the difference is ....I'm not arguing a point. Im trying to figure out why it's such an issue that people rage about it.
You can't figure it out because you lack the capacity. Probably best to just leave it there and walk away.
But we both know you won't, and it has nothing to do with trying to figure it out, it's just an extension of the same behavior that delights in using items like these...
"Participation in PVP-related activities is so low on an hourly, daily, weekly, and monthly basis that we could in fact just completely take it out of STO and it would not impact the overall number of people [who] log in to the game and play in any significant way." -Gozer, Cryptic PvP Dev
It isn't. The same question can be turned around, though, effectively making it moot. Why is it necessary that you must not dance, whether or not it would be appropriate for your character to do so? (If there's a disco ball, laser lights, and music, I'd say it's pretty appropriate to dance, wouldn't you?)
I will not engage you in a TRIBBLE-for-tat personal attack debate. I will merely direct you to the sentence directly after the one to which you are referring.
If it's moot, why bother?
It's already been explained why it can contextually not be appropriate for my character to be forced to dance. It might be fun, and silly, and meaningless to you, but you're not the only one here. And as silly as you might think my argument is, that doesn't give you the right to belittle it--or me. It lowers whatever standing you have in the conversation, and that's sad because it seems like it would actually be fun to have a discussion with you.
Why people insist on making this personal is beyond me. Your last sentence doesn't excuse the personal quip--no matter how hard you want to insist that it does. You were rude, you attempted to cover it up with the throw-in line at the end. That's it. I'm not offended, but I do think it's unhelpful if you're really trying to have an honest debate.
Well, technically your thread was the first thread on the matter that didn't get deleted by the GMs, so that's probably why you're the OP here.
It is interesting that they merged these threads together, since yours hasn't received any posts for some time now, which leads me to believe this is still a very minor issue on the part of the Dev team, as other issues are allowed to have multiple threads open (and new ones open as soon as older ones lose steam, relevance, etc).
Right now the only thing keeping this thread open is purplegamer's desire to get the final say in any argument here. The last post really didn't add anything to the debate, nor the topic, aside from "Well, your argument it flawed. Good day."
I personally vote that we change gears here a bit, because no matter how much time the same two people sit here, pointing out each other's fallacies (instead of constructively engaging each other in debate), it's not going to change now.
So, without further ado, this is now the post your favorite disco song thread (part 2):
Pointing out flaws is sorta how arguments work. I also find it strange that I'm the one that has to stop and give in, despite having presented a reasonable argument. Is it possibly because you just disagree, and rather than meet me in the discussion, you'd rather comment--needlessly--on how active I am in the discussion?
I will defend my position as long as people question it. And the reason I continue to post is that people continue to engage me in the conversation. If you don't want me to respond, don't refer to me, don't take part. Pretty simple, right?
No. It can't be that simple or you wouldn't be here baiting me.
You can't figure it out because you lack the capacity. Probably best to just leave it there and walk away.
But we both know you won't, and it has nothing to do with trying to figure it out, it's just an extension of the same behavior that delights in using items like these...
It's easy to confuse me for other people, though, what with the truth being universal and all.
Here's another truth. "If your post is anything like: 'I'm not bothered by the disco ball, so YOU can't be,' it's time to rethink posting."
"Participation in PVP-related activities is so low on an hourly, daily, weekly, and monthly basis that we could in fact just completely take it out of STO and it would not impact the overall number of people [who] log in to the game and play in any significant way." -Gozer, Cryptic PvP Dev
No, I told you if you were sincere, you weren't going to gain any understanding by continuing the thread, but that we both know it's all dissimulation.
"Participation in PVP-related activities is so low on an hourly, daily, weekly, and monthly basis that we could in fact just completely take it out of STO and it would not impact the overall number of people [who] log in to the game and play in any significant way." -Gozer, Cryptic PvP Dev
"Participation in PVP-related activities is so low on an hourly, daily, weekly, and monthly basis that we could in fact just completely take it out of STO and it would not impact the overall number of people [who] log in to the game and play in any significant way." -Gozer, Cryptic PvP Dev
I will defend my position as long as people question it. And the reason I continue to post is that people continue to engage me in the conversation. If you don't want me to respond, don't refer to me, don't take part. Pretty simple, right?
Allow me to rephrase that in neutral language:
"I do not believe I am wrong, so I will continue to try and prove that to anyone who will listen."
In a debate, the loser is the person who can no longer respond or form an argument in their favor. Essentially, you're saying that people should deliberately "lose" this argument against you before you'll stop posting. That's just another form of "I have to have the last word!". In addition, the very essence of a debate is having the capacity to form a consensus. I've already consented roleplay in more than one argument, pointing out real in-game circumstances, but you only ever use roleplay as a crutch to prop up your flawed point of view.
You have utterly and completely failed to address the following points that I (and probably others) have made because the only argument you can even try to make in your favor (it interrupts my roleplay) doesn't even apply:
- You never lose control of your character
- You are not physically or mentally forced to participate
- The party amp does not place recourse against your character (no negative effects, no reduction in attributes or stats, no changes in your physical appearance, etc.)
- There are locations you can go where no one will be able to drop a party amp on you, but you still have access to all the "public zone" amenities
- Players are using the party amp EXACTLY as intended, and you are selfishly asking for a change in that INTENDED functionality
- Etc.
The only argument you've been able to construct and re-construct this entire time is that you personally don't like it, and on that basis, everyone should be capable of turning it off on their client. I already know you're going to respond that this argument is invalid, again using some strange "logic" to attempt to justify that position, but I'll make it anyway: you are not that important. You are no more or less important in STO than I am. Your preference has no more weight than mine does. What separates the two of us is that you are advocating for change based upon preference, and I am advocating for status-quo based upon a lack of any compelling reason to do so. Remember, your preference has no more weight than mine, so it is not a compelling reason.
The only social devices to ever get nerfed were the following (reasons included):
- The biothermal dampener was nerfed because it put players in red-alert status. This would (at the time) forcibly close exchange and bank windows, take players out of Dabo, cancel trades (which would on rare occasions transfer items anyway, before both parties had finished setting up the transaction), etc. It legitimately interrupted gameplay by being more than a purely visual, cosmetic item.
- The balloon gun from the 3rd year celebration was nerfed because the balloons have physics effects. It was possible to glitch the balloons to approximately 10x their intended size, and fill a room with them. The balloons would always attempt to fall to the ground, and would not "settle" in stacks on top of themselves. It was therefore easy to introduce a situation in which you filled a room to the ceiling with overly-large balloons, creating a very large number of which were constantly re-calculating how to reach the floor. Since they were incapable of reaching the floor, though, they would just calculate a trajectory over and over again, creating what's called a "race" condition in the game code. This would drop players down to 1fps, or crash their client. Again, this caused actual consequences in the form of interrupting any player activity in the area, regardless of what they were trying to do.
The only thing the party amp interrupts is your character's idle animation. It does not close windows, it does not put you in red alert, it does not lock up or crash your client. The only things it can interrupt are other emotes, and there's only a very small handful of which are "persistent" rather than transitory (sit, sleep, the dances themselves, mokbara, etc.). Since we're merely substituting one idle animation for another, and since you can easily walk ~10 steps in any direction and re-assert your perferred idle animation, you are not disposed in any way beyond deliberately trying to make it an issue.
Here's another truth. "If your post is anything like: 'I'm not bothered by the disco ball, so YOU can't be,' it's time to rethink posting."
Ah, but I never made that claim. Throughout all my posts on this subject, I acknowledge that other people are bothered. Instead, I'm trying to point out why it is such a silly thing to be bothered by.
That's a lot of text to do the same thing you're saying I'm doing. You disagree with my argument, but that doesn't make it wrong. So let's agree to disagree.
EDIT: The insistence on there being winners and losers in this discussion highlights the mentality of some of the posters. I'm not interested in winning anything; I only want to present my argument (which I have) and continue to defend it so long as people continue to engage me in the conversation. That's how it works and it's why you and other continue to defend your own arguments.
then why didn't you say 'that' instead of: "You can't figure it out because you lack the capacity." ? ??
Because both statements are true. It's as simple as this: people are bothered by it because they don't like losing control of their characters. This has been stated multiple times, so you can't have missed it. If you still don't understand, then you clearly lack the capacity to.
That's a pretty elementary deduction.
"Participation in PVP-related activities is so low on an hourly, daily, weekly, and monthly basis that we could in fact just completely take it out of STO and it would not impact the overall number of people [who] log in to the game and play in any significant way." -Gozer, Cryptic PvP Dev
I'm not interested in winning anything; I only want to present my argument (which I have) and continue to defend it so long as people continue to engage me in the conversation. That's how it works and it's why you and other continue to defend your own arguments.
That's called "failing to concede", which is usually the last-resort of someone who is incapable of defending their position. I may have thrown around "right/wrong" concepts, which I suppose was actually a little wrong on my part, but it is definitely "wrong" to cling to an indefensible argument.
Once again, though, you've completely glossed over all the arguments, and instead choose to try and redirect the debate through misdirection and TRIBBLE-for-tat argumentation. In my previous "block-of-text" post, I made a list of arguments that you have either completely ignored, or just failed to address beyond acknowledgement that they exist. If you really do feel justified in your position, you should address each and every single one of them by backing them up with facts, not opinion, just as I have been doing this whole time.
people are bothered by it because they don't like losing control of their characters
No, people are losing control of their character's IDLE ANIMATION. They are still fully capable of moving, interacting, changing instances, etc. That's not a loss of control, that's a very minor visual alteration not related to their character's appearance (identity).
There's a VERY big difference there, and until you understand that, you'll always think you're being deliberately griefed. In reality, people with party amps are just telling you to lighten up a little, and have some harmless fun. :rolleyes:
Add option to be immune from party amo, and other social "toys"
Like to see an option that when you put someone on ignore in social zones that you don't even see their avatar.
items in the game used to grief in social zone need to be seriously chomped on.. this is not World of ********.. its supposed to be Startrek. When the matter of social griefing was brought to the attention of "the man" over at STOked radio.. his comment on it was quite possibly to subtle for most viewers... Bear in mind that the fellow at one time was a law enforcement officer too..
I quote "Nothing to see here, move along, move along"
Personal and pointed comments:
In game harrassment of players in social zones have driven people away from this game. Why any online gaming operation would even begin to permit a small minority of its player to drive away paying customers just boggles the mind That any game studio would put items in the game that would make this even easier to do... really amazingly.. DUmb, just sack of rocks dumb.
This company will not permit you to name names of harrasers in the forums. It constantly and apparently with forthought ignores player complaints on the matter and as near as I have been able to tell does absolutly nothing. Of course when you bother with a complaint its noted as "resolved"
Cryptic apparently refuses to even see this as an issue. Thats very unfortunate.. And not very Star Trek.
That's called "failing to concede", which is usually the last-resort of someone who is incapable of defending their position. I may have thrown around "right/wrong" concepts, which I suppose was actually a little wrong on my part, but it is definitely "wrong" to cling to an indefensible argument.
Once again, though, you've completely glossed over all the arguments, and instead choose to try and redirect the debate through misdirection and TRIBBLE-for-tat argumentation. In my previous "block-of-text" post, I made a list of arguments that you have either completely ignored, or just failed to address beyond acknowledgement that they exist. If you really do feel justified in your position, you should address each and every single one of them by backing them up with facts, not opinion, just as I have been doing this whole time.
There's nothing more to discuss when we both don't agree with each others premises.
I've already explained why the disco balls impose or otherwise force themselves on unwilling participants, and also how they can be--and are--used to grief other players. You simply disagree that any of that is taking place and provided your reasons for thinking so. I disagree with your conclusions on their very premise and I'd refer you to the lengthy trail of posts I've left in this thread for my reasons for disagreement. It's been said that my repeating myself means I need help and that I'm immoveable, so there you have it.
There's nothing more to be said, I've conceded that we can't find agreement. Right?
are you saying people have quit STO because of the party ball ?
People rarely quit because of one thing, it's the accumulation of issues that eventually pushes them over the threshold. And yes, this is an issue. Logically, for some, this was the 'last straw' that made them quit.
"Participation in PVP-related activities is so low on an hourly, daily, weekly, and monthly basis that we could in fact just completely take it out of STO and it would not impact the overall number of people [who] log in to the game and play in any significant way." -Gozer, Cryptic PvP Dev
...let the record show that purplegamer has failed to adequately defend his position. Even after I pointed out all the very valid arguments against his position that he has completely failed to address, he continues to ignore them in favor of opinion-mongering. He has instead tried to dismiss me as disagreeable in favor of, I can only assume, getting yet another person to engage in a "losing" debate with him.
I'm not saying his opinion is wrong, I'm only saying it's indefensible, and therefore not worth development time. He has failed to prove otherwise.
I wonder if he's going to, once again, respond to me merely to get the last word, ESPECIALLY since I'm not directly addressing him in this post...
I've posted in HEAPS of other threads suggesting the same thing as the OP. When it comes to these items there are 3 groups of players.
1 - The people that enjoy using them - These people will be able to continue using them. They also have the added bonus of not attracting any aggro from other players for using them. As far as I'm concerned, this is a win for group 1.
2 - The people that would prefer to not see the party favour effects - By turning off the effects these players will no longer be annoyed by these items. They will be able to continue to play the game as they wish to. This is a win for group 2.
3 - Those that like annoying other people with party favours - If people are able to turn off the effects of these items on their own screen, this group will miss out on their "fun". (The quotation marks are there as I believe it takes a slightly disturbed mind to get enjoyment from deliberately annoying other people.) This is a big lose for this group.
Groups 1 and 2, IMHO, are people to whom STO should be catering for the most. Group 3 should NEVER come out on top of groups 1 and 2.
...let the record show that purplegamer has failed to adequately defend his position. Even after I pointed out all the very valid arguments against his position that he has completely failed to address, he continues to ignore them in favor of opinion-mongering. He has instead tried to dismiss me as disagreeable in favor of, I can only assume, getting yet another person to engage in a "losing" debate with him.
I'm not saying his opinion is wrong, I'm only saying it's indefensible, and therefore not worth development time. He has failed to prove otherwise.
I wonder if he's going to, once again, respond to me merely to get the last word, ESPECIALLY since I'm not directly addressing him in this post...
I appreciate you sharing your opinions with us. These forums would be an empty, boring place without them.
And of course I did. You're welcome to interpret it any way you'd like. It'd once again only be your opinion though.
Comments
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xFrGuyw1V8s
( I had such a crush on these girls as a kid.......)
---- FIRE EVERYTHING ! ----
the difference is ....I'm not arguing a point. Im trying to figure out why it's such an issue that people rage about it.
call it a mild personal interest.
---- FIRE EVERYTHING ! ----
You can't figure it out because you lack the capacity. Probably best to just leave it there and walk away.
But we both know you won't, and it has nothing to do with trying to figure it out, it's just an extension of the same behavior that delights in using items like these...
If it's moot, why bother?
It's already been explained why it can contextually not be appropriate for my character to be forced to dance. It might be fun, and silly, and meaningless to you, but you're not the only one here. And as silly as you might think my argument is, that doesn't give you the right to belittle it--or me. It lowers whatever standing you have in the conversation, and that's sad because it seems like it would actually be fun to have a discussion with you.
Why people insist on making this personal is beyond me. Your last sentence doesn't excuse the personal quip--no matter how hard you want to insist that it does. You were rude, you attempted to cover it up with the throw-in line at the end. That's it. I'm not offended, but I do think it's unhelpful if you're really trying to have an honest debate.
Pointing out flaws is sorta how arguments work. I also find it strange that I'm the one that has to stop and give in, despite having presented a reasonable argument. Is it possibly because you just disagree, and rather than meet me in the discussion, you'd rather comment--needlessly--on how active I am in the discussion?
I will defend my position as long as people question it. And the reason I continue to post is that people continue to engage me in the conversation. If you don't want me to respond, don't refer to me, don't take part. Pretty simple, right?
No. It can't be that simple or you wouldn't be here baiting me.
did you just tell me to GTFO ?
....wow.
.
oh...and this ones fun to dance to too.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QYHxGBH6o4M
---- FIRE EVERYTHING ! ----
It's already been done. :cool:
Here's another truth. "If your post is anything like: 'I'm not bothered by the disco ball, so YOU can't be,' it's time to rethink posting."
No, I told you if you were sincere, you weren't going to gain any understanding by continuing the thread, but that we both know it's all dissimulation.
You haven't been on topic in quite some time...
then why didn't you say 'that' instead of: "You can't figure it out because you lack the capacity." ? ??
tsk tsk....
not very nice. but thats OK, I'm over it, I forgive you.
(bro-hug)
.
---- FIRE EVERYTHING ! ----
"I do not believe I am wrong, so I will continue to try and prove that to anyone who will listen."
In a debate, the loser is the person who can no longer respond or form an argument in their favor. Essentially, you're saying that people should deliberately "lose" this argument against you before you'll stop posting. That's just another form of "I have to have the last word!". In addition, the very essence of a debate is having the capacity to form a consensus. I've already consented roleplay in more than one argument, pointing out real in-game circumstances, but you only ever use roleplay as a crutch to prop up your flawed point of view.
You have utterly and completely failed to address the following points that I (and probably others) have made because the only argument you can even try to make in your favor (it interrupts my roleplay) doesn't even apply:
- You never lose control of your character
- You are not physically or mentally forced to participate
- The party amp does not place recourse against your character (no negative effects, no reduction in attributes or stats, no changes in your physical appearance, etc.)
- There are locations you can go where no one will be able to drop a party amp on you, but you still have access to all the "public zone" amenities
- Players are using the party amp EXACTLY as intended, and you are selfishly asking for a change in that INTENDED functionality
- Etc.
The only argument you've been able to construct and re-construct this entire time is that you personally don't like it, and on that basis, everyone should be capable of turning it off on their client. I already know you're going to respond that this argument is invalid, again using some strange "logic" to attempt to justify that position, but I'll make it anyway: you are not that important. You are no more or less important in STO than I am. Your preference has no more weight than mine does. What separates the two of us is that you are advocating for change based upon preference, and I am advocating for status-quo based upon a lack of any compelling reason to do so. Remember, your preference has no more weight than mine, so it is not a compelling reason.
The only social devices to ever get nerfed were the following (reasons included):
- The biothermal dampener was nerfed because it put players in red-alert status. This would (at the time) forcibly close exchange and bank windows, take players out of Dabo, cancel trades (which would on rare occasions transfer items anyway, before both parties had finished setting up the transaction), etc. It legitimately interrupted gameplay by being more than a purely visual, cosmetic item.
- The balloon gun from the 3rd year celebration was nerfed because the balloons have physics effects. It was possible to glitch the balloons to approximately 10x their intended size, and fill a room with them. The balloons would always attempt to fall to the ground, and would not "settle" in stacks on top of themselves. It was therefore easy to introduce a situation in which you filled a room to the ceiling with overly-large balloons, creating a very large number of which were constantly re-calculating how to reach the floor. Since they were incapable of reaching the floor, though, they would just calculate a trajectory over and over again, creating what's called a "race" condition in the game code. This would drop players down to 1fps, or crash their client. Again, this caused actual consequences in the form of interrupting any player activity in the area, regardless of what they were trying to do.
The only thing the party amp interrupts is your character's idle animation. It does not close windows, it does not put you in red alert, it does not lock up or crash your client. The only things it can interrupt are other emotes, and there's only a very small handful of which are "persistent" rather than transitory (sit, sleep, the dances themselves, mokbara, etc.). Since we're merely substituting one idle animation for another, and since you can easily walk ~10 steps in any direction and re-assert your perferred idle animation, you are not disposed in any way beyond deliberately trying to make it an issue.
no need...I'm not the reporting type.
IMO that would be similar to running to mom just to try and get brother billy in trouble first.
and FWIW we got a good 'bro-hug' out of it anyway.
:cool::cool:
.
oh...and .....http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AjPau5QYtYs
---- FIRE EVERYTHING ! ----
That's a lot of text to do the same thing you're saying I'm doing. You disagree with my argument, but that doesn't make it wrong. So let's agree to disagree.
EDIT: The insistence on there being winners and losers in this discussion highlights the mentality of some of the posters. I'm not interested in winning anything; I only want to present my argument (which I have) and continue to defend it so long as people continue to engage me in the conversation. That's how it works and it's why you and other continue to defend your own arguments.
Because both statements are true. It's as simple as this: people are bothered by it because they don't like losing control of their characters. This has been stated multiple times, so you can't have missed it. If you still don't understand, then you clearly lack the capacity to.
That's a pretty elementary deduction.
*sigh....even after a bro-hug .....
/e shoulders slump
.
---- FIRE EVERYTHING ! ----
Once again, though, you've completely glossed over all the arguments, and instead choose to try and redirect the debate through misdirection and TRIBBLE-for-tat argumentation. In my previous "block-of-text" post, I made a list of arguments that you have either completely ignored, or just failed to address beyond acknowledgement that they exist. If you really do feel justified in your position, you should address each and every single one of them by backing them up with facts, not opinion, just as I have been doing this whole time.
There's a VERY big difference there, and until you understand that, you'll always think you're being deliberately griefed. In reality, people with party amps are just telling you to lighten up a little, and have some harmless fun. :rolleyes:
Add option to be immune from party amo, and other social "toys"
Like to see an option that when you put someone on ignore in social zones that you don't even see their avatar.
items in the game used to grief in social zone need to be seriously chomped on.. this is not World of ********.. its supposed to be Startrek. When the matter of social griefing was brought to the attention of "the man" over at STOked radio.. his comment on it was quite possibly to subtle for most viewers... Bear in mind that the fellow at one time was a law enforcement officer too..
I quote "Nothing to see here, move along, move along"
Personal and pointed comments:
In game harrassment of players in social zones have driven people away from this game. Why any online gaming operation would even begin to permit a small minority of its player to drive away paying customers just boggles the mind That any game studio would put items in the game that would make this even easier to do... really amazingly.. DUmb, just sack of rocks dumb.
This company will not permit you to name names of harrasers in the forums. It constantly and apparently with forthought ignores player complaints on the matter and as near as I have been able to tell does absolutly nothing. Of course when you bother with a complaint its noted as "resolved"
Cryptic apparently refuses to even see this as an issue. Thats very unfortunate.. And not very Star Trek.
Khemaraa sends
There's nothing more to discuss when we both don't agree with each others premises.
I've already explained why the disco balls impose or otherwise force themselves on unwilling participants, and also how they can be--and are--used to grief other players. You simply disagree that any of that is taking place and provided your reasons for thinking so. I disagree with your conclusions on their very premise and I'd refer you to the lengthy trail of posts I've left in this thread for my reasons for disagreement. It's been said that my repeating myself means I need help and that I'm immoveable, so there you have it.
There's nothing more to be said, I've conceded that we can't find agreement. Right?
are you implying people have quit STO because of the party ball ?
.
---- FIRE EVERYTHING ! ----
People rarely quit because of one thing, it's the accumulation of issues that eventually pushes them over the threshold. And yes, this is an issue. Logically, for some, this was the 'last straw' that made them quit.
...let the record show that purplegamer has failed to adequately defend his position. Even after I pointed out all the very valid arguments against his position that he has completely failed to address, he continues to ignore them in favor of opinion-mongering. He has instead tried to dismiss me as disagreeable in favor of, I can only assume, getting yet another person to engage in a "losing" debate with him.
I'm not saying his opinion is wrong, I'm only saying it's indefensible, and therefore not worth development time. He has failed to prove otherwise.
I wonder if he's going to, once again, respond to me merely to get the last word, ESPECIALLY since I'm not directly addressing him in this post...
1 - The people that enjoy using them - These people will be able to continue using them. They also have the added bonus of not attracting any aggro from other players for using them. As far as I'm concerned, this is a win for group 1.
2 - The people that would prefer to not see the party favour effects - By turning off the effects these players will no longer be annoyed by these items. They will be able to continue to play the game as they wish to. This is a win for group 2.
3 - Those that like annoying other people with party favours - If people are able to turn off the effects of these items on their own screen, this group will miss out on their "fun". (The quotation marks are there as I believe it takes a slightly disturbed mind to get enjoyment from deliberately annoying other people.) This is a big lose for this group.
Groups 1 and 2, IMHO, are people to whom STO should be catering for the most. Group 3 should NEVER come out on top of groups 1 and 2.
I appreciate you sharing your opinions with us. These forums would be an empty, boring place without them.
And of course I did. You're welcome to interpret it any way you'd like. It'd once again only be your opinion though.