See how easy it is to steal words and marginalize entire portions of a society through media? Do you know where in history this has occurred in the past with catastrophic consequences? Ya ... this is dangerous shit people and this is only one tiny example of it.
Exactly why I say the word needs to be retired. It amazes me how quickly and blindly we have gotten to this point. As you say... it's dangerous shit. It's all about creating a "them" to villainize.
All time classic MY NEW FAVORITE POST! (Keep laying those bricks)
"I should point out that no other company has shipped out a beta on a disc before this." - Official Mortal Online Lead Community Moderator
Proudly wearing the Harbinger badge since Dec 23, 2017.
Coined the phrase "Role-Playing a Development Team" January 2018
"Oddly Slap is the main reason I stay in these forums." - Mystichaze April 9th 2018
You don't define it, because it is subjective. Toxic to me could be someone calling me "poopyhead", while to you it wouldn't be until someone called you a "fuckwad" that you consider it toxic.
Ultimately it is up to the devs to decide what they consider to be poor behavior, considering it is their game.
It used to mean people who threw temper tantrums and made the game less enjoyable. Ragers in LoL are the archetypal toxic gamer.
Now it's a meaningless buzzword that midwits throw out like "incel" or "alt-right" with no idea what they're talking about.
Probably how the term NPC came into being, users of terms like incels and alt-right etc. came under the NPC term as a lot of their arguments/accusations seemed to be 'scripted', kind of hillarious though that gaming terminology could be used in that way, accurately in some cases
Sounds to me a lot like people who try to shoehorn politics into every single conversation.
Probably how the term NPC came into being, users of terms like SJW and snowflake etc. came under the NPC term as a lot of their arguments/accusations seemed to be 'scripted', kind of hilarious though that gaming terminology could be used in that way, accurately in all cases
EDIT: Fixed it for you
NPC is used most often to replace terms like SJW and Snowflake, because they say the same scripted statements that often defy facts/logic etc. its a MEME that is probably the most successful weapon in use today against Snowflakes and SJW's, they hate it
Because "Lock Her Up", "Fake News", "Get Woke, Go Broke" aren't scripted statements/words repeated by Brawndo drinkers.
Slogans and memes aren't what he means by scripted.
The NPC meme is about people who can't think for themselves and simply follow a script written for them by someone else exactly like an NPC in a video game.
If you try to talk about something that's off their script, their reaction is kind of like the hosts in Westworld, only instead of "doesn't look like anything to me" you get called a Nazi.
Thank you for trying to explain how the dimwits who parrot words in response to people who parrot sentences are less "NPC" (because ideological football) and shout out to the non-NPCs who agree with you.
All totally sentient beings. Electrolytes.
"As far as the forum code of conduct, I would think it's a bit outdated and in need of a refre *CLOSED*"
I don't know if I'm alone in this, but my reaction to "toxic" pvp is pretty toxic. People like me provide a lot of motivation to the "toxic" people.
So many times in games I got ganked and spent the rest of my game time trying to get revenge, which rarely pans out and usually gives the ganker hours of entertainment. They can kill me 99 times, but as soon as I manage to come up with a strategy that kills them (like timing mass agro on me as I'm getting killed, popping smoke with vanish so he gets the agro, then killing him when he has a sliver of life) - I consider that a complete victory and win, log out with a smile and pretend I didn't get laughably owned for hours.
I remember the good nights like that a lot more than I do finally getting a raid boss down. God bless the toxic people and the good memories they provide us.
Has anyone here complaining ever heard of "Don't feed the trolls"? Because that's what you are doing. They are feeding off your reaction when you run to the forums to have a cry or the assmad tells you spam them. They love it.
You don't have to like what I say or how I say it. It's a fact. You're feeding the trolls. It's why they do it in the first place. Be smarter than this.
I clearly admitted I provide motivation to these types of players.
And I don't accept your definition of troll as someone engaging in allowed activity that was specifically coded into the game and at least tacitly agreed to by players of the game isn't trolling. Its playing.
And, again, though I don't do it myself I enjoy what happens as a result of these guys. Again, some of my best memories.
Anyone remember early Asheron's Call? Look at the gameplay and guilds that emerged due to so much ganking/toxic pvp. There was that huge guild that protected all the carebears.
I clearly admitted I provide motivation to these types of players.
And I don't accept your definition of troll as someone engaging in allowed activity that was specifically coded into the game and at least tacitly agreed to by players of the game isn't trolling. Its playing.
And, again, though I don't do it myself I enjoy what happens as a result of these guys. Again, some of my best memories.
Anyone remember early Asheron's Call? Look at the gameplay and guilds that emerged due to so much ganking/toxic pvp. There was that huge guild that protected all the carebears.
I was applying the "Don't feed the trolls" rule to griefers. The principle is the same. Like trolls, griefers are looking for an assmad reaction.
Yeah, I know guilds out there that are the "Gank Police". Both sides using the game mechanics and rules to have fun. The griefers have their fun. The Gank Police get to have their fun.
So these people that are so hurt by pvp have two choices.
1. Don't play pvp games/servers.
2. Be social and make friends (I hope they pick this one). Because the good guys like their pvp too.
I started this thread because, as I explained, I was watching a video about The Division 2 pvp and the guy who made the vid seemed to hope for a "toxic" environment from the perspective of a Dark Zone enthusiast. This made me wonder how we as individuals define the term "toxic" when we think about pvp. That's it.
I'm really surprised that there is so much faux-political commentary in this thread. I had no idea it would turn out that way. Some of the discussion is insightful.
I'm American but I've been living and working abroad for most of my adult life, so I have to say that I'm surprised at how out of touch I've become with American (and Europe has changed a lot too) life and social/political discourse.
It is an external entity that when it comes into contact with you, it causes bad things to happen to you.
So any one is toxic when they basically screw you.
But here is the rub, cigarettes are toxic but to some people they like it and some people they hate it. So in order to have a correct definition of toxic.
You need an external entity and a person who experiences it in which they also feel bad. Hence, it is subjective.
I win the definition contest as my theory is correct 100% of the time . . . .
Catch me streaming at twitch.tv/cryomatrix You can see my sci-fi/WW2 book recommendations.
It is an external entity that when it comes into contact with you, it causes bad things to happen to you.
So any one is toxic when they basically screw you.
But here is the rub, cigarettes are toxic but to some people they like it and some people they hate it. So in order to have a correct definition of toxic.
You need an external entity and a person who experiences it in which they also feel bad. Hence, it is subjective.
I win the definition contest as my theory is correct 100% of the time . . . .
Boiling water is an external entity that when it comes into contact with you, it causes bad things to happen to you, but it's definitely not toxic.
And since we're talking about PvP games, a more skilled opponent usually causes bad things to happen to you but it's not toxic.
We should use term toxic more selectively. It's not a blanket term for everything that we dislike.
An environment that is designed to ruin your opponents game play then complains about toxic.
it wasn't this way in the early days because devs were not cashing in on esport but now a days,it is the perfect environment to cash in and even more when there is a cash shop to support p2w.
Devs are the LAST people that should complain or point any fingers,they created the environment so they can deal with it. I mentioned it awhiel back that sure two combatants would curse or diss each other but after the game it is GG man and then next time it is good luck man.Now it's like send out the dream police "Cheap Truck pun lol"something terrible is going on in a game we created to cause toxicity.
I would love to hear these devs tell us they never figured any toxicity in their game,they figured everyone would be happy losing and made to look a fool at times.Esport is the biggest driving force in gaming right now,remember the old days ev1 said it's about the FUN,not any more,now it is sponsors and donate and subscribe to my channel's,look at me i am the #1 rank yada yada.
Create an environment of BRAGGING and complain about toxicity lmao,yeah good one.
Never forget 3 mile Island and never trust a government official or company spokesman.
So many incorrect assumptions and even some political tribalism between this and my last post ITT.
I don't cheat, I don't find killing someone much less experienced than me as rewarding as killing someone with whom I am evenly matched or an underdog to, I believe toxicity is a facet of individual personality, not game design, and I tend to be left-wing the last few years although before that I was libertarian and before that, republican, although I don't see what that has to do with anything.
Perhaps it's a facet of the way the question in this thread's title is phrased. Toxicity is. It's not limited to PvP mechanics; this is an incorrect assumption.
Do you got to a lemonade stand and find a lot of apple juice? No. You find lemonade. To say PvP games aren't consistently toxic isn't exactly what I would call being honest with one's self. I won't ever claim PvE focused games or players to not be toxic, but I wouldn't be surprised if most of the players who are toxic in PvE games are actually PvP trolls.
I tend to see it as a "correlation does not equal causation" type thing. Sure, in a more structured environment you aren't going to have a segment of the player base doing their best to gank newbies, and this in turn would likely lead to less reactionary, heated interactions, however it would be a mistake to say that the game mechanics caused the player intentions. Those players would be doing the same thing in any game if it were mechanically allowed. Furthermore, if a certain style of game play is permitted by game mechanics, I would stop before calling play within these mechanics toxic.
Post edited by Phaserlight on
"The simple is the seal of the true and beauty is the splendor of truth" -Subrahmanyan Chandrasekhar Authored 139 missions in VendettaOnline and 6 tracks in Distance
Toxic: the repeated killing of a less skilled player. This is not PvP this is griefing,
Then call it griefing instead of using political buzzwords like,"toxic". That stupid term is too broad to define. It can mean anything.
If developers didn't put in a mechanic to disallow others from killing you, then it's working as intended. Play a different game.
However, if developers DO put in a mechanic that disallows killing other players X level below your own, or have to be flagged for pvp, then it's working as intended.
See?
Oh, lol I see, and that is just the same pathetic excuse people that are scared of PvP use when they Greif, or behave in a toxic manner. It's bullshit, you aren't a PvPer, you're a bully. Simple fact. Hiding behind mechanics, rules, whatever excuse you want doesn't make it right. People that PvP want a challenge, toxic players just want to be toxic.
Also, not sure how you get political out of all of this, buzzword, sure I will buy that but this has nothing to do with politics.
Finally, it can't mean "anything" here is a definition. 3, would be pertinent to this thread. I hope this clears it up for you.
See?
If you want a new idea, go read an old book.
In order to be insulted, I must first value your opinion.
Online gaming is toxic for the most part. Been playing since what 1995 online. Online games PvP or not have been toxic.
Toxic to me just means you have whiners, ragers, shit talkers, racist and whatever other scum make home online. If players can communicate generally it will be toxic. Some more or less than others.
Finally, it can't mean "anything" here is a definition. 3, would be pertinent to this thread. I hope this clears it up for you.
See?
Yep. Subjective.
"3. causing unpleasant feelings; harmful or malicious"
You're not going to prevent 1:7,500,000,000 from getting their feels hurt.
What might hurt your feelings, may not hurt mine. So what gives you the right to control my behavior? (lol you won't)
It might be subjective but if the majority agrees that something is toxic and decide to do something like get the person banned then it won't matter whether they control your behaviour or not they just don't have to deal with you any more. If you don't want to abide by the rules you just don't play and no one cares about controlling you but ironically having stopped the person from playing they have controlled one aspect of their gaming that involved them playing the game in question.
Just like here if you don't follow the rules here you don't get to post or participate which in the end does end up controlling your access to the forum. Funny how that works isn't it.
It might be subjective but if the majority agrees that something is toxic and decide to do something like get the person banned then it won't matter whether they control your behaviour or not they just don't have to deal with you any more. If you don't want to abide by the rules you just don't play and no one cares about controlling you but ironically having stopped the person from playing they have controlled one aspect of their gaming that involved them playing the game in question.
Just like here if you don't follow the rules here you don't get to post or participate which in the end does end up controlling your access to the forum. Funny how that works isn't it.
Nobody is complaining about having to follow the rules or game mechanics. People are complaining because there isn't enough.
Does the game allow Player A to kill Player B when Player B is 5 levels lowers than Player A?
Does the game allow Player C to come help Player B, because Player C likes to PVP too?
If the answer is yes, then we are playing by the rules.
Now, how can you screw over Players A and C, if Player B is the minority? Why does Player B get to call the shots in this scenario?
It might be subjective but if the majority agrees that something is toxic and decide to do something like get the person banned then it won't matter whether they control your behaviour or not they just don't have to deal with you any more. If you don't want to abide by the rules you just don't play and no one cares about controlling you but ironically having stopped the person from playing they have controlled one aspect of their gaming that involved them playing the game in question.
Just like here if you don't follow the rules here you don't get to post or participate which in the end does end up controlling your access to the forum. Funny how that works isn't it.
Nobody is complaining about having to follow the rules or game mechanics. People are complaining because there isn't enough.
Does the game allow Player A to kill Player B when Player B is 5 levels lowers than Player A?
Does the game allow Player C to come help Player B, because Player C likes to PVP too?
If the answer is yes, then we are playing by the rules.
Now, how can you screw over Players A and C, if Player B is the minority? Why does Player B get to call the shots in this scenario?
Have you considered that the reason you can kill a player 5 levels lower than you isn't necessarily because devs want you to spend your time doing so repeatedly, but because if you couldn't and they could (because you're higher level than they are), it could be abused the opposite direction in that the lower level player can just keep whittling away at the higher level without any consequences, preventing the higher level character from being able to go about his or her business?
You're making far too many assumptions about the developer's justifications that you, quite frankly, don't have the context to prove.
It might be subjective but if the majority agrees that something is toxic and decide to do something like get the person banned then it won't matter whether they control your behaviour or not they just don't have to deal with you any more. If you don't want to abide by the rules you just don't play and no one cares about controlling you but ironically having stopped the person from playing they have controlled one aspect of their gaming that involved them playing the game in question.
Just like here if you don't follow the rules here you don't get to post or participate which in the end does end up controlling your access to the forum. Funny how that works isn't it.
Nobody is complaining about having to follow the rules or game mechanics. People are complaining because there isn't enough.
Does the game allow Player A to kill Player B when Player B is 5 levels lowers than Player A?
Does the game allow Player C to come help Player B, because Player C likes to PVP too?
If the answer is yes, then we are playing by the rules.
Now, how can you screw over Players A and C, if Player B is the minority? Why does Player B get to call the shots in this scenario?
normally a and c are being dumb, a open world would fix this by permiting a player change his leveling place, but most have 3 problems, gated way of leveling you will always move in the same maps to lvl, making the only possible way (or the fasted)of gearing by running dungeons, who have a lower drop rate, and most limit you entering each day,unless you pay thet is, and the last people mentality, they join a game who ahve pvp, is told there is pvp, the game will round around pvp, but complain when pvp happen, and most of these are also loners, used to have people carrying then around who mostly are useless
theme parks as a whole are strange on several layers on they tend to lock players in a certain patch, with no possible deviation, one example would be UO (always him lol) they ahd a open world then you move around to do whatever, and if a place was full of people hunting others you could just move to another area and you was free to do anything looting people for better gear, or crating such gear, because even so it was easy to regain said gear.
aion I liked a lot because I used to only do sieges and pvp, all my time was around doing pvp daily quests and some random quests to make some money, I hardly ever did dungeon, and even so you could have some lvl of protection (rifts being lvl restricted) people on higher lvl would hunt these invaders if they was called, even when some of these invader cryed a lot when we came rushing killing then and then destroying they kisk with made then leave the map for good(for the time being) was a good set of freedom during the paid years and pvp gear could be used to pvp and pve witohut much problem. now we don't see this kind of things anymore, and every time we think we will get the same freedom on the older games they just drop the ball and go for P2W cash shop and restrict a lot of thing
I've always secretly dreamed of hard linked IRL identities tied to internet accounts. I imagine the look on some shithead teenagers face when they meet real consequences for their behavior... I picture it being something like this..this guy is a fucking hero
Until then I'll just stick with mostly pve games, still some toxicity but much more managable.
Hero? I remember seeing this; this guy is a complete loser, not a hero. If you are comparing this to a game, it would be like a max level character taking out a newb.
"I have found a desire within myself that no experience in this world can satisfy; the most probable explanation is that I was made for another world." ~ C. S. Lewis
Have you considered that the reason you can kill a player 5 levels lower than you isn't necessarily because devs want you to spend your time doing so repeatedly, but because if you couldn't and they could (because you're higher level than they are), it could be abused the opposite direction in that the lower level player can just keep whittling away at the higher level without any consequences, preventing the higher level character from being able to go about his or her business?
You're making far too many assumptions about the developer's justifications that you, quite frankly, don't have the context to prove.
Have you considered a pve game/server?
Some people are pushing what the rules and mechanics allow. Until then, we will continue to have hate toxic. :shrugs:
The studios provided options for the players. It's the players fault for making bad choices, not the devs, not the other players.
One of my favorite MMO stories was when Shadowbane launched. I had a mage at a lizard camp on the newbie island. Keeping the camp clear with each spawn. Some warrior comes into the camp and decides he wants to share it. I explain to him that there really aren't enough mobs but just a short way down the road there is another camp. He says no and stays... so I use my ranged spells and tag every mob as they spawn before he can run to them. He says he is reporting me. Shortly thereafter a GM popped in. The other guy complains that I won't share the camp with him and am killing all the mobs. The GM says "You are lucky you are on the newbie island. We encourage conflict between our players. Off this island, he would not only kill the mobs, but kill you as well. Play2Crush!" and then he poofed.
Was one of the funniest things ever. Needless to say, the Warrior moved on to the camp 30 seconds away...
So.. was I toxic for not "sharing"? Was he toxic for just walking up and insisting I share? Was the GM toxic for encouraging player conflict?
I vote for #4: This "toxic" stuff is utterly silly, and very played out.
All time classic MY NEW FAVORITE POST! (Keep laying those bricks)
"I should point out that no other company has shipped out a beta on a disc before this." - Official Mortal Online Lead Community Moderator
Proudly wearing the Harbinger badge since Dec 23, 2017.
Coined the phrase "Role-Playing a Development Team" January 2018
"Oddly Slap is the main reason I stay in these forums." - Mystichaze April 9th 2018
Have you considered that the reason you can kill a player 5 levels lower than you isn't necessarily because devs want you to spend your time doing so repeatedly, but because if you couldn't and they could (because you're higher level than they are), it could be abused the opposite direction in that the lower level player can just keep whittling away at the higher level without any consequences, preventing the higher level character from being able to go about his or her business?
You're making far too many assumptions about the developer's justifications that you, quite frankly, don't have the context to prove.
Have you considered a pve game/server?
Some people are pushing what the rules and mechanics allow. Until then, we will continue to have hate toxic. :shrugs:
The studios provided options for the players. It's the players fault for making bad choices, not the devs, not the other players.
Their game, their rules.
I thought they were just playing within the rules, now they're "pushing" said rules because you can't be sure the intent the devs have behind the rules?
I thought they were just playing within the rules, now they're "pushing" said rules because you can't be sure the intent the devs have behind the rules?
Something smells fishy here.
They are still within the rules though. As long as players are not using exploits to work around mechanics (TOS, aka "the rules"), then all is fair.
If I was driving exactly 50mph and the speed limit is 50mph, should I still get pulled over and cited for "pushing" the speed limit?
It doesn't matter what individual police officers interpret, their job is to enforce the law. That's why they are called law enforcement. The judge interprets the law. Guess how that case turns out. Go ahead, take a wack at it.
I thought they were just playing within the rules, now they're "pushing" said rules because you can't be sure the intent the devs have behind the rules?
Something smells fishy here.
They are still within the rules though. As long as players are not using exploits to work around mechanics (TOS, aka "the rules"), then all is fair.
If I was driving exactly 50mph and the speed limit is 50mph, should I still get pulled over and cited for "pushing" the speed limit?
It doesn't matter what individual police officers interpret, their job is to enforce the law. That's why they are called law enforcement. The judge interprets the law. Guess how that case turns out. Go ahead, take a wack at it.
That isn't an analogous example. MMORPGs aren't democratic republics, and the rules aren't created by elected officials.
And if you wanna get technical, the law gives cops a lot of leeway to use judgement in how they approach the public. Stop and frisk, for example.
Companies have generally taken action against "toxic" behavior once it starts to detrimentally affecting their playerbase. See initiatives from companies like Blizzard, but also things like Trammel. Whether or not an activity in a game is "toxic" is 100% up to the company. And they aren't restricted by even their own game rules, because they regularly change said rules to respond to how they affect the player experience compared to the intent the developers had in creating them in the first place.
Comments
All time classic MY NEW FAVORITE POST! (Keep laying those bricks)
"I should point out that no other company has shipped out a beta on a disc before this." - Official Mortal Online Lead Community Moderator
Proudly wearing the Harbinger badge since Dec 23, 2017.
Coined the phrase "Role-Playing a Development Team" January 2018
"Oddly Slap is the main reason I stay in these forums." - Mystichaze April 9th 2018
Ultimately it is up to the devs to decide what they consider to be poor behavior, considering it is their game.
All totally sentient beings. Electrolytes.
¯\_(ツ)_/¯
And I don't accept your definition of troll as someone engaging in allowed activity that was specifically coded into the game and at least tacitly agreed to by players of the game isn't trolling. Its playing.
And, again, though I don't do it myself I enjoy what happens as a result of these guys. Again, some of my best memories.
Anyone remember early Asheron's Call? Look at the gameplay and guilds that emerged due to so much ganking/toxic pvp. There was that huge guild that protected all the carebears.
Yeah, I know guilds out there that are the "Gank Police". Both sides using the game mechanics and rules to have fun. The griefers have their fun. The Gank Police get to have their fun.
So these people that are so hurt by pvp have two choices.
1. Don't play pvp games/servers.
2. Be social and make friends (I hope they pick this one). Because the good guys like their pvp too.
I'm really surprised that there is so much faux-political commentary in this thread. I had no idea it would turn out that way. Some of the discussion is insightful.
I'm American but I've been living and working abroad for most of my adult life, so I have to say that I'm surprised at how out of touch I've become with American (and Europe has changed a lot too) life and social/political discourse.
It is an external entity that when it comes into contact with you, it causes bad things to happen to you.
So any one is toxic when they basically screw you.
But here is the rub, cigarettes are toxic but to some people they like it and some people they hate it. So in order to have a correct definition of toxic.
You need an external entity and a person who experiences it in which they also feel bad. Hence, it is subjective.
I win the definition contest as my theory is correct 100% of the time . . . .
You can see my sci-fi/WW2 book recommendations.
And since we're talking about PvP games, a more skilled opponent usually causes bad things to happen to you but it's not toxic.
We should use term toxic more selectively. It's not a blanket term for everything that we dislike.
it wasn't this way in the early days because devs were not cashing in on esport but now a days,it is the perfect environment to cash in and even more when there is a cash shop to support p2w.
Devs are the LAST people that should complain or point any fingers,they created the environment so they can deal with it.
I mentioned it awhiel back that sure two combatants would curse or diss each other but after the game it is GG man and then next time it is good luck man.Now it's like send out the dream police "Cheap Truck pun lol"something terrible is going on in a game we created to cause toxicity.
I would love to hear these devs tell us they never figured any toxicity in their game,they figured everyone would be happy losing and made to look a fool at times.Esport is the biggest driving force in gaming right now,remember the old days ev1 said it's about the FUN,not any more,now it is sponsors and donate and subscribe to my channel's,look at me i am the #1 rank yada yada.
Create an environment of BRAGGING and complain about toxicity lmao,yeah good one.
Never forget 3 mile Island and never trust a government official or company spokesman.
"The simple is the seal of the true and beauty is the splendor of truth" -Subrahmanyan Chandrasekhar
Authored 139 missions in Vendetta Online and 6 tracks in Distance
Also, not sure how you get political out of all of this, buzzword, sure I will buy that but this has nothing to do with politics.
Finally, it can't mean "anything" here is a definition. 3, would be pertinent to this thread. I hope this clears it up for you.
See?
If you want a new idea, go read an old book.
In order to be insulted, I must first value your opinion.
"3. causing unpleasant feelings; harmful or malicious"
You're not going to prevent 1:7,500,000,000 from getting their feels hurt.
What might hurt your feelings, may not hurt mine. So what gives you the right to control my behavior? (lol you won't)
Toxic to me just means you have whiners, ragers, shit talkers, racist and whatever other scum make home online. If players can communicate generally it will be toxic. Some more or less than others.
Just like here if you don't follow the rules here you don't get to post or participate which in the end does end up controlling your access to the forum. Funny how that works isn't it.
Nobody is complaining about having to follow the rules or game mechanics. People are complaining because there isn't enough.
Does the game allow Player A to kill Player B when Player B is 5 levels lowers than Player A?
Does the game allow Player C to come help Player B, because Player C likes to PVP too?
If the answer is yes, then we are playing by the rules.
Now, how can you screw over Players A and C, if Player B is the minority? Why does Player B get to call the shots in this scenario?
You're making far too many assumptions about the developer's justifications that you, quite frankly, don't have the context to prove.
Some people are pushing what the rules and mechanics allow. Until then, we will continue to have hate toxic. :shrugs:
The studios provided options for the players. It's the players fault for making bad choices, not the devs, not the other players.
Their game, their rules.
Was one of the funniest things ever. Needless to say, the Warrior moved on to the camp 30 seconds away...
So.. was I toxic for not "sharing"?
Was he toxic for just walking up and insisting I share?
Was the GM toxic for encouraging player conflict?
I vote for #4: This "toxic" stuff is utterly silly, and very played out.
All time classic MY NEW FAVORITE POST! (Keep laying those bricks)
"I should point out that no other company has shipped out a beta on a disc before this." - Official Mortal Online Lead Community Moderator
Proudly wearing the Harbinger badge since Dec 23, 2017.
Coined the phrase "Role-Playing a Development Team" January 2018
"Oddly Slap is the main reason I stay in these forums." - Mystichaze April 9th 2018
Something smells fishy here.
If I was driving exactly 50mph and the speed limit is 50mph, should I still get pulled over and cited for "pushing" the speed limit?
It doesn't matter what individual police officers interpret, their job is to enforce the law. That's why they are called law enforcement. The judge interprets the law. Guess how that case turns out. Go ahead, take a wack at it.
And if you wanna get technical, the law gives cops a lot of leeway to use judgement in how they approach the public. Stop and frisk, for example.
Companies have generally taken action against "toxic" behavior once it starts to detrimentally affecting their playerbase. See initiatives from companies like Blizzard, but also things like Trammel. Whether or not an activity in a game is "toxic" is 100% up to the company. And they aren't restricted by even their own game rules, because they regularly change said rules to respond to how they affect the player experience compared to the intent the developers had in creating them in the first place.