Gamers are psychos

@keris: Again, I will ask you. What is the goal in a game of chess? I'll tell you, the real goal of any game of chess is to check mate your opponent. It's easy as that. Sure, a lot of games may end in a stalemate, but the GOAL is to check mate your opponent.

These people are simply playng a game and using the mechanics available to them. @legion_ you are also using those mechanics, just poorly.

I take your point to certain extent, but forming such an extreme hypothesis in a free for all situation that isn't real is a sure-fire way to reach an insanely hyperbolic conclusion, which is what you've done.

I'd accept 'gamers are trolls' far more readily than the word 'psycho,' and even then, I'd have to argue that there are always exceptions to every rule.

I remember in my WoW days on a PvP server (not by choice, my rl friends were there) I'd never get into fights if I could avoid it, and often I'd help the opposing faction if they were in a PvE fight that was proving to be too much for them. Lots of them would turn on me immediately afterwards, but just as many would be grateful for the help, and often tell their friends to lay off me if they saw me.

My point being that all such experiences are entirely anecdotal. Coming to any conclusion, especially one as bombastic as 'psychotic' is very very dangerous ground.

This wasn't an argument on how fast you can level up, you said you CAN'T level up by killing other players, which you can, and I have. I COULD get to level 50 just by killing other players. I have proved your argument wrong with the simple fact that you can get XP from killing other players, and I have leveled up just by killing other players. You lose sir, stop digging a bigger hole.

@legion_: No, the goal is not just to checkmate. Especially, if a last round draw meant $5,000 while a loss meant $300. Also, it's not just ending in stalemate. A lot of these matches are ended on handshakes.

It is also the case where RDR's multiplayer isn't there just to let you level up (or even help you level up). It's called Free Roam for a reason. Everyone is free to do as they please making fun as they see fit. This includes engaging in behavior typical of the Wild West.

And do you seriously believe that because you refuse to play in a certain manner (sympathizing with bandits), that it somehow invalidates the notion that others would play in such a manner? That somehow that means they're playing the game wrong? How exactly do you debunk a play experience?

Oh, so now you go back to saying that you leveled just by killing other players? Because just one post ago, you stated that you did not level up just by killing other players.

And no, you cannot reach level 50 just by killing other players. For that to happen, you need to kill around 50.000 players. No one is able to do that. In theory? Sure. In practice? Hell no. And that's the only thing that's interesting. In theory communism and captialism are flawless, but in practice, they're not.

So again, you lose. And I implore you take your own advice.

Then you and I have a fundamental disagreement about all competetive sports and games. The goal of any sport or game is to win. Wanting to draw is the mentality of a loser.

If you exhibit clear anti-social behaviour, and you only engage with other players to ruin their experience, then I have no problem with saying that it's not only the wrong way to play a game, it's the wrong way to lead a life.

And with that, I'm done beating my head to the wall. You either argue just for the sake of arguing, or we have such a hugely different outlook that no matter how much we debate, we'll only get more entrenched in our own views. I really hope you open your eyes one of these days.

@legion_: I haven't read all of your posts, but have you ever answered the question of "why not play free-roam"?

That is what I've been playing the entire time, and what this discussion has been about from the start...

Sorry, I meant "friendly free-roam".

Because no one plays that, and because there used to be a certain tension when playing the normal mode. You'd have the guys who didn't kill people for no reason, and you'd have the people who did. Now, the people who kill everyone has driven the other group away, and ruined a great online experience.

...thus marking "clear anti-social behavior" in your words, right? If I'm not mistaken, you've also said that they act "anti-socially" in games because they are anti-social in real life, correct? If so, what evidence do you have for that correlation apart from your belief? The one where people behave in some fashion in a game because they have those behavioral tendencies, though restrained, in real life? It seems like your entire argument depends on that idea. Or has this been answered before?

@believer258: I've repeated myself several times, and so I will say this one last time. I do not think that everyone who behaves in a certain way has to be that way in real life. I am however saying, that I think behaviour in a virtual world can have a connection with behaviour in the real world. The virtual world becomes a outlet for behaviour that is not accepted in the real world.

But I'm tired of discussing this and repeating myself. I'm done.

@legion_: Wanting to draw is not the mentality of a loser. By definition, drawing is neither winning nor losing. How is it the mentality of a loser to offer a draw and get a first place ranking, rather than fight to the bitter end and chance losing and end up in fifth place? Doesn't getting first place qualify as winning?

If you exhibit clear anti-social behaviour, and you only engage with other players to ruin their experience, then I have no problem with saying that it's not only the wrong way to play a game, it's the wrong way to lead a life.

What makes you so certain that these people lead their lives in this way? Or are you taking it further and saying that the actual playing in this manner is the wrong way to lead a life?

I really hope you open your eyes and realize there are more people in the world than you and they all have differing opinions to yours. I hope that you realize that just because people see things differently than you, it doesn't make their views wrong. Also, if a person sees things the similar to the way you do, it doesn't make your mutual opinion right.

You strike me as a person, if given the chance and the authority, would kill everyone who broke the rules. That's a terrifying thought.

RDR seems like the wrong game for this sort of experiment, especially when you're gonna sensationalize the results.

News flash: 100% of murderers drink water.

Is this not the exact same position you're taking against people who wronged you in RDR?

No.

Well then, I still meant that part where I said:

I really hope you open your eyes and realize there are more people in the world than you and they all have differing opinions to yours. I hope that you realize that just because people see things differently than you, it doesn't make their views wrong. Also, if a person sees things the similar to the way you do, it doesn't make your mutual opinion right.

Yes RDR multiplayer was fun & quite crazy at times, though still surprised people are playing the multiplayer after all this time. I remember (while voice chat was muted on me & everyone else I believe) around the game launch I was in the multiplayer & somehow wound up in one gang that hijacked one of the stagecoaches with all 4 of us in there, one guy randomly driving around with the rest of us shooting anything that moved before moving on to taking out one of the outposts that were under siege. For me it was just memorable on the coordination without using the voice chat & more surprised that we didn't wind up just shooting each other when someone got bored.

There is such a thing as right and wrong. Let's just say I'm not in the wrong here.

I hope you one day realize what I mean.

And do you really think that you're not in the wrong for your ad hominem outburst?

@keris: No, I don't think that. I know.

Spoken like a true tyrant.

Can't believe I wasted my precious time on a idiot like you. You are clearly a stupid human being, borderline retarded.

And this one's spoken like a true asshole. My opinion of you after hearing this isn't too far off from that of a man who would terribly abuse any power he may wield, and you can be certain that I am not a stupid human being or borderline retarded.

Well it's good that you acknowledge that ad hominem attacks are wrong.

I don't know why this is worth posting about. A conclusion is drawn without any data to back it up, which means I wasted 30 seconds of my life reading this horseshit, 30 seconds that I could've spent doing much more productive things, like picking my nose, or peeling the sticker off the back of my phone because it's falling off.

Dude it's the Wild Wild West, no time for a Sunday stroll.

Did you use voice chat to talk to them in your experiment, I used to team up with like 8 friends when that game came out and if we saw a no mic just strolling along he wouldn't last long.

@believer258: You have yet to prove otherwise.

The MP of RDR is a griefers dream, I started and Advanced Co-Op with a friend and 2 pubes. The mission started, and one of the dudes instantly threw his hatchets at us and then killed himself. Tho I think there is a lot of fun to be had, it seems that I would have to agree with the op, these people are psychos.Looking forward to red dead rebellion, unfortunately I assume that it will be way after GTA 5. Secondly the MP in GTA 4 is just as lame, though it is in no way near the scope as RDR

@keris I'm certain you understood what I meant, but then again, it is you we're talking about... Anyway, I'm just gonna let you have the last word, because you're obviously one of those super cool and smart guys who think you "win" the discussion by having the last word, even though you've yet to make a single good argument. So, please, go ahead.

The real question in any of this is why the hell would anyone play the awful multiplayer in RDR?

@legion_: You haven't made an argument. OP is bullshit. You can have whatever unsubstantiated opinions you want, but I have no clue why you'd want to purposefully misinform yourself and others based off an "experiment" that falls prey to just about every easy fallacy of statistical analysis you can make. It's not even really an experiment, to be honest, because it doesn't follow the rules of one.

Atleast they had the decency to kill you, I would of just knocked you over with my raging bull over and over.

Yeah, I don't know why that guy would say that, but it's not true. And I can guarantee you that I'm serious.

@example1013: Yeah...

Oh wait, nope, you're wrong.

So that's what this has boiled down to? Nearly everyone just saying "Duder, stop, you're wrong" and you throwing around insults and telling other people they're wrong?

Sounds like the temper-tantrums of a maladjusted teenager with a superiority complex.

@legion_: Unless there's something I missed because I didn't feel like reading 3 pages of poorly constructed arguments, your "conclusion" has no basis, your experiment lacks a hypothesis in general, and all you've done is spend over an hour counting things that are completely irrelevant, because all the other problems make the data you collected worthless.

Any comments relating to people's offline behavior is laughably off-base, as you have literally no data on the offline behavior of your subjects. The only reason I even considered it worth my time to click on the "mentioned you" PM and reply to deal with the nonsense you're spewing is because I'm bored and don't feel like playing video games. I skimmed over (mostly ignored) 90% of the posts in this thread because they were attempting to argue against the conclusion, which is retarded, because it assumes that the experiment itself was even valid.

Gentelmen, you are simply wrong. There is no way around it. And now I'm done. I know I've said it before, but this time I really mean it. So, here's hoping you boys grow up someday soon.

Sure, I'll take the bait! The facts are as such: You were griefed in Red Dead Redemption (Normal or Hardcore) Free Roam. You didn't want to play in Friendly Free Roam (where you probably would have been griefed by people shooting your horse) because you felt there were insufficient people playing that mode. You devised an "experiment" (henceforth, referred to as "your experience") wherein you attempted to play in the mode where griefing is built in while not attempting any retaliatory or overtly offensive actions. The only quantitative data you recorded was time played, number of players met, and your number of deaths. You then come to this forum and present "your experience" and a qualitative conclusion as "your experience" being indicative of these players' individual mental health status. You then denigrated "gamers" as a whole as somehow being culpable in "your experience".

People in this forum expressed their misgivings about "your experience" masquerading as experiment and your conclusions from "your experience". You then engaged in deflection and name calling instead of attacking their arguments. You stated that because you don't engage in certain behavior, that such behavior does not exist. When grilled upon this point again, you gave a qualitative reason as to why it shouldn't be. I attempted to reinforce my arguments with articles and actual figures with actual data. You dismissed those arguments out of hand because Magnus Carlsen said something. I provided a retort as to why Magnus's quote does not apply. Eventually, you resorted to calling me "a idiot". You somehow concluded that I was "clearly a stupid human being, borderline retarded." You rebuffed my hinting that ad hominem attacks are fallacy and do not constitute good arguments.

My conclusions are such:

1. You are a loser. (This is evidenced by you dying repeatedly in RDR multiplayer)
2. You do not understand what science is and what role quantitative data plays into science.
3. You lack the proper credentials to make a ruling on the mental states of others.
4. You do not understand how to form a cogent and meaningful argument.
5. You lack empathy.

Thank you for so graciously conceding defeat and letting me win.

@legion_ said:

@legion_ Do you honestly feel YOU have made any good arguments so far? There are at least a few posts that have some good and valid points regarding your methodology that you just seem to ignore. Like @brodehouse mentioned among other things, did you really get killed over 5 times per minute?

Read my posts again. I said the first game I got into was just a bunch of people shooting at each other, and that's how I got to level 4 or 5.

And I find it hilarious that you say you cant reach level 50 by killing other players, then give instructions on how to do so. If you are going to argue that it can't be done, then give me legit reasons on how it can't be done. I get XP for every player I kill, therefore I will eventually reach the last level if I keep doing that. There's nothing stopping me except time and the number of players available.

As this thread has rather thoroughly shown, the irony is in you saying that anyone else is psychotic.

Whether it's an act or not, you really seem to have issues.

I'm just going to disagree with that statement. I think the people with issues are those who defend clear anti-social behaviour and sosiopathic tendencies and lable it as normal.

Getting into a huge argument with plenty this forum's users and then ignoring any and all logical flaws in your own argument (just now "addressing" them by childishly saying NOPE!!!) speaks of more anti-social behaviour than anything you have presented so far.

But I won't expect a response from you because you clearly can't deal with being wrong, or having an actual discussion.

I love a good discussion, and I have no problem with being wrong. But in this case, I'm not wrong, and the most valid argument has been that someone "can sympathize with the bandits". I know, pretty stoopid.

"64 unique players, and I've been killed a total of 324 times." "I've been playing for one hour. And yes, I've been counting."

BULLSHIT.

thats about 2 players a minute 5.4 deaths a minute. You sir are a liar.