In-game reports and punishment criteria
I'd like a little clarification on the game's ban system, which seems to be both looser in reporting and stricter in implementation as of late. This isn't in regards to a personal ban and thus should not break forum rules. It's just a general seeking to understand of the games internal rule system.
As many of us know, reports have suddenly been getting way more responses than they once did. It used to be you had to go through a tedious system with video footage, but the word "optional" is making many appearances in the reportable rules list that I dont recall it making before:
And when a player receives a ban, there's almost no info and no report to view on their end.
I'm curious to know what specifically constitutes ban-worthy behavior, and what's being used to quickly process all these reports with no footage and no replay system. The in-game report has vague options like "holding the game hostage" but there aren't even any examples of what that means on the website itself. "Working with the killer" is an in-game option, implying it's only a survivor that can get into trouble, but the website has it as "working with the opposite team," which is different. And how is "targeting someone to ruin their experience" judged?
How is anyone supposed to correct their behavior if there's no specific reason given with a ban, and no specific behavior even in the rules?
And what about exploits not needing video evidence now? What if someone just doesn't understand perks or mechanics and reports someone? What if it's a bug that accidently gets utilized? Could I have been banned for accidently grabbing people through walls as Wesker half a dozen times if they'd reported me? Are techs now reportable too because they're "undocumented features"?
For a system that now seems to issue bans liberally—and has an escalation system that doesn't decay—these rules need to be much clearer, and it would be nice if players didn't have to think any angry person reporting them might result in a ban.
Comments
I too would love some clarification on all of this. Thank you for writing this detailed thread my friend. You’re 💯 correct and it would be helpful to have an accurate set of rules to understand and follow by.
I agree in full. Unless we know the rules, and which rules are broken when they are broken, then there is no point to the rules outside of arbitrary applications. This isn't helpful for game stability, community behavior, or personal adherence. Can we have some clarity on this to better drive the spirit of game health moving forward?
I messaged player support to ask for clarification there as well and all I was got was a response about "degrading the experience of other players" which is the opposite of clarity. By that whim-based ruling you should be able to report anyone who hard tunnels you.
Maybe I'm wrong, but I think the heavier DC bans were phase one of this process. We saw what that looked like a year ago—the system was there to punish but it didn't know how to. Then it was scaled back to create a system where you feel like you have to stick things out that you wouldn't tolerate in any other game or else. A stricter report system without a clear idea of what's enforced puts everyone on edge all of the time while giving the ones enforcing the rules a lot more flexibility. You can't really contest a rule that you agreed to but were never told.
That being said, I'd love it if they were to clarify this but I don't think that's in their MO.
Yeah I just don't really know what the motives are. With DC penalties it's forced engagement to lose the penalty, so I guess that makes (twisted) sense. But the one that hits you for inactivity can potentially punish you for someone else's behavior—and it's a hated behavior that the game has greenlit too. And banning people entirely for anything but cheating is just baffling to me. You can't engage with and spend money on a game you've been banned from. And yet they won't clarify the rules. I don't know why transparency is so hard. If there's clear rules then fine, enforce them, but otherwise it appears random.
One thing I’ll add, that bit about tickets being optional has been there for years.
It's like the queue. For the longest time, nothing could be implemented because it might affect the queue. Then 2025 breaks that trend and this only seems to reinforce that. Does the queue not matter anymore?
I can tell you what the criteria are for post game chat harassment: you can literally say anything you want and not get punished. I’ve reported people for saying racist things, homophobic things, death threats, death wishes against me/family members. No responses from BHVR ever. It’s really sad that they don’t seem to take this stuff seriously. I was surprised to hear you say that bans are being issued more liberally because that is 100% the opposite of my experience.
I've gotten more reports of action being taken in the last couple months than ever. I thought it was nothing but a pacifier to make you feel better but I can confirm people are getting bans for things like griefing, and with no further explanation attached but that reason. No date, no further info, nothing.
regarding bug abuse part, I fully believe nobody gets banned for bug abuse. (I don't think they should either should be up to devs to fix, or ya know use kill switch)
I remember when the bug few years ago where flashlights could let you be invincible in lockers against most killers, I don't remember seeing anyone banned for that even tho that also falls into holding hostage, If you played that weekend someone would be doing every game they would of had to ban so many players.
I recall that being the case but I'm kinda wondering now. Weren't people getting banned for the white glyph bug recently? I think if you repeatedly abuse it you can be banned but even that is bs to me. Fix the problem, don't blame players for it.