Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!

Play Nice Policies Help Reduce Player Toxicity - Saga of Lucimia - MMORPG.com

1246

Comments

  • MadFrenchieMadFrenchie Member LegendaryPosts: 8,505
    Dullahan said:
    Except for the most egregious cases like RL threats or hacking/exploiting, I believe player community should police itself. Especially in a game that is cooperative, players will naturally ostracize the bad actors. This is how it worked in games of the past, and I don't think those games would have been as interesting if all players were forced to play the upstanding citizen. There should be heroes and villains.
    If the devs want player villains, than they simply make systems to support it.  CoV comes to mind.

    Having "villains" using glitches or exploiting faulty AI to the detriment of other players is a horrible way to go about producing villains in the game world.  However, I agree with you in essence that, if players are acting like assholes but aren't exploiting the game systems to do so, the community should be able to deal with that.  However, reputations have to be restored for that to work.

    image
  • SlyLoKSlyLoK Member RarePosts: 2,698
    Should be easy to enforce this considering only a handful of players will be playing.
    postlarval
  • OrinoriOrinori Member RarePosts: 751
    Sovrath said:
    Orinori said:
    Sovrath said:
    Orinori said:
    If the carebear is playing an open world ffa PvP game, you have a point.

    If you're circumventing gameplay systems to grief him, you don't.
    Define circuventing gameplay? because to me it sounds like a development error not a player error.
    Technically, if someone finds a bug or issue they are usually supposed to report it. So if there is a loophole and a player just takes advantage of it even though they are supposed to report it, then that is an issue.

    Exploits, glitches, hacking, 3rd party software use and general unintended gameplay are usually covered by the ToS due to devs not being able to foresee every issue or cover every angle in time. But behavior? how can you cover behavior? "that guy was mean to me" BANNED! it is totally subjective! Devs need to provide clear boundaries within the game world. Calling certain behaviors toxic is just incendiary and unnecessary and banning people because they are not 'nice'? really? 
    I'm pretty sure they already do. This is not rocket science.  If you can't actually differentiate the difference between harassment and "game play" then that's a whole other issue.

    None of this is hard.

    an example:

    You agree not to use any Service to:

    Take any action or upload, post, transmit, promote, or distribute any illegal Content, including, but not limited to, any UGC or any Game Mods;

    Take any action or upload, post, transmit, promote, or distribute any Content that infringes or violates any third party rights;

    Engage in, take any action associated with, or participate in any type of child solicitation, grooming behavior, pedophilia, or predatory behavior in any form;

    Harass, stalk, threaten, embarrass, spam or do anything else to another user of any Services that is unwanted, such as repeatedly sending unwanted messages or making personal attacks or statements about race, sexual orientation, religion, heritage, etc.;

    Take any action or upload, post, transmit, distribute, or communicate Your or any person's real-world personal information;

    Impersonate any person or entity, including, but not limited to, ZeniMax, ZeniMax's partners' or affiliates' employees, or falsely state or otherwise misrepresent Your affiliation with a person or entity;
    For some people harrasement is their gameplay and can have willing participants on either end, something you seem to continually fail to grasp here. All you have copied here is a ToS that uses catch all terms to cover their ass from legal challenges outside of the gameworld and is not addressing the point of my critique. ALL of these can and should be covered by the developer inside of the game world through tools and mechanics to control the behavior they want to promote within their game should they WANT to. As I have said and will continue to say here with you, the OP calling one persons type of gameplay choice toxic is incendiary and unneeded and wandering around banning people who are not 'nice' seems like a terrible game design plan!
  • RenfailRenfail Member EpicPosts: 1,638
    Orinori said:
    Sovrath said:
    Orinori said:
    Sovrath said:
    Orinori said:
    If the carebear is playing an open world ffa PvP game, you have a point.

    If you're circumventing gameplay systems to grief him, you don't.
    Define circuventing gameplay? because to me it sounds like a development error not a player error.
    Technically, if someone finds a bug or issue they are usually supposed to report it. So if there is a loophole and a player just takes advantage of it even though they are supposed to report it, then that is an issue.

    Exploits, glitches, hacking, 3rd party software use and general unintended gameplay are usually covered by the ToS due to devs not being able to foresee every issue or cover every angle in time. But behavior? how can you cover behavior? "that guy was mean to me" BANNED! it is totally subjective! Devs need to provide clear boundaries within the game world. Calling certain behaviors toxic is just incendiary and unnecessary and banning people because they are not 'nice'? really? 
    I'm pretty sure they already do. This is not rocket science.  If you can't actually differentiate the difference between harassment and "game play" then that's a whole other issue.

    None of this is hard.

    an example:

    You agree not to use any Service to:

    Take any action or upload, post, transmit, promote, or distribute any illegal Content, including, but not limited to, any UGC or any Game Mods;

    Take any action or upload, post, transmit, promote, or distribute any Content that infringes or violates any third party rights;

    Engage in, take any action associated with, or participate in any type of child solicitation, grooming behavior, pedophilia, or predatory behavior in any form;

    Harass, stalk, threaten, embarrass, spam or do anything else to another user of any Services that is unwanted, such as repeatedly sending unwanted messages or making personal attacks or statements about race, sexual orientation, religion, heritage, etc.;

    Take any action or upload, post, transmit, distribute, or communicate Your or any person's real-world personal information;

    Impersonate any person or entity, including, but not limited to, ZeniMax, ZeniMax's partners' or affiliates' employees, or falsely state or otherwise misrepresent Your affiliation with a person or entity;
    For some people harrasement is their gameplay and can have willing participants on either end, something you seem to continually fail to grasp here. All you have copied here is a ToS that uses catch all terms to cover their ass from legal challenges outside of the gameworld and is not addressing the point of my critique. ALL of these can and should be covered by the developer inside of the game world through tools and mechanics to control the behavior they want to promote within their game should they WANT to. As I have said and will continue to say here with you, the OP calling one persons type of gameplay choice toxic is incendiary and unneeded and wandering around banning people who are not 'nice' seems like a terrible game design plan!
    And yet the above ToS example, which is from ESO, is fairly standard across the industry. 

    The only thing which isn't standard is enforcement, which is where we are taking a page from the old days and actively policing players who can't grasp the simple concept of playing nice with others. 

    If you want to play an online game you are legally obligated to adhere to whatever standards and practises that game puts into place. 

    Play nice with others = no problems. Act in a toxic nature against the TOS, and suffer whatever consequences the publisher deems fit. 
    Tim "Renfail" Anderson | Wandering Hermits Patreon
  • SovrathSovrath Member LegendaryPosts: 32,616
    edited January 2018
    Orinori said:

    For some people harrasement is their gameplay and can have willing participants on either end, something you seem to continually fail to grasp here. All you have copied here is a ToS that uses catch all terms to cover their ass from legal challenges outside of the gameworld and is not addressing the point of my critique. ALL of these can and should be covered by the developer inside of the game world through tools and mechanics to control the behavior they want to promote within their game should they WANT to. As I have said and will continue to say here with you, the OP calling one persons type of gameplay choice toxic is incendiary and unneeded and wandering around banning people who are not 'nice' seems like a terrible game design plan!
    I'm pretty sure I addressed the "harassment is their game play" already in mentioning games like lineage 2 and EVE which promote that. If you aren't going to read the post then fine but I can't make the horse drink.

    I mentioned willfully obtuse above and that's what you are being "willfully obtuse".

    A player has every right to find a game that allows outlaws who can and do anything as long as it doesn't break any applicable laws.

    A player who doesn't want that type of game has the responsibility to stay away. They don't belong there.

    But after that, as I have already said, look to the baseline of whatever place you live and that will give you a good idea as to what is considered acceptable or not.

    edit: like I said, none of this is hard. But I'll put the onus on you, go ahead and give us a few examples and preferably the games they where they happened and I think you will find it pretty easy for people to tell whether it's harassment or not.

     
    pantaro
    Like Skyrim? Need more content? Try my Skyrim mod "Godfred's Tomb." 

    Godfred's Tomb Trailer: https://youtu.be/-nsXGddj_4w


    Original Skyrim: https://www.nexusmods.com/skyrim/mods/109547

    Try the "Special Edition." 'Cause it's "Special." https://www.nexusmods.com/skyrimspecialedition/mods/64878/?tab=description

    Serph toze kindly has started a walk-through. https://youtu.be/UIelCK-lldo 
  • DullahanDullahan Member EpicPosts: 4,536
    Dullahan said:
    Except for the most egregious cases like RL threats or hacking/exploiting, I believe player community should police itself. Especially in a game that is cooperative, players will naturally ostracize the bad actors. This is how it worked in games of the past, and I don't think those games would have been as interesting if all players were forced to play the upstanding citizen. There should be heroes and villains.
    If the devs want player villains, than they simply make systems to support it.  CoV comes to mind.

    Having "villains" using glitches or exploiting faulty AI to the detriment of other players is a horrible way to go about producing villains in the game world.  However, I agree with you in essence that, if players are acting like assholes but aren't exploiting the game systems to do so, the community should be able to deal with that.  However, reputations have to be restored for that to work.
    If using something like training is considered an exploit, then I can understand it. Can be a tough thing to police though if the game gets popular.
    MadFrenchie[Deleted User]


  • MadFrenchieMadFrenchie Member LegendaryPosts: 8,505
    edited January 2018
    Orinori said:
    Sovrath said:
    Orinori said:
    Sovrath said:
    Orinori said:
    If the carebear is playing an open world ffa PvP game, you have a point.

    If you're circumventing gameplay systems to grief him, you don't.
    Define circuventing gameplay? because to me it sounds like a development error not a player error.
    Technically, if someone finds a bug or issue they are usually supposed to report it. So if there is a loophole and a player just takes advantage of it even though they are supposed to report it, then that is an issue.

    Exploits, glitches, hacking, 3rd party software use and general unintended gameplay are usually covered by the ToS due to devs not being able to foresee every issue or cover every angle in time. But behavior? how can you cover behavior? "that guy was mean to me" BANNED! it is totally subjective! Devs need to provide clear boundaries within the game world. Calling certain behaviors toxic is just incendiary and unnecessary and banning people because they are not 'nice'? really? 
    I'm pretty sure they already do. This is not rocket science.  If you can't actually differentiate the difference between harassment and "game play" then that's a whole other issue.

    None of this is hard.

    an example:

    You agree not to use any Service to:

    Take any action or upload, post, transmit, promote, or distribute any illegal Content, including, but not limited to, any UGC or any Game Mods;

    Take any action or upload, post, transmit, promote, or distribute any Content that infringes or violates any third party rights;

    Engage in, take any action associated with, or participate in any type of child solicitation, grooming behavior, pedophilia, or predatory behavior in any form;

    Harass, stalk, threaten, embarrass, spam or do anything else to another user of any Services that is unwanted, such as repeatedly sending unwanted messages or making personal attacks or statements about race, sexual orientation, religion, heritage, etc.;

    Take any action or upload, post, transmit, distribute, or communicate Your or any person's real-world personal information;

    Impersonate any person or entity, including, but not limited to, ZeniMax, ZeniMax's partners' or affiliates' employees, or falsely state or otherwise misrepresent Your affiliation with a person or entity;
    For some people harrasement is their gameplay and can have willing participants on either end, something you seem to continually fail to grasp here. All you have copied here is a ToS that uses catch all terms to cover their ass from legal challenges outside of the gameworld and is not addressing the point of my critique. ALL of these can and should be covered by the developer inside of the game world through tools and mechanics to control the behavior they want to promote within their game should they WANT to. As I have said and will continue to say here with you, the OP calling one persons type of gameplay choice toxic is incendiary and unneeded and wandering around banning people who are not 'nice' seems like a terrible game design plan!
    Your attempt to create bizarro MMORPG world to support detrimental player behavior is quite strange.

    Sure, some folks like being harassed and griefed, some folks like getting the shit kicked out of them to get their rocks off..  But it's not the norm and it doesn't mean you get off on rape charges because "hey, I just thought they were one of THOSE people!"

    The fact is that the vast majority of gamers don't want to play with someone exploiting gameplay systems to harass, grief, or otherwise unduly interfere with their gameplay in a way the developers did not expressly intend.  There's again, no room for debate here, only attempts to act as if some silly, incredibly esoteric situation is an accepted norm to attempt to qualify behavior that is undertaken solely to detrimentally affect the experience of others.
    Sovrath

    image
  • gakulegakule Member UncommonPosts: 92
    A "sandbox" game as it is advertised with a strictly enforced "play nice policy". Doesn't sound very sandboxy, might want to reevaluate how you're advertising the game.
  • OrinoriOrinori Member RarePosts: 751
    Kyleran said:
    Renfail said:
    Orinori said:
    Sovrath said:
    Orinori said:
    If the carebear is playing an open world ffa PvP game, you have a point.

    If you're circumventing gameplay systems to grief him, you don't.
    Define circuventing gameplay? because to me it sounds like a development error not a player error.
    Technically, if someone finds a bug or issue they are usually supposed to report it. So if there is a loophole and a player just takes advantage of it even though they are supposed to report it, then that is an issue.

    Exploits, glitches, hacking, 3rd party software use and general unintended gameplay are usually covered by the ToS due to devs not being able to foresee every issue or cover every angle in time. But behavior? how can you cover behavior? "that guy was mean to me" BANNED! it is totally subjective! Devs need to provide clear boundaries within the game world. Calling certain behaviors toxic is just incendiary and unnecessary and banning people because they are not 'nice'? really? 
    We will be adhering to the same set of policies EverQuest and EverQuest II both used in their early days. Boundaries will be clearly defined in the ToS and toxic players will have several opportunities to play within the guidelines before they are banned. 

    Best rule of thumb? Play nice with others just like your parents and/or teachers taught you in your childhood. 

    The only people with anything to worry about are those who can't/won't play nice with others within the guidelines set forth by the TOS and PnP.  
    Amazing how such an obvious and simple concept can be argued against.

    Or that players have no responsibility to control their actions, leaving it all to the developers to "enforce" it through hard coding.

    Player bad behavior has been surprising devs since UO.

    This is simply because a game world and real life have very little in common outside of some basic form of interaction.

    What I find peculiar is that people should expect that real life behavior would and should be automatically transferred to a digital environment. Leaving players to be responsible to control their own actions in such a place is a recipe for disaster.

    Perhaps that is why devs are being constantly surprised?
  • MadFrenchieMadFrenchie Member LegendaryPosts: 8,505
    edited January 2018
    Orinori said:
    Kyleran said:
    Renfail said:
    Orinori said:
    Sovrath said:
    Orinori said:
    If the carebear is playing an open world ffa PvP game, you have a point.

    If you're circumventing gameplay systems to grief him, you don't.
    Define circuventing gameplay? because to me it sounds like a development error not a player error.
    Technically, if someone finds a bug or issue they are usually supposed to report it. So if there is a loophole and a player just takes advantage of it even though they are supposed to report it, then that is an issue.

    Exploits, glitches, hacking, 3rd party software use and general unintended gameplay are usually covered by the ToS due to devs not being able to foresee every issue or cover every angle in time. But behavior? how can you cover behavior? "that guy was mean to me" BANNED! it is totally subjective! Devs need to provide clear boundaries within the game world. Calling certain behaviors toxic is just incendiary and unnecessary and banning people because they are not 'nice'? really? 
    We will be adhering to the same set of policies EverQuest and EverQuest II both used in their early days. Boundaries will be clearly defined in the ToS and toxic players will have several opportunities to play within the guidelines before they are banned. 

    Best rule of thumb? Play nice with others just like your parents and/or teachers taught you in your childhood. 

    The only people with anything to worry about are those who can't/won't play nice with others within the guidelines set forth by the TOS and PnP.  
    Amazing how such an obvious and simple concept can be argued against.

    Or that players have no responsibility to control their actions, leaving it all to the developers to "enforce" it through hard coding.

    Player bad behavior has been surprising devs since UO.

    This is simply because a game world and real life have very little in common outside of some basic form of interaction.

    What I find peculiar is that people should expect that real life behavior would and should be automatically transferred to a digital environment. Leaving players to be responsible to control their own actions in such a place is a recipe for disaster.

    Perhaps that is why devs are being constantly surprised?
    No, you're projecting that because it's the easier argument to try and defend against.

    It's usually very clear what the developer intends and when a player deviates from that to the detriment of others, specifically when they repeatedly and intentionally do so.

    image
  • OrinoriOrinori Member RarePosts: 751
    Dullahan said:
    Except for the most egregious cases like RL threats or hacking/exploiting, I believe player community should police itself. Especially in a game that is cooperative, players will naturally ostracize the bad actors. This is how it worked in games of the past, and I don't think those games would have been as interesting if all players were forced to play the upstanding citizen. There should be heroes and villains.
    I don't know if self policing can even work anymore with today's attitudes and casual approach towards gaming. I do like the villains though, the really obnoxious ones that you can't stand and get right under your skin, they always leave lasting memories and provide quite a lot of entertainment!
  • OrinoriOrinori Member RarePosts: 751
    Orinori said:
    Kyleran said:
    Renfail said:
    Orinori said:
    Sovrath said:
    Orinori said:
    If the carebear is playing an open world ffa PvP game, you have a point.

    If you're circumventing gameplay systems to grief him, you don't.
    Define circuventing gameplay? because to me it sounds like a development error not a player error.
    Technically, if someone finds a bug or issue they are usually supposed to report it. So if there is a loophole and a player just takes advantage of it even though they are supposed to report it, then that is an issue.

    Exploits, glitches, hacking, 3rd party software use and general unintended gameplay are usually covered by the ToS due to devs not being able to foresee every issue or cover every angle in time. But behavior? how can you cover behavior? "that guy was mean to me" BANNED! it is totally subjective! Devs need to provide clear boundaries within the game world. Calling certain behaviors toxic is just incendiary and unnecessary and banning people because they are not 'nice'? really? 
    We will be adhering to the same set of policies EverQuest and EverQuest II both used in their early days. Boundaries will be clearly defined in the ToS and toxic players will have several opportunities to play within the guidelines before they are banned. 

    Best rule of thumb? Play nice with others just like your parents and/or teachers taught you in your childhood. 

    The only people with anything to worry about are those who can't/won't play nice with others within the guidelines set forth by the TOS and PnP.  
    Amazing how such an obvious and simple concept can be argued against.

    Or that players have no responsibility to control their actions, leaving it all to the developers to "enforce" it through hard coding.

    Player bad behavior has been surprising devs since UO.

    This is simply because a game world and real life have very little in common outside of some basic form of interaction.

    What I find peculiar is that people should expect that real life behavior would and should be automatically transferred to a digital environment. Leaving players to be responsible to control their own actions in such a place is a recipe for disaster.

    Perhaps that is why devs are being constantly surprised?
    No, you're projecting that because it's the easier argument to try and defend against.

    It's usually very clear what the developer intends and when a player deviates from that to the detriment of others, specifically when they repeatedly and intentionally do so.
    Projecting! this entire response is projecting! clear to who? The only sensible boundaries are ones that are physically set. You want to let 100 people online into a room and just expect they will behave in a way that pleases you with no direction given? give me a break. These are nothing than wishful thinking for your and others expectations.
    Kyleran
  • SovrathSovrath Member LegendaryPosts: 32,616
    Orinori said:
    Kyleran said:
    Renfail said:
    Orinori said:
    Sovrath said:
    Orinori said:
    If the carebear is playing an open world ffa PvP game, you have a point.

    If you're circumventing gameplay systems to grief him, you don't.
    Define circuventing gameplay? because to me it sounds like a development error not a player error.
    Technically, if someone finds a bug or issue they are usually supposed to report it. So if there is a loophole and a player just takes advantage of it even though they are supposed to report it, then that is an issue.

    Exploits, glitches, hacking, 3rd party software use and general unintended gameplay are usually covered by the ToS due to devs not being able to foresee every issue or cover every angle in time. But behavior? how can you cover behavior? "that guy was mean to me" BANNED! it is totally subjective! Devs need to provide clear boundaries within the game world. Calling certain behaviors toxic is just incendiary and unnecessary and banning people because they are not 'nice'? really? 
    We will be adhering to the same set of policies EverQuest and EverQuest II both used in their early days. Boundaries will be clearly defined in the ToS and toxic players will have several opportunities to play within the guidelines before they are banned. 

    Best rule of thumb? Play nice with others just like your parents and/or teachers taught you in your childhood. 

    The only people with anything to worry about are those who can't/won't play nice with others within the guidelines set forth by the TOS and PnP.  
    Amazing how such an obvious and simple concept can be argued against.

    Or that players have no responsibility to control their actions, leaving it all to the developers to "enforce" it through hard coding.

    Player bad behavior has been surprising devs since UO.

    This is simply because a game world and real life have very little in common outside of some basic form of interaction.

    What I find peculiar is that people should expect that real life behavior would and should be automatically transferred to a digital environment. Leaving players to be responsible to control their own actions in such a place is a recipe for disaster.

    Perhaps that is why devs are being constantly surprised?
    People interact outside the game world and they interact i the game world. I don't suddenly become an entirely different person because of it.

    Now, that is not the same as "act entirely different".

    You want to make the case that once a person enters a "video game" everything is off the table and it's a wild west of anything goes and a wretched hive of scum and villany.

    As that thinking goes the best case scenario, of a game not like EVE or Lineage 2 or darkfall or "pick your poison" is that it's not the type of community the developers want and they take steps to curb it. Worst case scenario you have laws that are going to be applied if one does something illegal.

    Now, I don't think you are talking about "illegal". You are talking about pk'ing, trash talk, scamming and any number of other activities where one can be the perfect villain. Or at least act like one. And as I said, games where that is encourage exist and it's great that it's there.

    But none of us were born yesterday and we should know that in general, scamming, stealing, racist comments, are not really acceptable in any world, digital or otherwise.
    Like Skyrim? Need more content? Try my Skyrim mod "Godfred's Tomb." 

    Godfred's Tomb Trailer: https://youtu.be/-nsXGddj_4w


    Original Skyrim: https://www.nexusmods.com/skyrim/mods/109547

    Try the "Special Edition." 'Cause it's "Special." https://www.nexusmods.com/skyrimspecialedition/mods/64878/?tab=description

    Serph toze kindly has started a walk-through. https://youtu.be/UIelCK-lldo 
  • SovrathSovrath Member LegendaryPosts: 32,616
    Orinori said:
    Dullahan said:
    Except for the most egregious cases like RL threats or hacking/exploiting, I believe player community should police itself. Especially in a game that is cooperative, players will naturally ostracize the bad actors. This is how it worked in games of the past, and I don't think those games would have been as interesting if all players were forced to play the upstanding citizen. There should be heroes and villains.
    I don't know if self policing can even work anymore with today's attitudes and casual approach towards gaming. I do like the villains though, the really obnoxious ones that you can't stand and get right under your skin, they always leave lasting memories and provide quite a lot of entertainment!
    The best villain I knew was Evil Seed in Lineage 2. Never trash talked, never did anything but pk you and everyone else. He was good at it. He had no problems going to a noob village and take out as many people as he could.

    He played the game well and made a name for himself "being a villain".
    Like Skyrim? Need more content? Try my Skyrim mod "Godfred's Tomb." 

    Godfred's Tomb Trailer: https://youtu.be/-nsXGddj_4w


    Original Skyrim: https://www.nexusmods.com/skyrim/mods/109547

    Try the "Special Edition." 'Cause it's "Special." https://www.nexusmods.com/skyrimspecialedition/mods/64878/?tab=description

    Serph toze kindly has started a walk-through. https://youtu.be/UIelCK-lldo 
  • OrinoriOrinori Member RarePosts: 751
    edited January 2018
    Renfail said:
    Act in a toxic nature against the TOS, and suffer whatever consequences the publisher deems fit. 
    You could have just said 'Act against the TOS'. I do find your constant use of the word toxic quite toxic here.
    SlyLoK[Deleted User]
  • RenfailRenfail Member EpicPosts: 1,638
    Orinori said:
    Renfail said:
    Act in a toxic nature against the TOS, and suffer whatever consequences the publisher deems fit. 
    You could have just said 'Act against the TOS'. I do find your constant use of the word toxic quite toxic here.
    The play nice policy is always part of the TOS. 
    Kyleran
    Tim "Renfail" Anderson | Wandering Hermits Patreon
  • XophXoph Member UncommonPosts: 180

    Renfail said:



    I find this refreshing and hope it works out great. One of the reasons I don't PvP much is because some players go way overboard with PvP in gaming and take it to a level of personal insults.


    Absolutely. It's also why I don't play PvP, and why we chose to make a PvE-only game. 



    So you're making a PvE game for all the sissy millennial kids who never learned to grow some skin? Your game looks like crap and trying to sell it with Gary Gygax quotes is absolutely fucking disgusting.
    pantaro
  • MadFrenchieMadFrenchie Member LegendaryPosts: 8,505
    edited January 2018
    Orinori said:
    Orinori said:
    Kyleran said:
    Renfail said:
    Orinori said:
    Sovrath said:
    Orinori said:
    If the carebear is playing an open world ffa PvP game, you have a point.

    If you're circumventing gameplay systems to grief him, you don't.
    Define circuventing gameplay? because to me it sounds like a development error not a player error.
    Technically, if someone finds a bug or issue they are usually supposed to report it. So if there is a loophole and a player just takes advantage of it even though they are supposed to report it, then that is an issue.

    Exploits, glitches, hacking, 3rd party software use and general unintended gameplay are usually covered by the ToS due to devs not being able to foresee every issue or cover every angle in time. But behavior? how can you cover behavior? "that guy was mean to me" BANNED! it is totally subjective! Devs need to provide clear boundaries within the game world. Calling certain behaviors toxic is just incendiary and unnecessary and banning people because they are not 'nice'? really? 
    We will be adhering to the same set of policies EverQuest and EverQuest II both used in their early days. Boundaries will be clearly defined in the ToS and toxic players will have several opportunities to play within the guidelines before they are banned. 

    Best rule of thumb? Play nice with others just like your parents and/or teachers taught you in your childhood. 

    The only people with anything to worry about are those who can't/won't play nice with others within the guidelines set forth by the TOS and PnP.  
    Amazing how such an obvious and simple concept can be argued against.

    Or that players have no responsibility to control their actions, leaving it all to the developers to "enforce" it through hard coding.

    Player bad behavior has been surprising devs since UO.

    This is simply because a game world and real life have very little in common outside of some basic form of interaction.

    What I find peculiar is that people should expect that real life behavior would and should be automatically transferred to a digital environment. Leaving players to be responsible to control their own actions in such a place is a recipe for disaster.

    Perhaps that is why devs are being constantly surprised?
    No, you're projecting that because it's the easier argument to try and defend against.

    It's usually very clear what the developer intends and when a player deviates from that to the detriment of others, specifically when they repeatedly and intentionally do so.
    Projecting! this entire response is projecting! clear to who? The only sensible boundaries are ones that are physically set. You want to let 100 people online into a room and just expect they will behave in a way that pleases you with no direction given? give me a break. These are nothing than wishful thinking for your and others expectations.
    This idea that there's no common sense of decency is what's silly.  Not only that, but that you think players should he allowed to evade or exploit gameplay mechanics because of it is quite silly.

    image
  • OrinoriOrinori Member RarePosts: 751
    Sovrath said:
    As that thinking goes the best case scenario, of a game not like EVE or Lineage 2 or darkfall or "pick your poison" is that it's not the type of community the developers want and they take steps to curb it. Worst case scenario you have laws that are going to be applied if one does something illegal.

    This is exactly where I am trying to lead, developers taking responsibility in shaping the environment they want and not passing the buck to the client. I honestly feel when a developer is banning people from their games for something that are not obvious glitches / exploits / hacking etc. then something has gone horribly wrong on the development side yet it is the client who must suffer? 


  • RenfailRenfail Member EpicPosts: 1,638
    xDarkjoy said:


    So you're making a PvE game for all the sissy millennial kids who never learned to grow some skin?
    Yep! One where PVP mentalities get left at the door. 
    Tim "Renfail" Anderson | Wandering Hermits Patreon
  • IselinIselin Member LegendaryPosts: 18,719
    Wizardry said:
    I should add a true story of a chick who was dating a gm in FFXI.She got several players banned including chicks she didn't like.How about that episode of a DEV cheating inside of Eve online,then they claimed they got rid of that employee but never did.
    Quite a few stories going around like this.Oh yes the infamous FFXI GM,the LEAD GM who banned a chick just because he said "the next person that asks me a dumb question is getting banned".Then he bragged about it on reddit.

    aimbot cheat accused a 10 year old of aimbotting after he got accused.Find out later he was a buddy of the GM,so the 10 year old kid got banned by an asshat GM.

    So yeah tell me again how GM's are going to fix this play nice?
    I'm surprised you said "chick" instead of "broad" or "dame" :)
    [Deleted User]Sovrath
    "Social media gives legions of idiots the right to speak when they once only spoke at a bar after a glass of wine, without harming the community ... but now they have the same right to speak as a Nobel Prize winner. It's the invasion of the idiots”

    ― Umberto Eco

    “Microtransactions? In a single player role-playing game? Are you nuts?” 
    ― CD PROJEKT RED

  • MadFrenchieMadFrenchie Member LegendaryPosts: 8,505
    Orinori said:
    Sovrath said:
    As that thinking goes the best case scenario, of a game not like EVE or Lineage 2 or darkfall or "pick your poison" is that it's not the type of community the developers want and they take steps to curb it. Worst case scenario you have laws that are going to be applied if one does something illegal.

    This is exactly where I am trying to lead, developers taking responsibility in shaping the environment they want and not passing the buck to the client. I honestly feel when a developer is banning people from their games for something that are not obvious glitches / exploits / hacking etc. then something has gone horribly wrong on the development side yet it is the client who must suffer? 


    Suffer?  You act as if first offenses are lifetime bans.  If a player is warned (as they'll most likely be) but continue to engage in the behavior..  Sucks to suck.

    image
  • JeffSpicoliJeffSpicoli Member EpicPosts: 2,849
    Iselin said:
    Wizardry said:
    I should add a true story of a chick who was dating a gm in FFXI.She got several players banned including chicks she didn't like.How about that episode of a DEV cheating inside of Eve online,then they claimed they got rid of that employee but never did.
    Quite a few stories going around like this.Oh yes the infamous FFXI GM,the LEAD GM who banned a chick just because he said "the next person that asks me a dumb question is getting banned".Then he bragged about it on reddit.

    aimbot cheat accused a 10 year old of aimbotting after he got accused.Find out later he was a buddy of the GM,so the 10 year old kid got banned by an asshat GM.

    So yeah tell me again how GM's are going to fix this play nice?
    I'm surprised you said "chick" instead of "broad" or "dame" :)

    pantaro
    • Aloha Mr Hand ! 

  • IselinIselin Member LegendaryPosts: 18,719
    @Renfail

    Well I hope you keep up your policing efforts long after launch when most games trim "non-essential" staff.

    Most MMOs make a point of tough enforcement of their TOS around the time of their release when everyone's watching but 2 or 3 years down the road they all slack off and the guilty parties who used to disappear within 15 minutes of reporting persist a lot longer.

    SBFordRenfail
    "Social media gives legions of idiots the right to speak when they once only spoke at a bar after a glass of wine, without harming the community ... but now they have the same right to speak as a Nobel Prize winner. It's the invasion of the idiots”

    ― Umberto Eco

    “Microtransactions? In a single player role-playing game? Are you nuts?” 
    ― CD PROJEKT RED

  • RenfailRenfail Member EpicPosts: 1,638
    Iselin said:
    @Renfail

    Well I hope you keep up your policing efforts long after launch when most games trim "non-essential" staff.

    Most MMOs make a point of tough enforcement of their TOS around the time of their release when everyone's watching but 2 or 3 years down the road they all slack off and the guilty parties who used to disappear within 15 minutes of reporting persist a lot longer.

    Indeed. 

    We should be good to go for the long haul as we have actively planned for and budgeted the extra man hours. 

    That being said, there is always the risk we'll turn out just like every other company out there. Good intentions don't gaurantee anything. 
    [Deleted User]
    Tim "Renfail" Anderson | Wandering Hermits Patreon
Sign In or Register to comment.