Why are so many MMO games filled with toxic players ?

Flyte27

Steelhelm said:

Looking at the world from the viewpoint of the three gunas(hindu philosophy), 1/3 of humans are destructive assholes.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Guṇa

It sounds like your Tamas is taking over when you think about the others controlled by their Tamas and the destruction they cause.

This philosophy doesn't explore the idea that destruction can be productive in an unseen way.  It just says that if you want to live in the serenity that you have to follow certain guide lines.  Some people might not want to live in serenity.  They might prefer the excitement and tension of chaos and destruction.

cameltosis

Flyte27 said:

Steelhelm said:

Looking at the world from the viewpoint of the three gunas(hindu philosophy), 1/3 of humans are destructive assholes.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Guṇa

It sounds like your Tamas is taking over when you think about the others controlled by their Tamas and the destruction they cause.

This philosophy doesn't explore the idea that destruction can be productive in an unseen way.  It just says that if you want to live in the serenity that you have to follow certain guide lines.  Some people might not want to live in serenity.  They might prefer the excitement and tension of chaos and destruction.

You've kinda just described my political voting guidelines! I would much rather vote for chaos and destruction over the usual stagnation - precisely for the purpose that chaos and destruction in the short term often results in greater long term benefits. 

It does tend to mean dicking over a small proportion of the existing population, but on balance more people benefit in the long term. 

However, my voting preferences in real life is very much about looking at the big picture (possibly because no political party in the UK addresses the issues I care about so it's not possible for me to gain personally). When I'm playing a game, I'm not looking at the big picture, I'm only looking at what I find fun and what I want to achieve. Being "nice" / non-toxic has always proven to be the quickest and easiest way to achieve my own goals. I do still appreciate the occasional toxic person - I love them when they're on the opposite realm as it really spices up pvp, and there are a few posters on this site who provide me with a lot of entertainment. 

Flyte27

cameltosis said:

Flyte27 said:

Steelhelm said:

Looking at the world from the viewpoint of the three gunas(hindu philosophy), 1/3 of humans are destructive assholes.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Guṇa

It sounds like your Tamas is taking over when you think about the others controlled by their Tamas and the destruction they cause.

This philosophy doesn't explore the idea that destruction can be productive in an unseen way.  It just says that if you want to live in the serenity that you have to follow certain guide lines.  Some people might not want to live in serenity.  They might prefer the excitement and tension of chaos and destruction.

You've kinda just described my political voting guidelines! I would much rather vote for chaos and destruction over the usual stagnation - precisely for the purpose that chaos and destruction in the short term often results in greater long term benefits. 

It does tend to mean dicking over a small proportion of the existing population, but on balance more people benefit in the long term. 

However, my voting preferences in real life is very much about looking at the big picture (possibly because no political party in the UK addresses the issues I care about so it's not possible for me to gain personally). When I'm playing a game, I'm not looking at the big picture, I'm only looking at what I find fun and what I want to achieve. Being "nice" / non-toxic has always proven to be the quickest and easiest way to achieve my own goals. I do still appreciate the occasional toxic person - I love them when they're on the opposite realm as it really spices up pvp, and there are a few posters on this site who provide me with a lot of entertainment. 

That is true, but toxic players can create an environment of chaos and destruction that can be fun in the game if you have the right attitude.  It's true that you can achieve your goals faster with politeness and teamwork, but perhaps getting the best loot, the highest level, or number one on a leaderboard is not a fun goal to some people.  Instead, they prefer the real chaos of people working against one another.  This seems like it produces nothing, but it will an environment that feels more real, but one with where no one can really get hurt IMO.  Personally, I don't really find working together with others in a video game to beat static content that much fun.  I much prefer the old games like UO and EQ where there were few static quests, things were simpler, but the world was more complex to the chaos and order of players that were in conflict with no supervision.  It felt a lot more like I a fantasy world I would enjoy being in.  On the flip side said worlds feel fairly boring without the players and their interactions bringing them to life via the conflict between order, chaos, and power struggle.  One might argue those still exist in these games, but I don't really agree.  They are fairly controlled environments.  People may compete for leaderboards, but that is a fairly dull battle to me.  I'm not saying I could win such a battle.  I'm just saying that I find it dull to try too.

Loke666

cameltosis said

You've kinda just described my political voting guidelines! I would much rather vote for chaos and destruction over the usual stagnation - precisely for the purpose that chaos and destruction in the short term often results in greater long term benefits. 

It does tend to mean dicking over a small proportion of the existing population, but on balance more people benefit in the long term. 

However, my voting preferences in real life is very much about looking at the big picture (possibly because no political party in the UK addresses the issues I care about so it's not possible for me to gain personally). When I'm playing a game, I'm not looking at the big picture, I'm only looking at what I find fun and what I want to achieve. Being "nice" / non-toxic has always proven to be the quickest and easiest way to achieve my own goals. I do still appreciate the occasional toxic person - I love them when they're on the opposite realm as it really spices up pvp, and there are a few posters on this site who provide me with a lot of entertainment. 

Uhm, so you would have voted on the Nazis then?

I am not saying that certain things don't get too big and complicated and should be teared down but if you always vote for destruction and chaos there wont be any rebuilding...

But yes, if you are nice against others, particularly new players, you will of course make the community a better place to be in. Lower yourself to their level and things just become worse.

Kyleran

nariusseldon said:

Kyleran said:

nariusseldon said:

kitarad said:

Look I'm not condoning it but some people don't want to waste their time. 

I am. Let's not be pretentious. Why should anyone not vote-kick or quit if they think they are wasting their time, or not having fun? Sure, you may have a different tolerances (or may be a bit of guilt if you vote-kick someone). But the bottomline is the same. There is no obligation for anyone to play with anyone else in a game.

If Zombie Apocalypse ever happens you are definitely not going to be invited into my group.  

Don't worry. The feeling is mutual :P 

Joking aside .. you don't think social norms in the REAL world should be the same as when playing a game, do you?

Well yeah, I sort of do feel basic courtesies apply in all social situations including game worlds.

I never forget there is a real person behind the avatar.

Steelhelm

Flyte27 said:

Steelhelm said:

Looking at the world from the viewpoint of the three gunas(hindu philosophy), 1/3 of humans are destructive assholes.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Guṇa

It sounds like your Tamas is taking over when you think about the others controlled by their Tamas and the destruction they cause.

This philosophy doesn't explore the idea that destruction can be productive in an unseen way.  It just says that if you want to live in the serenity that you have to follow certain guide lines.  Some people might not want to live in serenity.  They might prefer the excitement and tension of chaos and destruction.

For sure, I think the world would be a better place without all the nasty people. I think that's just natural to a certain types of personalities. A paradox in a sense.

Brald_Ironheart

If the game is actually a role-playing game where all the players are role-playing their characters, then of course I would want some players to act like villains.  Villains, criminals, or members of enemy factions, realms, alliances, or societies might act like evil jerks toward me or my allies and that would be okay.  Having enemies that you truly despise in a game can be fun.  But the game would need to be designed around meaningful player cooperation, competition, and conflict with each other.  It would also need to encourage and reward players for role-playing. 

But we don't see any mmorpgs being made like that.  Apparently the majority of people that play mmorpgs are not interested in role-playing.  Or at least developers don't seem to think so.

SEANMCAD

Flyte27 said:

I think we should get away from talking about snowflakes and instead talk about toxicity.  

but talking about snowflakes is fun because its often the people who call others snowflakes who are themselves being snowflakes!

anyway fair enough

Brald_Ironheart

@Flyte27 - I don't agree with your atheistic and morally relative views, but I don't think this forum is the place to debate our different belief systems and worldviews.

Anyway, I do agree that mmorpgs have become far too restrictive and boring in many ways.  A game that allowed for more freedom of choice and real conflict between players would be far more interesting. 

Games that force everyone to play an adventurer or a hero are not really designed for meaningful conflict between players.  A game that also allowed a player to choose to be a villain or a criminal (for example) would allow players to act in a toxic or destructive manner which might actually contribute to everyone's overall enjoyment of the game world.  But I don't know how many people are mature or skilled enough to play a villain without bringing real life stuff into  the game. 

Also, pvp needs to be fair and competitive in order for it to appeal to me.  I want to have a good chance of retaliating or taking revenge against someone that wrongs me in a game.

You say you liked ninja looting.  Well, if a player was able to steal from me, I would want the ability to hunt him down and take back what he stole.  But what if he just logs out after he ninja looted?  He gets to enjoy being a jerk, and I just get robbed.  I don't like being a jerk myself, so I'm not going to start ninja looting because someone else did it to me.

SEANMCAD

Brald_Ironheart said:

.... 

Games that force everyone to play an adventurer or a hero are not really designed for meaningful conflict between players.  .....

Given the literally near infinite possibilities in game content and the vast majority of which has not even been touched, most peoples view of 'the box' is so small that when they make a suggestion of something outside of the box to people like me it comes off as laughable.

'meaningful conflict between players' is a gaming meme that has not only already been done, its been done so much its passe and boring.

wake me up when something like House Flippers (look it up) becomes more standard exceptions.
Game industry has conflict down, that part of humanity is covered, what about all the rest of it?

Brald_Ironheart

I don't think the conflict in most mmorpgs is meaningful.  Why?  Because the game worlds in most mmorpgs are static.  Player choices do not effect or change the game world in a potentially lasting or permanent way.  The amount of wealth, resources, and equipment are infinite.  Territory does not exchange ownership or control.  No one really dies.  Players and npcs/mobs respawn.  Characters do not need to eat, therefore food production isn't necessary.  So control of land doesn't mean as much.  Building is not important for a variety of reasons.  Characters don't need to sleep or require shelter from foul weather.  There is no weight or encumbrance, so storage is not usually a problem.  Trade and economics is not important because of universal auction houses and npc vendors that sell most things players need.  Politics and diplomacy are not important because players can't be rule or be in charge of anything except for guilds.  There are more reasons, but those are some of the most important.  The things that produce meaningful conflict in the real world are not present in most mmorpgs.

And because the conflict is not meaningful, neither is the cooperation.  

SEANMCAD

Brald_Ironheart said:

I don't think the conflict in most mmorpgs is meaningful.  ...

and I dont think 'meaningful conflict' in an MMO is something to aspire to.

you want to argue over the details of is the conflict meaningful or not in the existing MMOs and how can existing conflicts in MMOs be more 'meaningful'

 I am saying people should be building rocket ships. see the difference?

yours is more wanting to slightly change the tune of a guitar. I am wanting to bring in a full band

SEANMCAD

Brald_Ironheart said:

 Player choices do not effect or change the game world in a potentially lasting or permanent way.  

they do in Wurm online. At least as much as they do in real life but to a smaller scale.

if you build a settlement and keep it, its going to be there forever, that is affecting the world. The server I played on when I joined was RADICALLY different then it was when it first opened

The real world is not permanent but as much as it is permanent games I play most  certifiably do what you are suggesting they dont

Brald_Ironheart

I understand what you're saying, but I'm not interested in building rocket ships.  Just living in a village and raising crops or living in a town and plying a trade wouldn't interest me either.  Not without the possibility that the village or town might be attacked.  Cooperation without conflict in an mmorpg doesn't interest me.  For me, there has to be conflict in a game for the cooperation to be interesting exciting.  I want to play Lord or the Rings, Star Wars, or Game of Thrones. 

SEANMCAD

Brald_Ironheart said:

I understand what you're saying, but I'm not interested in building rocket ships.  Just living in a village and raising crops or living in a town and plying a trade wouldn't interest me either.  Not without the possibility that the village or town might be attacked.  Cooperation without conflict in an mmorpg doesn't interest me.  For me, there has to be conflict in a game for the cooperation to be interesting exciting.  I want to play Lord or the Rings, Star Wars, or Game of Thrones. 

I am going to say something that I am going to get a lot of shit for but here goes.

actually if you were programmed differently you would like it more.
human instinct is NOT competition its actually cooperation, its one of life myths.

but anyway, sorry to have digressed. It just makes me jump when people talk within the box as if its outside of the box, because they very frankly only play shit ggames

Brald_Ironheart

I actually enjoy cooperation, teaching, and helping people in real life.  I'm not programmed that way.  I choose to be that way.  But I enjoy playing games where I can both cooperate, compete, and engage in conflict.

But it doesn't matter.  I doubt an mmorpg that I will really enjoy playing will be made anytime soon.  And that itself doesn't matter really.  There are far more important things I can be doing with my life than playing games.  And certainly far more important things I can be doing than talking about games. 

SEANMCAD

Brald_Ironheart said:

I actually enjoy cooperation, teaching, and helping people in real life.  I'm not programmed that way.  I choose to be that way.  But I enjoy playing games where I can both cooperate, compete, and engage in conflict.

But it doesn't matter.  I doubt an mmorpg that I will really enjoy playing will be made anytime soon.  And that itself doesn't matter really.  There are far more important things I can be doing with my life than playing games.  And certainly far more important things I can be doing than talking about games. 

if it makes you feel any better, almost 100% of what people complain about doesnt exist in games i play, pretty much 100% of what people want DOES exist in games I play.

Try Wurm PvP server

Brald_Ironheart

There are too many things I don't like about Wurm for me to enjoy the features I do like.

SEANMCAD

Brald_Ironheart said:

There are too many things I don't like about Wurm for me to enjoy the features I do like.

Life is Feudal.

are you willing to go outside of MMOs?

Brald_Ironheart

Nevermind.  I decided I just don't care that much anymore.

Theocritus

This is why grouping isnt a bad thing...it keeps the jerks in line because if they are asshats they dont a group....WHen the games start encouraging solo play and players dont need anyone then you get jerks.

SEANMCAD

Theocritus said:

This is why grouping isnt a bad thing...it keeps the jerks in line because if they are asshats they dont a group....WHen the games start encouraging solo play and players dont need anyone then you get jerks.

that would not be accurate.

the jerks are the ones who need the conflict. its like vampire and blood, they have to have it. conflict needs people to happen..

I say this very concretely, the worst people I have met without any exception where ALWAYS group players

Kyleran

Brald_Ironheart said:

I actually enjoy cooperation, teaching, and helping people in real life.  I'm not programmed that way.  I choose to be that way.  But I enjoy playing games where I can both cooperate, compete, and engage in conflict.

But it doesn't matter.  I doubt an mmorpg that I will really enjoy playing will be made anytime soon.  And that itself doesn't matter really.  There are far more important things I can be doing with my life than playing games.  And certainly far more important things I can be doing than talking about games. 

Yet here you are..talking about games. Welcome to the mire. They all float down here.

Eldurian

Flyte27 said:

Steelhelm said:

Looking at the world from the viewpoint of the three gunas(hindu philosophy), 1/3 of humans are destructive assholes.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Guṇa

It sounds like your Tamas is taking over when you think about the others controlled by their Tamas and the destruction they cause.

This philosophy doesn't explore the idea that destruction can be productive in an unseen way.  It just says that if you want to live in the serenity that you have to follow certain guide lines.  Some people might not want to live in serenity.  They might prefer the excitement and tension of chaos and destruction.

Natural human imperfection and the challenging nature of existence create enough natural strife that nobody needs to go out of their way to create it. Even if everyone is trying their best to be a moral person there will be conflict that arises from the fact that even the most moral person is not perfectly moral 100% of the time. Even if everyone was perfectly moral 100% of time there would still be famine, disease, wild animals, etc.

In other words there will always be conflict and challenge. Those who use your above logic to justify acting in an amoral faction are just crappy people looking for a reason to tell themselves they are not worthless as human beings. But here is the sad truth. All humans start with the same value but it doesn't stay the same. If you go out and do positive things your value increases. If you go out and do negative things your value decreases. Few people would argue that killing the greatest villains of history is an evil action even though we ascribe value to human life. That's because what I am saying is part of our natural ethics, the moral fabric we are built to implicitly understand even if only subconsciously. 

Long story short. If you go out with gun and rob an owner of a convenience store who is working hard to feed his family, it makes your existence worth less. If you log on, wake up, log in to a forum or game and intentionally set out to piss people off and cause drama, it makes your existence worth less. There is not only no value in an individual willing to harm others to get ahead and who enjoys causing negative emotions in others. If it's a large enough aspect of your personality, it makes you an individual of negative value. Not just worth less, not just worthless, but an actual liability to society and the human race.

_______________________________________

In terms of in-game drama, there in-character evil and out of character evil. The issue with toxicity in games as far as I see it is people doing things that are out of character evil in a game and saying it's just a game. For instance real life threats, lies about peoples personal lives etc.

Trolling a griefing definitely are an out of character evil. The entire point is to specifically attack the person behind the keyboard and get them angry. Griefing and trolling are by definition about giving others a negative experience, not just a challenge and conflict. That's a lot less forgivable than killing pixilated avatars for pixilated items.

Slapshot1188

F2P