Sun Qian's lawsuit against Honor of Kings was rejected after his algorithm claims were rejected. The court ruled that the case exceeded the scope of consumers' right to know.

The incident of a female player suing a player for playing Honor of Kings quickly sparked a frenzy on online platforms, with many expressing their support. This is because the matchmaking system has been unfairly ineffective for years, with winning streaks inevitably followed by losing streaks. This treatment has become unbearable. After a grueling 30-minute battle to win a game, the next game is surrendered after only 5 minutes. Despite the addition of lane-based matchmaking, the skill level of teammates is still disproportionate to the player's rank.

Algorithms exceed the scope of the right to know

The verdict has garnered citywide attention, as it will impact the future of esports. Given this precedent, how should games employing algorithms address consumer concerns? While esports games explicitly state and emphasize that victory or defeat involves multiple elements, including individual reaction, combat environment, and team composition, Sun Quan believes there is system manipulation behind the scenes, intentionally maintaining the win rate at around 50%. The lawsuit, which began last August, continues to this day with both sides sticking to their stories. Sun Quan argues for the right to know and demand disclosure, while the operator maintains it as a trade secret.

In April 2026, the court ruled to dismiss all of the plaintiff Sun Qian's claims. The reason was simple: the right to know listed in the Consumer Rights Protection Law does not include the game's matching algorithm. In other words, it exceeded the scope of the consumer's right to know.

Vicious cycle of matching vulnerabilities

Furthermore, operators have optimized consumer preferences through platforms and various means, including lane allocation and game strength, and have advised both parties to explain the game's future direction through interactive channels to meet consumers' need for information. After analyzing the right to know, the court, from the perspective of the obligation to disclose, offered its opinion. Regarding legal liability, Honor of Kings is classified as a competitive entertainment product, which is irrelevant to public interest or labor rights. Therefore, operators do not need to follow the example of internet companies by disclosing their algorithms.

Because the matchmaking algorithm still has significant vulnerabilities, it cannot be ruled out that players could maliciously exploit these vulnerabilities to circumvent the rules, thereby undermining the game's fairness. This is detrimental to the game's development and the gaming experience of the general public. In short, the conclusion drawn from this lawsuit is that games need to communicate more with consumers and strictly manage violations. Everything should return to normal; everyone can continue playing the game and report any unethical players.

Image source: Internet