In Other News...April 27

[DoctorFinger]

- Why I love EVE Online even though I don't play: it's the best sociological experimental platform in existence. Case in point: to protest the banning of a prominent player (a 30 day ban for publicly mocking a seemingly suicidal player while on stage at a company event) a large contingent of EVE players have promised to collapse the in-game economy. The "Burn Jita" effort involves a massive attack on the Jita trade hub. It's insane, but it's fascinating theater.

- Starting this weekend with Operation Exorcist, PS3 gamers will be able to participate in the weekend Mass Effect 3 multiplayer challenges. This weekend has a collective goal of 1M Cerberus Phantoms killed, and squad goals of a complete Gold run. If those are met you'll get a Victory Pack and Commendation Pack respectively.

- It sure looks like Call of Duty Black Ops 2 will be released on November 13. A formal reveal of the game should be coming next week.

- Irrational Games hasn't forgotten about Bioshock Vita, but work on it will be limited until Bioshock Infinite ships. But it will be an all new game, not a port.

[GunnyMo]

I fail to see how protesting the ban of an asshole douchebag for mocking someone who may have been suicidal would make someone love EVE on any level. People will be morally repulsive amidst anonimity. You don't need EVE to show that. To each their own I suppose.

I hope Black Ops 2 retains all of the great multiplayer stuff that made it so much better than MW3.

[Xerxes]

Bioshock at work on the go? get the fuck out of here

[KamaItachi]

Originally Posted by Xerxes

Bioshock at work on the go? get the fuck out of here

I shall be very much getting right in there. Buried like a tick.

[OldeWolf]

Originally Posted by GunnyMo

I fail to see how protesting the ban of an asshole douchebag for mocking someone who may have been suicidal would make someone love EVE on any level. People will be morally repulsive amidst anonimity. You don't need EVE to show that. To each their own I suppose.

I hope Black Ops 2 retains all of the great multiplayer stuff that made it so much better than MW3.

We love Earth even tho there are a lot of douche bags living on this planet. Same idea for EVE online, created by human developers and the players giving such liberties on that game is the same idea of having similar liberties on Earth; we basically do what we want on both mediums within the confine of it's designs.

[Reverant]

Originally Posted by DoctorFinger

- Why I love EVE Online even though I don't play: it's the best sociological experimental platform in existence. Case in point: to protest the banning of a prominent player (a 30 day ban for publicly mocking a seemingly suicidal player while on stage at a company event) a large contingent of EVE players have promised to collapse the in-game economy. The "Burn Jita" effort involves a massive attack on the Jita trade hub. It's insane, but it's fascinating theater.

I find it mostly terrifying. As the years go on, the more and more I see the internet as a land where people, stripped of reality's personal connections, engage in sick behavior on a massive scale.

- It sure looks like Call of Duty Black Ops 2 will be released on November 13. A formal reveal of the game should be coming next week.

My birthday!!! I can't wait to not get this.

[Reverant]

Originally Posted by OldeWolf

We love Earth even tho there are a lot of douche bags living on this planet. Same idea for EVE online, created by human developers and the players giving such liberties on that game is the same idea of having similar liberties on Earth; we basically do what we want on both mediums within the confine of it's designs.

Except real societies develop systems that place limitations on their members. The social contract develops in response to the consequences of damaging social interactions, such as murder, theft, or fraud. The digital arena has few, if any consequences. It doesn't have to evolve. I'd also argue it generally rewards antisocial behavior.

[Dirtbag]

EVE has one of the worst gaming communities -- why don't they all just go kill themselves?

[GunnyMo]

Originally Posted by Reverant

Except real societies develop systems that place limitations on their members. The social contract develops in response to the consequences of damaging social interactions, such as murder, theft, or fraud. The digital arena has few, if any consequences. It doesn't have to evolve. I'd also argue it generally rewards antisocial behavior.

To quote a legendary philosopher: "You use your mouth purtier than a $20 whore." Well said.

[Superman's Dead]

Except, of course, that the guy WAS banned. And he'd be banned again. This has no hope of changing the mind of anyone with the higher moral ground. It doesn't make anarchy a viable tactic.

[J Arcane]

Originally Posted by GunnyMo

I fail to see how protesting the ban of an asshole douchebag for mocking someone who may have been suicidal would make someone love EVE on any level. People will be morally repulsive amidst anonimity. You don't need EVE to show that. To each their own I suppose.

I hope Black Ops 2 retains all of the great multiplayer stuff that made it so much better than MW3.

I used to respect the EVE stories, in the same way I loved a good heist film, but as time has gone on, they've become less and less "clever" and more and more just outright douchebaggery.

The Mittani should be up on charges, not being hailed by thousands of fucking dickheads, but I guess that's Something Awful for you.

[Xerxes]

Those EVE players are lucky. If it was a SOE game they'd find they'd find their spaceships at the edge of the universe with nothing but darkness. Navigation would be broke.

[Narradisall]

While I *love* all the weird and wonderful shit that goes on in EVE, that's generally because it is company v company in game stuff, with players betraying others etc, which is very interesting and doesn't exist in many other games.

Players trying to screw over the economy in response to (in my opinion) a very fair move of banning someone for 30 days for making hateful remarks to a suicidal person in real life just seems pathetic and going against the creators of the game for that decision falls outside my ideas of the social experiment part of it.

---

Blops 2! Blops was the last one I played, and tbh only the 4th COD I'd played, but I'm kinda done with them now, but I'm more of a SP and COOP guy than MP.

[OldeWolf]

Originally Posted by Reverant

Except real societies develop systems that place limitations on their members. The social contract develops in response to the consequences of damaging social interactions, such as murder, theft, or fraud. The digital arena has few, if any consequences. It doesn't have to evolve. I'd also argue it generally rewards antisocial behavior.

I can list a lot of social groups that was not fully bound to the rules of law such as Genghis Khan which is what this event on EVE is reminding me of.

Besides, what is the real definition of a society anyways? To me it's the gathering of a group of humans into one place and it just so happened to be EVE Online where they literally created societies called Alliances and imposed expectations and rules on such things for players to follow. Just because the consequences are digital doesn't mean it's any less real. Human behaviors of all kinds are still active behaviors with active consequences no matter the mediums. As for antisocial behaviors, that is not really an issue within the societies of EVE online regardless on it being one in "real" life.

Every aspects of what we do is based on Nature vs Nurture and is again regardless of the medium it's being conducted within; the key telling point is the fact that we react to them, digital or not digital. So thus, based on our various reactions, societies are formed to handle those reactions. Societies made within EVE online being crude compared to societies outside the game is besides the point.

[tacitus]

Originally Posted by Reverant

The digital arena has few, if any consequences. It doesn't have to evolve. I'd also argue it generally rewards antisocial behavior.

Originally Posted by Narradisall

Players trying to screw over the economy in response to (in my opinion) a very fair move of banning someone for 30 days for making hateful remarks to a suicidal person in real life just seems pathetic and going against the creators of the game for that decision falls outside my ideas of the social experiment part of it.

Both nicely said. Its funny; I would have expected this douche-baggery if the a-hole had been banned for life, but 30 days. Can you say overreaction? I knew you could. It was always interesting what happens in EVE. When it drifts to/from RL which seems to happen too much in EVE, that makes me distinctly uncomfortable.

[edit : the funny thing is IF it had not been in response to a ban for encouraging griefing of a possibly suicidal player I would think it was cool, but is the Real Life connection that is disturbing.]

[kyrieee]

I'm sorry but this whole discussion is silly.
You can't read third or fourth hand accounts on what goes on in the game and then start judging people or preaching morals.

This is not the EVE equivalent of neo-nazis having some Hilter mourning parade. People aren't actually upset that the Mittani got banned, they're just playing into it. Half the people doing this aren't even Goons. Furthermore it's not even going to make a blip in the EVE economy, it's just being done for fun and most people who actually play the game are having a laugh about it.

[NotJeff]

Originally Posted by tacitus

[edit : the funny thing is IF it had not been in response to a ban for encouraging griefing of a possibly suicidal player I would think it was cool, but is the Real Life connection that is disturbing.]

It wasn't. It's been in the works for 4-5 months (http://www.pcgamer.com/2012/04/28/no...tic-trade-hub/) and the ban happened 30 days ago. It is cool/interesting.

[Dirtbag]

Originally Posted by NotJeff

It wasn't. It's been in the works for 4-5 months (http://www.pcgamer.com/2012/04/28/no...tic-trade-hub/) and the ban happened 30 days ago. It is cool/interesting.

THis.

Also, the Game's creators think the economic terrorism is cool, and are curious about exactly how this will affect the economy as a whole. They even switched servers around to accommodate the Goonswarm.

[DoctorFinger]

The actions which led to the ban were awful and I don't think many people will defend them. But the whole evolving economy and sociology of EVE fascinates me. As someone said earlier, it's how some of these people would act if given the opportunity. There are consequences, but they're minimal. It's an almost perfect medium for a social experiment, and it happened organically. It's like one of those sci-fi stories about the rapidly evolving planet happening before our eyes.

[Reverant]

Originally Posted by OldeWolf

I can list a lot of social groups that was not fully bound to the rules of law such as Genghis Khan which is what this event on EVE is reminding me of.

Besides, what is the real definition of a society anyways? To me it's the gathering of a group of humans into one place and it just so happened to be EVE Online where they literally created societies called Alliances and imposed expectations and rules on such things for players to follow. Just because the consequences are digital doesn't mean it's any less real. Human behaviors of all kinds are still active behaviors with active consequences no matter the mediums. As for antisocial behaviors, that is not really an issue within the societies of EVE online regardless on it being one in "real" life.

Every aspects of what we do is based on Nature vs Nurture and is again regardless of the medium it's being conducted within; the key telling point is the fact that we react to them, digital or not digital. So thus, based on our various reactions, societies are formed to handle those reactions. Societies made within EVE online being crude compared to societies outside the game is besides the point.

I agree that EVE's society is still a real society with its own rules and expectations, but I do think that digital societies differ from real ones in that there is little, if any cost to the individual that is willing to act out and then change identities. I can't delete my main and reroll a new toon in real life; I guess I could change my identity, but that has all sorts of significant costs that make it very punishing to misbehave and then reappear with a new name and a clean slate. For that reason, though I acknowledge EVE did develop a society, I have to say there is a fundamental quality lacking in it.

Also... I think the majority of EVE's players were already socially developed before they began the game, and developed in a society with very clearly defined norms, expectations, and rules. I'm going to go out on a limb and assume the majority of EVE players are American adult middle class white males (Wiki says males, average age 27). While not entirely homogenous, I think we can safely assume that all these players are largely familiar with and adhere to a broad set of norms and laws offline. They take these social patterns with them into the game, consciously or not. So while EVE may be its own society, it's made up largely of people conditioned by our own, which we are very familiar with.

It follows that an online game's society like Eve's should be a microcosm of the larger society it pulls players from. I find this idea troubling. We tend to assume that outliers like the Westboro Baptist church are just statistically insignificant nutballs, and that the appearance rate of such radicals disappears as a society is more educated and refined... like in an adult, tech-oriented population. I expect trickery, subterfuge, and sabotage in a game like EVE- it seems like that's what it's all about sometimes. What I didn't expect was that a player would urge others to grief another suffering from suicidal thoughts. Fair enough, the asshat is an outlier. But to have a whole organization rally behind him and, in support of him, attempt to destroy the digital ecosystem? That goes well beyond the usual gray-area playstyle we expect from EVE. It bothers me that their actions may reflect the condition of the social stratum that I inhabit.