“Choosing beggars” is someone who wants more or better than what they were offered. Criticizing the offering for flaws and problems is not.
IOW - I get a free chicken sandwich. I demand better toppings, a free drink and chips on the side. There’s a roast beef available, how come I didn’t get that? That’s a choosing beggar.
The chicken sandwich is undercooked, the bread is dry. That’s what’s happening here. Criticism.
I mean… I don’t disagree with your original point (within reason) but the guy complaining about the free chicken sandwich kinda sucks too? Idk about yall but I would never say that to someone who gave me free food. Think it’s just a rough metaphor for this situation, where Valorant is still trying to make money from in game purchases.
So if someone gave you a free sandwich but then also offered the exclusive place to sell mayonnaise, seasonings, and pickles, you’re fairly entitled to say “eh, this base product is kinda lacking and doesn’t entice me to come here”.
Or you could see it as it is. A community that’s passionate about the game, and games in general, giving feedback to the developer about why their game might die so that this game or future games might be more consumer friendly. Only someone who is overly critical/cynical assumes any and every feedback is whining and complaining.
I find it to be a pretty tired talking point. Especially on this thread where it has nothing to do with technical aspects of Valorant at all, it still needs to be interjected for some reason. Anyone on this forum already knows about riot anti cheating software, it’s just beating a dead horse now.
It’s relevant because the article acts like strictness is a unimodal thing. Riot decides how far they want to push it and some people will fall on one side and believe chat is overly sanitized while others will fall on the opposite side and believe that chat is overly toxic.
This makes it sound like the only reason someone could take issue with Riot being zealous with their policing is because that person wants to see these toxic behaviors in their game. The article quickly mentions hardware bans like they are magic, even though something like harder to spoof hardware is one of the reasons Riot would give for requiring invasive software.
And similar to how I won’t accept a game requiring such invasive measures I also won’t accept an article glossing over these things. Just like there are many players who see no problem with toxic behavior there are also many players who don’t see any problem with Riot’s measures or are simply uninformed, and the article should be more informative.
It’s ok, downvote means nothing. even on Reddit.
Sometimes people don’t understand that the fact Valorant (or other F2P) is a free game doesn’t mean they’re entitled to whine and bitch non stop.
That’s not how things work at all. Just because something’s free means you can’t criticize it? Where is that written?
Yea, beggar cannot choose. Take it or leave it. Free market will dictate it. People don’t like this harrasment approach? Valorant will die by itself.
So many entitled brats, you cant even offer suggestions. Just criticism for the sake of it.
“Choosing beggars” is someone who wants more or better than what they were offered. Criticizing the offering for flaws and problems is not.
IOW - I get a free chicken sandwich. I demand better toppings, a free drink and chips on the side. There’s a roast beef available, how come I didn’t get that? That’s a choosing beggar.
The chicken sandwich is undercooked, the bread is dry. That’s what’s happening here. Criticism.
I mean… I don’t disagree with your original point (within reason) but the guy complaining about the free chicken sandwich kinda sucks too? Idk about yall but I would never say that to someone who gave me free food. Think it’s just a rough metaphor for this situation, where Valorant is still trying to make money from in game purchases.
So if someone gave you a free sandwich but then also offered the exclusive place to sell mayonnaise, seasonings, and pickles, you’re fairly entitled to say “eh, this base product is kinda lacking and doesn’t entice me to come here”.
Complaining about free chicken sandwich… What a moron.
Or you could see it as it is. A community that’s passionate about the game, and games in general, giving feedback to the developer about why their game might die so that this game or future games might be more consumer friendly. Only someone who is overly critical/cynical assumes any and every feedback is whining and complaining.
This one is whining. No alternative, just complaining.
He was just sharing his opinion, I think he understands that Riot won’t/shouldn’t care.
I find it to be a pretty tired talking point. Especially on this thread where it has nothing to do with technical aspects of Valorant at all, it still needs to be interjected for some reason. Anyone on this forum already knows about riot anti cheating software, it’s just beating a dead horse now.
It’s relevant because the article acts like strictness is a unimodal thing. Riot decides how far they want to push it and some people will fall on one side and believe chat is overly sanitized while others will fall on the opposite side and believe that chat is overly toxic.
This makes it sound like the only reason someone could take issue with Riot being zealous with their policing is because that person wants to see these toxic behaviors in their game. The article quickly mentions hardware bans like they are magic, even though something like harder to spoof hardware is one of the reasons Riot would give for requiring invasive software.
And similar to how I won’t accept a game requiring such invasive measures I also won’t accept an article glossing over these things. Just like there are many players who see no problem with toxic behavior there are also many players who don’t see any problem with Riot’s measures or are simply uninformed, and the article should be more informative.