The act of camping and teabagging corpses while yelling profanities as a form of favourite pass-time is a fascinating yet objectionable social behaviour. I've seen a couple creative griefing in my time but generally others find it irritating and juvenile. I have done it several times in WoW. The PvP servers makes it a very alluring environment and even encourages it. Hence when it comes to my opinion of griefing, my judging hammer will remain strictly in my pockets. However, of the times I take on the griefer personae, I try to do it in a creative and curse-free manner. I'm not against swearing but I find the challenge of not using it adds another dimension to the activity. It's even more rewarding when the victim acknowledges the ingenuity.
That said, I think it's a different story when griefing becomes an uncontrollable habit--that the only way to extract fun in a game is to jerk their e-peen and vomit expletives against their online peers time and time again. Hurrah, you've managed to make a dozen fewer friends. Way to go.
The key to what I'd consider an acceptable form of griefing would be:
1. to play within the rules of the game. i.e. no cheating! 2. to offer an unique perspective of the gameplay to your victims. i.e. challenge them to be better at the game. 3. don't take enjoyment out of being a jerk. If you like griefing because someone else's misfortune makes you happy; see a shrink. 4. If you really must swear, make sure not to step over the bounds into obscenity. i.e. yelling racial slurs just makes you look like an ignorant fool. 5. Be a good sport, offer a truce. They don't have to take it--after all, you probably made their life hell for a short while. But at the least, once you've tossed your e-peen around, the least you can do is wash it.
I have been trawling around the web reading news on iPad, games and the iTunes store. I've hit upon a particular article on Kotaku that I think it's worth mentioning:
Before I get on with my rant, I want to first say that I don't approve of everything that Apple does. Furthermore, I think Brian Crecente, the author of the article is on the money with his concern. What I do have a problem with however, are some of the comments. "It's Apple! What do you expect?" To that I say, "educate yourself, fool."
People seem to be dissatisfied with Apple's control over Apps. Either that there's not enough control over the store; to the sentiments of, "Apple need to weed out shovelware crap", or Apple need to stop enforcing so much rules on the App approval process. It seems Apple is in a damned if you do, damned if you don't situation.
This is where I think commenters need to educate themselves before yelling out absurdities.
Apple enforces strict rules for stability (bug), objectionability (content) and iniquity (malware) but does not enforce the worthiness of a software.
Consider the following hypothetical sentiments from Apple:
1. "Your application will be removed if it continues to have bad reviews." 2. "Your application will be removed because only 50 people bought your application." 3. "Your application is rejected because it is not fun." 4. "Your application is rejected because we think it's 'shovelware'."
Consider applying the same sentiments to the internet. Imagine if Google would apply this to their search engine. I shudder to think of the consequences if Google decides to rank sites based on their own subjective view of what's worthy.
Apple simply lets the market decide. Apple does provide mechanisms to encourage better quality apps to 'bubble' up, much like search rankings; criteria being "best in genre", "top 25" (most popular, highest rated, etc.) What Brian has pointed out in his article is that while he sees the reason behind Apple's decision to change how Apple showcases apps, the issue is that Apple has taken too much control (making it overtly simple) which sacrifices the ability to perform advanced/precision searches to find content. This is a legitimate concern an I hope Apple figures out a way to satisfy the need for a "at a glance" view of app showcases, yet provide the advance mechanisms for precision searching.
It's easy to criticise Apple for how they've handled the iTunes store so far, but we also need to consider that there is little precedence to what Apple is doing in terms of sheer magnitude. Game companies are still trying to figure out how to turn the iTunes app store into a profitable business. It certainly is possible right now, as there are a few runaway indie game success case studies (in to the millions); over time, the market will stabilise. The iTunes gold rush will settle and we should start seeing a par in app quality with a standardised pricing structure dictated by market forces. Until then, I would give a bit of slack (but still remain critical) to Apple and applaud them for ensuring my iPhone/iPad/Pod Touch is not filled with unstable, objectionable and malicious software.
It's been said that the average age of gamers are closer to 30 than it is in the low 20s. The gaming boom happened around the early 80s, which is a generation I am a part of. Now that am a financial supporter and a father, the time I can spare for games have waned significantly; yet, my enthusiasm for games have not. My taste for games have changed over the years to suit the lifestyle I lead at the time. For example, the games I play during my high school years revolved around highly social games like Street Fighter or Bomberman. During my university golden years, it was skill-based games like Starcraft and Beatmania. As I was entering the work-force, it was MMORPGs, namely World of Warcraft.
The games I play today are more akin to block-buster movies. Games like Uncharted 2, God of War III and Final Fantasy XIII. The commonality between each of these games is that they all offer a linear-style of gameplay. I'm now at an age that enjoys heavy, emotive story in games but prefer to have games deliver them in a manner that I know I can experience through the end. In short, my interest is now more in the immersive experience than the challenge itself.
Log in to comment