MU Soapbox

Ganymede

@Wretched said in Do you care about other people's music?:

Such a good teenage heartbreak angst song for me at the time.

I'll raise you.

Ganymede

@Macha said in The ADD/ADHD Thread (cont'd from Peeves):

There actually is a condition for that. Defiance disorder.

Unironically, I was diagnosed with this.

Ganymede

I don’t care what people listen to or if they do, but I have bonded over a wiki playlist before.

I’m pretty sure that’s why @Wretched and I got along so well.

Ganymede

@RDC

Why did you summon me?

NOLA was a fine game and setting. I liked it just fine, but lost interest when it appeared that everyone else lost interest. Things like this happen. I couldn’t tell you why things faded.

If you wanted to open it again, that’d be fine. But the game seemed to have a distinct lack of direction.

Ganymede

In the first set of things to do, you have to fight someone with your fists. And the FPS fistfighting system was painfully stupid.

Like, I don’t mind a learning curve. And I don’t mind fistfighting. But this part was so frustrating, it turned me off the entire game.

Ganymede

Kingdom Come: Deliverance.

Absolutely the worst purchase I have ever made.

Ganymede

@Macha

Very illegal.

Ganymede

@Tinuviel said in Worst Games:

Well, as a company they're pretty... mneh.

As a company, they have put out a lot of popular games.

As Fortnite is considered a popular game, your 'mneh' should be more like:

vomit

Ganymede

@Thenomain said in Consent in Gaming:

All of this within reason.

Such a contextual term, "within reason". And so I'm going to contextualize it to Mushing.

"Reasonable Consent": what is emotionally healthy for you at the time

"Reasonable Sociability": what is emotionally healthy for you to give to others within the scene

I can get beside all of this.

As the terms apply to the topic at hand, I think that the generic response to my peevish one is "dude within reason." Which is fine, dude, I get that. The only counter I have to that is that some of us have been operating "within reason" in a more objective sense for a very long time, only to be ridden off because, holy fuckballs it can be tiring to be nice over time.

There seems to be an apt parable here to the paradox of tolerance, so I would point out that as we accommodate more and more "consent within reason" into games there will come a time when the mainstays who have been tolerant "within reason" are going to toss their hands up, and find a place that may cater to them as often as they cater to others.

Ganymede

@Tinuviel

Fuck you. And I mean that in the friendly sort of way.

@Thenomain

Clearly, direct insults are ineffective, but at least you understand how I will think of you were you to respond as others have to me.

I am a patient robot, but I am a robot with other shit to do. I don't know how much RPing you do these days, but the example that @Auspice has thrown up has become a regular thing. You can probably see how that would be frustrating to someone who not only has a limited amount of time, but takes some pride in bringing newcomers into the hobby.

Most of us have been on these games for the better part of a decade. I'm pushing into my third decade. I perceive a substantial lack of effort from other players, yet we constantly engage in discussions that border on "what have you done for me lately?" Which, fine, I understand why.

Like, bitch, you and I have throttled each other before, and we're good, and that's fine. You, me, we're cool.

But, as I said above, it seems readily apparent to me that the problems we have regarding consent in gaming has to do with a profound lack of self-awareness and a general lack of communication skills. You can see how the combination can kill not only the interest of newcomers but also tired veterans.

Ganymede

@Tinuviel said in Consent in Gaming:

The base idea of "actually say something is not to your taste/interest/whatever" is sound, and that's the point.

Point 1: Saying what you actually mean is an important part of communicating effectively.
Point 2: I have actually had someone say to me 'that doesn't sound like fun' to a suggestion I made recently.

Ganymede

@Thenomain said in Consent in Gaming:

GASP! Mass Effect?

No. I mean, I could, but -- no.

These are good suggestions. We can all have better communication skills, but part of what you're either going to have to get used to or not (that's my I-M-Smrt comment of the day) is that a lot of people don't.

I understand that a lot of people don't. The reasonable step forward is to blame the players. Like, everyone else. I'd like to avoid that if I could, but --

If anyone wants to see a barrier to newcomers, it's this kind of nitpicking which is not the slightest bit useful.

Is that so? Okay, let's say it is so. And let us say, then, that a lot of newcomers -- players, even -- have poor communication skills, and that this is why we still have fist-shaking arguments about consent.

At what point is it considered reasonable for me to put my foot down and request in firm tones that people either start to or learn to communicate better in a hobby that is undoubtedly reliant upon one's ability to effectively communicate?

You said all the points I could dance around, but let's be brief:

Players generally have poor communication skills.
We can solve an important social issue or two if we all communicated better.

But nitpicking about how we communicate is not addressing the problem?

Please.

But let me put my hands up and sue for peace here with the following statement:

If you want to engage in RP on a game, reacting to a proffered suggestion with "that doesn't sound like fun" will likely paint you as a petulant child. It is safe to presume that the people you are engaging with can handle a mild amount of constructive criticism. Instead, try the following reaction: "I'm not really interested in engaging in that kind of RP." And then, if you actually want to engage in RP, offer a suggestion of your own rather than demand that you prospective player-partner produce another for your review and scrutiny.

Going back to the topic at hand.

Every part of this hobby is consensual. No one should be personally offended to the core if you decide not to RP with them or go down a particular path of RP. If you elect to avoid that path, though, there may be consequences, which may include being excluded from RP if what you want to engage in is what others do not. In my opinion, the best way to react to those consequences is to either find players that want to engage in the kind of RP you do, or find another game.

Ganymede

@Tinuviel said in Consent in Gaming:

So yes, we are all in this together and we should do our best to ensure a good time is had by all, but punishing people for not wanting to play out the boring, the stupid, or the overlong just seems silly.

Define "punishment."

Should staff levy some sort of punishment? Of course not. Should players? Debatable. We all arguably want to be as accommodating as possible, but if someone is "depriving" me of my opportunity to do what I want to do, then I don't think anyone is going to look at me side-eyed for being a bit salty. So if I am the CO who is being dodged because a player doesn't want to play out a scene where I get to engage in the RP I'd like to engage in, I may decide not to spend a lot of time playing with that player's character in the future.

Is that punitive? Arguably. Consider the following:

@Thenomain said in Consent in Gaming:

Who you decide to help and spend your time with is up to you. This is ultimately a selfish hobby, and nothing, nothing can make you play well with others if you don't think they deserve it.

I think it is unreasonable for the player who elects not to play through a scene that I would like to player through to expect me to carry on, my wayward son, as if nothing at all just happened. Like we are still going to be besties if we only engage in the RP that such player wants to engage in, regardless of what I'd like to do.

The solution is to be deserving of it, of being self-aware.

Being self-aware sometimes means understanding that you may have to play through something that is boring in order to let others have their fun. It means understanding that it's not just about you and, maybe, you're part of a group whose needs and wants may be different from yours. If I could put my finger on what irks me these days, aside from people sitting around idle, it is the apparent absence of self-awareness reflected in attitudes and policies.

But I digress.

If someone says, "Hey, this doesn't seem like fun," don't think less of them. Think, okay what can we do that's fun? Have a conversation.

To be honest, if someone says "hey this doesn't seem like fun," I'm probably going to believe that they have the maturity of a pre-pubescent. One might as well say "I think this is boring" or "you're boring me," or something equally ribald.

Better approach: "I think we're heading in a direction I'd rather not RP through. Can we figure out a resolution that works out for both of us?"

Or: "I'm not really feeling this path of RP. Can we take it in a different direction?"

Treat your comrades like a fellow player, not a character who has to do things because otherwise your character won't get their spotlight time. Appease to their better nature or let them go.

As said above, jaded people get paranoid of being burned. Similarly, jaded people get tired of other players running over them because they attempted to appease to their better nature. Perhaps I am cynical, but I have found in the past decade that players are more than happy to take advantage of a situation to get what benefits them.

These nights, as I've become an elder, I find myself less and less willing to appease to anyone's better nature because, well, I can't find it. I have become increasingly frustrated with my experiences on games. I have trouble connecting by reaching out publicly to do so. So I am preparing not to give up, but instead to go back to building the game I want to see.