Once again subjective. Everyone needs EC and the loot that drops in the game is 98% vendor trash, 1% great for the exchange, and maybe 1% actual upgrades for others. And once again you are assuming motive, that players view the 'need' button as 'upgrade'.
Its not subjective. Most everyone hits "Need" whether it is that 1% upgrade or not, thereby removing the 1% upgrade from someone else who may have needed it. Subjection is to assume that 99% may actually need it other than for "GREED". Back in my EverQuest days, someone attempting this garbage would have been blacklisted from every guild on the server.
I wonder if creating a thread and constantly attacking others while attempting to be witty and display your ability to 'outsmart' them on a forum for the public to see about how you personally think a video game should both be played and designed qualifies.
And I wonder if replying to them in a trollish manner also qualifies.
For other players? Perhaps if it stood to benefit me, however I fail to see how changing this system when I can play a cruiser and get 1st place consistently, every single time on nearly any pug as being something that benefits me in the slightest. Maybe, if you go back and link it together and say, "well he's doing this for others, so the game will be more attractive, so others will play, and make the game more populated with team players which will make the game more fun for HIM". I'm sorry, I thought having more team-players in this game would make the game more fun for EVERYONE?
Attempting to significantly change the play experience of others who currently enjoy the status quo more-so than your personal proposal just might fall under this. Especially when you consider gems like:
How the hell is rewarding players MORE for being a team player (with much better rewards) changing game play for people who wish not to? Come again on that, you'll really have to explain that one because I think you're really grasping at straws now.
I'm sure not a single one of your statements falls under this category, other than the entirety of your original post...
And I'm guessing you're just doing your duty in barking public service announcements now? Are are you going to somehow pretend to overlook the yelling and screaming (sometimes in voice chat) when someone screws up an optional?
Really just a repeat, changing the play experience others currently enjoy so it fits your definition of 'fun' just might show a lack of empathy.
My definition huh? So you don't give a TRIBBLE about the thoughts of others as clearly demonstrated by this and previous comments? Interesting. Keep going...
Funny, after you said all that BS you finally asked. A wise man once said, it is better to remain silent... But I'll bring out the fool in you now: I had 4 friends stop playing STO under the univeral reason of "when I play a PVE no one chats or even attempts to work with each other, that's not fun". So I ran the EXPERIMENT being as I don't pug often as I likely should (there are usually some fleet members online to get a premade or at least partial). But I know, its still all MY play style, and I'm doing this purely out of SELFish reasons, riiight? riiiiight.
Why am I wasting my time in this thread, I'm done.
Of course you are, you have just proven to me at least you are the very definition of the dog I threw my brick at. You barked very nicely. Thanks!
Said NO to Arc. Gets punished by not being given a free outfit, free lobi, and free shuttle. Now forced to use Arc's site when trying to get to STO site. Still not rewards for beta testing the Arc website by force. Bravo Cryptic.
Disregard for right and wrong (letting someone die so they achieve a higher score in a pug PVE, check)
Persistent lying or deceit to exploit others (constantly hitting "need", check)
Intense egocentrism, sense of superiority and exhibitionism (lol check)
Repeatedly violating the rights of others by the use of intimidation, dishonesty and misrepresentation (see the folks in here that don't want this? Notice how this isn't a problem at all for them? Somehow it is all the fault of those who identify this as a problem? -- check)
Hostility, significant irritability, agitation, impulsiveness, aggression or violence (check)
Lack of empathy for others and lack of remorse about harming others (check, check, check)
Poor or abusive relationships (they're in a Pug, check)
Failure to learn from the negative consequences of behavior (they sometimes fail over and over again -- check)
WOW. Thanks for this, because it shows exactly how absurd your position is.
Let's take a look at these one at a time, shall we? (TL/DR: They are all based on the OPs absurd judgements about others, especially in regards to assuming hostility is the only possible reason for certain behaviors to happen.)
First:
Disregard for right and wrong (letting someone die so they achieve a higher score in a pug PVE, check)
You are making a huge, problematic assumption here when you assert that a lack of heals comes from spiteful intention, and not any of the myriad of other reasons a heal might not happen (they are on cooldown, you are out of range, you die too fast for the healer to get the heal off, someone else needed the heal more, your team expected you to be someone self-sufficient, etc.). I think you are also massively overstating the morality at play here - nobody is literally dying, it's merely a game. If you were right that individual performance affected individual rewards in STFs (and you flat out are wrong about that - it's only Fleet Actions like CE and Gorn minefield where this happens), the morality here would be more like not stopping in a race to help someone who tripped. Hardly sociopathic, at least any more than any kind of competition is sociopathic.
Second:
Persistent lying or deceit to exploit others (constantly hitting "need", check)
This is... I don't even know how you are justifying this connection in your head. There's no dishonesty or deceit here, certainly, since the selection of "need" or "greed" is announced in the system chat, so everyone sees what other people picked. If you are saying that "need" is exploitative of others, I disagree, but it doesn't even matter - the standard is 'using deception to exploit others', which can't happen here since deception is functionally impossible. At best, someone could lie and say they pick "greed" and pick "need" instead, but that works only once, and often not even then. The fact is, there shouldn't be "need" and "greed" options to begin with - it should just be "roll" or "pass", but whatever. At the core, rolling on team loot is certainly not more exploitative of your teammates than (say) expecting them to heal you or debuff your targets for you.
Third:
Intense egocentrism, sense of superiority and exhibitionism (lol check)
Here I think you're just confusing your sense of inferiority and frustration that other players don't let your special little star shine as brightly as you think it should with an active sense of superiority from them. Other players likely don't even bother to consider your performance in relation to their own, except in particularly extreme cases of competence/incompetence. The fact that you assume other players are automatically judging you says more about how YOU behave, and less about what others are really doing.
Repeatedly violating the rights of others by the use of intimidation, dishonesty and misrepresentation (see the folks in here that don't want this? Notice how this isn't a problem at all for them? Somehow it is all the fault of those who identify this as a problem? -- check)
LOL. So, so many problems. Let's start with the classic from the first example - you are again assuming intention where none exists. You actually started off this in your very first post, by outright stating that people who disagreed with you are likely to be sociopaths. I'm certainly not one, I just think your position is absurd and your proposal is actively bad for the game. Your response will be "then give some constructive feedback", but I don't think there is any constructive feedback possible beyond "abandon this idea because it is terrible". You started from faulty assumptions and proceeded to come to an absurd conclusion. No amount of tweaking will fix that.
In addition, you have made a huge mistake here in that you've shifted away from discussing the behaviors of players in the game to the behaviors of posters on the forums. This again shows that you have trouble recognizing that the judgements you make about people may be more about your emotional reaction to what you assume those players are doing/thinking, rather than anything real that is happening. Certainly you have no objective basis for concluding that people who disagree with you here are also "sociopaths" in the game.
Finally, I would be tickled to know what "right" you feel is being infringed on? Seriously - if you think that you have a "right" to your preferred brand of teamwork and a "right" to have players do what you think they should do, why does that not cut both ways? Why don't "sociopaths" have a right to demand that you change to suit their play style, rather than the reverse?
Next up, we'll deal with these together:
Hostility, significant irritability, agitation, impulsiveness, aggression or violence (check)
Lack of empathy for others and lack of remorse about harming others (check, check, check)
There's not much I can say here that I haven't already, but I just want to emphasize, again, that your assumption that the silence and lack of teamwork from other players is evidence of these behaviors says much more about how you judge other players, and virtually nothing of value about the people you are judging. Maybe the problem isn't that other players are hostile in general, maybe they just react with hostility when you attack them for being hostile?
Or maybe it's even more tragi-comic than that? Maybe you don't say anything to anyone else because you assume they will respond with hostility, and then you judge them on the basis of that untested assumption? Might it be that often far from being teams of "sociopaths", you have a team of 5 players who are too timid to break the ice in chat, for fear that one player might snap at them? Is it possible that threads like this, where someone uses baseless assumptions to pass unwarranted judgements against other players do more harm than good?
Here's one that's just offensive:
Poor or abusive relationships (they're in a Pug, check)
Yeah, good job with lack of perspective and understanding. Being on a random team with 4 other people doesn't automatically qualify as a "poor" relationship, and certainly doesn't meet the standard of an abusive one. But way to trivialize that idea in a vain attempt to make your point.
Last, but not least:
Failure to learn from the negative consequences of behavior (they sometimes fail over and over again -- check)
I suspect you're misusing this concept as well, as I suspect the "negative consequences" that sociopaths ignore are the ones that happen to other people, not themselves. I think your confusing players who are bad, or who take longer to learn, with players who are uncaring about others. Indeed, the self-interested nature of sociopaths seems to be directly at odds with the idea that they would fail to learn from repeated personal failure.
Few. Well, that was fun, thanks for exposing your argument explicitly so we could see how bad it was! I hope you've learned something from the negative experience of having your position so completely demolished. If not, well, I know someone who might think you're a sociopath...
I thought having more team-players in this game would make the game more fun for EVERYONE?
You are not lobbying for more team players. You are lobbying to change game mechanics to force roles on the community that may or may not want them. Such as myself who would likely stop playing STO and move on to another casual friendly MMO.
I had 4 friends stop playing STO under the univeral reason of "when I play a PVE no one chats or even attempts to work with each other, that's not fun".
Sounds like they made an intelligent decision and chose a game that suits their playstyle. Good for them I hope they are enjoying whatever they are doing instead of STO with their free time. That does not mean their is a problem with the game. I don't expect romantic comedies to magically become a thriller just because I prefer that genre of movie, that would be silly.
Are are you going to somehow pretend to overlook the yelling and screaming (sometimes in voice chat) when someone screws up an optional?
Don't use voice chat. In regular chat the person doing such things is typically of the TryHard player category and I simply tell them they should 'Learn2Carry' then yes, I ignore them.
You really should either find something in STO that appeals to you and stick to that, like running with fleet mates, or find something in a different game/hobby that appeals to you like your friends have.
When one uses the definition and symptoms of ASPD as loosely as you do pretty much anyone in the world can be called a sociopath, hell I meet a few of the symptoms myself, do I consider myself a sociopath? No. But I suppose if you want to take things to your extreme and use these as loosely as you do then I suppose you would call me a sociopath.
That's not in any way reasonable, to disagree with you is not to violate your rights in any way shape or form, it's not dishonest and we're not misrepresenting anything.
I also never called anyone a sociopath directly (else this thread would be deleted by now for violating the rules). I said it promotes sociopathic behavior. There is a clear difference there. If you guys want to play the ignorance card like you didn't get that by assuming was clinically diagnosing people as sociopaths (I did mention that pugs are likely dominated by sociopaths indeed which is true, as studies show that videogames in general are dominated by sociopaths -- if you need the source), but I called no one a sociopath. If you think I'm talking about you, you must indeed be that type of player I said would throw his fellow team-mate under the bus for a higher score and if so, you indeed wear the title well.
Said NO to Arc. Gets punished by not being given a free outfit, free lobi, and free shuttle. Now forced to use Arc's site when trying to get to STO site. Still not rewards for beta testing the Arc website by force. Bravo Cryptic.
You missed the point. If they get more loot by throwing you under the bus that's what happens. Sure they want the optional, IT IS MORE LOOT! But tell me, if its all about the "win" and not about the loot, then why in the HELL does 20% or so of the players in the 20 player fleet event leave before the final boss (I've personally witnessed before more than half drop)? Hmm?
Yeah. You don't know what you're talking about:
Players in The Cure don't get more loot if they let you die, since STF rewards are random. know you think they're not, but that's because you are confusing Fleet Action rewards with STF rewards. They are two different systems, and the STF system has been explicitly explained multiple times. It is random.
Nobody leaves like that in the 20 man event, because the mark rewards don't happen until after the final boss is dead. People DO leave like that in the 5 man, because the bulk of the marks are already awarded, and leaving early means they can queue up again for same event right away, instead of waiting for 30 minutes. It's a problem with the reward structure of just that mission.
The more you say, the more it becomes clear that you are reacting to things you assume are true, without bothering to check if those assumptions bear any connection to reality.
You are not lobbying for more team players. You are lobbying to change game mechanics to force roles on the community that may or may not want them. Such as myself who would likely stop playing STO and move on to another casual friendly MMO.
How is giving MORE rewards to players who are team players FORCING ROLES to players that don't want involvement? Assuming what you say is true then, wouldn't it also be true then to say that you are FORCING the DPS/anti-social role?
Sounds like they made an intelligent decision and chose a game that suits their playstyle. Good for them I hope they are enjoying whatever they are doing instead of STO with their free time. That does not mean their is a problem with the game. I don't expect romantic comedies to magically become a thriller just because I prefer that genre of movie, that would be silly.
You're obviously delusional in your bubble of YOU or can you not search for the ten thousand posts of threads complaining about lack of team-players in pugs? I think you can, I just think you're purposely getting agitated and lying now that your veil is being ripped off.
Don't use voice chat. In regular chat the person doing such things is typically of the TryHard player category and I simply tell them they should 'Learn2Carry' then yes, I ignore them.
Of course, if I don't like VC, don't use it, but if you don't like low loot for not being a team player, of course, that's forcing you into something you don't want to do but totally opposite if you're rewarded for dps. Completely understandable /sarcasm.
You really should either find something in STO that appeals to you and stick to that, like running with fleet mates, or find something in a different game/hobby that appeals to you like your friends have.
I have. As I said, pugs have no appeal to me, even if changed to my exact suggestion for the simple fact I get more enjoyment out of grouping with folks I know -- though I don't mind the occasional new player. However, as Janeway said once, "If you're not part of the solution, you're part of the problem" The fact is, STO is dwindling in size in its player-base and this generally means a little less money for PWE. There is a finite point (not today, not tomorrow but it is in the future) at which someone in the executive's chair makes that decision to pull the plug and at that very point, everything you love in this game comes to a screeching halt. And while you're in this pseudo-narcissistic mindset of "I don't care about your problems" to everyone but yourself, you're chasing the players away that WILL keep this game alive and when the plug is pulled -- well, you would have been the problem.
Said NO to Arc. Gets punished by not being given a free outfit, free lobi, and free shuttle. Now forced to use Arc's site when trying to get to STO site. Still not rewards for beta testing the Arc website by force. Bravo Cryptic.
Players in The Cure don't get more loot if they let you die, since STF rewards are random. know you think they're not, but that's because you are confusing Fleet Action rewards with STF rewards. They are two different systems, and the STF system has been explicitly explained multiple times. It is random.
Nobody leaves like that in the 20 man event, because the mark rewards don't happen until after the final boss is dead. People DO leave like that in the 5 man, because the bulk of the marks are already awarded, and leaving early means they can queue up again for same event right away, instead of waiting for 30 minutes. It's a problem with the reward structure of just that mission.
The more you say, the more it becomes clear that you are reacting to things you assume are true, without bothering to check if those assumptions bear any connection to reality.
Oh dear GOD. Did you not get that was an example of a PVE that actually REQUIRES TEAMWORK? Obviously, I've played that PVE some 200+ times in the past two months alone -- but yeah, sure I don't know what I'm talking about -- have fun in your assumptions troll.
Said NO to Arc. Gets punished by not being given a free outfit, free lobi, and free shuttle. Now forced to use Arc's site when trying to get to STO site. Still not rewards for beta testing the Arc website by force. Bravo Cryptic.
If you think I'm talking about you, you must indeed be that type of player I said would throw his fellow team-mate under the bus for a higher score and if so, you indeed wear the title well.
I never said you were talking about me, I was talking about me using what your posts implied, there's a difference. Also, some of players will throw people under the bus, most of them for the right reason (saving an STF for the other players for example), others of us are too tied up saving the mission from failure (usually myself), am I going to talk while running my ship at the limits of it's capacity? No. Should I be expected to? I should hope not!
Come to think of it, you're starting to remind me of another forum user who suggested similar radical changes in the name of "bettering the game"...
I never said you were talking about me, I was talking about me using what your posts implied, there's a difference. Also, some of players will throw people under the bus, most of them for the right reason (saving an STF for the other players for example), others of us are too tied up saving the mission from failure (usually myself), am I going to talk while running my ship at the limits of it's capacity? No. Should I be expected to? I should hope not!
Come to think of it, you're starting to remind me of another forum user who suggested similar radical changes in the name of "bettering the game"...
If you're not the player that would throw your team mates under the bus for a loot jackpot -- how can you think this implied everyone when I clearly said it was "dominated" (due to very real, clinical studies that show most video gamer's are sociopaths)? If you're going to say, that even if it was implied and it is wrong, you have to first prove those studies wrong, because that's my premise for that implication. You can't sit here and tell me of the 90% or so of video gamers that they say are sociopaths, that not a comparable statistic did not find its way to STO. I'm sorry, but I find this a little outrageous.
Bettering the game, I'm sure now, if I'm bursting your bubble, I will start reminding you of Hitler himself if you believe that will better help discredit and troll me. (sorry for going Godwin; it had to be done).
Said NO to Arc. Gets punished by not being given a free outfit, free lobi, and free shuttle. Now forced to use Arc's site when trying to get to STO site. Still not rewards for beta testing the Arc website by force. Bravo Cryptic.
If you think I'm talking about you, you must indeed be that type of player I said would throw his fellow team-mate under the bus for a higher score and if so, you indeed wear the title well.
Translation: If you're so innocent, why can't you admit that you're not?
The objection I have is that you describe some of my behaviors (not typically talking in chat, focusing on self-sufficient play, competing for a high score in the places where that matters), and ascribe to those behaviors motivations that don't exist. I think you do this because YOU judge other people this way, and are projecting those assumptions onto other people. I further think your proposed solution is ill conceived and wouldn't even solve the problem you are seeking to address, and I think you are reacting with hostility towards people because you can't accept that you might be wrong here.
I'm sorry that your friends left because they weren't having fun because nobody was chatting to them in STFs. Did they ever try starting conversations themselves? I have a small group of friends I like to play STFs with - we rarely chat during the mission, though, because we are all busy doing our jobs. I suspect most Puggers are the same way - it's not that they are hostile, they are just too busy trying to play the game to stop and make small talk.
As an aside, if you were playing missions with your friends instead of pugging, then how did the fact that they didn't enjoy pugging lead them to leave the game in the first place?
If you're not the player that would throw your team mates under the bus for a loot jackpot -- how can you think this implied everyone when I clearly said it was "dominated" (due to very real, clinical studies that show most video gamer's are sociopaths)? If you're going to say, that even if it was implied and it is wrong, you have to first prove those studies wrong, because that's my premise for that implication. You can't sit here and tell me of the 90% or so of video gamers that they say are sociopaths, that not a comparable statistic did not find its way to STO. I'm sorry, but I find this a little outrageous.
I wasn't disputing the stats, I never said anything about the stats, I said about what you said being implicative, now tell me this:
Now, obviously, we can't use examples such as arrests, or whatnot as an indicator in a game. However, everything that could be applied to a game, fits the definition entirely.
Disregard for right and wrong (letting someone die so they achieve a higher score in a pug PVE, check)
Persistent lying or deceit to exploit others (constantly hitting "need", check)
Intense egocentrism, sense of superiority and exhibitionism (lol check)
Repeatedly violating the rights of others by the use of intimidation, dishonesty and misrepresentation (see the folks in here that don't want this? Notice how this isn't a problem at all for them? Somehow it is all the fault of those who identify this as a problem? -- check)
Hostility, significant irritability, agitation, impulsiveness, aggression or violence (check)
Lack of empathy for others and lack of remorse about harming others (check, check, check)
Poor or abusive relationships (they're in a Pug, check)
Failure to learn from the negative consequences of behavior (they sometimes fail over and over again -- check)
That was about 80% of the symptoms.
Is not implicative.
Bettering the game, I'm sure now, if I'm bursting your bubble, I will start reminding you of Hitler himself if you believe that will better help discredit and troll me. (sorry for going Godwin; it had to be done).
Translation: If you're so innocent, why can't you admit that you're not?
The objection I have is that you describe some of my behaviors (not typically talking in chat, focusing on self-sufficient play, competing for a high score in the places where that matters), and ascribe to those behaviors motivations that don't exist. I think you do this because YOU judge other people this way, and are projecting those assumptions onto other people. I further think your proposed solution is ill conceived and wouldn't even solve the problem you are seeking to address, and I think you are reacting with hostility towards people because you can't accept that you might be wrong here.
I'm sorry that your friends left because they weren't having fun because nobody was chatting to them in STFs. Did they ever try starting conversations themselves? I have a small group of friends I like to play STFs with - we rarely chat during the mission, though, because we are all busy doing our jobs. I suspect most Puggers are the same way - it's not that they are hostile, they are just too busy trying to play the game to stop and make small talk.
As an aside, if you were playing missions with your friends instead of pugging, then how did the fact that they didn't enjoy pugging lead them to leave the game in the first place?
And you misunderstood. I said very clearly that folks are being encouraged to fall into this behavior. I believe A LOT of people would not if nudged out of that rut -- and call it what you will, that style while played with a team is the rut of the game (besides the lack of content).
I'm not describing YOUR behaviors, I'm describing a behavior you have had to choose in order to compete because of a ridiculous rule-set; while this doesn't make you a sociopath in the least, the behavior that you are forced into is sociopathic. This is of no fault of your own and I did not intend for that to be directed at you except to the people here who have definitely indicated that they are that person that throws their team under the bus for loot jackpots.
Said NO to Arc. Gets punished by not being given a free outfit, free lobi, and free shuttle. Now forced to use Arc's site when trying to get to STO site. Still not rewards for beta testing the Arc website by force. Bravo Cryptic.
I wasn't disputing the stats, I never said anything about the stats, I said about what you said being implicative, now tell me this:
Is not implicative.
Hyperboles just make you look silly...
The only implication I made except to those throwing their team under the bus, was that pugs are likely dominated by sociopaths -- the statics says this is true. There was no implication made, it was a mere logical statement.
Secondary, I have only implied sociopathy to those who've clearly displayed a total disregard for new players here.
As far as hyperbole's, indeed it does, maybe you shouldn't have used one yourself which I feel demonstrated the point nicely. Furthermore your silly response makes you look condescending in the worst way possible.
Before you try it, go back and read my posts. I generally do not condescend to folks unless they condescend to me. I truly appreciate reverse psychology for the effect it gains in critical understanding of folks whom seem to come across as narcissists.
Said NO to Arc. Gets punished by not being given a free outfit, free lobi, and free shuttle. Now forced to use Arc's site when trying to get to STO site. Still not rewards for beta testing the Arc website by force. Bravo Cryptic.
The only implication I made except to those throwing their team under the bus, was that pugs are likely dominated by sociopaths -- the statics says this is true. There was no implication made, it was a mere logical statement.
The problem is that everything written ever is open to interpretation to a degree, I evidently interpreted it differently to you.
Secondary, I have only implied sociopathy to those who've clearly displayed a total disregard for new players here.
I don't know about you but I distinctly remember something about everyone who doesn't agree with your changes must the be content with the setup in which the vast majority of players are sociopaths, and something else to do with being content with the current state of things must fit this demographic. More implications...
As far as hyperbole's, indeed it does, maybe you shouldn't have used one yourself which I feel demonstrated the point nicely. Furthermore your silly response makes you look condescending in the worst way possible.
I made no use of a hyperbole, and my only response to yours was to call you silly for using one... Nice try.
I'm not describing YOUR behaviors, I'm describing a behavior you have had to choose in order to compete because of a ridiculous rule-set. This is of no fault of your own and I did not intend for that to be directed at you except to the people here who have definitely indicated that they are that person that throws their team under the bus for loot jackpots.
And I am saying very, very few such players exist, and that furthermore the issue of throwing other players under the bus for better loots, if it is even a problem at all, is a problem only in a very small subsection of missions - namely the 5 man fleet alert (where the reward structure and mission cooldown encourage leaving early), and competitive events like Gorn Minefield and Klingon Scout Force, as well as PvP (though the rewards in PvP for "winning" versus "losing" are so minor as to make actually squabbling over them silly).
Since the Fleet Actions are explicitly billed as a competition between players, I'm not sure how trying to "win" the competition is any more sociopathic than trying to win any other competitive activity. Your stance there seems to be akin to saying Chess encourages sociopathic behavior, because the meta-rules for the game encourage misdirecting your opponent with your opening moves, so that you can create an opening you can exploit an use to mercilessly demonstrate your superiority by checkmate. Yes, competitive PvE encourages competition, but not all competition is necessarily sociopathic.
Finally, again, you keep confusing STFs with competitive PvE. You use examples of things like not speaking and not cross-healing in STF pugs as evidence of sociopathic behavior, when simpler and less "judge-y" explanations would suffice. The "rules-set" of STFs certainly doesn't encourage the kind of sociopathic play you seem to be railing against. Instead, STFs seem nowadays to be gently agnostic on the question of teamwork. It would be nice to have, but isn't mandatory. The fact that teamwork doesn't spontaneously arise in your pugs doesn't mean people are hostile or sociopathic, yet you have repeatedly assumed that it does.
As a sociopath I can say my life has never been better than since I threw off all unessesary ties to people.
I have found that people had caused 100% of the problems in my life and that I really didn't need the contact.
I understand that the typical person is gregarious and would implode without human contact, I'm very sorry for them.
Don't get me wrong, I can have friends and function well in PUGs, I just don't need them (other than being forced to group by MMOs), thus I don't have any high expectations of them and when they fail me, I just chalk it up to the status quo and get over it/ move on.
I really wish game companies would stop being lazy and relying on the players to be the AI for their games. The last thing anyone having any dealing with the public wants in their entertainment is more people and their problems.
The problem is that everything written ever is open to interpretation to a degree, I evidently interpreted it differently to you.
I don't know about you but I distinctly remember something about everyone who doesn't agree with your changes must the be content with the setup in which the vast majority of players are sociopaths, and something else to do with being content with the current state of things must fit this demographic. More implications...
I made no use of a hyperbole, and my only response to yours was to call you silly for using one... Nice try.
Maybe it is interpretation or maybe you took thinks as a literal, "set in stone" system, or maybe you see no problem at all and really like the current system. I can interpret things too, and the way it seems to me, as someone proposing a plan of "EXTRA REWARDS" to folks who team-play, being criticized as someone who wants rewards to himself, and told the system I propose (extra rewards) FORCES people to do what they don't want to do -- well that can only come across to me as someone that feels the idea pops their bubble.
The BS meter is high in this one. You tried to compare me to someone you knew once who, when I searched the forums had some very rash ideas that pales in comparison -- hyperbole.
Yeah I don't know about you, because I said (and I'll pull the quote if you want) that if you're happy with the current system and oppose change to the current system, then you must like this system else you would be giving ideas instead of very anti-constructive critique -- Oh, might I mention, this has been you the whole time and the definition of troll.
Said NO to Arc. Gets punished by not being given a free outfit, free lobi, and free shuttle. Now forced to use Arc's site when trying to get to STO site. Still not rewards for beta testing the Arc website by force. Bravo Cryptic.
You know, OP, despite your high education, it seems that you may have quite a bit to learn about persuasive arguments - namely, that poisoning your target audience is a lousy thing to do. I mean, if you had just said something more moderate like 'selfish' behaviour, or even left descriptors of motives out of the picture altogether - simply stating that the devs could promote teamwork through your suggestions, and that PUGs needed to learn to work in teams - we could have avoided a lot of this. In fact, you would have probably found a lot of sympathizers.
I think that most of the people here wouldn't unduly mind your changes - but you pretty much alienated them from the start. Notice how the most vehement objections are due to your sociopathic implications? I think this discussion/flame war has pretty much put paid to any chances of this thread getting any dev recognition. After all, they don't like controversy.
After all, what many would see from the beginning of your OP is, "I studied the behaviour of many of you, and most of you act like sociopaths." No wonder people are reacting so badly!
As a sociopath I can say my life has never been better than since I threw off all unessesary ties to people.
I have found that people had caused 100% of the problems in my life and that I really didn't need the contact.
I understand that the typical person is gregarious and would implode without human contact, I'm very sorry for them.
Don't get me wrong, I can have friends and function well in PUGs, I just don't need them (other than being forced to group by MMOs), thus I don't have any high expectations of them and when they fail me, I just chalk it up to the status quo and get over it/ move on.
I really wish game companies would stop being lazy and relying on the players to be the AI for their games. The last thing anyone having any dealing with the public wants in their entertainment is more people and their problems.
If you are being honest, it is highly appreciated. But the psychoanalyst in me has to ask, why are you so up-front about it? Most sociopaths only thrive under a veil of secrecy of their condition? Are you sure you're a sociopath and not just someone who's using the disorder as a solution to human stupidity?
I have nothing against sociopaths, and I also believe a better rewards system will even encourage them to be a team player (if they are rewarded for it). This "should" (purely speculation, I know) also cause a chain reaction for the good.
Said NO to Arc. Gets punished by not being given a free outfit, free lobi, and free shuttle. Now forced to use Arc's site when trying to get to STO site. Still not rewards for beta testing the Arc website by force. Bravo Cryptic.
You know, OP, despite your high education, it seems that you may have quite a bit to learn about persuasive arguments - namely, that poisoning your target audience is a lousy thing to do. I mean, if you had just said something more moderate like 'selfish' behaviour, or even left descriptors of motives out of the picture altogether - simply stating that the devs could promote teamwork through your suggestions, and that PUGs needed to learn to work in teams - we could have avoided a lot of this. In fact, you would have probably found a lot of sympathizers.
I think that most of the people here wouldn't unduly mind your changes - but you pretty much alienated them from the start. Notice how the most vehement objections are due to your sociopathic implications? I think this discussion/flame war has pretty much put paid to any chances of this thread getting any dev recognition. After all, they don't like controversy.
After all, what many would see from the beginning of your OP is, "I studied the behaviour of many of you, and most of you act like sociopaths." No wonder people are reacting so badly!
Sorry, tact is not a skill I possess nor can I consience allow me feel like I lied to someone by sugarcoating an issue. I think it is a hereditary plague :P
But, I have to say, you did pin that last part -- I won't lie, that's precisely what happened. You seem like the sensable player, can you in good conscience disagree? :P
Said NO to Arc. Gets punished by not being given a free outfit, free lobi, and free shuttle. Now forced to use Arc's site when trying to get to STO site. Still not rewards for beta testing the Arc website by force. Bravo Cryptic.
Sorry, tact is not a skill I possess nor can I consience allow me feel like I lied to someone by sugarcoating an issue. I think it is a hereditary plague :P
Ah......oh well, have fun then. Because it pretty much renders all this time and energy you're spending rather pointless.....
Ah......oh well, have fun then. Because it pretty much renders all this time and energy you're spending rather pointless.....
I've found that more than not, people tend to appreciate the raw honesty. I try to be as non-offensive as possible when laying out experiences or fact, but sometimes there is no easy way to go about doing it than to rip off the bandaid and put the wound in the light.
To be honest though, my patience has been worn thin by folks who are encouraging this snake to eat itself by repulsing new players. They are the same folks who come back at closing time QQing all over the place about their subs being wasted and this and that when they were the very ones that kept chasing away new players with loads of potential to being with. And did you see the rebuttal while ago to the 4 I got to play STO? To the tune of "Oh well, its good they are going to another game that they like then". This is unacceptable. While I agree that this game can't be fun for everyone, at least attempting to make it more fun for a new player in the name of balance is not unconscionable nor is it unreasonable.
Said NO to Arc. Gets punished by not being given a free outfit, free lobi, and free shuttle. Now forced to use Arc's site when trying to get to STO site. Still not rewards for beta testing the Arc website by force. Bravo Cryptic.
I've found that more than not, people tend to appreciate the raw honesty. I try to be as non-offensive as possible when laying out experiences or fact, but sometimes there is no easy way to go about doing it than to rip off the bandaid and put the wound in the light.
Time and place for everything - and this was definitely the wrong one.:P
If you are being honest, it is highly appreciated. But the psychoanalyst in me has to ask, why are you so up-front about it? Most sociopaths only thrive under a veil of secrecy of their condition? Are you sure you're a sociopath and not just someone who's using the disorder as a solution to human stupidity?
I have nothing against sociopaths, and I also believe a better rewards system will even encourage them to be a team player (if they are rewarded for it). This "should" (purely speculation, I know) also cause a chain reaction for the good.
Actually I have had a hard time nailing down an accurate definition of "Sociopath."
I prefer to be alone and would rather play games where I can progress unaided.
I believe that rewards should be higher for SOLO play as things become easier when done in groups.
I also believe that games should not force grouping. A simple scaling mechanism, like the one they already have in place for mission replay would allow people like me to enjoy more content that is currently locked behind the force group thing.
I believe the MMO company to realize this first will profit.
I can't believe that people having to deal with the public all day want more people. I am also older, so have done all that already and now just want a quiet life.
For example: I look at my old MK XI Borg set and it reminds me I had to get that under the diress of grouping for the old STFs. It was a painful and annoying experience that I never wish to repeat.
I also have the full MACO set, gotten after it was put in the Reputation System. However when I look at that I am angered about how I can't complete the Tailor options as they are locked behind completing ALL the STFs and I absolutly hate ground play.
Maybe it is interpretation or maybe you took thinks as a literal, "set in stone" system, or maybe you see no problem at all and really like the current system. I can interpret things too, and the way it seems to me, as someone proposing a plan of "EXTRA REWARDS" to folks who team-play, being criticized as someone who wants rewards to himself, and told the system I propose (extra rewards) FORCES people to do what they don't want to do -- well that can only come across to me as someone that feels the idea pops their bubble.
Maybe you should have said that in your OP, you might have got a wee bit more support, as it was it read (to me) that you wanted to realign the rewards system so that people who didn't follow your set model didn't get anything (or if they did it was very little)
The BS meter is high in this one. You tried to compare me to someone you knew once who, when I searched the forums had some very rash ideas that pales in comparison -- hyperbole.
I don't know what you found (I know what you didn't find, it was deleted due to the OP's mass trolling of everyone, very good troll her was to) but a simple "you remind me of someone" is no hyperbole
Yeah I don't know about you, because I said (and I'll pull the quote if you want) that if you're happy with the current system and oppose change to the current system, then you must like this system else you would be giving ideas instead of very anti-constructive critique -- Oh, might I mention, this has been you the whole time and the definition of troll.
I'd love to see you quote me as being the first person to say that (very careful choice of words as i just described you as having said it) and I'm afraid I've spent more time disagreeing with you and to a point defending myself than I have criticizing your ideas, maybe if you had spent more time asking people why they disagree and what they would do in your place rather than complaining and calling them trolls for disagreeing with you in the first place, maybe this thread could have been more constructive... oh well...
Actually I have had a hard time nailing down an accurate definition of "Sociopath."
I prefer to be alone and would rather play games where I can progress unaided.
I believe that rewards should be higher for SOLO play as things become easier when done in groups.
I also believe that games should not force grouping. A simple scaling mechanism, like the one they already have in place for mission replay would allow people like me to enjoy more content that is currently locked behind the force group thing.
I believe the MMO company to realize this first will profit.
I can't believe that people having to deal with the public all day want more people. I am also older, so have done all that already and now just want a quiet life.
I see that, but I disagree with the grouping being easier bit -- if it is a requirement that everyone in a group has to rely on each other, it becomes a lot more difficult -- not just for you, but for the entire group because it must be a well oiled machine. Getting or finding machines like this can be rare -- which is half of the difficulty and should be rewarded in kind.
MMO's have realized it, STO is trying it, and it is not going well because player after player -- one by one is leaving through a combination of lack of content and lack of team-play.
The problem is, if you are truly sociopathic, you must realize this: this game that you love comes to a halt the moment PWE finds it unprofitable. I won't pretend to know the numbers or the point at which that is as it could be 1,000 less players than current, or 10,000,000 less than current. I know that there is a magic number there where they will flip the game off -- as we can all agree, they're in it to make a profit. This would mean the game you enjoy would cease to exist. You also have to realize that only 3-4% of Americans are sociopaths which means by designing again counter to the majority alienates a large swaths of demographics, while I won't imply that "majority rules", I will state that if they're not accommodated, the game will run on the minority and may just be too little to sustain the game. The point being, you'll be biting the hands that help feed you. And, yes, I've really tried hard at pushing the point without being offensive :S
Said NO to Arc. Gets punished by not being given a free outfit, free lobi, and free shuttle. Now forced to use Arc's site when trying to get to STO site. Still not rewards for beta testing the Arc website by force. Bravo Cryptic.
You also have to realize that only 3-4% of Americans are sociopaths
To be fair most people who enjoy contact with other people go out and see other people... shocking I know... those who don't want to be around others play games to fill their free time as it usually doesn't involve others so why force the issue?
The problem is, if you are truly sociopathic, you must realize this: this game that you love comes to a halt the moment PWE finds it unprofitable. I won't pretend to know the numbers or the point at which that is as it could be 1,000 less players than current, or 10,000,000 less than current. I know that there is a magic number there where they will flip the game off -- as we can all agree, they're in it to make a profit. This would mean the game you enjoy would cease to exist. You also have to realize that only 3-4% of Americans are sociopaths which means by designing again counter to the majority alienates a large swaths of demographics, while I won't imply that "majority rules", I will state that if they're not accommodated, the game will run on the minority and may just be too little to sustain the game. The point being, you'll be biting the hands that help feed you. And, yes, I've really tried hard at pushing the point without being offensive :S
Here are the things we can agree on: The game needs players to survive. The game won't last forever.
Other than that, I think we're just on different planets (mine's called Earth, btw, what's yours called?).
First, you are creating a false dichotomy by asserting that not catering to a group is the same thing as actively repelling them. That is not the case. Just because STO doesn't have explicit teamplay rewards doesn't mean that sociopathic play is encouraged, nor does it mean that teamplay is discouraged.
Second, you are assuming that your form of teamplay is, in fact, what the "majority" wants. I suspect that you are getting there by again assuming a false choice - you seem to be asserting that players who don't like "sociopathic" players necessarily must like your brand of team play, but there's no reason to suspect that is the case. Thus, it's unclear that your solution would do anything to bring in more people.
Third, you are overlooking the very real possibility that there are other, more effective ways to draw new players into the game - say, releasing new content, or getting media outlets to cover the game, or by using actors from the shows to encourage fans of the show to try out the game, etc. Basically, even if you were right that your proposal would encourage people to try out the game, it probably doesn't matter, since things like the Season 8 update next week will probably do the same thing better.
Fourth, you are presuming without warrant that the game is actively on the decline. I see no reason to suspect that this is the case, and you have already admitted that you don't have any concrete evidence of this. At best, you have anecdotal evidence of people you know leaving, but I have anecdotal evidence of new people joining the game all the time, as well as older players coming back periodically when there is an update. Seems like it's possible that the game is currently doing fine, and the idea that the game is DOOOOOOOOOOOMED without these changes is unsupported.
Comments
True, that is an assumption, but it is more inference being it is a very logical assumption.
Its not subjective. Most everyone hits "Need" whether it is that 1% upgrade or not, thereby removing the 1% upgrade from someone else who may have needed it. Subjection is to assume that 99% may actually need it other than for "GREED". Back in my EverQuest days, someone attempting this garbage would have been blacklisted from every guild on the server.
And I wonder if replying to them in a trollish manner also qualifies.
For other players? Perhaps if it stood to benefit me, however I fail to see how changing this system when I can play a cruiser and get 1st place consistently, every single time on nearly any pug as being something that benefits me in the slightest. Maybe, if you go back and link it together and say, "well he's doing this for others, so the game will be more attractive, so others will play, and make the game more populated with team players which will make the game more fun for HIM". I'm sorry, I thought having more team-players in this game would make the game more fun for EVERYONE?
How the hell is rewarding players MORE for being a team player (with much better rewards) changing game play for people who wish not to? Come again on that, you'll really have to explain that one because I think you're really grasping at straws now.
Perhaps, or a courteous warning -- isn't this MY thread btw? Or did I threaten or intimidate you somehow, personally?
And I'm guessing you're just doing your duty in barking public service announcements now? Are are you going to somehow pretend to overlook the yelling and screaming (sometimes in voice chat) when someone screws up an optional?
My definition huh? So you don't give a TRIBBLE about the thoughts of others as clearly demonstrated by this and previous comments? Interesting. Keep going...
Funny, after you said all that BS you finally asked. A wise man once said, it is better to remain silent... But I'll bring out the fool in you now: I had 4 friends stop playing STO under the univeral reason of "when I play a PVE no one chats or even attempts to work with each other, that's not fun". So I ran the EXPERIMENT being as I don't pug often as I likely should (there are usually some fleet members online to get a premade or at least partial). But I know, its still all MY play style, and I'm doing this purely out of SELFish reasons, riiight? riiiiight.
Of course you are, you have just proven to me at least you are the very definition of the dog I threw my brick at. You barked very nicely. Thanks!
WOW. Thanks for this, because it shows exactly how absurd your position is.
Let's take a look at these one at a time, shall we? (TL/DR: They are all based on the OPs absurd judgements about others, especially in regards to assuming hostility is the only possible reason for certain behaviors to happen.)
First:
Disregard for right and wrong (letting someone die so they achieve a higher score in a pug PVE, check)
You are making a huge, problematic assumption here when you assert that a lack of heals comes from spiteful intention, and not any of the myriad of other reasons a heal might not happen (they are on cooldown, you are out of range, you die too fast for the healer to get the heal off, someone else needed the heal more, your team expected you to be someone self-sufficient, etc.). I think you are also massively overstating the morality at play here - nobody is literally dying, it's merely a game. If you were right that individual performance affected individual rewards in STFs (and you flat out are wrong about that - it's only Fleet Actions like CE and Gorn minefield where this happens), the morality here would be more like not stopping in a race to help someone who tripped. Hardly sociopathic, at least any more than any kind of competition is sociopathic.
Second:
Persistent lying or deceit to exploit others (constantly hitting "need", check)
This is... I don't even know how you are justifying this connection in your head. There's no dishonesty or deceit here, certainly, since the selection of "need" or "greed" is announced in the system chat, so everyone sees what other people picked. If you are saying that "need" is exploitative of others, I disagree, but it doesn't even matter - the standard is 'using deception to exploit others', which can't happen here since deception is functionally impossible. At best, someone could lie and say they pick "greed" and pick "need" instead, but that works only once, and often not even then. The fact is, there shouldn't be "need" and "greed" options to begin with - it should just be "roll" or "pass", but whatever. At the core, rolling on team loot is certainly not more exploitative of your teammates than (say) expecting them to heal you or debuff your targets for you.
Third:
Intense egocentrism, sense of superiority and exhibitionism (lol check)
Here I think you're just confusing your sense of inferiority and frustration that other players don't let your special little star shine as brightly as you think it should with an active sense of superiority from them. Other players likely don't even bother to consider your performance in relation to their own, except in particularly extreme cases of competence/incompetence. The fact that you assume other players are automatically judging you says more about how YOU behave, and less about what others are really doing.
Repeatedly violating the rights of others by the use of intimidation, dishonesty and misrepresentation (see the folks in here that don't want this? Notice how this isn't a problem at all for them? Somehow it is all the fault of those who identify this as a problem? -- check)
LOL. So, so many problems. Let's start with the classic from the first example - you are again assuming intention where none exists. You actually started off this in your very first post, by outright stating that people who disagreed with you are likely to be sociopaths. I'm certainly not one, I just think your position is absurd and your proposal is actively bad for the game. Your response will be "then give some constructive feedback", but I don't think there is any constructive feedback possible beyond "abandon this idea because it is terrible". You started from faulty assumptions and proceeded to come to an absurd conclusion. No amount of tweaking will fix that.
In addition, you have made a huge mistake here in that you've shifted away from discussing the behaviors of players in the game to the behaviors of posters on the forums. This again shows that you have trouble recognizing that the judgements you make about people may be more about your emotional reaction to what you assume those players are doing/thinking, rather than anything real that is happening. Certainly you have no objective basis for concluding that people who disagree with you here are also "sociopaths" in the game.
Finally, I would be tickled to know what "right" you feel is being infringed on? Seriously - if you think that you have a "right" to your preferred brand of teamwork and a "right" to have players do what you think they should do, why does that not cut both ways? Why don't "sociopaths" have a right to demand that you change to suit their play style, rather than the reverse?
Next up, we'll deal with these together:
Hostility, significant irritability, agitation, impulsiveness, aggression or violence (check)
Lack of empathy for others and lack of remorse about harming others (check, check, check)
There's not much I can say here that I haven't already, but I just want to emphasize, again, that your assumption that the silence and lack of teamwork from other players is evidence of these behaviors says much more about how you judge other players, and virtually nothing of value about the people you are judging. Maybe the problem isn't that other players are hostile in general, maybe they just react with hostility when you attack them for being hostile?
Or maybe it's even more tragi-comic than that? Maybe you don't say anything to anyone else because you assume they will respond with hostility, and then you judge them on the basis of that untested assumption? Might it be that often far from being teams of "sociopaths", you have a team of 5 players who are too timid to break the ice in chat, for fear that one player might snap at them? Is it possible that threads like this, where someone uses baseless assumptions to pass unwarranted judgements against other players do more harm than good?
Here's one that's just offensive:
Poor or abusive relationships (they're in a Pug, check)
Yeah, good job with lack of perspective and understanding. Being on a random team with 4 other people doesn't automatically qualify as a "poor" relationship, and certainly doesn't meet the standard of an abusive one. But way to trivialize that idea in a vain attempt to make your point.
Last, but not least:
Failure to learn from the negative consequences of behavior (they sometimes fail over and over again -- check)
I suspect you're misusing this concept as well, as I suspect the "negative consequences" that sociopaths ignore are the ones that happen to other people, not themselves. I think your confusing players who are bad, or who take longer to learn, with players who are uncaring about others. Indeed, the self-interested nature of sociopaths seems to be directly at odds with the idea that they would fail to learn from repeated personal failure.
Few. Well, that was fun, thanks for exposing your argument explicitly so we could see how bad it was! I hope you've learned something from the negative experience of having your position so completely demolished. If not, well, I know someone who might think you're a sociopath...
You are not lobbying for more team players. You are lobbying to change game mechanics to force roles on the community that may or may not want them. Such as myself who would likely stop playing STO and move on to another casual friendly MMO.
Sounds like they made an intelligent decision and chose a game that suits their playstyle. Good for them I hope they are enjoying whatever they are doing instead of STO with their free time. That does not mean their is a problem with the game. I don't expect romantic comedies to magically become a thriller just because I prefer that genre of movie, that would be silly.
Don't use voice chat. In regular chat the person doing such things is typically of the TryHard player category and I simply tell them they should 'Learn2Carry' then yes, I ignore them.
You really should either find something in STO that appeals to you and stick to that, like running with fleet mates, or find something in a different game/hobby that appeals to you like your friends have.
I also never called anyone a sociopath directly (else this thread would be deleted by now for violating the rules). I said it promotes sociopathic behavior. There is a clear difference there. If you guys want to play the ignorance card like you didn't get that by assuming was clinically diagnosing people as sociopaths (I did mention that pugs are likely dominated by sociopaths indeed which is true, as studies show that videogames in general are dominated by sociopaths -- if you need the source), but I called no one a sociopath. If you think I'm talking about you, you must indeed be that type of player I said would throw his fellow team-mate under the bus for a higher score and if so, you indeed wear the title well.
Yeah. You don't know what you're talking about:
Players in The Cure don't get more loot if they let you die, since STF rewards are random. know you think they're not, but that's because you are confusing Fleet Action rewards with STF rewards. They are two different systems, and the STF system has been explicitly explained multiple times. It is random.
Nobody leaves like that in the 20 man event, because the mark rewards don't happen until after the final boss is dead. People DO leave like that in the 5 man, because the bulk of the marks are already awarded, and leaving early means they can queue up again for same event right away, instead of waiting for 30 minutes. It's a problem with the reward structure of just that mission.
The more you say, the more it becomes clear that you are reacting to things you assume are true, without bothering to check if those assumptions bear any connection to reality.
How is giving MORE rewards to players who are team players FORCING ROLES to players that don't want involvement? Assuming what you say is true then, wouldn't it also be true then to say that you are FORCING the DPS/anti-social role?
You're obviously delusional in your bubble of YOU or can you not search for the ten thousand posts of threads complaining about lack of team-players in pugs? I think you can, I just think you're purposely getting agitated and lying now that your veil is being ripped off.
Of course, if I don't like VC, don't use it, but if you don't like low loot for not being a team player, of course, that's forcing you into something you don't want to do but totally opposite if you're rewarded for dps. Completely understandable /sarcasm.
I have. As I said, pugs have no appeal to me, even if changed to my exact suggestion for the simple fact I get more enjoyment out of grouping with folks I know -- though I don't mind the occasional new player. However, as Janeway said once, "If you're not part of the solution, you're part of the problem" The fact is, STO is dwindling in size in its player-base and this generally means a little less money for PWE. There is a finite point (not today, not tomorrow but it is in the future) at which someone in the executive's chair makes that decision to pull the plug and at that very point, everything you love in this game comes to a screeching halt. And while you're in this pseudo-narcissistic mindset of "I don't care about your problems" to everyone but yourself, you're chasing the players away that WILL keep this game alive and when the plug is pulled -- well, you would have been the problem.
Oh dear GOD. Did you not get that was an example of a PVE that actually REQUIRES TEAMWORK? Obviously, I've played that PVE some 200+ times in the past two months alone -- but yeah, sure I don't know what I'm talking about -- have fun in your assumptions troll.
I never said you were talking about me, I was talking about me using what your posts implied, there's a difference. Also, some of players will throw people under the bus, most of them for the right reason (saving an STF for the other players for example), others of us are too tied up saving the mission from failure (usually myself), am I going to talk while running my ship at the limits of it's capacity? No. Should I be expected to? I should hope not!
Come to think of it, you're starting to remind me of another forum user who suggested similar radical changes in the name of "bettering the game"...
If you're not the player that would throw your team mates under the bus for a loot jackpot -- how can you think this implied everyone when I clearly said it was "dominated" (due to very real, clinical studies that show most video gamer's are sociopaths)? If you're going to say, that even if it was implied and it is wrong, you have to first prove those studies wrong, because that's my premise for that implication. You can't sit here and tell me of the 90% or so of video gamers that they say are sociopaths, that not a comparable statistic did not find its way to STO. I'm sorry, but I find this a little outrageous.
Bettering the game, I'm sure now, if I'm bursting your bubble, I will start reminding you of Hitler himself if you believe that will better help discredit and troll me. (sorry for going Godwin; it had to be done).
Translation: If you're so innocent, why can't you admit that you're not?
The objection I have is that you describe some of my behaviors (not typically talking in chat, focusing on self-sufficient play, competing for a high score in the places where that matters), and ascribe to those behaviors motivations that don't exist. I think you do this because YOU judge other people this way, and are projecting those assumptions onto other people. I further think your proposed solution is ill conceived and wouldn't even solve the problem you are seeking to address, and I think you are reacting with hostility towards people because you can't accept that you might be wrong here.
I'm sorry that your friends left because they weren't having fun because nobody was chatting to them in STFs. Did they ever try starting conversations themselves? I have a small group of friends I like to play STFs with - we rarely chat during the mission, though, because we are all busy doing our jobs. I suspect most Puggers are the same way - it's not that they are hostile, they are just too busy trying to play the game to stop and make small talk.
As an aside, if you were playing missions with your friends instead of pugging, then how did the fact that they didn't enjoy pugging lead them to leave the game in the first place?
I wasn't disputing the stats, I never said anything about the stats, I said about what you said being implicative, now tell me this:
Is not implicative.
Hyperboles just make you look silly...
And you misunderstood. I said very clearly that folks are being encouraged to fall into this behavior. I believe A LOT of people would not if nudged out of that rut -- and call it what you will, that style while played with a team is the rut of the game (besides the lack of content).
I'm not describing YOUR behaviors, I'm describing a behavior you have had to choose in order to compete because of a ridiculous rule-set; while this doesn't make you a sociopath in the least, the behavior that you are forced into is sociopathic. This is of no fault of your own and I did not intend for that to be directed at you except to the people here who have definitely indicated that they are that person that throws their team under the bus for loot jackpots.
The only implication I made except to those throwing their team under the bus, was that pugs are likely dominated by sociopaths -- the statics says this is true. There was no implication made, it was a mere logical statement.
Secondary, I have only implied sociopathy to those who've clearly displayed a total disregard for new players here.
As far as hyperbole's, indeed it does, maybe you shouldn't have used one yourself which I feel demonstrated the point nicely. Furthermore your silly response makes you look condescending in the worst way possible.
Before you try it, go back and read my posts. I generally do not condescend to folks unless they condescend to me. I truly appreciate reverse psychology for the effect it gains in critical understanding of folks whom seem to come across as narcissists.
The problem is that everything written ever is open to interpretation to a degree, I evidently interpreted it differently to you.
I don't know about you but I distinctly remember something about everyone who doesn't agree with your changes must the be content with the setup in which the vast majority of players are sociopaths, and something else to do with being content with the current state of things must fit this demographic. More implications...
I made no use of a hyperbole, and my only response to yours was to call you silly for using one... Nice try.
And I am saying very, very few such players exist, and that furthermore the issue of throwing other players under the bus for better loots, if it is even a problem at all, is a problem only in a very small subsection of missions - namely the 5 man fleet alert (where the reward structure and mission cooldown encourage leaving early), and competitive events like Gorn Minefield and Klingon Scout Force, as well as PvP (though the rewards in PvP for "winning" versus "losing" are so minor as to make actually squabbling over them silly).
Since the Fleet Actions are explicitly billed as a competition between players, I'm not sure how trying to "win" the competition is any more sociopathic than trying to win any other competitive activity. Your stance there seems to be akin to saying Chess encourages sociopathic behavior, because the meta-rules for the game encourage misdirecting your opponent with your opening moves, so that you can create an opening you can exploit an use to mercilessly demonstrate your superiority by checkmate. Yes, competitive PvE encourages competition, but not all competition is necessarily sociopathic.
Finally, again, you keep confusing STFs with competitive PvE. You use examples of things like not speaking and not cross-healing in STF pugs as evidence of sociopathic behavior, when simpler and less "judge-y" explanations would suffice. The "rules-set" of STFs certainly doesn't encourage the kind of sociopathic play you seem to be railing against. Instead, STFs seem nowadays to be gently agnostic on the question of teamwork. It would be nice to have, but isn't mandatory. The fact that teamwork doesn't spontaneously arise in your pugs doesn't mean people are hostile or sociopathic, yet you have repeatedly assumed that it does.
system Lord Baal is dead
I have found that people had caused 100% of the problems in my life and that I really didn't need the contact.
I understand that the typical person is gregarious and would implode without human contact, I'm very sorry for them.
Don't get me wrong, I can have friends and function well in PUGs, I just don't need them (other than being forced to group by MMOs), thus I don't have any high expectations of them and when they fail me, I just chalk it up to the status quo and get over it/ move on.
I really wish game companies would stop being lazy and relying on the players to be the AI for their games. The last thing anyone having any dealing with the public wants in their entertainment is more people and their problems.
Maybe it is interpretation or maybe you took thinks as a literal, "set in stone" system, or maybe you see no problem at all and really like the current system. I can interpret things too, and the way it seems to me, as someone proposing a plan of "EXTRA REWARDS" to folks who team-play, being criticized as someone who wants rewards to himself, and told the system I propose (extra rewards) FORCES people to do what they don't want to do -- well that can only come across to me as someone that feels the idea pops their bubble.
The BS meter is high in this one. You tried to compare me to someone you knew once who, when I searched the forums had some very rash ideas that pales in comparison -- hyperbole.
Yeah I don't know about you, because I said (and I'll pull the quote if you want) that if you're happy with the current system and oppose change to the current system, then you must like this system else you would be giving ideas instead of very anti-constructive critique -- Oh, might I mention, this has been you the whole time and the definition of troll.
You know, OP, despite your high education, it seems that you may have quite a bit to learn about persuasive arguments - namely, that poisoning your target audience is a lousy thing to do. I mean, if you had just said something more moderate like 'selfish' behaviour, or even left descriptors of motives out of the picture altogether - simply stating that the devs could promote teamwork through your suggestions, and that PUGs needed to learn to work in teams - we could have avoided a lot of this. In fact, you would have probably found a lot of sympathizers.
I think that most of the people here wouldn't unduly mind your changes - but you pretty much alienated them from the start. Notice how the most vehement objections are due to your sociopathic implications? I think this discussion/flame war has pretty much put paid to any chances of this thread getting any dev recognition. After all, they don't like controversy.
After all, what many would see from the beginning of your OP is, "I studied the behaviour of many of you, and most of you act like sociopaths." No wonder people are reacting so badly!
If you are being honest, it is highly appreciated. But the psychoanalyst in me has to ask, why are you so up-front about it? Most sociopaths only thrive under a veil of secrecy of their condition? Are you sure you're a sociopath and not just someone who's using the disorder as a solution to human stupidity?
I have nothing against sociopaths, and I also believe a better rewards system will even encourage them to be a team player (if they are rewarded for it). This "should" (purely speculation, I know) also cause a chain reaction for the good.
Sorry, tact is not a skill I possess nor can I consience allow me feel like I lied to someone by sugarcoating an issue. I think it is a hereditary plague :P
But, I have to say, you did pin that last part -- I won't lie, that's precisely what happened. You seem like the sensable player, can you in good conscience disagree? :P
Ah......oh well, have fun then. Because it pretty much renders all this time and energy you're spending rather pointless.....
I've found that more than not, people tend to appreciate the raw honesty. I try to be as non-offensive as possible when laying out experiences or fact, but sometimes there is no easy way to go about doing it than to rip off the bandaid and put the wound in the light.
To be honest though, my patience has been worn thin by folks who are encouraging this snake to eat itself by repulsing new players. They are the same folks who come back at closing time QQing all over the place about their subs being wasted and this and that when they were the very ones that kept chasing away new players with loads of potential to being with. And did you see the rebuttal while ago to the 4 I got to play STO? To the tune of "Oh well, its good they are going to another game that they like then". This is unacceptable. While I agree that this game can't be fun for everyone, at least attempting to make it more fun for a new player in the name of balance is not unconscionable nor is it unreasonable.
Time and place for everything - and this was definitely the wrong one.:P
Actually I have had a hard time nailing down an accurate definition of "Sociopath."
I prefer to be alone and would rather play games where I can progress unaided.
I believe that rewards should be higher for SOLO play as things become easier when done in groups.
I also believe that games should not force grouping. A simple scaling mechanism, like the one they already have in place for mission replay would allow people like me to enjoy more content that is currently locked behind the force group thing.
I believe the MMO company to realize this first will profit.
I can't believe that people having to deal with the public all day want more people. I am also older, so have done all that already and now just want a quiet life.
For example: I look at my old MK XI Borg set and it reminds me I had to get that under the diress of grouping for the old STFs. It was a painful and annoying experience that I never wish to repeat.
I also have the full MACO set, gotten after it was put in the Reputation System. However when I look at that I am angered about how I can't complete the Tailor options as they are locked behind completing ALL the STFs and I absolutly hate ground play.
Maybe you should have said that in your OP, you might have got a wee bit more support, as it was it read (to me) that you wanted to realign the rewards system so that people who didn't follow your set model didn't get anything (or if they did it was very little)
I don't know what you found (I know what you didn't find, it was deleted due to the OP's mass trolling of everyone, very good troll her was to) but a simple "you remind me of someone" is no hyperbole
I'd love to see you quote me as being the first person to say that (very careful choice of words as i just described you as having said it) and I'm afraid I've spent more time disagreeing with you and to a point defending myself than I have criticizing your ideas, maybe if you had spent more time asking people why they disagree and what they would do in your place rather than complaining and calling them trolls for disagreeing with you in the first place, maybe this thread could have been more constructive... oh well...
I see that, but I disagree with the grouping being easier bit -- if it is a requirement that everyone in a group has to rely on each other, it becomes a lot more difficult -- not just for you, but for the entire group because it must be a well oiled machine. Getting or finding machines like this can be rare -- which is half of the difficulty and should be rewarded in kind.
MMO's have realized it, STO is trying it, and it is not going well because player after player -- one by one is leaving through a combination of lack of content and lack of team-play.
The problem is, if you are truly sociopathic, you must realize this: this game that you love comes to a halt the moment PWE finds it unprofitable. I won't pretend to know the numbers or the point at which that is as it could be 1,000 less players than current, or 10,000,000 less than current. I know that there is a magic number there where they will flip the game off -- as we can all agree, they're in it to make a profit. This would mean the game you enjoy would cease to exist. You also have to realize that only 3-4% of Americans are sociopaths which means by designing again counter to the majority alienates a large swaths of demographics, while I won't imply that "majority rules", I will state that if they're not accommodated, the game will run on the minority and may just be too little to sustain the game. The point being, you'll be biting the hands that help feed you. And, yes, I've really tried hard at pushing the point without being offensive :S
To be fair most people who enjoy contact with other people go out and see other people... shocking I know... those who don't want to be around others play games to fill their free time as it usually doesn't involve others so why force the issue?
Here are the things we can agree on: The game needs players to survive. The game won't last forever.
Other than that, I think we're just on different planets (mine's called Earth, btw, what's yours called?).
First, you are creating a false dichotomy by asserting that not catering to a group is the same thing as actively repelling them. That is not the case. Just because STO doesn't have explicit teamplay rewards doesn't mean that sociopathic play is encouraged, nor does it mean that teamplay is discouraged.
Second, you are assuming that your form of teamplay is, in fact, what the "majority" wants. I suspect that you are getting there by again assuming a false choice - you seem to be asserting that players who don't like "sociopathic" players necessarily must like your brand of team play, but there's no reason to suspect that is the case. Thus, it's unclear that your solution would do anything to bring in more people.
Third, you are overlooking the very real possibility that there are other, more effective ways to draw new players into the game - say, releasing new content, or getting media outlets to cover the game, or by using actors from the shows to encourage fans of the show to try out the game, etc. Basically, even if you were right that your proposal would encourage people to try out the game, it probably doesn't matter, since things like the Season 8 update next week will probably do the same thing better.
Fourth, you are presuming without warrant that the game is actively on the decline. I see no reason to suspect that this is the case, and you have already admitted that you don't have any concrete evidence of this. At best, you have anecdotal evidence of people you know leaving, but I have anecdotal evidence of new people joining the game all the time, as well as older players coming back periodically when there is an update. Seems like it's possible that the game is currently doing fine, and the idea that the game is DOOOOOOOOOOOMED without these changes is unsupported.