I'm pretty sure that is about banning bad actors across the whole ecosystem.
You know, because Minecraft is a game targeted at kids. And maybe you don't someone spouting racist/sexist garbage at them all day.
You know, because Minecraft is a game targeted at kids. And maybe you don't someone spouting racist/sexist garbage at them all day.
I don’t want Microsoft to police what sort of speech my kids are and aren’t allowed to have, nor do I want them to get to decide what the consequences for breaking the rules are.
What I’d like to be able to do is set up a server and let our kids and their friends play on it, without anyone else. That would protect the kids just fine.
This doesn’t take a globally unique Microsoft account, it takes a player guid. I’m pretty sure the capability is all there, too, but they just decided to lock it behind their ecosystem.
Well two of them at least.
A survival game where you are utterly alone fighting zombies and all kinds of monsters that come at night while you have no weapons or shelter.
Yeap... kids stuff.
This is Microsoft, and in a competitive landscape, no less. Not sure if this maps.
Moderation is hard work, expensive, and doesn’t scale. And Minecraft doesn’t have even a theoretical sinister benefit of being able to sway public opinion with it. It’s just a cost center to keep the ecosystem non-toxic.
And yet they are seeking the power to ban people from playing on their own private servers. It's a blatant power grab, but I guess it not real authoritarianism unless they're laughing like a cartoon villain when they do it, right? Give me a break. All corporations are power hungry by nature; and the largest and most powerful of them have demonstrated this nature time and time again to become the way they are today.