Do you really think so?
You do understand my question about tangible vs. fantasy environments though, don't you? Care to answer that point or is it too abstract?
PvP In defense of murder (in game)
- Thread starter Duc_Mallard
- Start date
Do you really think so?
You do understand my question about tangible vs. fantasy environments though, don't you? Care to answer that point or is it too abstract?
Yes, I'm certain.
No, I don't uderstand your question.
I suspect youre trying to stress the difference between physical and virtual world, with latter being of no consequence.
You don't understand but then give an understanding. Ok.
The virtual world has no consequence, you have said it yourself. There was therefore no consequence in the OPs interaction and calling it bullying was you demeaning the real meaning of the word 'bullying'.
Your posts are meaningless gibberish. You have two minutes to get the hell out of this thread. If I ever see you posting here again, I will be trolling you whenever I find your posts.
No hard feelings though, it's just a virtual world.
edit:
actually, I'm kind of afraid you'll take that too literally.
Let's forget it. You won.
Last edited:
Technically this is a pointless discussion. In-game murder is ok. FD has stated this several times.
FD has also acknowledged that many players don't particularly enjoy getting murdered by other commanders. There are tools to avoid it and in-game 'punishment' for those that commit it.
These discussion will always deteriorate in to name calling and questioning the psyche of the opposing side. In reality it's just a difference in perspective on what the game is.
If you view Open as a battle royal arena, it's totally absurd to question the right to commit in-game murder.
If you view Open as a co-op platform, all commander murders smell of team killing.
As long as FD want the game to be both it's more productive to discuss the game-mechanics than to put labels on other commanders.
ED is a computer game. It has rules. If we play by the rules and use the tools that are available, I think we will do fine.
FD has also acknowledged that many players don't particularly enjoy getting murdered by other commanders. There are tools to avoid it and in-game 'punishment' for those that commit it.
These discussion will always deteriorate in to name calling and questioning the psyche of the opposing side. In reality it's just a difference in perspective on what the game is.
If you view Open as a battle royal arena, it's totally absurd to question the right to commit in-game murder.
If you view Open as a co-op platform, all commander murders smell of team killing.
As long as FD want the game to be both it's more productive to discuss the game-mechanics than to put labels on other commanders.
ED is a computer game. It has rules. If we play by the rules and use the tools that are available, I think we will do fine.
No winning or losing here, we just have different takes on a concept.
Definitely no hard feelings and thanks for the debate and insights.
o7
TheMegaTurnip
Banned
(Peaks head out from rubble)
Is... Is it over..?
Is... Is it over..?
Technically this is a pointless discussion. In-game murder is ok. FD has stated this several times.
FD has also acknowledged that many players don't particularly enjoy getting murdered by other commanders. There are tools to avoid it and in-game 'punishment' for those that commit it.
These discussion will always deteriorate in to name calling and questioning the psyche of the opposing side. In reality it's just a difference in perspective on what the game is.
If you view Open as a battle royal arena, it's totally absurd to question the right to commit in-game murder.
If you view Open as a co-op platform, all commander murders smell of team killing.
As long as FD want the game to be both it's more productive to discuss the game-mechanics than to put labels on other commanders.
ED is a computer game. It has rules. If we play by the rules and use the tools that are available, I think we will do fine.
Ah, how refreshing! Good clean common sense
Technically this is a pointless discussion. In-game murder is ok. FD has stated this several times.
FD has also acknowledged that many players don't particularly enjoy getting murdered by other commanders. There are tools to avoid it and in-game 'punishment' for those that commit it.
These discussion will always deteriorate in to name calling and questioning the psyche of the opposing side. In reality it's just a difference in perspective on what the game is.
If you view Open as a battle royal arena, it's totally absurd to question the right to commit in-game murder.
If you view Open as a co-op platform, all commander murders smell of team killing.
As long as FD want the game to be both it's more productive to discuss the game-mechanics than to put labels on other commanders.
ED is a computer game. It has rules. If we play by the rules and use the tools that are available, I think we will do fine.
Stop making sense. Scream bloody murder
That's a shame. I was going to call you level-headed
The moment you began calling players bullies.
You can be doing wrong things regardless of feeling ashamed.
I don't recall calling any player that, only describing OP actions in his post as reminiscent of 9 y.o. bully.
You really don't like that word it seems.
Sorry, It's just shorter then saying
"someone who hurts or frightens someone else, often over a period of time, and often forcing them to do something that they do not want to do." every time
There was also a discussion if how you play the game is a reflection of you (damn, I'm trying to explain this again),
but it started because OP felt deeply hurt by my comparison, explaining that he was "arsehole in game, not in RL"
I simply followed that thought, because to me, if you play a MP game "as an arsehole" its not that magically separate from you.
You're not playing an arsehole in game, because ou were forced to, but you probably like it.
But sersiously, let's not get into that discussion again.
I don't recall calling any player that, only describing OP actions in his post as reminiscent of 9 y.o. bully.
You really don't like that word it seems.
Sorry, It's just shorter then saying
"someone who hurts or frightens someone else, often over a period of time, and often forcing them to do something that they do not want to do." every time
There was also a discussion if how you play the game is a reflection of you (damn, I'm trying to explain this again),
but it started because OP felt deeply hurt by my comparison, explaining that he was "arsehole in game, not in RL"
I simply followed that thought, because to me, if you play a MP game "as an arsehole" its not that magically separate from you.
You're not playing an arsehole in game, because ou were forced to, but you probably like it.
But sersiously, let's not get into that discussion again.
While its true I play this game as a reflection of myself (Lawful Good), its possible to play this game (role-play) as the opposite side of the alignment chart, do you agree? Or pick any of the alignments and roleplay that?
<Insert obligatory DnD alignment chart here>
Yes, I agree.
But if you play with another human being, and he tells you that he didn't felt good about your interaction while you were roleplaying, and you continue, then in my mind you've crossed boundary between what your character does/ likes and what you enjoy doing
Last edited:
I’m happy that my post made you refrain from such a devious insult.
I don't recall calling any player that, only describing OP actions in his post as reminiscent of 9 y.o. bully.
You really don't like that word it seems.
Sorry, It's just shorter then saying
"someone who hurts or frightens someone else, often over a period of time, and often forcing them to do something that they do not want to do." every time
Now that I come to think about it I very much doubt the "victim" in this case was frightened.
Actually, now that I come to realize it those people in the horror houses must be bullies, they certainly do frighten me. Once more, diccionary definitions are extremely superficial & do not take into account context.
I'm sure that by this point I'd need to show you interviews with the people who know me in RL to convince you that I'm a meh guy even if I sometimes just kill somebody in a game that is designed to allow such behaviour but keep going.
Last edited:
Doesn't matter, still for me it's a valid description of OP behaviour.
How would you describe it?
You're taking this too personally and too literally.
"Being an arsehole" doesn't mean shooting ships but many things you can do to spite another player. If you enjoy feeleing that kind of superiority over someone in game, it sure can tell us something about you. Something. That's all i've tried to say.
As an example i'm going to quote fragment of a post from another thread:
Can you honestly tell me that you think those people, representing "being arsehole in game", are somehow different once they turn PC off? Doesn't it say something about them?
A troll.
Believe it or not, this isn't personal (I know when I do) & I take you literally since you seem to be serious when writing here.
ED can be competitive if you wish so, feeling superior to the person who you've just beaten is just a natural consecuence.
Well I do consider spitting in the corpse of your victim to be rather low but that's not comparable to an actual bully nor the OP itself especially considering the OP describes his original encounter as piracy.
So according to you
bully=no, because it's not comparable to actual bully
pirate=yes, because it is comparable to actual pirate
I surrender.
Do I really need to say that I meant a space pirate that doesn't even exist?
Also, you know that's not the reason why I think the OP isn't a bully, it doesn't even fit in your short sighted diccionary definition.