Some of them are quite fair to be honest.
Doesn't matter who you are, you will get shot at. Can't get any more egalitarian than that. [hehe]
The Psychology of a Terrorist - A question for SDC
- Thread starter OHMSS
- Start date
- Status
Some of them are quite fair to be honest.
Doesn't matter who you are, you will get shot at. Can't get any more egalitarian than that. [hehe]
They shouldn't play games that you can die in.
Same goes for those who rage quit or get violent in real life due to a game (I know a guy who destroyed his Playstation after failing an objective in a game).
Some folks just shouldn't be allowed near tech.
<Redacted>
Last edited by a moderator:
verminstar
Banned
The psychology of a terrorist? This is a joke yes? No? Should be, its certainly funny enough to qualify as a joke ^
As someone who has spend a decade fighting Terrorists I really think your comparison is selected through a fair bit of ignorance. I can see why you have picked it however.
The big factor in how people react in a game such as ED (And EVE online and pretty much any other open world sandbox tbh) is whether or not they can distinguish between their role in the game and their real life.
Online activities and Role play are very actively used methods of dealing with issues like PTSD as it allows sufferers the ability to confront and deal with the problems they are having safely.
I have often found that 'griefers' (I don't agree with the term but there's a minority out there who do it to grief others) are usually the most level headed and personable people in these games. Simply because they KNOW their role and are playing to it. Most of the people who complain about griefing don't actually have much of a logical argument but are so blinded by the 'wrong' they have perceived to have been done to them personally. These are the people who need to have a good think about what they are actually complaining about.
While there is definitely a correlation between the actions of player and their own inner thoughts/personalities the real key is whether or not the individual understands the distinction between game roles and real life roles. You will find that a large number of those shouting and complaining the loudest are the one's who have a problem telling the difference.
The big factor in how people react in a game such as ED (And EVE online and pretty much any other open world sandbox tbh) is whether or not they can distinguish between their role in the game and their real life.
Online activities and Role play are very actively used methods of dealing with issues like PTSD as it allows sufferers the ability to confront and deal with the problems they are having safely.
I have often found that 'griefers' (I don't agree with the term but there's a minority out there who do it to grief others) are usually the most level headed and personable people in these games. Simply because they KNOW their role and are playing to it. Most of the people who complain about griefing don't actually have much of a logical argument but are so blinded by the 'wrong' they have perceived to have been done to them personally. These are the people who need to have a good think about what they are actually complaining about.
While there is definitely a correlation between the actions of player and their own inner thoughts/personalities the real key is whether or not the individual understands the distinction between game roles and real life roles. You will find that a large number of those shouting and complaining the loudest are the one's who have a problem telling the difference.
Last edited:
@OP, by making an entire thread spent on over analysing the situation and playing internet psychologist to the point of pedantry you are doing exactly what SDC wants to see. It really is as simple as that. They want to see a reaction and they know they'll get one. The bigger the over-reaction the better.
Rinzler himself explains the simple logic of it:
Deny them the reaction they want to see and you will frustrate them. Posting indignance and outrage at their obviously antagonistic actions and furthermore creating entire threads to disseminating their flame blaits only succeeds in giving them the reactions they wanted to see.
Rinzler himself explains the simple logic of it:
Deny them the reaction they want to see and you will frustrate them. Posting indignance and outrage at their obviously antagonistic actions and furthermore creating entire threads to disseminating their flame blaits only succeeds in giving them the reactions they wanted to see.
Have heard that argument before but don't buy it, if you find a game boring then why play it?
The issue I have with this is, they are playing a role that doesn't exist within the game. It's not terrorist, because a terrorist aims to achieve a political goal through terror. The role these people play is one that only exists outside the game. To cause as many players to have a bad time playing the game.
For me personally it's one of the most game breaking encounters in the game. I am in my galaxy, flying to achieve my aims, and I'm intercepted by someone going: lol, it's just a game, pixel spaceships, die noob. Now in my galaxy, these people should not exist, so I'll either fly in Private Groups (99% of the time) and ignore the ones I do encounter. Which usually means sitting back and rolling a cigarette until the rebuy screen pops up, before I can get on playing the game.
Now the term: Griefer is meaningless to me. The proper term I feel for these people is: irritants.
1st) In before lock
2nd) Get ready for the "It's just a game and not a reflection of who I am as a person, I'm good in real life - honest" answers you're about to get.
3rd) We all know what we do online is a direct reflection of our inner personalities (as per the study your family member is doing), but for some odd reason SDC members (and other groups) get real uppity when you highlight it.
Good luck, hope you got flame proof undies on.
Of course it reflects their personalities.
Some people are just cringy and weak both online and off.
Speaking personally I have never had the least concerns over the psychological state of any player of this game, in relation to actions (allegedly) taken in the game.
On the rare occasions that I have wondered about someone's condition, it's always been over actions (allegedly) taken out of game.
On the rare occasions that I have wondered about someone's condition, it's always been over actions (allegedly) taken out of game.
And at no point did I say they were terrorists. There is no relationship between in game killing to real terrorist activities.
Yes there a people out there that 'metagame' the heck out of things and that fine. Their perogitive. An your reaction to it is the perfect one. Don't let it bother you. Like you say those types are irritants that can be pretty easily ignored tbh. But in my experience I find that the number of those are way way less than what a lot of people would have you believe.
![[VR] Mad Mike](https://forums-cdn.zaonce.net/data/avatars/m/27/27910.jpg?1553527108){kind=avatar}
wise words and is why generally I do not respond directly when they make their own posts (assuming i pick up on it being from one of them).** Though if you search you will probably find examples where i did do just that without thinking**
but that said, (and i know it has the side effect of preening their egos) I do reply to posts like this because the only people that matter for seeing these are Frontier. The more it is forced on Frontier that a large section of the playerbase are unhappy with the statusquo and the more they are (hopefully) reminded they they themselves sold a game with consequences for such actions that they are currently reneging on.... the hopefully the more likely they are to fix it.
i could of course be deluding myself.
There are numberous ways FD could fix it... there are numbers ways they could stop me at least from posting and just give up (ie they could come out and officially admit that this is working as intended and to deal with it or move on).. until then i will continue to keep banging the drum.
at this point its not about what SDC or who ever think... because as you say, chaos and discontent IS what they want...... its about FD looking at their game and saying enough is enough, be it with proper consequences for actions or just giving us the 2nd open mode that was strongly hinted at in KSer. (or coming up with a way to remove the ceiling of PG numbers)
Last edited:
OP, you might find this interesting: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0191886914000324
Also, this thread from a few weeks back deals with similar issues: https://forums.frontier.co.uk/showt...he-quot-arguments-quot-of-griefers?highlight=
On a more anecdotal level: I know for a fact, from friends who are/have been on the SDC Discord server that "jokes" with racist, homophobic, or antisemitic content -- or targeting mentally disabled people -- are pretty frequent. People who say "you can't compare in-game behaviour with real-life personalities" should probably ponder this.
Also, this thread from a few weeks back deals with similar issues: https://forums.frontier.co.uk/showt...he-quot-arguments-quot-of-griefers?highlight=
On a more anecdotal level: I know for a fact, from friends who are/have been on the SDC Discord server that "jokes" with racist, homophobic, or antisemitic content -- or targeting mentally disabled people -- are pretty frequent. People who say "you can't compare in-game behaviour with real-life personalities" should probably ponder this.
So... if you treat everyone unfair your behaviour suddenly becomes fair?
Honestly Mike, at this stage there is only one explanation for the endless strife over all this that to me makes any kind of sense:
- Your goodself and like-minded customers want Frontier to make the Open environment quite a lot less risky from a PvP perspective, and as soon as possible.
- However, Frontier actually want to make it just a bit less risky from a PvP perspective, and very slowly, by tiny increments.
You are confusing equally to be the same as fair. Equal is objective. Fair is subjective.
i can only speak for myself....
i want to make open make sense, with realistic consequences for actions for all.
in some cases such as at a CG then yep, probably would end up less risky for my style of play
but i would not be against the over all difficulty of ai etc going up, and also the consequences i would like to see would not stop at JUST PvP either...
sure the PF bounties etc would just be against PvP because all PF members are players.... but i would happily see more consequences for murdering npcs..... or for annoying criminal factions too much etc.
I personally just want a plausible society in ED where serial killers dont get to flounce about in high sec, and dont get to buy all the shiny stuff from the legal market, and where a law abiding person does not get to flounce about in pirate control bases, and where serial killers are hated by all except for a handful of bases which are controlled by specific factions whos sole aim is to cause grief to, for instance PF members... but they should not be expecting the luxuries from the Pilots Federation, the very group they aim to attack.
(the notion of "selectively destroy hollow boxes because they are players" however is an out of game justification which i feel has no place in ED.. but that is just my view)
Last edited:
You're on a roll, can't rep you again yet.
SDC discord server is still in a game though. All you are doing is replacing the ED galaxy with a chat board. The concepts around roles and separation are exactly the same.
The discord is NOT real life just like ED isn't real.
- Status