@Vinuna said in Recent Bans.:
@IzzyData said in Recent Bans.:
Banning a large portion of a tiny playerbase seems like a bad financial decision. I wasn't going to spend any money because the game felt like it was in a really fragile position, but now it is even worse ontop of the game not having any content.
Just because people keep quoting the concurrent playernumbers from Steamcharts doesn't mean the game only has 3000-ish players. People may log in for like 20 minutes a day, or a week, before moving on to other games for the rest of the day.
Even when used correctly, a game like PSO2 NGS having such a small concurrent playerbase so early in it's life is bad. Monster Hunter World is now 2 generations behind the current Monster Hunter titles, and it has 5 times the playerbase of NGS. NGS might be making money due to scratches, but it's playerbase isn't in a healthy spot, or growing.
And besides, even if that were the case, punishing (not necessarily banning) 1600 accounts for toxic behavior is still the right move as a toxic community is much more likely to scare off new players than a small community, or a game with little content.
No, perma-banning without appeal because the appeal system is just bots.
The absolute problem is that "toxicity" isn't being defined and might as well be "anything sega doesn't agree with," which is really bad.