In recent times, Xbox has been a major part of cross-platform play becoming more of a standard. Phil Spencer, the CEO of Xbox, has made it no secret that he wants to see gamers across all consoles, whether it's Nintendo, Sony, PC, or Xbox, all play together. However, online play isn't the only thing he might want the platforms to share. In an interview with the New York Times, Phil Spencer discussed the concept of the "metaverse" and toxic communities in the gaming space.

In regards to harassment, Spencer had an idea for a solution: cross-platform bans. He noted that it would be difficult to pull off, but having players be banned from one service and then subsequently others, would reduce bad behavior online.

Something I would love us to be able to do--this is a hard one as an industry--is when somebody gets banned in one of our networks, is there a way for us to ban them across other networks?

A secondary concept he considered was having a "blocked user list" that would carry over from Xbox Live to PlayStation Network, and everything in between, easily allowing for users to avoid harassment across all platforms. Currently, Microsoft is working on an AI that can monitor game chats, and can even detect when conversations begin to "get to a destructive point".

Source

 

[Viri]

Saw a image of a guy banned from Forza for "non-consentual sexual imagery"

He made a basic looking image of a babe on his car. Like the classic aeroplane pin up ladies. Fully clothed. Literally nothing wrong with it. Banned.

This idiot wants him banned across all platforms for idiotic reasons like this? Say the wrong word that offends someone and have thousands of dollars and thousands of hours of saves ripped from you?

Fuck off

Yup, I posted that earlier in this thread. They ban people over stupid shit. Also, of course you cannot appeal your ban.

This is the same guy who bans people for funny cars in Forza 5. No fun allowed!

https://metro.co.uk/2021/12/01/forz...-7978-years-over-kim-jong-un-livery-15696748/

https://www.aroged.com/2021/11/26/t...5-for-8000-years-for-arts-with-girls-in-cars/


Also, don't forget when Xbox """accidentally""" revoked everyone's dev mode, and tried to raise the price of Xbox Live Gold, and had to backtrack, after people roasted them.

 

[Xzi]

why?

Because AI is useless when it comes to comprehending humor/satire, emotion, and context. It's no better than flipping a coin in certain scenarios. The decision to devalue a customer's purchase by banning them from online functionality, or the decision to ban them from altogether accessing a game they've purchased, is not one that should be left up to chance. They'd be inviting a lot of lawsuits that way.

Thankfully I don't see Sony, Nintendo, or Valve going along with this harebrained scheme to make cross-platform bans a reality.

 

[ChiefReginod]

Horrible idea. And just when I was starting to like the guy...

 

[eyeliner]

I'd like to be able to import my friend's contacts across services, with the unwanted ones being left out if marked as unwanted.

In the end, its this what he is saying. Most of you missed the mark.

The AI is already in effect, fellas. It doesn't ban you, but marks you to be analyzed by a human later. That's why sometimes you are not banned on the spot.

Twitch bans you immediately with its AI, with dubious flagging most of the times.

I don't mind, because I rarely interact in gaming and mostly play single player games, but having all my contacts in all platforms would be nice, if they had accounts there.

Like those messenger apps: "hey, let's access you contacts to add them here. We'll sell their emails later."

 

[guisadop]

It's just words on a screen, why go through all this trouble just to ban someone?

 

[Sheimi]

Imagine if you had a small disagreement and you get banned from all platforms

 

[HarveyHouston]

Currently, Microsoft is working on an AI that can monitor game chats, and can even detect when conversations begin to "get to a destructive point".

Cross-platform bans monitored by a bot is actually a bad idea, considering they also include the very fluid "hate speech" filters in there. What one person considers derogatory may not be to another, and thus trying to filter it all out would actually be very limiting, and quite possibly the bot would incorrectly detect wording and delete conversations that are actually beneficial. I've had this happen before.

 

[pustal]

This is not going to go well. If the potential punishment is being banned from online services across all platforms, then every case has to be manually reviewed by a human.

This is a stupid idea even for their own regard. Good luck trying to pass this in Europe with GDPR. Are they gonna exclude a whole continental market in this?

 

[codezer0]

Relax... Learn other languages and stop speaking English. Mess the algorythm.

Speak Portuguese, like true Gamers™.

"Br? Br? Gib money, or report u"

 

[ciaomao]

Because AI is useless when it comes to comprehending humor/satire, emotion, and context. It's no better than flipping a coin in certain scenarios. The decision to devalue a customer's purchase by banning them from online functionality, or the decision to ban them from altogether accessing a game they've purchased, is not one that should be left up to chance. They'd be inviting a lot of lawsuits that way.

Thankfully I don't see Sony, Nintendo, or Valve going along with this harebrained scheme to make cross-platform bans a reality.

I hope Xi Jinping reads this

 

[Ampersound]

There is not even cross platform *gaming* for all games available.
Maybe focus on the fun things first, hu?

 

[the_randomizer]

It's just words on a screen, why go through all this trouble just to ban someone?

Oh sure, when someone types words on a screen, no one blinks an eye, but when I say those same words, I get banned

 

[FAST6191]

This is a stupid idea even for their own regard. Good luck trying to pass this in Europe with GDPR. Are they gonna exclude a whole continental market in this?

I don't know that GDPR would bother things any more than it would individually, and I am sure even if it did then they would be able to do some workaround like then subscribing to a service (which they collectively own) or classing things as a joint venture (not like they are not variously in each other's business time and time again already).
I can already buy in blacklist IP addresses, email block lists and whatever else.




As far as the failings of AI word detection then I still like
https://www.theregister.com/2005/06/03/bofh_2005_episode_18/

 

[Deleted member 42501]

Wait til they bring the IRL version of this online not long after you lot accept this for gaming.

 

[FAST6191]

Wait til they bring the IRL version of this online not long after you lot accept this for gaming.

While horrifying and dystopian I do have to think the same technology could be twisted to make adblock for real life.

 

[Deleted member 42501]

Its a brave new world. Literally.

 

[sarkwalvein]

Well of course, Mr. Savage.

 

[regnad]

thats the thing though if the add cross ban for hacking in the mix i can see a lot of lawsuits piling up if they impliment that (even sony's cross gen ban for ps3-5 is unjust sure it sounds good to them but just because i hacked my ps3 doesn't mean I'll hack my ps5 but by doing that it'll make me want too then (as i said i use different account's for that reason i used a burner account during the hen days/ pre evilnat 4.88 to activate my profile now due to evilnat 4.88 you don't even need a psn account at all just a local user to activate to use .rap files/psn games

My hacked and banned 3DS didn’t get my Switch banned. And then when I hacked my Switch and that got banned, my other Switch, unhacked but using the same Nintendo account, hasn’t been banned.

I don’t think they want to ban you outright forever because then they lose a customer. They just want to ban specific systems that can play pirated content.

 

[TomRiddle]

And no company wants to employ humans for moderation for various reasons (mostly greed). They also love having bans be 100% irrevocable as it simplifies things for them.

Anyone who supports this in any capacity should be forced to experience an automated "no-reason" Google account ban first hand and be forced to go through the process of attempting to appeal it.

"They also love having bans be 100% irrevocable as it simplifies things for them."

Ah so corporations have the same mentality of shitty discord mods, good to know.

 

[bobmcjr]

"They also love having bans be 100% irrevocable as it simplifies things for them."

Ah so corporations have the same mentality of shitty discord mods, good to know.

The original Discord Mods