The New Chat Restriction in The Feast

[TiaHariberux3]

Actually the new chat is perfectly fine. I never got anything more interesting in it before 3.5, (minus raging, trash-talking and exchanges of insults, which upon reporting, the GMs would ignore right away).

If you can't follow target/ignore/bind marks and waypoints, maybe you should take up something less demanding.. I hear fishing is quite interesting at lv60.

Comes from a person who never pvp ~.~ You probably never played a single 4vs4 and still think its a good change. There is defintely more than "follow target" etc. and its a pain to make commands for all the possible phrases to a point its not even possible to use fast enough (already is). I mean dont get me wrong people can make feedback but doing so while never actually played the mode is meh. Also you can just hide your chatbox if you want to avoid toxic behaviour.

[Ama_Hamada]

there's 3 of them? wouldn't even notice - they looked the same to me (Kirin clones or whatever). I only got some items for future glams and desynth fodder..

Not a big fan of the Feast since its "free chat" days, as GMs would repeatedly neglecttheir responsibilities. Meanwhile, I did prefer the Frontlines, when we still had proper 24-player matches rather than the current 72 ice rush.
Since the patch I've only tried 8v8 (it's the only mode that pops now (!?)), but seeing the chat is removed I would be more than willing to try 4v4/solo again... no 10-line sound effect macro spam, no trash-talking because X player thinks we must give a **** about their ranking, none of this.

No, Dimitrii, this isn't joking: if you can't follow something as simple as a mark "attack this"/"bind/cc this" or even without these, ppl not paying attention to enemy CD usage/availability (I've seen way too many Silvers and Golds too failing hard at this, mind you), no amount of free chat will save your "strategy" or "tactics".. and "high levels of play" lol pls it's just a MOBA -it's not chess.
Anyways, I think I'll mark my initial response to Lorelei as off-topic, b/c this is getting derailed.

Then why allow chat in pve? Pve is more automated then pvp and used more often to be toxic then in pvp, because in pvp you need to communicate strategy where in pve you do not need to.

[Indicative]

When you enter a round of Feast you have a minute of prep time. This lets people talk and ask questions. "I'm going to sleep the healer, please focus the DPS." "Let's burst the healer down." It also lets people ask questions especially if it is their FIRST time.

People like Cordie, in my opinion, don't understand how invaluable this prep time is and how it can actually affect a team's performance. There's a lot of players who are very amiable to advice and communication that far outweigh the toxicity of some. Like how you could meet six sweet people in pf but one of them is really sour. You remember that one sour one more than the rest.

When dealing with randoms in PvP and in PvE, all communication is welcome, even in the middle of combat. While I never ranked, my experience with random players in unranked games (which are very popular at the moment) can be summarized as much worse after patch. I've had players who see me in the Wolves Den outside of a match talk to me and ask for help and express their disdain for not being able to ask questions and losing during the match. I can only wonder how many countless other players on other servers feel the same. For wanting to put more emphasis in PvP through the Faro event, SE did a great job in estranging new players in the Feast.

I honestly don't like how toxicity is handled on SE's end. It went from one radical end to the next. From disregarding harassment reports in the Feast and then outright putting these restrictions on. I feel it was very unnecessary and I really wish there was much more discussion with the player base than this seemingly rash decision.

[Synestra]

Holy crap!

Good luck fitting those 31 commands on your hotbars... this is actually good example why that chat ban wasnt smartest move.

[Februs]

Put like that it isn't. PvP is more than just Feast, yet the issue only exists in Feast. And that's "Due to the majority of chat containing harassment and not actual strategy."
Or, at least that's the current state of information.

What they said in the live letter is nothing if not vague, but that's hardly the point.

Firstly, no matter what translation you go by, SE did not offer quantifiable data to back up their statement. They never showed us that "harassment" far exceeds "actual strategy." They just expected us to take their word for it. Now, I am inclined to do exactly that, since it's their company and, in theory, they have all the facts. I'd like to assume they wouldn't lie to us ... despite them having lied to us several times in the past. The thing is, even if I assume the best of them, that's not enough. What was the sample pool for this decision? Was it the NA data centres? Japan? All? And where, exactly, is the line between harassment and "actual strategy?" For all we know, wording something as impolitely as, "What the hell, healer?! Use Sacred Prism!" could be considered "harassment." Everyone assumes that "harassment" is the worst of the worst insults, but we really don't know where SE draws the line. Even letting out a choice curse after losing a match or dying (which is a perfectly innocent venting of frustrations) could be considered harassment, if they simply go by the profanity filter standards. We do not know, and SE isn't telling.

Regardless, the more important issue here is that it really doesn't matter what SE says about their reasoning, because their reasoning is flawed. Even if harassment (true, toxic, and horrible harassment) outweighed actual strategy, so what? SE is still operating with a double standard. Why is it okay for them to single out the PvP community for this particular issue, when PvE can, and often is, much worse? Further, why is it okay for them to single out the Feast players, in particular, over Front Lines? It's not, but they did it anyway. Worse yet, they did it without being able to adequately qualify what "harassment" actually is, nor could they distinguish between harassment in actions vs harassment in words.

[Kai_Lee]

Well, SE could pin the chat banned is base on lore.

[bounddreamer]

When the one sour person is telling you to kill yourself or Uninstall, and player response is "tough, get a thicker skin, lol internets," until the company removes chat entirely, THEN the player response is "give it back, we needed it, beef up your reporting system," maybe it's time to looked at the player base as part of the problem rather than just demand rollbacks.

I'm enjoying Feast, don't get me wrong. I have my Goten and Raigo and I'm still playing with friends. I'd like to have the chat back. But I also have friends who said they tried it and the toxicity was so bad they haven't stepped foot in it since. And I've also seen matches that could have been so much better if only we could have strategized.

Raging at underperformers does nothing but make that rager part of the problem.

[Cordie]

Comes from a person who never pvp ~.~ You probably never played a single 4vs4 and still think its a good change. There is defintely more than "follow target" etc. and its a pain to make commands for all the possible phrases to a point its not even possible to use fast enough (already is). I mean dont get me wrong people can make feedback but doing so while never actually played the mode is meh. Also you can just hide your chatbox if you want to avoid toxic behaviour.

Hi Tiax!
I'm pretty sure I've played all modes (except for some older Wolves Den ones).
To be perfectly honest I would prefer to see bans happening, and keep the chat as a trap for offending players. Depriving them of their ability to offend is just as good though.. plus it spares SE the trouble of hiring GMs that can actually do their job :3
I think everyone wins.

[TiramisuMacaron]

Hi Tiax!
I'm pretty sure I've played all modes (except for some older Wolves Den ones).
To be perfectly honest I would prefer to see bans happening, and keep the chat as a trap for offending players. Depriving them of their ability to offend is just as good though.. plus it spares SE the trouble of hiring GMs that can actually do their job :3
I think everyone wins.

Bans do happen. They just only happen for slurs usually.

I think it sounds like you would agree that this global ban is too wrong and they should implement something more like they did with RMT? (A quick report button for harassment that mutes the player in all instances if they get too many reports.)

[Cordie]

Bans do happen. They just only happen for slurs usually.

I think it sounds like you would agree that this global ban is too wrong and they should implement something more like they did with RMT? (A quick report button for harassment that mutes the player in all instances if they get too many reports.)

Bans, they do happen for PvE. For PvP the GMs simply fail to do their job. I mean in one instance I had enough to take the person to court and win; guess what was the outcome of the report...
The only thing that could ever get you banned in PvP was going in with your lore (or esoterics) at anything less than 2k, because that was considered "lore/eso farming = win trading" with some logical leaps.

And no, you can't crowdsource bans/chat bans. And you shouldn't want to in the first place - you are still paying a subscription for services. supposedly.

[...] maybe it's time to [look] at the player base as part of the problem rather than just demand rollbacks.

This. Thank you Talya.