Jump to content
Search In
  • More options...
Find results that contain...
Find results in...

What do y'all consider a griefer?


Recommended Posts

  • Replies 102
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Posts

There are 3 types of PvPers in my opinion:   1) Honorable White Knight/Lawful Good type - The guys that want level playing fields as much as possible.  Equally matched sides (skill level/gear/troop

Griefing = doing something for the soul purpouse of ruining some one elses play experience

Yes, griefing is intentionally ruining someones game experience. But griefing only becomes a punishable offense, in my opinion, if it occurs outside the rules of the game like exploiting a bug or hack

Yes, I want to ruin your game experience.

 

That, to me, is the definition of a griefer.

 

I may kill you, camp you, steal all your stuff, and burn your house down, but my intent is not to ruin your game experience. My intent is to enjoy my game experience. If you suffer grief from my actions that is an unintended side effect.

IhhQKY6.gif

Link to post
Share on other sites

It depends.  I don't think grieving can be a consideration in this game under any circumstances.  If someone uses exploits or cheats that isn't grieving.  One is a hack and well using an exploit should be fair game until a patch can fix it.  I will note that I do not subscribe to using exploits though for the record.  

 

Surely we can play in multiple campaigns so having your current crow locked into a vessel won't be a problem if someone wants to graveyard camp you right?  If you get run out of a campaign or get camped go play another campaign until it cools down. 

Edited by GRiPSViGiL
Link to post
Share on other sites

That's what I always thought, too, but considering that some people are most sensitive than others prevents it from being a steadfast definition. Someone can be staying well within the lines of 'legal' gameplay but their behavior is stealing someone else's joy. Is that still griefing?

That's not griefing, that's just politics ;)

These replies are good to consider. First this is a rigged question because we don't know the motive of the OP. It also is very era specific.

 

The past 15 years or so players as a whole have grown up and played in the "Trammel Era." Where ANYHTING irritating or annoying is cheating/griefing/bad/wrong.

 

Game companies have made billions off of this type of game design where everyone MUST have the same exact positive crafted experience each and every time with no variations or real chance of harsh failure.

 

Going back to the "Pre-UO:R Era" you'll find that most games were brutally harsh forcing players to keep pumping quarters just to finish the boss fight. It was so rigged against us. Games that came to our homes equally hated us and kicked the crap out of you for not noticing that barely visible pixel that is just a .01% darker shade of red which opens the secret door to reveal the magic sword. The people that designed the first MMOs grew up in this era too.

 

UO wasn't a PvP focused game like SB but it had murders and thieves. We're they griefers? Hell-to-the-no. Were they a bunch of irritating poser? Sure, but I never wanted a single out of the game.

 

Now with games like DayS, Ark, and Rust players are now once again introduced to the feeling of being dropped kicked in the nut ballz by someone wanting to ruin your day.

 

So will Crowfall have griefing? Yep! Will we live? Yep! And it will a glorious day because you can go right ahead and kill em right back then loot his griefing corpse :)

Edited by Keaggan
Link to post
Share on other sites

That, to me, is the definition of a griefer.

 

I may kill you, camp you, steal all your stuff, and burn your house down, but my intent is not to ruin your game experience. My intent is to enjoy my game experience. If you suffer grief from my actions that is an unintended side effect.

 

I think you focused on too small a part of CYT's post.  To me, he is saying "ruin your game experience" as in "make my opponents lose, badly."  I did not read his post as an intention to harass a particular person, if that would cost him a victory elsewhere.  Just a willingness to punish your mortal enemies (elves)...

 

When we start getting into a focus on a person's intentions, the conversation is too far gone - no way to police that effectively.  In fact, your post Jah highlights that perfectly - a person can feel grief from people with very different intentions.  So, we are left with focus on actions.  The earlier post about the RvRvR alt following around their opponents and not engaging - closest idea to griefing in CF so far IMO.

 

Cheating, hacking, duping, exploits - no, no.  Beating someone down and camping their town for 48 straight hours?  Classic.

Edited by mctan
Link to post
Share on other sites

My interpretation of griefing is using the system in order to maliciously harass someone, such that they can do nothing about it.

 

This is an example of what I mean using a game scenario that I made up:

 

Let's pretend there is a game with open world pvp. Now, someone ends up killing you (this is fine and good) you end up spawning at a spawn point that you have no choice but to spawn at. Needless to say, a person who is 50 levels above you is sitting by the camp one shotting you every time you die and respawn. Since you have no choice but to spawn at that spawn point, there is no way possible way in which you can respond. Whether it be finding another spawn point, getting away, or even logging out. 

 

This is what I call griefing.

 

Hopefully, with the crows and vessels system, we can choose to spawn anywhere as long as there is a body or graveyard so this type of griefing does not happen.

Link to post
Share on other sites

It doesn't exist. Griefing only exists in the mind of the griefed. Harassment is different. I generally draw the line at people making remarks or attacking people outside of the game space. If I murder you and camp your only spawn point for hours, this is part of the experience. If I find a picture of you or information about you and use it in a negative way, this is harassment and should be perma banned and investigated.

 

Hate speech is also harassment. Real life sexism , racism, classism etc don't belong anywhere. If you need to be racist, feel free to comment about my in game race but, not about real life.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I think you focused on too small a part of CYT's post.  To me, he is saying "ruin your game experience" as in "make my opponents lose, badly."  I did not read his post as an intention to harass a particular person, if that would cost him a victory elsewhere.  Just a willingness to punish your mortal enemies (elves)...

 

When we start getting into a focus on a person's intentions, the conversation is too far gone - no way to police that effectively.  In fact, your post Jah highlights that perfectly - a person can feel grief from people with very different intentions.  So, we are left with focus on actions.  The earlier post about the RvRvR alt following around their opponents and not engaging - closest idea to griefing in CF so far IMO.

 

Cheating, hacking, duping, exploits - no, no.  Beating someone down and camping their town for 48 straight hours?  Classic.

 

I can't tell what is going on in CYT's head. If he says his intent is to ruin someone's game experience I have to take his word for it.

 

The thread is about "What do y'all consider a griefer?" and I answered that. To me, intent is part of the definition.

 

The thread is not about effective policing of griefing. Good luck with that!

IhhQKY6.gif

Link to post
Share on other sites

I can't tell what is going on in CYT's head. If he says his intent is to ruin someone's game experience I have to take his word for it.

 

The thread is about "What do y'all consider a griefer?" and I answered that. To me, intent is part of the definition.

 

The thread is not about effective policing of griefing. Good luck with that!

 

Heh, fair point on the topic.  

 

It's not as if "ruining someone's game experience" is some simple idea with only one interpretation, nor frankly is intention super cut and dry.

 

Is it ruining someone's game experience to kill them?  I have that intention.  

Is it camping a graveyard to kill people as they respawn?  I have that intention (already did it in SP).  

Is it sending constant forays to our nearest elven neighbors?  I have that intention.  

Is it to make someone so frustrated they log off?  I don't want that to happen, but I certainly expect it, and am not going to change my tactics just because of it being a possibility.  Now, I can openly claim that it is not my intention to make them quit, but I am also not intending to let up on my enemies just for the sake of it.

 

So, we may have different definitions.  I would classify griefing as circumventing gameplay through manipulating mechanics.  Therefore, the lack of FF combined with pre-set teams are mechanics that create space to grief with alts.  Of course, FF combined with pre-set teams also has opportunity to grief.  Really pre-set teams with no ability to shift politique creates major problems IMO.  Spies, on the other hand, are epic when it requires actual infiltration within normal game mechanics.

 

tl;dr quite simply a very nuanced concept.  I'd be much more interested in hearing devs work on anti-duping, anti-exploits, etc.

Edited by mctan
Link to post
Share on other sites

Was the Red Wedding in Game of Thrones griefing? Absolutely, and I want that kind drama to be part of Crowfall  :ph34r:  That's the type of player-driven content that makes things memorable.

 

What I don't want in Crowfall is hacking, cheating, exploiting known bugs for gain, and taking the grief to RL.

tiPrpwh.png

Link to post
Share on other sites

There are 3 types of PvPers in my opinion:

 

1) Honorable White Knight/Lawful Good type - The guys that want level playing fields as much as possible.  Equally matched sides (skill level/gear/troop numbers).  All things being equal, victory comes down to someone slipping up or seizing the moment when a tactical opportunity arises.  They don't want to gank as there is no honor or fun for them in it.  Stabbing a peasant in the back?  No thanks.

 

2) Ganker/Chaotic Neutral type - The guys that appreciates a fair fight as much as an unfair fight.  Our forces outnumber them 3:1?  Awesome!  Let's kick their butts!  Passing through an area and come across someone who they can defeat with little to no risk?  Won't even hesitate.  They have catapults, we have ballistas, let's gooooooo!  Free For All!

 

3) Griefer/Chaotic Evil type - The guys that will go out of their way looking for those who can't defend against them.  And will corpse camp you.  And will prevent you from doing whatever activity you were doing when they came across you.  Over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over.  To the point of causing you to either A) gather a group to stomp them into the ground or B) logoff and go do something else.   Find a complete and total overriding pleasure in pushing the limits of a game's rules when it comes to PvP.

 

Devs, in general, don't particularly like #3s.  Why?  If they cause someone to logoff because of a negative experience, they might never logon again.  Thus, costing the company a customer and revenue.  And if they do it enough times, to enough people, there goes profitability.   Unless the griefer is a billionaire that can single-handedly fund a game company.  Devs will usually encourage (by means of game mechanics or events) #1s to come to the rescue and take a stand against #3s to aid the victims.  And usually there will be enough #1s to balance against the threat of the #3s. 

 

All three types will be represented in Crowfall I have no doubt.  And all three bring something unique to the game that adds to it.  After 20 or so years of PvPing I've firmly settled into a #2 mindset.  Take what you can, give nothing back.  Keep to the code...they're more guidelines than rules....

 

Exploiters/Hackers/Cheaters are a completely separate group.  I don't consider them griefers, though they could utilize exploits/hacks/cheats to grief.  I consider them clear violators of the TOS/EULA and are subject to disciplinary action by ACE.  Period.

http://www.twitch.tv/Waikikamukau Yes, it's Why-Kick-Uh-Moo-Cow / Twitter: @TheMukau

Link to post
Share on other sites

That, to me, is the definition of a griefer.

 

I may kill you, camp you, steal all your stuff, and burn your house down, but my intent is not to ruin your game experience. My intent is to enjoy my game experience. If you suffer grief from my actions that is an unintended side effect.

That's an extremely subjective line you've drawn. Impossible to enforce or discern, as it requires exploration of intent. Ask Pann about that one. It's hard to do that. Impossible in this setting, really.

 

If their "enjoyment of the game experience" in Crowfall is anything like I expect everyone's to be, then you are griefing them by merely beating their heads in repeatedly, using this definition as it "ruin(s) their game experience."

 

My .02. take motive and intent out of it as you'll never be able to nail it down anyway in a game like CF.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Very rarely in Shadowbane did you get your backpack items back after being killed, and I would expect that same thing here in the outer CWs, with harsher death consequences in the inner CWs.   With that being said, I saw very little camping in SB, due to the way that death worked.  If you died within your city, then you spawned at a random TOL (tree of life); if you died outside your city, then you died at your bound TOL.  This made it almost impossible to really be camped in the game.  I'm curious how the respawn mechanics will work in CF.

 

I would agree though that a lot of deaths in or near the last vicinity you died could be common.

I dunno man. we camped trees a lot until the opposition just logged off in frustration or eventually (hours usually) were able to push us out. Numbers, skillful play, spec superiority. Lots of things let this happen, but it happened frequently prior to the advent of spires.

Link to post
Share on other sites

2) Ganker/Chaotic Neutral type - The guys that appreciates a fair fight as much as an unfair fight.  Our forces outnumber them 3:1?  Awesome!  Let's kick their butts!  Passing through an area and come across someone who they can defeat with little to no risk?  Won't even hesitate.  They have catapults, we have ballistas, let's gooooooo!  Free For All!

 

Guess I'm a Ganker! 

 

I love your break down of PvPers. I can picture every type of PvPers I've ever met! 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Griefing imo is when high levels camp low level areas to kill players that have no chance of defending themselves. It does differ from game to game spawn camping can be viewed as griefing in certain games. 

 

Basically to ruin the fun of others intentionally outside of beating them fairly on the field of battle.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Griefing imo is when high levels camp low level areas to kill players that have no chance of defending themselves. It does differ from game to game spawn camping can be viewed as griefing in certain games. 

 

Basically to ruin the fun of others intentionally outside of beating them fairly on the field of battle.

What if they are doing that to their enemy? We used to brutally roll "low level players" from enemy nations (read that or everyone on the map generally) for several strategic reasons. They level more slowly- giving your nation a strategic advantage, you get gold, they lose gold - giving your nation a strategic advantage. They lose items and resources and discipline runes - giving ... 

 

well, you have to get the picture. It also pisses off that other nation, creating larger scale conflict. Wars, alliances, zergs, insurrection, rebellion and all manner of epic fun has flowered from merciless rolling of lowbie groups. It is, in fact, good for the game (unless you consider the risk of a thin skin player taking his ball and going home a meaningful thing to avoid - I do not).

 

Short answer: I disagree that in a PvP game of this type (there have been exactly 2 of those in my view - ever) killing low level players - over and over if you can - is griefing in this game.

Link to post
Share on other sites

When you intentionally go out of your way to cross into an enemy faction lowbie zone that are literally doing nothing but trying to level up then that is not only cowardly it is also griefing there is nothing strategic about it. If they are stupid enough to head into enemy territory and pick fights as lowbies then yes they can expect to be killed. 

 

It really depends on the game but the majority of games either have faction sides/zones for the lower levels or its a FFA kill everyone but party members and guild mates, in which case it is still pretty cowardly for max levels to harass low levels, if you can 1 shot them, you shouldn't be attacking them, put on your big boy panties and go fight someone who presents a challenge. 

 

The difference it makes in every game I have played is so menial it's not even worth mentioning, your faction now has a few more copper then the enemy faction and a couple more players at the expense of risking turning away new players because you saw ruining their fun as a "strategic advantage" which translates into less people playing over all, which is anything but strategic to a games health. Now if low levels wanna beat the crap out of each other all day long, then all the power to them.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.


×
×
  • Create New...