KitNyx Goblin Squad Member |
KitNyx wrote:Bluddwolf wrote:So if two or three nations / kingdoms formed, the nation that is the most open to multiple alignments, reputation ranges, archtype classes, and the use if the various long term PvP flags will attract a larger segment of the population and be better prepared to defend itself and its interests.Only if you think size is all that matters in development and defense.Not just size, but versatility of alignment based skills, long term PvP flags, a greater mix of PvE and PvP focused players, etc.
As I mentioned earlier, if a nation has no access to its own assassins it will be at a great disadvantage in warfare versus a nation that does.
I will accept that you assume that...I will wait for confirmation.
Bluddwolf Goblin Squad Member |
@ Nihimon
It never occurred to you that I was writing my post and it was not immediately posted, before Realmwalker posted his more in depth reasoning.
Secondly, you by posting the mocking laughter of the Devs about the issue of playing solo, could not be taken the same way?
Thirdly, Xeen's comments are his own and are at a different level than any of mine. To compare them in the same sentence is not accurate to either his views or mine.
Fourth, I gave Realmwalker my honest opinion and I'm bit as optimistic as you were or are that the level of PvP won't be beyond the tolerance level of many people, let alone Realmwalker's physical limitations.
Finally, I believe somewhere Realmwalker did at least own up to the mistake of starting off with "Deal Breaker" comment, which in most forums amounts to the "I quit Thread" which usually gets moderated out.
I will agree to not be less welcoming towards people with legitimate reasons and declarations of not wanting to participate in PvP. I'd also expect that we could perhaps reach the same kind of understanding that a PvE Server only stance is equally detrimental to welcoming griefers into an MMO. I have seen games ruined by both on an equal basis to be honest.
KitNyx Goblin Squad Member |
I'd also expect that we could perhaps reach the same kind of understanding that a PvE Server only stance is equally detrimental to welcoming griefers into an MMO. I have seen games ruined by both on an equal basis to be honest.
I have seen something like this stated several times and I am afraid I do not understand. Can you explain what you mean here?
Lifedragn Goblin Squad Member |
Bluddwolf wrote:I'd also expect that we could perhaps reach the same kind of understanding that a PvE Server only stance is equally detrimental to welcoming griefers into an MMO. I have seen games ruined by both on an equal basis to be honest.I have seen something like this stated several times and I am afraid I do not understand. Can you explain what you mean here?
I am speculating, but I believe the opinion being expressed here is that the game would be boring without PvP, both consensual and non-consensual.
I would disagree, as I love cooperative games and find non-consensual PvP to be less than ideal (though highly support consensual PvP). I would personally not find the game to ruined so long as other challenges were put in place. Though I do welcome the game as good enough with the current understandings of design and the use of incentives to get more folks to voluntarily consent to PvP.
Bluddwolf Goblin Squad Member |
Bluddwolf wrote:I'd also expect that we could perhaps reach the same kind of understanding that a PvE Server only stance is equally detrimental to welcoming griefers into an MMO. I have seen games ruined by both on an equal basis to be honest.I have seen something like this stated several times and I am afraid I do not understand. Can you explain what you mean here?
First let me start by saying, not all PvE focused players are Care Bears. Now to clarifying my statement you ask about.
I put griefers and Care Bears in the same category of toxic behavior in an MMO that includes both PvE and PvP.
The griefers excessively harass players in repeatedly killing them for the sole purpose of ruining the victims game experience.
Care Bears excessively harass developers to to e down or eliminate risk. This is usually manifested in pushing PvP out further and further into the corners of the game, to eliminating the consequences of death, and to give them equally access to high or even the highest rewards at a much lower risk.
I'm waiting to see the reaction from the player base here in PFO, when the first well established and highly developed settlement falls. The reaction to that will show us if the balance here in PFO between those that accept risk vs reward and those that don't.
Hobs the Short Goblin Squad Member |
But if you absolutely must have some examples of what's not acceptable...
In that you replied to the post I deleted, you know that all my questions about your OP were from the point of view of in-game community building. The examples you supplied dealt with the forum, which was not my my focus. Does that mean I don't believe that building a healthy community can't start with what we do on the forum? Of course not. It's just not what I was referring to. I try to be as cordial as I can be on the forums and an effort by all of us to improve forum civility would be wonderful, as long as our helpful reminders and willingness to point out uncivil behavior is practiced without prejudice or bias.
It was for the sake of Realmwalker finding something worthwhile in PFO that I chatted with him in PMs.
It's blindingly clear to anyone who was more interested in engaging a new poster than in telling him to get lost that there was a real opening for Realmwalker to be persuaded that PvP in PFO wouldn't be like the other games he referenced.
I've asked two questions in this thread that I think are very important. I would very much appreciate any response to these:Nihimon wrote:Is that principle enough of a foundation to build a community around? Can that be our "shared sense of purpose"?Nihimon wrote:What will it look like when "the community" is "intolerant of a@!$$@&s"?*************************************
I'll be happy to answer these as best I can, but I need to go play Dad and cook dinner.
KitNyx Goblin Squad Member |
KitNyx wrote:Bluddwolf wrote:I'd also expect that we could perhaps reach the same kind of understanding that a PvE Server only stance is equally detrimental to welcoming griefers into an MMO. I have seen games ruined by both on an equal basis to be honest.I have seen something like this stated several times and I am afraid I do not understand. Can you explain what you mean here?First let me start by saying, not all PvE focused players are Care Bears. Now to clarifying my statement you ask about.
I put griefers and Care Bears in the same category of toxic behavior in an MMO that includes both PvE and PvP.
The griefers excessively harass players in repeatedly killing them for the sole purpose of ruining the victims game experience.
Care Bears excessively harass developers to to e down or eliminate risk. This is usually manifested in pushing PvP out further and further into the corners of the game, to eliminating the consequences of death, and to give them equally access to high or even the highest rewards at a much lower risk.
I'm waiting to see the reaction from the player base here in PFO, when the first well established and highly developed settlement falls. The reaction to that will show us if the balance here in PFO between those that accept risk vs reward and those that don't.
Interesting. I cannot say I agree. For instance, I see a world of difference between asking those who own a game to make changes you think will improve the game...the final choice after all is the devs, and purposely trying to wreck someone else's fun for the sole purpose of wrecking their fun. But, thank you for explaining your position
Nihimon Goblin Squad Member |
It never occurred to you that I was writing my post and it was not immediately posted, before Realmwalker posted his more in depth reasoning.
That didn't occur to me because both of my quotes were from the same post.
Secondly, you by posting the mocking laughter of the Devs about the issue of playing solo, could not be taken the same way?
Look, I wouldn't have the slightest problem with you echoing Ryan or Lisa saying "this isn't the game for you" except for the fact that Ryan asked us to stop, and even when presented with that information, you continued to insist that you were perfectly within your rights.
I will agree to not be less welcoming towards people with legitimate reasons and declarations of not wanting to participate in PvP.
Fantastic! This pleases me very much.
Quzon Mal Goblin Squad Member |
Bluddwolf Goblin Squad Member |
Bluddwolf wrote:It never occurred to you that I was writing my post and it was not immediately posted, before Realmwalker posted his more in depth reasoning.
That is incorrect, refer to page 9 and you will see his first post and mine.
Edit: I'm specifically referring to the more detailed post further down on page 9, before my first post logged in.
Lifedragn Goblin Squad Member |
Kabal362 |
Nihimon wrote:Bluddwolf wrote:It never occurred to you that I was writing my post and it was not immediately posted, before Realmwalker posted his more in depth reasoning.That is incorrect, refer to page 9 and you will see his first post and mine.
Edit: I'm specifically referring to the more detailed post further down on page 9, before my first post logged in.
well, im mostly a lurker here, but i have been observing that some ppl like to "disregard" bluddwold posts here on boards cause he wants to roleplay a bandit. i already saw in these boards some ppl posting "if it is open PvP i wont play it" and after 80% of the forum users trying to convince the guy to stay pointing some fair new points of view on the matter, but usually the guy is so closed minded thats refuse to hear any suggestion and just keep repeating "open pvp im out". its so irritating to see all goodwilled ppl ideas get shunned by the carebear that makes me reach the only reasonable conclusion "the game really isnt for him cause refuse to listen or discuss or even try, just complain".
About Xeen post, i cant see why roleplaying a mad druid or mage that kill everyone who sees is grief.
Vailla |
About Xeen post, i cant see why roleplaying a mad druid or mage that kill everyone who sees is grief.
Some consider any attack against them unacceptable , others simply don't care.
In practice only the reputation/ penalties matter, if he attacks mostly characters flagged for PvP he can keep his reputation high and avoid the penalties , the mad mage probably consider the unflagged unworthy to waste his time with them.Hobs the Short Goblin Squad Member |
1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I've asked two questions in this thread that I think are very important. I would very much appreciate any response to these:Nihimon wrote:Is that principle enough of a foundation to build a community around? Can that be our "shared sense of purpose"?
For clarification, the principle being discussed was this, from Ryan:
- the attitude that causing pain to another person is acceptable won't be tolerated...What I really want to see happen is that members of the community it's will reach out to players who come in with that attitude and help influence them to have a better approach to our community.
I think this is a marvelous principle to adopt. It is one that hopefully any mature player should wish to promote. More than simply as individuals, I would hope that PFO groups (CCs, settlements, nations, etc.) would make a habit of welcoming and educating new players about our community's expectation of mutual respect. Having worked extensively with new players in UO, I know first hand how impactful a concerted effort along these lines can be. Perhaps the proposed Guide Program can be of service in its role of often being the first community face that new players will see.
What will it look like when "the community" is "intolerant of a@!$$@&s"?
Hopefully, it would look rather positive and productive. However, using this forum as an example, there have been comments and posts - even by prominent community members - that many might toss into the category of a@!$$@-ery. Much like the debate about what exactly constitutes griefing or RPKing, this one might get a bit messy when trying to define what an a@!$$@&s looks like.
Do I think there is a level of civility that the vast majority of posters understand and embrace - yes. Do most posters likely know when the line of being uncivil is crossed - yes. However, to become institutionalized within the community, I believe three things must occur:
1. Self-restraint and Selflessness
For a healthy, long-lasting community ethic to exist, a degree of self-restraint and the ability to sometimes put the good of the community before yourself needs to exist. This takes an effort from each poster, for the good of the whole and out of respect for the individual - to refrain from knee-jerk posting, from throwing gasoline on already heated debates, and from worrying more about not letting the other poster appear to get one up on you. Often it means being the bigger person.
2. It's Everyone's Job
It requires enough community members to be willing to "remind" - not equally snap at, but remind - their fellow posters to be civil when they seem to have forgotten...enough of them so that they do not feel like they are in the vast minority. In short, they need to be supported in their attempts to keep things civil. You may not have been the one to call out the toxic behavior, but if it the call was valid, you need to be ready to support it. When you're the only one who seems to care, it's hard to keep caring.
3. The Community Has To Want This
It needs to be something the vast majority of the community wants, not just a few, or they will simply be viewed as people who want to control the actions/behavior of others. Honestly, sometimes that is what these efforts degenerate into - a select few who really just want to control everyone not like them in a game. But if the community members can find common ground - can commit to respecting one another and not tolerating those who don't - such efforts can give rise to communities that you want to be a member of for years and years.
One thing I would strongly suggest is that more posters make their way to PFO Fan Team Speak. Something about chatting, rather than simply posting, helps break down walls, clarify positions, and accentuate commonalities. If individuals and groups who have unfortunately begun to draw lines between themselves on the forums are truly interested in at least finding a shared sense of civility for their community's sake, I think open chats on PFO Fan TS would be a great place to start.
Hobs
Andius Goblin Squad Member |
well, im mostly a lurker here, but i have been observing that some ppl like to "disregard" bluddwold posts here on boards cause he wants to roleplay a bandit. i already saw in these boards some ppl posting "if it is open PvP i wont play it" and after 80% of the forum users trying to convince the guy to stay pointing some fair new points of view on the matter, but usually the guy is so closed minded thats refuse to hear any suggestion and just keep repeating "open pvp im out". its so irritating to see all goodwilled ppl ideas get shunned by the carebear that makes me reach the only reasonable conclusion "the game really isnt for him cause refuse to listen or discuss or even try, just complain".
And if we spent less time telling them why this game isn't for them, and more time clearly expressing our points on why it could actually be enjoyable for them, we might still be able to get a few more to stay.
The attitude of "This game isn't for you" toward everyone who has a slightly different take on PVP than the "kill everything that isn't an ally" crowd is what has turned most of these people off to Open World PVP titles, and created highly toxic communities in them.
What we need to be doing instead is giving these people reasons PFO will be different because it will be different. I know some of these people can be stubborn and frustrating but if you don't have any comments more constructive than telling them to go away, it's time to step away from the debate.
Dak Thunderkeg Goblin Squad Member |
Sennajin Goblin Squad Member |
The attitude of "This game isn't for you" toward everyone who has a slightly different take on PVP than the "kill everything that isn't an ally" crowd is what has turned most of these people off to Open World PVP titles, and created highly toxic communities in them.
What we need to be doing instead is giving these people reasons PFO will be different because it will be different. I know some of these people can be stubborn and frustrating but if you don't have any comments more constructive than telling them to go away, it's time to step away from the debate.
Let the record show, I completely, 100% agree with you on this. I will get behind any effort to show people that you can have a fun, open, and engaging community in an open PVP game. Just because some folks do kill everyone they see doesn't mean everyone kills everyone they see, or even the majority of folks kill everyone they see. Getting that message across in a constructive way, just like you said, is key.
Diella Goblin Squad Member |
Nihimon Goblin Squad Member |
I've heard a lot of talk about the swarm coming in at OE. What makes you think that there will not be as many as 2% of those who are getting in at EE being advanced members of the expected foes? That's how I would start if I were them. They may be on us sooner than you think.
I've been operating under the assumption that they're already here.
Nihimon Goblin Squad Member |
Nihimon wrote:Bluddwolf wrote:It never occurred to you that I was writing my post and it was not immediately posted, before Realmwalker posted his more in depth reasoning.That is incorrect, refer to page 9 and you will see his first post and mine.
Edit: I'm specifically referring to the more detailed post further down on page 9, before my first post logged in.
Silly me, it sounded like you were responding to the actual thing I was calling you out on. I didn't make any accusations about his "later post". Why should it have occurred to me?
Nihimon Goblin Squad Member |
... but usually the guy is so closed minded thats refuse to hear any suggestion and just keep repeating "open pvp im out".
Did you actually see someone 'refuse to hear any suggestion and just keep repeating "open pvp im out"'? Because I don't remember that, although I can see how framing it that way might paint Bluddwolf in a better light.
At any rate, Bluddwolf has already admitted that what he did was wrong, and has promised not to do it again, so I'm happy with that. Although, I'd really love to hear Xeen do the same. I think it could be really good, in fact, if he came back and owned up to it that way - it would certainly earn my respect.
Nihimon Goblin Squad Member |
... this one might get a bit messy when trying to define what an a@!$$@&s looks like.
The only bit of a~&~+#+ry that I'm trying to rally people to oppose is the kind that ridicules and disrespects new players. That's fairly easy to recognize.
1. Self-restraint and Selflessness
Utterly ineffective as a counter to the kinds of a~!##!!s who get off on driving people to tears.
2. It's Everyone's Job
3. The Community Has To Want This
Those are the exact reasons I started this thread, and am attempting to rally the community to stand up for these principles, and to confront the a%*+~@!s when they start hammering on someone - especially if that someone is a new guy.
... "remind" - not equally snap at, but remind...
Absolutely, start with gentle reminders, but those won't work against the asholes who, again, get off on driving people to tears. At some point, if they refuse to relent, someone has to confront them. Yes, that's going to be "confrontational", and will make some people uncomfortable. Sheep Dogs have scary teeth, too, and they're even scarier when they're being used.
I would add another...
4. There has to be a "bright line" about the behavior. It should either be provably false, or similarly clear - such as a direct violation of a specific, relevant request from Ryan. Just because someone is being stubborn about... oh, I don't know, maybe the definition of "Socialism"... doesn't mean they're being an a$+@$$* and need to have the community come down on them.
Nihimon Goblin Squad Member |
1 person marked this as a favorite. |
For those of use who do not know where to find the Pfo Ts [Team Speak?] a little information on how to go there would be helpful.
Thanks
It's listed in the Nihimonicon (still love that name) under Popular Player Threads.
Here's the direct link: PFO Team Speak Server
Bluddwolf Goblin Squad Member |
Kabal362 wrote:... but usually the guy is so closed minded thats refuse to hear any suggestion and just keep repeating "open pvp im out".Did you actually see someone 'refuse to hear any suggestion and just keep repeating "open pvp im out"'? Because I don't remember that, although I can see how framing it that way might paint Bluddwolf in a better light.
At any rate, Bluddwolf has already admitted that what he did was wrong, and has promised not to do it again, so I'm happy with that. Although, I'd really love to hear Xeen do the same. I think it could be really good, in fact, if he came back and owned up to it that way - it would certainly earn my respect.
I said no such thing. What I said was if someone explains that they are just not into PvP or they have some other legitimate reason stated why that is just not their play style, I would not tell them this might not be the game for them.
If on the other hand they come and say "If there is no way for me to avoid PvP, that is a deal breaker." Or there should be a "PvE Only server". I will say almost verbatim what I said to Realmwalker.
This is an Open World PvP MMO and there is only one server and no way for you to completely avoid unwanted PvP. If you can not play within that reality, you are best off looking for a game more to your liking. I wish you luck in your search.
How would you respond to a person who came here and said, " I'm here to be a noob killing griefer because I can. If I get booted, I'll just roll on another account. I don't care what your community norms are, I'm a griefer"?
You are not going to roll the red carpet out will you?
DeciusBrutus Goblinworks Executive Founder |
Nihimon wrote:Bluddwolf wrote:It never occurred to you that I was writing my post and it was not immediately posted, before Realmwalker posted his more in depth reasoning.That is incorrect, refer to page 9 and you will see his first post and mine.
Edit: I'm specifically referring to the more detailed post further down on page 9, before my first post logged in.
Why didn't you mention that when it was still relevant?
Nihimon Goblin Squad Member |
@Bluddwolf, then my job here is not done.
I know you latched on to that part of his quote to justify your actions, but you had to very deliberately ignore the sentences that immediately followed it, even after you were explicitly reminded of those statements, and even after you were reminded that Ryan has explicitly asked us not to do what you did.
You should admit that what you did was wrong, and you should promise not to do it again, and my greatest hope is that I won't be the only one telling you this.
Nihimon Goblin Squad Member |
How would you respond to a person who came here and said, " I'm here to be a noob killing griefer because I can. If I get booted, I'll just roll on another account. I don't care what your community norms are, I'm a griefer"?
I would tell them this is not the game for them.
Do you genuinely not see the difference? Is there anyone else here who can help me explain it to you?
Nihimon Goblin Squad Member |
Bluddwolf Goblin Squad Member |
Bluddwolf wrote:Why didn't you mention that when it was still relevant?Nihimon wrote:Bluddwolf wrote:It never occurred to you that I was writing my post and it was not immediately posted, before Realmwalker posted his more in depth reasoning.That is incorrect, refer to page 9 and you will see his first post and mine.
Edit: I'm specifically referring to the more detailed post further down on page 9, before my first post logged in.
I did, some time ago and gosh knows how many posts ago and in some other thread as well. Besides I never said anything all that harsh and certainly not to the level i was attributed to have done.
Jazzlvraz Goblin Squad Member |
Bluddwolf, Nihimon: time to drop it, please. I wish there were some way you two could avoid each other completely, but we have only the one board.
I've rarely seen you agree on anything, and all-too-often it's descended into this sort of animosity. A gentlemens' agreement not to address each other at all would be wonderful, but probably a bridge too far.
Nihimon Goblin Squad Member |
I never said anything all that harsh and certainly not to the level i was attributed to have done.
I agree, somewhat. That's why I said this:
And yeah, Bluddwolf has a decent argument to make that he wasn't really being rude, but he used a single quote to justify his insistence that he was right in telling Realmwaker to take a hike.
Here's Bluddwolf's favorite quote:
Realmwalker wrote:Unless there is a way to flag or unflag PVP or at least set up "no PVP" servers then it is a deal breaker to me.And here's the rest of the quote that immediately followed that:
Realmwalker wrote:Not every one enjoys PVP and most of the time I have played in mmo's that included it there were always griefers out there that kill players just for the sake of killing them, no matter what the level difference, no matter if it gained them nothing. Most of the time these types of players ruin the fun I have when in a mmo.It's blindingly clear to anyone who was more interested in engaging a new poster than in telling him to get lost that there was a real opening for Realmwalker to be persuaded that PvP in PFO wouldn't be like the other games he referenced.
So yeah, I count Bluddwolf telling Realmwalker to continue his search elsewhere as unacceptable behavior.
Nihimon Goblin Squad Member |
Bluddwolf, Nihimon: time to drop it, please.
Not the kind of support I was hoping for...
The question remains: What does it look like?
If Bluddwolf is going to insist that his behavior towards Realmwalker was acceptable, and something he's going to do again in the future, should we tolerate that?
Bluddwolf Goblin Squad Member |
Bluddwolf wrote:How would you respond to a person who came here and said, " I'm here to be a noob killing griefer because I can. If I get booted, I'll just roll on another account. I don't care what your community norms are, I'm a griefer"?I would tell them this is not the game for them.
Do you genuinely not see the difference? Is there anyone else here who can help me explain it to you?
No, I have stated on several occasions that I believe that a griefer and a care bear ( one who wants risk removed, particularly PvP risk or death penalties, etc), to be equally toxic to an Open World PvP MMO. I have experienced games ruined by both types of players. I'd rather neither plague PFO with their grief or tears.
Lifedragn Goblin Squad Member |
1 person marked this as a favorite. |
This is an Open World PvP MMO
But that statement incorrectly puts primary focus on PvP and paints the game in a manner that is not representative of the total experience. This is an Open World Sandbox Fantasy MMO that utilizes PvP as one of it's tools. Read the About blurb. I mean really read it... https://goblinworks.com/ PvP elements are described alongside multiple PvE elements.
The latter part of your statement is true, that you cannot completely control unwanted PvP. But to say the game is all about the PvP is misleading and incorrect. Part of enhancing the community is to clarify what the game IS vs. what the game HAS. The game is not a PvP Game. The game HAS PvP elements with mechanisms in place to provide incentives for engaging in PvP with individuals who desire it (expressed through flags) and disincentives for engaging people who do not (expressed through Rep Loss for attacking unflagged individuals).
Nihimon Goblin Squad Member |
... I believe that a griefer and a care bear ( one who wants risk removed, particularly PvP risk or death penalties, etc), to be equally toxic...
And that is unacceptable.
Just like it would be unacceptable for you to treat a Sorcerer or a Halfling or a Woman as if they were equally as toxic as a griefer.
Bluddwolf Goblin Squad Member |
Bluddwolf wrote:... I believe that a griefer and a care bear ( one who wants risk removed, particularly PvP risk or death penalties, etc), to be equally toxic...And that is unacceptable.
Just like it would be unacceptable for you to treat a Sorcerer or a Halfling or a Woman as if they were equally as toxic as a griefer.
Are you comparing sorcerers, Halflings, and women to griefers and Care Bears?
I've never had my gaming experience ruined by those three types if players, but the latter two... Yes.
Nihimon Goblin Squad Member |
Bluddwolf Goblin Squad Member |
Nihimon Goblin Squad Member |
Harad Navar Goblin Squad Member |
I have learned that if I have an expectation that something will happen in a certain was, either good or bad, I am much more likely to respond to what I have come to expect, and not to what has actually happen. This normally does not turn out well for me.
We are an incredibly small portion of the expected PFO EE population, and certainly an even smaller one when we get to OE. I'm not sure what we decide here will make any difference. It will be washed away by the shear number of those to come, whether they are "goons" or not.
In the end what matters is that each of us as players will have to make up our own minds when judging the actions of others (either as target of those actions or as an observer) as whether those actions are acceptable, or not. I suggest that once we make that choice, our next right action should be "OK, what am I going to do about that?" The forces committing those actions may be too large to confront directly. Those forces may be players we called our friends. Those forces may be us.
It does not matter what is the intent of the "goon squads". What maters is their actions in the game. As Ryan suggested, we may loose it all out there in the wilderness. We might loose it all in a war that destroys our settlements. It doesn't matter. "OK, what am I going to do about this?" is what matters.
In my mind the choice we make when faced with that question is the real design objective of PFO. Can you build community around that?
Nihimon Goblin Squad Member |
Can you build community around that?
It seems to be much more individualistic, without actually having expectations of communal behavior.
I agree with everything you said, but I don't see how it can be applied to the specific problem at hand - namely, that Ryan has tasked us with being "intolerant of a*%**&&s", and ensuring that we "will reach out to players who come in with that attitude [the attitude that causing pain to another person is acceptable] and help influence them to have a better approach to our community."
Andius Goblin Squad Member |
We are an incredibly small portion of the expected PFO EE population, and certainly an even smaller one when we get to OE. I'm not sure what we decide here will make any difference. It will be washed away by the shear number of those to come, whether they are "goons" or not.
I highly disagree, we are the most organized and established of the groups who will be first to come. The kickstarter has come and passed and the golden tickets are gone. If other organized groups were holding them why would they have not voted in the landrush?
We are going to be hitting the ground running on day one while other groups scramble to get things off the ground.
Is that a guarantee that any of us will be major powers by OE or a year afterward? No. But it means that if we don't squander our advantage we very well could be. We don't know at this point.
So with that in mind, what's the harm in trying to change things for the better should we fail?
Hobs the Short Goblin Squad Member |
Nihimon,
First, thank you for your reply. You've made your intent far more clear.
The only bit of a@*@&%*ry that I'm trying to rally people to oppose is the kind that ridicules and disrespects new players. That's fairly easy to recognize.
I agree that this one specific behavior should be fairly easy to recognize. My concern extends to how we all - the existing community - treat and respect one another. I would hope that we would discourage this same a@*@&%*ry among existing members, just as I would hope to extend existing members the same good will and respect that we extend new posters.
1. Self-restraint and Selflessness
Utterly ineffective as a counter to the kinds of a%!+%*!s who get off on driving people to tears.
It may be ineffective against those who have no interest other than to ruin people's experience on the forums (just as a griefer would in-game), but I've known many people to be "driven to tears" over heated arguments that eventually turn into mean-spirited flame wars that could have been avoided if the parties involved had shown more self-restraint and a little selflessness. Again, I'm speaking of the entire existing community and how we interact with one another, rather than only focusing on new posters.
2. It's Everyone's Job
3. The Community Has To Want This
Those are the exact reasons I started this thread, and am attempting to rally the community to stand up for these principles, and to confront the a!!*$%!s when they start hammering on someone - especially if that someone is a new guy.
We may have a differing approaches to accomplishing this particular goal, but the desired end result seems the same.
... "remind" - not equally snap at, but remind...
Absolutely, start with gentle reminders, but those won't work against the asholes who, again, get off on driving people to tears. At some point, if they refuse to relent, someone has to confront them. Yes, that's going to be "confrontational", and will make some people uncomfortable. Sheep Dogs have scary teeth, too, and they're even scarier when they're being used.
Again, same desire, if possibly different tactics.
I would add another...4. There has to be a "bright line" about the behavior. It should either be provably false, or similarly clear - such as a direct violation of a specific, relevant request from Ryan. Just because someone is being stubborn about... oh, I don't know, maybe the definition of "Socialism"... doesn't mean they're being an a#%#+$% and need to have the community come down on them.
This seems reasonable.
The only noticeable difference I see from our exchange on this topic is that your posts have been focused on the community's treatment of new posters, whereas I am hoping we are extending our desire and expectation for mutual respect to the existing community as well (note, I am not implying that you do not have a similar desire, only that your focus seems to have been more specific). After all, how can we presume to treat new posters so well and attempt to "reach out to players who come in with that (pain causing) attitude and help influence them to have a better approach to our community", if we are not treating the existing members of the community just as well?
Actually, if there are people already in the community that possess the attitude that Ryan speaks of, should we not be making a concerted effort to "influence them to have a better approach to our community" the same way we would for newcomers? If we hope to create "a community that lives up to Ryan's expectations", shouldn't that attempt begin with reaching out to those members who we already know?
*Note - the words in parentheses are my addition to clarify what kind of attitude Ryan was talking about in his original, longer quote.
Algrimbeldabar Goblin Squad Member |
Bluddwolf wrote:This is an Open World PvP MMOBut that statement incorrectly puts primary focus on PvP and paints the game in a manner that is not representative of the total experience. This is an Open World Sandbox Fantasy MMO that utilizes PvP as one of it's tools. Read the About blurb. I mean really read it... https://goblinworks.com/ PvP elements are described alongside multiple PvE elements.
The latter part of your statement is true, that you cannot completely control unwanted PvP. But to say the game is all about the PvP is misleading and incorrect. Part of enhancing the community is to clarify what the game IS vs. what the game HAS. The game is not a PvP Game. The game HAS PvP elements with mechanisms in place to provide incentives for engaging in PvP with individuals who desire it (expressed through flags) and disincentives for engaging people who do not (expressed through Rep Loss for attacking unflagged individuals).
I decided at this point to stop lurking and post.
While PFO is not a 100% PvP or die game, to downplay or try and say that PvP isn't the main thrust of the game is misleading. It seems more and more the main thrusts of the game (like the territory control and the ability to attack anyone especially if you don't care about flags) are PvP focused. Now we also have the games designers saying that while yes there will be PvE quests and elements, they going to be limited. You want to mine the best ores? Go out far away from all the safe zones and mine it.... but you can get ganked by anyone who wanders by weather you like it or not.
Unless you stay in the starting towns you cannot avoid it. I think it is highly wrong to say that with that kind of a situation that PFO is anything but as Bluddwolf called it, an open world PvP game.
So I feel Bluddwolf was right in telling Realmwalker that this wasn't the game for him. If anyone is dead set against PvP this isn't the game for them. Now, I'm all for trying to explain how you can avoid most of it and not to just damn the game because of it, but to say anything otherwise is quite honestly wrong.
People have to accept that. Not every game is for everyone. It's folly to think such. I don't go into a Vampire the Masquerade game and complain because I don't want to play as or against vampires. I don't go into a high fantasy game and complain that I don't have real world machine guns. Why would someone want to come to a PvP focused game and not either want or least accept that there is PvP?
Now as a personal thing, I dislike PvP. I'll try and avoid it, but will deal with it if I have to. I'm the type of person who in MMO's will happily ignore the flagged member of the other side(s) while out and about unless they do something to me first. Then I either kill them or die and continue along. If they wanna camp me I go make a sandwich :-) But I don't harbor any illusions that PvP will happen, it will happen weather I want it to or not and I know I'll be involved in it.
Anyone who is looking into this game has to know that as well or their just being mislead into thinking this is another WoW clone where PvP is 100% optional. It's not. There are no magic flags to turn off/on to make you a non target, no PvE only servers. Telling people otherwise is misleading at best or an outright lie at worst.
Andius Goblin Squad Member |
1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Several of the members of this community that I know of are people who came in saying they were not interested in a PVP game. We aren't lying, or misleading, or claiming PVP will be optional. We are saying PVP will be a fact of life in PFO but this game is putting measures in place to make the senseless slaughter you see in similar titles less prevalent. Which is a fact. Those who have stuck around understand that now.
The fact is most people oppose PVP titles because of misconceptions and bad past experiences. Not because it will truely ruin the game for them if they are taught the right mindset, and certainly not because they can't survive in a title where the worst behaviors carry meaningful consequences.
So just because someone says they aren't interested in a PVP title doesn't mean they still won't be after we state our case clearly. As I said, if you are frustrated enough to just tell them to go away it's time to step away from the debate. If this title isn't for them then they will show themselves to the door when they're finished with the conversation.
Bringslite Goblin Squad Member |
Papaver Goblin Squad Member |
The fact is most people oppose PVP titles because of misconceptions and bad past experiences. Not because it will truely ruin the game for them if they are taught the right mindset, and certainly not because they can't survive in a title where the worst behaviors carry meaningful consequences.
The problem with that is that misconceptions and bad experiences breed heavy bias. So I think that stating personal estimation of the likeliness if someone will have fun in a game like PFO, like I did, is a as valid a statement as any regardless of what Ryan said we should do or not.
And I fully support that Bluddwolfs initial reaction was completely valid regarding how aggressive the initial statement concerning PvP was. Because as everyone seems to deliberately ignore here the clarification that the dude in question is even willing to try PFO and the change to a milder construction of his concerns came later.
Algrimbeldabar Goblin Squad Member |
Several of the members of this community that I know of are people who came in saying they were not interested in a PVP game. We aren't lying, or misleading, or claiming PVP will be optional. We are saying PVP will be a fact of life in PFO but this game is putting measures in place to make the senseless slaughter you see in similar titles less prevalent. Which is a fact. Those who have stuck around understand that now.
The fact is most people oppose PVP titles because of misconceptions and bad past experiences. Not because it will truely ruin the game for them if they are taught the right mindset, and certainly not because they can't survive in a title where the worst behaviors carry meaningful consequences.
So just because someone says they aren't interested in a PVP title doesn't mean they still won't be after we state our case clearly. As I said, if you are frustrated enough to just tell them to go away it's time to step away from the debate. If this title isn't for them then they will show themselves to the door when they're finished with the conversation.
Agreed, but and here's my complaint with how some people come across (weather they mean to or not...
There will be PvP and unless you never leave the big NPC cities you will have to deal with it. Telling or seeming to state otherwise is wrong. I think it's perfectly fair to tell people that, but if after that they still say "I don't want to play with any PvP" then they should be told that PFO isn't a game they'll be likely to enjoy.
As I stated before. Not every game is for everyone. It's not a bad thing just how it works. I think it become to focused on the notion that "everyone will like it if they just see it in a different light" you're just setting up both you and them for disappointment.
AvenaOats Goblin Squad Member |
So I feel Bluddwolf was right in telling Realmwalker that this [edit: MAY] wasn't the game for him. If anyone is dead set against PvP this isn't the game for them.
Be that as it may. ;)
You have to always allow for a possibility space in the future. People can change their attitudes for all sorts of interesting reasons.
Elorebaen Goblin Squad Member |
Hobs the Short wrote:That said, I've read this thread and your replies in other threads when asked about this one. Here is my question - what exactly do you mean "Building a Community"?Based on his extensive posting history it seems clear to me he is not talking about a community in the sense of buildings and people, but in the sense of a PFO "shared sense of belonging, goals, and wish to see this game succeed" for PLAYERS to work together against those who wish to "destroy everything and watch the world burn", which RD warned us is out there and will make there presence felt.
This seems an accurate observation.