joaocordeiro Posted October 2, 2020 Share Posted October 2, 2020 Just now, JohnnyTazer said: Morals of his ingame character right? Not the real life person. The time spent by others building their ships is real. Their despair is real. Your satisfaction from it is real. The video game is just a transport for all this real-life elements. So answering to you directly, yes the person killing someone, in game, 10 times in a row, just camping its core, has low moral values in RL. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
joaocordeiro Posted October 2, 2020 Share Posted October 2, 2020 Just now, HairballHacker said: If the person comes back 10 times for his core and he gets killed by the same person 10 times, it's not griefing. The getting killed 10 times is stubbornly not learning his lesson that he should just give up. But if he wants to bring it upon himself, then so be it; not the "griefer's" fault IMO. Just look the definition of griefing. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JohnnyTazer Posted October 2, 2020 Author Share Posted October 2, 2020 1 minute ago, joaocordeiro said: The time spent by others building their ships is real. Their despair is real. Your satisfaction from it is real. The video game is just a transport for all this real-life elements. So answering to you directly, yes the person killing someone, in game, 10 times in a row, just camping its core, has low moral values in RL. But not 9 correct. I can kill someone 9 times in a row and retain my high morals. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
joaocordeiro Posted October 2, 2020 Share Posted October 2, 2020 Just now, JohnnyTazer said: But not 9 correct. I can kill someone 9 times in a row and retain my high morals. Is there a point here? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JohnnyTazer Posted October 2, 2020 Author Share Posted October 2, 2020 Just now, joaocordeiro said: Is there a point here? I can kill someone 9 times in a row and retain my high morals. According to you. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
joaocordeiro Posted October 2, 2020 Share Posted October 2, 2020 Just now, JohnnyTazer said: I can kill someone 9 times in a row and retain my high morals. According to you. Is there a point here? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JohnnyTazer Posted October 2, 2020 Author Share Posted October 2, 2020 1 minute ago, joaocordeiro said: Is there a point here? Yes, I want to know where the line is so i can keep my in real life morals. And since all morals are dictated by you alone, I want to know where the line is. And according to you, I can kill a person 9 times in a row and remain a person of high morals in real life. So thats good to know, i have not killed someone 10 times in a row before so its refreshing to know I am a person of very high morals. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
joaocordeiro Posted October 2, 2020 Share Posted October 2, 2020 Just now, JohnnyTazer said: Yes, I want to know where the line is so i can keep my in real life morals. And since all morals are dictated by you alone, I want to know where the line is. And according to you, I can kill a person 9 times in a row and remain a person of high morals in real life. So thats good to know, i have not killed someone 10 times in a row before so its refreshing to know I am a person of very high morals. Simple. When you stop doing economical and strategic damage to the enemy and focus on the pain that person is suffering. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JohnnyTazer Posted October 2, 2020 Author Share Posted October 2, 2020 1 minute ago, joaocordeiro said: Simple. When you stop doing economical and strategic damage to the enemy and focus on the pain that person is suffering. Thats not what you said. You said killing someone 10 times. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
joaocordeiro Posted October 2, 2020 Share Posted October 2, 2020 Just now, JohnnyTazer said: Thats not what you said. You said killing someone 10 times. Is there a point here? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JohnnyTazer Posted October 2, 2020 Author Share Posted October 2, 2020 Just now, joaocordeiro said: Is there a point here? I think its quite obvious. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HairballHacker Posted October 2, 2020 Share Posted October 2, 2020 1 minute ago, JohnnyTazer said: But not 9 correct. I can kill someone 9 times in a row and retain my high morals. Or maybe 10 different people kill him. Is it griefing then? NO, according to the definition of "griefing". The thing that joaocorde is stubbornly refusing to understand is that, in the killed-10-times-trying-to-retrieve-his-core example, the "victim" is choosing to return expecting a different outcome each time. The so-called griefer is being mean by camping the core, but the "victim" is knowingly putting himself in a situation where he will be killed again. Both party's are reprehensible IMO. NQ's attitude towards taking personal responsibility for entering into a PvP situation (which is what this issue is really about, not the "official" definition of griefing [if there even really is such a thing]) is admirable and to be commended in my opinion. If they back off on their stance, I will be very disappointed. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
joaocordeiro Posted October 2, 2020 Share Posted October 2, 2020 Just now, JohnnyTazer said: I think its quite obvious. Yes it is, you are trying to derail this. Its quite clear that "killing some guy 10 times camping his core" is included in "focus on that person's pain" Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JohnnyTazer Posted October 2, 2020 Author Share Posted October 2, 2020 Just now, HairballHacker said: Or maybe 10 different people kill him. Is it griefing then? NO, according to the definition of "griefing". The thing that joaocorde is stubbornly refusing to understand is that, in the killed-10-times-trying-to-retrieve-his-core example, the "victim" is choosing to return expecting a different outcome each time. The so-called griefer is being mean by camping the core, but the "victim" is knowingly putting himself in a situation where he will be killed again. Both party's are reprehensible IMO. NQ's attitude towards taking personal responsibility for entering into a PvP situation (which is what this issue is really about, not the "official" definition of griefing [if there even really is such a thing]) is admirable and to be commended in my opinion. If they back off on their stance, I will be very disappointed. If they back off their stance, there is a high probability they will lose a lot of paying customers. Since a lot of people chose to back this game because of their stance, as quoted by the Dev it was a stance they took over 4 years ago during kickstarter. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JohnnyTazer Posted October 2, 2020 Author Share Posted October 2, 2020 Just now, joaocordeiro said: Yes it is, you are trying to derail this. Its quite clear that "killing some guy 10 times camping his core" is included in "focus on that person's pain" But not 9 times. 9 times is ok according to you. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
joaocordeiro Posted October 2, 2020 Share Posted October 2, 2020 1 minute ago, HairballHacker said: the "victim" is choosing to return expecting a different outcome each time Its called despair. Hope is allways there. Thats what greifers use, their victim's hope. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
joaocordeiro Posted October 2, 2020 Share Posted October 2, 2020 Just now, JohnnyTazer said: But not 9 times. 9 times is ok according to you. No, you said that, again to derail this conversation. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HairballHacker Posted October 2, 2020 Share Posted October 2, 2020 1 minute ago, joaocordeiro said: Its called despair. Hope is allways there. Thats what greifers use, their victim's hope. You totally just made that up so that you could argue. JohnnyTazer 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JohnnyTazer Posted October 2, 2020 Author Share Posted October 2, 2020 1 minute ago, joaocordeiro said: No, you said that, again to derail this conversation. No you said 10, which implies 9 and below is ok. Otherwise why say "10" at all? if 10 is meaningless. Which is it? You need to clarify or leave the thread. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
joaocordeiro Posted October 2, 2020 Share Posted October 2, 2020 Just now, HairballHacker said: You totally just made that up so that you could argue. Why dont you google it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
joaocordeiro Posted October 2, 2020 Share Posted October 2, 2020 Just now, JohnnyTazer said: No you said 10, which implies 9 No it does not. Its simply a exaggeration. To make sure ppl understand the point. 9 would also be a exageration. 8 would..... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HairballHacker Posted October 2, 2020 Share Posted October 2, 2020 Just now, JohnnyTazer said: No you said 10, which implies 9 and below is ok. Otherwise why say "10" at all? if 10 is meaningless. Which is it? You need to clarify or leave the thread. You two harping on 9 vs 10 is silly. Please stop. It's not really the point. I believe the point is if you kill someone once, it's not griefing (unless you are an Elite Dangerous player in which case it is). If the same person kills the same person again, then it is griefing according to a very, very strict reading of the most common definitions of griefing. But again, what is missing is the fact that the so-called victim consented to PvP and is returning to the scene expecting a different outcome each time. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JohnnyTazer Posted October 2, 2020 Author Share Posted October 2, 2020 1 minute ago, joaocordeiro said: No it does not. Its simply a exaggeration. To make sure ppl understand the point. 9 would also be a exageration. 8 would..... Begs the question, if your stance is so definitive, why the need to exaggerate for people to understand? Why can't you just state your opinion or stance and give the reader the respect to understand what you are saying? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
joaocordeiro Posted October 2, 2020 Share Posted October 2, 2020 Just now, HairballHacker said: You two harping on 9 vs 10 is silly. Please stop. It's not really the point. Thats his fall back argument. To find a english flaw and call me a liar. Happened several times in the past... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
joaocordeiro Posted October 2, 2020 Share Posted October 2, 2020 1 minute ago, JohnnyTazer said: Begs the question, if your stance is so definitive, why the need to exaggerate for people to understand? Why can't you just state your opinion or stance and give the reader the respect to understand what you are saying? Is there a point here? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
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 accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now