FD promoting griefing?

[NeilF]

And as has been stated several times now, the Rat who got jumped did not consider themselves griefed. S/He said so in this very thread.
So by your own definition, this incident wasn't a case of griefing.

Symantics... The individual didn't do a survey first, on a scale of one to ten, if I blow you up right now, how annoyed will you be? With 1, not very, and 10, in tears...

He did it for no ingame bonus, benefit, reward, level up... He did it just because he enjoyed the thought of shooting another CMDR in the back, destroying them, and ideally upsetting them... He (generally) has no idea if this is the outcome of course, but he'll get a kick from the "imagined grief." If not, why else do it?

He shot the rat in an attempt to cause grief... No other reason IMHO.


Anyhow... We're going around in circles... Clearly we disagree on why this shining example of ED's gameplay should/shouldn't be headline news...

 

[Becks]

Clearly we disagree on why this shining example of ED's gameplay should/shouldn't be headline news...

We disagree WHY it shouldn't be a headline. We don't disagree that it shouldn't be one.

 

[NeilF]

We disagree WHY it shouldn't be a headline. We don't disagree that it shouldn't be one.

To clarify? Because you don't like the possibility (as demonstrated in this case) of the repocussions than may ensue? Eg: Out of game hounding etc? You'd rather such events were ignored and treated as non-events?

While I of course simply don't like the idea of such unsociable behaviour (unpopular with many I'd suggest) being headlined as, hey this is exciting news! And worse still, possibly taken by others as a, try this for a laugh as FD don't mind?

 

[sewerratuk]

Redacted again.
I need to move on from this

 

[Becks]

To clarify? Because you don't like the possibility (as demonstrated in this case) of the repocussions than may ensue? Eg: Out of game hounding etc? You'd rather such events were ignored and treated as non-events?

While I of course simply don't like the idea of such unsociable behaviour (unpopular with many I'd suggest) being headlined as, hey this is exciting news! And worse still, possibly taken by others as a, try this for a laugh as FD don't mind?

Basically yeah. The article just heated up something that should have ended in a reddit thread 10 days ago and should have stayed there.

 

[Cosmos]

Symantics... The individual didn't do a survey first, on a scale of one to ten, if I blow you up right now, how annoyed will you be? With 1, not very, and 10, in tears...

He did it for no ingame bonus, benefit, reward, level up... He did it just because he enjoyed the thought of shooting another CMDR in the back, destroying them, and ideally upsetting them... He (generally) has no idea if this is the outcome of course, but he'll get a kick from the "imagined grief." If not, why else do it?

He shot the rat in an attempt to cause grief... No other reason IMHO.


Anyhow... We're going around in circles... Clearly we disagree on why this shining example of ED's gameplay should/shouldn't be headline news...

I find this all very tiresome. If you think anything that goes on in a video game, where we play with imaginary space ships can result in grief then you've never likely experienced REAL grief.

Try watching someone you love die in your arms. Then we can talk about grief. Stop being silly

 

[frostypaw]

I find this all very tiresome. If you think anything that goes on in a video game, where we play with imaginary space ships can result in grief then you've never likely experienced REAL grief.

Try watching someone you love die in your arms. Then we can talk about grief. Stop being silly

This is a highly emotive and unfair way to make your point but i'm happy to call you out on it - there are scales of grief and upset between "death of loved one" and "funkydory".

That said I disagree with NeilF - but only because for the sake of sane semantics and differentiation we need to be able to distinguish between a random(ish) kill and a campaign of hate/unpleasantry chasing people down. That gets a special separate label of "griefing" which isn't necessarily related to the quality or quantity of real life grief it causes, but to the disruptive nature of that play

 

[Soliluna]

I find this all very tiresome. If you think anything that goes on in a video game, where we play with imaginary space ships can result in grief then you've never likely experienced REAL grief.

Try watching someone you love die in your arms. Then we can talk about grief. Stop being silly

I think it's clear NeilF wants to play a different game to the one many of us are currently playing.

 

[MacAllister]

All depends on the term I guess...

For me, if someone is doing something for no other reason than to derive enjoyment by knowing they're ideally upselling (causing grief) to someone else, that's griefing to me...

If that's not the generally accepted meaning of the word, then I apologise, but it seems to fit for me. If you have another term for such behaviour that you think is more appropriate, I'd be willing to adopt it. I do have some others, but the forum would chop them

I think I might be able to help you there. There is a game theory called Bartle's Taxonomy that describes the different types of players when they act with/against other players in an MMO. The player type you are describing is clearly defined in this theory, along with how these types of players interact with other player types.

Here are a couple good videos that give an overview of the theory.
Bartle's Taxonomy - What Type of Player are You? - Extra Credits
Balancing an MMO Ecosystem - Getting a Mix of Player Types - Extra Credits

You can even take a couple tests to find out what type of player you tend be.
http://4you2learn.com/bartle/
https://www.helloquizzy.com/tests/the-four-player-types-test

Knowing the type of player you are and how other player types react to you, can give you an advantage in handling player actions you have issues with. I know this has worked with me in figuring out how to deal with other players.

In this case I was flying a ship that I could afford to lose 50+ times over and remade the cost of insurance 30mins later, so no grief there. You just have to find ways of playing this game where the actions of this minority player type really doesn't affect the way you choose to play this game.

 

[NeilF]

I think it's clear NeilF wants to play a different game to the one many of us are currently playing.

Do you not think that risks being a rather dramatic statement?

If I understand your comment, you're seemingly suggesting I'm now in some minority view point group, which I'm assuming you'd label "wrong", or "bad". And you're over there in a majority view point group under a huge label with "right" on it?

And I assume you're infuring all this - I want to change ED into a different game - based on a few comments I've made you've seemingly taken a dislike to.


Or could it be we simply have slightly different opinions on a few matters, and in reality that's all it is? Now that wouldn't be quite so interesting and dramatic would it... But maybe a fairer assessment? Why the need for such loaded comments?



- - - - - Additional Content Posted / Auto Merge - - - - -

In this case I was flying a ship that I could afford to lose 50+ times over and remade the cost of insurance 30mins later, so no grief there. You just have to find ways of playing this game where the actions of this minority player type really doesn't affect the way you choose to play this game.

Understood...

But please do consider, I'm no overly concerned with the individuals involved in this matter. I'm simply questioning the event being put as front page news...

Seems many (most?) folks here are OK with that... Which is of course fine. I'm not so keen obviously.

 

[White Shark]

Woah hold your horses everyone! I wasn't advocating griefing at all. But like with all hostile actions against an innocent, well-meaning individual such as a Fuel Rat, there should be consequences for those who carry out such acts. In the spirit of role playing, the hostile gamer has committed a crime against an innocent individual, and therefore should be branded as a criminal and thus pay the price. I don't see what's wrong with that? You guys are too touchy.

 

[Soliluna]

Do you not think that risks being a rather dramatic statement?

If I understand your comment, you're seemingly suggesting I'm now in some minority view point group, which I'm assuming you'd label "wrong", or "bad". And you're over there in a majority view point group under a huge label with "right" on it?

And I assume you're infuring all this - I want to change ED into a different game - based on a few comments I've made you've seemingly taken a dislike to.


Or could it be we simply have slightly different opinions on a few matters, and in reality that's all it is? Now that wouldn't be quite so interesting and dramatic would it... But maybe a fairer assessment? Why the need for such loaded comments?

I don't think you're in some minority viewpoint group, I'm not interested in the number of the group. This isn't a vote.

I'm interested in the advertised gameplay and the rules as they are prescribed.

This gameplay is not griefing. FD have said so.

It seems you are in disagreement with the advertised gameplay and the prescribed rules. Nothing wrong with that, but how can I not conclue that you want a different game if you have that point of view?

An Open PVE game.

My dislike is in your calling people griefers because you do not enjoy the game they are playing. Instead of focusing your disdain on them, why not focus it on the lack of an Open PVE mode?

 

[Becks]

Woah hold your horses everyone! I wasn't advocating griefing at all. But like with all hostile actions against an innocent, well-meaning individual such as a Fuel Rat, there should be consequences for those who carry out such acts. In the spirit of role playing, the hostile gamer has committed a crime against an innocent individual, and therefore should be branded as a criminal and thus pay the price. I don't see what's wrong with that? You guys are too touchy.

Were we?

It's not hard to interpret "hunting someone down until he finds the game unplayable" as invitation for harassment.

Maybe you should improve the wording of your post, if that's not what you've meant.

 

[The Wallet Inspector]

Sounds more like a prank than a "grief", you presuppose that "griefing" consists of destroying a clean player. Someone PM me when FD prevent this from happening, but until then you can scream yourself blue in the face about how this is "griefing". It is not. That said, it would be down to the rat in question to organise a revenge response, if the killing took place in a Lawless system.

 

[NeilF]

I don't think you're in some minority viewpoint group, I'm not interested in the number of the group. This isn't a vote.

I'm interested in the advertised gameplay and the rules as they are prescribed.

This gameplay is not griefing. FD have said so.

It seems you are in disagreement with the advertised gameplay and the prescribed rules. Nothing wrong with that, but it seems to me you want a different game.

An Open PVE game.

My dislike is in your calling people griefers because you do not enjoy the game they are playing. Instead of focusing your disdain on them, why not focus it on the lack of an Open PVE mode?

So to clarify, we're talking about if whether the "mindless" (my term) destruction of CMDRs - who are in no position to fight back, and will offer no in game reward/bonus etc - for seemingly no reason than to gain enjoyment, is a good thing. You're happy with that notion it is... I'm not... ie: I think it should be penalised/diswaded etc.

I concur the existing rules do nothing to suggest this behaviour is unwanted, or "against the rule." I think this is more down to the fact the game is so thin across the board that there's just been no effort into doing so myself. And indeed, suggestion from recent Livestreams (eg: from Sandro) suggest just that. ie: They seem to be looking at diswading (repeat) mindess attacks.

But that's where we are... In muddy waters on the matter. Indeed there is nothing "wrong" with it. But that doesn't mean some people (like myself) don't thnik it's a bad/distasteful aspect of the game


And because of this it seems you - and others - might be under some notion I don't like PvP etc because I take offense to the kind of gameplay we've seen displayed in this news article going unpunished (in game), and my interpretation of the type of person who behaves this way etc. Quite the contrary IMHO. I want to see PvP given some long overdue TLC in the game.

As it stand the game does next to nothing to promote and organise it. Why not? We should be having activities/missions/tasks/community goals throwing (willing) CMDRs at each other in ever more interesting game play (eg: Why after a year and a half and I not able to fly in a wing of friends trying to protect a convoy under attack from another Wing of CMDRs?) And in my ideal world, SOLO and GROUP would never have even of existed, and instead we'd have just had OPEN (potentially with a PvE flag system if it fitted).


So we might disagree on how right/wrong the kind of "attack" is within this event, and indeed whether it's a good/bad aspect of the game. But - as you also suggest - it's a minor facet of the game really. So please let's not make it into a "them" and "us" situation...

 

[kofeyh]

While I of course simply don't like the idea of such unsociable behaviour..

You have spent nine pages explaining why you don't like something. Great. Duly noted.

This has zero bearing on whether something is news. You can argue morals until you are blue in the face. It's irrelevant to the nature of whether something should or should not be a news item. Zero.

Nine pages protelyzing morals as some justification as to why frontier is promoting griefing - all from a single event. Is FD promoting griefing? No.

 

[Comrade Error]

I think I might be able to help you there. There is a game theory called Bartle's Taxonomy that describes the different types of players when they act with/against other players in an MMO. The player type you are describing is clearly defined in this theory, along with how these types of players interact with other player types.

Here are a couple good videos that give an overview of the theory.
Bartle's Taxonomy - What Type of Player are You? - Extra Credits
Balancing an MMO Ecosystem - Getting a Mix of Player Types - Extra Credits

You can even take a couple tests to find out what type of player you tend be.
http://4you2learn.com/bartle/
https://www.helloquizzy.com/tests/the-four-player-types-test

Knowing the type of player you are and how other player types react to you, can give you an advantage in handling player actions you have issues with. I know this has worked with me in figuring out how to deal with other players.

In this case I was flying a ship that I could afford to lose 50+ times over and remade the cost of insurance 30mins later, so no grief there. You just have to find ways of playing this game where the actions of this minority player type really doesn't affect the way you choose to play this game.

I am not liking Bartle's Taxonomy. Watching that episode is giving me an identity crysis..

I like to achieve over explorer in most games (but this one) but the one that bothers me is the killer and socializer.. oh god how it bothers me. I pirate for almost the same amount of both

Halp.

I'll take your tests now..

I didn't like the test.. it depends on game and my mood.

But Achiever 67% Explorer 33% Griefer 47% Socializer 53%

Yea I don't want to do the second one, seems like same thing. I enjoy being both in the middle of the action (mostly here on ED) but I also enjoy being a support type character. Say Overwatch I preffere to heal and in Payday I preffere to be tank and in Borderlands a bit of both. I also enjoy finding easter eggs but again, some games and some games I do not, hell I enjoy exploring new ways to kill.

 

[StiTch]

Definition of griefing according to the great wiki:
"A griefer is a player in a multiplayer video game who deliberately irritates and harasses other players within the game, using aspects of the game in unintended ways."

Definition of griefing according to people of the ED forum:
"A griefer is a player that killed another player"

 

[kofeyh]

It seems you - and others - are under some notion I don't like PvP etc because I take offense to the kind of gameplay we've seen displayed in this news article going unpunished (in game) etc.

Yes. Nine pages of you being offended. And the proselytizing as to why the outrage is a justifiable reason for muzzling a news source.

Quite the contrary IMHO. I want to see PvP given some long overdue TLC in the game.

So crushing any PVP news because it's "frontier supporting griefing" is "long overdue TLC" then.

But - as you also suggest - it's a minor facet of the game really.

A minor facet. Nine pages (and counting) of moralising over a "minor facet". I'm really not getting that vibe, hey.

 

[White Shark]

Were we?

It's not hard to interpret "hunting someone down until he finds the game unplayable" as invitation for harassment.

Maybe you should improve the wording of your post, if that's not what you've meant.

I don't think the wording of my post was the problem. The individual has knowingly committed an in game act similar to that of a criminal (in game). Therefore being hunted down mercilessly (IN GAME) is not griefing. It's a bit of a moronic move to attack someone who rescues people. There should be some sort of consequence for that. Maybe a space police clan or something?