Blizzard Suspended Three College 'Hearthstone' Players For Pro-Hong Kong Protests (theverge.com) 78
An anonymous reader quotes the Verge:
Blizzard has suspended three college Hearthstone players for six months after they held up a sign that read "Free Hong Kong, Boycott Blizz" while participating in an official competition stream. The ban, which was first reported by VICE Games, comes just over a week after Blizzard suspended a professional Hearthstone player, Ng "Blitzchung" Wai Chung for six months...
Similar to Blitzchung's ban, the three college players didn't receive word about their ban until a couple of days after they held up the sign... Team player Casey Chambers tweeted out an email from a member of the Hearthstone team at Blizzard, which stated that the entire team received the ban for violating the company's official rules.
eSports consultant Rod Breslau posted on Twitter that now Blizzard is also not allowing post-game interviews for Collegiate Hearthstone teams. He adds, "I'm impressed with just how many bad decisions Blizzard has made through all of this..."
Similar to Blitzchung's ban, the three college players didn't receive word about their ban until a couple of days after they held up the sign... Team player Casey Chambers tweeted out an email from a member of the Hearthstone team at Blizzard, which stated that the entire team received the ban for violating the company's official rules.
eSports consultant Rod Breslau posted on Twitter that now Blizzard is also not allowing post-game interviews for Collegiate Hearthstone teams. He adds, "I'm impressed with just how many bad decisions Blizzard has made through all of this..."
Do these people really think China loves them? (Score:4, Insightful)
What do these lames at Blizzard-Activision think will happen to them if China takes over? They'll be first up against the wall. Well, maybe second, after the protesters themselves.
Supporting Chinese dominance is working directly against the interests of all free people.
Re: (Score:3)
Why would they be up against the wall? Blizzard/Activision have shown themselves to be happy to comply with anything China's government tells them to do. They'll just become the official gaming propaganda arm of the Chinese government.
Re: (Score:2)
They'll just become the official gaming propaganda arm of the Chinese government.
No doubt, but it wouldn't be the same people running it.
Re: Do these people really think China loves them? (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
They'll just become the official gaming propaganda arm of the Chinese government.
That's not how communism works. They'll be the official gaming propaganda arm until China decides otherwise, then they will have their assets seized for "the people" and the people previously managing those assets will be up against the wall.
Re: (Score:3)
You mean it's not how fascism works. China can't be communist by definition because it has both a class system and currency. Communism is a red herring. China is just as capitalist as the USA. It's only more authoritarian...
Re: (Score:1)
And for 8 trillionth time, every horrible Commie dictatorship is excused because it's not 'real' Communism. One of these day, we'll surely get that awesome Real Communism (TM) that everybody loves.
Re: Do these people really think China loves them? (Score:1)
Re: Do these people really think China loves them? (Score:4, Insightful)
Well shucks, if China is communist then the DPRK (North Korea) is democratic! After all, it's what the "D" in DPRK stands for! What's that? The DPRK is no democratic? But...but....it's in the name of the country! Could it possibly be that China isn't really communist as well?! But the ruling party calls itself communist therefore they must be communists! In reality the Chinese government is socialist at best. Do yourself a favor and get educated on other ideologies besides capitalism and forms of representative democracy lest you continue looking like an uninformed dumbass :D
Communism, 100% of the time, always has the same things in common:
- Communists tell a group of fanatics about how awesome the world will be if only people listen and kill capitalists
- A guerrilla group consisting of "the people" overthrows a government, including democratically elected ones. Karl Marx himself stated this is necessary, by the way, because he says communism is inevitable anyways based on his own assumptions about primal human nature, and that following the democratic process just takes too long.
- Communists say we're not communist yet, but we will be, we just have to instate socialism first
- As prescribed by Marx, communists first forcibly remove the means of production from its owners, bringing the economy to a grinding halt in the process, so everybody becomes poor
- Worry not they say, for everything will work out in the end, but meanwhile you're only allowed to vote for people who agree with us because if this doesn't go exactly according to plan then it won't work, so there is now only one legal political party
- Because we're not yet communists and we need to get you thinking like a future communist, you'll do whatever labor we say you'll do, and truancy is punishable by death, but this is so much better than others capitalizing on your labor.
- The GDP never really recovers and even decreases slowly over time
- Famine becomes commonplace, people grow discontent
From here, there are two paths:
1. People get tired of it, and overthrow the communist party, and the nightmare is over.
-or-
2. - Eventually the communist party realizes the only way to end famine is to allow capitalism and privatization to return in limited form. But don't worry, we're still the same good ol communist party that has kept you alive, and we will have communism soon.
- Meanwhile there's still a single party rule, power is highly concentrated, and the country is ruled by tyrants.
- Communists around the world criticize them and reassure the rest of the world that this failed because this isn't real communism, and post to slashdot and reddit that we still need to keep trying so that eventually we'll get it right, therefore, overthrow your democracies please.
Because this is the same thing that always happens, every single fucking time, and time again, and again, and again, I don't see how it can't be called real communism. It's about as real as communism gets.
Re: (Score:2)
Communism, 100% of the time, always has the same things in common:
Except it doesn't. You're just looking at the times it happened on the national level, and Communism is a young concept, it's barely existed for 100 years.
There have only been a couple dozen instances of it happening, and they've all been violent revolutions in areas that were authoritarian or near-authoritarian already. Those situations never turn out good, regardless of the -ism that takes over.
Also, communism does work in various areas. In fact, the USA has several communist policies in place that are su
Re: (Score:2)
And for 8 trillionth time, every horrible Commie dictatorship is excused because it's not 'real' Communism.
It's not even slightly Communism, because communism is characterized by the lack of a caste system (which they have), currency (which they have), and common ownership of the means of production (which they don't mandate, they have private ownership of businesses.) It may be a dictatorship, there is some room for debate there, but that doesn't automagically make it commie.
It's also not even slightly an attempt to excuse China's system, which I described as fascism, and more authoritarian than the USA (which
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
You make some fine points, but I think you're missing his. Substitute "pursuit of communism" for "communism".
They are becoming more capitalistic, not less. There is no pursuit of communism. The middle class in China is growing. Their economy does seem to be on shaky ground, though. They've got to the point where it's cheaper to have things made in other countries.
Re: (Score:2)
Yah, everyone knows - they get crazy good money from capitalism (not *actual free market*), but free market trade is anathema to their ongoing control.
Re: (Score:2)
everyone knows - they get crazy good money from capitalism (not *actual free market*), but free market trade is anathema to their ongoing control.
Sure, but free market is only one kind of capitalism, and perhaps the scarcest kind at that.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: Do these people really think China loves them? (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: Do these people really think China loves them? (Score:2)
China is as communist as it get...
And I'm as "anti-Commie" as they get but I'm also not such a meathead that I think the word only has one fucking definition...
Re: (Score:2)
China is as communist as it gets
Uh, no. China is only vaguely communist. The USSR was far more communist. Cuba is more communist. There's other extant countries more communist out there. China is much more capitalist than almost any other "communist" country out there - while it has communist aspects, it's only vaguely communist at this point.
Re: (Score:2)
In any form? It's not FUD?
Re: Do these people really think China loves them? (Score:2)
Do these people really think China loves them?
They likely don't think; they fear (chances are you can even see it in their eyes.)
Re: (Score:3)
The Boycott Bliz is going to far (Score:2, Insightful)
But calling for the boycott of the company your streaming for is a bit much.
Re:The Boycott Bliz is going to far (Score:5, Insightful)
Oh, so in other words "go ahead and protest, but not where anyone can see you". How very Neo-authoritarian of you.
No, don't put words in my mouth (Score:1)
Re: (Score:3)
People can call for whatever they want, don't an ass.
If the platform fails, that creates an opening in the market for a better platform.
Companies don't need to be somehow protected from their customers. It is entirely the company's responsibility to manage the relationship in a way that works for them. If that turns their customers into frenemies, that is on them to manage.
Re: (Score:2)
Blizzard can ban their players for promoting political views they dislike.
Players can ban Blizzard for promoting political views they dislike.
While I'm on the record on multiple occasions as hating cancel culture, I recognise that a boycott is a choice that people have, and often the only effective choice that they have.
Nobody (that I've seen - there's always some fuckwit out there) is demanding the name of the Blizzard executive that made this decision, demanding that they be sacked, demanding that they lo
Re: (Score:2)
Fundamentally I don't disagree with Blizzard. If you allow political statements people might like, you have to also allow the one that people won't as well. I think that there are plenty of the people who are angry at Blizzard over this thought the NFL w
Re: (Score:3)
In the end almost everything is political. Even sports has a LONG history of politics in it. Blizzard has also supported things like LGBT stuff which is also political.
Blizzard is only saying they don't want to be political because of this issue, on many other issues they are perfectly willing to take a stand on an issue so long as the stand is generally popular and will get them more money in the end.
Re: (Score:2)
In the end almost everything is political.
No, it is not. Almost everything could be (and is, apparently) painted as political, which is indeed the root problem. "Politics" has become synonym to "life" - and I personally hate to see that happening.
Company X bans politics from their servers? "POLITICAL DECISION!!!111oneone" - no, they simply want a clean area, devoid of political bullshit, that's all.
Re: The Boycott Bliz is going to far (Score:2)
I'm okay with them expressing political views; but calling for a boycott of the Montgomery bus system is a bit much.
Re: (Score:2)
> if it did we'd have to ban advertising in streams
And nothing of value was lost.
Re: The Boycott Bliz is going to far (Score:2)
But calling for the boycott of the company your streaming for is a bit much.
It certainly is not; you make some valid comments but this one's wrong and your position sounds suspiciously subjective.
We Take our Orders from China Now (Score:2)
Re: We Take our Orders from China Now (Score:2)
^^ this is why people say you're a pathetic bootlicker
The odd one out (Score:2)
I know I will be the odd one standing against the offended horde, but...
Gaming is entertainment. Gaming should be apolitical and religion free unless explicitly stated otherwise (e.g. games which have a political setting such as Democracy 3).
Hearthstone has no ties to politics as far as the game is involved. Those who infect the game with political statements should be swiftly shown the door, regardless of who they support.
Incidentally I am supporting the Hong Kong protests and I deeply dislike China for th
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
> Gaming is entertainment
This maneuvering is entertainment. It's the highest level of gaming.
> Gaming should be apolitical
What you think "should" happen is incommensurate with reality.
> I never make any political, racial or religious statements, because I strongly believe games should be free of such subjects
So your beliefs are important but others aren't. Got it.
Even abstract games like Chess have political elements (re: Saudi Arabia vs Israel, resulting in hosting ban)
Gamers are people and they h
Re: (Score:2)
What you think "should" happen is incommensurate with reality.
Maybe you are the kind of person who sees nothing wrong with a religious nutjob bursting into your favorite diner and starting to yell about the apocalypse coming or whatever while landing spitlets everywhere, including your food. This is no different.
So your beliefs are important but others aren't. Got it.
What you are saying is retarded. Everyone's beliefs are equally important, but there's a time and a place for them to be expressed, and there are times and places when/where they shouldn't be expressed. It's not censorship but common sense.
Gamers are people and they have always spoken with less restraint than the general public.
I see no problem wit
Re: (Score:2)
Maybe you are the kind of person who sees nothing wrong with a religious nutjob bursting into your favorite diner and starting to yell about the apocalypse coming or whatever while landing spitlets everywhere, including your food. This is no different.
So, are you deliberately pretending to not understand content-based restrictions vs. general restrictions to support the Chinese government, or are you just that ignorant?
The difference is, what Blizzard is doing is like saying it's perfectly fine for a nutjob to burst in and start yelling about something while landing spitlets everywhere, as long as the content of that yelling isn't a subject that offends Chinese censors. It's not that hard to understand.
What you are saying is retarded. Everyone's belief
Re: (Score:2)
So, are you deliberately pretending to not understand content-based restrictions vs. general restrictions to support the Chinese government, or are you just that ignorant?
The current Blizzard situation is a starting point for a more general stance, which is "please don't infect an entertainment activity with political statements". I don't care if they are banning players for standing pro- or against Chinese government or Trump or ISIS or $_POLITICAL_BODY, that is secondary to the main point.
The difference is, what Blizzard is doing is like saying it's perfectly fine for a nutjob to burst in and start yelling about something while landing spitlets everywhere, as long as the content of that yelling isn't a subject that offends Chinese censors. It's not that hard to understand.
We don't know that, not yet. It's been interpreted that way, but it's not necessarily true. It isn't false either, we just haven't seen bans for pro-Chinese statements just yet (or such s
Re: (Score:2)
while landing spitlets everywhere, including your food. This is no different.
Dude, like, maybe your monitor with eSpittle support wasn't a well-thought-out purchase?
Because unless you have that, you're fucking trolling.
This is much more like having other people in a restaurant talking loudly about some controversy that is dear to them, where you merely overheard them and didn't like it. If that is a problem or not depends generally on if their speech would be considered "offensive" in the country you are actually in. If it is as in your example and it is Deists predicting the End Ti
Re: (Score:2)
Even abstract games like Chess have political elements
Ayn Rand once published a hilarious Open Letter to Borris Spassky where she rambles on about how since chess players are smarter than her, they should share her values, and they should understand really well the feelings she presumes they associate with chess.
It is extreme tragicomedy, hard to read without either bursting out laughing, or throwing the book across the room.
In the end, command economies are best at producing chess players, because they can choose to waste the money on it, but worst at produci
Re: (Score:2)
while gaming, I never make any political, racial or religious statements, because I strongly believe games should be free of such subjects. We are there to have fun and socialize, and stating one's political stance does not belong to gaming.
You can believe that, and you're free to behave that way, but it doesn't make you right.
Re: (Score:3)
You can believe that, and you're free to behave that way, but it doesn't make you right.
Pot, kettle. Kettle, pot.
These differences of opinion are why speech (especially unpopular speech) needs protection. If someone says things which offend you, by all means, be offended. But if they're not actually harming you, then denying them expression is setting a precedent which can equally apply to you, and you have no right to expect others to be patient when you are surprised when your voice is silenced. You can be as surprised as you want, though. That's your prerogative, too.
Re: (Score:3)
Gaming should be apolitical and religion free [...] Those who infect the game with political statements should be swiftly shown the door, regardless of who they support.
Except the stifling of all political statements is itself a political statement, and a very strong one at that. When you remove the voice of both critics and supporters of the current government, it is always to the benefit of the current government. And it is also always a violation of the concept of free speech.
The only truly apolitical move of a gaming company (or any other company that allows communication through their medium) is to not regulate what is said at all.
Re: (Score:2)
Except the stifling of all political statements is itself a political statement, and a very strong one at that.
Except it's not. It's applying the rules. If the rules say "please refrain from political statements during a live stream", you can choose to either not live stream at all using that platform, obey the rules or disobey the rules and be banned.
Re: (Score:2)
Except the stifling of all political statements is itself a political statement, and a very strong one at that.
Except it's not. It's applying the rules. If the rules say "please refrain from political statements during a live stream", you can choose to either not live stream at all using that platform, obey the rules or disobey the rules and be banned.
In your defense, Blizzard's policies probably are not so different from other public entertainment networks. I'm sure Oprah, Fox and Friends, The View, The Oscars awards, Superbowl Half-Time performances, etc. have similar rules for their guests to refrain from discussing certain overly-divisive issues. We're not so accustomed to seeing these sorts of policies among video gaming/e-sports though. Also, the odds of conflict in e-sports/video games with these policies are probably much higher than other entert
Why should a gamer have less free speech? (Score:2)
Gaming should be apolitical and religion free unless explicitly stated otherwise ...
And why should a gamer have less free speech than others?
IMHO As long as nothing he says unfairly degrades his opponents' play, anything he says should be fine.
If the organizers want to go beyond that, they need to make it an official rule, announced in advance and enforced equally. Then the gamers can decide whether to move on to other venues, rather than waste time preparing for a contest where they'll be unfairly penali
Re: (Score:2)
There's value in having politics-safe spaces, where politically-divisive topics are banned. Yes, that includes a pride t-shirt. Anything politically divisive:not here.
Gaming and other escapism is a fine place to have such spaces. But that needs to be the rule up front!
We know Blizzard is just bending over for China and making up the rules as they go, but if they did have a "no divisive politics in streams" rule that they'd been enforcing for years, they'd be in the right here.
But they don't, and so they
Re: (Score:2)
a "pride" T-shirt is usually not political, it is usually an expression of a deeply held personal belief.
It is like saying that a cross is political and can be banned, simply because politicians sometimes talk about religion.
Re: (Score:2)
a "pride" T-shirt is usually not political, it is usually an expression of a deeply held personal belief.
Doesn't matter. Just like you don't have 10 Commandments statues in courthouses any more. Deeply held? Yes. Divisive? Yes. Gaming or movies as an escape from divisive things is fine. Gaming or movies about divisive things is also fine, but it needs to be clear up front which it is.
That's the thing about games: the rules can be arbitrary, but they need to be stable.
Re: (Score:2)
And why should a gamer have less free speech than others?
See, this is what most people fail to understand. I never said, implied or stated that. You were reading into things.
The ban on political statements in certain situations is simply common sense.
Examples: a Muslim bursting into a Catholic church yelling about Allah is bad behavior. Same if a Catholic bursts into a Mosque yelling about Virgin Mary. You wouldn't like someone leaning over your shoulder at the public toilet, whispering "have you found Jesus yet?", now, would you?
Many workplaces impose a ban on p
Re: (Score:2)
Wait, your examples of why banning political speech is sometimes good is because religion?
Oh, right, in China they consider religious speech to be political, and ban it. Your attempt to explain that in English without admitting the reasoning creates a pile of bullshit.
Re: (Score:2)
I know I will be the odd one standing against the offended horde, but... Gaming is entertainment. Gaming should be apolitical and religion free unless explicitly stated otherwise ...
I think I understand what you're trying to say; but don't you think what's happening in Hong Kong lies well beyond average everyday politics?
...while gaming, I never make any political, racial or religious statements, because I strongly believe games should be free of such subjects.
The quick Google search I just did seems to indicate that Hearthstone / Blizzard have never before been at the centre of such a controversy. This suggests that either a) Hearthstone has never penalized players for political commentary during games or b) such commentary has never taken place. Either of these is a strong indicator of the exceptional nature of this parti
Re: The odd one out (Score:2)
How's that Kung Pao bootleather taste?
Re: (Score:2)
You tell me, you seem to be quite the connoiseur.
Re: (Score:2)
I know you are, but what am I
and other great insights.
Re: (Score:2)
Politics is involved in everything humans do. Politics has been involved in games since the beginning. You don't think the stories in games are influenced by politics? Mass effect, Dragon age, Deus Ex, Far Cry, are all about politics. Most games involve politics in some way.
If you don't see politics in something it usually just means that the politics in it conform to your worldview and it just looks normal to you.
Re: (Score:2)
Politics is involved in everything humans do.
I'll remember that next time I take a shit.
Politics has been involved in games since the beginning.
Let me fix that for you: " Politics has been involved in some games since the beginning."
Mass effect, Dragon age, Deus Ex, Far Cry, are all about politics. Most games involve politics in some way.
Of course they are. And of course everyone is free to talk about the politics of those games as they are presented in said gameswhile the gamers play them. You could root for the Krogans or the Salarians, you could better identify with Cerberus or the Assari, that's fine. It's called "roleplaying". But please keep real-life politics out of the game.
If you don't see politics in something it usually just means that the politics in it conform to your worldview and it just looks normal to you.
No, it means I can make the d
Re: (Score:2)
I'll remember that next time I take a shit.
And I will name it comment number 59325762
A more true statement would have been that any human interaction involving more than two people involves politics, though.
Of course they are. And of course everyone is free to talk about the politics of those games as they are presented in said gameswhile the gamers play them. You could root for the Krogans or the Salarians, you could better identify with Cerberus or the Assari, that's fine. It's called "roleplaying". But please keep real-life politics out of the game.
You may not have noticed this, but most stories involving politics are making a point about the real world. Yes, even video games.
Re: (Score:2)
You may not have noticed this, but most stories involving politics are making a point about the real world. Yes, even video games.
While it's true everything could be reduced to "contains politics", sometimes we really need to let go of that interpretation, because the ties to real world politics are so faint they can be ignored, otherwise it becomes a slippery slope. I could force this kind of interpretation to "discover" Nazi propaganda in any situation, same goes for religion. But sometimes one gotta say "enough is enough", let's just have some fun and stop reading into things.
Re: (Score:2)
No. A card game seen strongly political to me... anyway, there's not less politics in Hearthstone than any other game...
Re: The odd one out (Score:2)
Gaming should be apolitical
"Should in one hand and shit in the other" I believe iis how the saying goes,..
Re: (Score:2)
Gaming is entertainment. Gaming should be apolitical ...
Of course you can have the opinion but it doesn't really hold up to reality. There's a lot of contrary evidence in the history of sports and entertainment more generally.
Not Blizzard, Activision. (Score:3)
Let's face it. Too many of us look at "Blizzard" though rose-colored glasses as though it were still the same company that made Warcraft 3, Starcraft, and Diablo 2. But once Activision sank its fangs into the company, they've gone nowhere but downhill.
Activision, EA, Microsoft... they are the the three prime evils of gaming; ruining everything they touch.
Re: (Score:2)
Let's face it. Too many of us look at "Blizzard" though rose-colored glasses as though it were still the same company that made Warcraft 3, Starcraft, and Diablo 2. But once Activision sank its fangs into the company, they've gone nowhere but downhill.
Activision, EA, Microsoft... they are the the three prime evils of gaming; ruining everything they touch.
Naah. It was World of Warcraft that sank it. Blizzard got bloated on easy cash and became first lazy, then evil.
Re: (Score:2)
I'm old, i remember Activision and EA to be gaming heroes and any gamebox with any of those names on would be quality stuff.
Cant ban everyone (Score:1)
Re: (Score:2)
I can't fucking wait for videos of protests at Blizzcon. This all blew up well after tickets went on sale, so presumably some of the people who bought them are now pissed off at Blizzard-Activision.*
* We need a less unwieldy name for these jerkoffs. Can't call them Blactivision for obvious reasons. Activeturd?
Bad Headline (Score:1)
They do NOT, however, have any particular ethical or moral obligation to provide a platform for people to call for a boycott of their services. That's just idiotic.