Goblin Squad Member
|
Check out Mr. Davis's first blog for us at Gobbocast!!
*Note: The views expressed by K. Joseph Davis are not necessarily the views of Gobbocast or its affiliates. All blogs by Mr. Davis are Op Eds.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
I would like to correct the author's use of terminology, "Ganking" is not the term he is speaking of, or he shouldn't be. He should be using the term "Greifing". The two terms are used, incorrectly,by many people in the industry interchangeably, and they are not synonyms of one another.
On his basic premise I agree, and have said it before. The presence of a small amount of grieifing is healthy for an MMO, because it provides the contrast needed to allow player's to see the difference between PVP done in a meaningful and healthy way, and PVP done in a destructive and non-meaningful way.
Besides, it is impossible for an MMO Developer to eliminate 100% of the griefing anyway, so players need to learn how to tolerate it in small amounts to build up a resistance for it. I know this is not how a few describe Ryan Dancey's vision for the game, but quite honestly, if his vision does not recognize that there will be griefing, it is naive and his vision won't be realized in the end no matter what he feels.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
No, Bludd, just, no. Please don't go there again. There has been an absolutely clear statement from the devs that griefing (not ganking) will not be tolerated. That would not be the case if they (and I hope you'll agree with me when I say that I feel they have a better understanding of what makes an MMO work than you do) felt it were healthy. By the look of things on the forum, it isn't healthy in most other people's opinions either, and no amount of your advocacy is going to change that. Can you not just accept that and move on?
You have successfully argued for what amounts to map wide PvP via factions etc. You have moved a lot of people who were wary of playing a PvP game into your camp. You have many people on your side (including me) in recognising the need for banditry style PvP in PfO. You have won these arguments, but you will not win this last one, especially if you use reasoning like this:
Besides, it is impossible for an MMO Developer to eliminate 100% of the griefing anyway, so players need to learn how to tolerate it in small amounts to build up a resistance for it. I know this is not how a few describe Ryan Dancey's vision for the game, but quite honestly, if his vision does not recognize that there will be griefing, it is naive and his vision won't be realized in the end no matter what he feels.
So, because we can't stop murder we should consider a little bit of it healthy, so as to build up a tolerance?
You have been quite right when you've said that not all unsanctioned PvP will be griefing. Please concentrate on that line of persuasion. Unsanctioned PvP is being interesting and creative, and weighing up consequences. Griefing is being a d!ck. It is targeting the player, not the character, and every time I see you advocate it you lose a little respect in my eyes.
You are winning the war, Bludd. Accept you may need to lose a few battles along the way.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
@Bludd, I don't think the author intends to use "griefing". In fact, in his blog he says, "Why [gank]? They were bored. Sure, some were jerks griefing noobs, but most were really just bored." This use of the word griefing implies he considers griefing to be player-to-player harassment, much the same as most people think of it.
It looks like instead he uses ganking to mean "attacking another player without their consent, often with little apparent motive and with overwhelming chances of victory", which I think is an okay use of it. I believe your personal definition is more along the lines of "initiating a fight with overwhelming chances of victory", the key difference being you don't associate the term ganking with motives. Of course, feel free to correct me if I'm mistaken.
I believe the point he's trying to make in the blog, which is a very basic point that's been done over many times in this board, is this: "Non-consensual PvP will be in PFO, but that's okay. If you take an objective look at it, as I will do in my next blog post, you'll see that PFO will benefit from allowing players to kill each other all over the map."
I guess with this first post he's just laying the groundwork, trying to characterize his own negative experiences with non-consensual PvP to let readers know that he went through some of them too but he still believes that PFO can do such PvP right.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
You have many people on your side (including me) in recognising the need for banditry style PvP in PfO.
A lot of us were singing the praises of non-consensual PvP and the benefits of Goblinworks supporting the Bandit lifestyle for a year or so before Bluddwolf picked up the megaphone.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
That is mainly correct Lhan... Except one part, and I hate to use it since it has been misused by everyone.
Ryan basically said what Bludd is saying. Griefing cannot be completely measured nor controlled. I could dig up the quotes, but I just dont feel like it, and that game is getting old.
If I remember correctly Ryan said they will not even define griefing.
So he is correct that we will see it... But since GW will not define it then who will? What are they going to do to stop it if they do not define it?
The comparison to Murder is a bit off, thats an extreme that doesnt even equate in the slightest bit.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
But since GW will not define it then who will? What are they going to do to stop it if they do not define it?
So, just to be clear: My point is that if you give people a rule about what is or isn't permitted in social interaction, some folks will treat that as a license to act out in harmful ways right up to the very edge of that line, and if they go over a bit to plead ignorance/passion/misimpression/etc. They will game the system, feeling that the rule protects THEM, not the community, from harm.
No rule? Arbitrary enforcement? Playing favorites for people with good reputations and social credibility? That makes it hard and not fun to jerk people's chains for the lulz, and even removes the post-ban 3rd party forum whines about unfairness and developer misconduct, and how one's rights have been violated, etc.
Pathfinder Online will be judged on its actual community tenor, not its theoretical limits. And I'm very confident that it will be graded highly by the kind of people interested in a healthy, reasonably non-toxic, mutually respectful, vibrant society we want as customers.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
That doesnt really answer anything. He does in sentence 3 what he is trying to avoid in sentence 2. And then of course leaves it to be a fluctuating definition based on the population of the game and the current mind set.
Makes no sense
I think if he follows that, he is causing more harm then good.
The 3rd party forum whines are always ignored, and laughed at by the other people...
Playing favorites is also a problem that needs to be avoided... Eve is going through that now, again, because they decided to play favorites... They are losing customers over that nonsense, again.
Leave it to the "community" and you are just asking for a toxic mindset.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
I could dig up the quotes, but I just dont feel like it, and that game is getting old.I sincerely hope that you don't take my passion for digging up relevant quotes to be an attempt to jerk your chain...
No it just turns into a war of who found what post, and how it can be interpreted. Since the guy who made the post in the first place will not make himself clear.
Except for...
(Add Nihimons Quote Here) (You can find one LOL)
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
Xeen,
No problem with ganking - it's a valid tactic. And I am not comparing griefing with murder - I am illustrating the lack of logic in Bluddwolf's arguments. It may be reductio ad absurdum, but it is a parallel.
GW have said that they will not define griefing for us. That does not mean that they will not know what it is when they see it, or that they do not have an in-house definition we will never see. It would be a real mistake to think that this means they will not police griefing, or have a way to deal with griefers.
The lack of public definition is specifically to prevent people playing right up to the edge of what is acceptable ... and then skating away again. If you don't know where the boundaries are you tend to be more careful. Familiarity breeds contempt; uncertainty breeds caution. But once you cross that ill-defined (again - for us) line, you will be punished. I believe the words "arbitrary" and "capricious" were used.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
@ Lhan,
You are taking my comment the wrong way. It is not advocacy, it is resignation to the fact, there will be griefing no matter what anyone tries to do about it.
So, what do we do?
I try to find that one shred of positive in it, in game terms. You can't use the same rationale using the real world, unfair comparison.
A little bit of murder is not good or healthy, to show people what is a better way of treating your fellow man.
In a game, we all know, or can learn the difference between getting killed in PVP and being griefed through PVP. Un til you experience both, and many of us have, then you won't appreciate the one and know to condemn the other.
Again, real world comparisons are unfair, it is just a game. Also, again, I'm not advocating for griefing I'm just recognizing it will exists.
I plan on putting griefers into my personal "Ugly Standing" and if they end up on the UNC "Ugly List", well our people like "The Goodfellow" will be very busy indeed!!!
I might even reserve my use of Death Curses against griefers, and not just those that have griefed me or my friends. I would offer it to people I respect, regardless of company, just for the opportunity of vengeance against a griefer (Calistria would be served).
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
I utterly refute the idea that I need to be griefed in order to understand the difference between griefing and other PVP. I am also highly doubtful that other people on this board are too stupid to do the same. This means that the argument that griefing is healthy for that reason collapses. All you do by calling it such is give it a cloak of semi-acceptability.
Your statement that you will be anti-griefer also strikes me as insincere as you have previously stated that you will regard nobody as a griefer unless so labelled by GW, by which time they may already have been banned. Are you willing to go on record and say that there are or may be some activities which you regard as griefing even before GW acts (such as corpse camping, for example) or are you completely devoid of any moral compass of your own whatsoever in this regard?
Normally when I disagree with you, I still respect your arguments. Here I'm afraid I find them weak, contradictory and ill conceived. It's nothing personal but we are never going to agree on this one.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
I may not have gone on record of what activities I consider griefing, and therefore will never do, but I certainly will.
* Corpse Camping
* Respawn Camping
* Killing the Same Person over, and over again with no reason for going
beyond the first kill.
* Kill harvesting in Noob Areas (once I'm no longer a noob myself).
Reasons for Killing Beyond the First Kill:
1. Character still has loot, or may have picked up new loot.
2. Character has griefed me or one of mine, in the past.
3. Character continues to reenter an area under my protection.
4. Character is a war target, feud target or faction target
That is pretty much it, and many can be dealt with at the player level.
To think that GW will be wielding the ban hammer frequent enough to severely limit or to eliminate griefing is wishful thinking and obviously untested.
Again I say, we can not know the nature of griefing or the nature of good PVP interaction, unless griefing exists in PFO, and not in its total absence. If it is going to exist, we at least should try to get something positive out of it.
The question is not, will it be there? It is not, what are the Devs saying they will do about it?
What are we going to do about it, in-game, is the real question?
1. Warn Others
2. Report
3. Respond
4. Retaliate
5. Revenge
6. Ignore
7. Complain
8. Troll
9. Roll Over
10. Quit
These are the 10 responses I can think of. Some may be good by you or bad by you. You may some that you would add or remove. You may change the order and prioritize (I did not, randomly what came to mind).
I personally would use a mixture of 1-6, and definitely not 8-10.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
For all you know the "community" might end up agreeing with you, Xeen. I bet you don't think it's such a bad thing then...
They are going to listen to their customers, it's the business model they promised they would have since the kickstarters.
The customer is always an a&+@*!*.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I believe what Mr. Davis refers to as "ganking" is by design not possible in PFO.
He references solo high level characters coming in to low level areas and wiping out the population.
That was not supposed to be possible in PFO as players do not scale in power similar to the games he is referencing.
As per his example "it sucked again when a level 60 paladin massacred my level 12 troll over and over again the first time I stepped foot in the Barrens" the PFO equivalent of a level 60 is not supposed to be powerful enough to easily kill the equivalent of a level 12 so unless the level 12 is somewhere stupid or doing something stupid they should be able to get to "safety" or get help from a few other level 12 equivalents to wtfpwn the level 60.
Unless the game design has changed significantly that is.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
Yeah, as I've said I think the examples were moreso to show that he's been one of those newbs getting killed in starter areas, instead of saying that this is going to happen in PFO. It's to let people who are hesitant about the free PvP know that he's been there too, but that he's not worried about it in PFO and you shouldn't be either. I think it'll be a clearer statement once he makes another post.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
@Bluddwolf
Thank you for doing what I hoped you would do and coming out and stating that there are some behaviours that you feel have no place in PfO. Consider me somewhat mollified.
With regard to your reasons to kill the same character repeatedly, I agree totally with 3 and 4 (though I'd like a warning given to stay away after the first kill - I don't see why you have to give up the element of surprise to warn beforehand), and partially with 2 - if you leave them long enough to accrue said new loot. As for griefing griefers, I wholeheartedly disagree, you are just exacerbating the situation, but then you didn't expect me to say otherwise, did you?
And as for what to do with griefers, I agree with 1 - 6, see complaining as useless unless it's to the right people (GW - with evidence), and am definitely not a fan of 8 - 9. As for quitting - not if you mean cancelling my subscription, but I'm quite happy to log off and go and do something else if I am being persistently griefed (after taking screen shots, recording combat and/or chat logs and frapsing if possible - I will report griefing on every occasion it happens). I do have a life outside of PfO (as I suspect we all do <shock horror>) and there are plenty of other ways to go and have fun.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
Ganking will be possible, at what level is required is the question.
There is no way they can remove it from the game, no way at all. If you can kill someone then there is a way to gank someone.
Now it may take 60 characters 5 seconds to kill 1 character, but it is still going to be possible.
I will say this, if it is that difficult to gank someone... Then 1v1 or small gang combat is going to take too long. Think of how long siege combat will take, damn that would be boring.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
@Bluddwolf
As for griefing griefers, I wholeheartedly disagree, you are just exacerbating the situation, but then you didn't expect me to say otherwise, did you?
I fail to see from my post, where I advocated "griefing the griefers". You have perhaps predetermined that it is there, but it is not.
Retaliation or Revenge does not have to use griefing tactics. But, since when is it not acceptable to want to bring grief upon someone who has harmed you, as a lesson of "giving them a taste of their own medicine?"
There was a time that that lesson was a value to be instilled into young children.
However, my post did not mention that, I was more leaning towards using the tools that the Devs have given to us.
SAD / Ambush
Kill in PVP Combat
Bounty
Assassination
Death Curse
Feud
War
Choose, one a few or even all....That might teach a griefer a lesson, without resorting to their tactics.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
That was not my experience. Most fights I've been in 1v1 and small gang were rarely below 10 minutes.
Then you guys werent really fighting, you were playing games with each other.
Docking games, jumping gates, pulling out of combat range... sure you can do all that and it take forever... Only exception is if both sides have too much logi and you cannot hurt each other...
I have seen Siege mode dreadnaughts go down in 1 minute to a small BS gang.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
I have to agree that 5 minute EvE fights tended to be the exception, rather than the norm. I had a fair bit of experience with super quick combat (I was in the high-sec piracy corporation for quite a while). If you know what you are doing and you press your advantage you should be able to bring most enemy ships down in under a minute. I would say that that was definitely true for any t1 sub-capital ship.
The only time I have seen fights go to those lengths was when someone brought a level 5 mission drone boat up against another level 5 mission drone boat. But then that isn't a PvP encounter, that is two brick walls slowly moving towards each other.
Then you guys werent really fighting, you were playing games with each other.Your way of playing a game is not the only valid way and I take offence to you discounting my observation in such a condescending way.
In a PvP environment there is very much a 'valid way' of playing the game. If I can kill you in under 30 seconds and you take over 5 minutes to kill me, I am playing the game in a more 'valid' way. You are free to play however you wish, but by a purely mechanical point of view my method is superior. If your fights took 5 minutes then you were likely doing something wrong. Or your opponent was not correctly countering your plays such that they weren't pressing an advantage.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
I have to agree that 5 minute EvE fights tended to be the exception, rather than the norm. I had a fair bit of experience with super quick combat (I was in the high-sec piracy corporation for quite a while). If you know what you are doing and you press your advantage you should be able to bring most enemy ships down in under a minute. I would say that that was definitely true for any t1 sub-capital ship.
The only time I have seen fights go to those lengths was when someone brought a level 5 mission drone boat up against another level 5 mission drone boat. But then that isn't a PvP encounter, that is two brick walls slowly moving towards each other.
In a PvP environment there is very much a 'valid way' of playing the game. If I can kill you in under 30 seconds and you take over 5 minutes to kill me, I am playing the game in a more 'valid' way. You are free to play however you wish, but by a purely mechanical point of view my method is superior. If your fights took 5 minutes then you were likely doing something wrong. Or your opponent was not correctly countering your plays such that they weren't pressing an advantage.Then you guys werent really fighting, you were playing games with each other.Your way of playing a game is not the only valid way and I take offence to you discounting my observation in such a condescending way.
This
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
ISnt that what Reputation does? Or banning them?That might teach a griefer a lesson...It seems to me that as soon as you target the player behind the keyboard by wanting to "teach them a lesson", you're probably crossing the line.
Those actions are taken by Goblinworks, not by other players.