New Riot Games Policy Puts Players’ Free Speech In Jeopardy

“League of Legends” developer Riot Games has decided its virtual battlefields aren’t enough; the fight to counter wrongthink must extend off-platform as well through a disturbing update to its terms of service.

For those out of the loop, “League” is one of the biggest games currently on the market. Millions of players log in to play daily, and esports tournaments featuring “League” have boasted prize pools of more than $60 million. The game has spawned myriad merchandising opportunities, spinoffs, and even a critically acclaimed Netflix animated series called “Arcane.” To call “League” a cornerstone of the gaming industry would be an understatement. 

On that note, Riot announced it plans to punish players in-game for alleged violations that occurred on non-Riot services. In a late November post announcing the change, Riot wrote, “Our intention with this update is to help protect players from harmful behaviors they can experience across the various places that touch their gaming experience.” 

Anticipating pushback, Riot preemptively tried damage control and argued, “This update applies very specifically and only to content where Riot’s games are the background of the content produced.” Yet even this is a bridge too far when it comes to protecting individuals’ free speech and property rights. 

It is easy to imagine that once given the power to moderate off-platform content, Riot will enforce political litmus tests for players to maintain access to their games. As Riot’s November post explains, “If you say or do things that break our Terms of Service while broadcasting or creating content about our games, we can restrict access to your Riot accounts (and suspend your Partner privileges if you are part of our Partner Program).” 

We’ve seen how “hate speech” is endlessly weaponized against people the left doesn’t like. What if a “League” streamer questions the proliferation of DEI initiatives in the gaming industry or expresses support for Donald Trump on his channel? Will Riot invoke the new terms of service to strip him of his ability to play?

Riot has already demonstrated it serves woke masters. Last June, the company went crazy for “pride month,” releasing emoticons, an LGBT-themed Spotify playlist, and more. There is zero chance Riot would view gamers uncomfortable with woke ideology with anything but pure scorn, setting the stage for massive real-world consequences.

“League” and many of Riot’s other products give players the option to purchase customizable cosmetics, weapons, and other in-game items with real money. If this trial run in authoritarianism is allowed to proceed, there will be consequences for gamers who either rely on streaming to make a living or casual players who invested money into the games — all for disagreeing with wokeness. 

All this assumes that Riot stops at only banning people engaging with its own content. What’s to prevent the company from enforcing speech codes on unrelated platforms like X or Facebook? We’ve seen this happen before with other companies that cut ties with streamers who express non-leftist opinions. 

Last year, Activision Blizzard removed in-game content featuring popular “Call of Duty” streamer “Nickmercs” after he tweeted support for parents fighting LGBT indoctrination in schools. “They should leave little children alone. That’s the real issue,” he tweeted, which led to the company severing ties. 

Why wouldn’t Riot follow suit? It has shown what side of the political aisle it has decided to support. And if there’s anyone who unabashedly and viciously tries to get its opposition removed from platforms, it’s woke cultists. 

Riot is treading dangerously here. Gamers lose when ideologues overreach to enforce dogma outside their own platforms. No one denies Riot’s right to enforce server-based terms of service. But expanding its reach to off-platform behavior suggests an effort less focused on cleaning up servers and more focused on enforcing ideological purity.

Those kinds of purity tests are responsible for the degradation of gaming into yet another frontier in the culture war. Gamers should reject this policy change wholesale and demand that Riot stick to its own lane. 

Or lanes, I suppose. You’d think the company that made “League” would be familiar with that concept.