Is "Abuse" worse than them "Cause"?

Occams Raiser·Aug 14, 2015·3 votes·478 views

I see a lot of people come up with solutions to problems only to be shutdown and ignored in the name of "it would be abused". Inset your complaint X, insert your fix Y. Someone calls abuse. But my question is, is the abuse worse than the problem? No wants like a ranked dodge system cause you have to wait longer for games or it would be a way people to get out of unfavorable match ups. Riot doesn't like prisoner island for offenders. Vote kick would cause people to harass others into quitting. If someone dcs at the beginning of the game you can quit immediately.... somehow there is a way someone can abuse that. I don't know.

There is a counter argument to anything but is the abuse worse than the problem? People feel the bs on the ol' sandbox argument. No one ever sees it until RIOT comes for you.

15 Comments

ImAHeroForFunAug 14, 20151 votes

I agree with you. its just like riots reasoning with sandbox mode. people would "grind" too much and others would abuse it by "toxicly" giving good advice. Everyone shit on riot for their logic, then use that same logic to shit on community ideas. whatever.

Occams RaiserAug 14, 20151 votes

i don't even know why sandbox would give you exp or IP.

ImAHeroForFunAug 15, 20151 votes

It wouldn't. the grinding would just be to become a better player. practicing difficult flashes/skillshots/in game scenarios, without having to sit through a full game and maybe get practice

Occams RaiserAug 17, 20151 votes

that all sounds like a great idea. you shouldn't have to fail flashes in game and discover through trial and error.

ImAHeroForFunAug 18, 20151 votes

I agree that's why riot got shit on for using horrible logic to explain why they don't want sandbox mode. then they eventually turned around and so oh maybe we should make it a priority. it was a literal shit fest on reddit

SmokedAlmondsAug 14, 20151 votes

The potential for abuse isn't inherently worse than w/e cause, but it certainly can be. My biggest issue with a lot of the abuse reasoning is that most of that abuse would already be considered against the rules. Like harassing team mates in an attempt to quit. Ya, that could happen if there was some benifit to you if someone else leaves an already losing game, but harassing team mates is already punishable so why treat that any differently?

I think particularly with the sandbox thing they just get backed into these weird corners because they absolutely refuse to say things like "its a good idea, but not enough people care about it." And I understand why they don't want to say it but I think they make things worse by trying to protect people's feelings. But I wont pretend to have any insight on how those things effect sales, but personally id rather hear the blunt truth even if its an answer I don't like than get the runaround.

JubbinautAug 14, 20151 votes

I have to be honest: as one of those people who brings up the abuse argument, I have no idea how it applies in the case of Sandbox. Honestly, this thread is the first time I've even heard of it being a concern. Concerns about verbal abuse in games would seem irrelevant to me, since they already exist in the same form (substitute "bots" or "co-op" for "sandbox"). And frankly, I don't see a way to abuse a sandbox mode to gain any kind of unfair advantage over your opponents, so long as all it gives you is experience (in the "practice" sense, rather than the leveling sense).

That said,

{quoted}

The potential for abuse isn't inherently worse than w/e cause, but it certainly can be. My biggest issue with a lot of the abuse reasoning is that most of that abuse would already be considered against the rules. Like harassing team mates in an attempt to quit. Ya, that could happen if there was some benifit to you if someone else leaves an already losing game, but harassing team mates is already punishable so why treat that any differently?

Because you don't want to reward or encourage the behavior. The fact that it happens alone is bad enough - adding in a measurable benefit to it would simply complicate both issues.

SmokedAlmondsAug 14, 20151 votes

{quoted}

I have to be honest: as one of those people who brings up the abuse argument, I have no idea how it applies in the case of Sandbox. Honestly, this thread is the first time I've even heard of it being a concern. Concerns about verbal abuse in games would seem irrelevant to me, since they already exist in the same form (substitute "bots" or "co-op" for "sandbox"). And frankly, I don't see a way to abuse a sandbox mode to gain any kind of unfair advantage over your opponents, so long as all it gives you is experience (in the "practice" sense, rather than the leveling sense).

That said,

Because you don't want to reward or encourage the behavior. The fact that it happens alone is bad enough - adding in a measurable benefit to it would simply complicate both issues.

I don't think there are really any abuse concerns with sandbox mode. I understand where they are going with the "not wanting it to feel required" argument though I don't really agree that the overall negatives outweigh the overall positives. I think the problem there is that the negatives and positives aren't going to hit the same people. There would be added pressure for casual players to use it but the benefits are really only for higher end players.

You could easily see this issue with WoW because there were tons of little things. Daily quest here, daily dungeon there, plant your garden, ect. Especially in wrath these became quite a burden because running 10 mans and alt raids for extra gear became common. They just become things no one really wanted to do but you kind of had to if you wanted to compete because other people were doing it.

Given all the attention riot gives to esports I am actually pretty surprised that not only do we not have it already but at the reasoning they gave.

JubbinautAug 14, 20151 votes

I tend to agree. I don't really see a compelling reason not to do it, since the people who care are already using customs for exactly that - and the ones who don't... don't.

Of course, I'm also not particularly concerned about it. I hadn't even considered it as a thing until I saw mention in the "Riot Pls" post. So I have no real investment in it either way.

Occams RaiserAug 17, 20151 votes

My apologies. I was saying that "abuse" and the argument RIOT gave to sandbox mode are often both taken as bullshit arguments. I was not making a parallel to abuse of a sandbox mode like other behavioral problems brought on by the implementation of "X" system.

People can see a bullshit argument handed to them but not when it is coming from them.

JubbinautAug 17, 20151 votes

[{quoted}](name=Occams Raiser,realm=NA,application-id=cIfEodbz,discussion-id=bPpY0PdU,comment-id=000100000001,timestamp=2015-08-17T04:50:35.252+0000)

My apologies. I was saying that "abuse" and the argument RIOT gave to sandbox mode are often both taken as bullshit arguments. I was not making a parallel to abuse of a sandbox mode like other behavioral problems brought on by the implementation of "X" system.

Ah, apologies for my confusion, then.