Why u even try explain ppl that black is black and white is white.They dont like it, after so many comments, that the definition of interactions changed 5 times is obvious why cleverly they dont want to define what kind of interaction they want. Anything u will say, it will just change their definition of interaction so i dont see any point to try more.
When nonsense goes unchallenged, some people will fail to recognize it as nonsense and start believing that nonsense.
So personally I try to champion truth and rational thought, because the more people who do so the better the world will be.
I do so because once I believed one particularly common bit of nonsense, and someone challenged me to back it up with evidence, and I couldn't, and that eventually led me to a wiser place.
"What is truly revealing is his implication that believing something to be true is the same as it being true. [continue]" -John Oliver
I understand what you're saying @Deivos but the examples the OP gave are anecdotal are they not ? Example of people passing by and seeing you dying and throwing a heal and buff or finding your body and rezzing it. He also mentioned being trained surely from my own memories of being trained multiple times in Everquest they were all anecdotal.
I quote, "You don't get buffs, saving heals or rezzes often." "Even the bad things like being trained or blown up by trick chest."
Yes, but that goes to the point that anecdote is easily refuted by anecdote, and is not itself sufficient evidence. When all that's been provided in counter is more anecdotal evidence then there is nothing but an argument of opinions.
It's a substitution for a rational thought process, and when someone believes they are pushing rational thought (when they aren't) by claiming their opinions as fact, then it becomes a problem.
Like Axe for example in his last post. He claims he's championing truth and rational thought, but he has only provided personal opinion and anecdote so far. Vermillion has at least had the decency to talk from his own opinion and perspective without claiming it's a universal truth.
It's not like garnering metric on this is that hard either. Go to any player hub and count up the amount of people there, then count up the amount of people talking in that, then count up the amount of people buffing or interacting with one another. If you're adventuring and find a player corpse you can pause to count how many players might come by before that character gets a rez, or conduct the test with your own character.
You will inevitably find that it's not a 1-1 ratio of how many people are interacting with one another, and the social element is often at best an activity of a finite subgroup separate from the game's type and play.
If we did get into the reality of the situation, we could note that the bulk of social activity and player interaction generally comes from guilds, not free-form play.
"The knowledge of the theory of logic has no tendency whatever to make men good reasoners." - Thomas B. Macaulay
"The greatest enemy of knowledge is not ignorance, it is the illusion of knowledge." - Daniel J. Boorstin
Since the OP is relying on anecdotal examples I suppose others on this thread can also make reference to their own anecdotal experiences too. This is just a friendly discussion on this forum so whether it is sufficient evidence is not the point.
If everyone treats it as an argument of opinions, sure.
However, when one person claims they "champion truth and rational thought" even though they are only providing their opinion and anecdotal evidence, then there is a problem.
It's painfully deceptive and horribly inaccurate. It can also be very misleading to any casual readers that may not pause to realize how nonsensical the resulting statement is.
Sharing opinions is fine. Even anecdotal evidence is ok in the context of opinion and personal experiences. Claiming one is spreading fact by doing so is a disconnect from reality.
"The knowledge of the theory of logic has no tendency whatever to make men good reasoners." - Thomas B. Macaulay
"The greatest enemy of knowledge is not ignorance, it is the illusion of knowledge." - Daniel J. Boorstin
And yet somehow players are still playing with each other all the time. So weird.
I don't deny that. Lots of players are having fun with other players. Some of them may not even be real life friends.
However, do you deny that this practice is getting less and less used in MMOs? Do you believe that the majority of players seek interactions out like they used to?
If u see the top voted games in development atm in this site,(most of these games are mmorpg's that lot ppl wait here) almost all of them seem to have lot more interactions between players than the mmo's that are already released.So i dont agree with the first part,not that is invalid tho, there are lot new mmo's that focus at single experience more than i would like.As for the second we can make only assumptions so guess i can only say what i like and this is ofc more interactions.
I never really followed video game designs, preferring to wait until they released. Maybe there is hope the genre after all?
If we did get into the reality of the situation, we could note that the bulk of social activity and player interaction generally comes from guilds, not free-form play.
and as the person who is ranting against anecdotal examples, you have scientific data to back up this statement of yours?
There is a saying here: If you shield yourself from the bad things you'll also miss the good things.
Very true. It is a very odd evolution from a genre largely starting out based on player interactions with a lot of other players to becoming a solo genre with each player inside their own bubbles.
I hate to say it but I think it has to do with the newer generation of gamers. 15-20 years ago was a much different online world. An online world where most people grew up prior to the internet. The kids that were born into the world of onlline are a whole different breed.
Just as an example. The other day my 8 year old niece showed me an online National Geographic animal game she plays. She also showed me youtube videos of people recording interactions with her in game. All these videos were warnings of her in game character scamming people out of rare items lol. She didn't even understand when I told her that this wasn't cool at all.
She is young, but I really am not looking forward to her generation being in my online games in the future. I imagine she isn't the only one (from her age group) basically being a dick online and not even phasing her.
Any other pointlessness you want to bother me with?
I don't know that you view providing evidence, even if they exists, of your claims is "pointless". I guess you just hope that people will just believe you blindly.
Obviously you are not willing to do the same. So, you are basically telling me that you have a double standard? It is "pointless" to be asked and provide evidence, but it is not "pointless" if you ask others to provide evidence.
Any other pointlessness you want to bother me with?
I don't know that you view providing evidence, even if they exists, of your claims is "pointless". I guess you just hope that people will just believe you blindly.
Obviously you are not willing to do the same. So, you are basically telling me that you have a double standard? It is "pointless" to be asked and provide evidence, but it is not "pointless" if you ask others to provide evidence.
Hmm .... I understand.
No, what's pointless is your derailing shenanigans.
Providing supporting argument and evidence for your claims certainly is good to do for anyone, and when it's necessary it should be able to be done on demand (as I did). However, when the only motivating factor in the behavior is the likes of yours where you're simply looking for a way to harass a conversation with nonsense that fails to contribute to the conversation, then it's pointless.
"The knowledge of the theory of logic has no tendency whatever to make men good reasoners." - Thomas B. Macaulay
"The greatest enemy of knowledge is not ignorance, it is the illusion of knowledge." - Daniel J. Boorstin
Comments
So personally I try to champion truth and rational thought, because the more people who do so the better the world will be.
I do so because once I believed one particularly common bit of nonsense, and someone challenged me to back it up with evidence, and I couldn't, and that eventually led me to a wiser place.
"What is truly revealing is his implication that believing something to be true is the same as it being true. [continue]" -John Oliver
It's a substitution for a rational thought process, and when someone believes they are pushing rational thought (when they aren't) by claiming their opinions as fact, then it becomes a problem.
Like Axe for example in his last post. He claims he's championing truth and rational thought, but he has only provided personal opinion and anecdote so far. Vermillion has at least had the decency to talk from his own opinion and perspective without claiming it's a universal truth.
It's not like garnering metric on this is that hard either. Go to any player hub and count up the amount of people there, then count up the amount of people talking in that, then count up the amount of people buffing or interacting with one another. If you're adventuring and find a player corpse you can pause to count how many players might come by before that character gets a rez, or conduct the test with your own character.
You will inevitably find that it's not a 1-1 ratio of how many people are interacting with one another, and the social element is often at best an activity of a finite subgroup separate from the game's type and play.
If we did get into the reality of the situation, we could note that the bulk of social activity and player interaction generally comes from guilds, not free-form play.
"The knowledge of the theory of logic has no tendency whatever to make men good reasoners." - Thomas B. Macaulay
"The greatest enemy of knowledge is not ignorance, it is the illusion of knowledge." - Daniel J. Boorstin
However, when one person claims they "champion truth and rational thought" even though they are only providing their opinion and anecdotal evidence, then there is a problem.
It's painfully deceptive and horribly inaccurate. It can also be very misleading to any casual readers that may not pause to realize how nonsensical the resulting statement is.
Sharing opinions is fine. Even anecdotal evidence is ok in the context of opinion and personal experiences. Claiming one is spreading fact by doing so is a disconnect from reality.
"The knowledge of the theory of logic has no tendency whatever to make men good reasoners." - Thomas B. Macaulay
"The greatest enemy of knowledge is not ignorance, it is the illusion of knowledge." - Daniel J. Boorstin
VG
MMORPG Guilds as Online Communities
Project Massive: A Study of Online Gaming Communities
Gaming and Cognition: Theories and Practice from the Learning Sciences
MMORPG Aren't Social Anymore
Any other pointlessness you want to bother me with?
"The knowledge of the theory of logic has no tendency whatever to make men good reasoners." - Thomas B. Macaulay
"The greatest enemy of knowledge is not ignorance, it is the illusion of knowledge." - Daniel J. Boorstin
Just as an example. The other day my 8 year old niece showed me an online National Geographic animal game she plays. She also showed me youtube videos of people recording interactions with her in game. All these videos were warnings of her in game character scamming people out of rare items lol. She didn't even understand when I told her that this wasn't cool at all.
She is young, but I really am not looking forward to her generation being in my online games in the future. I imagine she isn't the only one (from her age group) basically being a dick online and not even phasing her.
Obviously you are not willing to do the same. So, you are basically telling me that you have a double standard? It is "pointless" to be asked and provide evidence, but it is not "pointless" if you ask others to provide evidence.
Hmm .... I understand.
Providing supporting argument and evidence for your claims certainly is good to do for anyone, and when it's necessary it should be able to be done on demand (as I did). However, when the only motivating factor in the behavior is the likes of yours where you're simply looking for a way to harass a conversation with nonsense that fails to contribute to the conversation, then it's pointless.
"The knowledge of the theory of logic has no tendency whatever to make men good reasoners." - Thomas B. Macaulay
"The greatest enemy of knowledge is not ignorance, it is the illusion of knowledge." - Daniel J. Boorstin