Poggy

Question: Does RPing an evil character also justify in character abusive chat/speech? It seems it would. Interesting.

Sorry to restart our convo, but I'm curious about this. Why is this a douche move, but backstabbing a herb collector isnt? Surely by your own standard the map chaser is just playing the game within the rules same as you? They're RPing an outlaw, like you? The prima facie hypocrisy is breath taking. What am I missing here?

Xp? You kill people skinning animals for the xp? And that is better than grinding? And you took the deer? And by griefing people who can't shoot back you gain 'gameplay experience'? Are you playing the same game I am, because that's just nuts! Lol At least I'm glad you've stopped trying to offer any kind of reasonable moral justification for your trolling, you above post makes it very clear to everyone why you do what you do, and what kind of character you are. It's actually kinda funny Unsportsman like conduct is not part of your vocabulary, neither is accountability - it's their fault for being butt hurt, lol. Sure, let's leave it there, I'm happy with the outcome of our discussion.

No one used the word 'serious'. I have been at pains to point out that the negative impact is minor - look through my posts. You are now merely using a rhetorical device, creating a hyperbolic strawman, so as to paint your opposition as absurd as a means to justify your own immoral behaviour. Let me spell it out one more time as clearly as I can, this time presenting my own personal take rather than a more abstract ethical argument that seems to be too easily misunderstood: I role play as an outlaw, I treat NPCs very badly, doing things I'd never do irl (maybe, on a good day). But I don't grief PCs who share the RDO playground with me. Why? Because I know that it is irritating to have time spent hunting/grinding or a quiet moment fishing or whatever stolen from me by some rando headshotting me whilst I am unable to defend myself. It's not a major problem, it's not a trauma, but it is a minor irritation. And many people, as you can see on thread where and elsewhere, also find it an irritation - and for some it's annoying enough to not play in the playground at all. So, given that I gain nothing, why would I want to affect someone, albeit in a minor way, negatively? I can RP an outlaw with NPCs, I can test my skills in competitive series matches or missions - what can I possibly gain by deliberately irritating other people? There can be only one answer, it would be because I enjoy the very fact that I am causing minor distress, and bask in that knowledge. Their loss and emotional reaction would have to be my source of enjoyment. And I refuse to be this sadist-lite, this troll, this bully. I don't want to hurt people, however trivially, for my own enjoyment, and I don't want run the risk of genuinely upsetting someone, perhaps to the point of quitting the game, simply because I enjoy being an ass without repercussion.

And yet you do indeed come across as a thug and a bully, someone who deliberately causes real life loss/negative emotion to others simply for their own enjoyment. The fact that you cannot see that being a bully is wrong, well ... Again, we are just going to have to agree to disagree - I know I cannot convince you. You are what you are.

The fact you realise it's not nice says it all, really. You're choosing to be bad, you are choosing to upset other people. Yes, as you say, you are choosing to bully. Stop it, get some help

I hope Gavin is somewhere online . Just hope he didn't get any of that lumbago, nasty business.

Oh dear, Ugly ... So many words, so little comprehension. I guess we're going to have to agree to disagree as I don't think a protracted ethical debate on a forum is going to lead anywhere. I think my reasoning and analogy sound, you don't. Well, I don't have the ability to convince you if your conscience and my posts can't already get through to you. I have formed an opinion of your character and no doubt you have of mine. Some people are just bullies with poor excuses for their behaviour and I cannot change that. I just have to hope that maybe one day you will realise that it is not nice to scribble over Timmy's picture, vandalise other people's property, kick puppies, and deliberately cause other people upset for 'the lolz'.

Sorry to second post, but perhaps an analogy might help prime people's moral intuitions here. Imagine a community hall where local kids go and play. The hall is like RDO, a space where people can engage in various activities under the same roof. In one corner of the hall Ronald, Mo and Destiny are playing a board game (a series death match); in another corner Sammy and Yuko are seeing who can bounce the ball highest (stranger mission and interference); in yet another corner little Timmy is quietly colouring in a colouring book (free roam herb collecting). In walks Jed. Now, if Jed joins Ron, Mo and Destiny, plays fair, wins, and Mo gets upset at losing, then Mo is just being childish and Jed did nothing wrong. But what if Jed walks over to Little Timmy and scribbles over Timmy's picture? Isn't it clear that Jed is now acting like an asshat? And what if challenged Jed replies that Timmy knew this could happen when he came in the hall, that Timmy shouldn't be fragile and should play at home, and that it happened to him last week so it's ok for him to do it to someone else. Isnt it obvious that Jed is in the wrong?

So, further to your victim blaming justification, you now add the further justifications, 'it's happened to me' and 'it's a game.' Do you understand why these don't function very well as justifiers for a morally questionable act? Let's consider an unspecified act, X, which we know causes some small degree of loss of goods and negative emotional response in some people. Would be OK to do X based on the following: they are too fragile and shouldn't get upset; but someone did it to me; it's only a game? I don't think you've thought through your ethical position here. Edit: addition - your phrase 'come to terms with' being griefed implies your initial response was an emotional negative that you had to rationalise - which raises the spectre of hypocrisy with calling others too fragile to play the game.

Oh, I see. So it's the victims fault. My bad. If you have been hunting for half an hour, collecting high value pelts and carcasses, and then I kill you whilst you are in a skinning animation, and thus you lose the benefit of your actions for the past 30 minutes, then if you feel the slightest twang of annoyance you are fragile and should not play the game. Gotcha. Well, although we may have to agree to disagree on whether such behaviour and opinion is immoral, selfish and dispicable, at least I hope that you are not a hypocrite, and that should you ever feel any negative emotion whatsoever next time someone interferes with your gaming you will leave RDO forever. But even games can have real world effects on people?? For example, let's say I was able, somehow, to delete all your RDO saved data right now, would you be ok with that because 'it's just a game' and 'I can?' If not, then you must justify your hypocrisy, for killing someone who then loses pelts (data) is the same principle, just a lesser degree, like the difference between giving someone a paper cut or a punctured spleen (both are wrong, just one is worse).

It blanked out the option to reset a challenge once I got to ten? Is this as it should be?

Why is it fun to kill innocents bystanders? You do realise you might be causing someone real world distress and annoyance?

I had an entire building disappear on me playing last night.

Have a good one!

No idea. I imagine that if you don't want to grind, then gold (purchased with real cash) will be your, and R*, friend.

Trouble is, as word spreads on how to use this exploit people gonna eye it more and more. Saw it for the second time tonight . A gang running around invincible.

How can I compete with such brutal bad assery? I imagine that if Mario Kart was online, and you were on, you'd just find ways to ruin the fun for little kids. I don't think the game matters, does it? Would I be wrong if I suggested that you troll people, or take advantage of exploits, on any game - from FIFA to Minecraft?

... Or maybe it's exactly because targeting PCs causes real world discomfort that it is enjoyable. And the outlaw claim was an attempt to justify a form of minor sadism in public. But rather than speculating, perhaps unfairly, I'd actually like a response from the poster. I may be wholly wrong.

So, it seems there's more griefing and glitching and lag than normal. Guess the kids have broken up from school

One can only hope that they do this sort of thing to distract themselves from some agonising illness.

Some dumb exploit that needs a fix. How tragically socially crippled must someone be to grief with a cheat mode?

That is the reason I kill NPCs, I'm RPing being an outlaw, a killer. Fair enough. BUT - I don't grief PCs. Because that has real world consequences on real life people - their time, their emotions, their enjoyment. So if you want to be an outlaw, kill NPCs (or PCs in series matches). Unless you're a real life outlaw, I can't see how 'Because I'm an outlaw (in a game)' can be any justification for causing real life hurt or loss to real people, any more than me being an outlaw in RDO can justify bullying my neighbours kid. Do you have a further explanation? Because if you just want to roleplay being an outlaw you can do that very well killing NPCs without griefing people.

Yes, I've been killed by ghosting griefers, and so have others. There's a thread on it somewhere. No idea how they do it. It's tragic

Simple rule: don't shoot pinks EVER, unless: they shot first, or it's a series match, or they're trying to interfere with a mission, or they are messing with you in an obvious and harmful manner. I never shoot loiterers pre-emptively.