Backstage - OOC Forums
EVE-Online RP Discussion and Resources => EVE OOC Summit => Topic started by: Mizhara on 30 Aug 2010, 02:57
-
EDIT: The post I linked to got deleted, but the thread remained. In short, Artemis97 (our favorite goon) posted an OoC post saying the OP's chatlog was done OoC and was thus inadmissible.
There's a thousand different discussions on the matter, and a thousand different opinions... but once again it rears it's ugly head in a certain IGS post/thread. (http://www.eveonline.com/ingameboard.asp?a=topic&threadID=1376236&page=1#15)
Now, the question becomes, is our favorite goon right? Should a conversation/mail like that be disregarded as 'inadmissible' because it's not started IC? Or is it on the other hand just used as an excuse as in 'Oh, I'll say this OoC and perform the actions OoC and thus you can't blame me IC'? There's ample reasons to consider both to be the case.
Personally, I've always been a firm believer in the IC/OoC divide. That discussions that are OoC should not be considered IC, nor the other way around. One should theoretically not affect the other. That is... in a perfect world. We don't live in that, as far as I'm concerned. The world is too stupid for that, and so are the people in it. Of course, describing it somewhat differently, I'm simply saying that as long as there's so many differences of opinion you can't really trust in the IC/OoC divide.
Now, in this particular case, I'd be leaning towards that it's not an acceptable use of the IC/OoC divide. If you do something either in space, or in this case plans some kind of infiltration, sabotage or anything else... any kind of action that actually affects others in this game... that is and should be taken as In Character if you find out about it. I am sure as hell that our favorite goon finding logs of me talking about an infiltration of Star Fraction (or simply his corporation) and such would act upon said information. As he should.
While I am all for separating IC and OoC, and have even engaged in discussing the various potential actions and consequences of actions with my character's enemies in order to at least attempt achieving a satisfying resolution for everyone, or to avoid fucking too hard with another person's character, that's not the case here.
So I lay it out before you people. Are you of the opinion that this chatlog should be 'inadmissible' in an IC environment? It's a planned attack of infiltration and sabotage on an in-game entity. An attack by a player, on a player (or players) with the intent to cause in-game harm. How the hell is that not In Character? If it's not In Character... don't do it.
Besides, I thought Star Fraction was all for 'everything in-game is IC'.
Of course, that's just my opinion here. Backstage! Stand on the brink of the dreaded divide! Gaze upon this horrific entity and know terror, despair and resignation as it keeps confounding us all! In short, let's get the same old shit debate going once more. It's apparently not resolved yet.
-
As far as I'm concerned, OOC actions, (Although not chat) have quite a lot of bearing on IC stuff in this game. Being able to 'walk your talk' is a key part of reputation in this game. You wouldn't score an OOC victory in space and then totally ignore it IC would you?
Claiming that something like this is 'OOC' and therefore 'not relevant' simply isn't a valid argument in this game. There's an IC-OOC divide, sure, but it doesn't cover Actions or plans ingame, even failed ones.
-
The way I handle things is to talk things out OOC and if you have an agreement and a mutual understanding, to have these conversations IC to make it official.
That entire conversation was OOC because we had spoke before and I was following up.
Also, the Stillwater thing was completely OOC and was held in Stillwater's OOC public channel. This was done OOC because I really wasn't serious about any of it, I had logged on to sell some assets off and decided to fuck around.
The simple fact is that people are falling back on using OOC information and chatlogs in attempts to burn myself and my character IC and this is completely unacceptable. There are rules that are not being adhered to and it is wrong.
As for SF and the IC thing... Jade and Cosmo see no difference between OOC and IC when it comes to the game, personally. I, however, do and so does most of the community. CCP rules also spell out a clear dividing line.
-
He simply chose to post the OOC conversation because the IC one we had previously doesn't implicate him in a negative way, so he's picking and choosing what he claims as IC as it is convenient.
I never denied the conversation took place, only that posting OOC logs as IC evidence is not allowed.
-
Also, the Stillwater thing was completely OOC and was held in Stillwater's OOC public channel. This was done OOC because I really wasn't serious about any of it, I had logged on to sell some assets off and decided to fuck around.
Even if that's true, people think otherwise, and it made you look rather incompetent. You might consider dropping that particular bone.
The simple fact is that people are falling back on using OOC information and chatlogs in attempts to burn myself and my character IC and this is completely unacceptable. There are rules that are not being adhered to and it is wrong.
People tend to make up their minds about you based on past actions and comments. There's not very much you can do about this. Telling the very people doing this that they're attempting to 'burn' you isn't going to make it any better. Also: what rules? It's EVE
I never denied the conversation took place, only that posting OOC logs as IC evidence is not allowed.
Who enforces/decides this now?
-
Being that this was an attempt to screw with my corp's operations... I'll keep it civil.
I have to agree with Mizhara on this one. If the conversation was had here, then I wouldn't use it in game. However, it was had in game, it was IC.
You can even see when Alba Miri switches to OOC - when she switches to double brackets, which suggests, as far as she was concerned, it was IC.
Nothing personal against Rykis, I just think... well, you don't say anything to anyone you're not prepared to have repeated. Especially in EVE.
-
The conversation I posted was two days before bro.
The conversation posted in OP was OOC and shouldn't be admitted as evidence.
All I'm saying is that there was an IC conversation and an OOC conversation. The OOC one implicated the character less and was therefore chosen as the log to be used as evidence. I have no quarrel with the situation coming to light, even though it was agreed it wouldn't, but I do have an issue with the using of OOC logs as IC evidence.
-
Did you have it in game?
If yes, then I disagree.
But we're not going to get anywhere arguing about it. It's happened now, and you're going to have to figure out what your character does next.
The beauty of role-play.
The lesson, I guess, is stay in character when talking with people you don't know. That way, theres no IC/OOC difficulties like this.
-
Well how about this...
I wasn't actually going to do this myself, I was going to have another member of the RP community actually do this for me and I just increase the price and take a cut for being the middle man. This conversation was held completely OOC. So does this give me free reign to post this as IC evidence?
-
I wasn't actually going to do this myself, I was going to have another member of the RP community actually do this for me and I just increase the price and take a cut for being the middle man. This conversation was held completely OOC. So does this give me free reign to post this as IC evidence?
Yes, yes it does.
-
I see
-
I play "hard" RP as often as possible, that is, if I can do it IC, I do it IC, Local, fleet, corp mails, etc. I also don't do what Alex is doing and fudge around and come to terms OOC. I deal with things like that IC, and therefore, rarely have issues like this, the OOC stuff that remains is firmly on the other side of the divide, and I don't have to worry about it.
But.
But we have people like Alex, a lot of people in fact. They want to hammer out deals and do all the srsbizniz OOC, and then just go IC to announce it. This, in my mind creates issues, big grey areas, "my corp is joining the alliance, but I have no IC reason to go with them," or "I tried to engage in corporate espionage and then tried to dodge the bullet by discussing everything OOC."
Frankly, this stuff affects our characters, it doesn't negatively affect others roleplay if taken with a grain of salt, and therefore, its fair game to use it.
To be fair, I don't think this should be an issue at all, because if this was all just handled IC in the first place, it'd be no issue. But I know, people don't like to do that, so I'm forced to fudge the OOC divide to account for it.
-
Conversations and material that are released via the appropriate methods, such as here, are totally admissable as IC material if they impact our characters in any significant fashion. It's a line of causality. Would this plot, if brought to fruition, had a major impact? Yes. Therefore, it is essential for the parties affected to release and defuse the plot before it could be launched along a different vector. The material being in a different style of speech is irrelevant.
Causality, as always, is key. Does the OOC convo intend to have IC consequences? IC consequences being, RP relationships, game mechanic operations/impacts, and suchlike. If so, then we move to the question of acquiring the OOC convo details. In this case, Alex's contact betrayed him and transferred the logs out of her own IC conscience. Boom, proper procedure, and no real metagaming involved, merely in-character interactions.
What's the problem, again?
-
[admin]First, on a quick read-through, I haven't really seen any problem with this thread so far, and I appreciate everyone keeping civil. Being able to have this sort of discussion in a meaningful and substantive way is the sort of thing this board aspires to.I just want to mention that this is the sort of thread that goes pear-shaped very easily, as it is both a controversial issue, and in this case there are references to specific, again controversial, events. Mods will be keeping an eye, and I hope everyone will keep in mind the rules (http://backstage.eve-inspiracy.com/index.php?action=page;id=5) and FAQ (http://backstage.eve-inspiracy.com/index.php?action=page;id=4). [/admin]
-
Without speaking to the particular event that triggered this discussion, the line between IC and OOC in EVE has always seemed a little fuzzy to me. This largely comes from the fact that we play in a gaming subculture that includes metagaming as a major tactic.
Generally, I treat my in-game discussions about the game as IC as possible. Patch notes, not so much, but player actions, almost definitely. Evanda said it best: when invited to come RP, her response was, "I am roleplaying."
-
People shouldn't speak for me and it should be amply clear, OOC, that this is nothing to do with the Star Fraction.
Cosmo
-
That convo took place in an OOC channel? Then as far as I'm concerned IC it never took place. I shall ignore the IGS thread after I report it for OOC content. I would do the same no matter who was involved.
As far as the IC/OOC divide in general, it is everyone's own personal choice if they decide they want to be able to use whatever petty means possible to 'win at RP'. Perhaps one day when people realize how lame this is, we can once again have mainstream mutual RP between enemy factions.
-
[admin]Removed a post. Please keep in mind that bringing a flame from another board and responding to it here is still responding to a flame, and against the rules. Reposting a flame and saying 'I'm going to ignore this flame' is not ignoring it.[/admin]
-
Honestly, this type of inconsistency is a contributor of why I bailed when I did.
Some say I was right, some say I was wrong. The simple fact is, that I wasn't ready to make this official and had therefore not consulted with SF leadership to get a green light. It is the entire reason the first conversation was IC (when I was running EJECT) and the second conversation was OOC (when I was with SF). I wanted to make sure the client was still interested, etc before I brought it up to Jade and friends.
Regardless of how the corp exited the alliance, this action is why I had to leave SF and is why I got pissed. If there is no differentiation between OOC and IC, then why have OOC at all? I mean there's no point if it can all be treated as IC. I mean, when I first started doing this, I was told that your character has no knowledge of OOC conversations or actions and to RP according to either is a form of godmodding.
Honestly, this situation was a form of bear baiting, because people just wanted to take a shot at the alliance and I. The obvious bending of the rules is shown by the fact that there was both an IC and an OOC conversation regarding the exact same thing, yet the OOC one was chosen as the one to post... probably because I was in SF at the time of the conversation.
This is all I am saying on the matter. I hope you are all incredibly pleased with yourselves.
-
That convo took place in an OOC channel? Then as far as I'm concerned IC it never took place. I shall ignore the IGS thread after I report it for OOC content. I would do the same no matter who was involved.
Yes and no. If there is an OOC conversation that leads to an in-game agreement, then even if the actual discussion was OOC, presumably there was an IC conversation to achieve the same end, even if it's hand-waved.
I'm thinking of an OOC conversation where two pilots arranged to Hank someone even though they didn't hold an IC version of that conversation, I don't think it's unreasonable to consider that it happened
-
This is all I am saying on the matter. I hope you are all incredibly pleased with yourselves.
Dude, nothing that happened was personal. You tried to screw my alliance over and I'm not taking it personally.
Ixiris beat you this time, but take it in your character's stride and work out a way to have vengeance. I haven't commented on it on IGS, because IC, Mammal feels it's beneath him.
-
Ulphus. I believe what is said in OOC-only channels should stay in OOC-only channels. If there is a major issue with what is said, it can be dealt with OOC instead of breaking immersion. If there is an OOC conversation that leads to an in-game agreement, the IC convo would likely be private and expression of your knowledge of the convo may be metagaming. If you are directly involved in the situation and want the actual convo to be IC available, it's your fault if you don't have an IC convo in the first place. If you are indirectly involved, there are other more creative options instead of OOC convo log hearsay.
After checking the IGS thread in the op again, I believe in this case, CCP Zymurgist has taken appropriate action. To me, it doesn't matter who is involved or what the content is, OOC channels are 'sacred'. People shouldn't have to have their guard up in OOC channels.
-
this wasn't an OOC channel, this was a private convo, and as I said before:
This, in my mind creates issues, big grey areas, "my corp is joining the alliance, but I have no IC reason to go with them," or "I tried to engage in corporate espionage and then tried to dodge the bullet by discussing everything OOC."
Frankly, this stuff affects our characters, it doesn't negatively affect others roleplay if taken with a grain of salt, and therefore, its fair game to use it.
To be fair, I don't think this should be an issue at all, because if this was all just handled IC in the first place, it'd be no issue. But I know, people don't like to do that, so I'm forced to fudge the OOC divide to account for it.
This doesn't mean using knowledge our character's wouldn't have access to, I disagree with that, and I'm not going to pull up stuff like that if there's no way Nikita would know it but in cases like this, there is no reason our characters wouldn't have access to this.
Honestly, this should have just been kept IC to begin with. Whenever people try to do the whole 'lite' rp thing like this, it causes these issues, because stuff happens OOC that affects IC stuff, and when people try to bring it up IC, we get...well...this.
-
I have no strong opinions on the particular issue, but I'll try to describe a situation, and what I think is reasonable.
Albert and Bob are having an OOC discussion about the mechanics of Concordokken. After talking for sometime, Al suggests they go suicide gank a hulk, and they do and get popped.
Someone asks Bob IC why he got concordokkened, and he says IC that Al suggested it. I don't think that's an unreasonable thing to do, even though there was no explicitly IC conversation for that.
Assuming that the characters had a similar discussion to the players, and that's why the character was motivated to perform the actions seems more reasonable to assuming that they both just randomly decided to suicide-gank someone without discussion. If Albert complains that the discussion wasn't IC, and that it's unreasonable to blame him for suggesting it, then I wouldn't have a lot of sympathy.
I think the line is crossed when something is actually done. If Albert and Bob never actually do the ganking, then I would think it unreasonable to claim IC that Albert is a suicide ganker, without discussing it with p(Albert).
If Albert and Bob buy disposable ships and move them into position, but don't actually do a gank yet, then I'd still think it's reasonable to think there had been an IC discussion that might have happened "off-screen"
That said, I wouldn't do that without talking to the person in question. I have explicitly asked after an OOC conversation "Can we assume that that bit happened in character?" and I respect the other persons preferences.
Does that seem more reasonable Kazzzi?
-
Ixiris
...suddenly it is all in perspective.
-
Coming from a perspective of one who has had no previous RP experience with any of the players here, and who has no experiential knowledge of the situation that prompted this thread - here is my outsiders view.
In my 30 plus years of playing RPG's my experience has been that the groups where the players understood and respected the IC/Ooc divide were the best ones.
E.G., two players, one playing a thief and another playing an honest party leader could discuss how thiefy boy had or would do something vile and secret but IC the honest character would know nothing about this and could not act as if influenced by his OOC knowledge without an IC reason or experience that had tipped him off.
Or two players could plot any kind of scheme OOC, but unless they explicitly stated 'ok, out chars talked about this here and then', or actually RP'd it then they could not later have claimed to have done so.
If this divide were to be violated then that would be regarded as cheating and if it continued then the player would no longer be invited to play with the group.
As a player I found the groups always ran better and were less stressful and more immersive if the other players understood this and the DM enforced it.
As a DM I always made this clear and things ran better because of this.
However.... I had enormous difficulty finding any kind of on-line group with the same appreciation - for some reason the line has always been very much more blurred and RP just seems to fall apart because of this.
EVE is now the only RPG I play, and I only still play it because I can just, IC, assume that anyone who makes any reference to OOC stuff outside OOC channels is just insane. Thus is my immersion maintained.
Ideally OOC is totally free and people should be able to plan provisional plots, express things thier chars might do, and well anything, without any fear of someone taking that IC.
The reality is that different people come to EVE with very different views on what constitutes acceptable behaviour, definitions of terms, general play, and so on.
I just try to learn how to play with the people I meet as I go along, aware of the dangers of my preconceptions of others.
I definately find that it pays to never speak OOC in chat unless I prefix it with OOC/ or something and if later someone is saying my char said or intended this or that I could say, "You are either mistaken, or you are, basically, cheating by using OOC info to enhance the knowledge of one of your chars"
I guess this is one reason why I am in a two man corp where both the people are me.... :roll:
-
IC/OOC divide is a gentlemans agreement and a handicap.
Most of the people in EVE do not enjoy handicaps or act in a way that could be considered gentlemanly.
-
This is all I am saying on the matter. I hope you are all incredibly pleased with yourselves.
Dude, nothing that happened was personal. You tried to screw my alliance over and I'm not taking it personally.
Ixiris beat you this time, but take it in your character's stride and work out a way to have vengeance. I haven't commented on it on IGS, because IC, Mammal feels it's beneath him.
What I am taking personal is the release of information that shouldn't have been released that led to my having to remove my corp from Star Fraction ranks.
Nothing had happened yet, but mainly because of the shit storm that followed, I had to leave and essentially left me with nowhere else to go. The fact that the person had an IC chat log and an OOC chat log referring to the same event, but the person went with the OOC one shows it was personal, because the OOC log was when I was with SF. Otherwise, there's no reason not to publish the IC log.
-
What I am taking personal is the release of information that shouldn't have been released that led to my having to remove my corp from Star Fraction ranks.
Nothing had happened yet, but mainly because of the shit storm that followed, I had to leave and essentially left me with nowhere else to go. The fact that the person had an IC chat log and an OOC chat log referring to the same event, but the person went with the OOC one shows it was personal, because the OOC log was when I was with SF. Otherwise, there's no reason not to publish the IC log.
Yeah, that probably sucks for your character and stuff, but don't think we're all against you OOC. Lots of people hate SF, IC and OOC, so that has more to do with the reaction than anything else.
-
They say you consent to PvP in EVE when you undock.
I say you consent to metagaming when you sign up for an account. Nothing is truly OOC if it has to do with what happens in the client. This is why many corps have stringent admission and opsec policies and why you can never truly trust anything in New Eden. It's part of the charm. I think it requires you to think and act IC more than you usually might and perhaps even enriches the RP environment and reinforces the grim atmosphere of high stakes corporate/military competition in EVE.
As for the spark that lit this fire... So you tried a gambit and it failed. Okay. That stinks, Alex.
(http://img265.imageshack.us/img265/4766/notawinner.png)
Happens all the time.
Enjoy your soda. Buy another and please play again.
-
:roll:
It happens, would have been interesting to see how it turned out in the end.
-
It's no worries. I'm over it.
Since there's really nowhere else for my character to go, I'm dropping the RP bit altogether and going back to 0.0. It was entertaining of nothing else.
-
Since there's really nowhere else for my character to go, I'm dropping the RP bit altogether and going back to 0.0. It was entertaining of nothing else.
My suggestion is not to shelve the entire charater, but lay low and concentrate on some of the in space stuff. use the time to develop the charater in light of the recent storm and look at what RP you can do that compliments you in space actions.
Maybe plot some truly epic revenge on those who ridiculed you (IC of course).
You have a fairly entertaining, and somewhat unique in the RP scene, charater. It will be a shame to never see him again.
-
Well seeing as how there's not many places in the RP community I really want to go to, there's really no place to develop. I'm going to TEST and I'm gonna kill shit with my old brosefs for a while.
Who knows, maybe I'll let shit calm down and come back. The big thing is that RP is secondary to my enjoying the game. I'm not going to join a place because it fits my character, I'm going to join it because I want to be there. I figure out what I want to do and where I want to go and I RP to make it make sense.
-
That is pretty much my approach.
-
Yeah, that probably sucks for your character and stuff, but don't think we're all against you OOC. Lots of people hate SF, IC and OOC, so that has more to do with the reaction than anything else.
This. Casiella-c can't stand Jade Constantine for many reasons, mostly for being a public blowhard who seems more in love with violence than with the actual motivating ideology, where they're closer than either would admit.
Casiella-p thinks SF looks like a fun organization, and while Jade does get a tad verbose, has no sort of animus toward Jade or SF overall, because that would be ridiculous.
-
Yeah, that probably sucks for your character and stuff, but don't think we're all against you OOC. Lots of people hate SF, IC and OOC, so that has more to do with the reaction than anything else.
If people in a game hates me OOC for my ingame imaginary views in an imaginary organisation then I pity them and hope they seek the help of mental health professionals.
On the IC/OOC divide my view is that if you're in doubt you ask your counterpart. If the answer to that question is unsatisfactory you cut the conversation short and figure out another way of doing whatever you planned to.
-
I don't know how you get much more clear than saying at the beginning (( ooc please if you don't mind ))
-
If you contact someone OOC and arrange to do something in-game that would have in-character consequences, then it can be assumed that an IC conversation took place as well, since otherwise how would the arranged something actually happen?
Having said that, CAOD might in theory be a more appropriate place to post OOC logs etc. But then again, does anyone really want to see what would have happened if Andreus had made his post there and not IGS?
-
The entire point that is being missed is that:
There was an IC chat log and an OOC chat log regarding the exact same event, but the OOC logs were posted in lieu of the IC ones. If you want to slap my name up and say, "Hey look! He's trying to spy!", use the IC logs, not the OOC ones.
I don't understand how this is such a difficult concept to understand
-
If you want IC logs, it's your fault for not having an IC convo. If you aren't a part of the convo IC, expression of your knowledge is metagaming. If you are indirectly involved, put on your creativity hat and come up with some RP.
OOC channels are sacred, so are ((brackets)) and priv convos or evemails with an OOC disclaimer. CCP agrees. If you post logs from any of these onto IGS, CCP mods will delete it.
Pretty clear cut and dry.
-
It's even as simple as using the "Someone needs to get laid" remark IC.
Seriphyn is the LAST person you would use such an insult again, I can't help but think it's directed towards the player.
Besides, people refer to Seriphyn as "you", and can't make the distinction between me and my character.
Overall I think people are pretty sucky at keeping the divide, including myself.
-
Overall I think people are pretty sucky at keeping the divide, including myself.
This is true across games, communities, and generations. RPers generally have far more difficulty with IC vs OOC than any of us would like to admit, including about ourselves.
-
I'm going to hope this doesn't just add fuel to fires, but I feel like I might as well add to the discussion...
There's always going to be a connection between IC and OOC events and chat. The only thing that really changes is the extent, strength, and breadth of the connection. Most of the time, its relatively thin.
The problem is that if you openly admit, "my character is a pathological liar and an opportunistic backbiter," I, and probably everyone else in the RP community, will keep that in mind when dealing with you. My character, and probably everyone else's, will regard yours with caution. Anything they say will be filtered through the knowledge that it's probably a lie. This isn't to suggest we're purposefully trying to break the fourth wall. The problem is, if I/we know your character is capable and willing to betray me/us for their own gains, its going to be hard to say, discuss personal matters; I/we don't WANT my/our characters to get screwed.
Similarly, if you show yourself as a pathological liar and an opportunistic backbiter, the OOC side of the players you're dealing with goes on the defensive. Because they, like their characters, know you're willing to betray them for your own gains, and don't want to get screwed over; moreso, because that affects THEM, not their character.
So, there's the problem as I see it. We may not be our characters, but we certainly care enough about them not to let someone ICly or OOCly cut our throats or theirs.
-
So, there's the problem as I see it. We may not be our characters, but we certainly care enough about them not to let someone ICly or OOCly cut our throats or theirs.
Have you met Vieve? ;) <3
-
Have you met Vieve? ;) <3
I might be misremembering, but wasn't it her spine and not her throat?
-
Have you met Vieve? ;) <3
I might be misremembering, but wasn't it her spine and not her throat?
Which time?
Er.
Nevermind. Yeah, it was spine. Throat may have been after that, but I don't remember. Stupid characters and their stupid assassinations and my stupid brain that keeps forgetting stuff and having to look it up in stupid notes.
But I think we're getting off the topic!
-
I'm going to hope this doesn't just add fuel to fires, but I feel like I might as well add to the discussion...
There's always going to be a connection between IC and OOC events and chat. The only thing that really changes is the extent, strength, and breadth of the connection. Most of the time, its relatively thin.
The problem is that if you openly admit, "my character is a pathological liar and an opportunistic backbiter," I, and probably everyone else in the RP community, will keep that in mind when dealing with you. My character, and probably everyone else's, will regard yours with caution. Anything they say will be filtered through the knowledge that it's probably a lie. This isn't to suggest we're purposefully trying to break the fourth wall. The problem is, if I/we know your character is capable and willing to betray me/us for their own gains, its going to be hard to say, discuss personal matters; I/we don't WANT my/our characters to get screwed.
Similarly, if you show yourself as a pathological liar and an opportunistic backbiter, the OOC side of the players you're dealing with goes on the defensive. Because they, like their characters, know you're willing to betray them for your own gains, and don't want to get screwed over; moreso, because that affects THEM, not their character.
So, there's the problem as I see it. We may not be our characters, but we certainly care enough about them not to let someone ICly or OOCly cut our throats or theirs.
Yes, and herein lies the difference between RPG's IRL and MMOrpg'S, especially EVE.
IRL, the enjoyment of the immersion in what is basically an internal world, and sharing that experience with others in an RP environment, is important enough that wanting your player 'to win', well is not even part of the objective. In fact it becomes counter productive to the consensus goal of the game (to have fun by mutual immersion in an RPG).
In EVE, it seems almost the norm that the opposite is held true, that wanting your char to 'win' is more important than RP immersion and mutual enjoyment - this turns into wanting to 'win' as a player at cost of RP and immersion, and then in my mind the char just transforms into a sad little puppet to a players insecurity. Immersion is ruined
In an IRL RPG, wanting your char 'to win' and good mutual roleplay immersion have been, in my experience and I am sure a lot of others, mutally incompatible, because part of what makes RP fun is the successful putting aside of your IRL shit, and substituting it for the shit of some fantastically cool (or whatever) imaginary person.
Obviously I don't mean that in RL RP people don't want their chars to succeed, they may often compete with each other to the point of death, or the death of universes, I mean that they are not in competition with the other PLAYERS, so it becomes a bit antisosial to suddenly try to use OOC info to 'win' (although some sociopaths do seem to find this compelling).
On the other hand, in EVE - because of the nature of the game and also the medium through which it is played, it is not so blatantly sociopathic to compete with the other PLAYERS, and so is more acceptable to metagame, or use OOC info to 'win' IC.
For a lot of people, RPing simply means competing with the other players while pretending to be a toon.
For old-skool RP'ers, like me, this comes as a nasty surprise and it is difficult (but important) to remember that they are just playing a different game to you.
That is why the requirements for my corp are pretty much 'anything goes as long as the OOC/IC line isn't crossed' - because that is more important to me than 'winning' - I have learned I am in the minority with this though....
-
I'm going to hope this doesn't just add fuel to fires, but I feel like I might as well add to the discussion...
There's always going to be a connection between IC and OOC events and chat. The only thing that really changes is the extent, strength, and breadth of the connection. Most of the time, its relatively thin.
The problem is that if you openly admit, "my character is a pathological liar and an opportunistic backbiter," I, and probably everyone else in the RP community, will keep that in mind when dealing with you. My character, and probably everyone else's, will regard yours with caution. Anything they say will be filtered through the knowledge that it's probably a lie. This isn't to suggest we're purposefully trying to break the fourth wall. The problem is, if I/we know your character is capable and willing to betray me/us for their own gains, its going to be hard to say, discuss personal matters; I/we don't WANT my/our characters to get screwed.
Similarly, if you show yourself as a pathological liar and an opportunistic backbiter, the OOC side of the players you're dealing with goes on the defensive. Because they, like their characters, know you're willing to betray them for your own gains, and don't want to get screwed over; moreso, because that affects THEM, not their character.
So, there's the problem as I see it. We may not be our characters, but we certainly care enough about them not to let someone ICly or OOCly cut our throats or theirs.
Yes, and herein lies the difference between RPG's IRL and MMOrpg'S, especially EVE.
IRL, the enjoyment of the immersion in what is basically an internal world, and sharing that experience with others in an RP environment, is important enough that wanting your player 'to win', well is not even part of the objective. In fact it becomes counter productive to the consensus goal of the game (to have fun by mutual immersion in an RPG).
In EVE, it seems almost the norm that the opposite is held true, that wanting your char to 'win' is more important than RP immersion and mutual enjoyment - this turns into wanting to 'win' as a player at cost of RP and immersion, and then in my mind the char just transforms into a sad little puppet to a players insecurity. Immersion is ruined
In an IRL RPG, wanting your char 'to win' and good mutual roleplay immersion have been, in my experience and I am sure a lot of others, mutally incompatible, because part of what makes RP fun is the successful putting aside of your IRL shit, and substituting it for the shit of some fantastically cool (or whatever) imaginary person.
Obviously I don't mean that in RL RP people don't want their chars to succeed, they may often compete with each other to the point of death, or the death of universes, I mean that they are not in competition with the other PLAYERS, so it becomes a bit antisosial to suddenly try to use OOC info to 'win' (although some sociopaths do seem to find this compelling).
On the other hand, in EVE - because of the nature of the game and also the medium through which it is played, it is not so blatantly sociopathic to compete with the other PLAYERS, and so is more acceptable to metagame, or use OOC info to 'win' IC.
For a lot of people, RPing simply means competing with the other players while pretending to be a toon.
For old-skool RP'ers, like me, this comes as a nasty surprise and it is difficult (but important) to remember that they are just playing a different game to you.
That is why the requirements for my corp are pretty much 'anything goes as long as the OOC/IC line isn't crossed' - because that is more important to me than 'winning' - I have learned I am in the minority with this though....
The difference is that tabletop RPGs are normally co-operative in nature. If one player acheives something, then all of the players benefit.
Eve on the other hand is competitive - if your character is to be successful in any meaningful way then it generally means that someone else's character will be unsuccessful.
-
And that is indeed the conundrum.
I'm still confused why we're still having this discussion, however. The convo in question was an effort to generate an IC agreement/cooperative effort to infiltrate and/or destroy an In-character organization and set of peaceful relationships.
Saying it was an OOC convo is a red herring. It's representative, intentionally or not, of angling going on in-character in an effort to generate bad blood.
Thus, it must and can be dealt with in-character.
-
I fail to see how it is a conundrum. One can be competitive and still be amicable with their opponents.
-
Selling T2 hardware to others at competitive prices is win-win in my book ;)
Taking this from the reverse approach, lets assume the discussion was entirely OOC and just some musings between to friends who are players (potentially even plotting).
Now, if I am a player who has invested time and effort into the ILF, MXD, or I-RED (in my case LDIS); my time, effort, and product is under threat OOC. Characters do not build these entities and organizations, players do. Destroying my ship and my pod is fine (very IC), plotting how you the player are going to utilize alts ("agents") and infiltrate and destroy the organization I have built is different from destroying all the organization's assets.
What do you propose the appropriate OOC action is?
Should the player with the OOC Intel send a mail to the plotter and say "Really would like it if you just stayed out of our affairs"?
The response is likely to be "This is Eve, it is non-consensual PvP, oh and by the way, your characters don't know about it!"
At this point, I am going to go ahead and assume that my organization is going to have an OOC security situation and all the characters in it are extensions of their players. RP is out the window in order to ensure the security of what I and those around me have built. The announcement on IGS is "my organization is removing itself from these IC/OOC ROEs and playing the game like the other 95% of larger community."
-
OT: Let's not forget that, in EVE at least (and to varying degrees in other games), roleplayers do things besides drink in bars, as difficult as some folks might find that to believe. ;) We play the game, too, and we (mostly) do so IC. That means that roleplay isn't something we do apart from our gameplay; instead, we use it to add flavor to something we already like.
RP is the marinade for my MMOG steak.
-
What you're missing is that the question isn't if the information should have been released..
ITS THAT THE IC CONVERSATION SHOULD HAVE BEEN USED
I really don't know how to be any clearer
-
I don't believe its a discussion that can be had under the backstage forum rules but I would encourage people interested in just how far the IC/OOC divide can be stretched to come and get involved in the Chatsubo topic I just posted in regard to something I saw earlier today.
http://www.eve-chatsubo.com/phpBB3/viewtopic.php?f=25&t=5628&start=0 (http://www.eve-chatsubo.com/phpBB3/viewtopic.php?f=25&t=5628&start=0)
Obviously do not discuss this topic on Backstage. My link is so people can talk about the issue on the appropriate forum.
-
[mod]I'm putting up the same thing here I put in the other thread:If you can't address this issue here and stay in the guidelines, don't address it at all. Further moderator action here has a very good chance of resulting in warnings.[/mod]
-
I don't believe its a discussion that can be had under the backstage forum rules but I would encourage people interested in just how far the IC/OOC divide can be stretched to come and get involved in the Chatsubo topic I just posted in regard to something I saw earlier today.
http://www.eve-chatsubo.com/phpBB3/viewtopic.php?f=25&t=5628&start=0 (http://www.eve-chatsubo.com/phpBB3/viewtopic.php?f=25&t=5628&start=0)
Obviously do not discuss this topic on Backstage. My link is so people can talk about the issue on the appropriate forum.
Interesting example of exactly what we are discussing here, shows how crossing the IC/OOC line is a slippery slope for some people, even if it seems trivial in most cases.
One of the reasons the IC/OOC line is important is that IC we do or say things that would be completely hutful, immoral or illegal but it is ok because it is
a. pretend and
b. intended in the spirit of mutual fun.
Once the line begins to be crossed then those with experience stand back and say 'this is probaly gonna end in tears', while just letting the 'lol it is just internets,' people learn from the experience.
Anyone who has watched children play for any length of time regularly sees what happens when games turn into conflict when one childs imaginary loss turns into pinching and punching, and crying. It is the same dynamic - losing perspective. As an adult, intervene too heavily and you spoil their fun, intervene not at all and people get hurt. I guess that is part of the reason for the moderator heavy slant of this forum, unfortunate that it seems to be necesarry.
Ho Hum.
-
I'm putting up the same thing here I put in the other thread:
If you can't address this issue here and stay in the guidelines, don't address it at all. Further moderator action here has a very good chance of resulting in warnings.
Just to clarify. I knew that discussion of this issue would be impossible within backstage guidelines - I was trying to respect your rules here by pointing to a venue where it could be logically and openly discussed. Is it actually against the backstage rules to suggest that the users of this forum could use another venue to talk about something important to our interests as a community and thus saving the moderation team here the necessity of unneccessary work?
-
I'm putting up the same thing here I put in the other thread:
If you can't address this issue here and stay in the guidelines, don't address it at all. Further moderator action here has a very good chance of resulting in warnings.
Just to clarify. I knew that discussion of this issue would be impossible within backstage guidelines - I was trying to respect your rules here by pointing to a venue where it could be logically and openly discussed. Is it actually against the backstage rules to suggest that the users of this forum could use another venue to talk about something important to our interests as a community and thus saving the moderation team here the necessity of unneccessary work?
I think he was warning people to not bring that debate here but instead keep it on Chatsubo as he pretty clearly stated "If you can't have this debate here, don't." with the implication of "Have it somewhere else, like for instance where the link goes".
Don't be so defensive! :D
[mod]a comment relating to a removed comment was removed[/mod]
-
Fair enough, if I misunderstood his comment no problems.
-
The thread on the specific matter of webhosting is closed, but I found on Chatsubo that I had some more things to say on the matter, and as it applies across the entire IC/OoC divide debate, I'd like to copypaste it here.
Let's out of the blue take some other examples, completely disconnected from RP. Clear your mind of RP, and think pure Eve Online competitive gameplay:
Phallic Symbol Alliance use a webserver to host their propaganda pictures of what is clearly compensating imagery in their own personal server. They post on CAOD or wherever, and use said links ingame too for that matter. There's overall fun to be had, and they post both their internal plans/documents along with the public propaganda on said server.
Glory Hole Alliance does not. They use tinypic or another public hosting that effectively randomize urls to a point where no connection can be made, except by the one doing the hosting for the alliance. His pictures of Thoraxes flying into jumpgates with humorous subtext are all obviously connected but only by content.
Now, PSA have a dastardly plan. They want to plunge into the Glory Hole Alliance, penetrate their security and wrest victory from the tender nether regions of GHA by using alts. Alts made solely for infiltrating and sabotaging the enemy. The PHA knows that the GHA really likes certain imagery, so they even have the alt make a fabulous picture of a Phobos bumping a mothership, with fantastic subtext, but they screw up. They host it on their own webserver. GHA spots that the picture is hosted on the same private server as PSA's own propaganda.
Le Gasp.
The violation was nipped in the bud.
Now, :opsec: is something we all know. It's something we all use in an Alliance vs Alliance or Eve (Everyone versus Everyone) setting. We keep plans to ourselves, and away from enemy eyes. Getting intel on the enemy is vital. I have personally obtained rather juicy intel on a few corporations I'm considering wardeccing, and I know I have kept my own stuff to myself.
Why should RP be any different? Yes, there's various views on this matter. Yes, different people will decide on different places to draw the line. I will respect that some choose one place, different than where I draw my own, but that also means I will still abide by my line and not one that doesn't make as much sense to me. Just as I expect the others to abide by what they have chosen, regardless of how I may feel about it. I believe the term 'non-consensual RP' is tossed around a lot on this board, or at least it used to be.
I know people won't follow my rules of engagement when it comes to RP. I act accordingly. I secure my 'intel', because even though I may not have acted upon it, someone sure as hell will. Maybe you wouldn't act on finding some kind of intel on me, but maybe I would act on it if I found it on you.
You don't want your webhosting server connecting two separate characters? Don't use the same server for both. You don't want your enemies using this intel against you? Deny them from ever getting it.
RPers don't get special treatment from non-RPers. If you give Non-RPers intel in what you consider OoC fashion, they'll use it against you. I don't see why RPers should do any different. Don't want these negative consequences? Don't give them the option.
Tinypic. (http://tinypic.com/)
Learn to love it.
The point is... IC and OoC may be separate... but you'll never find a universal agreement on where to draw the line. Never. There will be a thousand people who are far stricter on separating IC/OoC than you are. There will be a thousand people who are far more lax in what they will use and what they won't.
No matter where you are, and where you draw the line... the solution is ridiculously easy. If you don't want the information used by less scrupulous people than you... Don't bloody give them the information. Trust the people you trust... don't trust the general public. Someone there will fuck you over if given the opportunity.
Seriously... why the hell should roleplayers have immunity from that when normal players never did?
-
No matter where you are, and where you draw the line... the solution is ridiculously easy. If you don't want the information used by less scrupulous people than you... Don't bloody give them the information. Trust the people you trust... don't trust the general public. Someone there will fuck you over if given the opportunity.
(emphasis mine on the bold/underline)
Okay I'm not sure I am understanding this in context and I apologize in advance if I am. But can you clarify your statement in the context of the recent ooc webserver info as IC RP thread (again I'm not sure if we are allowed to address the subject of a closed thread here but if not please delete these posts by all means.)
Are you saying that you think (in this instance.) that the player of a character who used the ooc website links to make an IC point is less scrupulous than the player who simply presented an IC character as separate from another IC character without going to the bother of using a separate webserver?
I'm really not trying to put words in your mouth. I would like a clarification so I understand what it is you are saying and I fully admit and publicly declare I might well have misunderstood you.
-
My apologies. The one connecting the dots and using information that's not universally recognized as IC information (even if he considers it to be), is of course the one with the least scruples. Least limiting IC/OoC divide choice. Some may say less principled RPer.
The point I was trying to make is that if you want people who may not play by the same rules as you do to not use information trails against you... don't leave said information trails behind.
... that's like a triple negative, isn't it? Screw it, I'm tired. I may fix this trainwreck tomorrow.
-
If you don't want information you consider confidential about, don't give it away in any shape or form.
I avoid reading blogs. Why? Because people tend to write personal secrets in them. What if a fellow corp member writes on his blog that he is going to betray me. What should I do? I mean, obviously I should ignore this information IC, but my brain simply doesn't work that way, the very knowledge that the character is going to betray me will color his or her IC actions differently from that point on. I can honestly not tell anymore if I would have picked up some hints of betrayal IC without having read the blog, because the OOC info is affecting my vision. Just imagine watching the Sixth Sense for the first time after someone else has told you the clue. No matter how hard you try, your viewing of the movie will be very much affected by that knowledge.
Once you know Rosalund Shaw is a Jade alt, you simply cannot look at her anymore without bias. That means that if you want to keep your alt and connection secret as a player, you should take every effort to avoid having OOC about. Even if I wouldn't use a connection like an image on the same private server as IC evidence, realizing that is the image is on the same server OOC would still spoil my IC interaction with the character.
If you put info into an OOC channel, and that info can be linked to IC actions or motivations, you cannot use the OOC/IC divide as a shield anymore in a nonconsensual game of players with different standards for IC/OOC. You should simply ask yourself, could a non-RP misuse this information and go with that.
-
If you don't want information you consider confidential about, don't give it away in any shape or form.
I avoid reading blogs. Why? Because people tend to write personal secrets in them. What if a fellow corp member writes on his blog that he is going to betray me. What should I do? I mean, obviously I should ignore this information IC, but my brain simply doesn't work that way, the very knowledge that the character is going to betray me will color his or her IC actions differently from that point on. I can honestly not tell anymore if I would have picked up some hints of betrayal IC without having read the blog, because the OOC info is affecting my vision. Just imagine watching the Sixth Sense for the first time after someone else has told you the clue. No matter how hard you try, your viewing of the movie will be very much affected by that knowledge.
Once you know Rosalund Shaw is a Jade alt, you simply cannot look at her anymore without bias. That means that if you want to keep your alt and connection secret as a player, you should take every effort to avoid having OOC about. Even if I wouldn't use a connection like an image on the same private server as IC evidence, realizing that is the image is on the same server OOC would still spoil my IC interaction with the character.
If you put info into an OOC channel, and that info can be linked to IC actions or motivations, you cannot use the OOC/IC divide as a shield anymore in a nonconsensual game of players with different standards for IC/OOC. You should simply ask yourself, could a non-RP misuse this information and go with that.
Excellent perspective and advice, I think I will bear this in mind.
For a long time I avoided any kind of RP forum or website related to EVE because I was familiar from my own experience of getting involved in modding communities for single player games, how my immersion was ruined and in the end I stopped enjoying playing the game and just got off on the modding challenges. Maintaining the IC/OOC divide is hard, as you say, even for single player RPG's if you aren't careful.
I was afraid the same thing might happen with EVE, but in the end I just got so bored with the fact that I was finding no RP opportunities I finally joined chatsubo.
But then from lurking there and IGS it seemed that the dangers (from an RP Immersion point of view) of getting involoved OOC, or even IC were just not worth it, even if tht did mean playing a solitary type.
Then I read the mission statement of this forum and thought, what the hell, I may as well say Hi!
More potentially to gain than to lose.
Your advice on the reality of the situation is lucid and helpful.
-
An entertaining read at the very least.
All this talk of ic/ooc divides and srs biznss makes me wonder if there's still any room for fun and engaging interaction. :ugh:
-
If you don't want information you consider confidential about, don't give it away in any shape or form.
I avoid reading blogs. Why? Because people tend to write personal secrets in them. What if a fellow corp member writes on his blog that he is going to betray me. What should I do? I mean, obviously I should ignore this information IC, but my brain simply doesn't work that way, the very knowledge that the character is going to betray me will color his or her IC actions differently from that point on. I can honestly not tell anymore if I would have picked up some hints of betrayal IC without having read the blog, because the OOC info is affecting my vision. Just imagine watching the Sixth Sense for the first time after someone else has told you the clue. No matter how hard you try, your viewing of the movie will be very much affected by that knowledge.
Once you know Rosalund Shaw is a Jade alt, you simply cannot look at her anymore without bias. That means that if you want to keep your alt and connection secret as a player, you should take every effort to avoid having OOC about. Even if I wouldn't use a connection like an image on the same private server as IC evidence, realizing that is the image is on the same server OOC would still spoil my IC interaction with the character.
If you put info into an OOC channel, and that info can be linked to IC actions or motivations, you cannot use the OOC/IC divide as a shield anymore in a nonconsensual game of players with different standards for IC/OOC. You should simply ask yourself, could a non-RP misuse this information and go with that.
Good point, well made.
-
[mod]Off-topic posts removed. If there are posts that are off-topic, please report them rather than responding and saying 'this is off-topic'. This is also not the place for the airing of personal, OOC conflicts. I would suggest PMs, or another venue. [/mod]
-
[mod]Hostile, flamebait, strawman[/mod]
-
[mod]Responding to flamebait, attacking other player's point without constructive suggestion[/mod]
-
[mod]Thread locked, will remain locked. The tone of discussion has gone as far downhill as I'm prepared to let it. [/mod]