Boards›Gameplay

Proposal for an age-verified ranked queue

Dummer Vollidiot··6 votes·1,157 views

Dear Riot,

I have enjoyed playing League Of Legends for a long time now, and enjoyed almost every moment of it. Unfortunately,my league of legends experience has a major downside to it, namely the negative and destructive attitudes of many of my randomed teammates.

Now I am sure I do not need to elaborate on this issue, as I know you already have spent a lot of thought about it. However, I want to propose a feature that might increase the chances that light-hearted and positive players to get to play together. For this, I propose an age verifed ranked queue to which you are only eligable if you have proven to be above a certain age, lets say 18 or 21.

Why would this help bringing people with positive attitudes together? Because it is a fact that people below a certain age lack the ability to reflect and to apply metacognition: That is, knowing that their thoughts are something else than reality. Knowing that when I start raging and flame other players, this is caused by my own emotional life rather than other people being "retards" (I really hate this word.). I am sure that if you would conduct a correlational study, you would quickly find that lower age and negative attitudes are highly correlated.

I do not seek to discriminate against underaged people that way. I think they should be equally allowed to play league of legends as anybody else - BUT NOT WITH ME. It is a completely arbitrary context that a 12 year old child is communicating with the same anonymosity as a sophisticated adult. In real life, all the environmental cues that entail such an encounter would create an uneven communication. These environmental cues are not present in league of legends, making a communication between a child and an adult that just does not work properly, causing even the adults to lower their level of commincation and become toxic.

Don't get me wrong, this extra queue should not replace the existing queues. It should merely be added as a new feature. Players that feel discomfort to obey to an objective age verifying meausre (e.g. by a passport-copy) should still be allowed to rank in the original queues.

Just wanted to get that off my mind.

Greets,

Dummer Vollidiot

23 Comments

Roit Gums6 votes

Because totally nobody is gonna lie in the age verification like in every other website

B00B001 votes

That's why he suggested a passport copy....number etc would be verified from a database and would take a few days but gets around the pretending to be X age thing.

I disagree and don't think this type of que is needed just for reference

Maximum Morde2 votes

You have any idea how many people don't bother with getting passports?

B00B001 votes

in NA most of you to my knowledge, here in the UK and generally outside america? most people do have them.

always different forms drivers license, other photo ids etc.

Maximum Morde1 votes

Yeah, most people here don't bother with passports. Waste of money.

B00B002 votes

Yeh i thought you was all stupid for not getting them and not travelling much.

then i travelled America, god, some states are beautiful and the weather difference....incredible, i understood then why most americans dont travel outside as literally unless you want to see the world for climates etc you just dont need to.

Maximum Morde2 votes

The whole world has beautiful locations, but you're right. One could spend a lifetime devoted to visiting all the areas of the USA.

Xavanic1 votes

I'm 22 and I don't have a passport...but my neighbors kid does....and hes 11

Zane Zephyr6 votes

Immaturity and toxicity has no age limit, mate.

B00B002 votes

I can testify to this while i don't Personally succumb and use any toxicity I try to use critism or suggestions but honestly I get told to shut up lol.

Anyway back on topic I have freinds who are more toxic than these so called kids at the age of 25, your sir are correct toxicity has no age limit

TheTarians3 votes

I do not seek to discriminate against underaged people that way. I think they should be equally allowed to play league of legends as anybody else - BUT NOT WITH ME.

Do this thing to this specific group of people because I don't like them. Do you know how baseless this argument is? It's basically saying that you don't like this specific age range, so they shouldn't be allowed to play a feature of a game that is Free to play. Now if League had an NSFW part to it, then yeah there would be age restrictions, but they don't have that... yet. Another reason as to why your argument is flawed, is because if we bring up examples, such as Tyler1, Pants are Dragon, Meteos, etc. We start to see that people in that age range that you prefer, are just as easily calling others retards, %%%gots and %%%%%%s as much as anyone else is.

Another reason why what your proposing is absolutely terrible is because: 1. People can lie about their age on the internet, and 2. For a Free to Play Multi million player game to ask for identification to just simply PLAY THEIR GAME (On a game that does not contain anything that is adult content) is like someone asking for I.D. over selling Ice Cream. It's too much of an extreme that will make too many players not want to start the game in the first place.

To be honest, your argument is the classic SJW argument. "It doesn't agree with what my standards are for this specific thing, so therefore it is bad and should be changed."

Dummer Vollidiot3 votes

For a Free to Play Multi million player game to ask for identification to just simply PLAY THEIR GAME (On a game that does not contain anything that is adult content) is like someone asking for I.D. over selling Ice Cream. It's too much of an extreme that will make too many players not want to start the game in the first place.<

True, but I have never brought up this argument. I have never said that an ID should be necessary to play the game. I am proposing an additional queue that has this feature, while the old, non-verified queues continue to exist. That is a huge difference. To stay with your metaphor, you can still get the same ice cream with no I.D. as before, just not the new alcoholic ice cream that was added.

Another reason as to why your argument is flawed, is because if we bring up examples, such as Tyler1, Pants are Dragon, Meteos, etc. We start to see that people in that age range that you prefer, are just as easily calling others retards, %%%gots and %%%%%%s as much as anyone else is.<

Honestly, I do not know the data, I speak from personal experience and the knowledge that I have gained throughout my psychology studies. It might be true that flamers and toxic attitudes can be found in all ages equally. In that case, I will shut up and my proposal is useless. But your argument is flawed, because your logical deduction (B follows from A) is wrong (A: "I know a couple of streamers that also flame badly, B: "Flaming is equally likely in all age ranges"). Just because you have a couple of examples that come easily to mind, you can not generelly state that flaming is equally likely in every age range.

To sum up:

  1. I have never argued that the old system should be replaced.
  2. It is illogical to conclude that flaming is equally likely in all age ranges based on a few examples of adult flamers that come to mind.

To be honest, I think that you had a certain kind of premiss ("OP is an arrogant, self-serving asshole who is trying to force his worldview on others") that negatively affected your ability/motivation to read my post carefully and then to come to an unbiased conclusion that's based on logic.

TheTarians1 votes

Players that feel discomfort to obey to an objective age verifying meausre (e.g. by a passport-copy) should still be allowed to rank in the original queues.

I have never said that an ID should be necessary to play the game

While you did not say I.D. specifically, a pass port-copy is more than enough to qualify as a form of I.D.

But your argument is flawed, because your logical deduction (B follows from A) is wrong (A: "I know a couple of streamers that also flame badly, B: "Flaming is equally likely in all age ranges"). Just because you have a couple of examples that come easily to mind, you can not generelly state that flaming is equally likely in every age range.

So then I ask where your evidence is to prove to us that you are able to say and generalize that all people under the ages that would be restricted to your new queue are the ones providing most of the toxicity. I gave you a few examples, and those were simply the ones that come to mind off the top of my head. If I were to actually put more time into than five seconds, I could most likely give you many more examples. So that being said, I'd like you to provide me with examples of people that are within your "Banned" age range and show me how toxic they can be compared to their older peers.

All you have stated in your argument is that you have had personal experiences with "Kids" (Put in quotations because I'm pretty sure you don't know their real age), and that they shouldn't be allowed to queue in a queue specifically for "Adults" (Also put in quotations because we have no real way of finding out someone's age)

  1. I have never argued that the old system should be replaced

Nor did I argue that you did. What I was saying, albeit poorly, was that Riot would simply never implement this queue because of the nature of excluding people from their game for no good reason.

  1. It is illogical to conclude that flaming is equally likely in all age ranges based on a few examples of adult flamers that come to mind.

And it is EQUALLY illogical to conclude that all flaming is coming from kids under the age of eighteen, and not also coming from the adults that play this game. Only based upon the fact that you have had bad experiences with "Kids"

To be honest, I think that you had a certain kind of premiss ("OP is an arrogant, self-serving asshole who is trying to force his worldview on others") that negatively affected your ability/motivation to read my post carefully and then to come to an unbiased conclusion that's based on logic.

I did read your post carefully, but the one thing I did fail to do (and am glad you pointed out) was thoroughly explain my argument.

Dummer Vollidiot1 votes

Players that feel discomfort to obey to an objective age verifying meausre (e.g. by a passport-copy) should still be allowed to rank in the original queues.

I have never said that an ID should be necessary to play the game

While you did not say I.D. specifically, a pass port-copy is more than enough to qualify as a form of I.D.

I did not want to make a difference between Id and port-copy. I wanted to point out the difference between "being able to rank in an exclusive queue" and "being able to play the game".

And it is EQUALLY illogical to conclude that all flaming is coming from kids under the age of eighteen, and not also coming from the adults that play this game. Only based upon the fact that you have had bad experiences with "Kids"

But I do not conclude that only based on bad experiences with kids.

I do this based on what I have learnt from science. I formulate a hypothesis based on theory, not on empirical data (while emprical data would be preferred, but we both do not have them, unfortunately)

Just to give you an example:

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3719211/

"Introspection, or metacognition, is the capacity to reflect on our own thoughts and behaviours. Here, we investigated how one specific metacognitive ability (the relationship between task performance and confidence) develops in adolescence, a period of life associated with the emergence of self-concept and enhanced self-awareness. [...]. Metacognitive ability improved significantly with age during adolescence, was highest in late adolescence and plateaued going into adulthood. Our results suggest that awareness of one’s own perceptual decisions shows a prolonged developmental trajectory during adolescence."

I might still be wrong. I just want to point out that my point is based on more than just a few subjective experiences.

DrCyanide1 votes

For a Free to Play Multi million player game to ask for identification to just simply PLAY THEIR GAME (On a game that does not contain anything that is adult content) is like someone asking for I.D. over selling Ice Cream. It's too much of an extreme that will make too many players not want to start the game in the first place.

Can confirm. Stopped going to the local Dairy Queen when they carded my wife.

No joke, they carded her when we used a coupon they emailed to her. We'd been getting miserable service from that location as it was, that was the tipping point. Now when we want Blizzards we go to the next town over, since their service is actually good and they don't card us for ice cream.

Xavanic2 votes

Alot of these ragers are between 17-30, you know this right?

Dummer Vollidiot2 votes

If this is true: Okay then, you have proved me wrong!

But so far, I have seen no actual numbers, no objective measure, all i hear is "many adults" and "a lot of flamers are.."

The problem is that people often make mistakes while using subjective data (experience) to draw a general conclusion to a large population. And I know that I am at risk of having made this fallacy, too. The problem is that we get no further in this debate if we don't know the actual numbers.

And this is definetly measurable. You could easily conduct a correlational study in which you measure how strongly age and in-game attittude are correlated. And for this correlation, I only have a hypothesis, but no facts. Would be great if someone had some objective data on this.

But honestly, this correlation just makes sense to me. If I see my friends around me, which whom I have been playing for a long while now, I can definetly see a trend between getting older and becoming less ragy/offensive/destructive. Of course this may be a low sample size, but this was enough evidence for me to make this post.

And so you are all telling me that you do not see this correlation, too?

Xavanic1 votes

every rager i see tells me their 17+ when their raging, lol If you really want to get back at these ragers just do this: Ask them "Are you this kid?" then send them this link https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YersIyzsOpc

YokoNomi1 votes

There's a great deal of bias in this post. Like, a lot.

Doodlzzz1 votes

25 year old league players are just as toxic as 12 year olds so pls stfu

Dummer Vollidiot1 votes

so pls stfu

I love this community.

lilpokfluf1 votes

People you would classify above age have just as many "bad" players as below age. What we need is a better system for weeding these types of people out. A short term solution won't change anything, if riot actually wants to fix the play base they need to set up checks for the future.

SilentBomber1 votes

This topic is meaningless.Players have been using the word "kid" like caramel.

Player 1 - Dude play kinda safe and i'll help you.

Player 2 - Stfu kid

And so on.

More from Gameplay

3 Refunds per season, upvote if you want 3 refunds per season.
Gameplay764 comments
7,167
votes
3 Refunds per season, upvote if you want 3 refunds per season.
Gameplay156 comments
3,510
votes
UPVOTE FOR URF
Gameplay606 comments
2,440
votes
Yes plz.
Gameplay456 comments
1,721
votes
3 Refunds per season, up vote if you want 3 refunds per season.
Gameplay114 comments
1,716
votes
When is ANYONE at riot going to address the awful new player experience?
Gameplay634 comments
1,383
votes

More by Dummer Vollidiot

Proposal for an age-verified ranked queue
Concepts & Creations5 comments
2
votes