To be fair I have always thought ED roleplaying sort of a murky description, for instance I'm not entirely convinced that people posting Deciat noob ganking reels in YT are strictly speaking "roleplaying" - but it's within the rules and it certainly doesn't mean that they murder people in real life (you can get banned for a long time or permanently for that, depending of the jurisdiction).
Imperial Slaves - A Proposition
- Thread starter furiouslog
- Start date
- Status
You said it yourself in the example: "Someone whom may enjoy killing other players"
When you roleplay, you create a character living in the fictional universe - there are no players there. Killing players is something that PLAYER can enjoy.
If I play some arcade game and I shoot other people's avatars there it doesn't mean I'm roleplaying - I'm just using mechanics of the game for my enjoyment.
Someone who plays Elite only to shoot spaceships - plays the game as it is - HE plays the game. It does not include creating some fictional character on top, that he (the player) will use to make decisions in game.
lol you're using semantics to mischaracterize my statement. You said ganking does not qualify as roleplay and I'm merely saying it does and it even falls under your own definition of the word...
"roleplay - that is to create specific character with certain traits and ethics, that acts in specific way, that does not have to be the way you would act in RL. You play a role."
I chose a poor example but the point can be made that the "role" is up to the user's discretion to "play" when and how they see fit.
So one could choose to play the role of a ganker.
Quite right, and from what I’ve seen on these forums I think I’d rather prefer those to the self-proclaimed lawful ‘gankers who gank gankers’... they seem more honest!
It's tough thankless work but someone's gotta be out there regulating, protecting the noobs. Also, no one has any clip of me ever pullin a gank.
No, this is a way of playing a game, not roleplaying.
Seriously, google it and read about roleplaying.
Semantics
Moronism.
Three players. One roleplaying a pirate, one roleplaying an ex-cop and one roleplaying horny android bunny wing up and enjoy ganking other players.
They do not roleplay gankers - they gank, while playing their own roles.
Are important to the use and meaning of language.
One could role-play an individual who engages in wanton violence against their peers, and this is fine.
One can also play a game where one attacks other player-characters with no pretense of deeper contextuality. This is also fine, as far as the rules go, as long as it doesn't descent into harassment.
Thank you for articulating what I could not
I was simply trying to make the point that one could role-play a ganker
Hello,
I'm a part of a player group that supports those minor factions in Elite: Dangerous, which happen to subscribe to a certain socioeconomic disposition that I personally find more or less agreeable.
Some people find it very disagreeable for a variety of reasons, most commonly the failures of mankind in the previous century or so. That's fine. I imagine some of those reasons are similar to what you have presented here, "trivialising" the human cost of something that happened a long time ago.
Some of those people also want to remove these factions from the game as they find it to be an eyesore or otherwise impossible to digest. That's not fine. The reason why this is my position will be iterated upon as follows:
I spend a lot of time making slavery impossible, in this video game, but I have no objections to any man, woman or otherwise that wishes to participate in slave trade. In this video game. Nor do I have anything to contribute with regard to any discussion on their mental status or strength in the dark triad of psychiatry. I find this type of behaviour to be little more than pontification; I have no need to somehow prove the superiority or desirability of my beliefs by censoring elements in the game that I don't like.
This is also because I believe video games to be art, and I don't particularly enjoy it when art is censored at the behest of "concerned citizens".
I recognise that I did not really answer any of your questions with regard to why exactly slavery should be kept in a video game. Until just now: why shouldn't it be?
I'm not the ultimate arbiter of right and wrong, and if someone paid for the game for the express purpose of trading in slaves, I'm okay with that.
I pay for some other video games for the express purpose of shooting at images depicting humans, sentient alien life and other miscellaneous fauna.
Regards,
Tamara Bunke
I'm a part of a player group that supports those minor factions in Elite: Dangerous, which happen to subscribe to a certain socioeconomic disposition that I personally find more or less agreeable.
Some people find it very disagreeable for a variety of reasons, most commonly the failures of mankind in the previous century or so. That's fine. I imagine some of those reasons are similar to what you have presented here, "trivialising" the human cost of something that happened a long time ago.
Some of those people also want to remove these factions from the game as they find it to be an eyesore or otherwise impossible to digest. That's not fine. The reason why this is my position will be iterated upon as follows:
I spend a lot of time making slavery impossible, in this video game, but I have no objections to any man, woman or otherwise that wishes to participate in slave trade. In this video game. Nor do I have anything to contribute with regard to any discussion on their mental status or strength in the dark triad of psychiatry. I find this type of behaviour to be little more than pontification; I have no need to somehow prove the superiority or desirability of my beliefs by censoring elements in the game that I don't like.
This is also because I believe video games to be art, and I don't particularly enjoy it when art is censored at the behest of "concerned citizens".
I recognise that I did not really answer any of your questions with regard to why exactly slavery should be kept in a video game. Until just now: why shouldn't it be?
I'm not the ultimate arbiter of right and wrong, and if someone paid for the game for the express purpose of trading in slaves, I'm okay with that.
I pay for some other video games for the express purpose of shooting at images depicting humans, sentient alien life and other miscellaneous fauna.
Regards,
Tamara Bunke
KS backer all those years ago but only just started playing about the time Polygon started investigating the in-game player slavery shenanigans?
Maybe that's on the wrong track there, but there is a developing rat-like odour to all this. Before you wrote this, there was a continuous set of honest, detailed and far more nuanced replies, than can be found in your own OP. It seems you discounted those views. Was it because your idea of a conversation doesn't allow for dissent?
It sounds like you ought to join us in Utopia. Not only is this a Power which, as it's primary form of control, hauls off dissidents for "re-education", or as I shall now call it: "Diversity & Equality Training", but Utopia also bans the buying and selling of all slaves of any kind, and closes black markets so slaves cannot be traded illicitly either. That eradication of the slave trade is a major motivator for a number of our pledges, and a frequent rallying cry for getting things done. For these players it has given them something to feel strongly about, and it certainly hasn't created a 'passive acceptance' of slavery. It is intensely condescending to treat people as unthinking, purely unconscious robots, so I wouldn't deem to assume it has heightened their awareness of the issues connected with slavery.
If you want to print my words, or misrepresent my perspectives, I have fees
It would be nice to be able to liberate slaves. Until then, I must continue ejecting them into a sun. Better to die free, than live as a slave. Hopefully they share my progressive 21st century values.They seem to primarily be arguing against censorship. Especially when it's as clumsy as your OP, which tramples on a lot of other issues, not least another threatening issue of our time which is the surrendering of our autonomy to AI. It is an issue fundamental to the basis of our gameplay; being the justification why technology is so advanced in ED in some ways, yet so manual & non-automated in others. But yeh, lets just wreck it all for the culture wars.
A long list of religions, also Monarchical systems & good ol' Capitalist Democracy each have a far higher body count by orders or magnitude than either of those ideologies. Im glad we're clearly talking about ideologies, not politics.
So.. are you sure you didn't write the article? Is this thread researching for a hatchet-job follow up? I can see it now, "Uncovered: Toxic Gamer Haven for Racist, Slavery-Deniers." A further investigation by a crack myopic intern has found the scandalous gamer slavery revealed in ED last month, was just the tip of a toxic iceberg. Rearranging their words & removing context to peel away their mendacious evasions, I have uncovered a Dangerous echo chamber of unconcious bias, unicorn-phobia, too many -isms to list, and appalling denial of every kind that we cant stand. Eventually someone said 'carebear'. the horror Arrests have been made.
mm clunky. Im sure you can work on the title, but the gist is free. & of course, complete nonsense, but that hasn't been an obstacle in journalism for a while, has it.
It's like saying that you're going to roleplay a kicker - someone who kicks everyone he encounters.
That's not a role one could play. That's description how you're going to approach interaction.
Gankers (players who enjoy attacking in groups) don't need to roleplay and they usually don't.
Ganking is a player behavior (we can also call it tactics). Roleplaying is also a player behavior.
KS backer all those years ago but only just started playing about the time Polygon started investigating the in-game player slavery shenanigans?
If you have a genuine concern about the poster then report it, if not can we stop the personal insinuations about who people are?
My understanding was that a ganker is anyone that interdicts and kills an unsuspecting CMDR.
The numbers involved and so forth are inconsequential in my understanding.
To say one chooses to play the role of a pirate mercilessly and indiscriminately interdicting and killing CMDRs is the same statement I have been trying to make bar the term "ganker".
You are trying to use semantics to mischaracterize my statements.
You are very adept at debating but I am not debating the matter, I am engaging in a discussion. I am entertaining several conversations, people and expressions of thought to further my own understanding and moral compass in regards to the topic of discussion.
And it's interesting to compare the Empire in FFE with the one in Elite Dangerous, too - a lot of retconning has gone on there, for very good reason.
FFE:
- primarily an antagonist faction in the plot
- society based largely on medieval European feudalism
- extremely deep-seated misogyny a key part of their leadership (Emperors genetically modified to be unable to have female children, women not allowed in large parts of the Imperial palace for fear of corruption)
- some pretty strong hints on eugenicism via leading-edge genetic engineering in other areas
- uses the same slavery definition as the various independents, slaves cross-traded between the two routinely
ED:
- primarily a protagonist faction in the plot
- society based largely on Imperial Rome, European/UK feudalism remnants still showing through slightly in the naval titles and those for the Imperial family
- no obvious gender inequalities
- genetic engineering largely not mentioned, and not obviously an Empire speciality
- a much watered-down form of slavery
All of which makes sense - they're much more interesting in this new form, the constraints of a multiplayer story mean having "designated bad guys" wouldn't work well with a dynamic universe (glances at wreckage of nearby Anarchy factions), and so on. The original FFE Empire would basically just have been gratuitously villanous.
I say we grind up all the slaves into Kumo burgers.
Win, win.
No more slaves or famine, everybody should be happy.
I totally agree with your assertions on RP, but one thing I've noticed throughout the years, is if you don't know (or ignore) the motivations of an RP mocking ganker type of person in a game and purely view them through their character's actions, they sometimes create some of the most convincing characters you'll meet, which I find interesting.
Win, win.
No more slaves or famine, everybody should be happy.
I totally agree with your assertions on RP, but one thing I've noticed throughout the years, is if you don't know (or ignore) the motivations of an RP mocking ganker type of person in a game and purely view them through their character's actions, they sometimes create some of the most convincing characters you'll meet, which I find interesting.
Its why I feel FD did a great job with the power and superpowers regards background in ED. No one is really 'the good guy'.
- Status