Orion
Orion
About
- Username
- Orion
- Joined
- Visits
- 124
- Last Active
Comments
-
@The_Crusader said:
Nah he's right. Once you're on the hook against a Spirit it's game over.They walk away a bit then phase walk back hooing tk catch someone unhooking you. If nobody is there they just repeat it over and over again until someone does unhook you, then they down you before you have a chance to get away and rehook you.
If you're not the one being camped have fun doing gens solo while the other two survivors run in, get hit, run away, heal, run in, get hit, run away, heal - and repeat. Though in some cases they do manage to unhook at which point the killer puts them right back on the hook and gets to skip the timer.
They are really boring and unfun games.
So they do the same exact thing every time, and yet you can't beat them?
-
@KatFever78 said:
I'm sorry I should have specified that I play on Xbox and message the killer directly with a GG and a smiley face. I can understand what you mean about the GG on the computer.Yeah, that definitely makes it look like you were mocking him. Killers on console get more abuse than on PC due to direct messages.
-
@powerbats said:
@The_Crusader said:
There's plenty of random BS in the game. Instaheals, keys, moris...plenty to keep complaining about but keep interested.If DS was a rare item rather than something guarenteed at least once almost every single game I think it wouldn't be as bad.
We know keys and moris are broken but yes they do allow that random "omg" moment to happen which we all love when it pays off for us.
I think DS could be one of these if it wasn't so damn common.
I'd prefer a flat out stun of say 6 seconds if you hit the 1st skillcheck which should be harder. But instead of you being dropped you can wiggle during that time frame. The killer can run Enduring which eats up the timer and reduces the stun time.
If the killer dribbles you it should increase your overall struggle progress since it's not going to be a instant escape anymore.
To make it fair to the killer it's once you've hit 35% on the struggle meter then the skillcheck comes up with say 15-20% chance at success. Again if you get dribbled that increases your progress so killers will want to dribble less.
For survivors saving it is a bad idea since if you wait until your closer to the hook to start struggling you're screwed. If it takes 20 seconds to wiggle out and you wait until the killer is 10 seconds from hooking you and you only get 6 seconds of free struggle you're toast.
In this case Iron Grasp would be deadly for the killer since they'll add several seconds to the struggle meter but even if the survivor manages to wiggle out the killers stun is going to be wearing off shortly after they wiggle out.
This would help killers by preventing someone from waiting until they're about to get hooked and running to the exit gate and out etc. DS would become a much more carefully used perk instead of a get out of jail free card to use the killer description of it.
Iron Grasp adds 2 seconds of wiggle time. The devs tried your idea, but it apparently only made SWF even more powerful by giving them the chance to coordinate a flashlight rescue.
-
Disconnecting while winning? That's definitely an outside influence.
-
@apropos said:
I've been seeing more on both ends, too. At one point I had a handful of games in a row where the killer would DC randomly, even when they were winning.Sounds like network instability or a game crash.
-
@PiiFree said:
@Orion said:
Bad teammates are why I play stealthily. Get (at least) two gens, take the hatch after everyone else dies.
That's what I do aswell but I'm still getting tired of the DCs. It's really crazy these days, I recorded my matches for the Ironman Billy challenge and in those ~50 matches from Rank 20 to Rank 1, a total of 19 Survivors disconnected (against an empty Billy).
That's like 40% of all matches included a DC, which is pretty ridiculous.
Too true. DCs need to be punished harder.
-
@PiiFree said:
@Orion said:
@PiiFree said:
Is this a coincidence? Huntress & IH & Ebony Mori = Epic failure most of the time. Is it because they never play Huntress and thus go fully tryhard without knowing how to land hatchets? Or maybe because survivors start to rush gens like crazy the moment she downs the first survivor?It's the latter. When the trial is made harder, Survivors start to play better. It's proof that Killers need buffs, to get rid of ######### teammates who goof around and get everyone killed.
Yea, I noticed that when I played Nurse a lot. They hear a blink = everyone focuses on gens. Huntress with instadown probably has a similar effect, or a Myers with suspiciously long stalking times.
Makes you realize how efficient Survivors could be if they stop messing around. Imagine if players would be that dedicated by default? Game would be pretty damn hard as Killer but eh, glad that's not the case most of the time
The depip squad proved that when Survivors play efficiently, Killers have no chance of winning.
-
@PiiFree said:
Is this a coincidence? Huntress & IH & Ebony Mori = Epic failure most of the time. Is it because they never play Huntress and thus go fully tryhard without knowing how to land hatchets? Or maybe because survivors start to rush gens like crazy the moment she downs the first survivor?It's the latter. When the trial is made harder, Survivors start to play better. It's proof that Killers need buffs, to get rid of ######### teammates who goof around and get everyone killed.
-
When Killers camp, I take the free win and move on.
-
@aarongai said:
@Orion said:
Moris are balanced because Survivors don't magically appear on the hook. The Killer has to waste time to get them there, allow for a rescue, waste more time chasing them down, and only then can the Survivor be killed. They also have to sacrifice an offering slot that could've been used for something else.Survivors don't magically appear on the hook regardless of the offerings burnt. Killers have to waste time in chases regardless of the offerings burnt. Moris just let the Killer skip the hooks and the chases, which are, you know, extremely significant time-consuming activities that help balance the game.
And again, no Killer offering has as large an impact on a game as a Mori offering. You can burn a map selection offering, but Survivors could negate it with their own. You can burn a Putrid Oak offering, but Survivors have their own version of that as well. But Survivors don't get an offering anything like a Mori. Nothing they have directly impacts generator repair progress (their main objective), so how is it balanced that the Killer gets an offering that aids in their main objective (killing Survivors).
It's almost like ultra rare things are supposed to be powerful or something...
Survivors have Brand New Part. Given that they primarily use one of two items (Flashlight and Toolbox), they either have to "sacrifice" an add-on or "sacrifice" use of an item. Then, that Survivor can still put up a map offering that could effectively render the Killer's Mori worthless depending on how much the map favors the Survivors. That's without taking into account the three other offering slots, one per Survivor. -
@The_Crusader said:
New idea for a perk:Exposed: While running this perk survivors stay exposed for the duration of the trial.
Now let me just get my fellow killer mains in here to jump down the throat of anyone who dares to call this unbalanced.
No Mither already exists.
-
Moris are balanced because Survivors don't magically appear on the hook. The Killer has to waste time to get them there, allow for a rescue, waste more time chasing them down, and only then can the Survivor be killed. They also have to sacrifice an offering slot that could've been used for something else.
-
@The_Crusader said:
If that works for you that's fine. I got bored of it though. The last part always dragged on way too long when it was game after game after game. If its going to come down to that as my best chance every game I found it better to just skip playing survivor entirely.If a game gets boring, I play something else. I find the last part (hatch search) to be very tense, but in a good way. No more second chances, nobody there to rescue me if I get my ass hooked, just me and the Killer, one-on-one. And that suits me just fine.
-
About the game? Obviously not.
-
@The_Crusader said:
Not surprised to be honest. Most are fed up with how others play.Not saying you play in a bad way but survivors are pretty fed up. They get bad game after bad game after bad game.
Not saying it excuses their actions but I can relate. I spoke to one as he stayed in chat after DC'ing. I demolished their team because their teammates played really bad. He was angry that he always gets put with survviors who make bad plays like rushing unhooks, or killers who just camp and tunnel everygame.
Seen others mention similar things. I imagine it must get frustrating when you have 10 games in a row where the killer never leaves the hook, or never leaves the basement and your fellow survviors run in anyway and everyone gets hooked before even 2 gens are done.
So I can understand why they just skip when they get a bad game.
Me? I just stopped playing survvior entirely. The game is too teambased to be played without communication. Plus killer is the power role and lets just say that there are some very poor people abusing that power role.
Bad teammates are why I play stealthily. Get (at least) two gens, take the hatch after everyone else dies.
-
@The_Crusader said:
Which idea was this you keep referring to?And no my point was pallets are easier. Maybe its density rather than quantity but it doesn't matter because they ARE easier to deal with now. You saying its density rather than quantity in no way nullifies that argument.
The idea of slowing down sacrifice speed when the Killer is within a certain radius of the hook.
Looping has not changed either, as many streamers have already shown.
-
Didn't you already make a thread about this?
-
The Legion is mostly fine. The changes need to be centered around the Deep Wound mechanic itself.
-
@The_Crusader said:
You mean like you lot do?This forum is just salty killer mains asking for buff after buff after buff to killer and ganging up on anyone who dares to suggest maybe things aren't perfect for survivors.
Not to mention most of the buffs asked for are incredibly stupid but who cares about balance so long as survivors are exposed for most of the game and you can get easy 4ks eh?
You create a really hostile atmosphere for survivor players, it's no wonder not as many get involved in these discussions.
Point out where I have been wrong in this discussion, if you don't mind.
I told you that the idea you said we'd think was dumb was already tested (in the very first PTB, no less) and proven to be dumb. This is a fact.
You said that pallets being more spread out also meant that there were fewer of them, which I debunked with my knowledge of density.Those were my two (counter)arguments in this thread so far, not including this comment. Maybe the problem is that you can't admit to being wrong.
EDIT: Just to clarify, it's fine to be wrong. Nobody's perfect, and nobody knows everything. What's not fine is pretending that being wrong has no bearing on whether you're right (which is what you're doing by dismissing blatant contradictions between reality and what you claim is reality), nor is it fine to refuse to even acknowledge that you are wrong.
-
@Wolf74 said:
Oh, one argument just got trashed… no problem, bring up a new one and just state nothing has changed.Indeed. You'll note he has not admitted to being wrong, not even once. His idea that he said we'd call stupid (for good reason) was already tried and objectively proven to be stupid, gets glossed over completely. His myth about fewer pallets gets debunked, it's no big deal, it's not like the invalidation of his premise invalidates his conclusion; logic is for suckers.
-
@The_Crusader said:
Omg are you serious? You're going to try and pick little details like that and pretend theres a difference?Pallets are more spread out because there is less. Or do you think that before there was more or the same amount amount of pallets, but to be less spread out they would had to have all been on one side of the map?
What is it with killer mains and conspiracy theories? I get that not every game is going to be easy but the mental gymnastics you guys go through to try and explain the problem is nuts.
Go watch clips of the game from a year ago. It's very different.
Did you not learn about density in high school? Pallet density was changed to be more homogeneous around the map, meaning fewer dead zones but also fewer zones with a high concentration of pallets. The actual number of pallets is the same, as anyone who's looked into it can tell you.
-
@The_Crusader said:
@Malakir"The rare occasions I get camped, I'm not frustrated to be camped, I'm frustrated to see 3 people crouching around the hook doing nothing"
Yes this happens so much. It would be nice to have kindred but then that becomes another mandatory perk. Plus when I have taken it, it doesn't even seem to make a difference most of the time lol
@Wolf74 pallet changes are a myth?
I watched a video of footage from around a year sgo last night. It was absolutely insane the amount of pallets the guy had to get through. With pallet vaccum gone and pallet changes killer has never been easier. Don't believe me? Go watch some old footage yourself. Pallets are definitely more spread out now.
You said there were fewer pallets; not that they were more spread out. "Fewer pallets" is a Survivor myth.
-
@The_Crusader said:
Yawn here we go with the defence again.Are accusations always true? No, but when there's a page FULL of them? No smoke without fire.
And yes from my experience when theres a page full of them they have ALWAYS been campers. In fact I've never clicked on a non-camping killers profile and seen thay.
I've been accused of camping after MYC triggered multiple times. I've been accused of camping after a Survivor very nearly succeeded in a basement rescue after the gates were already powered. I've been accused of camping because I stayed near the hook when all three remaining Survivors were swarming the hook like vultures. I've been accused of hacking when I was using Whispers. The list goes on, and it all boils down to one thing: Survivors can't just take the loss and admit they were less skilled than the Killer.
Yes, there is smoke without a fire, especially when it comes to Survivor accusations. -
@The_Crusader said:
Maybe it's killers who should have debuffs. Slow doen the sacrifice timer if they're stood too close to the hook for too long. Oh whats that you think thats a really dumb idea? No worse than your ides about survivors having a permanent debuff for every hook.Only one of those ideas has been tried, and it was objectively proven to be a really dumb idea. Can you guess which one it was?
-
@The_Crusader said:
But if I see someones profile and its a mass wall of "-rep camper" then I can make the informed decision to not play with that person.-ref camper
There, you are now a camper. Is that how it works? Accusations are always true?
-
I've rarely had Survivors say "GG" seriously. It's either to the other Survivors, as @Wolf74 said, or to mock the Killer. So yeah, it's difficult to assume good faith when the majority proves they don't do it to be friendly.
-
This sounds like a good way to guarantee they at least survive the first 30 seconds of any given trial. I like it.
-
@Mister_xD said:
@Orion said:
@Mister_xD said:
@MartiH said:
DS has never really been a problem for me either and I'm currently rank 12 as killer (my highest was 8), and there is at least one DS every match. I don't really think it's OP, it's more "annoying" in my opinion, because it's one of the many "second chance perks" that the survivors have, but there are ways to counter it.sadly, ther eis no real way to counter it, which is the biggest problem in my opinion.
all killers have is soft counters, like enduring to reduce the effects, or unnerving presence to make it harder to hit. yet, none of these actually nullify the effect of the perk itself.
the survivor always gets a second chance, no matter what.
the only thing that comes close to a counter is a bug called "dribbeling", ehich only works on very close range to a hook.Dribbling is not a bug, it's an actual, intended mechanic.
like many stuff (e.g. gentapping) dribbling started as a bug, but, when acknowledged by the devs, was made an official strategy.
the devs didnt intend dribbling to be a possibility to do. they didnt create DS and thought, hey! if the killer could simply drop and pickup the survivor repeatedly, they can reach a close by hook to avoid this perk!
in my eyes, it will always stay an "exploid" or "bug", not an "intended mechanic".
but as ive said in a different post, im okay with it as long as DS has not gotten nerfed.The bug/exploit was that it would use up DS even if the stun never occurred. That has since been fixed, resulting in the intended mechanic that we have now.
-
@Mister_xD said:
@MartiH said:
DS has never really been a problem for me either and I'm currently rank 12 as killer (my highest was 8), and there is at least one DS every match. I don't really think it's OP, it's more "annoying" in my opinion, because it's one of the many "second chance perks" that the survivors have, but there are ways to counter it.sadly, ther eis no real way to counter it, which is the biggest problem in my opinion.
all killers have is soft counters, like enduring to reduce the effects, or unnerving presence to make it harder to hit. yet, none of these actually nullify the effect of the perk itself.
the survivor always gets a second chance, no matter what.
the only thing that comes close to a counter is a bug called "dribbeling", ehich only works on very close range to a hook.Dribbling is not a bug, it's an actual, intended mechanic.
-
@twistedmonkey said:
It's a scummy thing to do yes, it was born out of a problem killers actually created though, you never used to see this before they started dodging lobbies when certain items or clothing were used.The solution could be to time out either side for leaving a lobby which increases the more you do it, you can then make survivors have to lock in early so killers can setup before the match starts.
They should also have a rule that if the ping was over a set amount you don't get timed out as imo that is the legit reason someone should leave, real life doesn't matter as the timeout should be over with by the time you get back.
And Killers started dodging lobbies because Survivors wearing those clothes were abusing everything under the sun. Remember the insta-blind bug? Flashlight usage spiked during that time, for whatever strange reason.
-
@Aari_Piggy66 said:
It's pretty much the play the way I want you to or [BAD WORD] off rulesAnd almost always to the disadvantage of the other person, since you try to limit whatever advantages they might hold over you. Turns matches of skill into dice rolls.
-
@The_Crusader said:
Im not saying let them see killer offerings or even what killer they selected, just profiles. Nobody wants to play with scum like these people.That "scum" is playing within the confines of the rules. Just because you don't like to be camped doesn't mean they should have to abide by your wishes. Furthermore, salty Survivors will call anything and everything that isn't a completely free unhook "camping". And finally, even if this did go through, they'd just make their profiles private.
-
No. Killers are the ones who need the advantage of more information, and SWF clearly shows why it should've remained that way. Camping is not against the rules.
-
Record it and report it.
-
@ChesterTheMolester said:
Its called scrub mentality.
Play Demo or Firebug in KF2 and witness how they only start votekicking once they realise that you are top fragging.I had a guy ######### about me having the highest number of kills as Firebug, saying it was "just because you're playing an AoE class and are always alone". I just asked him "So why don't you do it?" Immediately shut him up.
-
@powerbats said:
@DocOctober said:
Unless you know the games shown on the videos are consecutive (like with the de-pip squad), I would disregard all numbers provided by anyone as YouTubers usually cherry-pick their good trials only for a video.Well the depip run was also against at times baby killers and this was also rank 20 to 1 since Marth was a rank 20 wasn't he? Also a 4 man Delta Force team isn't what i'd call a valid experiment.
OP asked for the very best. I'd say the depip squad qualifies.
-
@Theluckyboi said:
@Orion said:
I'm gonna follow @Nickenzie's example and leave you guys to your anti-SJW crusade. It's clear you label anyone who disagrees with you as the enemy.Damn you are indeed a complicated person
Normal people usually are a little more complex than a three-letter acronym you ascribe to anyone who calls you out for being an #########.
-
I'm gonna follow @Nickenzie's example and leave you guys to your anti-SJW crusade. It's clear you label anyone who disagrees with you as the enemy.
-
@Theluckyboi said:
You cant expect people to act civilized on some game, it is ridiculousWhy? Because you've already normalized their behavior?
-
@Theluckyboi said:
Basic civility? on some game? on the internet? really?The anti-SJW movement applies to real-life as well, you know. Hell, it's primarily focused on real-life. The SJWs who complain about misogyny in games and whatnot just give them something to try to legitimize their views.
-
@MhhBurgers said:
I get called everything under the sun because I mostly BM ingame and then write reports myself that I earned through toxic gameplay, but I literally don't give a ######### what some pasty nerd calls me over the screen.You're really overthiniking things, maybe read less books n stuff.
If you don't care, why are you so triggered by this thread?
-
@MhhBurgers said:
@Orion said:
@Theluckyboi said:
@Orion said:
@Theluckyboi said:
@Orion said:
@Theluckyboi said:
@Orion said:
@Theluckyboi said:
I think you all missed the point of the converstion, should minor offenses be bannable?You consider them "minor offenses". The devs do not. Can you guess whose opinion actually matters?
If the devs consider them why are they ignoring them? as i said i am not a PC player but above i read devs are doing nothing to ban these people, and i think they are not because they do consider them minor offenses.
They're not ignoring them. People get banned all the time.
Uhh
@zacmangaming said:
I don't even bother reporting Survivors like that since I know nothing will be done. For a dev team that claims to have 200+ people It's astounding that they couldn't focus on getting a half decent report featureThat person is wrong. Peanits has shown several times that reports are handled and bans handed out. There are threads by people who were banned after each and every ban wave. However, because they don't get a personal message saying "So and so player was banned", and because temporary bans don't show up on Steam profiles, people ignorant to the latter and expecting the former end up believing that bans just don't happen.
Well, i ought to trust you, it´s just that it is silly getting mad over some "light" hearted insults
More people get mad for being reported and banned. Disproportionately so. This "anti-SJW" movement is proof of that. They don't want to be held accountable for what they say and do, so they label basic civility as the enemy, and many other people fall for it.
Sounds like you love SJWs. Most people just hate the fact that the internet is the wild West, was always and should always be the wild west. heck the videos I watched when I was a kid and the websites are visited is something that people are missing out big time right now because everything is being controlled and sheep cheer on being controlled by ppl who have no clue about real life.
I don't like SJWs either. The difference is, I'm not labeling basic civility (i.e.: conversing like adults) as the enemy. I also don't call anyone who disagrees with me "sheep".
-
@MhhBurgers said:
@Orion said:
@MhhBurgers said:
@Orion said:
@MhhBurgers said:
@Orion said:
@MhhBurgers said:
Rules made by the company are indeed something that most true gamers don't really give a single crap about and why would they? Heck in germany even signing a contract like the TOS is not binding to us and can and will be overthrown in court easily if it breaches customerrights.Then those gamers shouldn't get pissy when they get banned for breaking the rules.
paid 60 bucks for a game that they ofc won't get back, yeah they have every right to be pissy esp if they actually did not commit a hatecrime but basically just paid 60 bucks to further somebody else's career who's just gonna spend the money on illegal ######### himself anyways.
They have no right to be pissy when they did things they knew would get them banned. Or worse, when they didn't even care enough to learn which things would get them banned. It was on them to prevent it. If and when you get kicked out of the apartment you're illegally occupying, don't pretend you're not to blame.
Nobody reads the game TOS, literally nobody. Heck I didn't even read my work contract.
It's btw called a lawyer and if the game breaks local laws then they have no chance of enforcing these bans, the thing is nobody would go to a lawyer and pay 4000+ over some 60 bucks video game.
You should've read your contract. You'd be surprised what kind of crap doesn't break local laws but will [BAD WORD] you over just the same.
As for the TOS, basic common sense will tell you that you probably shouldn't be spouting racist, sexist, or homophobic bullshit. That is, unless you're racist, sexist, or homophobic yourself, in which case you think it's perfectly fine to be that way.You went to the Anita Sarkeesian school of argumentation I see, ppl spout racist, homophobic stuff all the time without meaning it, it's called not being part of the "upper" echelons of society and it's pretty much the way many of us talk. Tell me how would you survive in any school environment below middle school?
I can't stand the sight of her nor her voice. Regardless, do you think that applies to the post-game chat? Do you think people spouting racist, etc., stuff in the post-game chat are doing it in jest? Or do you think it's because they actually want to be #########?
-
@Theluckyboi said:
@Orion said:
@Theluckyboi said:
@Orion said:
@Theluckyboi said:
@Orion said:
@Theluckyboi said:
I think you all missed the point of the converstion, should minor offenses be bannable?You consider them "minor offenses". The devs do not. Can you guess whose opinion actually matters?
If the devs consider them why are they ignoring them? as i said i am not a PC player but above i read devs are doing nothing to ban these people, and i think they are not because they do consider them minor offenses.
They're not ignoring them. People get banned all the time.
Uhh
@zacmangaming said:
I don't even bother reporting Survivors like that since I know nothing will be done. For a dev team that claims to have 200+ people It's astounding that they couldn't focus on getting a half decent report featureThat person is wrong. Peanits has shown several times that reports are handled and bans handed out. There are threads by people who were banned after each and every ban wave. However, because they don't get a personal message saying "So and so player was banned", and because temporary bans don't show up on Steam profiles, people ignorant to the latter and expecting the former end up believing that bans just don't happen.
Well, i ought to trust you, it´s just that it is silly getting mad over some "light" hearted insults
More people get mad for being reported and banned. Disproportionately so. This "anti-SJW" movement is proof of that. They don't want to be held accountable for what they say and do, so they label basic civility as the enemy, and many other people fall for it.
-
@Crow said:
I've never talked about being pissy for being punished, in fact I think it's fair being punished for #########-talking in post-match.
What I was talking about is that people these days gets triggered just for a couple of bad words from a guys behind a screen, people should endure more.
You know who actually gets triggered? People who get reported for those "couple of bad words". I've seen more threads and complaints from people who were banned for being ######### than I've seen from people who think bans don't happen.
People who write the reports usually do so in a very dismissive fashion. They write the report and move on. However, you, and many other people here, have fallen for propaganda that it's the ones who report that are wrong for doing so. -
@Theluckyboi said:
@Orion said:
@Theluckyboi said:
@Orion said:
@Theluckyboi said:
I think you all missed the point of the converstion, should minor offenses be bannable?You consider them "minor offenses". The devs do not. Can you guess whose opinion actually matters?
If the devs consider them why are they ignoring them? as i said i am not a PC player but above i read devs are doing nothing to ban these people, and i think they are not because they do consider them minor offenses.
They're not ignoring them. People get banned all the time.
Uhh
@zacmangaming said:
I don't even bother reporting Survivors like that since I know nothing will be done. For a dev team that claims to have 200+ people It's astounding that they couldn't focus on getting a half decent report featureThat person is wrong. Peanits has shown several times that reports are handled and bans handed out. There are threads by people who were banned after each and every ban wave. However, because they don't get a personal message saying "So and so player was banned", and because temporary bans don't show up on Steam profiles, people ignorant to the latter and expecting the former end up believing that bans just don't happen.
-
And when you break the rules, you shouldn't be pissy that you get punished for it. It's that simple.
-
@Theluckyboi said:
@Orion said:
@Theluckyboi said:
I think you all missed the point of the converstion, should minor offenses be bannable?You consider them "minor offenses". The devs do not. Can you guess whose opinion actually matters?
If the devs consider them why are they ignoring them? as i said i am not a PC player but above i read devs are doing nothing to ban these people, and i think they are not because they do consider them minor offenses.
They're not ignoring them. People get banned all the time.
-
@MhhBurgers said:
@Orion said:
@MhhBurgers said:
@Orion said:
@MhhBurgers said:
Rules made by the company are indeed something that most true gamers don't really give a single crap about and why would they? Heck in germany even signing a contract like the TOS is not binding to us and can and will be overthrown in court easily if it breaches customerrights.Then those gamers shouldn't get pissy when they get banned for breaking the rules.
paid 60 bucks for a game that they ofc won't get back, yeah they have every right to be pissy esp if they actually did not commit a hatecrime but basically just paid 60 bucks to further somebody else's career who's just gonna spend the money on illegal ######### himself anyways.
They have no right to be pissy when they did things they knew would get them banned. Or worse, when they didn't even care enough to learn which things would get them banned. It was on them to prevent it. If and when you get kicked out of the apartment you're illegally occupying, don't pretend you're not to blame.
Nobody reads the game TOS, literally nobody. Heck I didn't even read my work contract.
It's btw called a lawyer and if the game breaks local laws then they have no chance of enforcing these bans, the thing is nobody would go to a lawyer and pay 4000+ over some 60 bucks video game.
You should've read your contract. You'd be surprised what kind of crap doesn't break local laws but will ######### you over just the same.
As for the TOS, basic common sense will tell you that you probably shouldn't be spouting racist, sexist, or homophobic bullshit. That is, unless you're racist, sexist, or homophobic yourself, in which case you think it's perfectly fine to be that way.