Liav said:Feyshtey said:If someone is known throughout the community as an ass, he doesnt get groups. He doesnt get guilds.
The most toxic players I've ever known in games have almost always been in guilds equally as toxic as they are. There's no such thing as a toxic lone wolf in MMOs.
It's like I said. Social ostracization doesn't matter when the people ostracizing you are people you'd never have associated with anyway.
Unless the game doesn't allow you easily avoid those people. You are still thinking in terms of new games where players are given the tools and ability to avoid everyone. If Pantheon doesn't allow that as EQ did not allow it, good luck keeping a full roster of those kind of players. In EQ, even the most successful "elitist" guilds had to at least maintain the appearance of being friendly if they wanted new recruits. Had they just crapped on everyone, people would be diverted to the friendlier competition.
Dullahan said:Unless the game doesn't allow you easily avoid those people. You are still thinking in terms of new games where players are given the tools and ability to avoid everyone. If Pantheon doesn't allow that as EQ did not allow it, good luck keeping a full roster of those kind of players. In EQ, even the most successful "elitist" guilds had to at least maintain the appearance of being friendly if they wanted new recruits. Had they just crapped on everyone, people would be diverted to the friendlier competition.
I mean, I guess in the extremely early days maybe? That certainly isn't the case on emulated classic servers, such as p99 and TLP. I don't see player mentality returning to the naivette of the 1990s.
Amsai said: ... @ EQ folks A big thing you all are always talking about is community policing. Assuming no help is possible or feasible from devs, how would community policing work in PvE? It only seems it eould have have any real teeth in PvP to me. Thoughts?
It doesn't work. At all.
Since launch, on Phinigel, for example, in EQ1 until today, there are a few guilds that are completely ostracized by the larger community. No-one groups with them. No-one talks to them. Most casual players know them by direct action or reputation (phinnykills.com).
Asylum of Shadows, Echoes of Elysium, Original Gangsters Club are currently the most egregious offenders on the server. Community policing does not affect them, in the slightest, because as a sub-community, they have the poopsocking drive to reach their goals, both regarding personal/guild progression & power, as well as financial results from treating the game like a job and selling powerlevelling and straight up selling characters. They also actively manipulate the krono market, again, for RL profit. They don't need anyone else in the sense of "I need a group to get XP". The only need other players represent are monetary sources.
There is no community policing that would ever affect them. Even if it was PvP, it boils down to red vs. blue gang thuggery of the lowest order. The largest zerg wins. Been that way since M59 and UO up until today. Ostracized guilds just move around in packs of 12 or whatever size deters casual ganking.
The above? That's why some of us (myself included) are extremely concerned about Visionary Realms by design including toxic community griefing tools into Pantheon. Having experienced the consequences of all the attempts at curbing douchebaggery, asshattery, and general shenanigans on the part of players, it's extremely important that player interaction is limited to positive interactions, via the hard coded rules of the game. The mechanics. Play nice policies? They don't work. Recommended rules of conduct? They don't work. Locked encounters? They work. Instances for progression/quests/lore-raids? They work.
Players will simply do whatever is possible to accomplish their goals. That is the reality of 2017+ MMO's. If Visionary Realms isn't designing their game to prevent abuse, exploitation and toxic community behavior NOW, it will overrun their game long before launch. So far, their responses have been woefully naive, from my perspective. I'm not sure how that's possible, given Brad has likely played MMO's since 1999, but there it is.
Liav said:Dullahan said:Unless the game doesn't allow you easily avoid those people. You are still thinking in terms of new games where players are given the tools and ability to avoid everyone. If Pantheon doesn't allow that as EQ did not allow it, good luck keeping a full roster of those kind of players. In EQ, even the most successful "elitist" guilds had to at least maintain the appearance of being friendly if they wanted new recruits. Had they just crapped on everyone, people would be diverted to the friendlier competition.
I mean, I guess in the extremely early days maybe? That certainly isn't the case on emulated classic servers, such as p99 and TLP. I don't see player mentality returning to the naivette of the 1990s.
Yes, servers where hardcores make up the majority of the playerbase, do not compare to servers where hardcores were less than 10% of the population. Seriously, in most games, hardcores make up a very tiny portion of a server's community as a whole. In EQ and WoW only a small number of players even reached current level caps during their heydays. In WoW's case, Blizzard reported less than 10% raided with less than 1% completing all raids. Classic emus and progression servers are in no way representative of how things existed back in the day, how games work today, or how games like Pantheon will work in the future.
It's not a matter of naivete, it's a matter of capability. This is 100% within the power of Visionary Realms to encourage or discourage that kind of behavior.
vjek said:snip
Can confirm, considering a guild I'm a member of is listed. It doesn't affect me in the slightest to be considered a shitter. Unless I'm forced to interact with and/or depend on people outside of my guild, it's irrelevant what the community thinks. Daybreak's intervention is all I care about, and they're pretty hands off about most things like that.
It sucks for the server, but I still play inside the rules considering my account has never been suspended in my entire EQ career. VR is going to have to try very hard, and for a studio that small, I'd say it's in their best interest to add mechanics to the game that will directly reduce the burden on them, and discourage witch hunting and various other madness.
Dullahan said:Yes, servers where hardcores make up the majority of the playerbase, do not compare to servers where hardcores were less than 10% of the population. Seriously, in most games, hardcores make up a very tiny portion of a server's community as a whole. In EQ and WoW only a small number of players even reached current level caps during their heydays. In WoW's case, Blizzard reported less than 10% raided with less than 1% completing all raids. Classic emus and progression servers are in no way representative of how things existed back in the day, how games work today, or how games like Pantheon will work in the future.
It's not a matter of naivete, it's a matter of capability. This is 100% within the power of Visionary Realms to encourage or discourage that kind of behavior.
That's a good point. I hope you're right, for Pantheon's sake. I'm going to be a very unhappy individual if casuals quit Pantheon in droves due to abuse from a small portion of sociopaths. I hope VR is well staffed enough to investigate and take proper action in hundreds of incidents a day.
Liav said:Feyshtey said:If someone is known throughout the community as an ass, he doesnt get groups. He doesnt get guilds.
The most toxic players I've ever known in games have almost always been in guilds equally as toxic as they are. There's no such thing as a toxic lone wolf in MMOs.
It's like I said. Social ostracization doesn't matter when the people ostracizing you are people you'd never have associated with anyway.
Good job cutting out the part that addressed this very point.
Feyshtey said:Amsai said: @ EQ folks A big thing you all are always talking about is community policing. Assuming no help is possible or feasible from devs, how would community policing work in PvE? It only seems it eould have have any real teeth in PvP to me. Thoughts?If someone is known throughout the community as an ass, he doesnt get groups. He doesnt get guilds. He doesnt get good deals when bartering. That stings. A lot. More than a few people have rerolled or moved to a different server entirely because their gameplay has suffered severely enough.
Obviously there are times when these asshats team up and become a guild. That guild is ostracized. They are ridiculed, and often multiple guilds will band together to mitigate the attempts of the bad guild from succeeding.
It's not foolproof by any means, but it does have an impact. It's no replacement for GMs policing things though.
I am not worried about just one person with no affiliations being a jerk. As you said, it will be easy to zone that person out of the community.
However, I am skeptical guilds that do it will just force other guilds to act the same way. (snowball in todays community)
Feyshtey said:Liav said:Feyshtey said:If someone is known throughout the community as an ass, he doesnt get groups. He doesnt get guilds.
The most toxic players I've ever known in games have almost always been in guilds equally as toxic as they are. There's no such thing as a toxic lone wolf in MMOs.
It's like I said. Social ostracization doesn't matter when the people ostracizing you are people you'd never have associated with anyway.
Good job cutting out the part that addressed this very point.
You're right, I kind of did. However, having guilds witch hunting eachother and ostracizing eachother sounds like a terrible, and more importantly avoidable issue.
I'm really not sure how it will play out on a PvE server in 2016. I imagine people today will be more willing to overlook the behavior to some degree, as we've all become somewhat accustomed to trolling. I do think having a bad reputation as a player or guild will eventually have a negative impact on you permitted there are other better, more positively regarded alternatives. Players will also be far more likely to compete with hostile guilds aggressively or "accidentally" drop trains on their groups and raids. Unlike other games where dying doesn't matter, that kind of thing will hurt in Pantheon and discourage a lot of players from keeping that guild tag.
I would expect that guild-level development of toxicity is primarily enabled by guild-level toxic actions. The only toxic guild-level actions that I've seen or heard about are training and competing over raid content. The devs have already said they're looking into lockouts and other approaches, which would limit the benefits of participating in toxic raid content behaviors. I am personally of the mind that mechanics to mitigate kill stealing and other such actions should be sought out and tried and it seems like they are doing that in a measured way. As long as you don't allow for mechanics where large groups of players are encouraged to be toxic together, then I would expect that it would seriously limit the spread of toxicity and maybe the end game toxic guilds would not form in the first place.
If toxic behaviors are limited to the small scale (players and single gropus), then I could see GMs, guides, and the community being able to handle those issues individually.
Dullahan said:Unless the game doesn't allow you easily avoid those people. You are still thinking in terms of new games where players are given the tools and ability to avoid everyone. If Pantheon doesn't allow that as EQ did not allow it, good luck keeping a full roster of those kind of players. In EQ, even the most successful "elitist" guilds had to at least maintain the appearance of being friendly if they wanted new recruits. Had they just crapped on everyone, people would be diverted to the friendlier competition.
Have to disagree with you here. I was in one of those "elitist douche" guilds for a short time on the TLP. After I left they cornered all spawns and trampled over just about every other guild. So much so, that there was an alliance of guilds to fight against them. It didn't really make a difference though because if someone wanted to get their epic and down bosses they joined the guild. When you completely control things, people will follow because they have no other choice. Even with an alliance of guilds against them, they still managed to win 9 out of 10 boss spawns and even into kunark managed to continue to lock down naggy/vox from other guilds.
Hell even back in the day, FoH had some truely craptastic players attitude wise. But they were good and made things happen so people flocked to them. The only thing you need to bring people in is control. If you have it, you will have people. If you don't and can't get bosses, then you will fall.
Beefcake said:Can we just get a new stream or reveal so we can move on to something not already in the ground?
Its dead, Jim.
Fully agree. Streams all day erry day.
Pretty sure the content deprivation is the leading cause forum angst. You should just park a character AFK somewhere in the world and stream in 24/7 so we can debate about the skybox and tree physics.
Ainadak said:I would expect that guild-level development of toxicity is primarily enabled by guild-level toxic actions. The only toxic guild-level actions that I've seen or heard about are training and competing over raid content. The devs have already said they're looking into lockouts and other approaches, which would limit the benefits of participating in toxic raid content behaviors. I am personally of the mind that mechanics to mitigate kill stealing and other such actions should be sought out and tried and it seems like they are doing that in a measured way. As long as you don't allow for mechanics where large groups of players are encouraged to be toxic together, then I would expect that it would seriously limit the spread of toxicity and maybe the end game toxic guilds would not form in the first place.
If toxic behaviors are limited to the small scale (players and single gropus), then I could see GMs, guides, and the community being able to handle those issues individually.
This is what I am waiting to hear. I really do hope they go the lock out route. Small time camp stealing and KSing is usually a minor thing and that can be policed and handled. The raid content is where the serious battles come into play. This would stop a lot of the animosity before it even began and give those who don't spent 14+ hours a day in game a shot at doing raid content
Enitzu said:Dullahan said:Unless the game doesn't allow you easily avoid those people. You are still thinking in terms of new games where players are given the tools and ability to avoid everyone. If Pantheon doesn't allow that as EQ did not allow it, good luck keeping a full roster of those kind of players. In EQ, even the most successful "elitist" guilds had to at least maintain the appearance of being friendly if they wanted new recruits. Had they just crapped on everyone, people would be diverted to the friendlier competition.
Have to disagree with you here. I was in one of those "elitist douche" guilds for a short time on the TLP. After I left they cornered all spawns and trampled over just about every other guild. So much so, that there was an alliance of guilds to fight against them. It didn't really make a difference though because if someone wanted to get their epic and down bosses they joined the guild. When you completely control things, people will follow because they have no other choice. Even with an alliance of guilds against them, they still managed to win 9 out of 10 boss spawns and even into kunark managed to continue to lock down naggy/vox from other guilds.
Hell even back in the day, FoH had some truely craptastic players attitude wise. But they were good and made things happen so people flocked to them. The only thing you need to bring people in is control. If you have it, you will have people. If you don't and can't get bosses, then you will fall.
A lot of those big name guilds were huge and largely uncontested for long stretches. You can still look back at Legacy of Steel to this day, and after a repop they would basically go around the entire world and kill every named without much opposition.
The TLP is not at all indicative of how things existed on live servers, how they exist on normal servers today, or how they will exist in the future.
Odd - I orignally quoted someone above but it entered two others quotes instead... snipped and removed...
I don't thiunk you are understanding the testing process. I will do things that will force others to test the PETITION system, REPORTING system, and as many things as possible. I have done this in MANY games (testing CS systems) and always make an attempt to MAKE SURE that CS KNOWS that what I am doing and why. I WILL try to get "banned" - meaning I will push the limit on what I can do by breaking the Terms of Service (ToS) etc. These systems need to be tested as well. To me, alpha access is more like work than just getting earely access to play the game. I will be doing this and my post was just letting you guys know that if you see me doing these things to you, please take no offense at it! I am not really an A-Hole! Feel free to stop me and talk to me etc. I'll be happy to explain that my intentional KSing is just a part of the test process.
I know what to write here in the forums to test CS issues as well - but don't want to do that yet unless I work something out with Kilsin (you'd be really, REALLY suprised).
Again - please don't be offended. I will do this during testing - but never ever will I do it when we go live.
Nephretiti said:Odd - I orignally quoted someone above but it entered two others quotes instead... snipped and removed...
I don't thiunk you are understanding the testing process. I will do things that will force others to test the PETITION system, REPORTING system, and as many things as possible. I have done this in MANY games (testing CS systems) and always make an attempt to MAKE SURE that CS KNOWS that what I am doing and why. I WILL try to get "banned" - meaning I will push the limit on what I can do by breaking the Terms of Service (ToS) etc. These systems need to be tested as well. To me, alpha access is more like work than just getting earely access to play the game. I will be doing this and my post was just letting you guys know that if you see me doing these things to you, please take no offense at it! I am not really an A-Hole! Feel free to stop me and talk to me etc. I'll be happy to explain that my intentional KSing is just a part of the test process.
I know what to write here in the forums to test CS issues as well - but don't want to do that yet unless I work something out with Kilsin (you'd be really, REALLY suprised).
Again - please don't be offended. I will do this during testing - but never ever will I do it when we go live.
Seems like just typing /petition and filing a petition is far simpler than disrupting other testers. Obviously KSing needs to be tested but that can be done in a much more sterile environment than actual KSing.
Nephretiti said:Odd - I orignally quoted someone above but it entered two others quotes instead... snipped and removed...
I don't thiunk you are understanding the testing process. I will do things that will force others to test the PETITION system, REPORTING system, and as many things as possible. I have done this in MANY games (testing CS systems) and always make an attempt to MAKE SURE that CS KNOWS that what I am doing and why. I WILL try to get "banned" - meaning I will push the limit on what I can do by breaking the Terms of Service (ToS) etc. These systems need to be tested as well. To me, alpha access is more like work than just getting earely access to play the game. I will be doing this and my post was just letting you guys know that if you see me doing these things to you, please take no offense at it! I am not really an A-Hole! Feel free to stop me and talk to me etc. I'll be happy to explain that my intentional KSing is just a part of the test process.
I know what to write here in the forums to test CS issues as well - but don't want to do that yet unless I work something out with Kilsin (you'd be really, REALLY suprised).
Again - please don't be offended. I will do this during testing - but never ever will I do it when we go live.
This I think is a good idea make sure the CS systems are about ready to handle anything. :) I'll leave that to you I'll be testing the newbie areas (like I did in Vanguard) unless the Devs direct us elsewhere. :) Also naming...there are a lot of rather repugnant names I have seen over the years in other games. They just bring the whole atmosphere of the game down. By repugnant I mean really nasty unnecessary...names. :) Hope there is some sort of ruling on that to keep the worst ones from being rampant in the game. :)
We need to deal with what we know...
There is no way to make this an "open world", unrestricted game for just honest people or people with integrity. It is like the real world, there is a mix opportunist A-holes on one end, and selfless giving people on the other.
I would like to think I live somewhere toward the selfless end, but I expect others to make an effort to move themselves forward. I don't get along with people with their hand out all the time...
From what I have gathered, the majority want an unrestricted, open world that is alive and dynamic. The million dollar question: So how are we going to deal with the criminals without limiting the quality of our game lives?
Pyye said:... snip ...
From what I have gathered, the majority want an unrestricted, open world that is alive and dynamic. The million dollar question: So how are we going to deal with the criminals without limiting the quality of our game lives?
How I handled KSing on the EQ 1 progression servers was simple... You either beat them at their own game or move to another location. If another group was trying to steal the mobs I was grinding on for exp, I would either pull faster and out dps them or find somewhere else.
As long as there are enough camps at each level range for gaining exp, I don't think we need a mechanic to deal with the "criminals". With that said, if someone is outright griefing another person, then I think GM intervention would be warranted.
I'm worried about witch hunting more than anything else, as well as the massive burden that will be placed on VR's CS team as a result of highly abusable mechanics.
Does VR have the resources to police thousands of people babyraging on the forums on a daily basis? Time will tell, I guess.