(Apologies for the crudity of my language but I do feel a certain robustness of expression is required to fully express what I am trying to get at).
Thanks to Syncaine I read an interesting piece about a Darkfall player called Darwoth who pulled of a series of impressive guild bank heists by tricking players into making him an officer in their guild.
I admire what Darworth achieved. It required audacity and cleverness and I believe this type of behaviour is entirely in keeping with the hardcore ethos of a game like Darkfall. This is exactly the sort of meta-game scheming that makes EVE a great game and is essential to the atmosphere of danger and mistrust that this type of game needs.
Unfortunately while I admire what he did I have nothing but contempt for Darworth himself. In his writing he comes across as a racist. He comes across as insulting and bad mannered. He comes across as a whinger. He constantly whines about what he calls zerg guilds. He whines about guard towers. He even whines about Trammel!!! Trammel happened almost a decade ago and he is still whining about it.
Am I completely naieve to think that it should be possible to role play a villain in the context of a game without being an arsehole in real life? I guess Hollywood has spoiled me. Too many David Niven and Michael Caine movies have led me to believe in the concept of the gentleman swindler who will rob you blind but with a debonair politeness.
Thanks to Syncaine I read an interesting piece about a Darkfall player called Darwoth who pulled of a series of impressive guild bank heists by tricking players into making him an officer in their guild.
I admire what Darworth achieved. It required audacity and cleverness and I believe this type of behaviour is entirely in keeping with the hardcore ethos of a game like Darkfall. This is exactly the sort of meta-game scheming that makes EVE a great game and is essential to the atmosphere of danger and mistrust that this type of game needs.
Unfortunately while I admire what he did I have nothing but contempt for Darworth himself. In his writing he comes across as a racist. He comes across as insulting and bad mannered. He comes across as a whinger. He constantly whines about what he calls zerg guilds. He whines about guard towers. He even whines about Trammel!!! Trammel happened almost a decade ago and he is still whining about it.
Am I completely naieve to think that it should be possible to role play a villain in the context of a game without being an arsehole in real life? I guess Hollywood has spoiled me. Too many David Niven and Michael Caine movies have led me to believe in the concept of the gentleman swindler who will rob you blind but with a debonair politeness.
Comments
They were all lovely people, considerate and generous.
Actually thinking further I am getting a bit confused now. How do I know this Darworth person is really unpleasant in real life? All I really know is that his internet persona is unpleasant. I suppose I am making the assumption that anyone who makes racist and abusive comments on an internet forum or blog is probably not very pleasant in real life.
ME2 allows you to be an arsehole but the results could mean the cost of your characters life in ME3 - now that's something to consider!
Plenty of people agreed that Iraq deserved to be bombed to shit in 2003. Then suffer an invasion of terrorism that didn't exist there beforehand.
Who is the villain?
Watch the BBC doco: The Trap - What happened to our Freedom?
Solbright
People are social beasts. What does being social mean? It's contributing to the wider community.
This is a basic urge and need we all have. We can't stay sane without regular successful contributions.
Can bringing about harm to others be considered as a contribution to the community? This certainly could explain the enthusiasm some do exhibit towards bullying. More than mere politics that's for sure.
So ... A contribution can be either constructive or destructive, the human psyche doesn't make a distinction.
Solbright
From my limited experience in EVE I can almost agree with that. Without Nasty people EVE could be a very boring game. Its the nasty people and the sense of danger they bring which makes the game exciting.
There will be arguments about preparedness and vigilante justice but those don't have to involve bullying. That's just politicking.
Eve does indeed reduce it down to constructive vs destructive. Any loses are kept to in-game investments. So it's a purist clean room exercise where both sides actually end up wanting the conflict as much through boredom as anything else. That said, the excitement of suddenly finding your efforts at risk and the possibility of beating or escaping the opposition does get the heart pounding.
Solbright
The question of preparedness is maybe a bit more important than I gave it credit for earlier. Even the most well designed rulebook will lapse into disused if nothing ever calls for it. Humans are naturally lazy and will take shortcuts when given the chance. This can easily spill into public policy - overriding the rulebook.
The rulebook would have to be self-monitoring and likely self-aware to streamline human activities to no longer depend on conflict or, for that matter, even competition.
Solbright