Microsoft will now tell you if you are a jerk on Xbox Live

The launch of the Xbox One console in November also introduced the idea of online player reputations for Microsoft's game console. Today, the company announced that it will begin to send out notifications to players who need to boost their reputation scores.

As we have previously reported, Microsoft uses colors to represent Xbox One player reputation levels, with "Green" linked with "Good Player," "Yellow" meaning the score "Needs Work" and "Red" standing for "Avoid Me." In a post on Xbox Wire, Microsoft stated, "Beginning this month, some players will start receiving reputation warnings as their reputations drop due to feedback from the community."

If a player sees his or her online reputation fall into the Red level, they may experience limitations on playing games on the Xbox One until they can boost their score up. That may also include not being able to broadcast games via the Twitch app. On the other side of  the equation, Microsoft says it has plans to offer rewards for players who are in the green and have been rated as having a good online reputation. Details about those plans should be released in the future. Microsoft insists that their algorithm will adjust if some people attempt to make false reports against Xbox One players.

Source: Microsoft | Image via Microsoft

Report a problem with article
Previous Story

Microsoft discontinues Surface Wireless Keyboard Adapter

Next Story

Microsoft finally starts promoting wireless adapter it just discontinued [Update]

58 Comments

Commenting is disabled on this article.

Yeah way to many asshats online nowadays. Don't know for sure as I was in my early teens when I actively started using the internet for more than downloading a song or 2.
But the general internetting community USED to be quite nice and friendly 15 years ago. There where trolls but it was different, it was just for fun. Not to actually be a total troll or that your one pleasure in life is trolling others to be "cool".
We werent cool for using the internet, we were the opposite.

Nowadays so many people think its so cool to be an online ######, giving them some kind of e-penis.
Plus the For The Win gameplay attitude, if you're playing public matches in BF4 for example... those 110-120 levels always _HAVE_ to show their dominance. The games that are "just for fun" attitude are rare. I used to have that all the time in UT/RA etc. People played "Just For Fun" and not "For The Win".

Go Microsoft, wish Steam and Sony implemented a similar feature. MS has already had something like this, you could report individuals for rtard behavior and XBL matching would in the future not match you up with the same rtards you reported.
I absolutely loved this feature on XBL when I had a 360, most used feature.

Unfortunately, the reporting system is all bark and no bite. One person can send another person a message saying " I will rape u" and even if they are reported no action will be taken. Even if the threat was followed through, I doubt their xbl account would get banned.

Offering rewards is sadly the only way to improve online actions. Even then, the entitlement-ers wouldn't be persuaded by a reward system and would carry on with their asshattery.

Why does the article say Microsoft will tell you if you're a jerk? It's not Microsoft, it's other users, "as their reputations drop due to feedback from the community" So many of your articles seem to have this negative vibe toward Microsoft John, or at least in the title of the article.

Correct, it's based on user ratings and the system auto-generates the message. Microsoft isn't monitoring this and picking and choosing who's good. I don't know if John actually plays Xbox Live games (and even Playstation games), but he'd know there are some pretty bad jerks who ruin the experience for everyone, so this system sounds great to me.

PurpleHaze420 said,

Nothing wrong with a good tea-bagging. Lol..


that depends on who's getting tea bagged. I would not enjoy being on the receiving end

Oh and here I was thinking there was a level above Good.

So does your reputation go down when you ram people off the track intentionally on Forza?

Would be interested to know what would stop people from marking people bad just out of spite.

Good move since I avoid playing with random people since people like to act tough and say things while hiding behind the screen. When the first elections with Obama, the racists really crawled out of the woodwork.

Smart models with enough data can recognize and ignore that kind of vindictive activity.

(whether their model is sufficiently smart is a different question, but it can be done)

techbeck said,
Would be interested to know what would stop people from marking people bad just out of spite.

Good move since I avoid playing with random people since people like to act tough and say things while hiding behind the screen. When the first elections with Obama, the racists really crawled out of the woodwork.

You'd have to campaign against a single person and even then it'd be obvious. If you get a few bad apples that are just dinging you out of spite it won't affect you. The dings start when you go into a game lobby and start insulting people, bad mouthing people, berating people, etc. Trends will set in and your rep will go down.

It's a good thing. I say put all the @sshats into games with themselves and let them have at it. It's one reason I don't play online much anymore - so many idiots. I just want to play a g'damn game. :p

techbeck said,
Would be interested to know what would stop people from marking people bad just out of spite.

Good move since I avoid playing with random people since people like to act tough and say things while hiding behind the screen. When the first elections with Obama, the racists really crawled out of the woodwork.


The system would detect people who regularly give down votes and they'd probably be tagged for review in the system. Trolls are easy to detect with such a system if you look for them.

D. FiB3R said,
It pisses me off (far more than it should) that the green bar for "good", doesn't completely fill the meter.

Hah. I feel your pain..

D. FiB3R said,
It pisses me off (far more than it should) that the green bar for "good", doesn't completely fill the meter.

Amen Brother!
Obviously no one is that good. haha

D. FiB3R said,
It pisses me off (far more than it should) that the green bar for "good", doesn't completely fill the meter.

It's a meter based on community votes. It probably starts at full, and then decreases a little as people down vote you (to prevent people from abusing the system).

j2006 said,

It's a meter based on community votes. It probably starts at full, and then decreases a little as people down vote you (to prevent people from abusing the system).

But their downvotes only count if they've actually been in a game with you.

And a handful of downvotes indicating isolated incidents wouldn't count either.

You really only lose reputation if a lot of people who engaged you in-game downvoted you within a short period of time....and then your reputation would gradually improve again as long as no new downvotes came.

Joshie said,

But their downvotes only count if they've actually been in a game with you.

And a handful of downvotes indicating isolated incidents wouldn't count either.

You really only lose reputation if a lot of people who engaged you in-game downvoted you within a short period of time....and then your reputation would gradually improve again as long as no new downvotes came.

Pretty much. Negative votes are pretty damaging to your reputation, but Microsoft counts each null vote as a positive one. E.g if you join a battlefield 4 server and nobody avoided your gamertag, it would count as 63 positive votes.

McKay said,

Pretty much. Negative votes are pretty damaging to your reputation, but Microsoft counts each null vote as a positive one. E.g if you join a battlefield 4 server and nobody avoided your gamertag, it would count as 63 positive votes.

Yup. I really can't imagine why someone would be upset with this system unless they (a) don't understand how it works, (b) have found a serious flaw that could be exploited in a believable scenario, or (c) are one of the jerks.

SierraSonic said,
Removing features because of "behavior"... From a paid service... Hrm this won't fly to well.

that probably only happens if you act like really, really bad online.

aviator189 said,

that probably only happens if you act like really, really bad online.
Really really bad, means they should get banned as in removed from the service. Unless you are doing something that requires removing you from the service, the features of a pay for service should be uninhibited.

SierraSonic said,
Really really bad, means they should get banned as in removed from the service. Unless you are doing something that requires removing you from the service, the features of a pay for service should be uninhibited.

If you don't be a jerk then you'll be fine.

SierraSonic said,
Removing features because of "behavior"... From a paid service... Hrm this won't fly to well.
If by "removing features" you mean not matching you with people who don't play with dicks... I think MS gains in that decision much more than it loses.

Audien said,

If you don't be a jerk then you'll be fine.

If you dont be a jerk, if you don't have anything to hide, if you don't etc. I tire of these comments with no thought put into them.

There has been plenty examples within my lifetime where these comments are only stated by people who have YET to feel the other side of the stick they keep sharpening.

This system isn't going to be foolproof, I imagine a certain percentage of false flags to occur. Plus don't forget what happens when a group of people want to influence the system to get the results they want. These automated systems seem to make it easier to abuse good people.

Block quote on how the system works

Ultimately, your reputation score will determine which category you are assigned - "Green = Good Player," "Yellow = Needs Improvement" or "Red = Avoid Me." Looking at someone's gamer card you'll be able to quickly see their reputation. And, your reputation score is ultimately up to you. The more hours you play online without being a jerk, the better your reputation will be; similar to the more hours you drive without an accident, the better your driving record and insurance rates will be. Most players will have good reputations and be seen as a “Good Player.” The algorithm is looking to identify players that are repeatedly disruptive on Xbox Live. We'll identify those players with a lower reputation score and in the worse cases they will earn the “Avoid Me” reputation. Before a player ends up with the “Avoid Me” reputation level we will have sent many different alerts to the “Needs Improvement” player reminding them how their social gaming conduct is affecting lots of other gamers.

The algorithm is sophisticated and won't penalize you for a few bad reports. Even good players might receive a few player feedback reports each month and that is OK. The algorithm weighs the data collected so if a dozen people suddenly reporting a single user, the system will look at a variety of factors before docking their reputation. We'll verify if those people actually played in an online game with the person reported - if not, all of those player's feedback won't matter as much as a single person who spent 15 minutes playing with the reported person. The system also looks at the reputation of the person reporting and the alleged offender, frequency of reports from a single user and a number of other factors.

MrHumpty said,
If by "removing features" you mean not matching you with people who don't play with dicks... I think MS gains in that decision much more than it loses.
Until innocents get marked as bad. :/ What recourse will these people have to fight this? I bet this solutions fixes nothing but creates more problems, like every one of these systems has.

It is not proper to remove features you are paying for. This is punishing monetarily for completely legal behavior.

Sraf said,
Block quote on how the system works
Yea, basically "Even though you aren't doing anything illegal, your neighbors complained enough times, so you can't use your garage anymore."

Basically I could be receiving negative scores for disagreeing with this, luckily Neowin doesn't have down votes, and won't restrict you based on how many downvotes you get.

Goto liveleak to see how well community monitoring works on the comments. This being based on morality instead of legality is the issue here.

Read the whole thing, there are checks in place to prevent harassment via this system, it will notify you if your score starts getting low. In addition, I'm sure the same recourse that is currently in place for people who are banned or suspended will still be around to contest any false positives that slip through all the checks and balances

And don't get me wrong, people will try (and possibly succeed) at finding ways to exploit this system, and aside from the aforementioned mode of recourse, MS has also stated that this is a living system, which means that they will make changes as they are needed. I also would like to point out that this rep system has been in place since the launch of Xbox One, and it is only now that they are enabling the system to act on the data that it has collected. This rep system was also based on the old rep system from the Xbox 360, so they do have mountains of data to statistically determine if and when a user should be impacted

ANd ultimately, I would prefer a system like this that warns me of bad behaviour but lets me keep playing, than the current one where your account can be suspended or banned without as much feedback/warning

Sraf said,
And don't get me wrong, people will try (and possibly succeed) at finding ways to exploit this system, and aside from the aforementioned mode of recourse, MS has also stated that this is a living system, which means that they will make changes as they are needed. I also would like to point out that this rep system has been in place since the launch of Xbox One, and it is only now that they are enabling the system to act on the data that it has collected. This rep system was also based on the old rep system from the Xbox 360, so they do have mountains of data to statistically determine if and when a user should be impacted

ANd ultimately, I would prefer a system like this that warns me of bad behaviour but lets me keep playing, than the current one where your account can be suspended or banned without as much feedback/warning

I get how the system runs, basically like every other system that works like this, "live system" just means they will update it, just like every other system before hand, nothing is special here but the wording.

The system will in the end resolve nothing, segregate players, and add more issues than it resolves.

In the end it doesn't affect me, I haven't paid for a single month of xbox live, I don't believe I should pay for features that should be free, nor do I want them to be able to be taken from me when I am paying for them. Whether they are taken by an automated system, the human factor, or glitches in the system. (down time is expected, but a glitch banning certain people from certain features isn't)

The best way to fix the issues at hand is:
"Are you over 18?" (with verification)
and
"Do you want to set your profile as 18+?" (Which would prevent anyone not verified as 18+ from looking at your content)
and/or
"Do you want to prevent gameplay/communication/sharing with minors not on your friends list?"
and the best feature
"This game is 18+, you are REQUIRED TO HAVE/BE AUTHORIZED BY AN 18+ ACCOUNT TO PLAY "

Edited by SierraSonic, Mar 26 2014, 8:37pm :

SierraSonic, I don't disagree with your concern. But in the same context of "putting thought into it", what are your proposed countermeasures for this problem? Just ignore it? There was a time in the PC gaming world (the only world I game in, consequently) where you could CHOOSE what game servers you want to play on. I always connected to family-friendly ones. You don't have that choice anymore, so gamers are at the mercy of foul-mouthed, childish individuals who just ruin the game. What would you suggest as a way to deal with this?

Robert Wade said,
SierraSonic, I don't disagree with your concern. But in the same context of "putting thought into it", what are your proposed countermeasures for this problem? Just ignore it? There was a time in the PC gaming world (the only world I game in, consequently) where you could CHOOSE what game servers you want to play on. I always connected to family-friendly ones. You don't have that choice anymore, so gamers are at the mercy of foul-mouthed, childish individuals who just ruin the game. What would you suggest as a way to deal with this?
Separate Children, Teens, and Adults by opt-in? Allow 18+ only servers, chat rooms, etc.

Right now your choices are, Public(imagine your are in a classroom) or Private(in your own bedroom).

I want the choices to be, Public(classroom), Private(bedroom), Mature(bar).

Most other features are already in place by other systems, avoid matchmaking with person in the future, ignore(mute) person, etc.

Edited by SierraSonic, Mar 26 2014, 9:12pm :

By what measure do you set "Mature"?
I would like to play with people who are emotionally mature, who might even swear from time to time, but are not verbally abusive, constantly spouting profanities and so on (IE emotionally immature)

The system you propose doesn't cater much to that, but the MS one would

Sraf said,
By what measure do you set "Mature"?
I would like to play with people who are emotionally mature, who might even swear from time to time, but are not verbally abusive, constantly spouting profanities and so on (IE emotionally immature)

The system you propose doesn't cater much to that, but the MS one would

I've been going by age... so age?

The problem here is to "protect the children", most people have no problem ignoring these 'problem people', children actively engage in it or are just involved by being there. There is nothing stopping you from muting these players and marking them as do not play with, at that point they can't annoy you anymore. This is a better way to solve it as it isn't automated and can't be abused. The system Microsoft wants can and will be abused, my system would just as effective without your choice affecting mine.

Edited by SierraSonic, Mar 26 2014, 9:57pm :

If age is the decider, then you have just clumped the ####-talkers in with the underaged group

And the thing is, age is not a reliable tell if someone is emotionally mature. You needn't look further than politicians to see physically mature people acting like petulant children.

And I don't care about the children, I'm not a parent myself, and I think that no matter how hard you try you'll still be exposed to poor influences. No, I'm being greedy. I do not want to play with these kind of people, I would rather play with people who are open communicators, and where an entire team can communicate freely, not one where I've muted half the team

Sraf said,
I do not want to play with these kind of people, I would rather play with people who are open communicators, and where an entire team can communicate freely, not one where I've muted half the team
I agree with you, I firmly beleive my method would actually block the people you want without blocking people you do not want blocked. While on the other hand the automated system will screw you over.

Lets assume one person is for some reason marked to a lower tier, and now they are playing with nothing but the people in that tier, so it becomes harder and harder to work out of this hole as the main way of ranking you is decided by the people who are most likely going to cause issues. If people griefing you over voice is bad, just wait til they get their hands on this.

I'm sure microsoft's system will prevent the random one or two downvote from hurting rankings, but what happens when a collective of griefers playing together downvote you? Which is what usually happens when these systems are in place.

I mean look at the pc game hacking scene, I've seen people who buy cdkeys cheap online,just to go online and grief with aimbots, get banned a month later and just spend another $5 or so to do it all over again.

There are people out there who just want to watch the world burn, doesn't matter if the world is virtual.

The system is already noted as putting less importance on the negative rating of someone who constantly is reporting people, and it doesn't care about the ratings of someone who hasn't even interacted with you

We'll verify if those people actually played in an online game with the person reported - if not, all of those player's feedback won't matter as much as a single person who spent 15 minutes playing with the reported person. The system also looks at the reputation of the person reporting and the alleged offender, frequency of reports from a single user and a number of other factors.


Again, I do think someone will try to abuse the system, and that they might succeed, but I think you are blowing the impact of such, and the ease of doing such, out of the water(figuratively speaking). Ultimately time will tell as screwing up a system like this will be a very good way to move users away from your (MS') system

Maybe I'm reading you wrong too, so there could be that


EDIT: You last line after your edit does make me wonder: will repeat offenders (people who have their accounts banned, then make new one, then have it banned again a bunch of times) be punished harder? MS already does ban consoles from Live for certain violations of the TOS...

Edited by Sraf, Mar 26 2014, 9:24pm :

I'm sure microsoft's system will prevent the random one or two downvote from hurting rankings, but what happens when a collective of griefers playing together downvote you? Which is what usually happens when these systems are in place.

First, you'd have to be playing with all of them for it to matter (and the longer you play with them, the more it matters, a short session with a dozen griefers matters less than a long session with normal people. If they are Griefing you, personally I would leave), secondly they'd have to have good reps themselves, thirdly they'd only be able to affect so many people before the system starts devaluing their feedback (that frequent reporter thing again)

And lastly, as is the current situation, I'm sure you can still appeal a devaluation to a mod, same as you can appeal a suspension or ban now

Edited by Sraf, Mar 26 2014, 9:43pm :

SierraSonic said,
what happens when a collective of griefers playing together downvote you? Which is what usually happens when these systems are in place.

That pattern is recognizable. Pretty sure their system won't be governed by sheer volume of votes, and there's no doubt that they'll be tuning the model as it goes, so a damage reputation could be corrected by an improved model, even if the data it was based upon didn't change.

So what if these people give good ratings to bad people and bad ratings to good people? They are still contributing, though I don't believe you can code if someone is being honest with their vote.

Just from browsing a couple forums you could tell that the griefers aren't worried, they never are, in the end this system will just work against honest people because it is trying to think for them.

Think of it as the DRM for etiquette.

SierraSonic said,
Until innocents get marked as bad. :/ What recourse will these people have to fight this? I bet this solutions fixes nothing but creates more problems, like every one of these systems has.

It is not proper to remove features you are paying for. This is punishing monetarily for completely legal behavior.

There is no way they haven't created mechanisms, checks, tests, procedures to deal with false positives.

But more importantly. I'm not disagreeing with you. However, if you buy a gold sub. Then act a dick. Then lose access to many of the popular people on match making services you've done it to yourself. You are only punished if you continue to pay after being shunned by the community. And at that point... I just don't care.

MrHumpty said,
There is no way they haven't created mechanisms, checks, tests, procedures to deal with false positives.
There is no way they are foolproof.

But more importantly. I'm not disagreeing with you. However, if you buy a gold sub. Then act a dick. Then lose access to many of the popular people on match making services you've done it to yourself. You are only punished if you continue to pay after being shunned by the community. And at that point... I just don't care.
Thats assuming they are actually being a dick and not just being screwed over by the system.

Again, I believe the system will work against the innocent and work well in those hands that you are trying to take away the access from.

So what if these people give good ratings to bad people and bad ratings to good people? They are still contributing, though I don't believe you can code if someone is being honest with their vote.

There is no "good" rating you can give. The idea is that in regular play, you rep improves unless people are always complaining about you, muting you, etc.

Lots of online games are paid but if you're a tool people will avoid you and if its bad enough you'll get temporary bans or worse. The bottom line is: don't be a tool and you'll be fine.

This was there kinda with the 360 too. XBL where you can report bad gaming behavior and in the future in ANY XBL game you play, that you're able to avoid the players you pick to avoid.

Something I really find annoying on PSN, where I keep getting matched up with total rtards where their game isnt the game we're playing. But ruining the gameplay of other gamers.

MS takes it a step further now, GREAT :D. Wish Sony gave us a similar feature. I want to play games for fun. Not to have others play the same game only to attempt to ruin my gameplay.

Sraf said,

There is no "good" rating you can give. The idea is that in regular play, you rep improves unless people are always complaining about you, muting you, etc.
OK, I should have read the source before I spoke, I still think that the system will have its flaws and that there will be some way to fool the system. Microsoft got these metrics when nobody really used the reporting features to do anything, now that the system is on, I am sure people will use it more to troll. Though I am positive Microsoft has safeguards in place, there will be ways around them, no system made by man that man himself cant destroy.

MrHumpty said,
There is no way it will be as remotely as bad as you're assuming either.

How bad do you think I think it will be? I'm saying it wont do much to improve the situation. You make it seem like I somehow was saying things are going to get worse.

My original point is still that taking away features that you pay for isn't going to fly well. Which is more why I prefer the PC anyway, as someone has stated already, you can easily join servers for specific purposes, adult servers, child friendly servers, casual gaming servers, servers specifically to mess around, etc. All for free, usually with someone to administrate the server according to the servers rule, if I don't like it, I move on, if they don't like me, they remove me.

With consoles you get what you get, and play how the system wants you to play, you can now lose access to the features you want to use because you may play differently than others, and the worst part is you are continually paying to potentially lose your features. Quit assuming that people affected by this are going to be the worst slime out there, from experiance with these systems, they will affect those who shouldn't have also.

It's all about choice, and I believe if you want to choose who you play with, you should have more control, not let a system automatically pick that for you.

SierraSonic said,
How bad do you think I think it will be? I'm saying it wont do much to improve the situation. You make it seem like I somehow was saying things are going to get worse.
The situtation, as you are describing it, is people will be penalized unfairly and lose privileges due to people screwing with their rep. I'm saying that I believe the amount of false positives will be minimal and MS will work diligently to avoid them otherwise it creates a form of abuse out of an otherwise useful feature of XBox Live.
My original point is still that taking away features that you pay for isn't going to fly well.
Nearly all services you subscribe to have Terms or User or codes of conduct. WoW, for example, will ban you w/o refund if you behave incorrectly and are reported. This system is much more automated and has different levels of "punishment" which is funny since you bring up "Which is more why I prefer the PC anyway,"

Your other points about PC gaming are irrelevant because they are pc gaming and not a hosted service. If you love pc gaming, do that, and don't participate in Xbox Live. Which is what I would tell anybody who doesn't like the moderated more "family friendly" requirement of the service. You're choosing to pay for the service, if you find yourself unable to participate at a level you don't want... just stop paying.

Quit assuming that people affected by this are going to be the worst slime out there, from experiance with these systems, they will affect those who shouldn't have also.
I'm sorry. But people I know who've been banned from paid services or suspended usually did something very legit to have that happen. So I'm sorry, I'll assume that are having limited privileges on XBox Live are more than likely deserving of it, especially because it is very transparent as to what your level is and you have to get through 3 levels of rep to hit the "only play with other low rep toons and not upload to twitch"
It's all about choice, and I believe if you want to choose who you play with, you should have more control, not let a system automatically pick that for you.
I couldn't agree more. If you choose not to abide by the community rules you can choose to not pay to be part of the community.

The only scenario where I would agree with you is if the community somehow organizes to screw someone's rep. I highly doubt that will be possible and if so, I'm certain MS will fix their algorithm's to handle it... they have a huge profit/loss motive to do so.

Edit: FYI, I really dislike console gaming. I only game on PC. But I have an Xbox Live sub because I use my Xbox 360 as a media machine of sorts. However, if I choose to play Forza or something online I have no problem with this system because I do think it will stop ppl from acting like dicks online. It's a self regulation that really appeals to me rather than someone dropping a ban hammer.

http://www.neowin.net/forum/to...eing-a-jerk/#entry596331661 <-- conversation I should have joined. :p

MrHumpty said,
walloftext

I dont play WoW, but that automatic banning system seems to add reason to not play it. Again, I am certain this feature will catch some innocent people, just like any other system like this.

I don't participate in XBL, I can still give my opinion on features being added.

My problem is there is no ability to play in an adult atmosphere, being forced to be overly moral ONLY because we need to "think of the children" is really annoying. People talk #### all the time everywhere, you shouldn't expect people to be "civil" while stabbing people in the back and goring people.

Of course legit ######## are going to be blocked, but so are many innocents. This system is going to be just as effective as it was in WoW, HoN, ETC. Go through the forums on those games, nothing changes with these systems being implemented, other than the possibility of some innocent people getting hurt in the crossfire of slightly reducing these annoyances.

I couldn't agree more. If you choose not to abide by the community rules you can choose to not pay to be part of the community.
The only scenario where I would agree with you is if the community somehow organizes to screw someone's rep. I highly doubt that will be possible and if so, I'm certain MS will fix their algorithm's to handle it... they have a huge profit/loss motive to do so.

You completely agree, yet praise the automatic system. The community is built up from multiple groups of people, and some of them want to watch the world burn. To find a community of people who are dedicated to ruining gaming for other people I recommend looking at that aimbot forum, I don't know the name. It's a group of thousands of people out there just to troll games, and I bet you this system won't even make them flinch.

EX: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GUq5uVuZuws

Perfect example. :)

None the less, I am only against this method of trying to resolve the problem as it has been shown time and time again to be ineffective. Otherwise if it does work, great for everybody. Still think it wont matter. :)