So where do RP bad guys stand?

Florenus

Florenus
Jmanis said:
This is why I find the EVE community so much better than Elite's.

Ganking? Scamming? That's just the done thing. You're not a sociopath, you're just playing the game by the same rules everyone else is.

Here though? It still varies user to user whether causing a lockdown at a station is just playing the game or punishable griefing. It's so bizzare.
Click to expand...
The thing is, as long as you're using game mechanics only, you can't do anything wrong - excluding ingame chat obviously. If game rules allow you to do something, then it's ok.
When people undermine other people's BGS work, then it's just one form of competitive gameplay (that's why I don't care about BGS too much btw - someone might easily undo all my work and it's just creating grind for eachother)
Roleplaying is fine, as long as people understand that they are roleplaying. When you lure someone to do something, lying, hiding truth and trying to exploit them, then it's hardly having fun together, is it?
In this case, at first I thought that Fdev reaction was too harsh (whether info about the ban is true or not), but after thinking about it I realized that those people simply crossed the line between playing the game and using other people and I don't think Frontier should allow that to continue. Sure there are stupid or naive people everywhere, but if you allow someone to exploit them, just standing by and watching, then you're no better.
And I don't mean that all those who fell for that scam were stupid - it's about the potentially most vulnerable and gullible of all of them.
 

Jmanis

Jmanis
Florenus said:
Roleplaying is fine, as long as people understand that they are roleplaying. When you lure someone to do something, lying, hiding truth and trying to exploit them, then it's hardly having fun together, is it?
Click to expand...
If it's within the mechanics of the game, it's fine (to me). I think that might be where FD came unstuck in the idea of FC's being squadron assets... they start dipping their toes into a the well-travelled EVE game mechanic of corporate theft at that point. I don't think FD wanted to wear the issues that might come with that.

But a kicker with roleplay in particular is it must be consensual when directed at another player, otherwise it can cross a line into genuine harassment, even if kept in character. This is where I think this (might) come unstuck and see someone get banned.
 

Florenus

Florenus
Jmanis said:
But a kicker with roleplay in particular is it must be consensual when directed at another player, otherwise it can cross a line into genuine harassment, even if kept in character. This is where I think this (might) come unstuck and see someone get banned.
Click to expand...
From where I stand it seems that a lot of people use roleplaying as an excuse. Even that "slaver" said he was roleplaying when asked directly by The Pilot during the interview, although I got the impression he hesitated, becasue he needed a moment to recall what that roleplaying thingy was.

When I play in Open I usually don't roleplay openly - I do it for myself only (which usually means I'm making decisions based on character I've devised for the game), but most people I encouter are being themselves and I feel it would be inappropriate, like I could as well go outside and talk "in character" to someone on the street.

Anyway, roleplaying is not a game mechanic, so it's rather delicate thing - like making a joke on the forums. Without ;) emote it's hard to tell whether it was indeed a joke or someone is serious, but really, really weird. 😆
 

Go'Gen

Go'Gen
Would be interesting to see a forum Poll about how FDev should deal with "slavers" in this case, with several options.
Can someone put this up?
Maybe we'd get opinion from more Cmdrs than are willing to participate here by actually writing a post.
 

Agony_Aunt

Agony_Aunt
Go'Gen said:
Would be interesting to see a forum Poll about how FDev should deal with "slavers" in this case, with several options.
Can someone put this up?
Maybe we'd get opinion from more Cmdrs than are willing to participate here by actually writing a post.
Click to expand...

The only way I can see any sort of gameplay like this is where people willingly becoming trapped/limited in what they can do and give their consent to it, and that consent is unambiguously recorded somewhere, like on FD's forums in a thread.

That way everyone knows what they are getting into and understand the gameplay involved and acknowledges they are fine with it.

Whether someone thinks this is stupid or shouldn't be required is irrelevant. FD have now made their stance clear on the matter.
 

Brrokk

Brrokk
The whole thing about "bad RP" hasn't been clarified. I'm not sure what OP had in mind, but it could mean several things: a bad person doing RP, a person doing RP badly or a person RPing as a bad character. Examples:

1. "Bad person doing RP" - "I've just thought of a way to ruin people's gaming time. I'll just randomly blow them up unexpectedly for lulz, and if challenged I'll say I'm RPing a psychopath".

2. "Person doing RP badly" - "What character am I playing as? Dunno really, I just like blowing stuff up".

3. "Person RPing as a bad character" - "Arrr, I'm a pirate matey! Drop 10 tons of that tasty cargo or I'll boil you up!"

Opinions will vary. I think 1 is a ToS violation and for me goes straight to the block list; 2 & 3 are OK gameplay, though I'd only describe 3 as good gameplay.
 

Navigare Necesse Est

Navigare Necesse Est
Brrokk said:
The whole thing about "bad RP" hasn't been clarified. I'm not sure what OP had in mind, but it could mean several things: a bad person doing RP, a person doing RP badly or a person RPing as a bad character. Examples:

1. "Bad person doing RP" - "I've just thought of a way to ruin people's gaming time. I'll just randomly blow them up unexpectedly for lulz, and if challenged I'll say I'm RPing a psychopath".

2. "Person doing RP badly" - "What character am I playing as? Dunno really, I just like blowing stuff up".

3. "Person RPing as a bad character" - "Arrr, I'm a pirate matey! Drop 10 tons of that tasty cargo or I'll boil you up!"

Opinions will vary. I think 1 is a ToS violation and for me goes straight to the block list; 2 & 3 are OK gameplay, though I'd only describe 3 as good gameplay.
Click to expand...

Why would that even matter? Here: I roleplay a sex maniac and you're now my slave. Enjoy the happy romance you've consented to.
 

Bantha

Bantha
I just don’t understand what the problem is, I really don’t.

If it’s ok to go round randomly killing people and costing them their cargo, exploration data and rebuy costs, (and it clearly is ok. ED have clarified many times that this is perfectly acceptable behaviour), then why is this so-called slavery issue worse.

If anything, it’s much much better!

It’s intelligent, clearly thought out, well
implemented, emergent character-driven gameplay.

Not just shooting people randomly.

Don’t ban them. Give them a frggin medal!
 

Agony_Aunt

Agony_Aunt
Bantha said:
I just don’t understand what the problem is, I really don’t.

If it’s ok to go round randomly killing people and costing them their cargo, exploration data and rebuy costs, (and it clearly is ok. ED have clarified many times that this is perfectly acceptable behaviour), then why is this so-called slavery issue worse.

If anything, it’s much much better!

It’s intelligent, clearly thought out, well
implemented, emergent character-driven gameplay.

Not just shooting people randomly.

Don’t ban them. Give them a frggin medal!
Click to expand...

Because after the kill the person can continue. They take the risk, they get killed, they can repeat or try something different.

In the case of the slavery they were taking players options away from them.

Reminds me of Ark where there was a server where new players spawned in, they were clubbed, then put in cages and kept there. I can imagine a vast majority never returned to those servers. But in ED's case, there is only one server, and when trapped, especially if a new player, you might not understand there are ways out of it.
 

tolm

tolm
What one person calls “emergent gameplay” another person might consider “bullying”. It’s always gonna be an issue with any online game where PvP only requires a “yes” decision from one party.

As for the recent “gulag” fiasco ... folks were being douches, they got called out for being douches and now they’re butt-hurt that they got banned for being douches. Pfff ... grow up and move on with your life and, y’know, maybe try and be a bit less “douchey” in future.

For the stuff mentioned by the OP ... I’m intrigued by the concept of “willing participant” ... do you literally ask them if they mind being “kidnapped” or is it more “agree to being kidnapped or we blow your ship up” because those are two different things!
 

Navigare Necesse Est

Navigare Necesse Est
Agony_Aunt said:
Because after the kill the person can continue. They take the risk, they get killed, they can repeat or try something different.

In the case of the slavery they were taking players options away from them.

Reminds me of Ark where there was a server where new players spawned in, they were clubbed, then put in cages and kept there. I can imagine a vast majority never returned to those servers. But in ED's case, there is only one server, and when trapped, especially if a new player, you might not understand there are ways out of it.
Click to expand...
So what happened with the Ark server.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom