An Elitist's View on Crashing

[Blyaunte]

i believe you are the one comparing runescape monster spawns to real life.

 

No - I am comparing social behaviour at said spots with social behaviour in the outside world.

[Troacctid]

But in a perfect world it wouldn't. Should we help towards a better society than say it sucks and be with it? If you do the second, surely you are the tool. However, this is getting rather off topic (if you want to talk about society as a whole, use the Off-topic forum)

 

 

ideally yes. but the only realistic solutions to this issue, which we have already discussed, involve changing game mechanics, and jagex is highly unlikely to do so or care.

 

Your mother never taught you "sharing"? :rolleyes:

 

she did. then my dad taught me to think as well.

 

OT: to expect everyone to share is just unrealistic in this situation. why don't we all share houses, for example?

 

I see -- and your father taught you what, exactly? How to claw away at other children in order that you can attain the top of the crap heap?

 

Food, shelter, clothing -- these are the essentials of life. They can all be shared, and often are, given certain circumstances within the social environment.

 

Really -- are you comparing a compilation of pixels with the essentials of life? Do these pixels REALLY mean that much to you?

 

If so -- I think you REALLY need to re-consider your values. No. Really.

We're not here to say that sharing is bad. There's no need to respond as if your moral values are under attack.

[Bladewing]

i believe you are the one comparing runescape monster spawns to real life.

 

No - I am comparing social behaviour at said spots with social behaviour in the outside world.

which is ridiculous - imagine if i told you to stop shooting people in call of duty because it's antisocial.

 

hint: it's not antisocial to shoot people IN CALL OF DUTY. in real life it is because the social norm is to not shoot people. in call of duty the social norm is to shoot people. in runescape the social norm is to kill monsters.

[Blyaunte]

But in a perfect world it wouldn't. Should we help towards a better society than say it sucks and be with it? If you do the second, surely you are the tool. However, this is getting rather off topic (if you want to talk about society as a whole, use the Off-topic forum)

 

 

ideally yes. but the only realistic solutions to this issue, which we have already discussed, involve changing game mechanics, and jagex is highly unlikely to do so or care.

 

Your mother never taught you "sharing"? :rolleyes:

 

she did. then my dad taught me to think as well.

 

OT: to expect everyone to share is just unrealistic in this situation. why don't we all share houses, for example?

 

I see -- and your father taught you what, exactly? How to claw away at other children in order that you can attain the top of the crap heap?

 

Food, shelter, clothing -- these are the essentials of life. They can all be shared, and often are, given certain circumstances within the social environment.

 

Really -- are you comparing a compilation of pixels with the essentials of life? Do these pixels REALLY mean that much to you?

 

If so -- I think you REALLY need to re-consider your values. No. Really.

We're not here to say that sharing is bad. There's no need to respond as if your moral values are under attack.

 

Oh trust me -- I am not worried about my "moral values".

 

I am, however, worried in the interesting trends I see within our so-called "civilization" -- i.e. that thin veneer of decency that the vast majority of humanity pretends to put on, and then gleefully peels away whenever they think no one is watching. :unsure:

 

You know -- like when they're playing games on the internet ... <_<

[Blyaunte]

i believe you are the one comparing runescape monster spawns to real life.

 

No - I am comparing social behaviour at said spots with social behaviour in the outside world.

which is ridiculous - imagine if i told you to stop shooting people in call of duty because it's antisocial.

 

hint: it's not antisocial to shoot people IN CALL OF DUTY. in real life it is because the social norm is to not shoot people. in call of duty the social norm is to shoot people. in runescape the social norm is to kill monsters.

 

LOL -- you're missing the point. Either that or you're deliberately mis-directing the point, which amounts to the same thing.

 

Start again.

[Obtaurian]

If people would just read the thread, we wouldn't be having this discussion right now. I don't even want to get involved in this one. It's yet another fundamental misunderstanding of WHY people crash. It has absolutely nothing to do with morals and everything to do with there being two or three players fighting over Graar on EVERY non-LS world. Blame Jagex for throwing a single steak to a thousand starving players.

[Troacctid]

Oh trust me -- I am not worried about my "moral values".

 

I am, however, worried in the interesting trends I see within our so-called "civilization" -- i.e. that thin veneer of decency that the vast majority of humanity pretends to put on, and then gleefully peels away whenever they think no one is watching. :unsure:

Cool philosophy bro. If you're gonna be ranting about the inner beast within us all, how about you take it to Off-Topic, though. :shades:

[Quyneax]

Oh trust me -- I am not worried about my "moral values".

 

I am, however, worried in the interesting trends I see within our so-called "civilization" -- i.e. that thin veneer of decency that the vast majority of humanity pretends to put on, and then gleefully peels away whenever they think no one is watching. :unsure:

Indeed it rather sounds like you think you're quite something that you have penetrated this veneer to see the true nature of mankind. Did you think that that all yourself? Or are you just the next person to complain about how society/mankind are degrading? Because I can tell you, if you do a small historical survey, you'll find that the Romans already had this sort of thinking; there has always been that kind of sentiment. And I think we haven't really degraded as much as you'd expect if such doomthinking were actually to be a decent prediction of morality in the future.

 

LOL -- you're missing the point. Either that or you're deliberately mis-directing the point, which amounts to the same thing.

 

Start again.

He is not missing the point. You compare behaviour (social behaviour, even, how wonderful) in RS to behaviour in (non-RS) life. The behaviour is different. From this you somehow conclude the behaviour in RS is wrong? What you forget is that what you are simulated to do in RS is not the same as doing that IRL. Killing a person in RS is not the same as killing a person IRL. That goes for all actions performed. Even namecalling in RS is not the same as namecalling IRL (for one, you don't use your vocal chords). So you may think that crashing in RS is as bad as crashing IRL, but that is your opinion. In no way can you conclude that because someone thinks crashing IRL is bad, they must logically believe it is bad in RS as well.

 

Deliberately mis-directing the point also does not amount to accidentally missing the point, but w/e.

[Pluckey]

Although manners in this game are horrid.

 

 

 

When it comes to bosses,

 

 

I am a believer in the "Survival of the fittest" theory.

 

 

Meaning, When you get the maxed stats you are able to kill them more efficiently.

 

 

Do you see me complaining that I always get crashed when I go to bosses?

 

The answer is: No. I simply look for a uncrowded world. They have the better stats, They get the spot.

 

 

Not that I boss hunt anyways. I have bad luck when it comes to drops.

[stonewall337]

Was watching a movie when my girlfriend said, "Lol, these two guys are trying to crash me at TDs." So I hopped on the other PC, grabbed a full inventory of Saradomin Brews and a few Prayer Potions and went and grabbed every TD in the world and brought them over.

 

Now the funny thing is they immediately said, "Nice lifes" (Good spelling / grammar to begin with). They sat there for a half hour to an hour saying, "Makes more sense for one to hop then two."

 

So my opinion is this:

In worlds were crashing is a must, that's fine. If I'm at Bandos and people stronger then me with chaotics come in, I understand and I leave. But at TDs where there is always an open world, lootshare or not, crashing is just being an arrogant [bleep].

 

:). They learned their lesson when they almost died multiple times. ^^. They didn't even hop... They sat there so long their unicorns left and they had to restock. Haha! Not that I cared, I was watching a movie while AFKing. =).

 

crashing should only be done if you are the strongest. To a lower level/undergeared player its a waste of time to crash someone stronger then you.

 

That's pure and utter BS and you know it. Crashing seldom has anything to do with whether someone is higher level or better equipped. It entirely comes down to whether someone has a faster computer with a better connection.

 

Either way - it's plain rude.

 

Tired of these opinions. Prove it, make an arguement, but don't just say "OMG U SO ROOD"

 

Prove it.

[Blyaunte]

Oh trust me -- I am not worried about my "moral values".

 

I am, however, worried in the interesting trends I see within our so-called "civilization" -- i.e. that thin veneer of decency that the vast majority of humanity pretends to put on, and then gleefully peels away whenever they think no one is watching. :unsure:

Indeed it rather sounds like you think you're quite something that you have penetrated this veneer to see the true nature of mankind. Did you think that that all yourself? Or are you just the next person to complain about how society/mankind are degrading? Because I can tell you, if you do a small historical survey, you'll find that the Romans already had this sort of thinking; there has always been that kind of sentiment. And I think we haven't really degraded as much as you'd expect if such doomthinking were actually to be a decent prediction of morality in the future.

 

Yes, I am very well acquainted with the complaints and subsequent philosophies of the ancients. Plato, himself, in The Republic spoke of the woes befalling his own society and sought to find a manner in which he could create a "just society".

 

It is interesting to likewise note that, in Leviathan, Hobbes indicated that, given human nature to squabble over the limited resources presented to itself, the quality of human life without a social order was "cruel, brutish and short", and that the only way to maintain a decent quality of life for everyone was to form a "commonwealth", in which all of the members of society shared the benefits.

 

Of course, while I will admit that it appears that I may taken this discussion "off topic", there is still one underlying factor here.

 

All of your excuses about being "stronger" and therefore taking priority over other weaker players are, of course, entirely perfect examples of anti-social behaviour and -- for the most part -- all of your very poor efforts at trying to explain why you feel entitled to behave in this manner only suffice to demonstrate:

 

1. The degree to which your anti-social behaviour has degraded; and

2. The extent to which you will exert your better efforts to not have to take responsibility for your anti-social activities.

 

In other words, the only effective argument that you have provided to endorse your bad behaviour is "neener neener".

 

You know, during a similar discussion on another forum, I once argued with someone that the average Western country currently lives, roughly, 72 hours away from total chaos. All it takes is 72 hours before people will degrade from law-abiding social beings, back to cave-man-like "take whatever I want" creatures of no social conscience whatsoever.

 

That is – if people living in, say, the United States, for example, were relieved of those services that maintain the "social order" within their society – and which keep one another away from each other's throats – they would reduce themselves to utter chaos within three (3) days.

 

That prediction was made roughly 18 months prior to the Katrina disaster. Within 72 hours of Katrina hitting the Gulf Coast, I was proven correct.

 

The next time a similar disaster hits somewhere in the Western world – and the people are declined the luxuries of life that enforce them to follow the social order – there will again be another explosion of chaos within 72 hours.

 

LOL -- you're missing the point. Either that or you're deliberately mis-directing the point, which amounts to the same thing.

 

Start again.

He is not missing the point. You compare behaviour (social behaviour, even, how wonderful) in RS to behaviour in (non-RS) life. The behaviour is different. From this you somehow conclude the behaviour in RS is wrong? What you forget is that what you are simulated to do in RS is not the same as doing that IRL. Killing a person in RS is not the same as killing a person IRL. That goes for all actions performed. Even namecalling in RS is not the same as namecalling IRL (for one, you don't use your vocal chords). So you may think that crashing in RS is as bad as crashing IRL, but that is your opinion. In no way can you conclude that because someone thinks crashing IRL is bad, they must logically believe it is bad in RS as well.

 

Deliberately mis-directing the point also does not amount to accidentally missing the point, but w/e.

 

Once again, all you're doing here is providing another excuse for poor social behaviour and saying that there is nothing that can, or should, be done about it.

 

Making excuses for bad behaviour – or explaining it in such a way as to make it seem more commonplace – does not an improvement make.

 

Don't you think that maybe, just maybe, it's time for people to actually take the contrary position to such behaviour with the intention of correcting or, at least, modifying said behaviour, with the eventual hope that such people could learn how to behave in any social environment?

 

:rolleyes:

[TheAncient]

Oddly, this person's pretentious, condescending patronization is far more rude, impolite, and annoying than dealing with a polite crasher... I mean really - getting crashed is actually not that bad if the person doesn't flame you for it. I don't mind hopping if I have to.

 

Citing plato etc. is kind of laffable. it doesn't make you look smart.

[Blyaunte]

Oddly, this person's pretentious, condescending patronization is far more rude, impolite, and annoying than dealing with a polite crasher... I mean really - getting crashed is actually not that bad if the person doesn't flame you for it. I don't mind hopping if I have to.

 

... slagging me for calling you on your anti-social behaviour isn't correcting your mistakes either ... :shame:

[Hedgehog]

I've learned in my years of Lincoln-Douglas style debating that morality is a common value that people hold, and that morality is a value that most hold on to strongly. Morality, however; cannot be defined as x or y. It's a fluid concept, as what's wrong in one situation may be acceptable in another.

 

Killing is immoral.

 

We all know that stabbing one's cousin is frowned upon, however that does not make the conjecture that killing is immoral true.

 

If someone went on a killing spree, is it wrong to kill them to prevent any future victims? Was it wrong that we attempted to kill Hitler? Was it wrong that we killed Suddam Hussein? Is it wrong to try to find Osama Bin Laden with the sole purpose of executing him?

 

Sharing is moral.

 

If a starving child asks you for a bite of pizza, is it wrong to deny them? Hell yes it is. However, if a player in a game asks you to share a green dragon spawn, is it wrong to deny them? Hell no it's not.

 

The key difference in the above paragraph is that we are talking about a game.

 

A game is a structured activity' date=' usually undertaken for enjoyment and sometimes used as an educational tool. Games are distinct from work, which is usually carried out for remuneration, and from art, which is more concerned with the expression of ideas.[/quote']

 

As you can see, a game is not real life. A game is neither a matter of life nor death, and therefore one cannot transfer any moral standards from a matter of life or death to a game.

 

Therefore, we can conclude that sharing is not necessarily the right thing to do in a game, and we can infer that killing is not the wrong thing to do either.

 

One could make a case that no one owns any property in a game and therefore all items and resources in said game are, in fact, public domain. However, this is not the case. One of the few principles from real life that transfer to an alternate reality is the principle that any object belongs to the being that is best able to control it. If a country wants an area of land, as has had happened countless times in history, in order to own it, they must express enough power to seize and maintain said area. If they have neither the strength nor the resources, then they would be overpowered by the opposition. The same holds true in Runescape. Whoever has the resources. namely maxed melees, overloads, chaotics, turmoil, etc., deserves to "crash" General Graardor. If said player wishes to share, then that's acceptable; however, it is comparable to Germany allowing Poland to "share" East Prussia.

 

One more question I would like to pose: Is it immoral to cater to your own wants before catering to someone else?

 

Quote Oxford Dictionaries:

noun

1. 
    
   
2. chiefly archaic a lack or deficiency of something:Victorian houses which are in want of repair it won't be through want of trying
   
3. the state of being poor and in need of essentials; poverty:freedom from want
   
4. a desire for something:the expression of our wants and desires
   

 

A player killing a boss wants money (or any other object that can be obtained from bosshunting, however none are needs).

 

If you kill a boss, it's because you want money.

 

In the most common case, you two would be pitted in a non-LS world, the only one with just 2 people. The two main options are to either A. Crash the other player or B. Be "nice" and leave the player to his or her self.

 

Seeing that I've already, for the most part, argued on behalf of option A, I'll focus on option B for now.

 

B indicates a complete sacrifice of one's own want, the want to earn money, for the want of another who is likely to be equally as (un)fortunate as you. And, in all honesty, to take this option would be insanity. There is no case, set anywhere or set in any time, to set a precedent for the action. No one would simply give all of their assets to another simply because they were asked.

 

You are not Jesus for not crashing.

 

You are not Jesus.

 

You are no benefactor of mankind for your generous actions.

 

You are only an eyesore to yourself and others.

 

You are not some morally-high Messiah for your actions in life.

 

You scream for a reprieve from the evils of the world, however you may just be the evil. You could be the own thorn twisting in your side.

 

Being nice is not always moral. Sometimes being nice can only harm yourself, and harming yourself is more immoral than preventing someone from killing a god damned pixel in a god damned game.

 

 

 

 

The above comments were directed at no one in particular.

[Blyaunte]

Perhaps some of you should become better acquainted with the notion of "Game Theory". :unsure:

 

Just sayin' ...

[Hedgehog]

Perhaps some of you should become better acquainted with the notion of "Game Theory". :unsure:

 

Just sayin' ...

 

That's really kinda meaningless.

 

Just sayin'...

[Bladewing]

Perhaps some of you should become better acquainted with the notion of "Game Theory". :unsure:

 

Just sayin' ...

i'll humor you

 

here's a payoff matrix for the following situation: player 138 and player 110 are in the bandos room in a non-lootshare world. player 138 always gets the kill if both of them are in the room together. player 138 alone kills graardor twice as fast as player 110 alone. together, player 138 kills 33% more graardors per hour. if either player leaves, it means that they go to an alternative money making method - gathering mort fungus (which is 1m/h).

 

 

as you can see, the 138 has a dominant strategy to stay in the room and kill graardors. a rational level 110 will leave, because he knows the 138 is going to stay - in which case his best strategy is to leave and go make 1m/h instead of making no money (actually losing because of supplies, but whatever).

 

i don't know what you're trying to prove. we all know that 138s stay and 110s hop - isn't that what this thread is about?

[Serpent Eye]

What's the difference between a lower leveled player and me?

An ego, and a false sense of entitlement.

 

I don't know why would assume that someone hasn't worked as hard as you for their equipment or levels just because they are different or lower than yours.

 

That solo mage that you have no qualms about crashing has probably been working his butt off to get to the point that they're at, and by boss hunting they are clearly trying to gain better stats, equipment, or the cash to help with both. You've ranted about people who aren't working to acheive stats like yours, but by crashing them you are denying them the chance to do the very thing you say they should be doing. How can any "low-level" person be expected to train their character up if other, more arrogant players don't allow them the space to?

[Bladewing]

no boss is good for training on, unless you consider frost dragons a boss

 

go train your stats the real way (hint: not 20k xp/h at bandos) if you want to have high stats. i use 30m gear at dks not counting divine - it's not like you need to kill bosses to make 30m lol.

[Serpent Eye]

no boss is good for training on, unless you consider frost dragons a boss

The concept is the same, more or less.

 

I would assume that people boss hunt for cash, and that lower-level player can very well turn around and use that cash to buy better equipment to help him train on more suitable monsters.

 

Edit:

 

go train your stats the real way (hint: not 20k xp/h at bandos) if you want to have high stats. i use 30m gear at dks not counting divine - it's not like you need to kill bosses to make 30m lol.

I just don't see how you can apply your method of gameplay to everyone else. There are countless people out there who don't know how to make money from skilling, and therefore rely on combat methods.

[TheAncient]

What's the difference between a lower leveled player and me?

An ego, and a false sense of entitlement.

 

I don't know why would assume that someone hasn't worked as hard as you for their equipment or levels just because they are different or lower than yours.

 

That solo mage that you have no qualms about crashing has probably been working his butt off to get to the point that they're at, and by boss hunting they are clearly trying to gain better stats, equipment, or the cash to help with both. You've ranted about people who aren't working to acheive stats like yours, but by crashing them you are denying them the chance to do the very thing you say they should be doing. How can any "low-level" person be expected to train their character up if other, more arrogant players don't allow them the space to?

 

This point was addressed a lot earlier in the thread. There are a lot of better alternative money makers - some which even train stats - for lower levels.

 

Furthermore, much of the equipment and gear you need is pretty easily obtainable without large sums of cash. "Good" gear such as Bandos, Spirit Shields, and Armadyl are actually unnecessary in many situations.

 

A good way to train and get money is slayer - it gives you combat xp, summoning xp, and cash that you can eventually put into prayer.

 

Herblore can be trained for a profit using weapon poison ++, with reasonable profit and low attention needed. Alternatively you could get good at reselling cleaned herbs for high xp an hour and profit.

 

I just don't see how you can apply your method of gameplay to everyone else. There are countless people out there who don't know how to make money from skilling, and therefore rely on combat methods.

This is really just a reflection of lack of research rather than inability.

[Serpent Eye]

This point was addressed a lot earlier in the thread. There are a lot of better alternative money makers - some which even train stats - for lower levels.

I agree with you that there are better alternative ways to making money. However, that doesn't mean that someone shouldn't or can't make money a slower, perhaps more inefficient way, does it?

[Golvellius]

i don't know what you're trying to prove. we all know that 138s stay and 110s hop - isn't that what this thread is about?

No, its 42 pages of somebody having a guilt trip and then needing other elistists to make him feel better.

Throw in some dog-eat-dog jargon or a good chapter from one of machiavelli's numerous dribbles and thats what this is.

I mean really who are you going to convince with that chart other than yourself that crashing is good for the game and your great player for doing it?

Just make sure to throw some insults when you crash so they get out sooner and never come back. :idea:

[stonewall337]

What's the difference between a lower leveled player and me?

An ego, and a false sense of entitlement.

 

I don't know why would assume that someone hasn't worked as hard as you for their equipment or levels just because they are different or lower than yours.

 

That solo mage that you have no qualms about crashing has probably been working his butt off to get to the point that they're at, and by boss hunting they are clearly trying to gain better stats, equipment, or the cash to help with both. You've ranted about people who aren't working to acheive stats like yours, but by crashing them you are denying them the chance to do the very thing you say they should be doing. How can any "low-level" person be expected to train their character up if other, more arrogant players don't allow them the space to?

 

Because you DIDN'T. Your low stats PROVE you didn't train as much as me. If you want it, GET MY STATS. Then you can compete. Until then, you are crash bait. I don't recognize your right to "First come first serve" at a boss, and as such, I can, and will crash, if needed.

[TheAncient]

No, its 42 pages of somebody having a guilt trip and then needing other elistists to make him feel better.

Just make sure to throw some insults when you crash so they get out sooner and never come back. :idea:

 

:rolleyes: Oh, gov.

 

This point was addressed a lot earlier in the thread. There are a lot of better alternative money makers - some which even train stats - for lower levels.

I agree with you that there are better alternative ways to making money. However, that doesn't mean that someone shouldn't or can't make money a slower, perhaps more inefficient way, does it?

 

Why not? There's no reason I should sacrifice my own preferences just so that some random stranger - regardless of level - can have the convenience of choosing between bad and worse options.

 

Obviously this would differ for people I know in real life.