×

Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

Before you choose to head back to the Classic look of the site, we'd appreciate it if you share your thoughts on the Beta; your feedback is what drives our ongoing development.

Beta is different and we value you taking the time to try it out. Please take a look at the changes we've made in Beta and  learn more about it. Thanks for reading, and for making the site better!

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

Soulskill posted about 2 years ago | from the i-like-that-shirt-by-the-way dept.

Businesses 316

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.'"

cancel ×
This is a preview of your comment

No Comment Title Entered

Anonymous Coward 1 minute ago

No Comment Entered

316 comments

I like this (3, Interesting)

GoodNewsJimDotCom (2244874) | about 2 years ago | (#39749557)

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 (1)

Samantha Wright (1324923) | about 2 years ago | (#39749571)

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!)

More Importantly (5, Insightful)

eldavojohn (898314) | about 2 years ago | (#39749585)

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 (2, Informative)

Talderas (1212466) | about 2 years ago | (#39749655)

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

Re:More Importantly (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#39749765)

They're the same thing. "Now, a real jerk that annoys everyone, they can still play, but a game is full price..." Basically only people with a good reputation will get any discount, so anyone who wants to play for free will have to play nice.

Wut? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#39749783)

You cut that quote hilariously short:

“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.'"

Re:More Importantly (2)

tepples (727027) | about 2 years ago | (#39749861)

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 (3, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#39749989)

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 (2)

slimjim8094 (941042) | about 2 years ago | (#39750067)

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:I like this (5, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#39749659)

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 (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#39749995)

It's all pussification. Rather than be taught how to deal with assholes and ignore or properly deal with them, the bed-wetting gamers cry to mommy to ban people outright if they get their feelings hurt(or asses fragged) by a better gamer.

Slashdot is the perfect example of this. They banned me permanently from posting because I was too brash and passionate although my message was grounded in reality. Reality is too tough for the bed-wetting manchildren and 2 token females of Slashdot. so they cried to mommy.

It's bad enough that all you overcoddled, undersocialized weenies spend all of your time indoors away from society. Even worse is that you try to force censorship on everybody else because you are oversensitive crybabies.

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. Signed, Booze-Powered

Re:I like this (2)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#39750061)

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

Re:I like this (5, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#39750083)

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 (4, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#39750247)

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 (0, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#39750101)

I love when people whine about how much people whine. You got banned, 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!

Re:I like this (0)

wisnoskij (1206448) | about 2 years ago | (#39749681)

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

Re:I like this (3, Informative)

Artraze (600366) | about 2 years ago | (#39750043)

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 (1)

Paul Slocum (598127) | about 2 years ago | (#39749817)

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 (3, Interesting)

ArhcAngel (247594) | about 2 years ago | (#39749977)

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 (-1)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#39750175)

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

And yes, honda drivers suck. Just have a look at the next time someone pulls in front of you ans slows down, there's 50% chance that its a fucking honda.

Then there's the honda fuckers who drive 7 MPH below the speed limit in the fast lane.

the bad driving fish, followed by the stickers make up a good chunk of the rest.

Re:I like this (2, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#39750047)

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 (2, Interesting)

19thNervousBreakdown (768619) | about 2 years ago | (#39749883)

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 (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#39749959)

What if I want to surround myself with jerks?

Well, what if you do? Nobody cares what you want.

Which presumably you'll be pleased about *shrug*

Re:I like this (1)

DNS-and-BIND (461968) | about 2 years ago | (#39750091)

Yeah. You're the asshole. People like you are called 'griefers' as you're not playing the same game the rest of us are playing. You need to be charged more for the privilege of us allowing you to continue to exist in our ecosystem.

If something is happening, and the assholes say they don't like it, it's a sign that it was the right choice.

Re:I like this (3, Interesting)

Man On Pink Corner (1089867) | about 2 years ago | (#39750093)

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 (4, Interesting)

19thNervousBreakdown (768619) | about 2 years ago | (#39750325)

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 (1)

Local ID10T (790134) | about 2 years ago | (#39750189)

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 (5, Insightful)

Vintermann (400722) | about 2 years ago | (#39750259)

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 (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#39749891)

I'm in the beta. They have little buttons (4 of them) on which you can judge another player, like "teacher" or "patient" or "likable" (Can't check at work, dont remember specs) So it's karma, peer based...

Re:I like this (1)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#39750241)

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.

Good Model (1)

Frankie70 (803801) | about 2 years ago | (#39749575)

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 (3, Informative)

timeOday (582209) | about 2 years ago | (#39749647)

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 (1)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#39749675)

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 (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#39749683)

Read it again. Players with high positive reputation pay less for games and services. Everyone else gets the street price. He's also joking about anyone paying extra for voice.

Re:Good Model (4, Insightful)

N0Man74 (1620447) | about 2 years ago | (#39749831)

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 (1)

myrdos2 (989497) | about 2 years ago | (#39749963)

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 (2)

Desler (1608317) | about 2 years ago | (#39750077)

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 (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#39750285)

This just in:
    A community of satisfied, if low-paying customers is more valuable than virtually any ten power users.

Although candidly, I'd recommend that valve simply take those metrics and make them available for "troll rated" (trolls trolling trolls) servers. E.g. Get flagged poorly, and you can only go on servers that accept troll scores > 0.7 until your score declines through an inversely weighted/slower the higher your score is backoff process.

Just need to make sure there's a bit of selection available.

Freemium model necessarily attracts jerks... (1)

LordNicholas (2174126) | about 2 years ago | (#39749595)

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

Seriously, those guys suck.

Re:Freemium model necessarily attracts jerks... (4, Insightful)

Luckyo (1726890) | about 2 years ago | (#39749689)

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... (1)

CanHasDIY (1672858) | about 2 years ago | (#39749709)

...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... (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#39749923)

All the more reason why I don't want to bother actually getting the damned thing to run since it has failed 4 separate times with 3 separate installers.
The only game I have ever had a problem with installing before this was that terrible Red Faction for PC. Infinitely stretching textures sure makes a game impossible to play.

It sounds more like a massive failure on the games construction.
The inability to lock games for certain level groups should be an option in any PvP games. And this ESPECIALLY if there is any sort of paying to win, which breaks so many damn games it is unbelievable.
It plagues the smallest flash games to the biggest MMOs.

Re:Freemium model necessarily attracts jerks... (4, Insightful)

Anubis IV (1279820) | about 2 years ago | (#39749911)

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

Marco Arment, the developer of Instapaper [instapaper.com] , 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 [marco.org] . 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.

Europe (1)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#39749597)

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

Re:Europe (1)

Luckyo (1726890) | about 2 years ago | (#39749741)

What on earth are you talking about?

Re:Europe (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#39749807)

iTunes already got fined for their discriminatory pricing across Europe. Valve has yet to get in the target sites for their unfair pricing across the EU zone. This however, WILL put them in the target sights and the side effect will be that the entire pricing on Steam will be looked at. Steam will lose more than they bargined for by getting into the spotlight with this kind of pricing, they should have stayed a low profile with their steam pricing. Already trading laws for "digital" purchases are being tightened up in favour of the consumer the law is due to come into effect in all member states within the next year or so and Amazon is already complying because they know it is cheaper that they do it NOW. Valve is just being a typical yanky company in Europe, that is, until they get BURNT, which they will. Then they do a hissy fit and pull out because they cannot hack the fair laws that protect consumers. I do hope Valve get looked at for their steam pricing models which is against the EU laws but hasn't gotten the attention yet so bring it on Valve :) We are ready with our pitchforks :)

Re:Europe (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#39749985)

How is this against EU law?

I'm not sure what iTunes example you're referring to, but it sounds like you're waiving around the word "discrimination" as if ANY form of the dictionary word discrimination is illegal under one unified law.

To quote another poster. "Fun Fact! No law actually prohibits discriminating against jerks"

Might have the opposite effect? (5, Funny)

wamatt (782485) | about 2 years ago | (#39749605)

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

Gaming the system (3, Insightful)

capnchicken (664317) | about 2 years ago | (#39749615)

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 (1)

GLMDesigns (2044134) | about 2 years ago | (#39749781)

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 (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#39750081)

Penny Arcade interviewed Gabe Newell awhile ago [penny-arcade.com] and they talked about this. From that article it sounds like they want to use player behavior metrics rather than some kind of reporting system. Like if people have a tendency to quit a group that includes you before it's finished, you may be an asshole. If you have a tendency to quit groups before they are finished, you may not be a valid indication of whether someone else is an asshole.

Re:Gaming the system (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#39749845)

Those jerks would also likely need to be rich.
Still, the system could be abused.

One way I can think of would be a simple video verification with various people who downvoted as to why they did.
One rich person would be screwed. Admittedly they could pay people to lie and even give away a whole account to them, though. (and even use them to attack others in time)
Of course, they could randomly just message one person who is online to say "hey, you want to verify with you downvoted X on video? Will only take a few seconds", to be able to find someone in such a short amount of time and equally have them connect through the same IP.
One failure there is they could also stream a skype conversation with someone they paid and stream that...

So, I guess the point here is don't piss off rich people online. You will always lose.
Actually, that online is redundant.

Re:Gaming the system (1)

tool462 (677306) | about 2 years ago | (#39750349)

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***

Poor Chozo (1)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#39749621)

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.

Discrimination (-1)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#39749731)

This is unfair discrimination plain and simple. We'll see how valve fairs after they are sued and shutdown.

Re:Discrimination (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#39749913)

Discrimination against whom?

Discriminating against jerks is completely legal in most places.

First Jerk to Fine: (4, Insightful)

CanHasDIY (1672858) | about 2 years ago | (#39749747)

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: (0, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#39749825)

If you don't know what DOTA is I think you might be on the wrong site.

Re:First Jerk to Fine: (4, Informative)

tepples (727027) | about 2 years ago | (#39749937)

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

Re:First Jerk to Fine: (-1)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#39750053)

And that mod has lead to the development of Heroes of Newerth, League of Legends, DOTA 2, Blizzard DOTA, and others.

If you don't know what it is, you are not into PC gaming.

Re:First Jerk to Fine: (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#39749943)

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

Re:First Jerk to Fine: (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#39749983)

Technology covers a lot more than the FPS-of-the-month video games.

Re:First Jerk to Fine: (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#39750155)

Not a single FPS involved in the story at all, actually.

If you're going to be snarky, you have to make sure you're not being stupid first.

Re:First Jerk to Fine: (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#39749991)

Day Of The A--holes?

Re:First Jerk to Fine: (-1)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#39749953)

http://bit.ly/I8WmMk

Re:First Jerk to Fine: (1)

Jammer6502 (1430197) | about 2 years ago | (#39750121)

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: (4, Informative)

Necroman (61604) | about 2 years ago | (#39750265)

DOTA [wikipedia.org] = "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 [wikipedia.org] (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 [battle.net] a DOTA mod for Starcraft 2.
2) You have Valve creating DOTA 2 [dota2.com] . (note that Valve and Blizzard are having a trademark war [joystiq.com] right now over DOTA). Dota 2 is a stand-alone game.
3) LoL (League of Legends [leagueoflegends.com] ) is a DOTA style came released back in 2009. It's a stand-alone game with persistant characters.

So (1)

wisnoskij (1206448) | about 2 years ago | (#39749751)

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 (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#39749875)

It already has that internal to the game. If you get enough reports (or if you abandon games to often), you get put into low priority for matchmaking, which in theory makes you wait longer and will tend to match you with other people in low priority.

Re:So (4, Insightful)

VGPowerlord (621254) | about 2 years ago | (#39750033)

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?

Maybe Valve should concentrate on other things. (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#39749799)

Like stopping cheaters in nearly every multiplayer game there. Or maybe giving players a monthly cash deposit to their bank for each and every cheater they run across. Then they can concentrate on their shitty customer service and perhaps smooth it out and make it more professional.

They live in a pretty big glass house and those stones might become dangerous.

Re:Maybe Valve should concentrate on other things. (4, Insightful)

mistermocha (670194) | about 2 years ago | (#39749867)

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

personal pronouns are your friend (3, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#39749813)

Now, a real jerk that annoys everyone

"Who". A real jerk who [wikipedia.org] annoys everyone.

-- a real jerk who annoys everyone

Mind Control! (2, Interesting)

Anachragnome (1008495) | about 2 years ago | (#39749835)

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! (1)

Opportunist (166417) | about 2 years ago | (#39750039)

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

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

Friendly players can make an online game (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#39749881)

In a way, he has a point though. Besides the specifics of how you'd go and deal with this monetary-wise, multiplayer games can thrive if they have a community of friendly and open players that are encountered often. These people do add to the atmosphere and enjoyment of a game, inducing new players and giving extra pull to an online game.

Sure, no gaming company can get away with including "asshole tax" on games, but they can work in the other way, creating strata of assholes that play together while the nice and new people stick together. Or even reward players in-game (achievements, honor, whatnot) for adding to a community.

The first hypocrisy benchmark? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#39749957)

Should give some interesting social results.

Wasted Karma! (1)

SoTerrified (660807) | about 2 years ago | (#39749979)

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!!

I play tf2 but won't play DOTA (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#39750017)

>should get DOTA 2 for free, because of past behavior in Team Fortress 2.

??? because someone is nice in one game doesn't mean they will be nice in the next (or even want to play the other game). I for one love TF, have played it for the past 15 years, but I have yet to play a single game of DOTA (isn't it a War3 mod? -- I do have War3, somewhere, collecting dust). Anyway I can see this statement working better - should get TF3 for free, because of past behavior in TF2 - that makes much more sense.

So, in a nutshell, (1)

Opportunist (166417) | about 2 years ago | (#39750025)

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.

What if we don't have any friends? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#39750029)

I play games and try to be a pretty cool guy to play with. Saying that I almost never go to the same server twice and don't have much of a reputation built up anywhere. Will I be penalized for not having anyone to report my "not a jerk" status?

Hoist by their own petard (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#39750035)

Of course, if they do implement this, the Valve developers and admins will be forced to pay higher rates than some of their customers. Won't that be a shame.

This model brought to slashdot (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#39750059)

If a similar model was brought to slashdot's comment section, Khyber and roman_mir would probably have to pay 10$ per post. APK would require the GDP of a medium sized nation to post at his usual rate.

(btw apk, hosts files suck and linux is the better server os)

Who cares? (-1)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#39750063)

Anyone that supports Valve and its spyware and anti-consumer Steam is a jerk so everyone has to pay full price

We've all been chosen last (1)

Culture20 (968837) | about 2 years ago | (#39750111)

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 (2)

VGPowerlord (621254) | about 2 years ago | (#39750119)

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.

How it is (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#39750157)

My League of legends account has been banned like 6 times.

Those sound like good metrics to me.

I won't stop being a bad person online though

Because I'm such a good person in real life it's infuriating.

Does this reputation carry over to other games? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#39750257)

This sounds like a terrible idea.

I got banned from DOTA when I first started playing because.. I didn't know how to play and was trying to learn. Apparently that can get you banned in a little under 3 hours. Under that sort of an arrangement, would that also get me labeled as a jerk/noob/banned for counter strike, day of defeat, team fortress, and the other valve games?

This sounds like a great idea... but... (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#39750295)

... it can't be community moderated directly.

See what happens is that you get a bunch of buddies or hire some chinese robo-fleshbags to steal accounts and rank you higher.

AI ftw (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#39750317)

and that is why i play singleplayer games since a couple of years.

People are idiots. ....also thats why im single i guess ^_^

Load More Comments
Slashdot Account

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?

Don't worry, we never post anything without your permission.

Submission Text Formatting Tips

We support a small subset of HTML, namely these tags:

  • b
  • i
  • p
  • br
  • a
  • ol
  • ul
  • li
  • dl
  • dt
  • dd
  • em
  • strong
  • tt
  • blockquote
  • div
  • quote
  • ecode

"ecode" can be used for code snippets, for example:

<ecode>    while(1) { do_something(); } </ecode>
Sign up for Slashdot Newsletters
Create a Slashdot Account

Loading...