You are confusing law/rules and morality. It's a fairly common mistake, but allow me to explain how your entire thought process is wrong.
The laws set by a government, and the rules set by an MMO are under no obligation to be moral, and many times are not. There are the obvious examples of real world governments who were so morally whacked half the darn world banded together to shut them down, but simpler ones as well. For instance: cheating on your girlfriend is not illegal, just wrong. And yes, you're an asshole if you do it despite the lack of a law against it. Infact if say their brother beat your ass senseless for it, that would be illegal, and yet he would still occupy a higher moral ground than you do. Because law/rules are not the same thing as morality.
That's why I actually really like the D&D alignment system. Because Chaotic Good (On the wrong side of the law and the right side of morality) and Lawful Evil (On the right side of the law and the wrong side of morality) are very real things.
Thus "the game allows it" may be an argument you shouldn't be banned. It's not a valid argument that you aren't an asshole, and others should not treat you like the asshole you are.
So, not only is this the argument you defaulted back to after you got called on your strawman in order to save face. It's also just a crap argument.
You are confusing law/rules and morality. It's a fairly common mistake, but allow me to explain how your entire thought process is wrong.
The laws set by a government, and the rules set by an MMO are under no obligation to be moral, and many times are not. There are the obvious examples of real world governments who were so morally whacked half the darn world banded together to shut them down, but simpler ones as well. For instance: cheating on your girlfriend is not illegal, just wrong. And yes, you're an asshole if you do it despite the lack of a law against it. Infact if say their brother beat your ass senseless for it, that would be illegal, and yet he would still occupy a higher moral ground than you do. Because law/rules are not the same thing as morality.
That's why I actually really like the D&D alignment system. Because Chaotic Good (On the wrong side of the law and the right side of morality) and Lawful Evil (On the right side of the law and the wrong side of morality) are very real things.
Thus "the game allows it" may be an argument you shouldn't be banned. It's not a valid argument that you aren't an asshole, and others should not treat you like the asshole you are.
So, not only is this the argument you defaulted back to after you got called on your strawman in order to save face. It's also just a crap argument.
My argument has been the same from the beginning. All allowed PvP is intended PvP. It hasn't changed.
The real world is not a game world. Game worlds have hard set rules for what you can and can not do. The devs set these rules. If they explicitly set the rules to allow something, it's because they intend for that to happen. Playing the game the way the devs intend is explicitly not griefing.
I can't make this any simpler. I've explained it to you like you're 5. I've drawn it in crayon.
What you are disconnecting is the idea that the pixels are fake, and the players are real.
If you can't see how going into an area where the people fighting back against you have no hope of winning, and wasting massive quantities of their time when there is no strategic advantage or monetary reward to be had by doing so doesn't make you a total asshole, then you are a lost cause.
And a total failure as a human being I might add. If sitting behind a screen completely removes your capacity for empathy then you clearly never had much of of a conscience to begin with.
The problem with all the deathmatch sandbox PvP clones is they are less realistic than themepark MMOs. And griefing is a big cause. In real life, even in the medieval times, criminals would be executed, hanged, burned at the stake. Steal a piece of bread? That is a huge deal. In today, people are tried in court and can spend 2-3 years for just a minimal crime or a few months for stealing depending how much was stolen, and far more for a major crime.
Why don't deathmatch sandbox clones do that? People always ask for more realism, but when the realism targets the PvPers suddenly they don't want realism.
My Skyrim, Fallout 4, Starbound and WoW + other game mods at MODDB:
What you are disconnecting is the idea that the pixels are fake, and the players are real.
If you can't see how going into an area where the people fighting back against you have no hope of winning, and wasting massive quantities of their time when there is no strategic advantage or monetary reward to be had by doing so doesn't make you a total asshole, then you are a lost cause.
And a total failure as a human being I might add. If sitting behind a screen completely removes your capacity for empathy then you clearly never had much of of a conscience to begin with.
What you are disconnecting is that it's a game. You're acting like somebody murdered your dog and made you eat its corpse.
You were inconvenienced in a VIDEO GAME and think that makes someone a "total failure as a human being." There's something seriously wrong with you. This is a mental illness.
What you are disconnecting is the idea that the pixels are fake, and the players are real.
If you can't see how going into an area where the people fighting back against you have no hope of winning, and wasting massive quantities of their time when there is no strategic advantage or monetary reward to be had by doing so doesn't make you a total asshole, then you are a lost cause.
And a total failure as a human being I might add. If sitting behind a screen completely removes your capacity for empathy then you clearly never had much of of a conscience to begin with.
What you are disconnecting is that it's a game. You're acting like somebody murdered your dog and made you eat its corpse.
You were inconvenienced in a VIDEO GAME and think that makes someone a "total failure as a human being." There's something seriously wrong with you. This is a mental illness.
Seek help.
No. Time spent in the game is real time spent. yes its a game, but you can spend 100s or 1000s of hours building up your character only for some griever to come along and steal it all because the devs didn't build their PvP mechanics properly, they let pvpers kill someone who just started or far less items to be worth killing at all and let them ruin their game experience.
In Ultima Online, I remember just starting and some dude followed me from one end of the map to the other (well maybe not so far, but it was one city to another). I finally stopped running and kept calling for guards over and over (but they were broken and took ages to show up if at all), he killed me. Then laughed and told me what a loser I was. Then all my noob stuff was taken and I had nothing. I quit the game and never went back until forced PvP was taken out of the game.
Was it the players fault? Yes. But it was also the devs fault for not doing anything about players (the grievers) like that.
My Skyrim, Fallout 4, Starbound and WoW + other game mods at MODDB:
In any case. Grievers are why sandbox deathmatch PvP MMOs will always be niche. Most people don't want to deal with grievers, and only grievers actually get any enjoyment out of doing what they do. Its why EVE high-sec is vastly more popular than low sec or null sec. its why Ultima Online removed forced PvP from their game, because they were losing too many people because of it.
I've seen many cases where grievers will drive off the vast majority of players (like the age of conan PvP server)...and all they have is themselves and a VERY dead server. Grievers are self destructive of their own environment.
My Skyrim, Fallout 4, Starbound and WoW + other game mods at MODDB:
What you are disconnecting is that it's a game. You're acting like somebody murdered your dog and made you eat its corpse.
You were inconvenienced in a VIDEO GAME and think that makes someone a "total failure as a human being." There's something seriously wrong with you. This is a mental illness.
Seek help.
Oh no. I'm very aware of the gravity of what you are doing. Griefing isn't murder but it is saying "I view my amusement at the annoyance of others more important than their ability to enjoy their freetime."
This is the exact same line of thought that has people saying "I enjoy my amusement at the person I shove around and treat like crap on the schoolbus more important than their ability to ride the bus to school in peace." or "I find my amusement at the suffering of rats and flies more important than their dignity in not being tortured to death."
You are causing an annoyance for the sake of your own enjoyment.
This is very different from someone killing a miner for ore in null sec or waging war over sovereignty. See, with a null sec miner there is this expectation that they actually kind of enjoy the thrill of mining in dangerous space, and while nobody likes to lose if they didn't run the risk of being pirated the game wouldn't be as fun for them. With a war over sovereignty there is this expectation that they enjoy the competition, and if other nations didn't push their sovereignty they wouldn't enjoy the game as much.
That's the same reason I would sit down and play a game of Monopoly. Sure, I don't enjoy losing but the competition is a thrill, for me and presumably everyone else at the table. I view our competition as mutually enhancing and the more they enjoy their experience, the more I enjoy mine. My intent is not to make them suffer, it's to have fun through competition.
Griefing is an entirely separate matter. Nobody enjoys getting one shot by high levels while trying to do a level 20 quest in a level 20 zone. Nobody's game is enhanced by this. And they offer no competition or notable reward to you for doing it. It isn't done in the spirit of competition. It's done because you enjoy their suffering.
Deriving pleasure from inflicting pain, suffering, or humiliation on others.
"she took a sadistic pleasure in tormenting him"
That's the word that best describes your actions in that instance if you aren't familiar with it.
Now I'm a subscriber to the idea of Utilitarian ethics. That means I believe every action has a consequence of positive or negative value. The extent to which something is ethical or unethical is determined by that value.
I take this a step further, and apply it to humans. Humans have a positive or negative value based on the sum of their actions. So how would I measure someone who derives pleasure in inflicting pain, suffering, or humiliation on others? They literally seek to create negative value. That seems to quite clearly to be a negative value person to me.
So no. I don't think griefing alone would make a person a negative value person. But the quality needed to grief random strangers, the quality of sadism, is one that almost certainly means they have the kind of mindset that leads to negative value person overall.
What you are disconnecting is that it's a game. You're acting like somebody murdered your dog and made you eat its corpse.
You were inconvenienced in a VIDEO GAME and think that makes someone a "total failure as a human being." There's something seriously wrong with you. This is a mental illness.
Seek help.
Oh no. I'm very aware of the gravity of what you are doing. Griefing isn't murder but it is saying "I view my amusement at the annoyance of others more important than their ability to enjoy their freetime."
This is the exact same line of thought that has people saying "I enjoy my amusement at the person I shove around and treat like crap on the schoolbus more important than their ability to ride the bus to school in peace." or "I find my amusement at the suffering of rats and flies more important than their dignity in not being tortured to death."
You are causing an annoyance for the sake of your own enjoyment.
This is very different from someone killing a miner for ore in null sec or waging war over sovereignty. See, with a null sec miner there is this expectation that they actually kind of enjoy the thrill of mining in dangerous space, and while nobody likes to lose if they didn't run the risk of being pirated the game wouldn't be as fun for them. With a war over sovereignty there is this expectation that they enjoy the competition, and if other nations didn't push their sovereignty they wouldn't enjoy the game as much.
That's the same reason I would sit down and play a game of Monopoly. Sure, I don't enjoy losing but the competition is a thrill, for me and presumably everyone else at the table. I view our competition as mutually enhancing and the more they enjoy their experience, the more I enjoy mine. My intent is not to make them suffer, it's to have fun through competition.
Griefing is an entirely separate matter. Nobody enjoys getting one shot by high levels while trying to do a level 20 quest in a level 20 zone. Nobody's game is enhanced by this. And they offer no competition or notable reward to you for doing it. It isn't done in the spirit of competition. It's done because you enjoy their suffering.
Deriving pleasure from inflicting pain, suffering, or humiliation on others.
"she took a sadistic pleasure in tormenting him"
That's the word that best describes your actions in that instance if you aren't familiar with it.
Now I'm a subscriber to the idea of Utilitarian ethics. That means I believe every action has a consequence of positive or negative value. The extent to which something is ethical or unethical is determined by that value.
I take this a step further, and apply it to humans. Humans have a positive or negative value based on the sum of their actions. So how would I measure someone who derives pleasure in inflicting pain, suffering, or humiliation on others? They literally seek to create negative value. That seems to quite clearly to be a negative value person to me.
So no. I don't think griefing alone would make a person a negative value person. But the quality needed to grief random strangers, the quality of sadism, is one that almost certainly means they have the kind of mindset that leads to negative value person overall.
What you are disconnecting is the idea that the pixels are fake, and the players are real.
If you can't see how going into an area where the people fighting back against you have no hope of winning, and wasting massive quantities of their time when there is no strategic advantage or monetary reward to be had by doing so doesn't make you a total asshole, then you are a lost cause.
And a total failure as a human being I might add. If sitting behind a screen completely removes your capacity for empathy then you clearly never had much of of a conscience to begin with.
This is not a normal reaction to being inconvenienced in a video game. Seek help.
Ill add this .. There is something that the griefing adds...
I spent a large portion of my gaming time fighting Reds in UO from day 1 ... Hundreds of battles .. Me and a group of 4 -5 others logged in each nite to find where the reds were camping , and went to kill them ..
To ride in and save the day .. Was pretty satisfying when folks thanked us gave us a purpose and a name in game ... Reds avoided us and feared our group ...
Oh sure. Griefing can generate fun for anti-griefers, just like for instance, I one day choked out the main bully on our bus, and it was loads of fun. Doesn't mean they aren't still assholes.
Perhaps not. But you are at least unable to dispute my logic and can only come back with weak trollish retorts.
You don't have any logic. Your whole post boils down to "people who inconvenience me in a video game are bad people." No person of sound mind would consider inconvenience sadistic.
Your arguments are stupid and childish. You are not mentally stable and require immediate psychiatric attention as you may be a danger to yourself or others.
So no. I don't think griefing alone would make a person a negative value person. But the quality needed to grief random strangers, the quality of sadism, is one that almost certainly means they have the kind of mindset that leads to negative value person overall.
Perhaps not. But you are at least unable to dispute my logic and can only come back with weak trollish retorts.
You don't have any logic. Your whole post boils down to "people who inconvenience me in a video game are bad people." No person of sound mind would consider inconvenience sadistic.
Your arguments are stupid and childish. You are not mentally stable and require immediate psychiatric attention as you may be a danger to yourself or others.
Yes, his line of logic is much farther out in left field than yours. Because players love being griefed. Only snowflakes and the mentally ill have an issue with griefing, everyone knows that.
That's why one of your apparent favorites, Shadowbane, was so immensely popular and continues its run of success, right? Oh wait.
@Caffynated - Ah man. I insinuated you had poor comprehension right after you told people "I'm going to draw this in crayon so it will be on a level you understand." I hope I didn't hurt your feelings you poor sweet little thing.
The point is, nobody is arguing against killing people in PvP. Nobody is arguing against non-consensual PvP. Nobody is even arguing that killing someone weaker than you makes you a griefer. What is being argued is that when you specifically go into the areas you expect to find weak targets with little reward who offer no resistance and little reward, and target those players out when you are perfectly capable of going to the areas that offer better rewards but at a bit more risk to yourself, yeah, you've essentially become the internet version of a schoolyard bully. And that makes you a weak, pathetic, 2nd rate PvPer who very rightly should be looked down on by all of us who aren't too cowardly to hang in low sec and null or whatever equivalents to those areas the game you are playing offers.
Do I need to spell this out in crayon again? You can not grief someone by PvPing in a PvP game. The devs have known since the 90s that high level players will kill low level players. If they still don't put a level limit on PvP, or downscale high level players in a low level area 20 years later, then they want this to happen. It is intended. Playing the game the way the designer intends is not in any way shape or form griefing.
The tendency to boil that down into "You just don't like PvP" or
"You hate non-consensual PvP" is a strawman argument because that isn't
what is being argued.
No, your argument here is a strawman. My argument is that you can't grief someone by PvPing in a PvP game. All allowed PvP is intended. When I've said this multiple times and even drawn it for you in crayon, and you still can't understand it, it's not me who has the comprehension problem.
Now you are changing your tune because you got called on it. Your
illustration shows someone killing someone saying "Ida best" as both
what happens and what is intended. That is broad image that applies to
all forms of PvP, and you followed it with the staement:
"Killing other players in a PvP game is not griefing. It is the intended player interaction.
Killing other player in a PvP game is not being a "a$$hole." It is the intended player interaction."
A statement I agree with under most premises.
So
either you are terrible at conveying your point, or you were acting
like those who specifically decry griefing hate all PvP, which is a
strawman.
Or you're just incapable of comprehending basic English.
Your argument would be wrong.
Griefing someone and simply killing someone are not the same thing. Griefing involves significantly more than killing. It is going out of your way to ruin someone else gameplay.
Since they aren't the same thing you absolutely can grief someone in a pvp game. Corpse camping is a common example.
If you can't understand the difference between them by now then there is no help for you.
Just because you don't like it doesn't mean it is bad.
@Caffynated - Ah man. I insinuated you had poor comprehension right after you told people "I'm going to draw this in crayon so it will be on a level you understand." I hope I didn't hurt your feelings you poor sweet little thing.
The point is, nobody is arguing against killing people in PvP. Nobody is arguing against non-consensual PvP. Nobody is even arguing that killing someone weaker than you makes you a griefer. What is being argued is that when you specifically go into the areas you expect to find weak targets with little reward who offer no resistance and little reward, and target those players out when you are perfectly capable of going to the areas that offer better rewards but at a bit more risk to yourself, yeah, you've essentially become the internet version of a schoolyard bully. And that makes you a weak, pathetic, 2nd rate PvPer who very rightly should be looked down on by all of us who aren't too cowardly to hang in low sec and null or whatever equivalents to those areas the game you are playing offers.
Do I need to spell this out in crayon again? You can not grief someone by PvPing in a PvP game. The devs have known since the 90s that high level players will kill low level players. If they still don't put a level limit on PvP, or downscale high level players in a low level area 20 years later, then they want this to happen. It is intended. Playing the game the way the designer intends is not in any way shape or form griefing.
The tendency to boil that down into "You just don't like PvP" or
"You hate non-consensual PvP" is a strawman argument because that isn't
what is being argued.
No, your argument here is a strawman. My argument is that you can't grief someone by PvPing in a PvP game. All allowed PvP is intended. When I've said this multiple times and even drawn it for you in crayon, and you still can't understand it, it's not me who has the comprehension problem.
Now you are changing your tune because you got called on it. Your
illustration shows someone killing someone saying "Ida best" as both
what happens and what is intended. That is broad image that applies to
all forms of PvP, and you followed it with the staement:
"Killing other players in a PvP game is not griefing. It is the intended player interaction.
Killing other player in a PvP game is not being a "a$$hole." It is the intended player interaction."
A statement I agree with under most premises.
So
either you are terrible at conveying your point, or you were acting
like those who specifically decry griefing hate all PvP, which is a
strawman.
Or you're just incapable of comprehending basic English.
Your argument would be wrong.
Griefing someone and simply killing someone are not the same thing. Griefing involves significantly more than killing. It is going out of your way to ruin someone else gameplay.
Since they aren't the same thing you absolutely can grief someone in a pvp game. Corpse camping is a common example.
If you can't understand the difference between them by now then there is no help for you.
Griefing doesn't have to involve killing at all. PvE has griefers as well.
Griefing someone and simply killing someone are not the same thing. Griefing involves significantly more than killing. It is going out of your way to ruin someone else gameplay.
Since they aren't the same thing you absolutely can grief someone in a pvp game. Corpse camping is a common example.
If you can't understand the difference between them by now then there is no help for you.
Griefing doesn't have to involve killing at all. PvE has griefers as well.
Correct. And this is one of the reasons I enjoy PvP games. When someone is being a dick to me in a PvP game I just turn around and kill them.
However, I would say PvP games are more common places to encounter griefers, and that people like Gdemami and Caffynated of the school of thought of "My enjoyment of the suffering of random strangers is perfectly natural and healthy" do have disproportionate representation in PvP games and servers.
I do think it is more common in PvP. I have personally never experienced griefing in pve. I've heard stories about people routinely kill stealing so no one else gets experience and repeatedly killing quest givers but never experienced it myself.
I've had people ks me, but only on one target by accident. I've had quest givers killed but 5 minutes later it respawned and I had the quest.
I have been repeatedly corpse camped at starting zones in pvp games going right back to EQ. Ultimately they weren't my cup of tea so I left.
edit - in development learning (not the name but can't think of the name) there is a theory that initial success determines future success. When people achieve some success with whatever task it is initially, they are much more likely to push on, learn more, overcome the challenges... in future and more difficult levels/ares of that task. This extends to everything from tag, to scouting to school to hockey...
I think this is what happens in pvp. Someone relatively new to the genre checks out a game and depending on their initial experiences will shape what they think of future games. Repeatedly being killed in newbie zones, have people trash talking you, miming raping your corpse (and other things I wouldn't let my neices/nephews watch) tend to leave a bad taste in people's mouth. They don't like that happening to them and generally I believe people don't want to do that to others.
On the other hand if someone helps you out, guides you, protects you from those creeps. Well then pvp games for you might turn out to be the best thing since... ever.
Just because you don't like it doesn't mean it is bad.
I have been repeatedly corpse camped at starting zones in pvp games going right back to EQ. Ultimately they weren't my cup of tea so I left.
Right and that is the issue with griefers. I'm assuming the reason you left wasn't because you couldn't hand PvP, but because you had no interest in playing the role of punching bag for a bunch of little sadists.
And that sad part is that isn't what these games are about. They are about grand scale wars and living in a dangerous environment. But you never got the main content of the game because of an initially bad experience.
That's why I have zero tolerance for these little twats. They destroy our games and game communities.
Comments
The laws set by a government, and the rules set by an MMO are under no obligation to be moral, and many times are not. There are the obvious examples of real world governments who were so morally whacked half the darn world banded together to shut them down, but simpler ones as well. For instance: cheating on your girlfriend is not illegal, just wrong. And yes, you're an asshole if you do it despite the lack of a law against it. Infact if say their brother beat your ass senseless for it, that would be illegal, and yet he would still occupy a higher moral ground than you do. Because law/rules are not the same thing as morality.
That's why I actually really like the D&D alignment system. Because Chaotic Good (On the wrong side of the law and the right side of morality) and Lawful Evil (On the right side of the law and the wrong side of morality) are very real things.
Thus "the game allows it" may be an argument you shouldn't be banned. It's not a valid argument that you aren't an asshole, and others should not treat you like the asshole you are.
So, not only is this the argument you defaulted back to after you got called on your strawman in order to save face. It's also just a crap argument.
The real world is not a game world. Game worlds have hard set rules for what you can and can not do. The devs set these rules. If they explicitly set the rules to allow something, it's because they intend for that to happen. Playing the game the way the devs intend is explicitly not griefing.
I can't make this any simpler. I've explained it to you like you're 5. I've drawn it in crayon.
You're a lost cause.
If you can't see how going into an area where the people fighting back against you have no hope of winning, and wasting massive quantities of their time when there is no strategic advantage or monetary reward to be had by doing so doesn't make you a total asshole, then you are a lost cause.
And a total failure as a human being I might add. If sitting behind a screen completely removes your capacity for empathy then you clearly never had much of of a conscience to begin with.
Why don't deathmatch sandbox clones do that? People always ask for more realism, but when the realism targets the PvPers suddenly they don't want realism.
My Skyrim, Fallout 4, Starbound and WoW + other game mods at MODDB:
https://www.moddb.com/mods/skyrim-anime-overhaul
You were inconvenienced in a VIDEO GAME and think that makes someone a "total failure as a human being." There's something seriously wrong with you. This is a mental illness.
Seek help.
In Ultima Online, I remember just starting and some dude followed me from one end of the map to the other (well maybe not so far, but it was one city to another). I finally stopped running and kept calling for guards over and over (but they were broken and took ages to show up if at all), he killed me. Then laughed and told me what a loser I was. Then all my noob stuff was taken and I had nothing. I quit the game and never went back until forced PvP was taken out of the game.
Was it the players fault? Yes. But it was also the devs fault for not doing anything about players (the grievers) like that.
My Skyrim, Fallout 4, Starbound and WoW + other game mods at MODDB:
https://www.moddb.com/mods/skyrim-anime-overhaul
I've seen many cases where grievers will drive off the vast majority of players (like the age of conan PvP server)...and all they have is themselves and a VERY dead server. Grievers are self destructive of their own environment.
My Skyrim, Fallout 4, Starbound and WoW + other game mods at MODDB:
https://www.moddb.com/mods/skyrim-anime-overhaul
This is the exact same line of thought that has people saying "I enjoy my amusement at the person I shove around and treat like crap on the schoolbus more important than their ability to ride the bus to school in peace." or "I find my amusement at the suffering of rats and flies more important than their dignity in not being tortured to death."
You are causing an annoyance for the sake of your own enjoyment.
This is very different from someone killing a miner for ore in null sec or waging war over sovereignty. See, with a null sec miner there is this expectation that they actually kind of enjoy the thrill of mining in dangerous space, and while nobody likes to lose if they didn't run the risk of being pirated the game wouldn't be as fun for them. With a war over sovereignty there is this expectation that they enjoy the competition, and if other nations didn't push their sovereignty they wouldn't enjoy the game as much.
That's the same reason I would sit down and play a game of Monopoly. Sure, I don't enjoy losing but the competition is a thrill, for me and presumably everyone else at the table. I view our competition as mutually enhancing and the more they enjoy their experience, the more I enjoy mine. My intent is not to make them suffer, it's to have fun through competition.
Griefing is an entirely separate matter. Nobody enjoys getting one shot by high levels while trying to do a level 20 quest in a level 20 zone. Nobody's game is enhanced by this. And they offer no competition or notable reward to you for doing it. It isn't done in the spirit of competition. It's done because you enjoy their suffering.
That's the word that best describes your actions in that instance if you aren't familiar with it.
Now I'm a subscriber to the idea of Utilitarian ethics. That means I believe every action has a consequence of positive or negative value. The extent to which something is ethical or unethical is determined by that value.
I take this a step further, and apply it to humans. Humans have a positive or negative value based on the sum of their actions. So how would I measure someone who derives pleasure in inflicting pain, suffering, or humiliation on others? They literally seek to create negative value. That seems to quite clearly to be a negative value person to me.
So no. I don't think griefing alone would make a person a negative value person. But the quality needed to grief random strangers, the quality of sadism, is one that almost certainly means they have the kind of mindset that leads to negative value person overall.
This is not a normal reaction to being inconvenienced in a video game. Seek help.
http://lmgtfy.com/?q=psychiatric+care+near+me
There is something that the griefing adds...
I spent a large portion of my gaming time fighting Reds in UO from day 1 ... Hundreds of battles ..
Me and a group of 4 -5 others logged in each nite to find where the reds were camping , and went to kill them ..
To ride in and save the day .. Was pretty satisfying when folks thanked us gave us a purpose and a name in game ...
Reds avoided us and feared our group ...
Without True Darkness there cannot be True Light
Your arguments are stupid and childish. You are not mentally stable and require immediate psychiatric attention as you may be a danger to yourself or others.
That's why one of your apparent favorites, Shadowbane, was so immensely popular and continues its run of success, right? Oh wait.
Griefing someone and simply killing someone are not the same thing. Griefing involves significantly more than killing. It is going out of your way to ruin someone else gameplay.
Since they aren't the same thing you absolutely can grief someone in a pvp game. Corpse camping is a common example.
If you can't understand the difference between them by now then there is no help for you.
~~ postlarval ~~
Which shows the point even more. There is a difference between griefing and just killing someone.
However, I would say PvP games are more common places to encounter griefers, and that people like Gdemami and Caffynated of the school of thought of "My enjoyment of the suffering of random strangers is perfectly natural and healthy" do have disproportionate representation in PvP games and servers.
I think some people just use griefing as an excuse to hate on PvP. They mostly can't come up with any other valid reasons.
~~ postlarval ~~
I do think it is more common in PvP. I have personally never experienced griefing in pve. I've heard stories about people routinely kill stealing so no one else gets experience and repeatedly killing quest givers but never experienced it myself.
I've had people ks me, but only on one target by accident. I've had quest givers killed but 5 minutes later it respawned and I had the quest.
I have been repeatedly corpse camped at starting zones in pvp games going right back to EQ. Ultimately they weren't my cup of tea so I left.
edit - in development learning (not the name but can't think of the name) there is a theory that initial success determines future success. When people achieve some success with whatever task it is initially, they are much more likely to push on, learn more, overcome the challenges... in future and more difficult levels/ares of that task. This extends to everything from tag, to scouting to school to hockey...
I think this is what happens in pvp. Someone relatively new to the genre checks out a game and depending on their initial experiences will shape what they think of future games. Repeatedly being killed in newbie zones, have people trash talking you, miming raping your corpse (and other things I wouldn't let my neices/nephews watch) tend to leave a bad taste in people's mouth. They don't like that happening to them and generally I believe people don't want to do that to others.
On the other hand if someone helps you out, guides you, protects you from those creeps. Well then pvp games for you might turn out to be the best thing since... ever.
Go to Google, type in 'griefing PvE' and behold!
~~ postlarval ~~
None of that (what you said, or what I did) changes what I said though.
Must make it true! its on google!
My Skyrim, Fallout 4, Starbound and WoW + other game mods at MODDB:
https://www.moddb.com/mods/skyrim-anime-overhaul
And that sad part is that isn't what these games are about. They are about grand scale wars and living in a dangerous environment. But you never got the main content of the game because of an initially bad experience.
That's why I have zero tolerance for these little twats. They destroy our games and game communities.