It’s a bit unusual for developers to comment on specific bans, but PlayerUnknown had some strong opinions on what one of his game’s biggest personalities did on stream. Here’s a tense exchange that went down on Twitter after the banning incident:

Dr. Disrespect later threatened to kick PlayerUnknown’s various body parts, provoking PlayerUnknown to divulge a few personal views on violence, which, surprisingly for a third-person shooter developer, lean more toward pacifism:


And in a longer message, PlayerUnknown explained that “even the threat of violence is not something that should be joked about. . . All I ask from anyone that reads this is to consider that your words, however flippant they may be, could have unintended effects on those reading them.” He then divulged a story:

“When I was in college, many years ago, I had a disagreement with my flat mate. Instead of talking it out like men, he decided to get aggressive and while I was backing away from him, he kicked me in the chest and put my head through a plate glass door. Thankfully, I don’t suffer from any ill effects due to this experience.

The point of that story is to attempt to explain why I think even the threat of violence is not something that should be joked about. Given my experience in college, and the fact that The Doc’s threat, even as a joke, synced up closely to a bad experience I endured, it could have brought up bad memories, triggered a panic attack or had other consequences The Doc might not have intended when composing the tweet.”


So what does the incident say about PlayerUnknown? That developers are their own people with their own views and the games they make—or those games’ communities—don’t say everything about who they are.