Importantly

[cbhacking]

It's changed dramatically. The idea used to be that new items had differen tradeoffs, and that if you didn't have them then you were more or less even on power with those who did. You lacked versatility and flexibility, perhaps (to use a medic example, there are times when crits are more important than invulnerability) but in theory the items were balanced against eachother. Additionally, the items didn't tremendously change the classes - each was still more-or-less played the same way (medic heals, soldier shoots rockets, demo shoots gravity-sensitive explosives, engineer builds turrets, etc.).

Now, that's all been thrown out. There are now weapons, or sets of gear (including hat), that are flat-out upgrades without drawbacks. There are new classes (effectively; kits of gear that alter pretty much everything about a given class) that, although perhaps not strictly better than the other ones, offer completely new gameplay options.

While I'm not opposed to a game evolving over time, I find TF2's changes to be unacceptable, and an excellent example of how to fuck up a game (regardless of F2P or not). Of course, I can't return it (yes, I paid for it, back when it cost money) or resell it, so I've taken a different approach: Valve doesn't get any of my money anymore. I've played DotA 2 (a friend gave me a key) but even if it ever replaces HoN in my preferred list of DotA-like games, I won't spend a cent on it. The last game I bought on Steam was... Mass Effect 2, maybe? I don't even redeem the Steam keys for Humble Bundle games; why would I want DRM added to my currently DRM-free games?

Re:More Importantly

[rtb61]

F2P, everyone always ignores the most important difference PVP or PVE or a combination. Player versus player always seems to be a suck in driven by nothing but which player is willing to spend the most money to win, hint, it is always the spoilt brat, jackasses that make multi-player gaming unbearable unless you can avoid them.

Simplest route to keeping multi-player games going, incorporate player versus enemy 'only', that people can play only against enemies and never have to encounter spoilt brats. If players choose to make use of player versus player elements they can but it should never be a requirement.

Team fortress 2 for example might be even more fun with three and fourway battles, with the third and fourth teams being robots, just to add chaos. Even in regular team fortress, rather than adding players to a game, replacing robots would likely work better thus maintaining numbers in the game.

Re:More Importantly

[hairyfeet]

Reallly....(looks at corpse where someone slammed a rocket up my ass for the 30th time)..."hey dead HL dude get up! There is nobody there to shoot you!" I guess the zombies must have taken over or something as I got HL1 DM as part of a HL bundle on the big Xmas Steam sale and I never have a problem finding multiple people more than willing to blast a rocket up my ass. Now my Bioshock II MP? It can take 4 or 5 minutes before enough straggle in to have a match but to be fair they really broke MP on that one (need to reach level 40 before the good weapons and plasmids open up, before that you are cannon fodder) but with HL 1 DM I can fire that up and be ass deep in asplosions and mayhem in seconds.

Freemium model necessarily attracts jerks...

[LordNicholas]

...If the League of Legends community is any indication.

Seriously, those guys suck.

Re:Freemium model necessarily attracts jerks...

[Luckyo]

I think it's less of an issue with monetization and more of an issue with DOTA format. I've played it in HoN, I played it in SC2 DOTA mods like SOLTS, I played it in LoL. They all suffer from the same problem in spite of being 3 different models. HoN was buy to play, SC2 was buy the main game, play custom games for free and LoL was free to play. LoL is not actually/technically freemium as paying customer doesn't get any gameplay advantages over someone playing for free.

DOTA format just makes people into assholes because someone making mistakes punishes the entire team in a very direct and visible manner. So people become assholes to the "feeders" very quickly, as they directly ruin their gameplay experience.

Re:Freemium model necessarily attracts jerks...

[CanHasDIY]

...If the League of Legends community is any indication.

Seriously, those guys suck.

Word. I completely ditched LoL within about a week after getting destroyed every single fucking game by high-level douchebags who would only play against low level noobs such as myself.

Terrible thing, when the community is the reason for a games downfall.

Re:Freemium model necessarily attracts jerks...

[Anubis IV]

It's not just freemium that attracts jerks. Free in general does.

Marco Arment, the developer of Instapaper, talks about his development process and business decisions relatively regularly, and I recall one of his posts regarding his decision to drop the free version of his app. If you scroll down to the "Undesirable customers" heading, you'll see some of his talk about the sorts of stuff he noticed as a trend between the free and paid versions of his app.

Though he doesn't out-and-out say it this way, his point is basically that people attracted to free are cheapskates who tend to have unreasonable demands and a sense of entitlement. I'm inclined to agree as well. Having people pay even a buck or two makes them much more invested and filters out a lot of the riffraff who you'd rather not be dealing with.

So, it's not just in games where you get undesirable types with a free-product business model.

Re:Freemium model necessarily attracts jerks...

[skine]

So obviously we should make /. a fee-based service.

Re:Freemium model necessarily attracts jerks...

[WrecklessSandwich]

So obviously we should make /. a fee-based service.

It's worked out well enough for the Something Awful forums. That didn't even start with the intention of using it as a revenue stream. There was just this one guy that kept banning that would come back through various proxies, etc. and Lowtax said screw it, $10 registration fee. Problem solved.

Re:Freemium model necessarily attracts jerks...

[lilrobbie]

A little more detail to this as well. It is the direct punishment that will then drag on for 10mins that seems to breed ragers. E.g., in LoL, after you die you get to stare at your screen for 1min waiting to respawn. Gives people plenty of time to get all worked up and very abusive :/

TF2 for example doesn't usually have the same intensity of hatred that I see regularly in LoL.

Re:Freemium model necessarily attracts jerks...

[Anubis IV]

You're conflating a symptom and a reaction. Free attracts jerks: symptom. Going fee-based: one of many solutions. Marco solved it differently by dropping his free option. Valve is solving it by charging different amounts. Slashdot solves it by using moderation.

Just because someone used one solution and had it work for them does not mean I espouse its use everywhere else. Pick the solution that works best for you. Suggesting the same solution for everyone is just silly.

Re:Freemium model necessarily attracts jerks...

[skine]

Honestly, I was going for Funny.

How it would up "Insightful" is beyond me.

Re:Freemium model necessarily attracts jerks...

[Anubis IV]

Ah, gotcha. I caught the sarcasm, but thought it was intended to make the opposite point. It does work a lot better as Funny. :D

Re:Freemium model necessarily attracts jerks...

[LittleImp]

That doesn't explain why there are so many assholes and ragers in every other online-game. It really has nothing to do with the fact that the game is free.

Re:Freemium model necessarily attracts jerks...

[Anubis IV]

I never claimed that it explained all behavior of that sort. I merely suggested that free tends to attract those sorts of people, and I would hold to that idea. Just because it attracts them, however, doesn't mean that other things are unable to attract them as well, or that there cannot be additional explanations for that sort of behavior. It doesn't need to explain the presence of jerks everywhere that jerks appear for it to be a valid idea.

Europe

[Anonymous Coward]

Good luck selling that in Europe. I don't think it will pass the fair trading :)

Re:Europe

[Luckyo]

What on earth are you talking about?

Re:Europe

[Luckyo]

Discriminatory pricing within EU unified economic zone based on location is indeed illegal. This is very specific law, aimed to make sure that EU is in fact a unified economic zone.

What does it have to do with pricing people based on behaviour?

Re:Europe

[Fjandr]

Really. It's not discriminatory pricing based on location. It's selective discounts based on customer profiles.

Might have the opposite effect?

[wamatt]

"Dude I paid $100 bucks to be a jerk. Did you? No then STFU asshole."

Re:Might have the opposite effect?

[cronostitan]

Actually, that might not be too far from reality. It takes a small obnoxious group of jerks to make the life of everyone else miserable.
And even worse: They will feel that it is their good right to harass everyone else because they paid for it.

Re:Might have the opposite effect?

[Cederic]

Actually, I'd be with them. Charge me extra because I'm not 'nice' and I feel no obligation to even try.

Sometimes it's nice to be honest with people, and sadly work usually isn't the place for, when out dancing I'd lose out on some good.. dances, and while I'm out shooting, the other people are armed too. So really it's only when gaming that I get to be completely honest about the people around me.

Re:Might have the opposite effect?

[Anonymous Coward]

Then you have issues $100 won't fix.

Re:Might have the opposite effect?

[lilrobbie]

There is a difference between being honest, and being abusive though. If you want to pay extra to tell someone what you really think, I'm cool with that. If you want to pay extra so you think you can spend 20mins abusing someone up and down the isles, making some other player's life utterly miserable... I'd quite happily tell you to go jump in the ocean :)

Re:Might have the opposite effect?

[Andtalath]

So, you're a pathetic fuck with anger issues, thus you want to take it out on people having a good time?

Nice.

Re:Might have the opposite effect?

[Cederic]

Interesting, did you pay extra to make that comment?

While I may or may not be a pathetic fuck, and my mood swings don't stray into anger management complexities, I'd actually just prefer not to buy the game.

It's interesting however that you interpret 'being honest' with 'pathetic' and 'anger issues'. I pity you.

Gaming the system

[capnchicken]

The real jerks will make sure they game whatever reporting tool there is in order to make other people look like jerks.

Re:Gaming the system

[GLMDesigns]

Coming up with metrics that works has been shown to be more than a little difficult to implement: even if you could prevent people from gaming the system. About the "only" way to prevent gaming (that I can think of) is to confirm real-person identity, in otherwords no multiple personas and not allowing a group from rating each other up. The first can be done; the second can be mitigated - but we still have the basic metrics to work out.

Re:Gaming the system

[tool462]

Note to self: mod capnchicken Troll every time he posts for outing our ruse!

***Extra note to self: don't post "notes to self" on a public form***

Re:Gaming the system

[interkin3tic]

I'm not sure. In my experience, microsoft seems to be doing a decent job of policing xbox live.

Yes, you read that right. MICROSOFT is doing a decent job. Reports that xbox live is a cesspit of cursing 13 year olds are greatly exaggerated. The secret seems to be having actual people be the judges: it's not a simple system where x number of complaints = marked as bad and banned.

If MS can get it semi-right, you have to expect that Valve can do a passable job too.

Poor Chozo

[Anonymous Coward]

I can't even fathom what Chozo will need to pay if this payment model is implemented.

Search Youtube for "Chozo Team Fortress 2" if you're lost.

Re:Poor Chozo

[littlebigbot]

Well, that's just amusing.

First Jerk to Fine:

[CanHasDIY]

Whoever posted this summary without spelling out exactly what DOTA is.

Second asshole to be fired from the cannon would be the article writer who did the same fucking thing.

Re:First Jerk to Fine:

[tepples]

Apparently "Defense of the Ancients" is a Warcraft III mod, and not everybody owns a copy of Warcraft III.

Re:First Jerk to Fine:

[Jammer6502]

I halfway agree with you since a lot of people on this site have never heard of it. However, generally the people that play DOTA just sound out the acronym, they almost never refer to it as Defense of the Ancients. So in effect the name of the game is just DOTA, what it stands for is meaningless. Similar to how people use the word radar not realizing that it originally meant RAdio Detection And Ranging. To each his own though, I never liked the game anyway.

Re:First Jerk to Fine:

[Necroman]

DOTA = "Defense of the Ancients".

The basics of the game are that you control a single unit (a hero), and you work with a team of people (normally 5 other players). So it becomes a 6 vs 6 battle where you are trying to destroy the other teams base. This game style has been dubbed ARTS (action real time strategy).

  It originally started as a Warcraft 3 mod. Since then, numerous companies have copied the style.

1) You have Blizzard creating a DOTA mod for Starcraft 2.
2) You have Valve creating DOTA 2. (note that Valve and Blizzard are having a trademark war right now over DOTA). Dota 2 is a stand-alone game.
3) LoL (League of Legends) is a DOTA style came released back in 2009. It's a stand-alone game with persistant characters.

Re:First Jerk to Fine:

[X0563511]

I play League of Legends. I didn't know what DOTA was.

How might you explain this, Mr. Jerky Jerk?

Re:First Jerk to Fine:

[Barefoot Monkey]

Why? Does it say 'News for WoWtards' at the top?

DotA is for Warcraft 3, not WoW. So this would fall under "News for W3rds".

Re:First Jerk to Fine:

[CanHasDIY]

In more formal writing, like, say, journalism, the proper approach is to introduce the agency, organization, or other entity that uses an abbreviation, or abbreviations of terminology, by spelling out the name on first reference. I.e., when referencing the FBI in an article, the first usage should spell out Federal Bureau of Investigation. This is to mitigate confusion as to the topic of the writing.

Also, it is appropriate but not necessary to spell out the name if the subject is referenced multiple times in a short period; for example:

The FBI is a federal agency. The FBI handles cases involving both domestic and foreign entities.

could also be written as

The Federal Bureau of Investigation is a federal agency. The FBI handles cases involving both domestic and foreign entities.

I'll give the submitter a break, since they didn't write the article (though, had it been me, I would have spelled out the acronym myself for that very reason), but the writer is obviously a hack.

Re:First Jerk to Fine:

[Cederic]

Hmm. Someone pointing out that they've never heard of DOTA so you flame them for.. not knowing what DOTA is?

Shit, I've been PC gaming since '91 (and "home computer" gaming and programming since '82) and I only know what DOTA is because I saw it mentioned as a genre a while back and went hunting across the 'net to find out what it is. I've since played a couple of DOTA based games and found them entirely unrewarding, so it doesn't surprise me at all that someone hasn't come across that style of game or particularly that particular implementation.

I mean, shit, Blizzard fucked up every RTS they made after Warcraft II, it's hardly a surprise many PC gamers haven't played a mod for WCIII.

Re:First Jerk to Fine:

[JustAnotherIdiot]

I've played DOTA before and I didn't have a clue what it stood for until just now.

Re:First Jerk to Fine:

[boxxertrumps]

You missed the internet when WC3 was in it's heyday. Never checked out blizzcon or the like.
You aren't between 19 and 30 i'd guess.

Re:First Jerk to Fine:

[boxxertrumps]

It's pretty common knowledge. They never spell out DARPA or SOPA or NASA, do they?

Re:First Jerk to Fine:

[CanHasDIY]

It's pretty common knowledge. They never spell out DARPA or SOPA or NASA, do they?

Who is "they?" Surely you're not referring to professional writers, as they above anyone should know the proper format by which to address acronyms.

As for it being "pretty common knowledge," that's an obvious fallacy as if it were common knowledge, people wouldn't have to ask.

Re:First Jerk to Fine:

[X0563511]

I'm 26. Not everyone plays the same games. I can't stand games like WC3. Starcraft I can tolerate, almost entirely because of the setting.

Re:First Jerk to Fine:

[Skythe]

FYI Valve have dropped the "Defense of the Ancients" moniker and now more generically refer to it as Dota.

Re:First Jerk to Fine:

[nrook]

In fairness to the summary, they did spell out what DOTA 2 is. DOTA 2 is an online strategy game developed by Valve which will likely have a "freemium" business model.

What they didn't say is what DOTA stands for. But as far as I know, to Valve, DOTA stands for DOTA. Valve has consistently called their game "DOTA 2". They have never let on that the name is an acronym, so it isn't. DotA was "Defense of the Ancients." DOTA 2 is just "DOTA 2".

I believe their second choice was "Dota is Not a Windows Emulator", but that didn't go over quite as well.

Re:First Jerk to Fine:

[cbhacking]

I'm not sure why HoN (Heroes of Newerth, by S2 Games) was left off this list... it started out as actual DotA clone, and has diverged slightly but is still played by the same mechanics. Unlike LoL, which has never been more than like DotA than, say, WarCraft 2 was like StarCraft, a DotA player will immediately be able to play HoN even if using one of the new heroes (with no more difficulty than they would have playing a new hero on DotA).

I get that LoL is popular (though I truly can't understand why; the concept of flat-out bonuses to some players just because they've played more in a competitive multiplayer environment is abhorrent) but HoN is doing quite well for itself and certainly is bigger than DotA 2 (still in beta of course, but listing DotA 2 and not HoN seems weird).

Re:First Jerk to Fine:

[cbhacking]

Your last line confuses me, badly. I mean, WC2 was fun (for its time), but SC was a much better game (getting off the tile-based movement system, getting away from two damn-near-identical races, adding more sequence to the campaign, a deeper tech tree with more upgrade levels to allow you to prioritize resource spending more broadly, and so on) and also supported much better online play (though they eventually added Battle.Net support to WC2). WC3 was a different *kind* of RTS, but it was still an excellent one in its own right, sold exceptionally well, and its heavily customizable maps and surprisingly versatile game engine led to some incredible "mods"... such as DotA, which has spawned an entire new genre.

That said, I'm no fan of SC2. Its gameplay is good, if nothin particularly exciting, but the mandatory use of Battle.Net is inexcusable to me. That's the third RTS that Blizzard release post-WC2 though, so I'd be curious what you thought was wrong with the other two...

Re:First Jerk to Fine:

[boxxertrumps]

Then it was already explained in your comment's GP... It's a mod for a game you hate.

Re:First Jerk to Fine:

[boxxertrumps]

Most people don't have to ask. Out of all the comments I read, only yours had any issue with this.

I meant "they", the Slashdot editors. Just in the summaries of a couple of today's articles:
NASA: http://news.slashdot.org/story/12/04/20/2245215/canadian-bureacracy-cant-answer-simple-question-whats-this-study-with-nasa
DARPA: http://science.slashdot.org/story/12/04/20/2146258/hypersonic-test-aircraft-peeled-apart-after-3-minutes-of-sustained-mach-20-speed

You're being silly. If you're on slashdot, you already have a connection to the internet. There's no reason you can't lookup things you don't know.

Re:First Jerk to Fine:

[erroneus]

Kids can't be bothered with clarity of languae these days. In fact, adults can't either. Context is everything and without it, you're lost... and it seems people can't be bothered with considering whether or not they are making themselves clear.

Beyond "gaming" I just had a conversation at work through email where I was completely baffled by the request of one of our contractors. He was looking for a particular type of file and he kept referring to "xxx.* files as if I knew what he meant. I didn't. I could have just responded with all of the energy and accuracy he displayed by just saying "WTF?!" But instead, I had to explain that (1) no such "xxx." files existed and that if there is special meaning to this expression, it is lost on me.

Language skills are being lost everywhere we look. It seems people are just "kanging" things they say and presume people know what they are talking about. Yes, I just said "kanging." It's from another episode of "what the fuck are you talking about?!" Turns out, at least in the context of android custom ROM building/hacking, to "kang" means to use parts or all of other peoples' work into your compilation. I read that term for DAYS before finally begging for an explanation of what the hell that means. There was a whole lot of "if you don't know, I'm not going to tell you" reaction out there meaning either they don't know themselves or they lack the linguistic ability to translate.

People are just becoming more and more stupid.

Re:First Jerk to Fine:

[Necroman]

Agreed, it probably should have been included. I sorta rushed to post with the information I knew off-hand. Though, the links to the DOTA wiki entry and ATRS entry both include HoN.

Re:First Jerk to Fine:

[shutdown -p now]

(not the original GP) I am into PC gaming, I just don't care about these kinds of games (and I found WC3 to be very meh back in the day). Why do you automatically assume that everyone shares your interests just because they play on the same platform?

Re:First Jerk to Fine:

[Fjandr]

Then again, you might not be.

Not everyone has their head stuck up Blizzard's nether regions. I game avidly and, though I recognize the game to which it belongs, had no idea what DOTA stood for prior to reading it in comments attached to this story.

Re:First Jerk to Fine:

[benthurston27]

DOTA stands for DOTA's Only Technically an Acronym?

So

[wisnoskij]

Valve thinks it is OK to be a jerk if you are rich enough to afford $100?
And they think that it is a good idea to game the multiplayer experience of everyone to make as little as $100?

This problem has already been solved. charge everyone the same and ban the jerks.

Re:So

[VGPowerlord]

Yes, an furthermore $100 wasn't exactly a figure plucked out of the air... it's the cost of the "Something Special for Someone Special" item in the TF2 store, which when purchased, sends out a message to all players currently playing TF2 that "[Person A] has given a [Renamed Thing] to [Person B]. Congratulations!"

Needless to say, this item is used by jerks with various messages. For $100 a pop.

Did I mention the item's other use is a barely-visible cosmetic item in the game?

Re:So

[trancemission]

Oh if I had the mod points.......welcome to the Internet Steam.

Rich people != jerks - give me a break.

If I don't play TF2?

[cwrinn]

How much does it cost me if they have no data because I don't play much PVP FPSes?

personal pronouns are your friend

[Anonymous Coward]

Now, a real jerk that annoys everyone

"Who". A real jerk who annoys everyone.

-- a real jerk who annoys everyone

Re:personal pronouns are your friend

[Shoe Puppet]

That, as opposed to which, can be used for both people and things.

Re:personal pronouns are your friend

[Anonymous Coward]

Now, a real jerk that annoys everyone

"Who". A real jerk who annoys everyone.

-- a real jerk who annoys everyone

"That" was more appropriate in this case, as we are trying to dehumanize jerks here. Don't go implying that they are people too...

Mind Control!

[Anachragnome]

Mind Control!

Seriously, who decides what is "acceptable" behavior? Valve? Players acting as moderators? GROUPS of players acting as moderators? PAID GROUPS? (see where I'm going with this?)

The moment you start applying anything other then peer pressure is the moment where distrust SHOULD come into play. Some people should never be allowed such control over others, in-game or out. Sure, some people are dicks, but handing out baseball bats (excuse me, Ban-Hammers) to the disgruntled is not the solution.

"The Disgruntled Ones is now recruiting for Scalper positions, as well as Guild Attorney. Must have Moderation Points!"

Re:Mind Control!

[Opportunist]

Groupthink, of course. Be, do and say what others like and you're beloved.

Gee, you haven't been long here on /., have you?

Re:Mind Control!

[RyuuzakiTetsuya]

if you think that smacking wrists and telling people to play nice is mind control now, I can't even imagine what you were like as a kindergartener. Sheesh. Not everyone thinks life is a survival-of-the-assholeiest struggle where life and death are determined by how much of a jerk you can be online.

Unfortunately, those who DO are DOTA players. HON sure was fun to get yelled at over my ear piece because I'd never even heard of what a DOTA was before. it was kind of fun, but I had no interest in being verbally abused the entire time.

Re:Mind Control!

[Cederic]

Yes. But that's because Slashdot discussions generally include multiple diverse viewpoints intermingled and intelligently argued, in amongst the jerks, the DOTA fanatics and the people going "WTF is DOTA and why should we care if jerks want to pay for it?"

Re:Mind Control!

[scot4875]

Yeah, it really sucks that they're doing this. Tolerating jerks while playing video games has been necessary forever! I mean, I remember back in the SNES days when we'd play Mario Kart, and all those jerks that we didn't like would just come over and talk shit and be generally unpleasant assholes and we couldn't do ANYTHING about it! It's not like we could just ask them to *leave* or anything.

</sarcasm>

It's sad that generally the only way to get a decent online gaming experience is to play exclusively with people you know. There's also no reason it needs to be that way. I can go out and play a game of pool or cards with someone I've never met, and most of the time it manages to be a fairly enjoyable experience. Occasionally you'll get some overly competitive players, but there's a big difference between competitiveness and being a jerk ass.

--Jeremy

Re:Mind Control!

[boxxertrumps]

Slashdot is falling apart with this scheme, you're right. WON'T SOMEONE THINK OF THE CHILDREN!

Re:Maybe Valve should concentrate on other things.

[mistermocha]

Can't resist.... Maybe Valve should finally finish the Half-Life series

Re:Discrimination

[Phasma Felis]

Fun Fact! No law actually prohibits discriminating against jerks.

Re:DOTA == Dead On The Arrival

[dclozier]

undoing wrong moderation... actually thought this was what DOTA stood for. (my bad)
Defense of the Ancients

Wasted Karma!

[SoTerrified]

I've been playing TF2 since it came out. I often help new players with tips and advice and I've received a few gifts for my efforts, making me think I'd be high up on Gabe's "Don't be a jerk" scale...

But I have no interest in DOTA2! Waaaahh!!

So, in a nutshell,

[Opportunist]

Everyone who sucks at the game will get it for free, and everyone who's good at it will have to pay full price.

Face it, it's more fun for most people to play with target dummies.

Re:So, in a nutshell,

[BinarySolo]

I'm guessing you've never played DotA or anything in the genre? The target dummies you refer to have this annoying habit of always ending up on your team. Considering that even one weak link on a team will usually cost the game, this is what creates the rampant noob-hostile community in the genre.

I actually think the opposite of what you said will happen - everyone will game the system to report the terrible players (skill-wise, not personality-wise) from their team, and new players will eventually be turned away because they keep getting reported and having to pay more.

Re:So, in a nutshell,

[PaulMorel]

What's worse is that if you're a good, forgiving player, you will get matched with the winless idiots ... sigh (see my post below)

We've all been chosen last

[Culture20]

Look, we've all been chosen last for some sport. Doesn't matter if we were good or not, we were the nerds. That why we play video games now and not pickup b-ball with the other over-40 guys. Don't make us feel like we've been picked last (pay $200 for voice) or we won't play. Without those guys paying $200, no one will get to play for free (or now marginally annoying guys get targeted to cough up the dough).

The secret formula

[VGPowerlord]

How it works is this:

If you've played TF2:

(Medic hours + Soldier hours + Heavy hours) / (Spy hours + Sniper hours + Pyro hours). The higher the number, the less you pay.

Re:The secret formula

[KlomDark]

Infinity

Re:The secret formula

[Barefoot Monkey]

I wonder where I'd fit in this - I almost always play Scout/Demo/Engineer. OK, I admit I do take the the pyro quite often because they're really good at protecting allies from explosives and fire, can remove sappers, keep spies away and have my favourite weapon: the almighty flaregun of sniper-slaying. I hope that doesn't make me a jerk.

Re:The secret formula

[baenpb]

Why are pyros hated so much? I think they're one of the most strategically effective classes. I understand rage against snipers and spies, but pyros REALLY help round out a team if used effectively. -Demo/Pyro/Medic player

Re:The secret formula

[hibiki_r]

Bad pyros are horrible for a team, and most Pyros are bad.

Now, someone that has no problems reflecting rockets, understands that pyros can't charge straight against a team, and can pick off medics in the chaos of close quarters combat is welcome in any team.

Re:The secret formula

[VGPowerlord]

And what is 0/0?

Valve will patch that bug. Eventually.

Not a bad idea

[doston]

But, tt's roughly the gaming equivalent of Ladies Night at the classy local sports bar.

Re:Not a bad idea

[Requiem18th]

Buy me a hat and I'll pocket you all night long.

This concept could promote good behaviour at least

[ace37]

I don't think charging extra or penalizing annoying players will ever work--it's too easy to game that into an offensive weapon--and I do think manipulation of any new system should be expected as an eventuality. But that's no different from any other rules of the game.

The fundamental idea, to crowdsource who is a 'fun' player from other players and then give them discounts or incentives sounds great. (voice chat?) Good crowdsourcing models are out there, but the real trick is to figure out ways to enable true 'fun' players to to spread their influence that don't cut both ways. It does no good if it can be readily manipulated to empower and enable bad behavior.

Starting with the goal of making the game free to play for the most 'fun' players seems like a reasonable thing. Maybe WoW could not charge your next monthly fee if everybody thought you were among the awesomest 1% of users. Some would game the system, but bad in-game behavior would not be directly magnified, and users who are good influences would get public support.

Re:DOTA == Dead On The Arrival

[SrLnclt]

Glad I'm not the only one clueless on what DOTA is short for. Would be nice to have it spelled out somewhere in the article description if its not ubiquitous on here like HTTP or SOPA.

BTW... DOA is the acronym for Dead on Arrival.

Re:I play tf2 but won't play DOTA

[X0563511]

I think you are confusing skill with personality. They are not related.

Re:I play tf2 but won't play DOTA

[VGPowerlord]

Anyway I can see this statement working better - should get TF3 for free, because of past behavior in TF2 - that makes much more sense.

Even ignoring the fact that Valve can't count to 3, I can't see TF3 coming out anytime soon... some people have invested a lot of money into their virtual items in TF2.

I suspect Valve will continue updating TF2 with new things and new game engine versions until people finally stop paying them for in-game items, or it drops below a certain threshold.

Lets get back on topic.

[phazemstr]

Gabe Newell has gotten fat. If we pick on him, we have to pay more for DOTA 2.

Sorry, but 2 is the limit for Valve games.

[dstyle5]

Sorry, but once Valve gets the game to 2 thats when they no longer make games in the series, with Counter Strike being the exception. Once they make Counter Strike 2 then its will be the last game in the series.

1. Half-Life 2: Episode 2
2. Left 4 Dead 2
3. Portal 2
4. Dota 2
5. Team Fortress 2

Heads Up

[Dripdry]

Just for those of us who don't play all the new shiny games that come out, or who have professions that keep us pretty shackled to work, or who are just plain ignorant, could the summary PLEASE SPELL OUT wtf DOTA is? It's sounds really stupid when I say it in my head or out loud, like "Dote" only said in a baby's voice. Doesn't make me want to play it.

rest of the discussion is great, but please please please provide enough information for people to know what the heck is going on, submitters?

Currently, Matchmaker Cripples Nice Players

[PaulMorel]

As a Dota 2 player with lots of commends, this makes me a little bit happy. I work hard for those commends. Buuuut ... because I have so many "teaching" commends, I OFTEN get matched with new people. And this really makes me mad. The matchmaker sees that I have tons of "forgiving" and "teaching" commends, and it constantly puts me with players with 0-20 wins, even though I have over 100 wins. In short, I like getting a discount, but I don't like getting a competitive disadvantage. I would rather pay full price, and get fair matchups.

Re:Currently, Matchmaker Cripples Nice Players

[baenpb]

I'll back this up. One solution is to try to find people to play with regularly. If you have a group of 5, then matchmaking is done based on your team's collective skill, and you don't need to worry about teammates

Re:EVE online

[19thNervousBreakdown]

Oh man, are you going to be upset when you find out how rich the average Goon is.

Mining an unlimited resource

[David Gerard]

... Wow. Did Valve just monetise Internet dickishness?

F2P Content reduction

[baenpb]

My biggest fear about this model is that I will be limited in the gameplay elements I have available. For instance, when the game comes out, I was really hoping to pay a flat fee so that all heroes/items are available. I don't care about hats and skins, those should cost exorbitant money to the player so valve can keep up their profitable business model. If it's based on how "nice" a player is(however that's determined), I'll still have to play a few games before I can unlock items at a reasonable price. And I'll have to make sure I play support classes, help people out, buy wards, give compliments, and upvote other friendly people to increase my ranking (I'm guessing criteria here) This being said, I've played the beta extensively. I am a friendly player, and I do help noobs. I did the same in TF2...so I'm sure this model will benefit me more than others, I just don't want to have limited content (or pay super high prices) when the game comes out.

Many problems foreseen...

[RanceJustice]

I don't see how this can be a true, honest viable metric to make decisions by. First is the major issue at hand - does "Good for the community" mean "Nice guy who generally is a cordial player" or does it mean the more marketing-centric decision of "Is likely to/already has demonstrated the ability to - buy lots of DLC, get lots of other people to buy DLC, refer people to the game in exchange for content, have a well known social media/blog presence, sell one's concept of privacy for a free hat, participate or be involved in the "esports" streamcasting world, get lots of people to vote for them and/or a particular game-related bit of info etc..."?

Despite the fact we usually consider Valve a "good guy", this is a serious issue and I am unwilling to give anyone a free pass when it comes to a monetization scheme in gaming these days. A perfectly affable player who is friendly to newbies, plays well with others, and generally brightens the server but only plays occasionally for shorter bursts of time is far too easy to write off instead of picking the more financially-direct rewarding option. Someone who's a jerk but is worth it to advertisers or spends a lot of money and time on the game is more valuable than X number of casual friendly players. There are all sorts of ways to bend "Its good for the community" to suit your worldview if you wish to justify it. MOBA type games like DOTA have basically proven an extreme example of this - they all pretty much subsist nearly entirely on "serious" gamers who are outright cuntbaskets in their interactions with others; verbal insults at the slightest wrong move is par for the course and there is to date little if anything developers or communities choose to do to change this. Rather, it is embraced because to eliminate these abrasive players is to cut their revenue stream immensely at this point. The very same attitudes pervade the competitive fighting game scene and "E-Sports" play as a whole. "Good for the community" or "likable to play with" doesn't have to mean an affable, respectful person and it is far too easy to overlook all but the most egregious behavior so long as the perpetrator provides a revenue stream.

Secondly, even if it is implemented in an idyllic manner, there is a huge potential for corruption innate in the system because it is either 1) Putting decisions in the hands of fellow players and/or 2) provides known benchmarks and milestones that can then be purposefully achieved/exploited while. "Likable to play with" is completely subjective. Some would rather a top notch player on their team who is a trash-talking, abrasive asshole than a less skilled but friendly player because for them winning makes for a more enjoyable play session regardless of their teammate's attitude. For others, its the reverse. If I piss off someone with enough guild/clan/messageboard/socialnetwork friends and time on their hands, I may be down-voted to oblivion needlessly. If I have a virtual "army" of my own, I can convince them to up-vote myself, which also renders anyone legitimately down-voting me nearly moot as I have to many upvotes to cancel them out, providing a certain amount of buffer. Bribery and threats will be commonplace, as will the formation of webs and networks of players for the purpose of protection, aggression, or just to game the system. If fellow players are at all involved in someone's status, there is little potential for it to work well. If the "achievements" necessary to attain lower priced games and other bonus content are made public, then anyone with the time an inclination will work to game the system. This may end up harming the very community they were put in place to protect. For instance, players may keep more to private servers and well known friends, because the wildcard notion of playing with others could jeopardize their status, which leads to less of an overall community but instead forms tribal groups who hold dominion over small islands.

I cannot see any good coming from such a system as either a perversion of

Re:Many problems foreseen...

[bluemonq]

It wasn't a real system; he was just throwing ideas out there. The reason this was brought up (and this interview occurred LAST May) was simply an off-the-cuff example of a mechanism of rewarding players who give back to the community. The fact that they haven't actually implemented that exact system should clue you into a possible reason why they didn't actually do it.

Problem is with ...

[blahplusplus]

... game developers. Game developers never learn that if you have a game based on player vs player you're naturally going to get people angry. People don't like to lose. All competitive games had this problem going back to the beginning. If you want a game where people don't get angry then you have to change the goals for winning and make game modes that don't penalize you heavily for having bad players. i.e. where only 1 or 2 people can carry a whole team of newbies, or a fundamental change in goals where newbies dying has little effect on the overall game.

Games like DOTA naturally heavily penalize you for having bad players, in games like first person shooters you usually have these people just change to the winning team.

Also many newbies while I can understand not wanting to be harassed by assholes often just can't play competitively even with a lot of practice and learning. Competitive games are natural breeding grounds for hostility because no one likes sucking and no one likes losing but most people who play competitive games aren't very good.

there's a certain demographic

[circletimessquare]

that votes a certain way, that will never understand this, and destroys so much of the country economically, socially, and politically, and really really believes their antisocial cruelty is a good thing

No need to worry.

[bluemonq]

It's not a real proposal; it was taken out of context (this Q&A happened months ago). He was just throwing things out there.

Oh, get ready for this

[SmallFurryCreature]

In Holland a child molestor is currently on trial. His major griefance? That people don't appreciate the camera work he put into his video's of him raping kids that he then put on the internet. Serious.

In dutch http://nos.nl/artikel/357245-robert-m-toont-twee-gezichten.html but hey, all the cool kids speak dutch!

Hij vindt ook dat sommigen met wie hij het materiaal deelde, hem niet genoeg waardeerden voor zijn 'werk'.

He finds that some of who he shared the material with, didn't appreciate him enough for his 'work'.

As the commenter below says, this is how sociopath thinks, see the complete mind fuck of Breivik's testimony this week in Norway. People can get some really strange idea's in their head. Like software wants to be free! Mwahahahaha! I am not insane, the voices tell me I am not!

The same in any group activity, the group

[SmallFurryCreature]

It speaks badly of gamers that so many are so totally opposed to the idea of referees and club rules. Every sport has them. Oh wait, what do FPS multiplayer gamers do the moment they got a tiny bit of resources to spend? Oh yeah, set up private servers.

Don't want to play by anyone's rules? Then play alone. Anytime you are in a group, there are rules and if you break them, you are soon kicked out of that group. Doesn't matter whether it is the rule of society, law, a relationship or the soccer association. People need rules. Those who don't are either totally unaware of how life works or complete and utter sociopaths.

Mind you, I am not surprised that a lot of people in this sector don't get it. One of things about Autism is that the victims just don't get social interaction. An autist, functional or not who breaks the rules of society isn't being an asshole, he/she (mostly he because it affects males far more often) just doesn't get the rules or even that their are rules and how they sometimes apply and sometimes do not. Why is it okay to turn the music on hard on friday but not on monday? Why not when someone else in the office is on the phone? Why during a personal call but not a call with an angry client?

"Normal" people get this. Some don't. Some don't because they don't think the rules apply to them and some because they don't "see" the rules.

BUT the rest, when they are trying to do something, just don't want to hassle of dealing with others. We live increadibly close to each other and the only way to cope for most is to pass each other by with the minimum of hassle which means the minimum of interaction. Cause no hassle, suffer no hassle.

Who REALLY wants to share an office with a Touret patient? A train with a loud speaker on the phone? A flight with a crying baby? Would you, if the option exists limit your "group" to people that follow the rules, rules you agree with?

It isn't even really about being an asshole or not. I was once part of a group that exercised together. But we weren't fanatics about it. Nobody watched calories for instance, if only because what is the point in counting how much you burned when you celebrate with a "health" drink that is double the calories? And you need a burger to give you some energy! I have been known to run... walk briskly... stroll... gasping for breath on those running machines with a milkshake in one hand and a burger in the other. But hey, I was of my fat ass. Which counts for something right? But then another co-worker wanted to join for the fun but she was a fanatic about it. She actually followed a strategy instead of picking whatever machine looked the least taxing... not so much in effort in doing the routine as in getting to it from the bar. It didn't work. Our rules, didn't match hers.

I have been in MMORPG guilds as raid leader where I knew if X wanted to come, not to invite Y. Depending on my own mood and those who signed up early, I knew it was going to be either a noob run (actually a lot more fun as leader) or a speed run. And taking along a speed only player on a noob run is hell on earth so, you don't.

People who are incapable of playing outside their own rule set often call others who have their own rule set elitist or assholes. They never see that the problem really is with them. The answer is for the finicky to just play amongst themselves. Don't want rules, then play on an unregulated server. Nobody wants to play there or pay for them? Well, that says something doesn't it? Run your own then, advertise it as a no rules server and enjoy! I guarantee you that within a day, you will have crafted more rules then the UN.