Greetings, glorious adventurers! If you're joining in our Alpha One spot testing, please follow the steps here to see all the latest test info on our forums and Discord!
Options
Define griefing
Lazyactor
Member
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.
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.
3
Comments
PvP is not griefing.
Non-consensual PvP is not griefing, either.
https://knightsofember.com/forums/members/winner909098.54
This is the definition I see most people using.
That is not dead which can eternal lie. And with strange aeons even death may die.
I super doubt it but meh. I was bored.
apart from bdo where people 'own' mob rotations and killing mobs in that rotation is griefing. apparently.
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 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.
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.
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.
That is not dead which can eternal lie. And with strange aeons even death may die.
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.
.. yeah
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.
That is not dead which can eternal lie. And with strange aeons even death may die.
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!
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.
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.
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.
Revenge is a dish best served in bloody vengeance
damn right !!