Why Gaming Communities Are Toxic?

Many gaming communities are toxic, no doubt here. Many community managers have spent countless hours thinking about how to mitigate it. Some were successful, some were not. Sometimes, the root of the problem was identified, sometimes it was not and in some cases, it was found but nothing was done about it. I’ll showcase some of the reasons why a gaming community can become toxic and aggressive in this article. It’s meant for both CMs who deal with these issues and game designers who hold power and can often make changes to make their titles less aggravating and more welcoming. These reasons are based on my experiences, both as a professional and a gamer, so it may not exhaust the topic. I’ll also do my best to provide some well and lesser-known examples from the industry.

Multiplayer and pressure

Games often revolve around a conflict of interests. This applies to almost all genres. One huge distinction, however, has to be made between who or what provides the challenge. When we’re talking about single-player games, it’s usually an antagonist – an “entity” that most often can’t be reasoned with and whom we expect to make life harder for us. In the case of multiplayer games, though, things get hairy.

Firstly, we add other people into the mix. The skill level of each person will vary, sometimes wildly. It usually isn’t a massive issue in the case of PvE-oriented games, as people often go solo, or have teammates who balance each other out. Pop into ESO or FF14 and you’ll see what I mean.

The issues arise in the case of PvP games, especially those in which you are teamed with others. Loading a game of CS:GO can often be a hard experience not only from the gameplay perspective. Very often you’ll be paired with teammates who will offend you on voice chat (usually in Russian), others will go AFK or just purposefully take actions that will result in losing the game and then there’s the pretty high level of execution required from all. It isn’t a massive surprise that such a competitive and tense environment may cause people to be hostile for what they may consider good reasons at the moment.

What’s interesting about this example, or say LoL, is the fact that we may often be faced with additional challenges from people who are supposed to work together with you. It’s easy to point out your teammates’ shortcomings and start being toxic. Most people make an effort to either be constructive in their criticism or to remain silent. Peer pressure at its “finest”. Some don’t and I believe it’s natural.

Look at the games that don’t require a teammate – Street Fighter 6, for example. Sure, you get a lot of people mad at how they have been doing, but they have nobody, but themselves to blame. Sure, they can blame bugs, mechanics and design choices, but there are no teammates to which they can say “Oh, you suck, you should’ve shot the other guy or healed me or whatever”.

Therefore, the conclusion is that games with multiplayer modes are more prone to having a toxic community, as there are more points of conflict between people. Especially susceptible are the ones in which the player is assigned to a team. On the other hand, we can also surely say that such an environment forces people to communicate and allows for a bigger degree of bonding, resulting in a community that’s easier to build and maintain its growth – nothing’s black and white after all.

Lack of new content

New content introduced to games isn’t a new concept. It’s been around at least since the early 90s – The first example I can think of is the enhanced versions of Street Fighter 2. However, the emergence of the internet, DLCs, F2P games and seasons/battle passes over the years have caused a massive shift in how games are made and perceived nowadays.

A game rarely is a one-off project, even a single-player one. Let’s look at Dragon Quest XI. After some time had passed, a new version was released – Dragon Quest XI S and it introduced some new content (to an already huge game) and quality-of-life features. Or Skyrim with its innumerable versions. This means that games are almost expected to become bigger and have more content after they are released to the market. Many companies also fully embrace this model introducing cyclical updates with new content – Fortnite was huge when it came to popularising the concept of battle passes.

Mobile games also play a huge part in that regard, as they are often extremely reliant on LiveOps such as in-game events, price drops for IAPs (in-app purchases) and so on.

Therefore, we can end up in a situation where a game, telling a single story with no ends untied, will be attacked over time for not having new content introduced. No new content easily translates to the customers’ dissatisfaction which may quickly evolve into toxicity. This may become extremely bad for games that are expected to have new content introduced over time, but it’s not delivered. Star Citizen or The Pride of Taern are prime examples of that.

It’s important to point out two major things in this case:

The perception of players seems to be set in stone at this moment and it’s likely that they will complain about having no new content introduced to any game released nowadays.
Seasonality and new content help with exploiting already existing and create new revenue streams, effectively allowing the studio to earn more money from a product over time.

Because of these factors, it’s best to create games that allow for adding new content in a reliable manner. It will do both the players and the studio well. Having this need of the customers satisfied, they will remain satisfied with the product and it will decrease the risk of the game’s community becoming toxic.

Miscommunication

Miscommunication in this case is an umbrella term for any situation in which communication has been issued and wasn’t fulfilled – either by not delivering the thing that was communicated, addressing a different issue, ignoring an issue or just not being appropriate. I’m about to present a list of examples that can lead to misunderstandings which can lead to the deterioration of player sentiment:

Missed deadlines – This may apply to many different things, but the usual is a missed deadline on the release of the game or additional content, like DLCs or patches (examples: Duke Nukem Forever, Cyberpunk 2077),
False information – There are a lot of things that fall under this term/ Let’s just say that it is a piece of communication that presents facts that either haven’t or won’t happen (example: sequel to 2006’s Prey).
Misinformation – A piece of information that misrepresents an event or a fact. It may contain some truth, so it can’t usually be equated with the “false information” mentioned above (example: Watch Dog’s 2012 E3 trailer). NOTE: Both “false information” and “misinformation” could be also considered “disinformation” – an intentionally spread false information. However, it boils down to semantics and whether the people responsible for communication did it in bad will and it’s a matter of ethics and moral discourse which depends on each case… As we factor in the perception of players, it’s important to ask whether the people will find out if that piece of information really is false and if it is meant to cause any malevolent or harmful effects.
Inappropriate remarks – This refers to situations where developers address people in an offensive or socially unacceptable way. These remarks may concern the game but don’t have to. Their primary objective is to offend or belittle the recipient (example: FEZ’s developer laughing at people not willing to buy their game at $9 and openly calling for people to steal that amount of money and use it to buy the game).

These things are generally to be avoided during the normal communication process. It’d be hard to think of situations where these would be a good call.

One point that I need to address is the fact that in this entry, I was talking exclusively about communications made by the team addressed to their players. However, it may also happen that such miscommunication is made by the players, usually to other players or to the devs. Overseeing and moderating player activities are crucial for minimising and getting rid of miscommunication. If you’re looking for someone who can do that for your games, reach out to me via e-mail: jakub@heapsagency.com. Let’s work on your community management and communications together.

Aggressive monetization policies

IAPs, just like a hatchet, aren’t inherently good or evil. It is their perception by individuals that enforces the image. The perception depends on what they are used for and whether it’s a fair and agreeable cause or not.

Having played heaps, and worked on a bunch, of games with IAPs, I can say that there are a few types of motivations players have. Richard Bartle noticed that in the 90s and in 1996 he published a work on the types of motivations MUD (multi-user dungeons) players have:

Hearts (Socializers) Interact with Players (hearts empathize)
Clubs (Killers) Act on Players (clubs hit) – clubs also support and even mentor other players, as long as they get to act directly on them
Diamonds (Achievers) Act on the World (diamonds shine)
Spades (Explorers) Interact with the World (spades dig). – source: https://www.runagame.net/2015/06/player-types-and-motivations.html

Even though MUDs have evolved into MMORPGs and later MMOs, mobile games, battle royale games and so on, this categorisation doesn’t seem obsolete. Let’s look at how these archetypes respond to paid content and how different types of purchasable goods cater to their needs:

Hearts – cosmetics such as skins, emojis and other “vanity items” that don’t affect the gameplay or do so in a very limited manner.
Clubs – items that allow one to have an advantage over other players, such as special weapons that deal more damage, cars that are faster than anything else, buffs that grant additional damage or better defence. An example could be Sha Ling, a purchasable character in Brawlhalla that dominated the meta of the game at one point.
Diamonds – items that help with resource management or will allow for the players to expand their influence, for example, additional slots, storage and equipment for clans in MMOs.
Spades – additional content that expands the base game – story DLCs could be an example (the true ending of Asura’s Wrath is an infamous example).

Of course, the list is not extensive. However, we can see that some of the items influence the overall experience more strongly than others – the ones that cater to the needs of clubs and spades. It’s also worth noting that it’s pretty much impossible to only have a single type of motivation. They also can change over time or under different circumstances. Therefore, items and content that allow players to decimate others or that are hidden behind paywalls are the ones that could be considered as factors causing the community to become toxic.

Mobile games deserve a special footnote here. They are most often monetization and competition-heavy, achieving this by their often limited scope and simple gameplay loop. Thus, the vast majority of purchases focuses on the clubs. Prime ways to create a P2W environment in which players do realise that they have virtually no hope of competing and progressing if they don’t pay for items needed to be better in the endless stream of LiveOps events. They often feel discouraged from venturing further into these games due to the fact that there are people who will be able to consistently outcompete (or in this case, outpurchase) them.

In order to avoid IAPs and monetization becoming a point that can lead to toxicity, you can:

Focus on creating items that cater more towards the needs of hearts and diamonds,
Don’t make your game P2W.
In the case of F2P titles, do not paywall the new content.

It’s easier said than done, of course, and there will be many KPIs you’ll need to consider, such as DARPU/MARPU (daily/monthly revenue per user), Rx% (player retention rates), customer sentiment, DAU/MAU (daily/monthly active users) and others. The most lucrative in the long run would probably be creating a balance of sorts and slightly pivoting it according to the needs of your studio. You can measure these KPIs effectively with AB testing monetization features.

Inconsistent quality

Suzuki released what many consider to be the worst motorcycle ever made in 1971 – the TM400. The bike had a number of flaws, however, the ignition was probably the worst offender. It caused problems with timing and both peaks and dips of power delivered to the wheel. Hopping on one of these bikes is pretty much the vehicular version of Russian roulette.

Why am I talking about a ’70s motorcycle? To show the point that people often don’t mind if something is good, mediocre or bad as long as they are allowed to enjoy the game. They mind whether it’s consistent in its delivery and rewards. And by being consistent, I mean:

There aren’t random crashes and bugs.
The game is decently balanced.
It has a similar level of polish across all of its components.
It doesn’t throw cheap deaths or massive difficulty spikes at you.
Rewards are adequate.

The prime example of an inconsistent game (at launch) would be Cyberpunk 2077. It’s an awesome game, but it had a ton of issues and glitches and this is the reason it’s been tarnished and ridiculed by the gaming community as a whole. There are games that may allow you to have some inconsistent elements, like roguelikes with their cheap deaths and random nature, or JRPGs with their difficulty spikes (shoutout to all SMT 3 fans out there – Red Capote goes brrrrr). In most cases, these must be gotten rid of. Thorough testing is what helps with delivering a consistent and successful game. And with building a healthy community.

Conclusion

I believe these are the main reasons (mostly dependent on the game’s design) why a gaming community may become toxic over time. There are also other, way more specific and case-based, like bullying an individual which will turn into a meme (as happened with Yandere Dev), elitism (happens quite often in the fighting games and JRPG scenes – SMT fans looking down at Persona fans), personal feuds and so on. However, it’s often hard to predict these and they often will happen without a warning. What I described in this article is a set of factors that can be worked on by the dev team. It’s your responsibility to have a community that is welcoming to new players and helps with realising their potential. As gamers, people and customers.

It can be exceedingly hard sometimes, sure. So, if you’re struggling with that aspect of communications in the world of gaming, message me at jakub@heapsagency.com and let’s figure out a solution crafted to your needs.

This topic was a bit heavy and talked about negativity, so here’s something to cheer you up – an interview with a Discord mod of a grassroots gaming community.