Saturday, March 17, 2012

Morality ramblings

Most recently mister Darius III made a post in followup of Jester's post about sec status gains only going to the person with the final blow.  Of course, this post was made in CnP so any attempt at quality discussion was out the door by the first page.  The thread started off with the usual cast of people agreeing, people saying its not big a deal, and carebear trolling.

While i'm not sure how many of the "PIRAT TEARS DELISHUSH!" posts were legit, I have to say that i've been noticing an increasing trend of carebear entitlement and self-delusion.  First off, I want to start by saying the worst part about these posts is that hardline carebears and "good guys" can't really seem to discern what tears really are.  Maybe its the lack of self-awareness coming from the fact that they have never harvested them themselves, rather they are the source, who knows.  Still, I can't help but think how bad these people are for the game.  They approach consequence in EVE from a RP perspective in that for every crime an appropriate consequence needs to be levied.

To them, it would be perfectly acceptable for someone to go from 0.0 to -5.0 for killing some noob's CNR they brought into lowsec to mission.  Why?  Because to them, if you're going to kill someone's mission ship that took them a month to save up for then you should be forced to spend an entire month seccing back up as punishment.  Obviously, this would be game breaking from many perspectives, but the main point I want to make by bringing up this attitude is that the extreme carebear or carebear roleplayer plays a completely different game than we do.  EVE as an MMO stands apart from others because the burden of the journey falls upon the player.  While to the new player this may seem overwhelming, to older players, this is crux of what makes EVE much more rewarding than any other game I've played.  There is no dungeon finder that automatically teleports you to a plex, nor are there any PVP "zones".  If you want to make ISK, depending on where you go or what you want to do, that is entirely up to you, in decision and responsibility to execute.  The same thing goes for PVP in that depending on what you are feeling like that day, you can find it in any part of New Eden.  Conversely, this also means that you need to be prepared for it, but this is what makes the game unique.

The reason these extreme carebears aren't healthy for the game at least not in the attitude they bring is because they don't understand this.  They would rather rely on game mechanics to protect themselves, than learning to protect themselves through their own devices.  While I understand that not everyone wants to do this, some people just want to log in, carebear a bit, and then logoff, this does not mean that the core foundation of what EVE is should be changed to accommodate.  EVE is NOT that kind of short term gratification game, even the way you train skills is evidence of that.  There is no power leveling.  These kind of players are like someone who plays Gran Turismo 5, but then criticizes the gameplay because the races are too long for casual play and complain about how one mistake can cause you to go from first place to last place.  These kind of players miss the point that the Gran Turismo series is a racing simulator and they can't handle the realities of what this entails and can't understand why they keep losing since they were awesome at Mario Kart.

EVE is a game that punishes stupid.  In fact, it punishes stupid severely at times.  Combined with in-game losses being much more significant, this generates a lot more "rage" and "tears" than most other games.  Most games nowadays barely punish losses.  In Counter-Strike, when you get killed, either by another player's skill or your own stupidity, you have to wait the rest of the round to participate again, however, most games nowadays, this is only a matter of seconds.  In EVE, losing your faction fit CNR in a lowsec mission to pirates could potentially mean you just lost 100 dollars of real life money in the matter of seconds.  If you earned the ISK in game, this could potentially mean you just lost out several weeks worth of work.  Obviously to the victim, this is upsetting and easy for them to classify the aggressors as morally bad people in real life, since they killed you for no reason other than you were in the wrong place at the wrong time, and they felt like it.  The argument always goes that people's true selves show by the decisions they make in EVE, but that argument only makes sense to the people who play EVE as an extension of their real life.  In fact, I would argue that the person who drops 100 dollars in PLEX on a GAME without understanding the reality that they can lose it instantly, is just irresponsible.  

Just because you were just minding your own business doesn't mean that you get a free pass to do whatever you want.  Just because you don't get your way all the time doesn't mean the other person is bad.  Just because you feel self-entitled to be left alone doesn't mean that you are right to expect it or be upset when you don't get your wish, especially in a multiplayer game.

As easy as it is to forget that there's a real person on the other side of the computer monitor, its just as easy to forget that what you see in game are nothing more than just pixels.  

Just because you make like to make other people's ships explode, doesn't mean you're a bad person, nor does picking Bowser in Mario Kart mean you like turtles.

tl;dr Roleplayers are bad for the game in regards to their views on how game mechanics should be.  Extreme carebears are the worst because the only thing they roleplay is being a victim.


  1. I wouldn't say that roleplayers are bad for the game - in fact there are plenty roleplayers in EVE who would happily violence your ships. Calling them extreme carebears hits the mark better.

    Also, that crimes should carry consequences is hardly a purely RP approach either, since EVE prides itself on being a game where PVP has consequences.

    On the other hand, what is an "appropriate" consequence is open for discussion, and I agree that the security status nerf is bad: it makes it even harder for sensible carebears (roleplaying or not) to fight back.

  2. Agreed, agreed, and agreed some more. Are we both alts of the same person or what? lol.

    Well, I was with you up til the tl;dr summation. I'm failing to see what "roleplayers" have to do with carebears. They're two completely different things that have nothing to do with each other in a direct manner, and only occasionally in a coincidental way.

    I think the term "carebear" is used a little too loosely, thrown around too flippantly, and has lost its original meaning.

    For those not in the know about the provenance of the term "carebear", here:
    Pick a couple episodes and educate yourself. Well, really, if you make it halfway through one, you're doing better than I. Hell, I couldn't stomach the show when I was a kid and it was mixed in with the regular weekday afternoon/Saturday morning cartoon mish-mash (I watched shit like Robotech, and QQ now about how the Megathron looks like a Super Dimensional Fortress rip lol).

    tl;dr: a real "carebear" IS delusional, as Pinky said, in thinking that we should "all just get along", "work together", and "love love love each other", blah blah etc etc. Unlike the characters who lent them the name, however, an EVE carebear when treated "unkindly" responds with voluminous rage, "tears", threats, or "poor me"-isms and an affectation of near-suicidal despondence. Real carebears just "stare" and "love", "care", etc.

    I wonder if Ty Pennington would get pissed if we made a "show" called Extreme Carebears EVE Edition.... ;-)

    1. EVE carebears DO explode in rage. There are no carebears the way they are depicted in that show, because humans are simply not that nice.

      A carebear is someone who is against non-consensual PVP and believes that they should be able to play in peace if they want to, and that interrupting them in this pursuit is evil, sociopathic, and immoral.

      Pinky's usage stands.

    2. Iam guessing that your username, like mine, is more a "state of being" than a name. Uare Widdershins -- counter to the clockwise.

      Being contrary is often a good thing, Mark Twain and HL Mencken both made noise along the lines of "Should you find yourself agreeing with the majority, you should re-evaluate where you stand."
      However, being contrary for the sake of being contrary, as you seem to be doing, is just annoying.

      For example, last post of mine you replied to, you made a straw man and proceeded to tear it apart while ad-hominem attacking me as a fun sidebar.

      This post, you actually are agreeing with me in intent if not exact wording, yet doing so in an adversarial way.

      Is there anyone you DO get along with? Just curious.

    3. If your username is a 'state of being,' I don't know a lot of Chinese, but I'm guessing it means "terrible PVPer who doesn't want to get better."

      Or maybe it has something to do with a lack of adaptability and reading comprehension in your arguments. Like I said, I don't know Chinese.

      I'm not just being contrary for the sake of being contrary; I'm disagreeing because you're wrong. "Carebear" is not a word that refers to someone that is infinitely tolerant and loving in EVE, because there are no such people; while you understand this, that does not mean that the word has lost its meaning. Rather, it has gained meaning, being now defined as something that exists in the context that it's used. That's the development of language.

      Yes, I get along with people just fine, and I'm not contrarian. Based on what I've seen of you so far, though, you're a moron, and I don't really WANT to get along with you. You've every chance to change this perception, but so far you've not really been working towards that end.

    4. Mmm, indeed. Should I just acquiesce that you're correct in all of your assumptions, and hope that then you'll like me?

      I will say, though, that I don't think the problem is so much that I'm a moron as my humor isn't quite so obvious as you'd like. Morons generally lack subtlety -- I seem to have, would you say, a plethora, El Guapo?

      As for you, I'd say you're deliberately obtuse, and yes, "contrarian" as well. At least those aren't such damning indictments on a base personal level as you've made of me.

      If you expect me to be hurt, sir, I am happy to disappoint.

      You will be happy to know, though, that I WILL concede that I'm a terrible PvPer -- though since I've never EVER claimed to be "l337" or even "good", this is something of a shallow victory for you, like swatting a Velator with an AF.

      You are absolutely dead-wrong, however, in the assertion that I don't want to get better. But then again, assigning motive, intent, and ideals to people is your specialty, so it seems.

      You have a very closed mind, Iam. I would suggest you step outside of yourself and have a look around sometime.

  3. Also: "The argument always goes that people's true selves show by the decisions they make in EVE, but that argument only makes sense to the people who play EVE as an extension of their real life."

    lol Wait. I've spent all this time and blog space writing proofs that RL is actually an extension of EVE ... now you're calling me wrong? WTF man? :-/ QQ ... well so much for us being alts of each other.

  4. I often have difficulty separating "Eve as I would like it to be" from "Eve as it is".

    In the former a drastic drop in security status for aggressing in hisec is, I think, reasonable; but then in empire space all the asteroids would be mined out long ago, and any issues with regards to law and order (i.e. missions) would be rare at best forcing PVE players into less charted and controlled space.

    In the latter (Eve as it is), I agree that the penalties are strong enough already (although I wouldn't be bothered with bigger sec status drops then either, IF the faction navies + concord were nerfed leaving more up to the players - oh wait, I'm back in the "as I would like it to be" mindset :).

    I think all carebears are roleplaying up to a point (but then, aren't we all?), and the game they're actually playing isn't at all the game they think they are playing. When I started playing Eve I approached it as a fun futuristic society in space simulator; it took me a while to realise that it's all actually just a vehicle for making ships go boom. Both the imagined and actual games could be fun, but not if you're expecting one and get the other.

    I suspect a lot of people want CCP to change the game into what they think it should be, and have difficulty accepting the game for what it actually is already.

    1. Wow this is a very good perception. I had similar feelings to it but couldn't quite explain it this clearly! Thx!:)

      But still i don't really understand the way some ppl play this game.
      What kind of meaning does it carries if a pvp veteran in a pvp fit combat ship kills a defenseless miner, salvager, or any non combat related ship doing a non combat related activity in an irrelevant location for the pvper.
      If it is a fight for territory, resources, it is a war, a juicy hauler, etc. i understand.
      But just for the kill mail, for the killboard? Really?
      Couse destruction only for the purpose of destruction is jsut dumb imho.

      I haven't seen a single pirate that ransomed me if i got cought in a low sec system. They just went for the kill every time i bumped in any of them.
      The occasional smartbombing BS at gates. Or the gatecamps in some of the lowsec systems where they kill everyone that tries to get through. Like on Frigfry Fridays: some guys blocked the high sec entrance of amamake, so even a rifter couldn't get through. How is that good pvp? Without any tactic, just sheer destruction. They effectively blocked a lot of players' fun to had with frigs in any size of groups. Maybe it's just me, but i don't really see any good game in this.

      It makes the majority always on the lookout for the minority that just want to blow up stuff.

      Maybe we have an issue with the number of griefers here, like titan proliferation!:) (more likely i have an issue here...)

      I would like to have every ship killed in New Eden some meaning other than just griefing or a trophy on someone's killboard. But that would be another game.

      Immortality screws up the morality of players in EVE. This might be the final conclusion of what i wanted to say here.:)