You asked "In what way is griefing a good thing to have in a game?" and I thought I tried to answer that sincerely. Now it seems you changed the question.
In what way is griefing a good thing to have in a game?
- Status
You asked "In what way is griefing a good thing to have in a game?" and I thought I tried to answer that sincerely. Now it seems you changed the question.
It's ok. He likes his safe space. Having to defend your opinions is hard when they're based on false premises and misunderstanding.
In the end, he's complaining about people who can only play the way they play if people have opted into playing in the mode that allows that kind of interactions explicitly and he wants to control what they can do in this mode. Which is exactly what he's accusing them of doing. This circular logic is some kind of mental retardation that is seemingly more rampant this past decade than I remember it being but perhaps it's just that they're being given more platforms to carry out their brand of censorship.
You have 3 modes of gameplay. Open is not the one you pick if you want to control the interactions between players. Problem solved. "Griefing" is not a problem. Apparently, being able to select your game-mode from the options screen is for a subset of players.
Bob Lighthouse
Banned
Not at all, an Open PvE mode would be great for those that would want that.
It would be a shame that the boards would them become full of new and inventive ways players were pad blocking/ramming otherwise exploiting the system to grief each other.
I'm sorry you don't see people in PG on the PS4. From what I hear, CGs in Mobius are pretty full on PC. Perhaps your issue is that PS4 simply isn't well populated?
Its a weak conversational tactic and frequently counterproductive I'd agree.
Refusing to spend your leisure time with deliberately unpleasant people isn't odd at all though, its just basic human nature.
DeletedUser191218
D
Yes. I appreciate you think this is an answer. But you asked if I felt it answered my question and I advised I don't believe it does (or at least I don't see it as a positive). I don't think limiting the style of play that players can adopt in Open is a good thing. Your example specifically implied, regardless of whether you now enjoy it or not, you have been forced into a style of play because of griefing. I view that as something a game like ED should be avoiding, not celebrating. I didn't mean to denigrate your response in any sense.
Bob Lighthouse
Banned
Much like how cockroaches flee from light, so do snowflakes flee from disagreement.
I have no illusions of changing anyone, it's just observation.
Life goes on...
But I'm off today, and just made a pot of coffee!
Bob Lighthouse
Banned
Sure, so long as we ackowledge that what someone defines as "deliberately unpleasant" can also simply mean "someone who won't let me spew nonsense uncontested."
It's all a matter of perspective.
Some perspectives are patently silly.
Subjective assessments like "unpleasant" can always be used to hand wave objective observations.
It's a mutton-headed approach, albeit a common one.
Of course it's unpleasant to be shown you're wrong.
Get over it if that's the case.
I don't think I'd have actively chosen many of the trials and travails in my life, or my entertainment, but I have no regrets.
Most games that are pure fan service where everyone gets exactly everything they want, and exactly nothing they do not, aren't very fun, certainly not in the long run.
If NPCs weren't purpose built as fodder to die at our CMDRs hands, the other modes would demand the same.
All my CMDR's ships are 'defense ready' (which is honestly more a state of mind than a ship build), and most of them are capable of at least light combat in a pinch. This is precisely what allows me to "blaze my own trail". Needing a warm jacket and pair of boots to explore the arctic shouldn't be an outrage.
Neither do I.
I think the basis of any discussion, especially when you have two opposing points of view, is finding the earliest common ground.
Unfortunately in this we can't even agree on what defines a Griefer.
You can also see how Krash's response is given as "wrong" even though it does honestly answer the question. This, to me at least, leads RJ to move the goalposts and say that it might or might not answer the question with the added caveat that this is still negative (in RJ's opinion) because of additional reasons, that were unstated.
I know this is the internet. I know not everyone is trained in discourse. I even know that no one cares what I think, really, but this type of argument is just depressing.
I'll leave this to meander on, indeterminably, like all the Hotel Cali threads before. Nothing new - not addressing points - zzzzzz.
Fly safe o7.
I'm at work now with a phone running out of juice so I can't properly answer that (I will when I get home) but suffice to say for the time being I haven't read a credible griefing story yet on this thread.
That's the argument I used in court..
I told the judge and jury that I attacked, mugged, attacked again, got bored of attacking and started carving my intitals in the victims eyeballs with a sharp stick, I then jumped up and down on them, gave them a phone so they could call for help, changed my mind, kicked it away then curb-stomped them which seemed to put an end to things.... and I did all this to enrich their day. Some people just don't understand.
I'm sure if asked, the victim may have opted out of such ' human interaction' whilst enroute to see his newborn child for the first time if given the choice.
Last edited:
You seem to be immensely confused by the two points I made about different things. Try reading the sentences separately with a break in between them if that helps.
This isn't real life. In real life you don't have a choice of which mode to enter. In real life death is real and permanent. The sanction for unlawful killing is consequential.
Do you really not see this? Honestly?
Bob Lighthouse
Banned
Great post, agreed, but be not depressed.
May your supply of Kitten Brand Coffee never run out!
o7
I'll cope Bob, I have excellent coffee to hand and it's my birthday soon - perhaps why I am having a quick "despair" moment. Guess what though - it passes, I learn from the experience and I get better.
Whilst this is the far end of the scale, there is still a person on the other side that doesn't share the sentiment that being a "non consensual" 'victim' is 'enriching'.
EDIT: but also, the disparity between consequence of victim vs perp is beyond fair. It's always bordered on being a joke. I do not know of any penalty a perpetrator can be dished out that would compensate an explorer losing 9 months of exploration data and 'firsts', as a result of 25 seconds of 'enrichment' by someone looking for an easy kill....
Last edited:
Bob Lighthouse
Banned
No, I'm saying that is exactly the excuse people often use to "evade dispute".
I read it just fine.
The words themselves are indistinguishable.
It IS unpleasant to be shown, for example, that you misquoted your own source.
That is perfectly OK to feel foolish, and people should get over it.
It should be unpleasant, and it IS a deliberate action to refute nonsense.
How else will one find out the nonsense and weak points in one's positions?
That is called a false equivalence.
It makes no sense to rational people.
If that makes sense to you, you are being irrational.
False equivalence is painful. Especially where you're trying to lead it. #CargoToo is not a thing and shouldn't be a thing. And if you try to make it a thing, brace for endless dark humor about how if you didnt want to lose your cargo you shouldn't have flown it into an Anarchy system with barely any shields on.
Seriously, shame on you.
Ah, ze old obfuscate ploy. 'Define greifing'. Play semantics to labour a point or befog further. Everyone knows what greifing is or isnt in general terms. But some bring this greifing to the forum in order to try to mess with people. Cheap debating tactics and not worth the virtual pixels. As in game, so too in forum. Block or ignore.
- Status