Aselus
Crimson Right
0
|
Posted - 2012.03.29 17:34:00 -
[1] - Quote
+CCP Games Rant, on the weakness of a company to certain social 'inadequacies'
the first weakness of CCP(and a good number of real people) is shown... for all those who listened to the mitani during the live-stream or read about it, it's an interesting case, but not one that warrants the response that has actually taken place in my honest opinion. Real life statements should not in any way effect the game as a whole, this response: """ Q3, Real life actions should not equate to in game sanctions. Why did this happen? A3, After much deliberation on the subject, CCP considers the Alliance Panel to be an official CCP forum, as it is hosted by CCP and broadcast in a similarly visible fashion to the EVE Online forums. As such, it falls under the jurisdiction of the TOS. Furthermore, the panelist, present on the panel in order to represent his in-game identity, advocated using in-game actions to achieve a real world outcome. Specifically he suggested that if anyone wanted to make another player kill themselves in real life, they should go in game and harass them to achieve that consequence. The totality of the situation including the official forum in which it was held and statements of the panelist during the Q&A, have since lead to in-game sanctions. However, it is important to note that this incidence does not necessarily create precedence for any other "real life" actions or statements triggering a ban. """" does not sit well with me at all. Statement of precedence or not, there is an inherent weakness in a company that I have supported based on its social policy(the gamers make their own rules) for a long time. But it should be clearly stated that this action/response puts CCP in a DRAMATICALLY bad light in my eyes, not the actions of Alex themselves, as those where statements made in a drunken stupor, which where followed by the correct response from him (a public apology - and even if there was anything more to BE done it would need to be done on behalf of the targeted party, NOT CPP, and in a real life venue[i.e.:court]), but the fact that CPP did anything at all takes them down from a paragon of progress in the games social space back into "he said he hates me please ban him" or WoW. This should not be in any way the current state of affairs in relations, as an action is being taken under unprecedented statements in the EULA/TOS, it is impossible to hide behind a document that DOES NOT COVER THE ALLIANCE PANEL/FANFEST IN ANY MANNER OR SORT, i read over it just to make sure, no such clauses are present.
|