most awesomest thing to happen in a mmorpg, ever!

[213374U]

I read the post, and the article sincluded. My statement  stands; but hey; as per usual you try to make everything personal while I was commenting strictly on the article and on the opinions about said artle.

Right. I should not pick on you just because your reading comprehension skills are severely impaired. I guess it's not your fault. My apologies.

[Yst]

I haven't played Eve save in beta, but it's definitely true that 'infiltration' of this sort if very, very poorly viewed in most other MMORPGs. As far as I'm concerned, whether it is or isn't acceptable really just has to be based on a concensus within the community. If everyone accepts that guild/alliance/corp infiltration (which as others have noted, inevitably necessitates RL duplicity and breach of faith) is part of the way the game is played, and that gameplay strategy does indeed extend outside the game universe into RL, then maybe it will add to it in a positive way. But in other games, absolutely the opposite is the case and even if the player does somehow manage to stay RP *all the time* (which is essentially impossible in all MMORPGs where large-scale PvP occurs), it would be considered foul play.

[Walsingham]

Yeah but diplomacy is the sux.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

From what I heard, it doesn't suck. You just suck at playing it.

 

 

Kaftan, it's very rpg-like, just without much stats or so. You're effectively playing the role of a miner/contract spy/manager/etc. And player interaction seemst to be vital

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

 

No stats? :ph34r: Come qvuickly my friend. Vee are not talkink safe here. ...

[Lord Tingeling]

Since when has roleplaying been about stats?

[Authority]

P.S. Your trolling has been reported.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

 

My apologies.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

 

 

Yes, yes.. everyone behave and all that, or you I will emtpy my bowels of wrath upon you etc.

[jiujitsu]

I read the post, and the article sincluded. My statement  stands; but hey; as per usual you try to make everything personal while I was commenting strictly on the article and on the opinions about said artle.

 

But, hey, troll on, McDuff, and let's make this about posters not topics.

 

R00fles!

 

P.S. Your trolling has been reported.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

Yea, I hate when people troll. Like when they create random spam threads that don't really make much sense at all. Or when they accuse others of doing something when they don't even know what the person is talking about. Trolls should be ashamed. And spammers too.

 

R00fles!

 

As for MMORPGs I don't like them. They cost too much. I played Anarchy Online for free for a couple months and liked it for a little while, but my eyes were opened once I reached higher levels and it took hours to gain one level. It makes me sick, physically sick, to think about Anarchy Online anymore.

 

R00fles!

[Kaftan Barlast]

I think its a perversion of nature for one troll to rapport another for trolling.

[metadigital]

... But games are pratice for RL. 

Of course. I SO could use better backstabbing skills in my common everyday life.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

You never know ... also, it would help you spot the telltale precursor man

[Yst]

More importantly, what kind of person allows themselves to be befriended IRL from an internet game ...?

 

:ph34r:

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

For a clan or guild who spends many hours every week together, for a bunch of people working towards long term collective goals, communicating constantly, engaging in what is for many their chiefest hobby, for such a group, considering themselves to have some real life personal investment in the experience (which would make duplicity a real life moral concern) is weird? I mean, what's a hobby that does justify real life personal investment in the associations one makes through it, if that kind of constant cooperation, communication and interaction doesn't serve as an adequate premise for some sort of sense of comeraderie which would at least make lies and deceit something more than gameworld tactical elements?

[Azarkon]

I have no doubt that the person at the receiving end was hurt both emotionally and in-game.

 

But ultimately, answer me this: are you ever truly roleplaying a character, if you cannot be emotionally hurt by the experiences of said character?

 

That is the great paradox of roleplaying. When asked about the future of RPGs, everyone clamors for more immersion, more emotional depth, more "caring" about the characters; and yet how can that be, if these games remain "games"? How can you ever treat an act or an event with emotional intensity, if you were not yourself convinced through the suspension of disbelief? And thus in pursuit of escalating immersion there must be a point where we cease to believe in the fictionality of our characters and instead must be led to believe that they were real. That, as sci-fi authors have predicted for decades, is the grand finale of immersive entertainment.

 

And yet, we waver before the plunge, before the complete immersive experience, because somehow it's just not right. Somehow we don't want the real deal, the true holographic reality of the Matrix and its dozens of incarnations.

 

Somehow, there's a point where it becomes too real. Isn't that funny?

[Sarjahurmaaja.]

"This most likely involved OOC sucking up, lies, and duplicity. And it most certainly has involved OOC gloating. That part of the receiving end I have a hard time believing is like 'gg'. For that is called betrayal, pal."

 

See, the receiving end I was talking about was the guy who got betrayed and assassinated.

 

So, yeah.

 

Hell, the community of EVE Online, AFAIK, prides on playing a carebear free game, or some such nonsense.

 

"If they don't find premeditated personal betrayal, set up through primarily non-game channels, to be transgressive metagaming then what's over the line? Can I find their names out and harass them over the phone? Should I expect a slap on the shoulder and a "GG!" after I jump out of some guy's bushes and punch him in the stomach? Maybe I should be allowed to scream and pretend to have seizures during my opponent's turn in a chess match?"

 

I wouldn't go there if I was you - I hear that slope is mighty slippery!

[metadigital]

More importantly, what kind of person allows themselves to be befriended IRL from an internet game ...?

 

:ph34r:

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

For a clan or guild who spends many hours every week together, for a bunch of people working towards long term collective goals, communicating constantly, engaging in what is for many their chiefest hobby, for such a group, considering themselves to have some real life personal investment in the experience (which would make duplicity a real life moral concern) is weird? I mean, what's a hobby that does justify real life personal investment in the associations one makes through it, if that kind of constant cooperation, communication and interaction doesn't serve as an adequate premise for some sort of sense of comeraderie which would at least make lies and deceit something more than gameworld tactical elements?

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Yes, all well and good, but this is the internet, remember! All bets are off, the internet plays on the false sense of familiarity that we social creatures get by the faux-intimacy of the epistolatory format of our messaging.

 

Caveat scriptor! :cool:

[Sarjahurmaaja.]

Fishboot sure is taking his sweet time. I bet it's gonna be the longest post evah!

[Guest Fishboot]

I wouldn't go there if I was you - I hear that slope is mighty slippery!

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

Slippery slope is not necessarily a logical fallacy. Here I was using it to display that metagaming "boundaries" are:

 

1) universal - that is, everyone has them.

2) arbitrary

 

You cannot argue that any individual player will regard some metagaming behavior or another as "beyond the pale". For example, humiliating or hurting another player with out of game knowledge, or harassment, or threats, or whatever, there will always be something that even the most casual metagamer will consider as "too far". Therefore everyone has metagaming boundaries.

 

Further the boundaries are arbitrary. For every person who out of earnest competitiveness, machismo or simple cruelty admits some nasty new bit of metagaming into the game proper without protest, there is another person for whom it is a bridge too far and vice versa. There is no precise dividing line between propriety and impropriety.

 

Clearly the situation where different players abide different rulesets is weird and strange, and further it suggests that the most profligate metagamers will have the most advantageous rulesets and thus the most success. That seems like a gnarly imperative to alloy into an MMORPG.

 

In games that demand a physical presence there is a palpable overlay of social propriety and decorum, I think, that limits too much metagaming, but in multiplayer games decorum goes right out the window.

[Sarjahurmaaja.]

"You cannot argue that any individual player will regard some metagaming behavior or another as "beyond the pale". For example, humiliating or hurting another player with out of game knowledge, or harassment, or threats, or whatever, there will always be something that even the most casual metagamer will consider as 'too far'. Therefore everyone has metagaming boundaries."

 

See, the difference between your examples and what happened is this: no one's person or property was attacked or harmed.

 

So, yeah.

 

"Further the boundaries are arbitrary. For every person who out of earnest competitiveness, machismo or simple cruelty admits some nasty new bit of metagaming into the game proper without protest, there is another person for whom it is a bridge too far and vice versa. There is no precise dividing line between propriety and impropriety."

 

Oh, but there is: profit.

[Guest Fishboot]

Oh, but there is - profit.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

"Give me X credits or we'll tell everyone you're gay, or possibly fat."

 

"Give me X credits or we'll screw you over in a different game."

 

"Give me X credits or we'll spam this that and the other channels, AIM and e-mail."

 

"Give me X credits or metagame consequence #4."

 

Bleah.

[Musopticon?]

"Give me X credits or we'll spam this"

 

Sounds like fun.

 

And as this fiery little struggle is going nowhere...

[metadigital]

Slippery slope is not necessarily a logical fallacy. Here I was using it to display that metagaming "boundaries" are:

 

1) universal - that is, everyone has them.

2) arbitrary

 

You cannot argue that any individual player will regard some metagaming behavior or another as "beyond the pale". For example, humiliating or hurting another player with out of game knowledge, or harassment, or threats, or whatever, there will always be something that even the most casual metagamer will consider as "too far". Therefore everyone has metagaming boundaries.

 

Further the boundaries are arbitrary. For every person who out of earnest competitiveness, machismo or simple cruelty admits some nasty new bit of metagaming into the game proper without protest, there is another person for whom it is a bridge too far and vice versa. There is no precise dividing line between propriety and impropriety.

 

Clearly the situation where different players abide different rulesets is weird and strange, and further it suggests that the most profligate metagamers will have the most advantageous rulesets and thus the most success. That seems like a gnarly imperative to alloy into an MMORPG.

 

In games that demand a physical presence there is a palpable overlay of social propriety and decorum, I think, that limits too much metagaming, but in multiplayer games decorum goes right out the window.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

The problem you encounter, though, in trying to police any metagaming boundaries

[Sarjahurmaaja.]

"[apparently complete misunderstanding]

 

Bleah."

 

The profit to developers, silly!

[Guest Fishboot]

The profit to developers, silly!

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

Oops. I plead sleep deprivation.

 

 

 

Let's go with amicable disagreement on the overarching point. Also, SC2 is the best game evar.

[Sarjahurmaaja.]

"Also, SC2 is the best game evar."

 

Man, it'd be totally awesome if the Orz screwed you over in the end.

[Guest Fishboot]

The problem you encounter, though, in trying to police any metagaming boundaries

[metadigital]

Well, that at least seems pragmatic. I don't believe it is possible to extirpate unwanted

[Sarjahurmaaja.]

By the way, for those of you who disagreed with the awesomeness, how would you feel if some sort of player organized police force would've infiltrated and thwarted the GHSC's operation?

 

Now, what would you think of a MMORPG where this was how stuff happened?

 

"OMG NO LIEF"ers need not reply.

[213374U]

See, the receiving end I was talking about was the guy who got betrayed and assassinated.

 

So, yeah.

Links, plz. Either that or STFU. )

 

 

Hell, the community of EVE Online, AFAIK, prides on playing a carebear free game, or some such nonsense.

Which doesn't mean they are happy with what happened. From the 10 people who were asked about their thoughts on the matter for the article, 5 of them were flat out against. IIRC only 2 or 3 thought it was "cool".

 

So, yeah.

 

 

See, the difference between your examples and what happened is this: no one's person or property was attacked or harmed.

Read the article again. The economic damage has been equivalent to some $16k. Yes, that's RL currency.

 

 

By the way, for those of you who disagreed with the awesomeness, how would you feel if some sort of player organized police force would've infiltrated and thwarted the GHSC's operation?

 

Now, what would you think of a MMORPG where this was how stuff happened?

You obviously haven't understood a word of what's being discussed here. It would make no difference at all, if said "police force" had used the same metagaming emotional scam tactics that the GHSC used to carry out their hit.

 

It would still suck. In a scary, yet rather pathetic way.