@Jayce_Fitzpatrick i think you are needing a hug
come here big fellow
1 Like
1 Like
Yes, the base substance remains the same. For example, the aggression remains, but it’s “sublimated” into, say, a career in boxing or the military, or blowing up spaceships in a video game.
Hm, well when you talk about “good” and “evil”, now you’re getting away from psychology and more into philosophy. Clinically, I think in terms of “adaptive” and “maladaptive”, “healthy” or “unhealthy” (all of which exist on a continuum without clear borders). If you want to talk philosophically though, I’m inclined to agree with Solzhenitsyn:
“If only it were all so simple! If only there were evil people somewhere insidiously committing evil deeds, and it were necessary only to separate them from the rest of us and destroy them. But the line dividing good and evil cuts through the heart of every human being. And who is willing to destroy a piece of his own heart?” - Aleksandr Solzhenitsyn
That would depend on your perspective. In the Christian tradition, humans exist in a fallen state, and we are all tainted with Adam’s original sin; we are pluripotent, capable of great acts of altruism and kindness or great acts of evil and destruction. From a Buddhist perspective (and I do believe Siddhartha was the first psychologist), there is no “good” and “evil” as all is Maya or illusion.
I’d be the first to admit that I’ve indulged in antisocial tendencies in EVE Online.
Lied about what?
Do you have some sources/links to corroborate these statements?
I actually don’t score particularly high on those traits. While I do score below the mean for trait Agreeableness, all the Agreeableness I have comes from the facets modesty, straightforwardness, and altruism which stand in contradistinction to egotism, Machiavellianism, and psychopathy.
You’re painting this picture of me as some evil sociopathic spymaster. In reality, most of the “bad” things I’ve done in EVE Online are best compared to small time thuggery and petty opportunism.
Post on your main.
PlanetSide 2 was pretty dope until they added massive amounts of cheese.
Minimal yet they are higher then any of the other regions except delve because of the one in a half decade war against long standing enemies.
Seems like you gut caught in another lie with your peddling of the dark triad.
I bet if we dig deeper into this we will find that the 3-4 trillion lost in the major regions for the major races is due to people like code. It seems your lying never ends.
You have to prove this is in fact the case. I believe the reason why eve is as successful as it is, is simply because the other options are not good options. Take eve vs Elite for example. the reason why elite is not a major competitor for eve is because finding people is extremely difficult. Everything in eve takes place around a an object and when it does not it takes place around a point (we refer to as safes). In elite you effectively have so much space there things are not taking place around objects and because of this the game is just impossible to play as an mmo.
I do think that the complex form of game play is part of it. As designers we have alienated these players to much over the years, but i dont find that changing high sec from having suicide ganking to be against them and it is a happy medium.
A prime example of the intellectual dishonesty in a discussion. officially the stance is “concord does not deter, its a retribution mechanic”. When you pat 1m for a 500m kill, there is no mechanic that is retribution based that will ever “deter” attacks.
I’m inclined to agree. If a child is crying because their team lost the soccer game, that’s not a problem with soccer or a problem with the winning team, that’s a problem with the losing team and that particular child.
Punishment is a form of deterrence.
I think that the way that EVE Online is played by different people is so varied and individual, and the sheer scope of the game is so vast and complex that it’d be hard for anyone, from the outset, to be in a position to anticipate exactly what they were signing up to in a holistic sense.
In addition to this, as I’m sure you are aware, and as I stated clearly earlier, the motivations of why people play in a complex myriad of ways is intrinsically linked to their own personal psychology and this in turn is as complex as the person themselves.
Given all of this, I think it’s quite possible for some people to exploit this is a sadistic way and equally possible for people not to be wholly aware one this implications of something until it hits them.
Having said all this, the comment I was making about victim blaming was specifically about the comment you made where you said. " the fault lies with you, and not with that other player". Whether you like it or not, that is victim blaming.
As far as the personal insult about me being “sick in the head” goes, well it doesn’t really deserve an articulate response because if you need to insult me to win your argument then you have already lost it.
2 Likes
“Blaming the victim” occurs when the victim of a crime or wrongful act is blamed for it. However, sometimes the victim does share in the blame, or at least plays a role in the event.
We’re playing a video game, though. Suicide ganking and blowing up ships in EVE Online is not a against the rules nor a wrongful act. So it’s entirely appropriate to blame people who get blown up for making stupid decisions.
It is when it causes lots of people to leave. For me, that is more important, but from a balance perspective there is no real balance mechanic to suicide ganking because you choose the exchange, and the exchange is always positive.
as i said if you drop 1m ships for 500m with the loot, you are never at a loss. On top of this, generally speaking people do not need to farm because of the high income rates. Its broken, both for the health of the game and in balance perspective. We’ve nerfed everything else, its time suicide ganking gets it (by rejecting it to low sec to actually kill a second problem, which is, its uselessness).
And yet time and time again real world studies have shown that punishment is not an effective deterrent to crime. This is in the real world where punishment can have significant impact to lives; I doubt that punishment in a pixel world will be more impactful.
1 Like
If getting blown up in a game about spaceships blowing up makes a player leave, that’s a problem with the player, not the game or the act of blowing up spaceships.
Also CCP has studied it and, statistically speaking, getting blown up increases player retention, rather than reducing it.
Increasing the severity of punishment doesn’t impact crime rates. The perception that the chances of being caught are high deters crime because… punishment deters crime (otherwise the high chances of being caught wouldn’t have any impact).
For some people (people with frontocortical defecits, psychopaths, anti-social personality disorder, etc) punishment is not an effective deterrent. But that’s due to pathology.
No, its a design problem.
You don’t start a business and tell people “hey, if you don’t like it leave”. That results in dead businesses, or in this case a dead game and business.
Not really. If EVE was designed to be a harsh, punishing game, then design elements that make it a harsh, punishing game are not problems.
EVE Online seems to be doing okay. It’s one of the longest running MMORPGs on the market.
As it was pointed out, what it was and what it is are not the same thing anymore. On this topic any time you are so stuck in your ways to not move on and advance with time you get lost in the past. These are among the chief problems ccp has.
What EVE was and what it is are still the same: a harsh, punishing game.
There have been some design problems in regards to things like asset safety, overabundance of NPC stations, timers on citadels, etc. CCP has worked at cross-purposes over the years, but growing sentiment among the devs (especially CCP Hilmar) is that they want to return to core ethos of EVE Online being a social game of groups working together, balancing risks with rewards.
Is it though?
Last we know there was around 40% of the population being alts, and we can safely assume its much worse then that now (with various stunts like mention above, and the obvious spam of alts these days on top of removing that data from the public). Its clear its probably over half of the online players (and i suspect even up to 60%).
Even at 40% population we are looking at around 17,000 (ish) concurrent players. that is almost a third (of the previous est 40,000 unique players online at peak). This is a massive difference. 2/3rds of the population of eve is gone, and it has not healed in the slightest, and the prospect to making that happen is not looking good because we are stuck on this past. Something has to change, for the sake of ccp and the game.
That’s a completely fair point and I can’t disagree.
However they are still a victim though. Whilst it’s entirely fair to point out that they might be foolish, it’s not okay to say that it’s all their fault. For a victim to exist, someone has to take advantage of them and that makes them the perpetrator.
I’d partially agree with you here.
Blowing up ships is a core part of the game and that’s a fact. I could have a big debate about the style of conflict but in truth that’s a different argument.
However the loss of a ship does not necessarily equate to the person flying it being some kind of fool. Don’t get me wrong, sometimes they really are a fool, but not always.
I totally agree.
Yes, EVE Online is one of the longest running MMORPGs on the market.
This doesn’t really have anything to do with what I said. But do you have a source to corroborate this? Because CCP has released data on this:
Where are you getting your numbers from?
This is not necessarily the case. If I physically assault you, I am the aggressive party and you are the victim, HOWEVER, if your response to my assault is to illegally shoot and kill me, now I am a murder victim. But I’m still largely to blame, because I shouldn’t be assaulting people.