They probably spend fractions of a percent of their profits on moderation. We’re talking like 0.01%. Half the time it’s cycling college grads through 18 month contracts that they terminate so they can pay them less and less each time (Source: Worked at Microsoft, and they’re infamous for this. Hell, QA for Microsoft’s game division make about 50 cents above minimum wage in BC.)
Actually, no.
While it’s hard to imagine anyone finding goofy mods swapping cartoon characters or kids’ TV characters for grisly monsters all that scandalous - something that Capcom seems to recognise by acknowledging that “the majority of mods can have a positive impact on the game”
TSG_Asmodeus@lemmy.world 1 year ago
ante@lemmy.world 1 year ago
Why are you intentionally leaving out the rest of that sentence?
They are specifically talking about restricting modding.
MycoBro@lemmy.world 1 year ago
Goddamn. What a shady move. I expect it from the media and shit by for some reason it stings more when a rando does it.
Chariotwheel@kbin.social 1 year ago
Restricting, not preventing like you said.
ThunderingJerboa@kbin.social 1 year ago
Oh yes, because everyone knows. They say one thing it totally won't morph into something new afterwards. Also how do you imagine they will "restrict" the modding? By making the game more tamperproof and harder to mod. So while it may not be "prevented" they will basically make the only mods around texture swaps or some shit.