EVE General Discussion

Smacktalk

The thing that you get when you decide to engage in mind-dumbing activity, an activity that would instantly justify Don Quixote's battle against windmills as a worthy cause or an activity which does not provide any meaningful content whatsoever. All-3-combo included.

As long as we have one side that does not have any meaningful downside for their actions and another that is impotent to do anything other than fish the killmails (you know the proper term for this... I'm just being polite) with CONCORD, you will have this Mexican standoff situation with a lot of foul mouth from all involved parties.

Enjoy the "emergent gameplay" and "community made content"... or the complete lack of both.

I agree on both points but need to add a footnote.

If gankbears would not hide in station all day ...
... and people weren't believing that "easy equals winning" ...
... then there would be no discussion about how gankbears lack negative consequences for their actions.

The game provides negative consequences,
but the weak minds simply avoid them,
creating an imbalance they think is called "winning"
while ruining it for themselves in the long run.

I am still waiting for the tipping point where CCP HAS to give in,
and it will come eventually, because the as.. just keep being what they are.

OMG COMMON SENSE!
THANK YOU ERIN!

lol, I like making myself feel clever by stating the obvious!

I think he meant "not being afk" etc,
but its sad and stupid he calls it the code way,
ignoring that they did not actually invent that.

Propaganda machine showing its working.

No, not being afk is called the "not being A Free Kill" way.

The rest of your post is just you talking about being the only original thought left on earth, or whatever. Assumptions, and all that.

Just that one has to have that type of character or personality, even if it comes out later, that's all.


Nah, not at all. Just that if you enjoy this then that's what you enjoy and that's because of personality - so simple. I'm not arguing in any direction, was actually just agreeing with what Christina Project said: that whatever you do, in RL or in game, is merely a reflection of your personality.

This part I agree with.

I'm not so comfortable with the leap that because someone likes blowing ships up and drawing out tears in a game (or ranting insults when they get blown up), that this equates to them being bad people IRL.

I'm not a behavioural scientist, so what follows is just a layman's understanding.

There has been a lot of work that shows the context of the situation and environment is an important influence on how people act.

Choosing to be the bastard in a video game can as much be influenced by the fact that you see it as a video game with no real consequences for anyone, as anything else.

We each of us have multiple versions of ourselves that we present to the World based on who we are with and what the situation is. How I act in game for example is not how I behave in my workplace, nor at home. It's not the same as how I act in public or in private with my family.

Human nature isn't as simple as us all being one dimensional beings that behave the same all the time. It seems to me that some of those complicating factors mean we can't just draw conclusions that people are the bad guy in a game because they really are bad guys in real life and enjoy hurting people.

They can chose to be the bad guy in the game because as an environment and context for play, it's safe to do so (for everyone).

Just my 0.02c as always and maybe I'm too optimistic about human nature, but I just can't believe that how we play EvE is a straight reflection of our broader lives. It's just a snapshot of a small part.

Well, that depends ...

If by "PvP" you mean specifically "ship-to-ship combat", then no, you really can't make them want to do it. However, you can force them into it anyway (yay for non-consensual aggression mechanics!).

If by "PvP", you mean "Player vs. Player [interactions]", then all EVE players willingly engage in it simply by logging in (or being on the forums), as many of the basic activities involve "PvP" -- the Markets, Mining, Exploration, (ninja) Salvaging, Ratting, etc.

Now, for those of you who will argue that Mining or Exploration (etc.) are not "PvP", because "Well, the other guy can just go somewhere else" -- fact of the matter is, the site was cleared by you (a player), and now I (another player) have a negative consequence (i.e. "No sites, so go somewhere else") because of your actions.

Edit -- and, I think I totally misread the tone of your post the first time through, Kaarous.

It takes effort to roleplay the villain for normal people, if you are already a sociopath and arse****, of course it takes very little effort since its your nature. Code caters to that, in fact CCP caters to that as well, the "be a villain" ad sadly does not attract the GHSC kind of guy or the eve bank heist kind of guy but the small sociopath arse**** kind of guy. Which is why CCP should really think about that kind of Ad campaign since its not the schoolyard bully that made EvE famous but the guy who invested months and years for his heist.

I would not mind if Code was just another pirate gang, in fact I find the miners permit scam very much in line with EvE's general gameplay but Code members have time and again trespassed the boundaries of what can be called human behavior which brings me to the point were I do not believe them to be roleplaying arse**** but being RL arse***** as well.