The toxicity of online gaming.

[ninjainspandex]

I had a guy a couple months ago saying he was the guy who called swat on team optic, was kind of a scary guy seemed really off his rocker, it was probably all bullshit but I left the lobby immediately just in case. he was threatening to call swat on me, trace my IP and hack my identity and steal all my money. In hindsight I probably should of contacted the police I wish I remembered his gamertag, I just left the lobby so quickly. Who knows if they could of even done anything

[Ack]

The funny thing is that all of this ties back to John Romero, who effectively invented modern gaming trash talk while developing the multiplayer aspect of Doom and Doom II at id Software. He started with it as a means to laud himself but also throw off the other players, who in turn began doing it in response. Eventually they spread this via LAN parties and QuakeCon to the public, turning it into a gamining norm for the PC community in the late 1990s.

There is a strategic purpose for trash talk in gaming, though how many people recognize this and intentionally use it for this purpose is questionable. In any online match, play is heavily based on skill and precision, but also on player mindset. A distracted or overly emotional player will be unfocused and play poorly, potentially enabling victory for the opponent. So use of shock tactics to attack the core player(as opposed to the avatar, army, etc.) is a valid route to obtaining victory.

However, there are a few dangers I see present here:

1. Players employing shock tactics will sometimes get caught up in them and simply begin doing it out of anger, thus both losing the strategic value and causing said player to become emotional, hindering their own play.

2. As the methods and techniques of such warfare have spread in use, players have effectively "grown thicker skin," and so the trash talk has continuously escalated to the point we have been at for a while, where online talk is pure vile smut.

3. Escalating trash talk has taken on every offensive aspect it can, becoming increasingly more racist/homophobic/mysoginistic/obscene/blasphemous. I personally believe this has occurred not because all the folks playing are actually prejudiced, but because these are words which easily upset and offend. This is also in a format with little moderation, as opposed to something akin to professional sports which have some kind of governing league. As esports grow in popularity, and professional leagues form, we may begin seeing a de-emphasis on trash talk in the more "professional" culture.

Now I have said some heinous and foul things to my friends before while playing a game, and they have in turn said some horrendous things to me. Several friends in particular stand out in my mind as people who use humiliation in their toolset, though amongst friends we generally understand that what we say is in jest. This isn't the case for public servers, which I have grown away from in the last few years. In public servers I will still do some trash talk, but I attempt to focus on more humorous put downs in the hopes that everyone involved will laugh and have a good time.

[Jmustang1968]

I completely agree Ack, you echo my sentiments exactly.

[Retrogamer0001]

I've never really been interested in playing online games, with the exception of Diablo and Starcraft. Both of those online communities have their share of assholes and douchebags, but nothing that would drive me away from playing them. My Xbox 360 is an older model and doesn't have a built-in Wifi, but even if it did, I wouldn't use it for online multiplayer. My PS3 games are used only for single-player campaigns.

Like the OP mentioned already, the internet in general is horrible for this kind of behavior - hell, even on Racketboy there are some pretty assholish posters. Not much you can do about these kinds of things though, except to ignore those people.

[ZenErik]

My experience with the FFXIV community has been mostly positive. sure there are some assholes and rage quitters and what not. But for the most part the people I have met and often play the game with are great.

[pierrot]

Using racist/sexist terms like "white/male privilege" does nothing to further the living conditions of others. Two wrongs don't make a right.

What this sounds like to me: 'I'm offended by the term, therefore, I'm entitled to ignore any empirical evidence that might suggest bias toward men and people of Caucasian descent in things such as funding of school systems and education, voting laws, wage disparity, general upward mobility, or otherwise.'

What this sounds like to me: "White men have things better than other people, and that makes me mad. They should feel guilty." How about focusing on helping others up to our level instead of focusing on jealousy and guilt? As I said in the quote, using racist terms helps nothing.

Yes, that is about how I thought you were interpreting this, and to be frank: Get over yourself. It's not about you feeling guilty. It's about considering other peoples' positions in socioeconomic structures in juxtaposition with your own. It's about awareness. It's about compassion for others. Not just one's self. I'm sorry if that makes you feel guilty, or demonized—it's probably an unfortunate result of how people have framed it to you—but that doesn't give you the right to stand in the way of fairer treatment for others. No one has asked you to (or I would imagine, even wants you to) feel guilty. If you feel guilt, that's on you. To rephrase the innocuous statement Dave made, that you chose to scoff at: 'Hey guys. I can imagine the threats and verbal abuse in online gaming directed toward minority/non-Western demographics could be a bit more daunting by comparison, considering how much they're shit on on the internet, even when not relevant or party to something.' The only people I can imagine this kind of statement to be meant to shame would be people who actually verbally denigrate others in online gaming communities.

If you're just upset because I used the word "privilege," then I apologize for my poor choice of words. You still haven't really presented a salient counter-argument beyond, 'Yeah, but we're occasionally discriminated against, too,' and, 'No one else gets things unless I do, too.' (And I know that what you have actually been saying is, 'Let's help others up to our level,' but that doesn't happen without acknowledging, and creating awareness of the areas in which a disparity exists in order to identify what we need to do, correct or support in order to help level things out.)

Also, "jealousy" isn't relevant to this conversation. That you would even suggest it is frames the dubious thought process you are taking issues of equality through.

I'm not going any further down this rabbit hole with you. The last thing I have to say about it, is if you're feeling particularly curious, just jot down a tally of how often you read or hear something on the internet that's prejudiced or xenophobic toward non-white, non-American people; misogynistic; or intolerant of non-heterosexuals. (Go ahead and give a pass to half of them if you like.) Then compare it to a tally of how often you encounter the reverse. I'd be curious to see your results. (As a start, I'll hypothesize that in terms of heterosexual vs not, the results are going to be astronomically weighted toward the latter in terms of aggression.)

Besides, I thought I had the right not to hear offensive things online. Or do you expect me to actually utilize the block feature that's been provided to me?

Sure. Go ahead and block me.

You keep conflating the issue to suit your argument. I don't remember anyone mentioning protecting witnesses to abuse online; only the abused.

[Retrogamer0001]

We have a "block user" feature on this site? Oh my giddy aunt!

[TSTR]

Does this mean I should stop typing text dingalings in stream chat on Fight Nights?

[BoringSupreez]

What this sounds like to me: 'I'm offended by the term, therefore, I'm entitled to ignore any empirical evidence that might suggest bias toward men and people of Caucasian descent in things such as funding of school systems and education, voting laws, wage disparity, general upward mobility, or otherwise.'

What this sounds like to me: "White men have things better than other people, and that makes me mad. They should feel guilty." How about focusing on helping others up to our level instead of focusing on jealousy and guilt? As I said in the quote, using racist terms helps nothing.

Yes, that is about how I thought you were interpreting this, and to be frank: Get over yourself. It's not about you feeling guilty. It's about considering other peoples' positions in socioeconomic structures in juxtaposition with your own. It's about awareness. It's about compassion for others. Not just one's self. I'm sorry if that makes you feel guilty, or demonized—it's probably an unfortunate result of how people have framed it to you—but that doesn't give you the right to stand in the way of fairer treatment for others. No one has asked you to (or I would imagine, even wants you to) feel guilty. If you feel guilt, that's on you. To rephrase the innocuous statement Dave made, that you chose to scoff at: 'Hey guys. I can imagine the threats and verbal abuse in online gaming directed toward minority/non-Western demographics could be a bit more daunting by comparison, considering how much they're shit on on the internet, even when not relevant or party to something.' The only people I can imagine this kind of statement to be meant to shame would be people who actually verbally denigrate others in online gaming communities.

If you're just upset because I used the word "privilege," then I apologize for my poor choice of words. You still haven't really presented a salient counter-argument beyond, 'Yeah, but we're occasionally discriminated against, too,' and, 'No one else gets things unless I do, too.' (And I know that what you have actually been saying is, 'Let's help others up to our level,' but that doesn't happen without acknowledging, and creating awareness of the areas in which a disparity exists in order to identify what we need to do, correct or support in order to help level things out.)

Also, "jealousy" isn't relevant to this conversation. That you would even suggest it is frames the dubious thought process you are taking issues of equality through.

I'm not going any further down this rabbit hole with you. The last thing I have to say about it, is if you're feeling particularly curious, just jot down a tally of how often you read or hear something on the internet that's prejudiced or xenophobic toward non-white, non-American people; misogynistic; or intolerant of non-heterosexuals. (Go ahead and give a pass to half of them if you like.) Then compare it to a tally of how often you encounter the reverse. I'd be curious to see your results. (As a start, I'll hypothesize that in terms of heterosexual vs not, the results are going to be astronomically weighted toward the latter in terms of aggression.)

I don't know why I'm responding since you've stormed out of the room on this topic, but here I go.

So what your basically saying is that since whites have things better than the rest, it's ok to use terms that negative towards an entire race. OK. I don't see how that does a particularly good job of creating awareness. The problem is not that whites have it better off, it's that others have lagged behind. Yet the terminology brings attention to the fact that whites are ahead, as if that by itself were the issue.

My entire problem with the phrase "white privilege" and "male privilege" is that it attempts to create "awareness" by putting white males in a negative light. That is completely unnecessary.

Besides, I thought I had the right not to hear offensive things online. Or do you expect me to actually utilize the block feature that's been provided to me?

Sure. Go ahead and block me.

You keep conflating the issue to suit your argument. I don't remember anyone mentioning protecting witnesses to abuse online; only the abused.

Why is it such a stretch for you to include hearing offensive indirectly as well as directly? The point is that your hearing offensive speech in an online game. You're just being anal at this point.

[Hobie-wan]

That is exactly what it is. People are not innately good, and once they're given the mask of anonymity they feel free to show their true selves. Societal pressures are a huge part of what keeps people in check, and it's why anarchy can never work.

Horseshit.

I'm nice to people without being religious and having the threat of 'eternal damnation' barked at me weekly to make sure I stay in line. I'm nice to people on here and I've only met 8 people face to face that I first knew from posts on here. I only interact with a few of them regularly, but the level of humanity did not change simply because they were no longer 'anonymous' screen names.

Army life and the people you're around over there are affecting you in a negative way and it makes me sad. I don't think you would have made statements like this before you left home.

*edit* Not meaning to introduce religious argument into the discussion. Just saying that some people will be nice, some will be ugly, and some will be ugly until you loom something over their head and remind them they shouldn't be that way.