Greetings, glorious testers!

Check out Alpha Two Announcements here to see the latest news on Alpha Two.
Check out general Announcements here to see the latest news on Ashes of Creation & Intrepid Studios.

To get the quickest updates regarding Alpha Two, connect your Discord and Intrepid accounts here.

Define griefing

I am seeing a lot of PK = griefing type arguments on here lately. People are so terrified of griefing they muddle the meaning of the word to include anything that slightly inconveniences you. It seems to me that there are quite a few meanings to the word and the reason we all go in circles with the same argument every new MMO that features the possibility of non consensual pvp. Lets try to define the meanings first before we do this every two days.

Anti pvper's definition: The anti pvper defines griefing as any act of hostility that can result in lost time or progression. They might try and cover up what they mean or claim they only want to a fair and balanced system etc, but at heart they simply dont want pvp at all. Using the term and the fear of griefing as a platform to base their arguments over.

They average players definition: The average player generally defines griefing as any focused attempt to delay or torment a player who has no recourse or path to victory. This ranges from a higher level person camping out a low level quest objective or a group of people chasing out numbered players or lower level areas for kicks. This is most likely what most people think of when they think grief.

The PvPer definition: The average PvP minded player would typically define griefing as any attempt to abuse game mechanics to circumvent a fight instead of taking part in one or sniping members of a party while camping in a safe zone with no intention of engaging in a straight up fight. Generally these players are only worried about people unfairly stopping them from engaging in content. Should be noted that most people with this mindset also agree with the average players definition since it is not mutually exclusive.

The PvE players definition: As well as the average players mindset these players generally see greifing as any time content is closed off in someway that is perceived as unfair. A group of players causing havoc during a world boss attempt with the objective of just not letting that content be done or when the entrance to a dungeon or dungeon itself has people in it or at the entrance with the sole objective of preventing access to content.

Gathering players definition: When games feature gathering another definition must also be considered. These players as well as agreeing with the average players mindset as well as the PvE players mindset will see griefing as any time resources are perceived to be unfairly hard to collect. This ranges from players utilizing safe unintended ways to scout out where gathers are for their group to pk and take for resources all the way to players doing things just to slow down or prevent gathers from collecting resources. Dragging mobs into gathering spots or using skills that interrupt the gathering process for instance.

Now most people can agree with multiple definitions at once. There are people who wont agree to any of this as greifing. Generally the griefers themselves. So its important now to define who or what a griefer is.

Griefer: Any player who bases their enjoyment around the harassment or exclusion of players from content they wish to do. Good examples of this are team killing or low level player ganking. A griefer specifically targets the player behind the character rather than the system around the game as a way of fighting. In this objective most will use any tactic that produces frustration or annoyance. Any player can grief and any player can become a griefer. Most players have participated in a form of griefing at one time or another.

It is important to define griefing and griefers to prevent the extremes of definitions. Anti PvP arguments crop up and gain traction under the guise of other definitions. People who do not want PvP in any shape or form in a game do not care that you do. They dont care that there are thousands of other games that cater to them. They never have and never will. As far as they are concerned you can go play Call of duty if you want to pvp.

Griefers if they have there way are the exact opposite. They dont care that the game wasnt meant to be played that way or a mechanic isnt designed for how they use it. They never have and never will. The objective is to have fun by preventing others from fun.

I recommend when discussing griefing and anti grief mechanics that you determine what type of definition people use. A random attack on another unsuspecting player is not griefing. Killing people for resources instead of collecting them isn't griefing. Locking down an area for your group isn't inherently griefing. PvP isnt on its own griefing. It is just the most common vehicle for grief.

Comments

  • HazardNumberSevenHazardNumberSeven Member, Alpha Two
    Griefing is defined as - "A griefer or bad faith player is a player in a multiplayer video game who deliberately irritates and harasses other players within the game, using aspects of the game in unintended ways."

    PvP is not griefing.
    Non-consensual PvP is not griefing, either.
  • thank you for clearing this up, hopefully it stops everyone from complaining about griefers.
  • Cold 0ne FTBCold 0ne FTB Member, Alpha One, Adventurer, Alpha Two, Early Alpha Two
    Griefing is defined as - "A griefer or bad faith player is a player in a multiplayer video game who deliberately irritates and harasses other players within the game, using aspects of the game in unintended ways."

    PvP is not griefing.
    Non-consensual PvP is not griefing, either.

    This is the definition I see most people using.
    ZxbhjES.gif

    That is not dead which can eternal lie. And with strange aeons even death may die.
  • thank you for clearing this up, hopefully it stops everyone from complaining about griefers.

    I super doubt it but meh. I was bored.
  • AardvarkAardvark Member, Alpha One, Alpha Two, Early Alpha Two
    Griefing is the act of causing another person grief
  • LafiLafi Member, Founder, Kickstarter, Alpha Two, Early Alpha Two
    Griefing is defined as - "A griefer or bad faith player is a player in a multiplayer video game who deliberately irritates and harasses other players within the game, using aspects of the game in unintended ways."

    PvP is not griefing.
    Non-consensual PvP is not griefing, either.

    This is the definition I see most people using.

    apart from bdo where people 'own' mob rotations and killing mobs in that rotation is griefing. apparently.
    Twitch.tv/Lafidell
  • HazardNumberSevenHazardNumberSeven Member, Alpha Two
    edited July 2020
    Aardvark wrote: »
    Griefing is the act of causing another person grief

    There are anti-griefing rules in many games, and if griefing was just 'causing someone grief' you could get people banned for literally anything, because emotions are subjective and anything can cause anyone grief.

    "That person is using a cosmetic that reminds me of someone who I hate and it's causing me grief!"
    And then the person with the cosmetic is spoken to by GMs for their griefing.

    Also, if that were the meaning of the word you would see it used IRL in ways like ..
    "Yeah, I broke up with my girlfriend she's been griefing me all year."
  • I only really bring this up since now that AOC is gaining notice it wont be long before the hoard of anti PvPer's come to bombard the forums in the hopes of removing all forms of PvP that are not instanced. They will attempt this by pretending to be using different definitions, outright demanding pvp be removed, claiming they will refuse to play if there is pvp. We have all seen it happen again and again. Now you might think that it wont happen but plenty of PvP focused games fell prey so why wont this one. Obviously the most recent example of this was New World. They went so far as to redesign the whole game to cater to this mob. The hard truth is they really arent the majority they portray themselves as. We have seen them make multiple accounts and organize themselves to mass disagree in a thread however. Be vigilant. Make sure you are discussing things in good faith and dont be fooled by those whose objective is to remove PvP.
  • SongcallerSongcaller Member, Alpha One, Alpha Two, Early Alpha Two
    PvP Will not be removed from Ashes. Those PvE Hordes who will hope to remove PvP will be sadly mistaken. Have no fear, PvP is as much a part of Ashes as PvE. It's a PvX game which is love from me.
    2a3b8ichz0pd.gif
  • Neurath wrote: »
    PvP Will not be removed from Ashes. Those PvE Hordes who will hope to remove PvP will be sadly mistaken. Have no fear, PvP is as much a part of Ashes as PvE. It's a PvX game which is love from me.

    I would love to agree with you but if a game all about PvP can be completely written off the table why couldn't PvX? People said this about new world the entire time it was being bombarded. Just saying. I worry about it because an MMO without meaningful conflict is not one that is even a little bit enticing.
  • darthadendarthaden Member, Braver of Worlds, Kickstarter, Alpha One, Alpha Two, Early Alpha Two
    Those who dont like Steven's vision can go make their own game. Imo the systems Steven have in place will be more then enough to keep ganking to a low enough level that it doesnt ruin my experience. 1-2 corpse runs every few hours isnt the end of the world and even that will probably be rare unless my guild is at war with another.
  • HazardNumberSevenHazardNumberSeven Member, Alpha Two
    I share your concerns, PvP-bro.

    I have faith in Steven, but I also have 15+ years of utter disappointment title after title of pretty much exactly what we're afraid of happening, happening.
  • Cold 0ne FTBCold 0ne FTB Member, Alpha One, Adventurer, Alpha Two, Early Alpha Two
    Lazyactor wrote: »
    I only really bring this up since now that AOC is gaining notice it wont be long before the hoard of anti PvPer's come to bombard the forums in the hopes of removing all forms of PvP that are not instanced. They will attempt this by pretending to be using different definitions, outright demanding pvp be removed, claiming they will refuse to play if there is pvp. We have all seen it happen again and again. Now you might think that it wont happen but plenty of PvP focused games fell prey so why wont this one. Obviously the most recent example of this was New World. They went so far as to redesign the whole game to cater to this mob. The hard truth is they really arent the majority they portray themselves as. We have seen them make multiple accounts and organize themselves to mass disagree in a thread however. Be vigilant. Make sure you are discussing things in good faith and dont be fooled by those whose objective is to remove PvP.

    I wouldn't worry about it Steven seems to be the kind of guy that stands by his own beliefs and opinions. It's part of why I think this game will be such a success. He isn't in it to create your favorite game or my favorite game. He would love it if it does become our favorite game but he has a strong vision for what this game is going to be and unlike New World that lacks a defined vision. I think that the game he is describing today is the game he intends to make. Things might change or develop with time but the core mechanics will not.
    ZxbhjES.gif

    That is not dead which can eternal lie. And with strange aeons even death may die.
  • Lazyactor wrote: »
    I only really bring this up since now that AOC is gaining notice it wont be long before the hoard of anti PvPer's come to bombard the forums in the hopes of removing all forms of PvP that are not instanced. They will attempt this by pretending to be using different definitions, outright demanding pvp be removed, claiming they will refuse to play if there is pvp. We have all seen it happen again and again. Now you might think that it wont happen but plenty of PvP focused games fell prey so why wont this one. Obviously the most recent example of this was New World. They went so far as to redesign the whole game to cater to this mob. The hard truth is they really arent the majority they portray themselves as. We have seen them make multiple accounts and organize themselves to mass disagree in a thread however. Be vigilant. Make sure you are discussing things in good faith and dont be fooled by those whose objective is to remove PvP.

    I wouldn't worry about it Steven seems to be the kind of guy that stands by his own beliefs and opinions. It's part of why I think this game will be such a success. He isn't in it to create your favorite game or my favorite game. He would love it if it does become our favorite game but he has a strong vision for what this game is going to be and unlike New World that lacks a defined vision. I think that the game he is describing today is the game he intends to make. Things might change or develop with time but the core mechanics will not.

    Fair enough bro. That being said I will adopt a time will tell approach. I honestly didnt expect the game to get this far. Starting to feel the hype. But I dont want to feel the hype. We all know what happens when we feel the hype.
  • HazardNumberSevenHazardNumberSeven Member, Alpha Two
    edited July 2020
    Lazyactor wrote: »
    Lazyactor wrote: »
    I only really bring this up since now that AOC is gaining notice it wont be long before the hoard of anti PvPer's come to bombard the forums in the hopes of removing all forms of PvP that are not instanced. They will attempt this by pretending to be using different definitions, outright demanding pvp be removed, claiming they will refuse to play if there is pvp. We have all seen it happen again and again. Now you might think that it wont happen but plenty of PvP focused games fell prey so why wont this one. Obviously the most recent example of this was New World. They went so far as to redesign the whole game to cater to this mob. The hard truth is they really arent the majority they portray themselves as. We have seen them make multiple accounts and organize themselves to mass disagree in a thread however. Be vigilant. Make sure you are discussing things in good faith and dont be fooled by those whose objective is to remove PvP.

    I wouldn't worry about it Steven seems to be the kind of guy that stands by his own beliefs and opinions. It's part of why I think this game will be such a success. He isn't in it to create your favorite game or my favorite game. He would love it if it does become our favorite game but he has a strong vision for what this game is going to be and unlike New World that lacks a defined vision. I think that the game he is describing today is the game he intends to make. Things might change or develop with time but the core mechanics will not.

    Fair enough bro. That being said I will adopt a time will tell approach. I honestly didnt expect the game to get this far. Starting to feel the hype. But I dont want to feel the hype. We all know what happens when we feel the hype.

    :cry:

    .. yeah
  • Cold 0ne FTBCold 0ne FTB Member, Alpha One, Adventurer, Alpha Two, Early Alpha Two
    Lazyactor wrote: »
    Lazyactor wrote: »
    I only really bring this up since now that AOC is gaining notice it wont be long before the hoard of anti PvPer's come to bombard the forums in the hopes of removing all forms of PvP that are not instanced. They will attempt this by pretending to be using different definitions, outright demanding pvp be removed, claiming they will refuse to play if there is pvp. We have all seen it happen again and again. Now you might think that it wont happen but plenty of PvP focused games fell prey so why wont this one. Obviously the most recent example of this was New World. They went so far as to redesign the whole game to cater to this mob. The hard truth is they really arent the majority they portray themselves as. We have seen them make multiple accounts and organize themselves to mass disagree in a thread however. Be vigilant. Make sure you are discussing things in good faith and dont be fooled by those whose objective is to remove PvP.

    I wouldn't worry about it Steven seems to be the kind of guy that stands by his own beliefs and opinions. It's part of why I think this game will be such a success. He isn't in it to create your favorite game or my favorite game. He would love it if it does become our favorite game but he has a strong vision for what this game is going to be and unlike New World that lacks a defined vision. I think that the game he is describing today is the game he intends to make. Things might change or develop with time but the core mechanics will not.

    Fair enough bro. That being said I will adopt a time will tell approach. I honestly didnt expect the game to get this far. Starting to feel the hype. But I dont want to feel the hype. We all know what happens when we feel the hype.

    I feel you my dude. The only thing that concerns me about this game is the scale and whether or not this project is too ambitious. If this game was to fail at this point I think it would be because of that.
    ZxbhjES.gif

    That is not dead which can eternal lie. And with strange aeons even death may die.
  • I share your concerns, PvP-bro.

    I have faith in Steven, but I also have 15+ years of utter disappointment title after title of pretty much exactly what we're afraid of happening, happening.

    In the interviews I watched he did seem hyper aware of how most MMO players felt in this regard. He himself being on of us helps I suppose. I guess we should indeed consider the fact he isnt a boardroom of suits. Nice to have a gamer behind the money in a game and not the freaking suits. Gaming as a whole has seen a massive shift from passionate creators of games to profit driven mindless suits who never played so much as candy crush.
  • HazardNumberSevenHazardNumberSeven Member, Alpha Two
    Lazyactor wrote: »
    I share your concerns, PvP-bro.

    I have faith in Steven, but I also have 15+ years of utter disappointment title after title of pretty much exactly what we're afraid of happening, happening.

    In the interviews I watched he did seem hyper aware of how most MMO players felt in this regard. He himself being on of us helps I suppose. I guess we should indeed consider the fact he isnt a boardroom of suits. Nice to have a gamer behind the money in a game and not the freaking suits. Gaming as a whole has seen a massive shift from passionate creators of games to profit driven mindless suits who never played so much as candy crush.

    It really has, and it's lasted so much longer than I thought it would. WILL THIS DARKNESS EVER END?

    I don't even remember what fun smells like anymore!
  • Lazyactor wrote: »
    Lazyactor wrote: »
    I only really bring this up since now that AOC is gaining notice it wont be long before the hoard of anti PvPer's come to bombard the forums in the hopes of removing all forms of PvP that are not instanced. They will attempt this by pretending to be using different definitions, outright demanding pvp be removed, claiming they will refuse to play if there is pvp. We have all seen it happen again and again. Now you might think that it wont happen but plenty of PvP focused games fell prey so why wont this one. Obviously the most recent example of this was New World. They went so far as to redesign the whole game to cater to this mob. The hard truth is they really arent the majority they portray themselves as. We have seen them make multiple accounts and organize themselves to mass disagree in a thread however. Be vigilant. Make sure you are discussing things in good faith and dont be fooled by those whose objective is to remove PvP.

    I wouldn't worry about it Steven seems to be the kind of guy that stands by his own beliefs and opinions. It's part of why I think this game will be such a success. He isn't in it to create your favorite game or my favorite game. He would love it if it does become our favorite game but he has a strong vision for what this game is going to be and unlike New World that lacks a defined vision. I think that the game he is describing today is the game he intends to make. Things might change or develop with time but the core mechanics will not.

    Fair enough bro. That being said I will adopt a time will tell approach. I honestly didnt expect the game to get this far. Starting to feel the hype. But I dont want to feel the hype. We all know what happens when we feel the hype.

    I feel you my dude. The only thing that concerns me about this game is the scale and whether or not this project is too ambitious. If this game was to fail at this point I think it would be because of that.

    I dont know man. In this day and age I disagree that they are aiming to high. Honestly if the three big MMO's would just die I feel the scope of this game would be the norm for the future of the genre. I mean is it really that crazy in scale? Sure there are quite a few systems to support things but I can easily see a world where not only AOC pulls it off but many MMO's pursue it in the future. As far as I can tell it isnt just any one system that is shooting high but the combining of so many into one title that impresses people. It isnt the same as say star citizen that is trying to go beyond what people think is possible in nearly every system of the game. AOC presents a cool new feature "Nodes" and just builds decent ideas around it. I dont think its reaching beyond whats possible in that regard.
  • Lazyactor wrote: »
    I share your concerns, PvP-bro.

    I have faith in Steven, but I also have 15+ years of utter disappointment title after title of pretty much exactly what we're afraid of happening, happening.

    In the interviews I watched he did seem hyper aware of how most MMO players felt in this regard. He himself being on of us helps I suppose. I guess we should indeed consider the fact he isnt a boardroom of suits. Nice to have a gamer behind the money in a game and not the freaking suits. Gaming as a whole has seen a massive shift from passionate creators of games to profit driven mindless suits who never played so much as candy crush.

    It really has, and it's lasted so much longer than I thought it would. WILL THIS DARKNESS EVER END?

    I don't even remember what fun smells like anymore!

    The moment people stop buying garbage products is the moment the suits lose. I cant remember the last awe inspiring work that has come out. Everything is low effort bare minimum playing it safe as you can get. Maybe cyber punk will be different. CD Project Red shows with every game release that they can deliver amazing titles that turn huge profits without being scumbags about it.
  • SongcallerSongcaller Member, Alpha One, Alpha Two, Early Alpha Two
    Lazyactor wrote: »
    Neurath wrote: »
    PvP Will not be removed from Ashes. Those PvE Hordes who will hope to remove PvP will be sadly mistaken. Have no fear, PvP is as much a part of Ashes as PvE. It's a PvX game which is love from me.

    I would love to agree with you but if a game all about PvP can be completely written off the table why couldn't PvX? People said this about new world the entire time it was being bombarded. Just saying. I worry about it because an MMO without meaningful conflict is not one that is even a little bit enticing.

    The systems mean there are no ways of obtaining PvP Armour, unless they add PvP Experience. If they add PvP Experience then there would be a separation between PvP and PvE but the PvP would go insane, milking up PvP Experience from anywhere and that would increase ganking and Open World PvP. I'm not against Open World PvP but I think it is easier on PvE players if their Armour works in PvE and PvP, because otherwise the PvE players become fodder for the PvP players.
    2a3b8ichz0pd.gif
  • If I go by Something awful raids ... I would count body collision as a system that was used for great grief. doorways and lots of people blocking NPCs. That also would abuse guards while people try to PK these green flagged players to get access to what ever npc or building. Not that these things happen often, but it would be naive not to think about misuse of systems. If collision is a thing maybe have social-skills in town where you can push trough a crowd without really moving anyones position but the characters muddle trough somehow.
  • WololoWololo Member, Phoenix Initiative, Hero of the People, Kickstarter, Alpha One, Alpha Two, Early Alpha Two
    I think griefing is a good thing as long it doesnt come to verbal insults. It makes ppl come back to fight or rage and call friends in the middle of the night so you can have some mass PvP anywhere, anytime. Its tough having to hear the initial QQing but the reward is sweet like candy :#
    Signature-member.gif
  • NagashNagash Member, Leader of Men, Kickstarter, Alpha One, Alpha Two, Early Alpha Two
    Wololo wrote: »
    I think griefing is a good thing as long it doesnt come to verbal insults. It makes ppl come back to fight or rage and call friends in the middle of the night so you can have some mass PvP anywhere, anytime. Its tough having to hear the initial QQing but the reward is sweet like candy :#

    Revenge is a dish best served in bloody vengeance
    nJ0vUSm.gif

    The dead do not squabble as this land’s rulers do. The dead have no desires, petty jealousies or ambitions. A world of the dead is a world at peace
  • WololoWololo Member, Phoenix Initiative, Hero of the People, Kickstarter, Alpha One, Alpha Two, Early Alpha Two
    Nagash wrote: »
    Wololo wrote: »
    I think griefing is a good thing as long it doesnt come to verbal insults. It makes ppl come back to fight or rage and call friends in the middle of the night so you can have some mass PvP anywhere, anytime. Its tough having to hear the initial QQing but the reward is sweet like candy :#

    Revenge is a dish best served in bloody vengeance

    damn right !!
    Signature-member.gif
Sign In or Register to comment.