These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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

Does the 'PvPers are Sociopaths' argument bother anyone else?

Author
Morwen Lagann
Tyrathlion Interstellar
#121 - 2012-06-06 16:27:00 UTC
You can kind of make the argument that people who grief for no reason beyond lulz and tears are sociopaths, but meh.

It's more funny than bothersome, to me. The funniest one yet is the dude who thinks anyone who has ever PVPed in the game even once is going to go to hell on top of being a sociopath/rapist/child molester/terrorist/etc. IRL.

Yes, this person exists. And yes, I've been on the receiving end of one of their rants.

It's pretty ******* hilarious.

Morwen Lagann

CEO, Tyrathlion Interstellar

Coordinator, Arataka Research Consortium

Owner, The Golden Masque

Obsidian Dagger
Nitrus Nine
#122 - 2012-06-06 16:28:07 UTC
As a borderline sociopath who happens to be able to cope in normal society without recourse to drugs or an institution (now anyway, it wasn't always the case. The drugs they give you generate some GNARLY dreams), and at least pretend to care about the feelings of others in real world encounters, I am grossly offended by the attitudes of most EvE players.

A true sociopath would not play EvE at all, it's an MMO - a social game, where the intent is to impact on other people emotionally (the pixels are just a way of keeping SCORE in this regard).

You have to actually WANT to make other people miserable to engage in ganking and PVP etc. An EvE player CARES that he/she is causing misery and distress.
A sociopath does not care, and in fact only really feels in relation to themselves.

So, eve contains few, if any, sociopaths, no matter what whiny carebears like to think/say.
Ranger 1
Ranger Corp
Vae. Victis.
#123 - 2012-06-06 16:42:13 UTC  |  Edited by: Ranger 1
Zyress wrote:
Ranger 1 wrote:
March rabbit wrote:
Knus'lar wrote:
For real, do some people honestly believe people act the same in game as they do in real life?

i think there is other question: what makes person play "the worst" person in game than he is in RL?

I can understand "white knights": in RL you see so many bad things you can't change. You see bad people you can't fight with and they win. But in game you have this option so you can hide from reality and be "the stronger" in game. As i do usually in all games i play. In RL i would evade conflict but in game i have option and power to fight. So i will. But i never wanted to hurt even NPC (not in Eve tho where NPC is obvious and standard source of ISK). What for? I always can win going other way.

Other side is a "dark side". Only reason i can find is: game doesn't give you consequences for your business. Well it gives but not as in RL. Other reasons to be "bad boy" in game? I dunno really.


For many, it is the enjoyment of giving the "White Knights" a worthy adversary. People that have run role playing games of all sorts over the last few decades will freely tell you they spend the bulk of their time portraying bad guys for the enjoyment of others (and indirectly for themselves).

For others, it is the simple fact that "Bad Boys" have a certain undeniable cool factor.

Who wasn't a fan of Darth Vader as opposed to the whiney Luke Skywalker, or didn't angrily proclaimed "Han Solo shot first"?
Who didn't think Hanibal Lector was a facinating and brilliant psychopath?
Who can deny that Heath Ledgers portrayal of the Joker struck a chord, or for that matter didn't secretly identify in some way with the violent vigilante known as The Batman?

There is nothing wrong, ethically or psychologically, with portraying a bad guy in a fictional setting.


Actually I didn't like Darth Vader, more of a fan of Qui-Gon Jinn, Hanibal Lector was a sick fu@%, I preferred Jack Nicholsons Joker and Batman may have worn black but he was a white Knight.


And you are fullly entitled to your opinion of those characters.

However if you take the extra step of accusing the actors that portrayed them, or the writer that created and scripted the characters, of obviously having those same qualities (because how else could they act or think like that) you have stepped beyond the realm of common sense.

Fictional settings are just that, as are fictional characters.

Well balanced people are able to keep that distinction firmly in mind.

View the latest EVE Online developments and other game related news and gameplay by visiting Ranger 1 Presents: Virtual Realms.

Talon SilverHawk
Patria o Muerte
#124 - 2012-06-06 16:42:59 UTC  |  Edited by: Talon SilverHawk
Obsidian Dagger wrote:
As a borderline sociopath who happens to be able to cope in normal society without recourse to drugs or an institution (now anyway, it wasn't always the case. The drugs they give you generate some GNARLY dreams), and at least pretend to care about the feelings of others in real world encounters, I am grossly offended by the attitudes of most EvE players.

A true sociopath would not play EvE at all, it's an MMO - a social game, where the intent is to impact on other people emotionally (the pixels are just a way of keeping SCORE in this regard).

You have to actually WANT to make other people miserable to engage in ganking and PVP etc. An EvE player CARES that he/she is causing misery and distress.
A sociopath does not care, and in fact only really feels in relation to themselves.

So, eve contains few, if any, sociopaths, no matter what whiny carebears like to think/say.


Ok agreed no sociopaths, just as*holes Lol

Tal
Lustralis
Center for Advanced Studies
Gallente Federation
#125 - 2012-06-06 16:50:58 UTC
Svarek wrote:

To be honest, I'd have to side with the PvP-ers on this one, despite being generally more PvE myself. A world without player/player interaction like PvP would be completely flat and false, and the entire aspect of the player-driven world - to which PvP is absolutely vital - is what makes Eve Eve and not some other, generic MMORPG like Star Trek Online.


But you present a false dichotomy. Not many people are just doing PvE, if you count industry as PvP (which some would, if you have competitors). For example I mine sometimes to get mins for the things I build through invention. I mine ice sometimes too to exchange it for fuel blocks (equivalent value) to run the POS I use to manufacture. Am I doing PvE or PvP? To most people PvP is about getting into a ship and firing your guns. The majority of people aren't doing that though. In this context PvP is a minority activity in Eve.
Barbelo Valentinian
Strategic Exploration and Development Corp
Silent Company
#126 - 2012-06-06 16:53:04 UTC  |  Edited by: Barbelo Valentinian
AAAARGH, ******* FORUM ATE MY POST!!!!! GRrrrrrrr *throws coke at monitor*
Talon SilverHawk
Patria o Muerte
#127 - 2012-06-06 17:00:16 UTC
Barbelo Valentinian wrote:
AAAARGH, ******* FORUM ATE MY POST!!!!! GRrrrrrrr *throws coke at monitor*



You monitorpath


Tal

Zyress
Caldari Provisions
Caldari State
#128 - 2012-06-06 17:01:34 UTC
Ranger 1 wrote:
Zyress wrote:
Ranger 1 wrote:
March rabbit wrote:
Knus'lar wrote:
For real, do some people honestly believe people act the same in game as they do in real life?

i think there is other question: what makes person play "the worst" person in game than he is in RL?

I can understand "white knights": in RL you see so many bad things you can't change. You see bad people you can't fight with and they win. But in game you have this option so you can hide from reality and be "the stronger" in game. As i do usually in all games i play. In RL i would evade conflict but in game i have option and power to fight. So i will. But i never wanted to hurt even NPC (not in Eve tho where NPC is obvious and standard source of ISK). What for? I always can win going other way.

Other side is a "dark side". Only reason i can find is: game doesn't give you consequences for your business. Well it gives but not as in RL. Other reasons to be "bad boy" in game? I dunno really.


For many, it is the enjoyment of giving the "White Knights" a worthy adversary. People that have run role playing games of all sorts over the last few decades will freely tell you they spend the bulk of their time portraying bad guys for the enjoyment of others (and indirectly for themselves).

For others, it is the simple fact that "Bad Boys" have a certain undeniable cool factor.

Who wasn't a fan of Darth Vader as opposed to the whiney Luke Skywalker, or didn't angrily proclaimed "Han Solo shot first"?
Who didn't think Hanibal Lector was a facinating and brilliant psychopath?
Who can deny that Heath Ledgers portrayal of the Joker struck a chord, or for that matter didn't secretly identify in some way with the violent vigilante known as The Batman?

There is nothing wrong, ethically or psychologically, with portraying a bad guy in a fictional setting.


Actually I didn't like Darth Vader, more of a fan of Qui-Gon Jinn, Hanibal Lector was a sick fu@%, I preferred Jack Nicholsons Joker and Batman may have worn black but he was a white Knight.


And you are fullly entitled to your opinion of those characters.

However if you take the extra step of accusing the actors that portrayed them, or the writer that created and scripted the characters, of obviously having those same qualities (because how else could they act or think like that) you have stepped beyond the realm of common sense.

Fictional settings are just that, as are fictional characters.

Well balanced people are able to keep that distinction firmly in mind.


Actors play a part because they were cast for it, they are being paid to play it, or they think its a challenging role that will advance their career, it would not be logical to assume they enjoy being an a$$, thats not a good comparison to a video gamer that chooses, their role, how they want to behave in regard to other human beings. I have no problem with Pvp, I enjoy it, but I don't force it on people trying to avoid it by living in hi-sec aside from legitimate war targets. I'm not saying hisec should be perfectly safe and a$$hol@s are a necessary part of the game, much more boring without them. Fortunately there are plenty of them to be found and they obviously enjoy their negative interactions.
Ranger 1
Ranger Corp
Vae. Victis.
#129 - 2012-06-06 17:02:36 UTC
Lustralis wrote:
Svarek wrote:

To be honest, I'd have to side with the PvP-ers on this one, despite being generally more PvE myself. A world without player/player interaction like PvP would be completely flat and false, and the entire aspect of the player-driven world - to which PvP is absolutely vital - is what makes Eve Eve and not some other, generic MMORPG like Star Trek Online.


But you present a false dichotomy. Not many people are just doing PvE, if you count industry as PvP (which some would, if you have competitors). For example I mine sometimes to get mins for the things I build through invention. I mine ice sometimes too to exchange it for fuel blocks (equivalent value) to run the POS I use to manufacture. Am I doing PvE or PvP? To most people PvP is about getting into a ship and firing your guns. The majority of people aren't doing that though. In this context PvP is a minority activity in Eve.


Literal definitions of PVP aside and speaking strictly of combat situation... unless you are one of the individuals that never undocks everyone in EVE is engaged in either seeking out or avoiding PVP. It is the most common activity in the game, and always has been. It is a constant competition that includes people actively seeking combat as well as those actively seeking to evade (or at least survive) it.

Everything in EVE centers around this simple fact.

View the latest EVE Online developments and other game related news and gameplay by visiting Ranger 1 Presents: Virtual Realms.

Ranger 1
Ranger Corp
Vae. Victis.
#130 - 2012-06-06 17:19:00 UTC  |  Edited by: Ranger 1
Quote:
Actors play a part because they were cast for it, they are being paid to play it, or they think its a challenging role that will advance their career, it would not be logical to assume they enjoy being an a$$, thats not a good comparison to a video gamer that chooses, their role, how they want to behave in regard to other human beings. I have no problem with Pvp, I enjoy it, but I don't force it on people trying to avoid it by living in hi-sec aside from legitimate war targets. I'm not saying hisec should be perfectly safe and a$$hol@s are a necessary part of the game, much more boring without them. Fortunately there are plenty of them to be found and they obviously enjoy their negative interactions.


Actors also often play those parts because they enjoyed them and found them interesting. Check the bio of most actors and they often list classic bad guys as the most enjoyable characters they have portrayed.

Writers often feel the same way about the most memorable villians they have created, not to mention that without those villians their story's would have been abysmally boring.

The EVE universe is every bit as much a fictional universe as any movie or book, and you can no more compare the actions of the fictional characters in that universe to the people behind them than you can the mental state of the actor or writer who enjoys portraying/creating a character for a fictional movie or book.

There is nothing wrong with trying to avoid PVP situations in EVE, just as there is nothing wrong with trying to force PVP situations. The capability to do both are an intergal part of the game.

Attributing psychological problems to people that pursue those perfectly acceptable and allowed activities in EVE is nonsense, exactly as it is nonsense to accuse Vincent Price or Alfred Hitchcock of being a dangerous maniac.

People that insist on doing so have a serious problem separating fiction from reality.

View the latest EVE Online developments and other game related news and gameplay by visiting Ranger 1 Presents: Virtual Realms.

Horus Ernaga
Doomheim
#131 - 2012-06-06 17:44:31 UTC
[/quote]
MMO's, card games, and real life sports DO have one thing in common. They all have their own unique rules sets... rule sets that have little if anything to do with the rules we follow in our daily real life.

Suicide gankers are not breaking any of the rules of EVE, in fact the rules have been very carefully written and tweaked over the years to specifically allow it to happen.

While some would (understandably) think that I can walk on water, in fact I cannot. However I do not let the acquisition or loss of imaginary assets upset me in the slightest. My usual reaction to a loss is a simple "Well done"... exactly as it would be if I found myself in check mate, lost a hand at poker, or if I failed to outscore an opponent in a fencing match (it's been awhile).

I will say again, if you feel more than a momentary reaction of "Doh!" when you lose (or lose something) in a game or sport... if you feel uncontrollable rage or misery when this happens, you need to take a large step back from the activity.[/quote]


Of course we have rules, but they and the way they are used are far from the norm. I'm sure they, like myself, at first wonder they being killed just floating around some rocks versus that guy over there in his shiny battleship, or those guys out there looking for a fight, especially since this is high sec and they are guaranteed to lose their ship.

Like I said, I'm positive the majority of use feel something when losing a ship or pod even if just for a brief moment, hard to imagine someone smiling or completely blank during. Of course there are always exception, I laughed when my full meta 1 caracal was jumped at a gate by 10 people. Though getting podded wasn't quite as funny. I agree though if it upsets you for a duration or you completely lose it you should step away. In general that response comes from repeat offenses at in-opportune times for that specific player. Hunting down these players only adds to the problem as the compounds the frequency, so yes you are liking to get a emotion outburst.

All in all shame on those that hunt these people down just for the response, and shame on those that do not step away before such a response can be
Heinrich Rotwang
Spectre Fleet Corporation
#132 - 2012-06-06 18:24:07 UTC
The safety of remote + pseudonymity keeps attracting the same kind of people on the interwebs. Like that drunk little guy with the wizard hat.
Disregard That
Republic Military School
Minmatar Republic
#133 - 2012-06-06 18:28:31 UTC
Heinrich Rotwang wrote:
The safety of remote + pseudonymity keeps attracting the same kind of people on the interwebs. Like that drunk little guy with the wizard hat.

Your fallacy falls apart when you realize that he was there in real life. Drinking real Jager.

On camera. Un-delayed, natch.

And you paid for it.

At the end of the day his plane ride home was on you, too.
Ranger 1
Ranger Corp
Vae. Victis.
#134 - 2012-06-06 18:40:13 UTC  |  Edited by: Ranger 1
Quote:
MMO's, card games, and real life sports DO have one thing in common. They all have their own unique rules sets... rule sets that have little if anything to do with the rules we follow in our daily real life.

Suicide gankers are not breaking any of the rules of EVE, in fact the rules have been very carefully written and tweaked over the years to specifically allow it to happen.

While some would (understandably) think that I can walk on water, in fact I cannot. However I do not let the acquisition or loss of imaginary assets upset me in the slightest. My usual reaction to a loss is a simple "Well done"... exactly as it would be if I found myself in check mate, lost a hand at poker, or if I failed to outscore an opponent in a fencing match (it's been awhile).

I will say again, if you feel more than a momentary reaction of "Doh!" when you lose (or lose something) in a game or sport... if you feel uncontrollable rage or misery when this happens, you need to take a large step back from the activity.



Quote:
Of course we have rules, but they and the way they are used are far from the norm. I'm sure they, like myself, at first wonder they being killed just floating around some rocks versus that guy over there in his shiny battleship, or those guys out there looking for a fight, especially since this is high sec and they are guaranteed to lose their ship.

Like I said, I'm positive the majority of use feel something when losing a ship or pod even if just for a brief moment, hard to imagine someone smiling or completely blank during. Of course there are always exception, I laughed when my full meta 1 caracal was jumped at a gate by 10 people. Though getting podded wasn't quite as funny. I agree though if it upsets you for a duration or you completely lose it you should step away. In general that response comes from repeat offenses at in-opportune times for that specific player. Hunting down these players only adds to the problem as the compounds the frequency, so yes you are liking to get a emotion outburst.

All in all shame on those that hunt these people down just for the response, and shame on those that do not step away before such a response can be


You are getting there, but have still missed the point.

Non consentual combat in all it's forms is completely the norm, the whole game is designed around it.

People get confused on a subconcious level when they see Concord retaliate and blow up a suicide ganker. In the back of their head they see an in game authority figure punishing someone for criminal behavior and think "this person is breaking the rules and doing something fundamentally wrong... what's wrong with him."

This is, of course, nonsense.

That ganker has done literally nothing wrong and is playing the game well within the rules. In fact, a large amount of programming was done specifically to allow him to do this. It would have been far simpler to simply not allow weapons activation in high sec unless it is against a war target or someone with a GCC. Instead a great deal of effort went into making it possible to suicide gank, but in a manner that had very measured penalties to it as well.

Suicide ganker does not equal griefer, exploiter, rule breaker, cheater, sociopath or anything else other than simply being another player playing EVE by the rules.

View the latest EVE Online developments and other game related news and gameplay by visiting Ranger 1 Presents: Virtual Realms.

Virgil Travis
Non Constructive Self Management
#135 - 2012-06-06 18:43:17 UTC
Lustralis wrote:
Virgil Travis wrote:

Actually no it's not, I was talking about the attitude that you should be left alone which has nothing to do with what you're talking about at all, so my argument is not moot at all, it's just you trying to change it to suit yourself. I'm not talking about game mechanics at all so if you wish to discuss that fine, but I'm talking about that fact that some people feel they should be allowed to be completely separated from the rest of the game, which is utterly fallacious thinking.


It is moot, because what are you arguing here? If another player wants to be left alone to engage in whatever activity in Sandbox Eve, where ganking his ass is one possible choice of many and by no means compulsory, who are you to say he's "playing it wrong"? It's really none of your business what he does with his time! Why do you even care?

I honestly have no idea where the fun is in doing something like that. If he's in field with 9 other Hulks all called ChingChongChang0x, then yes, I can see the point. But if it's OldeBob and his alt mining Velspar, what is the point? It's just, you know, being an ass for the hell of it.

I have a nephew who likes to be an ass just for the hell of it. He's a lovely lad out of game, but a complete twonk inside of it. I try to teach him a little self-respect and tell him that even though it's a lot of space pixels, there are other people, some of whom suffer from a surfeit of emotion, out there on the other end of the line. He pays no attention. I'm sure that he'll grow out of it.

Anyway, don't get me wrong, suicide ganking is fine if you aren't doing it with recycled alt. It's just called Gameplay. If you are doing it with recycled alt it's totally not fine and is an exploit. I would be interested to know what proportion of ganks are of the latter form. If it's a significant number CCP has a problem.





This is my argument: If he's in the same universe as me and I encounter him and decide I want to interact in whichever way, be that mining the rocks he wanted to, undercutting him on the market or blowing his ship up the sandbox gives me that option. If he want's to be left alone he has to assert that right by either finding a place where I don't go or using some method to deter me, it's not an assumed right for him to say 'leave me alone', he should have some way to back that up and if he can't, the sandbox says 'sorry, you lose'

I don't gank myself, but I agree, using disposable alts is an exploit and players should deal with the consequences, but those wishing simply to be left alone, it's not a right that's given to them, it's something they earn, find a quiet system or get some teeth and tell the gankers where to go.

Unified Church of the Unobligated - madness in the method Mamma didn't raise no victims.

Disregard That
Republic Military School
Minmatar Republic
#136 - 2012-06-06 18:43:34 UTC
How is one form of button mashing to move data around in Eve's database morally superior to another form of button mashing to move data around in Eve's database?

Please, anybody who can explain this?

I worry I may be a sociopath if I play a game. Roll
Heinrich Rotwang
Spectre Fleet Corporation
#137 - 2012-06-06 18:44:01 UTC  |  Edited by: Heinrich Rotwang
Disregard That wrote:
Heinrich Rotwang wrote:
The safety of remote + pseudonymity keeps attracting the same kind of people on the interwebs. Like that drunk little guy with the wizard hat.

Your fallacy falls apart when you realize that he was there in real life. Drinking real Jager.

On camera. Un-delayed, natch.

And you paid for it.

At the end of the day his plane ride home was on you, too.


You really think you can troll a N-a-z-i like me with the jager thing?
Disregard That
Republic Military School
Minmatar Republic
#138 - 2012-06-06 18:45:20 UTC
Heinrich Rotwang wrote:
Disregard That wrote:
Heinrich Rotwang wrote:
The safety of remote + pseudonymity keeps attracting the same kind of people on the interwebs. Like that drunk little guy with the wizard hat.

Your fallacy falls apart when you realize that he was there in real life. Drinking real Jager.

On camera. Un-delayed, natch.

And you paid for it.

At the end of the day his plane ride home was on you, too.


You really think you can troll a N-a-z-i like me with the jager thing?

Did you reply?
Heinrich Rotwang
Spectre Fleet Corporation
#139 - 2012-06-06 18:54:41 UTC
Disregard That wrote:
Did you reply?


Oh, you're pulling the last resort early :-)
Disregard That
Republic Military School
Minmatar Republic
#140 - 2012-06-06 18:57:36 UTC
But really, I'm talking about button-mashing on these forums.

Fallacies aside.

How is one form morally superior to another form?

How is where you put CCP's data on their game board somehow sacrosanct and how others manipulate the data is reprehensible?

Do you hold all your Draw Fours when you play Uno against your friends/family/children/acquaintences/strangers?

I doubt this very much.