Elite: General talk

Sakashiro
26 Nov 2020, 12:17pm
XeknosBut you do click on open with the knowledge that people will attack you. That's what I'm saying. You accept those consequences by choosing to play in open. You thinking it's "unfair" or "pointless" doesn't especially matter. The onus is on you to figure out how to deal with unfriendly commanders.

It's entirely possible to click open for one reason but not another. Going open does not imply consent to ganking, just like leaving home doesn't imply consent to getting robbed in the street.

It's a game; you don't need consent. That's the whole point: you can be a bad guy in ED without RL repercussions. But don't claim to be a good guy because you had the consent of that stranger whose ship you blew up. That's just a Jedi mind trick you're playing on yourself.
Aleksander Majjam
26 Nov 2020, 12:26pm
RenraikuDiscussions on such topics are necessary from time to time to bring balance to the occasional skewed views of some.


Skewed views, huh? Differences of opinions are now skewed views?
Renraiku
26 Nov 2020, 12:38pm
Skewed views is correct. Differences of opinions are just that, differences of opinion.
Aleksander Majjam
26 Nov 2020, 12:45pm
RenraikuSkewed views is correct. Differences of opinions are just that, differences of opinion.


Cool!
Synthya Wylder
26 Nov 2020, 1:45pm
Whew, after refreshing the page, I saw 82 new posts... been a busy day or so, hasn't it?

On the topic of online bullying, & specifically, that sad event described in Eve Online, I've always thought it odd that what some would do or say online to each other, but not to their face in person, to be a strange incongruity. Must be something of a disconnect that makes the separation by keyboard, screen & interweb connection actually meaningful to them.

I relate to others, i.e., RL people, online exactly the same way I relate to them personally, over a hot beverage & pizza. I won't treat them any differently, I'm as polite & respectful regardless the means of connection &/ the distance. But, that's me.

Others seem to find the difference between the 2 a distinction, & feel no regret or remorse & seem to justify that via 'it's what the game allows' & 'it's only game pixels' & 'they aren't actually real people because of those 2 things'.

While I'm not the combat type, & never have nor ever will be focused on it, I feel no regret or remorse over popping NPCs... they are as much an element of the game itself, like any of the other hazards.

Take for instance, >10 years ago, I played Second Life. It was a free-for-all, an open sandbox, where one could find & do just about anything, & I mean, anything.

Without getting specific, it got to the extent that there had to become separations between sections for minors & adults, & even that didn't work. By the time I left, it had become to the best of my knowledge, an adults-only platform. I could go through a list of ethically & morally & legally reprehensible acts, but if I posted that list here as examples, I couldn't cover all that was there, & I've no doubt that Artie would axe my post, if not outright ban me.

Suffice it to say, IMO, given an environment with no repercussions, would you, say, engage in bestiality, or sexually violating an infant or child? Just to name a couple... while I can't speak for others here or in E:D, I can unequivocally state for myself, absitively not!

My point is, what someone finds it amenable to do to another online is generally congruent with what they find amenable to doing to them in-person. For example, if there were absitively no repercussions, would you, the reader, do the type of things in RL that I mentioned above?

That's the question I ask those that make the claim of distinction between RL personal interactions & online (specifically, in-game) interactions. Take a look at so many forums for example. People will do & say so many nasty things online to each other, & then react completely differently face to face... to me, that's a mystery.

Getting back to that sad event with the Eve Online player, I've played Star Trek Online for >5 years (only because I'm a die-hard ST fan & it's the only one available due to licensing & copyright restrictions - it is a true 'care-bear environment' & those looking for or needing a game like that, I recommend them going there).

With my skills in interpersonal relationships, & interest in the general well-being of others, I became the 'Elder Auntie' of 5-6 fleets (potentially up to 500 members each) & 2 Armadas of 13 fleets each. Do the math. Due to the nature of the game, chats weren't persistent, so we formed a Discord channel, where things could be taken offline.

Because there's no 'emotional-stability' requirement to any online game, there were a number who, for one reason or another, had to be called to the red carpet, & I did my best to try to counsel them - not because I'm any sort of licensed professional, or even formally trained in that sort of thing, but I applied the perspective & wisdom & life experience that tends to come with senior years. Sometimes I was successful, sometimes not & I'd end up strongly advising them to seek serious professional social or medical help. Sometimes, they returned to play & became valuable members.

I offer my opinion & experiences for others to consider, but it's just that, my opinion.

My bottom line is, there's a distinction between NPCs & real players & the FDevs should be making more of an effort for informing especially new(er) players about the realities of the game & the means & options to avoid experiences which would otherwise lead to their un-installing the game.

It would only serve the players & the game itself.

I think by now that I've exceeded my rant quota for the day.
Renraiku
26 Nov 2020, 2:35pm
Many and I mean many online games have you disrupting others progress as part of the game, a lot of those don't tell their players of the pitfalls of PvP, however the game is stated as having a PvP element and yet nobody is upset that it happens because it is part of the game. Why oh why is it different here? it makes no sense. The only reason I can see is that PvP encounters are so few and far between in Elite: Dangerous that it's a shock when it happens because people have lulled themselves into a false sense of security and don't see a need to learn how to defend themselves because they have never been attacked, until it happens.

Pure speculation of course.

Synthya WylderThat's the question I ask those that make the claim of distinction between RL personal interactions & online (specifically, in-game) interactions. Take a look at so many forums for example. People will do & say so many nasty things online to each other, & then react completely differently face to face... to me, that's a mystery.

This has levels.

One level for example, I speak to people on the forums and in game approximately the same as I do in real life. Unless I am roleplaying in which case it is obvious and appropriate.

The distinction for me is the fact that the game has rules to follow, I follow those rules, If I am allowed to do something in the game that I normally wouldn't be able to do in real life, that I find appealing and is something my character would do, is not against the law (up to a certain point, your extreme's are repulsive to me and I wish I had never read them), I would like to experience what that would be like in a safe place where it's allowed. Depending on the game, a roleplaying game like Elite: Dangerous I would create a character, normally this would be a character I roleplay because who wants to be themselves when they can be someone else and tell/play out their story.

Others will have their own distinctions and levels of association or disassociation for lack of a better synonym.
Synthya Wylder
26 Nov 2020, 3:30pm
I posted those extreme examples to make a point; it seems that I was successful.

Renraiku The distinction for me is the fact that the game has rules to follow, I follow those rules, If I am allowed to do something in the game that I normally wouldn't be able to do in real life, that I find appealing and is something my character would do, is not against the law (up to a certain point, your extreme's are repulsive to me and I wish I had never read them), I would like to experience what that would be like in a safe place where it's allowed. Depending on the game, a roleplaying game like Elite: Dangerous I would create a character, normally this would be a character I roleplay because who wants to be themselves when they can be someone else and tell/play out their story.


I gather then that you'd fall into the 2nd category, those making a distinction between RL personal interactions & those online/in-game, because the game/environment allows it; the details & specifics re: roleplay are moot. Some may consider those 2 examples abhorrent acts perfectly fine, so long as they are role-playing them.

In E:D, I can fly a spaceship & visit celestial bodies & stations & ports. I can't do those in RL. I can pop NPCs, because they're an in-game hazardous element. I can also do nasty, harmful & non-consensual things to other players via the game mechanics, namely in the topic of this discussion, 'ganking'. But, as I've stated prior, that's just not who & what I am at my core as a person.

Can I do that? Sure! Have I or will I ever do that? No way. I think that it's a fundamental difference in psychologies.

The image of the old excuse of "...I was just following orders..." & the past mass atrocities in the Nazi concentration camps of WWII comes to mind... Just another example.

That's already my impression. I'm not saying that it's right or wrong, that's just who you are as a person, as you've already plainly stated.

As I recall, a saying by Janis Joplin was (paraphrasing), "Wherever you go, you open your eyes & there you are." Meaning, one can't escape the essence of their core identity, no matter the place or venue; it is integral.

Thank you for making it clear.

Last edit: 26 Nov 2020, 3:35pm
Rebecca Hail
26 Nov 2020, 4:13pm
I keep hearing "non-consensual" getting thrown around.

The moment you log into open you give consent to all player interactions, hostile or friendly, you might have with a random player. Implying that it is non-consensual to be pulled out of supercruise and getting killed in Open is a non-argument. If you're not prepared to face these kinds of hostile player interactions don't go into open.


Synthia, your examples are way out of line and don't belong in a discussion about behaviour inside a video game. The only thing these examples will do is escalate the discussion to the point where it just gets purged again.
Renraiku
26 Nov 2020, 4:31pm
I will also add that PvP does not have to be about ganking, I spar with friends often and I have been involved in organic wing fights with in game enemy squadrons. Is this idea foreign to you too?

I am rarely involved in any form of Ganking, although I have in the past. I am more about organic PvP and PvP in roleplay.

I don't believe I fall neatly into any of your categories. I also disassociate myself from a lot of the things you say about gankers and the psychology surrounding it. None of that is relevant to what I do.

I also agree with Rebecca.

Last edit: 26 Nov 2020, 4:51pm
Shalis
26 Nov 2020, 4:59pm
just jumping in here from the nether to drop my worthless 2 cents.

whether a videogame or not, you are still dealing with people on the other end and there are repercussions to every interaction. I really don't give credence to that distinction that video games because they have the word game in it, have no bearing on your personality, ethics or morality. I've been hearing this argument since the 90s. I thought it wasn't sound then and i still think so. Its, imho, just a way to dismiss responsibility and pressure to be morally acceptable for those who already have few morals to begin with. After all these are not just "games", they are a medium through which you interact with other human beings. My first MMO was meridian 59, and i've played pretty much all since (and muds/bbs before that). I think i can comfortably say that i've met most if not all of the player archetypes out there. And i can honestly say that toxic behaviour in game = toxic human irl (whether themselves or their "leader" and cohorts but then what is the difference? if you chose to follow and emulate an asshat or surround yourself with such, then you are one), full stop. I used to think otherwise, after all being bad ass is fun in a childish manner, but all that got me was disappointment and drama as i watched player group after player group turn on itself, and narcissist after narcissist leading people astray.

everything else is just examples of the human mind power to rationalize its behaviour, no matter how nonsensical (i.e.: pooping where you eat, where you literally drive a game you love to its death bed.. i could provide examples if needed, its been a long history of repeat mistakes in the online gaming world when it comes to community management).
Renraiku
26 Nov 2020, 5:02pm
Your experiences are valid, however they are not everyone's experiences.
Shalis
26 Nov 2020, 5:13pm
RenraikuYour experiences are valid, however they are not everyone's experiences.


For sure, and so are yours. All we can do is share them and hopefully learn something from it.
Sakashiro
26 Nov 2020, 5:22pm
Rebecca HailThe moment you log into open you give consent to all player interactions, hostile or friendly, you might have with a random player.

Spoken like a lawyer. But there's a difference between accepting a risk and giving consent. For example, the moment you eat sushi, you accept the risk of food poisoning, but you don't give consent to being poisoned.

We need to be realistic here. New players log into open not because they're fine with being blown up but because they expect the rewards to outweigh the risks. If they experience seal clubbing the very first moment they leave the newbie zone, they will re-evaluate and likely conclude that the rewards aren't worth it. And chances are they won't give a fuck about someone saying "but wait... you gave consent!"
Michael Wolfe
26 Nov 2020, 5:42pm
Perhaps a better way to phase this paradigm is that you consent to the possibility of PvP if not the act itself.
Shalis
26 Nov 2020, 6:00pm
sigh. this is what some of you are defending?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oIwOzfnzQuQ&feature=emb_logo

Post a reply

You must be signed in to post here.
Anything at least partially related to the Elite:Dangerous, but doesn't exactly fit the Game talk thread. Elite community, astrophysics and so on...