open All Channels
seplocked Jita Park Speakers Corner
blankseplocked Logit Probit for CSM [a slide-show manifesto]
 
This thread is older than 90 days and has been locked due to inactivity.


 
Pages: 1 2 [3] 4 5

Author Topic

Hamshoe
Posted - 2009.10.13 20:52:00 - [61]
 

Originally by: Logit Probit
[The nice thing about EvE is that I don't have to care about your norms, because there are plenty of others to choose from.


Pity for you that the Sociopaths are already so well represented.

You'll need to find something to set yourself apart.

Razin
The xDEATHx Squadron
Legion of xXDEATHXx
Posted - 2009.10.13 23:07:00 - [62]
 

If you promise to dedicate a significant portion of your CSM time to bringing delayed Local to 0.0 you've got my vote.

Professor Tarantula
Hedion University
Posted - 2009.10.14 00:32:00 - [63]
 

Edited by: Professor Tarantula on 14/10/2009 00:32:00
Originally by: Governor LePetomane
Should one also feel bad about beating somebody at chess?


When people sit down to play a game of chess it's an understood and agreed upon competition. People aren't suddenly challenged to chess games while they try to go about their daily business, and losing in chess more often than not doesn't cause someone to lose anything of any value.

It can't be compared to causing misery to random people in a video game simply because it satisfies them on some primitive level. I'm not making a giant moral judgement about people who engage in such behavior, but lets be honest; They are doing it because they enjoy making others suffer. They are sadists by every definition. They should at least have the balls to admit that instead of deluding themselves and others.

Governor LePetomane
Rock Ridge Brokerage Solutions
Posted - 2009.10.14 01:25:00 - [64]
 

Originally by: Professor Tarantula
Edited by: Professor Tarantula on 14/10/2009 00:32:00
Originally by: Governor LePetomane
Should one also feel bad about beating somebody at chess?


When people sit down to play a game of chess it's an understood and agreed upon competition.


Stop. This is different from undocking in Eve how, exactly? You might tell yourself that you "should" be immune to unexpected aggression, but that certainly doesn't mean you are; and I think most people understand that at some point. If they don't, that's a failure on their part.

Razin
The xDEATHx Squadron
Legion of xXDEATHXx
Posted - 2009.10.14 13:47:00 - [65]
 

Originally by: Governor LePetomane
Originally by: Professor Tarantula
Edited by: Professor Tarantula on 14/10/2009 00:32:00
Originally by: Governor LePetomane
Should one also feel bad about beating somebody at chess?


When people sit down to play a game of chess it's an understood and agreed upon competition.


Stop. This is different from undocking in Eve how, exactly? You might tell yourself that you "should" be immune to unexpected aggression, but that certainly doesn't mean you are; and I think most people understand that at some point. If they don't, that's a failure on their part.

Back to the drawing board time for the professor.

Professor Tarantula
Hedion University
Posted - 2009.10.14 14:09:00 - [66]
 

Originally by: Governor LePetomane
Originally by: Professor Tarantula
Edited by: Professor Tarantula on 14/10/2009 00:32:00
Originally by: Governor LePetomane
Should one also feel bad about beating somebody at chess?


When people sit down to play a game of chess it's an understood and agreed upon competition.


Stop. This is different from undocking in Eve how, exactly? You might tell yourself that you "should" be immune to unexpected aggression, but that certainly doesn't mean you are; and I think most people understand that at some point. If they don't, that's a failure on their part.


Go. Everytime we leave our house in real life we accept the possibility that we could be shot by a mugger or killed by some psychopath for no reason at all, so us having prior knowledge of the chance makes the people who do it justified somehow?

I'm not saying people should be immune or anything, don't try to twist my words. All i'm saying is the people who engage in such behavior should be honest with themselves and others about why they do what they do, instead of creating delusions and justifications that allow them to see themselves as righteous while they go about cruel and sadistic behavior.

Imertu Solientai
Gallente
Posted - 2009.10.14 14:18:00 - [67]
 

Edited by: Imertu Solientai on 14/10/2009 14:25:03
Originally by: Professor Tarantula
Originally by: Logit Probit
The fact is that anyone who I or my mates have ever destroyed has deserved to lose their ship.


Everyone from Charles Manson to Jack the Ripper convinced themselves their victims deserved it too. The ability for some people to rationalize like that allows them to do terrible things and not see themselves for what they are.


NOTE TO SELF:

Next time you get mugged, press CTRL+Q and wake up safe in the REAL™ world.


EDIT:

Originally by: Professor Tarantula
Originally by: Governor LePetomane
Originally by: Professor Tarantula
Edited by: Professor Tarantula on 14/10/2009 00:32:00
Originally by: Governor LePetomane
Should one also feel bad about beating somebody at chess?


When people sit down to play a game of chess it's an understood and agreed upon competition.


Stop. This is different from undocking in Eve how, exactly? You might tell yourself that you "should" be immune to unexpected aggression, but that certainly doesn't mean you are; and I think most people understand that at some point. If they don't, that's a failure on their part.


Go. Everytime we leave our house in real life we accept the possibility that we could be shot by a mugger or killed by some psychopath for no reason at all, so us having prior knowledge of the chance makes the people who do it justified somehow?

I'm not saying people should be immune or anything, don't try to twist my words. All i'm saying is the people who engage in such behavior should be honest with themselves and others about why they do what they do, instead of creating delusions and justifications that allow them to see themselves as righteous while they go about cruel and sadistic behavior.


Seriously, please just re-read everything you have posted in this thread and think about it for a minute. You are saying that when you log on to a Counterstrike server you should be left alone because you aren't asking to be shot? You are saying that when you log on to a COMBAT GAME, you haven't actually agreed to engage in COMBAT? EVE, by every definition is a combat game. Why do you think practically every video of the game has ships blowing each other up?

How would you like it if on your next mission the NPCs turned around and said "Actually, we don't want to be shot. Go away." and jammed all your weapons? Consider that, then consider whether EVE is the game for you.

Bongo Debbie
Minmatar
In Praise Of Shadows
Posted - 2009.10.14 14:19:00 - [68]
 

Every time you read a reply on the forums you run the risk of catching stupid.

Dumb people on the forums are therefore automatically griefers and therefore obviously both mentally unstable and evil psychotics in real life. CCP should pass on these players details to the proper authorities so they can be put in mental institutes for the criminally insane.

Malcanis
Caldari
Vanishing Point.
The Initiative.
Posted - 2009.10.14 14:21:00 - [69]
 

Originally by: Professor Tarantula


Go. Everytime we leave our house in real life we accept the possibility that we could be shot by a mugger or killed by some psychopath for no reason at all, so us having prior knowledge of the chance makes the people who do it justified somehow?

I'm not saying people should be immune or anything, don't try to twist my words. All i'm saying is the people who engage in such behavior should be honest with themselves and others about why they do what they do, instead of creating delusions and justifications that allow them to see themselves as righteous while they go about cruel and sadistic behavior.


In themepark games people roleplay being Evil™ by getting different coloured armour and maybe some better ofensive magic. You may get a different cut-scene or too as well.

In EvE, people roleplay being evil by doing evil things. In-game.

Professor Tarantula
Hedion University
Posted - 2009.10.14 14:40:00 - [70]
 

Originally by: Malcanis
In EvE, people roleplay being evil by doing evil things. In-game.


But you won't see good people deciding to 'roleplay' as evil and cause others misery in a video game. You'll just see people who have those desires but can't act out on them in real life. Good people are good, in every circumstance you put them in.

They might want to think everyone is like them, and because a monkey can be sadistic too it's part of our nature and that makes it ok, but i can tell you that's not the case. Some people are aversed to causing emotional suffering to others, even through a video game.

This is the last time i'm going to repeat this, but my only point is that the people who decide to 'roleplay' evil shouldn't try to claim their victims, chosen at random, deserved it somehow. If you're going to be evil, don't be a ***** about it. You like causing others misery, and that's why you do it.


Malcanis
Caldari
Vanishing Point.
The Initiative.
Posted - 2009.10.14 14:54:00 - [71]
 

Originally by: Professor Tarantula
Good people are good, in every circumstance you put them in.


Shocked

Laughing

Maybe you never heard of this?

Man, I hope you survive the RL learning experiences you have in front of you. It's probably good you're playing EVE - this way the shock wont be so bad. I'm guessing you're maybe 18 or 19 or perhaps in your early 20s? No-one with much life experience could possibly say what you just said.

Kitty McKitty
Gallente
In Praise Of Shadows
Posted - 2009.10.14 14:55:00 - [72]
 

You can repeat things all you like but you still have a poor understanding of roleplay and what in game behaviour signifies in the attitude of the player.

Professor Tarantula
Hedion University
Posted - 2009.10.14 15:02:00 - [73]
 

Edited by: Professor Tarantula on 14/10/2009 15:05:08
Originally by: Malcanis
Maybe you never heard of this?


It goes far beyond your little link there. Check out the Lucifer effect for added madness.

Most people are weak minded. They follow the herd, doing whatever everyone else is doing, easily influenced by someone else, whether it's an authority figure or not. They don't know how to think for themselves.

Not everyone is like that, though.


Hamshoe
Posted - 2009.10.14 15:09:00 - [74]
 

Originally by: Governor LePetomane
Should one also feel bad about beating somebody at chess?


If 500 people are waiting to play chess and you make a point of only playing the kid with the helmet and the mittens pinned to his coat, yes.

Emily Spankratchet
Minmatar
Pragmatics
Posted - 2009.10.14 15:20:00 - [75]
 

Originally by: Professor Tarantula
Good people are good, in every circumstance you put them in.


Quote:
Most people are weak minded. They follow the herd, doing whatever everyone else is doing, easily influenced by someone else, whether it's an authority figure or not. They don't know how to think for themselves.


And yet, people who do think for themselves can still meet this criteria of "goodness" without an external reference. Are we dealing with some sort of Platonic ideal of goodness, or is it more of a case of deterministic moral universalism?

Bongo Debbie
Minmatar
In Praise Of Shadows
Posted - 2009.10.14 15:33:00 - [76]
 

I live a good live vicariously and release my urge to do harm by baking fluffy cupcakes. Transdimensional evil monitors my anguish metastasis through string cell hypertabernacles, thus my dissonance is halved and my resolve pustulated.

In short, im a spazz irl as well as ingame.

Professor Tarantula
Hedion University
Posted - 2009.10.14 15:38:00 - [77]
 

Originally by: Emily Spankratchet
Are we dealing with some sort of Platonic ideal of goodness, or is it more of a case of deterministic moral universalism?


Yeah, I believe that subconsciously, or at least on some level, everyone knows 'right from wrong' as it were, they can sense it in every fiber of their being. Carl Jung said all mental illness is due to people refusing to experience genuine suffering. As soon as they start feeling guilt or remorse, it bothers them, and they come up with a different perspective on things that makes them feel better about themselves, but it's a delusion, and that's the point where people start getting out of touch with reality and what they're really doing.

Logit Probit
OIive OiI Inc.
Posted - 2009.10.18 20:50:00 - [78]
 

Originally by: Professor Tarantula
Originally by: Emily Spankratchet
Are we dealing with some sort of Platonic ideal of goodness, or is it more of a case of deterministic moral universalism?


Yeah, I believe that subconsciously, or at least on some level, everyone knows 'right from wrong' as it were, they can sense it in every fiber of their being. Carl Jung said all mental illness is due to people refusing to experience genuine suffering. As soon as they start feeling guilt or remorse, it bothers them, and they come up with a different perspective on things that makes them feel better about themselves, but it's a delusion, and that's the point where people start getting out of touch with reality and what they're really doing.


There is no significant difference between a player choosing to cross the boundary into lowsec or 0.0, and a player choosing to open fire on a ninja-looter in highsec.

Either way, the player is making a conscious decision to assume risk.

Ninjas are totally "in touch with reality and what they're really doing". They are offering mission runners a chance to engage in PvP on extremely unfavorable terms.

All this talk about good, evil, and mental illness is totally ridiculous.

Bel Amar
Amarr
Sudden Buggery
Situation: Normal
Posted - 2009.10.18 21:11:00 - [79]
 

Originally by: Professor Tarantula
Good people are good, in every circumstance you put them in.


Simply saying something is so, does not in fact make it so

Valrandir
Gallente
Distant Thunder
Perihelion Alliance
Posted - 2009.10.18 23:12:00 - [80]
 

Originally by: Logit Probit
These screenshots demonstrate everything that is right and wrong with EvE Online.

Before I explain, allow me to make two introductions.

Logit Probit is a scumbag who ninja-salvages other players' missions near a highsec mission hub. He's a parasite and a griefer. On top of that, he doesn't honor ransoms. He runs an association of similar players, who choose not to incorporate mainly because it makes retaliation difficult.

I'm a 29-year-old Ph.D student at a midwestern American university. I'm married, have a doberman puppy, love to ride my motorcycle, and I help my landlady take out her garbage. I'm a researcher in the areas game theoretics and mass behavior, and I love playing EvE Online.

If you are a mission-runner, Logit deserves your scorn. However, give me a chance to convince you that Logit is your best friend at the same time he's the biggest pain in your backside.

As CCP is well aware, EvE is great because it's a sandbox. The lack of constraints on us in-game allow numerous “steady states” of group behavior to arise. In fact, there are so many different behavioral equilibria that it is difficult for any one player to experience more than a few of them. Even within one “profession”, you will see different tactics in different regions, even if the strategies are the same. Mining ops in one area will be organized differently than ops in another area; FCs in the north operate a little differently than Russian FCs.

Multiple norms of behavior allow the events to occur that make EvE amazing.

Armageddon single-handedly destroys a 40-man highsec mining fleet with a surprise suicide attack.
Trusted broker's conscience gets the best of him; commandeers stolen unique ship and returns it to the player it was stolen from.
Bank CEO absconds with hundreds of billions.
Legendary alliance destroyed by espionage.

In other words, EvE is great because the unexpected occurs.

There have been other games like EvE, sandbox games that were great, but were ruined because well-intentioned changes rippled through them, destroying behavioral equilibria. A classic example was the addition of rare tools into Star Wars Galaxies that could prevent gear from decaying to the point where they were unusable. This change was meant to preserve the hard work of some of the game's most dedicated players, and to encourage rare item use in PvP. However, the change disrupted the player-made economy; demand for high-end crafted gear evaporated, incentives to hunt for looted crafting components disappeared, and SWG was soon hemorrhaging 10k subscriptions per month. SWG had unintentionally constrained the variety of fun behaviors and interactions.

While CCP has maintained minimal constraints on behavior, its track record is not perfect. For instance, the introduction of jump freighters has reduced the number of viable behaviors available to those who enjoy the challenge of long-range, heavy-volume commerce. Soon, a comprehensive set of structural constraints will be introduced into 0.0. While the changes may turn out for the best, it is a fact that increased constraints reduce the possible number of behavioral equilibria.

In other words, with more rules, the unexpected becomes less so.

On the 4th CSM, I'll dedicate full effort to exploring the unintended consequences of the big changes that are coming to EvE.

Logit Probit may be a horrible bastard, but I'll be on my best behavior, and I'll do everything I can to preserve that sweet spot in EvE where the learning curve is just a little too high and the barrier to making horrible mistakes is just a little too low.

Trust me, that spot is where we all want to be.

Now get out there and run some missions.

YARRRR!!


There go with +4 votes.
Good luck in the CSM.

Bhaumut
Posted - 2009.10.18 23:56:00 - [81]
 

Your making me leave my comfy spot under the bridge in C&P, to troll you here... this makes me unhappy.

Fail 1
Fail 2
Fail 3

And also Bubble girl says no too...

Please visit your user settings to re-enable images.

Logit Probit
OIive OiI Inc.
Posted - 2009.10.19 00:18:00 - [82]
 

Originally by: Bhaumut
Crying or Very sad



CCP Applebabe

Posted - 2009.10.19 05:50:00 - [83]
 

Moved to " Jita Park Speakers Corner ".

Maxsim Goratiev
Gallente
Imperial Tau Syndicate
POD-SQUAD
Posted - 2009.10.19 22:01:00 - [84]
 

This guy isn't that bad.. This sorta people make eve what it is, it's about balance between this and order. Half of the attacks on the OP are not reasonable.
Not voting for you because I have another candidate in mind.

And btw: all the talk about good an evil is kinda lame.

Logit Probit
OIive OiI Inc.
Posted - 2009.10.30 21:50:00 - [85]
 

CCP just informed me that my candidacy was approved. 49 candidates total! That's quite a few. Hope there are enough ninjas and suicide gankers out there to give me a shot. (I suppose if there aren't, then they don't really deserve representation. lol)

Daugar Draaken
Posted - 2009.10.31 16:47:00 - [86]
 

I read your position and I find myself nodding empthatically at

"In other words, EvE is great because the unexpected occurs."

Yes. This is what I care about.

Logit Probit
OIive OiI Inc.
Posted - 2009.11.04 06:53:00 - [87]
 

Originally by: Daugar Draaken
I read your position and I find myself nodding empthatically at

"In other words, EvE is great because the unexpected occurs."

Yes. This is what I care about.


:D

Kirana
Posted - 2009.11.05 18:05:00 - [88]
 

Originally by: MatrixSkye Mk2
Edited by: MatrixSkye Mk2 on 11/10/2009 12:43:38

Actually, a radical anti-carebear elected to the CSM will do less damage than one that presents himself to be "more balanced". For this reason alone I encourage all the carebear haters and "OMG iM s0 uB3r h4RdcOrE" PVPers to vote for this guy. There's nothing like an idiot elected by idiots to represent them.




LMAO MatrixSkye for President of sig images!

Well said. Anarchy, while attractive to students of college philosophical and anthropological concepts, isn't exactly sustainable. I have played since just after launch and it's kind of disturbing to see the skyrocket trend of asshattery for asshattery's sake that doesn't add anything to the game. You can be a pirate/scammer/bad guy and not be a tool. It is possible. It's unfortunately also increasingly rare in Eve.

Eve isn't anyone's experiment in social behavior, unless I missed the memo. Last I checked it was a video game. He has some good points about treading lightly on game mechanics. Maybe he's even correct about the source of the demise of SWG. I think Eve can endure far more than a game like SWG and WoW though.

Time will tell. Very Happy

Kirana
Posted - 2009.11.05 22:04:00 - [89]
 

Originally by: Imertu Solientai
EVE, by every definition is a combat game. Why do you think practically every video of the game has ships blowing each other up?


Huh. By the same logic one would assume from watching the evening news that humanity is all about murder, ****, war, and whatever ridiculous holiday is currently being celebrated. These are all facets of humanity but they don't define humanity.

Eve, in my opinion, is an empire building game. You can play and excel in Eve without ever fitting an offensive module. Counterstrike is a slice of a reality taken out of context. The whole world doesn't wake up in the morning, strap on a tactical vest, and head out to the office to snipe the guys across the street. Maybe if you live in Mogadishu or something, but probably not even then.

There are a lot of people that want it very badly to be a pure combat game. Just like there are people who want it to be mining game or a market trading game.

However, I am pretty sure that no matter what your slant, you would probably whine to someone if you went to the grocery store in your average modern city and someone mugged you and blew up your car with a rocket launcher. If you went strolling through some "bad" neighborhood that you didn't belong in to go grocery shopping, you might expect trouble. And if you lived in a world where there were no "good" places, then you would essentially have the dark ages. No progress, just war and famine and sorrow for war famine and sorrows sake. Given the highly organized nature of Eve, I doubt that is what CCP have in mind. But that's just my take.

It's weird how this argument always seems to end up with one extreme or the other being the only way. The PVP folks want, unrealistically, to be able to destroy at will, anyone, anywhere, with no more inconvenience than a lost (insured) ship and a slap on the hand in the form of a security ouchie. And the non PVP folks want, unrealistically, to be able to autopilot freighters from one side of Eve to the other and AFK mine anywhere without risk of getting ganked.

Without PVP, industry is worthless. Without industry PVP is bumper pods.

Find a happy medium or whine about it. Pretty simple.

In my opinion there are two kinds of idiots in this game. High sec grief pilots, meaning the unorganized pilots with no goals beyond blowing up as many people as possible regardless of gains. And the ninnies that want a game that you can play on autopilot while you do your laundry. I like to pretend both of these camps are all in the 12-18yo range so that I don't have to be sad that there are adults that are that deluded, naive, and self important.

You want respect as a pirate, try a hard target now and then instead of killing noobs all day and salvaging peoples wrecks. Then high fiving your buddies in local like you accomplished something. You want respect as a miner, tank some 0.0 belt rats while ninja mining a rival alliances space and don't cry when a 10 man cov ops roam blows you out of that space. Or do a freight run in low sec.

The real pirates don't give a **** about high sec because there's not much that CCP could change that would prevent them operating somewhere. And the same goes for real industry pilots.

The root of the problem, as I see it, is "high sec" is a misnomer. It's not secure and it's certainly not highly secure. No one wants to take away combat. Well, no one that matters. People just want it to make sense. Currently it doesn't really. High sec is a pile of crap right now. Just a giant monkey **** fest of griefers and carebears. Solve this and I am pretty sure you solve several interdependent issues like spreading out the population. Why would anyone leave high sec? As risky as it is, it's still the safest place for the little guy to mine and build. And the risk keeps the markets relatively even between low and high sec. And considering that there isn't really any risk to the pirates, why not park next to the food bowl and just stay there

Kirana
Posted - 2009.11.05 22:18:00 - [90]
 

For the record. I don't think ganking should be outlawed in high sec. I don't think combat should be outlawed in high sec. But the penalties should be adjusted to be more in line with the varying sec ratings. And that doesn't mean more gate cops and concord.

The juciest targets should be riskier. For the same reason, there is no Arkonor in high sec.

And salvage should have ownership like cans. That way when I run into Logit he won't be the only one having fun. Laughing Although I am pretty sure the reason it doesn't was a design issue more than a decision to not apply ownership beyond the loot inside the wreck.


Pages: 1 2 [3] 4 5

This thread is older than 90 days and has been locked due to inactivity.


 


The new forums are live

Please adjust your bookmarks to https://forums.eveonline.com

These forums are archived and read-only