These forums have been archived and are now read-only.

The new forums are live and can be found at https://forums.eveonline.com/

EVE General Discussion

 
  • Topic is locked indefinitely.
 

Player morality in EVE online. Why did you leave it at the door?

First post
Author
Issler Dainze
Tadakastu-Obata Corporation
The Honda Accord
#621 - 2011-11-03 13:03:06 UTC
Mag's wrote:
stuff where Mags shows how he hasn't bothered to think about the philosophical issues of morality in a persistent MMORP... ]


Mags,

You can ignore the content of the comments make a lot of cute derisive comments that deflect the core concept of my argument.

That argument is not all games are the same and Eve is unique in that it allows someone to invest the only real world currency (their time) to build something that persists and as a result has real value. That the act of someone destroying that "thing" just for the fun of it even though it is virtual is no different to the victim as taking something out of the victims RL that cost them the same RL currency (their time).

That you don't see how the world we live in is blurring what is "virtual" and is "real" means you are unaware of your surroundings or living in a cave.

Game or RL is exact;y the same in terms of time spent and the value there of. You can go off and say its a game but that just shows you lack of understanding. All you have is your time. If I waste your time I am harming you in a way that you can never recover from. Time can not be replaced.

You aren't smart enough I guess to understand the nature of the human experience and how the the time we have is all that matters in the end. Maybe you need to get older or have a brush with your morality. I hope you do as it may give the perspective that more aware folks have developed.

Once you understand the value of the time we have left your life can improve dramatically,

Issler


Jaroslav Unwanted
Brutor Tribe
Minmatar Republic
#622 - 2011-11-03 13:06:18 UTC  |  Edited by: Jaroslav Unwanted
Well i for one hope that Mags will never understand. I certainly wish i did not.

He knows who he is. And that certainty makes him as an person. Broke that link and maybe it could be better. Question is if it would be better for him. I doubt it.

Its not an insult just in case. Its more like fly safe and take care.

Just let settle in following statement.

People intentions differs.

No-one owe anyone any explanation for his/her doing.

This thread deliver plenty of interesting thoughts.
Aubepine Finfleur
Sebiestor Tribe
Minmatar Republic
#623 - 2011-11-03 13:10:40 UTC  |  Edited by: Aubepine Finfleur
EvE is fun... if you're an online sociopath. This game is great if you're after Schadenfreude.

But it's really subpar in the sense that it presents itself as a game, while it's not really at all. It's not either an online app where you release pent-up aggression with like-minded people, like HoN is. Upon logging in HoN you know every other player is a mouth-foaming hambeast that's gonna rage endlessly on voice comms.
EvE is an online social platform where not everybody is after Schadenfreude, not everybody logs on fully consenting to be scammed, ganked, abused, but they know those things happen and make the game exciting. Those people also naively believe there are tools to either prevent that or enact revenge. While preventing those things is possible, using a secondary account to scout gate camps, and even multiple trials (multiple boxes) to scout around for gank squads -notice how it's not cumbersome at all!-, enacting revenge on gankers is nigh impossible since they also use multiple accounts, will scout you, and will stay docked or use positive sec status alts to run missions while you camp them.

The people who want to play EvE as a game are usually ridiculed for being all kind of stupid, and expect their fellow gamers to have some sort of common decency, i.e. play the game to have fun.
A fairly large part of the playerbase doesn't. The most lazy of them just camp gates and chat on ts or play other games, waiting for the activation signal. They don't play EvE, for them it's not an app that brings gaming fun. It's only an app they use to reap rl grief from people they don't even know -rl grief because you lose several hours' worth of effort when getting ganked, and it's not even a fight-. And then they mock those people (who actually play EvE as a game): "Don't be mad bro, it's only a gaem!"

While "carebears" and decent players see in-game stuff as an end in itself, therefore being in synch with the roleplaying part in MMORPG (in that case, pretend you're a space pilot out to amass riches), most angrrry EvE players don't give a single thought about their stuff, which is just a means to an end: reap Schadenfreude, real life rage from their fellow gamer. Therefore the sarcasm: "internet spaceships".

This game is terrible because of said double standards. Either you're an online sociopath and it's a great way to get your kicks but you're not playing it at all, or you're a gamer and then you have to triple-check everything and are forced to use alts to offset mechanics that actually coddle ganking and game-accepted griefing.

Remove Concord, make kill rights transferable, change gateguns mechanics (introduce tracking)

Twisted Alice
Doomheim
#624 - 2011-11-03 13:15:56 UTC  |  Edited by: Twisted Alice
Naran Eto wrote:
Twisted Alice wrote:
Naran Eto wrote:
"A system of morality which is based on relative emotional values is a mere illusion, a thoroughly vulgar conception which has nothing sound in it and nothing true. "



Socrates(BC 469-BC 399) Greek philosopher of Athens




And this is relevant how?

Sounds to me he's talking about a moral code that is flexible when it suits. Pretty much how griefers view morals.


Exactly.

There is no such thing as morality because it is all relative to your own beliefs, one mans opinion is another mans argument..

What you believe to be imoral, would be to a "greifer" (who's the greifer? the one killing someone or the one telling him not to?) acceptable social behaviour.

Socrates understood this thousands of years ago.




A lot of morals are a shared belief, it's how large groups manage to live in a large community. Same as rules and laws they're all there for guidance.

Moral - Concerned with character or disposition, or with the distinction between right and wrong.


There maybe some degree for interpretation but the vast majority of people know the difference between right and wrong.

Where morals are concerned it comes down to how much value you place on them, that distinguises those that act in an immoral way to those that act in a moral way.
Mag's
Azn Empire
#625 - 2011-11-03 13:16:52 UTC
Issler Dainze wrote:
Mag's wrote:
stuff where Mags shows how he hasn't bothered to think about the philosophical issues of morality in a persistent MMORP... ]


Mags,

You can ignore the content of the comments make a lot of cute derisive comments that deflect the core concept of my argument.

That argument is not all games are the same and Eve is unique in that it allows someone to invest the only real world currency (their time) to build something that persists and as a result has real value. That the act of someone destroying that "thing" just for the fun of it even though it is virtual is no different to the victim as taking something out of the victims RL that cost them the same RL currency (their time).

That you don't see how the world we live in is blurring what is "virtual" and is "real" means you are unaware of your surroundings or living in a cave.

Game or RL is exact;y the same in terms of time spent and the value there of. You can go off and say its a game but that just shows you lack of understanding. All you have is your time. If I waste your time I am harming you in a way that you can never recover from. Time can not be replaced.

You aren't smart enough I guess to understand the nature of the human experience and how the the time we have is all that matters in the end. Maybe you need to get older or have a brush with your morality. I hope you do as it may give the perspective that more aware folks have developed.

Once you understand the value of the time we have left your life can improve dramatically,

Issler


The fact that you resort to personal insults, tells me all I need to know about you and any argument you may have. Blink

Destination SkillQueue:- It's like assuming the Lions will ignore you in the Savannah, if you're small, fat and look helpless.

Naran Eto
Caldari Provisions
Caldari State
#626 - 2011-11-03 13:20:33 UTC  |  Edited by: Naran Eto
Twisted Alice wrote:
Naran Eto wrote:
Twisted Alice wrote:
Naran Eto wrote:
"A system of morality which is based on relative emotional values is a mere illusion, a thoroughly vulgar conception which has nothing sound in it and nothing true. "



Socrates(BC 469-BC 399) Greek philosopher of Athens




And this is relevant how?

Sounds to me he's talking about a moral code that is flexible when it suits. Pretty much how griefers view morals.


Exactly.

There is no such thing as morality because it is all relative to your own beliefs, one mans opinion is another mans argument..

What you believe to be imoral, would be to a "greifer" (who's the greifer? the one killing someone or the one telling him not to?) acceptable social behaviour.

Socrates understood this thousands of years ago.




A lot of morals are a shared belief, it's how large groups manage to live in a large community. Same as rule and laws they're all there for guidance.

Moral - Concerned with character or disposition, or with the distinction between right and wrong.


There maybe some degree for interpretation but the vast majority of people know the difference between right and wrong.

Where morals are concerned it comes down to how much value you place on them, that distinguises those that act in an immoral way to those that act in a moral way.



I dissagree, people only "understand" right and wrong because they are told and brought up to believe this and that is right or wrong, case in example, in the UK a person is deemed old enough to have intercourse at 16, although under 18 it is still frowned upon by some people, in some of the "less developed" countries children are expected to have been married and produced their first child by the time they are 15. Which is wrong moraly? Either side would argue hteir case qith equal conviction. It's all to do with perception and how you are tought to behave.

If it were as you say, then there would be no crime, no atrocities because everybody would have the exact same moral code.
Twisted Alice
Doomheim
#627 - 2011-11-03 13:32:53 UTC
Naran Eto wrote:


I dissagree, people only "understand" right and wrong because they are told and brought up to believe this and that is right or wrong, case in example, in the UK a person is deemed old enough to have intercourse at 16, although under 18 it is still frowned upon by some people, in some of the "less developed" countries children are expected to have been married and produced their first child by the time they are 15. Which is wrong moraly? Either side would argue hteir case qith equal conviction. It's all to do with perception and how you are tought to behave.




Different races have different cultures, there will be some discrepancies, difficult to say who's right and who's wrong is the case you've chosen.


The rulings on your example. are there to protect the teenager. In the UK they probably worry if the young person is mentally old (prepared) enough rather than physically.
Naran Eto
Caldari Provisions
Caldari State
#628 - 2011-11-03 13:46:59 UTC
Twisted Alice wrote:
Naran Eto wrote:


I dissagree, people only "understand" right and wrong because they are told and brought up to believe this and that is right or wrong, case in example, in the UK a person is deemed old enough to have intercourse at 16, although under 18 it is still frowned upon by some people, in some of the "less developed" countries children are expected to have been married and produced their first child by the time they are 15. Which is wrong moraly? Either side would argue hteir case qith equal conviction. It's all to do with perception and how you are tought to behave.




Different races have different cultures, there will be some discrepancies, difficult to say who's right and who's wrong is the case you've chosen.


The rulings on your example. are there to protect the teenager. In the UK they probably worry if the young person is mentally old (prepared) enough rather than physically.


Exactly, in our culture we have been lead to believe that, in other cutlures it has been bred into them differently, they have one moral code and we have another. The concept of right or wrong is different depending on your perspective and how you have been trained to think. but even within the same cultures there are discrepencies in what we think is morally acceptable. which is exactly what Socrates was trying to say, a moral code is only as moral as it is perceived by the individual.

Granted there are certain moral prohibitions that are almost universal to a degree, but they only have that status because they have been bred into us over hundreds of generations, if those who set the precident originaly perceived things differently then we would have different morals today, which is why there is so much difference in the way that we all perceive morality on a general basis.
Jenshae Chiroptera
#629 - 2011-11-03 13:54:47 UTC
Does it bother anyone else that so many people want to be [insert expletive] ?

CCP - Building ant hills and magnifying glasses for fat kids

Not even once

EVE is becoming shallow and puerile; it will satisfy neither the veteran nor the "WoW" type crowd in the transition.

Alpheias
Tactical Farmers.
Pandemic Horde
#630 - 2011-11-03 14:04:35 UTC
Jenshae Chiroptera wrote:
Does it bother anyone else that so many people want to be [insert expletive] ?


No. Because it is a game. What bothers me though is that you have people on the edge of having a nervous breakdown, with all that may follow, if they lose their stuff in a game.

Agent of Chaos, Sower of Discord.

Don't talk to me unless you are IQ verified and certified with three references from non-family members. Please have your certificate of authenticity on hand.

Twisted Alice
Doomheim
#631 - 2011-11-03 14:53:42 UTC
Naran Eto wrote:
Twisted Alice wrote:
Naran Eto wrote:


I dissagree, people only "understand" right and wrong because they are told and brought up to believe this and that is right or wrong, case in example, in the UK a person is deemed old enough to have intercourse at 16, although under 18 it is still frowned upon by some people, in some of the "less developed" countries children are expected to have been married and produced their first child by the time they are 15. Which is wrong moraly? Either side would argue hteir case qith equal conviction. It's all to do with perception and how you are tought to behave.




Different races have different cultures, there will be some discrepancies, difficult to say who's right and who's wrong is the case you've chosen.


The rulings on your example. are there to protect the teenager. In the UK they probably worry if the young person is mentally old (prepared) enough rather than physically.


Exactly, in our culture we have been lead to believe that, in other cutlures it has been bred into them differently, they have one moral code and we have another. The concept of right or wrong is different depending on your perspective and how you have been trained to think. but even within the same cultures there are discrepencies in what we think is morally acceptable. which is exactly what Socrates was trying to say, a moral code is only as moral as it is perceived by the individual.

Granted there are certain moral prohibitions that are almost universal to a degree, but they only have that status because they have been bred into us over hundreds of generations, if those who set the precident originaly perceived things differently then we would have different morals today, which is why there is so much difference in the way that we all perceive morality on a general basis.



In your example, it not a case of being bred into us it's a case of observation over the years and then a group deciding where they should fix the age at, there has to be an age specified otherwise you can't use laws to protect them. In countries that have a high infant death rate the age is likely to be a bit less.



3 main groups where morals are concerned

Those that place a high value on them.

Those that place a high value on them only when it suits them (largest group and the group Socrates was moaning about).

Those that place little value on them in pursuit of their own interests.


Morals are taught to people at an early age and reinforced over the years, but I would not say they're being bred into us. Again it's the value you place on the moral which determines if you will embrace it or not.


ACY GTMI
Veerhouven Group
#632 - 2011-11-03 14:54:08 UTC
Mag's wrote:
Being able to distinguish between reality and a game, often helps. But hey what do I know, apparently I'm shallow, fail at being a human, a troll, wildlife, have no morals, ethics and a rat bastard in RL. Oh yea and an asshat, let's not forget that. Big smile


I think the point Issler is trying to make is that suicide ganker's actions in-game, although, "Just for fun". can have a significant effect on other player's gaming experience.

As an extreme example, I have been saving for two years to buy an Anshar. If some twinkie decided to gank it, somehow, I'm not going to take it well.

Yes, I have enough ISK to replace one, but the second one would have to sit in a hanger for about a year while I put together enough ISK to replace it.

To me, the loss of an Anshar, or even a Retriever are not on the same level as "Just for fun." or "Moar tears."

People who can't make that distinction are a danger to themselves, and others, both in game and IRL.
Danks
Fat Angry Toe Tappin Inbreds
#633 - 2011-11-03 15:05:17 UTC
ACY GTMI wrote:

People who can't make that distinction are a danger to themselves, and others, both in game and IRL.


People who can't make a distinction between a game and real life are idiots who are a danger to themselves.
ACY GTMI
Veerhouven Group
#634 - 2011-11-03 15:08:23 UTC
Danks wrote:
ACY GTMI wrote:

People who can't make that distinction are a danger to themselves, and others, both in game and IRL.


People who can't make a distinction between a game and real life are idiots who are a danger to themselves.


I'm suggesting that, in this game, the line is blurred. I spent two years of RL time getting the ISK together to buy that ship.
MeestaPenni
Mercantile and Stuff
#635 - 2011-11-03 15:52:23 UTC  |  Edited by: MeestaPenni
ACY GTMI wrote:
I spent two years of RL time getting the ISK together to buy that ship.


And in that one sentence is where I think the breakdown occurs. You, ACY, are actually playing in a 'sandbox'.....although, you maybe haven't realized it yet that the 'sandbox' aspect of EvE is gone. Don't take that as a criticism. I think you're playing the game "the right way"; as it was intended.

I think there are many players now who completely ignore the 'sandbox' aspect. Ironically, many of them justify actions with the "it's a sandbox" ploy.

The ability to buy GTCs, convert them to PLEX, then sell the PLEX on the market in order to fill a wallet totally shatters any semblance of 'sandbox'. No mining, missioning, manufacturing, etc. needed in order to continue buying "stuff".

If you have enough income (and I get the sense that EvE players generally have some discretionary funds) you can start a character, buy the skill books, do nothing but train skills, and through the PLEX mechanism, never indulge in any of the 'sandbox' aspects of the game'. Ever.

When it became easy to refill a wallet through "out of game" means.....the sandbox went out the window.

I am not Prencleeve Grothsmore.

Michael Holmes Holmes
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#636 - 2011-11-03 17:26:18 UTC  |  Edited by: Michael Holmes Holmes
I have spent some time reading the thread again and really trying to get a feel for everyone's arguments and beliefs.

I noticed a few things keep coming up that need to be settled as fact.

1.) We know this game is not real life, every player knows that and if they don't than they are probably already identified as mentally unstable.

2.) Some players do need to understand the inherent risk involved in this game and that you can, at any moment, lose your ship, your cargo and any implants to a ganker who is "just doing it for the lulz".

3.) For the most part, nobody thinks that any measures should be taken by CCP to restrict ganking or any other low or high sec crime, we all understand that the charm and fun in this game comes from the risk and don't want to change that.


The Whole "I can act how I want because it is just a game" stuff does not make much sense to me though, I have said it over and over again, I don't care if you blow up my ship and pod me, I do care if you go out of your way to be a douche about it.

When you blow up a ship and then personally attack the player than I am sorry, you are not playing the game anymore, when you attack the player themselves, you can't hide behind your avatar anymore.


Knocking someone down in a football game is par for the coarse, but it is not proper to continue to beat them after the fact, that is considered both illegal and unsportsmanlike. Saying "it is just a game" only applies if you keep your actions within the context of the game.
Alpheias
Tactical Farmers.
Pandemic Horde
#637 - 2011-11-03 17:54:40 UTC
Michael Holmes Holmes wrote:


The Whole "I can act how I want because it is just a game" stuff does not make much sense to me though, I have said it over and over again, I don't care if you blow up my ship and pod me, I do care if you go out of your way to be a douche about it.

When you blow up a ship and then personally attack the player than I am sorry, you are not playing the game anymore, when you attack the player themselves, you can't hide behind your avatar anymore.

Knocking someone down in a football game is par for the coarse, but it is not proper to continue to beat them after the fact, that is considered both illegal and unsportsmanlike. Saying "it is just a game" only applies if you keep your actions within the context of the game.


Wow... I can't believe you wrote that. Perhaps re-read what you post next time? Roll

Agent of Chaos, Sower of Discord.

Don't talk to me unless you are IQ verified and certified with three references from non-family members. Please have your certificate of authenticity on hand.

Herzog Wolfhammer
Sigma Special Tactics Group
#638 - 2011-11-03 17:59:15 UTC  |  Edited by: Herzog Wolfhammer
There was stuff.... blasted forums.....


TLDR: you all suck.

Just kidding. Lol

Bring back DEEEEP Space!

Danks
Fat Angry Toe Tappin Inbreds
#639 - 2011-11-03 18:06:27 UTC
ACY GTMI wrote:
Danks wrote:
ACY GTMI wrote:

People who can't make that distinction are a danger to themselves, and others, both in game and IRL.


People who can't make a distinction between a game and real life are idiots who are a danger to themselves.


I'm suggesting that, in this game, the line is blurred. I spent two years of RL time getting the ISK together to buy that ship.


I'm suggesting if you get that worked up by a damn video game maybe you should take a step back. That also goes for writing long winded diatribes about how in-game actions reflect who you are IRL like some second rate philosophy student.
Handsome Hussein
#640 - 2011-11-03 18:13:08 UTC
Michael Holmes Holmes wrote:
The Whole "I can act how I want because it is just a game" stuff does not make much sense to me though, I have said it over and over again, I don't care if you blow up my ship and pod me, I do care if you go out of your way to be a douche about it.

So, I can gank you whenever I want so long as I don't act like an *******?

"Tears" and KMs are p ******* boring IMO, but people offer them up all the time. :shrug: I love it when they try to convo me and tell me I'm an ******* or something; I just close the window. If you get bent out of shape by losing a ship in this game you're an idiot. If it makes you feel any better, I don't even insure my Thrashers; I usually forget.

I'll admit I enjoy the fear that is inspired when I enter local in my neighborhood, even if I'm just making a run to the trade hub. Maybe I'm different, though. I have a goal and when I reach it I'll likely stop. Well, unless I get invited to help gank a botting Hulk. Now that is a worthy cause.

Christ, can't stop posting in this train-wreck...

Leaves only the fresh scent of pine.