PvP servers are a different discussion entirely. You're talking about open world PvP on a PvE server which the majority of players will not be able to handle at all.
It's still kind of ambiguous what is meant by griefing. 1-2 bored people looking to annoy is a rare situation. More often than not, it's going to be people pushing out a group because they have something to gain from it.
PvP on a PvE server just isn't going to fly for the majority of people. I'll be playing PvP if it's done well, but PvE servers are not going to survive with a mechanic like that.
Liav said:PvP servers are a different discussion entirely. You're talking about open world PvP on a PvE server which the majority of players will not be able to handle at all.
It's still kind of ambiguous what is meant by griefing. 1-2 bored people looking to annoy is a rare situation. More often than not, it's going to be people pushing out a group because they have something to gain from it.
PvP on a PvE server just isn't going to fly for the majority of people. I'll be playing PvP if it's done well, but PvE servers are not going to survive with a mechanic like that.
Liav said:PvP servers are a different discussion entirely. You're talking about open world PvP on a PvE server which the majority of players will not be able to handle at all.
It's still kind of ambiguous what is meant by griefing. 1-2 bored people looking to annoy is a rare situation. More often than not, it's going to be people pushing out a group because they have something to gain from it.
PvP on a PvE server just isn't going to fly for the majority of people. I'll be playing PvP if it's done well, but PvE servers are not going to survive with a mechanic like that.
It is simply a duel which is on most PvE servers, taken one step further. A mechanism to force the hand of the griefer if enough players concur.
With a 10 player minimum, 10 minute warning, 1 hour reset, and player currency involved, it is hardly "open world pvp".
Hopefully we will have a community more like Everquest than WOW, i stopped playing these after all the abuse players got in the 2nd. But having a great guild helps.
DragonFist said:
That is simply not my experience. My experience in actually playing through situations like this, is that if one makes taking over or stealing content not worth the effort, the griefers give up and usually relatively fast. I have experienced where it took a while to create that effect (hours) but I can also tell you that one specific guild that used to engage in this behavior on my server in EQ eventually came to just enter a zone and if I or member of my guild were in that zone, they just moved on to easier prey.
That, for me, is a much more enjoyable game than one in which I have to leave because a griefer guild shows up in my zone.
Look, I'm not saying that general training and other activities that clearly can ruin the game for others should be condoned. But I am saying that a "self-defense plea" is and should be a valid thing.
I also think that records should be kept of those that have such situations come up regularly so that GMs can start investigating both people that are regularly reported on for griefing and those claiming "self-defense" a whole lot. Those that are problematic will likely have higher number of incidents and mechanics that allow GMs to keep track of those things and be given a list of the biggest red-flags would go a long way to handling things because you could narrow things down to the few major offenders.
So we're clear, I think we may be talking 2 different situations. For someone showing up and "camp stealing " or "Kill stealing" then I'm actually right there with you. That was part of my "Push through" comment. Often times this sort of thing doesn't bother me and ultimately I like a lot of people here don't necessary believe this is griefing but rather just part of the game and being in a zone with tons of other players. DPS is king seems to apply in these instances and if you can't push through because they have too much DPS or whatever then you switch it up.
For me, Griefing is something more than that. Its more like training camps multiple times and intensionally following people around to harrass or otherwise annoy. If we're talking strictly just another group moving into your territory then thats a different question, but if we're talking a group purposely trying to get you killed with trains to drive you off or one that follows you as you move from camp to camp to constantly contest whatever you are doing then thats where it crosses the line into griefing.
That said, I don't buy the "self-defense plea" as that just gives true griefers a way out. Escalating isn't the right thing to do and this eye for an eye stuff isn't a great idea. counter training or self defense griefing (as described above) shouldn't be encouraged nor should it be given special consideration. This isn't a murder trial, nor does VR have the resources or time it would need to take its incident handling to that level (nor would it be healthy to do so if they had the resources/time). Griefers are gonna grief, create methods and ways to report it and give the gm's what they need to do their jobs then move on. It may not happen overnight that they get whats coming to them but it always seems to happen. A few get banned for griefing and suddenly the other griefers tend to cool their approach and take note.
Zybane said:Liav said:PvP servers are a different discussion entirely. You're talking about open world PvP on a PvE server which the majority of players will not be able to handle at all.
It's still kind of ambiguous what is meant by griefing. 1-2 bored people looking to annoy is a rare situation. More often than not, it's going to be people pushing out a group because they have something to gain from it.
PvP on a PvE server just isn't going to fly for the majority of people. I'll be playing PvP if it's done well, but PvE servers are not going to survive with a mechanic like that.
It is simply a duel which is on most PvE servers, taken one step further. A mechanism to force the hand of the griefer if enough players concur.
With a 10 player minimum, 10 minute warning, 1 hour reset, and player currency involved, it is hardly "open world pvp".
Such a mechanic would be prone to abuse and a tool of griefers. They would just start roaming in bands of 10+ people that target and /Pvp a healer from the group and force them out of the zone. there simply isn't a real way to control its potential abuse without directly limiting its use in its intended purpose. Paying a "small fee" to do so won't discourage people from abusing the command and paying a sizable fee will inhibit anyone from actually using it for its intended purpose since groups only include 6 people and its unlikely you'll find outside groups willing to assist you at that cost. Not to mention there are plenty of groups out there willing to pay sizable fee's if they can go 10 v 1 agaisnt a particular person.
Furthermore its usefulness against people who grief by training would be limited since normally the only time you see them is when they have a massive group of nasty mobs behind them and at that point you typically have other things to do than to try and attack them.
Keldaria said:DragonFist said:
That is simply not my experience. My experience in actually playing through situations like this, is that if one makes taking over or stealing content not worth the effort, the griefers give up and usually relatively fast. I have experienced where it took a while to create that effect (hours) but I can also tell you that one specific guild that used to engage in this behavior on my server in EQ eventually came to just enter a zone and if I or member of my guild were in that zone, they just moved on to easier prey.
That, for me, is a much more enjoyable game than one in which I have to leave because a griefer guild shows up in my zone.
Look, I'm not saying that general training and other activities that clearly can ruin the game for others should be condoned. But I am saying that a "self-defense plea" is and should be a valid thing.
I also think that records should be kept of those that have such situations come up regularly so that GMs can start investigating both people that are regularly reported on for griefing and those claiming "self-defense" a whole lot. Those that are problematic will likely have higher number of incidents and mechanics that allow GMs to keep track of those things and be given a list of the biggest red-flags would go a long way to handling things because you could narrow things down to the few major offenders.So we're clear, I think we may be talking 2 different situations. For someone showing up and "camp stealing " or "Kill stealing" then I'm actually right there with you. That was part of my "Push through" comment. Often times this sort of thing doesn't bother me and ultimately I like a lot of people here don't necessary believe this is griefing but rather just part of the game and being in a zone with tons of other players. DPS is king seems to apply in these instances and if you can't push through because they have too much DPS or whatever then you switch it up.
For me, Griefing is something more than that. Its more like training camps multiple times and intensionally following people around to harrass or otherwise annoy. If we're talking strictly just another group moving into your territory then thats a different question, but if we're talking a group purposely trying to get you killed with trains to drive you off or one that follows you as you move from camp to camp to constantly contest whatever you are doing then thats where it crosses the line into griefing.
That said, I don't buy the "self-defense plea" as that just gives true griefers a way out. Escalating isn't the right thing to do and this eye for an eye stuff isn't a great idea. counter training or self defense griefing (as described above) shouldn't be encouraged nor should it be given special consideration. This isn't a murder trial, nor does VR have the resources or time it would need to take its incident handling to that level (nor would it be healthy to do so if they had the resources/time). Griefers are gonna grief, create methods and ways to report it and give the gm's what they need to do their jobs then move on. It may not happen overnight that they get whats coming to them but it always seems to happen. A few get banned for griefing and suddenly the other griefers tend to cool their approach and take note.
I am referring the the repeated actions of a person, group or guild to harrass another person, group or guild, often with the result of preventing them from using content or taking said content by use of tactics such as repeatedly training them (especially when they have a named in camp at the time), etc. I'm not talking about normal competition. I'm not talking about two groups trying to take out-dps each other on a named. I'm not even talking about an accidental train or even a one-time "I'm pissed off that you won the dps race" train. I'm talking about that situation in which a set of individuals make it their "duty" to prevent others from playing the game or preven the use of certain content ( A named, a certain camp, zone, etc.) And I have never seen "ignoring" such persons result in anything other than the griefer believing they are on the top of the food chain and taking an attitude of "go ahead, report us. Meanwhile we'll use this content now and you can't prove anything and we win. Piss off."
Non-griefers tend to follow the rules in the first place. There might be incidents where emotions run high but for the most part people try to follow the rule a discussion can sort out most. But the actual griefers have no intention of following the rules. And THAT is the problem. It isn't a matter of "escalation". It is a matter of the only thing that will stop them from actively working to ruin the game for others is to be removed from the game or to have an impact on them personally. Generally, they use the fact that others follow the rules to gain control of an area and get a monopoly on certain content.
I don't care about "escalation". I can tell you that if a group trains my group over and over in an effort to drive me out, and a /report does nothing, I'll take care of it myself. And I'm against any rules that would result in a ban for doing so, especially with the griefers not also getting banned.
Frankly, those that wish to grief others tend to greatly support "doing the right thing" under these circumstances. Makes it easier to grief others if they are not allowed to fight back.
lol I remember the good auld days you where able to say camped in general world chat and hardly anyone would try and take it away from you even when it took forever to spawn in Everquest. All games are going to have bad players but let's hope in this one the good ones outnumber them and we all have a enjoyable gaming experience.
Tristar said:lol I remember the good auld days you where able to say camped in general world chat and hardly anyone would try and take it away from you even when it took forever to spawn in Everquest. All games are going to have bad players but let's hope in this one the good ones outnumber them and we all have a enjoyable gaming experience.
Exactly, normal players play well with each other. It is far too common that when one has to /report someone, they are not dealing with normal players. And they go to great lengths to not only disbodey the rules but to use the fact that the normal player follows them to further grief the player. Unless they are caught red-handed, they are very difficult to deal with. One can't prevent the community from dealing with them as well.
Tristar said:lol I remember the good auld days you where able to say camped in general world chat and hardly anyone would try and take it away from you even when it took forever to spawn in Everquest. All games are going to have bad players but let's hope in this one the good ones outnumber them and we all have a enjoyable gaming experience.
I sincerely hope that this is how it ends up in Pantheon (on PvE servers). I don't know how anyone is/could be okay with another group coming along and stealing your camp because they have more DPS/whatever than you do, it's just extremely bully-ish behavior.
DragonFist said:I am referring the the repeated actions of a person, group or guild to harrass another person, group or guild, often with the result of preventing them from using content or taking said content by use of tactics such as repeatedly training them (especially when they have a named in camp at the time), etc. I'm not talking about normal competition. I'm not talking about two groups trying to take out-dps each other on a named. I'm not even talking about an accidental train or even a one-time "I'm pissed off that you won the dps race" train. I'm talking about that situation in which a set of individuals make it their "duty" to prevent others from playing the game or preven the use of certain content ( A named, a certain camp, zone, etc.) And I have never seen "ignoring" such persons result in anything other than the griefer believing they are on the top of the food chain and taking an attitude of "go ahead, report us. Meanwhile we'll use this content now and you can't prove anything and we win. Piss off."
Non-griefers tend to follow the rules in the first place. There might be incidents where emotions run high but for the most part people try to follow the rule a discussion can sort out most. But the actual griefers have no intention of following the rules. And THAT is the problem. It isn't a matter of "escalation". It is a matter of the only thing that will stop them from actively working to ruin the game for others is to be removed from the game or to have an impact on them personally. Generally, they use the fact that others follow the rules to gain control of an area and get a monopoly on certain content.
Fair enough, we seem to be on the same page as what constitutes griefing. I just wanted to make sure we weren't in some sort of symantics debate.
As far as the idea that the only way to stop a griefer is to take matters into your own hands and grief them back, I can't say I buy into that. I've never seen an instance where training someone who trained you makes them suddenly stop griefing. If anything it just becomes a new norm of gameplay as it often encourages those that do see its as breaking the rules that the rules don't matter.
DragonFist said:And I'm against any rules that would result in a ban for doing so, especially with the griefers not also getting banned.
For what its worth, I feel the appropriate rules should ban you both and call it a day. I'm really, really not big on the idea of "Well he started it" as a defense.
EDIT: Just going to add to this that I'd advocate for a strong and active Guide program along with typical logging and anti-grief replay tools that can be created and implimented with current technology to aid in monitoring/verifying the reported players and strengthening rules enforcement. There doesn't have to be 20 paid GMs on call to verify stuff 24hr a day to ensure enforcement happens. If VR is worried about loosing subscriptions then they can always throw caught players onto a designated No-Rules server and let them go hog wild. Then they essentially give the player that got caught a choice, "Hey I caught you griefing players on 6/XX/2018, 6/XX/2018 and now again today on 7/XX/2018 (or however many strikes you want to give). You can either be moved to the no ruleset server or you can be banned. Your choice, choose quickly."
TL:DR - Griefing is bad mmkay, but what is the real definition of griefing as it pertains to VR and their EULA, and how should we respond to griefers. Implementation and punishment.
What you really should do - The best thing you can do in this situation is what I do. I don't argue with them, I don't call them names, and I certainly don't treat them with the same bad behaivor. Instead I fire up OBS hit live stream or record and let the actions show for themselves. Then I send in a ticket to CS with the link as proof. End of story. You want to stop this kind of stuff then you need to be proactive, but in the right way. Its best to avoid confrontation all together, that way you don't end up getting banned yourself.
THIS IS MY OPINION - CS needs to devise a fast an easy (in game) process to report this behaivor. For example right clicking the name and selecting "report for griefing". Once a specific threshold is met ie: 3-5 people (just an example) report the same person then a temp ban automatically takes place for a certain amount of time (maybe an hour with an explanation emailed to the reported individual) After that hour if the person gets reported again (by different people: this is key) then an actual CS intervenes with an invesitgation. (this investigation would include talking to those who reported the person) Once CS indentifies yes this person is in fact griefing in a purposful manner then a ban of 7 days should be implemented. If after 7 days the person has not closed the account and they come back and do it again lifetime ban. If you are not harsh from the start then people will just keep griefing because they know they can get away with it.
Whats really going on? - The key thing to keep in mind is this. It should be the decision of VR as to what the punishment should or should not be. To give you an exampler (Eve Online) anybody who has played that game knows that the dev team will take your cookies and milk and eat them in front of you and tell you to quit crying, but if they find you have commited actual griefing and you're guilty of it, you might as well just turn your account off because the CS team will not tolerate "REAL" griefing.
What we all need to understand - Another issue is defining what griefing is in the eyes of VR not what we think griefing is. The reason I say this is you will have people who will report anything as griefing. If you consider chat griefing then you would be mistaken, because you can put that person on ignore. Unless it is racial or actual threats on your life (the sorts of things that should always be taken seriously) Then you have people who will report others as a form of griefing itself. So now you have to determine if they should be punished for applying a false report in the first place.
What can really be done - At the end of the day though many people here have already made good suggestions. After all its just a game, and frankly the best thing you can do is report, take a break, and come back later. Don't stoop to the level of those who grief just because they think they can otherwise your actions are no better then the griefer.
Keldaria said:DragonFist said:I am referring the the repeated actions of a person, group or guild to harrass another person, group or guild, often with the result of preventing them from using content or taking said content by use of tactics such as repeatedly training them (especially when they have a named in camp at the time), etc. I'm not talking about normal competition. I'm not talking about two groups trying to take out-dps each other on a named. I'm not even talking about an accidental train or even a one-time "I'm pissed off that you won the dps race" train. I'm talking about that situation in which a set of individuals make it their "duty" to prevent others from playing the game or preven the use of certain content ( A named, a certain camp, zone, etc.) And I have never seen "ignoring" such persons result in anything other than the griefer believing they are on the top of the food chain and taking an attitude of "go ahead, report us. Meanwhile we'll use this content now and you can't prove anything and we win. Piss off."
Non-griefers tend to follow the rules in the first place. There might be incidents where emotions run high but for the most part people try to follow the rule a discussion can sort out most. But the actual griefers have no intention of following the rules. And THAT is the problem. It isn't a matter of "escalation". It is a matter of the only thing that will stop them from actively working to ruin the game for others is to be removed from the game or to have an impact on them personally. Generally, they use the fact that others follow the rules to gain control of an area and get a monopoly on certain content.Fair enough, we seem to be on the same page as what constitutes griefing. I just wanted to make sure we weren't in some sort of symantics debate.
As far as the idea that the only way to stop a griefer is to take matters into your own hands and grief them back, I can't say I buy into that. I've never seen an instance where training someone who trained you makes them suddenly stop griefing. If anything it just becomes a new norm of gameplay as it often encourages those that do see its as breaking the rules that the rules don't matter.
DragonFist said:And I'm against any rules that would result in a ban for doing so, especially with the griefers not also getting banned.
For what its worth, I feel the appropriate rules should ban you both and call it a day. I'm really, really not big on the idea of "Well he started it" as a defense.
EDIT: Just going to add to this that I'd advocate for a strong and active Guide program along with typical logging and anti-grief replay tools that can be created and implimented with current technology to aid in monitoring/verifying the reported players and strengthening rules enforcement. There doesn't have to be 20 paid GMs on call to verify stuff 24hr a day to ensure enforcement happens. If VR is worried about loosing subscriptions then they can always throw caught players onto a designated No-Rules server and let them go hog wild. Then they essentially give the player that got caught a choice, "Hey I caught you griefing players on 6/XX/2018, 6/XX/2018 and now again today on 7/XX/2018 (or however many strikes you want to give). You can either be moved to the no ruleset server or you can be banned. Your choice, choose quickly."
Well, let's just say that I REALLY hope that you don't have significant influence on the how this ends up. As I've said, several times, I am all for and want several earlier steps from better AI on mobs to tools that allow for effective reporting. But, at the end of the day, if none of that works, one has one of two choices, give up and let the griefer win or do something yourself. And in this final scenario, I completely disagree with your live and let live solution as I know it doesn't work. It doesn't work in life and it doesn't work under these circumstances either. But I'll be very happy to have it be a non-issue because there were enough reporting tools to begin with. I've not seen a single game where that has worked out. Even in todays sterilized on-line single player games, griefers find ways to harm other players. It doesn't have much long term effect as most every thing is instanced and one can single-player somewhere else. But there are not very fun either.
Lastly, you call it "he did it first". I call it self-defense. It exists in the real world for a reason. You can downplay it all you want but it is a valid fact that someone causes a situation. Blaming the victim for that because they do something about it is just wrong. I understand the difficulty in determining the true cause and the tools to allow accuracy in that are of the greatest importance. But just because the tools fail and one can't prove who was the aggresive actor in a situation, doesn't change the fact that there is always one tha the exists in any such situation. Your solution ignores that fact and throws the victim into the same pot as the attacker. There are people that believe a woman that kills the man raping her should go to jail. I do not. They also say she should blow a whistle or call the police and leave it to them. I think she should carry a gun and after asking the attacker to walk away if the chance presents itself, blow him away and as long as the facts support it, no murder charges are brought. I don't think that an on-line video game is as serious as the example. However, it does give example to the concepts I am trying to convery.
DragonFist said:Well, let's just say that I REALLY hope that you don't have significant influence on the how this ends up. As I've said, several times, I am all for and want several earlier steps from better AI on mobs to tools that allow for effective reporting. But, at the end of the day, if none of that works, one has one of two choices, give up and let the griefer win or do something yourself. And in this final scenario, I completely disagree with your live and let live solution as I know it doesn't work. It doesn't work in life and it doesn't work under these circumstances either. But I'll be very happy to have it be a non-issue because there were enough reporting tools to begin with. I've not seen a single game where that has worked out. Even in todays sterilized on-line single player games, griefers find ways to harm other players. It doesn't have much long term effect as most every thing is instanced and one can single-player somewhere else. But there are not very fun either.
Lastly, you call it "he did it first". I call it self-defense. It exists in the real world for a reason. You can downplay it all you want but it is a valid fact that someone causes a situation. Blaming the victim for that because they do something about it is just wrong. I understand the difficulty in determining the true cause and the tools to allow accuracy in that are of the greatest importance. But just because the tools fail and one can't prove who was the aggresive actor in a situation, doesn't change the fact that there is always one tha the exists in any such situation. Your solution ignores that fact and throws the victim into the same pot as the attacker. There are people that believe a woman that kills the man raping her should go to jail. I do not. They also say she should blow a whistle or call the police and leave it to them. I think she should carry a gun and after asking the attacker to walk away if the chance presents itself, blow him away and as long as the facts support it, no murder charges are brought. I don't think that an on-line video game is as serious as the example. However, it does give example to the concepts I am trying to convery.
Taking analogies to that point is rediculous and using killing of a rapist as an example is unnecessary and doubly rediculous. To even compare what I am saying to that level is quite frankly insulting. Not only to me but to anyone that ever found themselves in that situation. I ask that you to please dial your responses back a tad as I am NOT attacking you or your opinion but rather I am debating the subject and explaining my opinion, you can disagree, and you can even have reasons to disagree but that doesn't mean my reasons for having my opinion are wrong. Furthermore, if we are going to compare griefing to reality than this is more like vandalizing someones house. If someone breaks your house window and you in turn decided to break their houses window does that mean the police should ignore your response because they started it? We can agree to disagree here but can we at least do so in a reasonable mannor?
Keldaria said:DragonFist said:Well, let's just say that I REALLY hope that you don't have significant influence on the how this ends up. As I've said, several times, I am all for and want several earlier steps from better AI on mobs to tools that allow for effective reporting. But, at the end of the day, if none of that works, one has one of two choices, give up and let the griefer win or do something yourself. And in this final scenario, I completely disagree with your live and let live solution as I know it doesn't work. It doesn't work in life and it doesn't work under these circumstances either. But I'll be very happy to have it be a non-issue because there were enough reporting tools to begin with. I've not seen a single game where that has worked out. Even in todays sterilized on-line single player games, griefers find ways to harm other players. It doesn't have much long term effect as most every thing is instanced and one can single-player somewhere else. But there are not very fun either.
Lastly, you call it "he did it first". I call it self-defense. It exists in the real world for a reason. You can downplay it all you want but it is a valid fact that someone causes a situation. Blaming the victim for that because they do something about it is just wrong. I understand the difficulty in determining the true cause and the tools to allow accuracy in that are of the greatest importance. But just because the tools fail and one can't prove who was the aggresive actor in a situation, doesn't change the fact that there is always one tha the exists in any such situation. Your solution ignores that fact and throws the victim into the same pot as the attacker. There are people that believe a woman that kills the man raping her should go to jail. I do not. They also say she should blow a whistle or call the police and leave it to them. I think she should carry a gun and after asking the attacker to walk away if the chance presents itself, blow him away and as long as the facts support it, no murder charges are brought. I don't think that an on-line video game is as serious as the example. However, it does give example to the concepts I am trying to convery.Taking analogies to that point is rediculous and using killing of a rapist as an example is unnecessary and doubly rediculous. To even compare what I am saying to that level is quite frankly insulting. Not only to me but to anyone that ever found themselves in that situation. I ask that you to please dial your responses back a tad as I am NOT attacking you or your opinion but rather I am debating the subject and explaining my opinion, you can disagree, and you can even have reasons to disagree but that doesn't mean my reasons for having my opinion are wrong. Furthermore, if we are going to compare griefing to reality than this is more like vandalizing someones house. If someone breaks your house window and you in turn decided to break their houses window does that mean the police should ignore your response because they started it? We can agree to disagree here but can we at least do so in a reasonable mannor?
Even though I clearly stated the purpose of the analogy, you still had to use this argument. You can't ask something of me that you are unwilling to do yourself. You are factually deteriorating the debate into insult with such statements. I very clearly stated that this is not the same order of magnitude and just an analogy.
Be that as it may. I think I've made my point. You don't don't have to agree with it. But don't accuse me of not using reason. I'm sure you can work out what was meant. And none of these analogies are perfect. Neither is yours, as I'm not breaking their property. But even in that example, if someone repeated broke the windows of my house over and over for hours and I threw one brick in response, the law WOULD see the actions as different.
You insist on comparing the action to children fighting and saying "but he started it". Well, even in that scenario, if the parent takes your attitude and fails to determine who actually started, it will result in an injustice. I'm sure most can remember situations in which this was the case. The parent may not be able to sort out who did what. Often the parent does just punish both. I'm certain that isn't good for either the child or the peace of the household, but it has been done often. Doesn't mean it is right or even works. How many more fights continue down line because the actual cause wasn't determined. Determination of fault is a key part of any system of justice. It can't be brushed aside with a reference to "be he started it" childhood examples of (mostly) injustice.
DragonFist said:Even though I clearly stated the purpose of the analogy, you still had to use this argument. You can't ask something of me that you are unwilling to do yourself. You are factually deteriorating the debate into insult with such statements. I very clearly stated that this is not the same order of magnitude and just an analogy.
Be that as it may. I think I've made my point. You don't don't have to agree with it. But don't accuse me of not using reason. I'm sure you can work out what was meant. And none of these analogies are perfect. Neither is yours, as I'm not breaking their property. But even in that example, if someone repeated broke the windows of my house over and over for hours and I threw one brick in response, the law WOULD see the actions as different.
You insist on comparing the action to children fighting and saying "but he started it". Well, even in that scenario, if the parent takes your attitude and fails to determine who actually started, it will result in an injustice. I'm sure most can remember situations in which this was the case. The parent may not be able to sort out who did what. Often the parent does just punish both. I'm certain that isn't good for either the child or the peace of the household, but it has been done often. Doesn't mean it is right or even works. How many more fights continue down line because the actual cause wasn't determined.
Wow, really? I asked you to dial your response back not stop using analogies. I take no exception with the use of analogies, even with them going to the extreme to attempt to make a point, I often use analogies myself. The part I draw the line on is taking them overboard like you did above, that is all and I've asked you to dial that back as nothing suggest this issue would warrant anywhere near the consideration as the situation in which you described. Yes you clearly stated it in your opinion what you were attempting to do but you didn't have to take it to the level as it is completely unnecessary and the same points could have been made without going to that level.
Yes you did make your point, I'm happy to agree to disagree, and I've never accused you of not using reasoning but rather am clarifying my own reasoning as I often suspected I was being misunderstood based upon your reaction (hense my questioning what you defined as griefing earlier). My analogy isn't perfect (no analogy is) but its worth pointing out that yes in that scenario they would see a difference and they would charge them with breaking multiple windows and you as breaking one. They may sympathize with you but they would still charge you for what you've done.
As for your parenting analogy, I would hope that my kids were smart enough to learn the proper way to handle a situation rather than doing something that gets themselves also in trouble but I suppose we'll have to disagree here as well. At any rate, I wish you the best as this conversation seems to be at the Agree to Disagree point and we're only rehashing the same points.
You are missing the point and apparently intend to because I could not have been more clear about "I don't think that an on-line video game is as serious as the example. However, it does give example to the concepts I am trying to convery."
But you chose to take offense anyway, and continue to do so even though I have pointed it out a second time. There is nothing I can do about that.
I've made my point. It is a valid point. I don't really care that you don't agree with it and am certainly not worried about your judgement of my ability to reason.
And there are plenty of cases where the victim is not charged with reactions, especially if done within a reason period of time of the intial action. It weighed on a case by case basis and the precidents are too numorous to list.
A story.... extreme and not a reality for all... but true none the less...
Several years ago I was in an endgame guild in another MMO. We had one other guild on the server who we considered to be rivals but we had a great reelationship with them even helping each other at times. To the rest of the server we were outsiders who didnt spend time associating with others and this was fine by us because we were there for one thing and that was to beat the game content.
We ran a tight guild with a business mentality raiding 5 nights a week. With that being the case a lot of us had alts that unbeknown to others on the server played with them and were a part of their guild. We did this for 2 reasons... one was for our guild's benefit which was to scout out and poach their top players if we had an opening but the other was more of an individual's choice to have some down time away from the duties of the guild without outsiders knowing who we were and what guild our mains belonged to... some enjoyed role playing so they would join a role playing guild and others joined guilds for more casual and fun play.
There was a point when several people became know by many on the server for griefing on an ongoing basis and just being .... choose a word.... this turned out to be a consistant thing lasting several weeks and becoming worse and worse and after several guilds tried to talk to their guild about their members actions and, being griefed by the guild itself in turn, our alts decided to bring it to our guilds attention.
We talked to our rival guild to help deal with this and sent out word to several guilds on the server if members from this guild show up anywhere in the world we asked to be notified. Over the next 3 days when one of them or the guild logged in to do anything they were challenged. One day they tried harvesting a zone and within 20 minutes we had 150 ppl in the zone to be on every node and harvest before they could. If they camped something we would role in en mass and take over the camp. If they dared turn on PvP... well... mistake. Their only safe zone was instances.
Three days.. and they were no longer seen on the server.
Was this the right thing to do.. who knows but it was obvious the devs were not going to stop them so someone had to.
Was this an extreme? Yes. Did we enjoy doing it? No. But something needed to be done for the good of the server so we did.
It sucks if or when it comes to this but that type of behavior will always be in the vast minority. If the community stands by when its obvious the devs wont do anything to help after enough evidence has been built against them which negatively affects the entire server... they deserve what they get.
Kilsin said:Guys, you can both disagree and walk away, there is no need to drag it out and argue opinions in my thread, this is why so many threads get closed.
I agree after reading all that.
On a side note, do you think devs concider harassement the same as griefing? What i understood from years ago they are completely different but go hand and hand usually.
It is a bannable offence to harass another person, usually in most EULA at the start of every title, but griefing can be also "faked" in order to become an elite dickhead troll, just to feel special.
In the past i ran through a zone, i got a notice 2 days later did you train this person on purpose i said what train? it ended up being someone completely different that did those things.
Trains happen, even if it is more then once, but if you sit at the zoneout afk or killing mobs expect some bad pulls.
Otherwise what do you think the stance is kilsin?
another time, i sat at a camp spot all alone pulling mobs to myself. Never had any issues with anyone. All of a sudden a guy pulls up with 4 toons and starts ksing, and pulling into my little spot. I tried to ask him? ok mind moving to another location so i can continue to play. He never responded then at the end said FU period. Ill do what i want.
Zybane said:Relying on an army of GM's awaiting your beck and call isn't going to work and is never a reality.
Easiest way to deal with it is play on a PvP server. I just hope VR doesn't make classe(s) like the EQ1 bard that were stupidly over powered for training purposes.
TL:DR - I don't agree with your approach
I don't PvP so while your point could be valid for some it is not for me. Having said that I want to point out what is the relevance of pvp in dealing with griefers? (actual people who intentionally ruin the game experience for another person by their actions with the intent to disrupt game play or access to content of another paying customer) PvP in no way shape or form even remotly fits that description as a way to deal with the root cause.
As I stated earlier in a post in this thread its not up to us (the gamer) to validate what constitutes griefing, but it does need to be handled in a professional manner, albeit with a little transparancy by VR. Its VR's job to identify what they consider to be griefing and then to implement said policy via the EULA which we all agree to follow by the very nature of logging into the game. Having said that there is no sense in downplaying the actual issue of griefing. It isn't a question of an Army of GM's being at any of our beckoning calls. This is my opinion (key word) but it has everything to do with controlling this kind of bad behaivor which more often then not is comitted by actual adults vs. children who may do the same thing.
That alone speaks to an underlying issue in of itself because what kind of Adult (sane adult) would actually act this way in a professional setting or when confronting other people. (so why act this way in a game) The behaivor of griefing is an unacceptable activity and should be dealt with to an extreme to ensure that those who want to partake in this bad behaivor are severly punished for their actions (once VR can confirm any wrong doing) I pity the gamer who falsly accuses somebody for griefing as well, because they should be met with the same kind of punishment of someone who does grief.
Crazzie said:Kilsin said:Guys, you can both disagree and walk away, there is no need to drag it out and argue opinions in my thread, this is why so many threads get closed.
I agree after reading all that.
On a side note, do you think devs concider harassement the same as griefing? What i understood from years ago they are completely different but go hand and hand usually.
It is a bannable offence to harass another person, usually in most EULA at the start of every title, but griefing can be also "faked" in order to become an elite dickhead troll, just to feel special.
In the past i ran through a zone, i got a notice 2 days later did you train this person on purpose i said what train? it ended up being someone completely different that did those things.
Trains happen, even if it is more then once, but if you sit at the zoneout afk or killing mobs expect some bad pulls.
Otherwise what do you think the stance is kilsin?
another time, i sat at a camp spot all alone pulling mobs to myself. Never had any issues with anyone. All of a sudden a guy pulls up with 4 toons and starts ksing, and pulling into my little spot. I tried to ask him? ok mind moving to another location so i can continue to play. He never responded then at the end said FU period. Ill do what i want.
There are a few differences to separate them, the main ones are:
- Griefing is the act of irritating and angering people in video games through the use of destruction, construction, or social engineering.
- Someone intentionally training you is considered griefing.
- Harassment (not including sexual or other forms of harassment) is the act of aggressive pressure or intimidation including threats and demands.
- Someone threatening you if you don't give them an item or your account details is considered harassment
Griefing is a punk move, Harassment is illegal, both would be on a case by case basis, obviously, harassment is a lot more serious, both would be dealt with according to our internal disciplinary protocol or the law depending on the situation.
If someone intentionally trains you more than once (once can be considered an accident/mistake or due to a disconnection, internet drop or lag), report them and let a GM, Guide or VR Staff member handle it.
If someone threatens you, try to screenshot the text or record their voice as evidence then discontinue any interaction with them and report them to us immediately.
Obviously both context and intention are critical factors. Unless ill intent is manifest it may be a good idea to try and talk to the other person about it. It may be a 10 year-old that has never played before and is borrowing her sister's or mother's character and has no idea what is normal or proper. Not necessarily a good situation but not necessarily something to bother VR about if they stop the offensive behavior when asked to. Or maybe you walked through a roleplaying event without knowing it and the "threat" is part of the roleplaying scenario not meant or taken by the roleplayers to be serious outside of the roleplaying. And they didn't notice that you weren't one of them.
