Gamers are psychos

@clonedzero: There is basically no one playing the other mode, which kinda beats the purpose of a multiplayer game. And I disagree with the notion that it's just "open world deathmatch". I think it could be so much more, but large parts of the gaming community are juvenile, power hungry sociopaths. Give them a gun and anonymity, and there's nothing they won't do.

I'd say it's more because the game encourages violence, not only giving you many more options for violence than non-violence, but rewarding you for it with achievements and shit. Of course, that doesn't fare much better for humanity, but still...

@video_game_king: Yeah, it's kinda sad that the mass appeal of our great medium is that you can shoot people. With no emotional response at all, other than wanting to shoot more people.

Games aren't fun if no one is losing. Yeah, there's tons of activities to do around the world...like killing NPCs (which you still haven't explained why it's wrong to kill neutral players, but not NPCs). But if you're still playing open world RDR at this point, I imagine they don't have anything better to do than to kill people. Hell, I've played RDR open world for about 2 hours before I got tired of all the activities it had to offer. Have you also considered the possibility that that's the only fun thing to do? Yeah there's TDM modes, but those maps are limited. Maybe some people just want a big open world deathmatch. You really haven't considered all possibilities in this experiment. You just came in with a predetermined conclusion and stuck to it without considering anything that might inspire such behavior. To say there's something wrong with people who do that is like saying (I'm repeating this again cause you ignored it) Vinny hates women cause he brutally beat women in the Sleeping Dogs quick look. Of course he doesn't hate women, you know this cause you can put a face and personality to the player and know there's more to Vinny than how he plays his videogames. You don't see a face to these players, you don't know them in real life, so you paste on them the typical face that FOX news likes to paint on gamers. That being the secretly crazy, soon to be suicidal shooter face.

@legion_:

@minipato: There clearly a difference between killing a NPC and a PC. As a player, if I opt out of being killed every fifteen feet I take, then that should be respected. If you go on to kill me over and over and over, while I'm off doing my own thing, that shows signs of clear anti-social behaviour. The NPCs are basically walking targets, and you don't disrupt their play session by actively harassing them.

I just find it weird that you're basing this entirely on a single game, in a single PvP activated mode ignoring the PvP-disabled one. Not to mention the game is several years old, and people still playing are probably just goofing off shooting each other, when the game was new there was plenty of co-op in freeroam even when you could kill each other. I know cus i did it when the game was new.

You joined the Open world death match mode. There is the co-op and experience the world together modes, you said they're dead, well thats probably cus the game is several years old.

Calling them all sociopaths and stuff makes me think you're the crazy one, not them. They're just goofing off in a game. How are they supposed to know you're trying to have a different experience. again, you never ran away. If you didnt run away, why would they think you didnt want to be killed? Of course they're going to keep killing you, you're the weird aimlessly walking guy.

If you had played this before the playlists were split, when the game was still extremely active, you would have noticed people posseing up to defend each other, ally together to fight off the "gankers".

I mean maybe you're messing with their experience? maybe they wanted the free roam death match thing going on, cus I fondly remember having like 15 people all riding around int he forest using freeaim (instead of locking on) weaving through the trees on horse back all shooting each other. It was amazing. Theres no "death match" playlist for that kinda thing.

Stop judging people for how they play a 3rd person open world shooter. its gross.

@minipato: There clearly a difference between killing a NPC and a PC. As a player, if I opt out of being killed every fifteen feet I take, then that should be respected. If you go on to kill me over and over and over, while I'm off doing my own thing, that shows signs of clear anti-social behaviour. The NPCs are basically walking targets, and you don't disrupt their play session by actively harassing them.

To put it this way, can you even imagine Vinny beating the shit out of that poor chinese girl if it was a PC? Can you imaine him hunting her down, and actively ruining her play session? Of course not, because Vinny is a normal person, who's not filled with anti-social tendencies.

@clonedzero: Wow, so did I meet you online today or what? You say I've never tried running away? I have. What happens then is that they hunt on horseback and shoot you, or snipe you from extremely long ranges.

Even when I'm just doing my own thing, clearing out gang hideouts, I get sniped from across the map, or ran down by a group of guys who are just there to shoot me. They don't even finish the hideout, instead, they wait for me to return and kill me again.

It's clear anti-social behaviour, and it's psychotic.

That's the main gameplay interaction of RDR, once you strip it down to its bare bones: ride around and shoot things. You could coordinate and roleplay, but have you ever tried doing that with randoms? Even if you don't get a room full of dicks, it's nearly impossible to get everybody on the same page, solely because you don't know each other and are likely playing for different reasons. So what do people fall back on? Shooting.

As for why it's fun in the first place, which seems to be the real question you're asking, it's because war games (by which I mean any violent play) tickle that survival instinct. It's why animal play consists of chasing, hunting, and fighting. Hell, most human play can be boiled down to survival simulation. Hide and seek is all about hunting and being hunted, for example. All video games are doing is being more literal about it. You're basically walking into a giant game of tag and wondering why people keep tapping you on the shoulder.

Nope. I just find it weird and almost insulting that you're calling other people psychos, insane and anti-social merely because they enjoy a specific video game differently than you.

I've been playing Xcom, dragons dogma and watching Arrested Development season 4 all day. (not at the same time clearly)

Almost every single game that has those player versus player options implemented in open world or into singleplayer have ways to opt out.

You said you played alot of Dark Souls yeah? Didn't you notice that almost every single invader, (yes i actually mean almost all of them) will show themselves, let you finish any monsters your fighting, then do the bow emote to signify a fair fight? It's VERY rare for an invader to NOT do that. The Dark Souls online community is pretty honorable and fair actually. Makes it quite fun.

If there were a person behind that character, I still wouldn't be jumping to conclusions. Can you imagine someone doing that in real life? Cause people have and have done worse. RDR/Sleeping Dogs a videogame where death and murder holds no consequences, to say that represents some hidden part of our society is ridiculous. At worst you get annoyed, not dead or physically harmed.

Humans enjoy hunting humans because it is pitting wit against wit. People are smart and therefore offer a challenge, so it's more challenging and fun to go after a character with a brain behind the controls. You getting shot in RDR is about as harmful as getting tapped on in tag. You are playing tag and all the players are constantly it, except you can fight back and choosing not to makes you an easy target. There is fun in hunting prey, nothing anti-social about it in the context of it being a harmless game. Sure you didn't opt in to it, but this is a lawless world you have entered, even in the context of the game setting that makes sense that people shouldn't respect your personal space.

That's not the experience I had playing it on PS3. No one would let me finish my fights, and would exploit it to extreme degrees.

I totally forgot that RDR even had multiplayer!

@minipato: I don't see it that way at all. It's obviously to violence that attracts people when playing RDR online. There's nothing else but shooting people going through their minds. They demonstrate clear anti-social behaviour, and that you defend said behaviour implies that I hit a nerve.

We obviously won't come to an agreement here. You condone anti-social behaviour, where I don't. It's easy as that. I know you'll probably get all riled up because I said that, but there's really no way around it.

Dude, you're calling people playing SHOOTER in a PvP active area as people demonstrating anti-social behavior.

They're playing a game. They're interacting with each other, having fun, shooting each other. Its fun. You, were weirdly not participating, not running away showing that you didnt want to fight, and yet still walking at them. What were they supposed to do?

You weren't participating in the rowdy free for all chaos that is RDR free roam, and you weren't running away signifying you wanted to do outposts or other stuff. So I would argue that YOU were the one with the clear anti-social behavior.

I mean how else could you describe someone playing an open world shooter, not participating in any shooting, and yet not fleeing from combat showing they didnt want player combat? I'd call that awkward anti-social behavior forcing the other players to shoot you since they didnt know your motives and you didnt make it clear to them at all what they were. You weren't interacting with them in any way, you were provoking them so you could prove a point that you had already made up in your mind.

You're the anti-social one. not the guys trying to have fun online.

Alright you got me. This was a good troll thread. This post made me realize I should have noticed that this was a troll post all along from the over-dramatic OP. You are way too over-dramatic for this to be a serious thread. This has to be an act right?

I'm not going to assume you can't read, I'm just going to assume you don't want to read. As I've said before, I've tried running away. Several times I even went as far as to fast travel to a completly different area of the map, only to have them follow me there.

When you actively hunt someone for sport, that's anti-social behaviour. It's insane.

@minipato: Well, do you condone people going online and hunting other people like it's a sport? Do you condone people actively harassing other people online? Seems to me that you do.

Co-op in free roaming just takes too much work to make fun. There needs to be consistent, legitimate incentive for people to band together. I mean putting a battle plan togther to take over a stronghold is fun for like the first time, but it gets old real quick to keep putting effort into coordination. It's just kind of fluff missions that's not worth the time to coordinate, which leads to you just shooting down a guy for instant gratification. I think someone mentioned it before, Day Z's a good example where co-op is fun for an extended period. Where the environment itself provides the incentive to work together with someone else just to stay alive.

Also, you're reading into it too much to relate what happens in RDR to IRL.

Maybe the psycho is the person who doesn't understand the difference between killing computer people and real people. Are you taking your role-play as Legion a bit too far, by any chance?

You're gonna have to make your FOX news trap a little less obvious than that.

You're gonna do a "Minipato condones sociopathic behavior because it is my professional opinion that killing people online is sociopathic behavior."

You premiums think you can troll us just cause we don't have a fancy badge, but we're smarter than you think!

You're not participating in the social norm of that playlist, which is to fight each other. That is anti-social behavior. You clearly identified that that game mode has changed to being an open world free roam death match mode, where players can team up and make impromptu team death matches and battle over different areas of the map, ect. Yet you refused to take part in it.

You were the one that wasn't participating. You were the one refusing to interact with them, even if that interaction is a gunfight. You were actively not wanting other people to "ruin your game experience". You didnt want to interact with other players. that by definition is anti-social behavior.

Maybe YOU were ruining their experience by not fighting back, by not participating. Did you think of that possibility? nope. clearly, as you have a point to prove on the internet.

Wut? Didn't even notice you weren't a paying member. And I'm not Fox Newsing anything. I hate Fox News. I live in a socialist state, a pretty little place called Norway. Still, that was basically what you said though?

"Did I ever tell you the definition of insanity?"

@development said:

This is hilarious, considering Legion actively enjoyed online shooters and kept getting banned from them (because he was too good).

I don't know, you're little "test" seems a little psychotic to me. Perhaps you've been brainwashed or desensitized by the boogie man. You better get help fast. I'm worried for you, friend.

@clonedzero: That's the most stupid thing I've ever read. If I met 15 random people in the street, and they all started fighting each other, and I left, would I be the one with anti-social behaviour? Man, you're talking out of your ass. I don't know why I even bother.

You obviously feel slighted by what I said, because you partake in that kind of behaviour.

There's just no way around it. If I'm playing Red Dead and I'm going about doing my business, only to be killed 15 times in a row by the same person, who has nothing to gain but to ruin my play session, then that's anti-social behaviour.

@legion_: Why the hell are you playing an online shooter when you don't want to actively engage in the community that's been built around it? That's like playing an MMO and complaining that other people are around. If you don't want to play an online shooter then don't engage in the online environment. Play single player. Red Dead has a fantastic single player game.

I want to engage with the community. I just think there's other ways to interact with people than hunting them like animals. I know, I'm weird that way.

That last part about premiums was a joke, because after you said I condoned sociopathic behavior and implied that I myself was sociopathic in reply to my rather level headed and well explained post, I had to guess this whole thread was a joke.

And no that's not what I said.

If you hate FOX news stop acting like FOX news and putting words in my mouth. I'm not arguing whether sociopathic behavior should be condoned. I'm arguing whether killing someone online should constitute as sociopathic behavior. I argue it does not. But after accusing me and ClonedZero of being sociopaths cause we disagree with your shallow psychoanalysis, it's clear you're either trolling or you have no interest in hearing any kind of counter argument. Or maybe English isn't your first language and you're not really getting what we're saying, to which I don't hold that against you, just don't insult us cause you don't get what we're saying.

Because the social norm in REAL LIFE is to be nice and not hit or hurt each other.

The social norm in an ONLINE SHOOTER, is to shoot each other alot.

I can tell the difference because im not a crazy person. You clearly can't. Video games and real life are completely different. If i shoot someone in a video game, no one is hurt. If i shoot someone in real life, someone is either horribly injured or dies. Theres a pretty massive difference there and its insane that you're comparing the two. Like actually insane. I'm not kidding. You clearly have issues if you can't separate the two.

If you're playing Red Dead in a player versus player environment then yes, don't be surprised when some guy shoots you alot, because thats the point. Thats why he's there, he wants to get in old western shoot outs with other players in the open world. Its why most people play that playlist.

You have several ways to not have other players ruin your play session, you can play the co-op only freeroam playlist. You can play the co-op mission playlists, you can play single player. Yet you chose to force your way of playing on other people and when they played differently than you, you're calling THEM the weird ones?

I don't know, man. You've always come across as rather psychotic yourself--and performing "experiments" in an online videogame which revolves around killing, looting and riding horses isn't helping your case.

@clonedzero: Yeah, I'm tired of repeating myself, so I'm just gonna go ahead and let you have the last word. I've a feeling you're never gonna stop, no matter how laughable your arguments are. If you want counter points to your post, read my previous posts. Thanks.

Sure, I might be the crazy one. I don't know why, but I just don't like ruining things for other people. Damn me, damn me to hell!

@legion_: People killed you in pvp? Pics or it didn't happen. I refuse to believe that there are people out there joining player versus player servers for the sole purpose of ganking other players. I am going to need to see hard evidence.

Where in your other posts have you talked about that perhaps you were the one ruining other peoples experiences?

Where in your other posts did you defend that you were the one with the anti-social behavior? Not participating in an online community where having chaotic openw orld shootouts was the point, then calling the psychos for it. Where did you defend that.

Where did you show you understood the difference between reality and video games when just a few minutes ago you compared them to each other as if killing someone in a game was as bad as killing them in real life.

You can ignore my arguments if that makes you feel better. But don't act like you've refuted them, because you haven't. Not a one.

Well to be fair, we are talking about game whose main play mechanic is shooting/killing.

Which means other gamers have only two basic ways to interact with you

1) Attempt to kill You

2) Ignore You

Other than trolling of some sort, that's all there is in Red Dead Redemption. Free Roam does allow co-operative play but it's hard to coordinate that effectively with randoms. And the communication methods aren't super great. And you also joined a Free Roam that allowed PvP.

Given that play mechanic is killing and people naturally want to play the game not ignore it, what do you think most are going to do? And perhaps most critically assume that you are going to want to do. If you're in a game like that everyone assumes you're PvPing.

I know if I saw you in that situation, I'd assume you weren't killing me only because you hadn't noticed me yet and as a result I'd take the opportunity to gank you. I don't think that makes me a pyscho at all. Just someone playing the game within the bounds of how people expect it to be played.

Everybody bluffs in Texas Hold 'Em Poker, Does that mean Poker players are opportunistic compulsive liars?

People in RDR have been conditioned to kill any player they see on site, because it happens to them. If you did this in the beginning of the multiplayer scene, results may have been different. Players don't know you and don't trust you therefore they see you, they'll take the first shot so you don't.

I remember an instance in WoW on a PvP server where it was me, a Tauren druid and another player, a night elf druid. Immediate thought is to kill this one level lower elf player, because well... I can. Both of us, I suppose, were about to go into the same cave to do a different quest. We didn't attack each other, we just both went into the cave and took turns clearing out the mobs. I didn't feel like killing this player, because I was just trying to finish a quest and he/she didn't, I guess felt the same. Plus in that instance, there's always that thought that if the other player is killed they will come back and attack you at a moment of weakness.

Making a general statement that gamers are psychos is a little disingenuous. Every game provides a different experience and conditions a way of thought. It just so happens that RDR conditioned the majority of players not to trust and to kill on site. You look at a game like Journey and that game conditions the player to help other players, because it feels more rewarding in that game to interact with others after feeling so isolated.

That just Proves. Vinny is the reason we cant have nice things.

How about we stop throwing around anti-social behavior

I was playing Red Dead Redemption on PS3 earlier today and I stumbled across this guy who was just walking around doing nothing. Since there were no immediate players in my vicinity I decided to just shoot this guy because:

1) The game rewards you for killing other players (it would be spiteful otherwise)
2) You respawn in seconds (I'm sure he wouldn't care)

Once he came back to life he didn't engage me. He just started walking around some more, so I killed him again hoping the next time he would put up a challenge. Again he just starts strolling, like he's trying to enjoy the scenery or something (he could do this in the main game, it would be bizarre to try to do this here) so I killed him again. Because you are rewarded for killing other players in Red Dead I started farming this guy for XP, because... well why shouldn't I? He wasn't fighting back and I was a pretty low level and the way he was just strolling along his merry way it seemed like he really didn't seem to care. In conclusion, I think this guy who was just walking around in this free roam deathmatch was being really antisocial.

Yeah, I have refuted them. Every single one.

• I think stalking people around a game world is anti-social behavior. You don't.
• I think playing a game for no other reason than to greef others is anti-social behaviour. You don't.
• I think shooting someone who is engaged in other activites is anti-social behaviour. You don't.

You think that I'm the one with anti-social tendencies for not condoning and participating in that kind of behaviour? Well, then I'm glad to be anti-social by your standards, and normal and sane by normal and sane peoples standards.

I hate guys like that!

I can't even imagine what you think of some CoD players that spend $60 to do nothing but the stuff you're describing.

I don't think Red Dead Redemption is really a good example of the gaming community to really show how gamers are pyschos. The multiplayer itself isnt that great due to the fact that the free roam offers nothing but riding around on horse back in the game world and shooting players/npcs. There's not really an incentive to group up with players because it's not like you share XP or resources with them.

I think DayZ shows the human condition more in a survival situation because the game doesn't really give you a set of rules to follow except that your character needs water and food in order to live. That game is perfect because it also says "Oh hey, the area you can explore is infested with zombies and by the way, you can loot from dead player's bodies." However, in DayZ it's almost impossible to gather large quantities of things unless you have another person with you to help. So the incentive to work with others is higher. This also leads to new players joining with other new players to survive together against the more experienced players who typically grief new players. Yeah, probably about 70% of the time you encounter people in that game leads to a firefight, but the thought of not being alone and having someone else to help outweighs the risks involved.

This doesn't really mean that the people who kill you are psychotic though. They're just defensive about it. To me it's just normal behavior in a game. Afterall, everyone is armed in the game and even in real life, I myself living in Arizona where everyone can walk around with a gun on their hip is a bit scary to see. Griefing isn't even really pyschotic. There's just always going to be that asshole in a game that tries to ruin a noobs day.

Because they can and it's the normal behaviour in that game? There's not much to do except have shootouts with each other in that mode anyway.

True

Wow, this troll actually got fed quite a bit. Congrats guys.

I myself dabbled in pacifism once...but not really.