Deleted

[Jenkiiii]

4 hours ago, FrancisMcReary said:

 

Well, I missed the enjoyment and was about to stop playing because of that. It's inverted; I was trying to re-invigorate. Wrecking other people's stuff is still fun, but I never did it because I know it's toxic. I'm glad about the discussions in this thread and the good ideas I received, but haven't been playing since and got less of a drive to do it ever since and now it's gone completely. Me and GTA are ex partners. You were 100% right but I'm far from sensitive to addiction on a personal, individual level.

Good post and the only right conclusion came from you. It's done and over. Because the problem may not have been addiction, it sure as hell was me. Sincerely, I appreciate your post. 

Good for you, buddy, I appreciate your kind words also. Most of what I say is from my own experiences and not a direct hit at you.

 

Becoming toxic and messing up other people's stuff in freemode as a way of reinvigorating your interest in the game is not the way to go, especially as you're not that type of player to begin with. That little voice inside you, your conscience, will tell you you're being an asshole, over and over again, until you eventually believe it and become a giant walking anus for real. If you enjoy being an asshole, great, many millions of people use GTA online and other games to vent off and take away the burden of real life, but if you go to bed feeling stressed out, unfulfilled and generally unhappy then you should appreciate that it's not working for you.

 

Congratulations on choosing not to go down the sink hole!

 

Edited April 10, 2021 by Jenkiiii

[MechanicMammal]

On 4/7/2021 at 6:43 PM, Big Molio said:

Stand on rooftops with the explosive sniper and shoot people off their oppressor 2’s. That’s what I do whilst on call for races.

 

I also do this occasionly, I will also take down Jets, Deluxo's and Choppers.

But with those I do check to see if they are causing other players grief first.

But the OP mk 2 that I see as fair game even unprovoked.

In my opinion toxic griefing is when someone keeps trying to kill the same player over and over, doing so in a way that does not require skill. Or hindering buisiness work, destroying deliveries etc.

Killing the odd player for fun and moving on to the next victim is not griefing in my opinion. Certainly if you can do it in a funny or inventive way.

My guilty pleasure is to block players into shop's using a car (preferably there PV) to block the door. Then I might call Lamar to mug them. But I will do this in passing and after setting it up will get on with something else

Oh and if I am in my Toreador or a similar vehicle and a Random jumps in a passenger seat uninvited (normally happens after contact jobs) I will take them jumping high in the hills or deep sea diving, then I will simply kick them out.

 

The only player type I do kill twice is the OP mk 2 rider that tries to attack me first, if I knock one off with the boopy gun and the bike is unharmed I will add a prox mine or sticky, Most OP riders really are that stupid! and are reliant on the bloody thing. So 9 out of 10 times they will go running back to that Broomstick or should I call it Boomstick why's it beeping? lol.

It was so good when Rstar added the cooldown on this thing it made it more likely they would go back to the same bike.

 

Edited April 28, 2021 by MechanicMammal

[Ethereal_NYC_]

On 4/8/2021 at 5:20 PM, Nutduster said:

 

This is me. I have sometimes-severe cravings to dish out violence, but there's satisfaction in choosing targets who deserve it rather than just random innocent players. In a full session, it doesn't usually take long to find the combat-roller hassling everyone in sight, the d-bag blowing up cargo and such, the tryhards running Stand Your Ground just to bait low levels into a spawn trap, the griefer in the jet or Mk II just pooping on random people every minute or two, etc. Some of these people (in my view) deserve it more than others, but they are basically all opting in for PvP, so why not give it to 'em?

 

I also hunt bounties. Feel like anyone with a bounty on them should know they are fair game. But I stick to a code as much as possible. This is my playstyle in a nutshell: today I hunted a bounty into the desert, realized he was doing a business supply mission, and managed to kill him but leave his supplies alone. As I was leaving, some other guy showed up and nuked his supplies, and I turned back around and fought that other guy for a while, allowing the MC prez to get on with his day. Now to him this probably just seemed like two assholes hassling him, but at least I felt like I wasn't the worst of the two assholes.

 

you were right about his perspective

 

the fact you killed him during a mission means;

 

1. you took away time from his timed mission

 

2. set him up to be griefed

 

if you wouldve never killed he probably wouldve got more done

 

bounty hunting is lame af especially when your a high rank because most bounties are placed by AI

 

On 4/8/2021 at 5:28 PM, paperbagdude said:

Better off embracing the toxicity. It has never been the core of online gameplay, but it has developed into a fundamental baseline of the game today. People play by the book, and that book is toxic behavior and griefing. It's just what the game's culture has become, and playing in manners deviating from said culture won't do you any favors either.

 

after reading the first sentence i see your one of the ones who didnt recieve the proper care from your folks. its ok little buddy, everything will be alright.

 

On 4/8/2021 at 7:23 PM, SummerFreeze said:

To me, on a philosophical level, hunting bounties is essentially the same as destroying cargo. If a player survives the bounty, it's his or her money. The game encourages you to hunt bounties, just like it encourages you to destroy cargo. There is a difference in value of course.

 

agreed its annoying to have someone blow me up becuz i had to steal a car mid mission or because some troll put a bounty on me just because

[Yellow Dog with Cone]

On 4/8/2021 at 4:28 PM, paperbagdude said:

Better off embracing the toxicity. It has never been the core of online gameplay, but it has developed into a fundamental baseline of the game today. People play by the book, and that book is toxic behavior and griefing. It's just what the game's culture has become, and playing in manners deviating from said culture won't do you any favors either.

"Embracing toxicity" is exactly how this game and its playerbase ended up as hostile as they currently are, after all, you can't be toxic against NPCs, it takes two to tango.

 

Sure, giving people the benefit of the doubt in a game as notoriously toxic as this one will backfire on you most of the time, but again, seeing how it literally takes another player to start the vicious cycle of toxicity, there's always the possibility of breaking that cycle to the betterment of everyone.

 

It's in the playerbase's best interest to curb this toxicity, no matter how ingrained it may be, and to confront, shun and drive away those who would rather keep it going for their own nefarious agendas, from griefers to Rockstar themselves.

 

Be the better player.

[HamwithCheese]

1 hour ago, Yellow Dog with Cone said:

and playing in manners deviating from said culture won't do you any favors either.

I mean, I won't feel like an asshole so 

[JB94]

I was playing GTA Online when it launched for a month, then (thanks to university and other things) had a break until March 2020 (when I got a new laptop) and played regularly until Christmas 2020. I found it astonishing just how terrible the atmosphere in public lobbies would appear to the average agreeable citizen.

 

I will admit, that with a KDR of 6.64 at the time of writing, some of my actions may be classified as toxic, but I'll let you decide. In freemode, the things I'll target are;

• MC cargo - too easy a target; there are much easier and faster ways to be making cash than driving a trash truck or postal van (I will point these players to more efficient money making activities)
• MK II Oppressor abusers/ griefers - karmic retribution, quite simply.
• Bounties - you must have done something to upset somebody (if you got a modder bounty, then that's a shame and I am partly sorry). I'll kill you, clear your bounty and then leave you alone. Better me, than the next guy/ girl who will probably repeatedly kill you thereafter...
• Players unduly targeting me - you have chosen death.

In any case, I won't delve or be drawn into the insults and arguments that are commonplace in freemode; I have a limited lifespan and don't want to waste it, heh Even when targeted by MK II broomstick clowns, modders or griefers, this remains the case; there's more to life than GTA Online, so I don't care enough to pick/ maintain fights with people I neither know nor care about.

 

How to avoid becoming toxic? Behave like an agreeable citizen would in reality. Also, spending a while playing in closed sessions with friends/ doing activities away from freemode helps as well; they're always pleasant places and will greatly contribute to one's mental health not deteriorating when playing GTA Online. My racing record is 152 wins vs 16 losses and both characters are retired, with more money and casino chips than they'll ever need; proof of the power of collaboration (and some flaws in the way the game is made which opens up glitches xD)

Edited April 30, 2021 by JBanton
maintain

[SummerFreeze]

4 hours ago, JBanton said:

I will admit, that with a KDR of 6.64 at the time of writing, some of my actions may be classified as toxic, but I'll let you decide. In freemode, the things I'll target are;

• MC cargo - too easy a target; there are much easier and faster ways to be making cash than driving a trash truck or postal van (I will point these players to more efficient money making activities)

So you blow up their sale and tell them to buy a Kosatka? That's quite the service.

[paperbagdude]

11 hours ago, Ethereal_NYC_ said:

after reading the first sentence i see your one of the ones who didnt recieve the proper care from your folks. its ok little buddy, everything will be alright.

k

6 hours ago, Yellow Dog with Cone said:

"Embracing toxicity" is exactly how this game and its playerbase ended up as hostile as they currently are, after all, you can't be toxic against NPCs, it takes two to tango.

 

Sure, giving people the benefit of the doubt in a game as notoriously toxic as this one will backfire on you most of the time, but again, seeing how it literally takes another player to start the vicious cycle of toxicity, there's always the possibility of breaking that cycle to the betterment of everyone.

 

It's in the playerbase's best interest to curb this toxicity, no matter how ingrained it may be, and to confront, shun and drive away those who would rather keep it going for their own nefarious agendas, from griefers to Rockstar themselves.

 

Be the better player.

I understand what you're saying, but considering the age of the game, doesn't it seem a little too late to make that change for the better? You can always try and play nice, hopefully influence other players by it, but ultimately only find yourself in frustration as your agenda of being a good person among savages, only end in your own failure?

[Big Molio]

On 4/28/2021 at 10:17 AM, MechanicMammal said:

I will also take down Jets...

 

I always shoot down jets that are tearing up the lobby. I generally leave the ones coming back from the aircraft carrier shuttling business battle crates alone (unless I am playing the business battle as well)

[ambi3nt]

Imo most people who become toxic after a while are commonly just cheaters and exploiters. If you earn everything fair, I don't really see player like that going on and blowing up other people's stuff etc. Ofc it doesn't apply for completely everyone, but mostly works that way.

[Nutduster]

13 hours ago, Ethereal_NYC_ said:

 

you were right about his perspective

 

the fact you killed him during a mission means;

 

1. you took away time from his timed mission

 

2. set him up to be griefed

 

if you wouldve never killed he probably wouldve got more done

 

bounty hunting is lame af especially when your a high rank because most bounties are placed by AI

 

 

Boo hoo. I mean, come on, man. If you really want to do "missions" without any chance of getting killed by another player ever, you really should not play in public free roam at all. It is fully unreasonable to expect players in a predominantly PvP environment to not engage in any PvP except when both parties mutually consent beforehand. And you should also know at basically any level that having a bounty on you makes you a target more than anything else. If that's a problem, maybe DON'T DO BUSINESS MISSIONS WHILE YOU STILL HAVE A BOUNTY. Wait that sh*t out, or go get killed before you start your mission.

 

Personally my conscience is clear by leaving people's business stuff alone. I only bother players on missions if they have a bounty (and even then I won't destroy their stuff, just them). After that I let them go about their business. And for what it's worth too, that guy was going to get griefed no matter what. I didn't set him up for anything that wasn't already going to happen; motherf*cker was in the middle of the desert in a regular-degular car with a high-level tryhard beelining right at him.

Edited April 30, 2021 by Nutduster

[Yellow Dog with Cone]

4 hours ago, paperbagdude said:

k

I understand what you're saying, but considering the age of the game, doesn't it seem a little too late to make that change for the better? You can always try and play nice, hopefully influence other players by it, but ultimately only find yourself in frustration as your agenda of being a good person among savages, only end in your own failure?

Well, better late than never, even more when this game's lifecycle isn't ending any time soon because of the eventual Expanded and Enhanced next gen version.

 

And well, if I can at least change one mind, I don't consider my actions a failure, so there's that too.

[Black-Dragon96]

3 hours ago, Nutduster said:

If you really want to do "missions" without any chance of getting killed by another player ever, you really should not play in public free roam at all. It is fully unreasonable to expect players in a predominantly PvP environment to not engage in any PvP except when both parties mutually consent beforehand.

 

Yeah because they can totally do all their bussiness related stuff in invite only lobbys.

Oh wait...

 

And I wouldnt call it a predominantly PvP environment. Its a sandbox. It can be anything at any time.

The ones who want to make it a predominantly PvP environment are the nutjobs who fly around on their mk2 all day trying to farm afk players and the clowns who cream themself over their K/D.

[Nutduster]

48 minutes ago, Black-Dragon96 said:

 

Yeah because they can totally do all their bussiness related stuff in invite only lobbys.

Oh wait...

 

 

They don't have to do it in any lobby. They don't have to play the game *at all*. Bearing in mind that I agree that the player base for this game is a toxic sh*tshow, there should at least be SOME responsibility accepted by the "victims" for choosing to play Grief Theft Auto. I mean, how many times do you have to learn the lesson before you realize that the entire game was designed to hassle you while you try to make money? And equally if not more, the responsibility lies with the developers for making a game where hassling people is the point and the objective half the time. The only real way around it is to ONLY do invite-only lobbies or instanced-session content like contact missions, and they damn well knew that when they released the game, and with every subsequent update that locked enjoyable content into those same public sh*tshow sessions.

 

Edited April 30, 2021 by Nutduster

[Nutduster]

1 hour ago, Black-Dragon96 said:

 

And I wouldnt call it a predominantly PvP environment. Its a sandbox. It can be anything at any time.

 

 

If you're in a public free roam session, then I'm sorry, you chose to step into a predominantly PvP environment. Rockstar forces you to do your businesses in public sessions specifically so you will get interference from other players. How could you not see what's right in front of your face?

 

People looking for GTA to be a utopia of choice are failing to pin the blame exactly where it belongs--on the designers who decided that it was best to funnel everyone into the same lobbies, with no real option to opt out of PvP play (aside from passive mode, which disables the majority of the playable content). When you start a business mission, a global timer goes off notifying people to come hassle you. You yourself are notified of this notification. Players are paid and given ammo for destroying your sh*t. Weapons and homing missiles lock onto you most of the time (there are exceptions but it seems like they were added just for some semblance of balance rather than to discourage PvP play). There is only positive reinforcement--and absolutely no punishment, no negative reinforcement not to do it, at all. Maybe the worst that will happen is you reporting them for griefing, but honestly at that point you're being as bad as they are. They, after all, are playing the game as designed, and you're reporting them just because you're mad that the game was made the way it was. Not to mention, reporting does basically jack and sh*t unless they get reported by the entire lobby twice over. One report is meaningless.

 

The game is the game. Please stop lying to yourself that it's not. You can whinge on for eternity about toxicity in the GTA fanbase and I agree that it is rampant. But the main reason it is so toxic is because Rockstar built a sandbox that was more for them than for you. That has been the case since fall 2013 and will continue to be the case until they shut down the servers. So the next time little Psycho SuzyXxX or her barcode friend blow up your supply run, remember, the order of blame falls first on Rockstar, then on you for opting in, and last on the mouthbreathers who are doing exactly what the game invites, encourages, congratulates, and rewards them for doing, while forcing you to put yourself in their crosshairs. That is... unless you OPT OUT.

Edited April 30, 2021 by Nutduster

[Black-Dragon96]

5 hours ago, Nutduster said:

So the next time little Psycho SuzyXxX or her barcode friend blow up your supply run, remember, the order of blame falls first on Rockstar, then on you for opting in, and last on the mouthbreathers who are doing exactly what the game invites, encourages, congratulates, and rewards them for doing, while forcing you to put yourself in their crosshairs

The order of blame falls first on the mouthbreather who makes the decision to blow that stuff up for sh*t and giggles, then on R* for designing that crapfest and last on the player who just wants to do what he bought the bloody game for - to play it.

[Yellow Dog with Cone]

7 hours ago, Nutduster said:

there should at least be SOME responsibility accepted by the "victims" for choosing to play Grief Theft Auto. I mean, how many times do you have to learn the lesson before you realize that the entire game was designed to hassle you while you try to make money?

There's a difference between expecting responsability from experienced players who at this point should know better than putting themselves in a position of being griefed, and outright victim blaming.

 

You can't expect new players, which this game still get by the dozens somehow, to know better when they don't know literally anything about how the game works or how the playerbase is, you can't put the onus of not getting griefed on someone who doesn't know how to avoid it or that it's even griefing.

 

7 hours ago, Nutduster said:

Maybe the worst that will happen is you reporting them for griefing, but honestly at that point you're being as bad as they are.

How so? If destroying cargo is part of the game, then so is reporting for petty reasons, as pointless as it may be. Sure, it may not be its intended purpose, but then again, destroying cargo isn't done for its intended purpose (to pose a challenge, I guess?) either most of the time anyway, so who cares really?

 

People who destroy cargo can't claim the moral high ground when they get reported or kicked from sessions, after all that's part of the game too.

 

7 hours ago, Nutduster said:

The game is the game. Please stop lying to yourself that it's not. You can whinge on for eternity about toxicity in the GTA fanbase and I agree that it is rampant. But the main reason it is so toxic is because Rockstar built a sandbox that was more for them than for you. That has been the case since fall 2013 and will continue to be the case until they shut down the servers.

This "it is what it is" mentality is exactly why we're stuck in this terrible state of affairs in the first place, the reason why nothing has changed is because not enough people push for change, either because they're afraid to raise their voice (we all know how toxic this community can be), because they don't care or because they directly benefit from how the game is set up (from griefers to even grinders who don't want to see certain problematic vehicles nerfed).

 

Acknowledging the elephant in the room is useless if we don't do anything about it.

 

7 hours ago, Nutduster said:

So the next time little Psycho SuzyXxX or her barcode friend blow up your supply run, remember, the order of blame falls first on Rockstar, then on you for opting in, and last on the mouthbreathers who are doing exactly what the game invites, encourages, congratulates, and rewards them for doing, while forcing you to put yourself in their crosshairs. That is... unless you OPT OUT.

You have the order wrong though, first it's Rockstar from enabling griefers, then it's the griefers from engaging in said behavior and that's it, unless the player willingly put themselves in a position of being griefed, he can't be guilty from it.

[The Other Dude]

I started collecting cars on both of my characters, making manufacturer-themed garages, and got into making and finding cool crew colors. 

[Cigars and chill]

13 hours ago, Nutduster said:

 

If you're in a public free roam session, then I'm sorry, you chose to step into a predominantly PvP environment. Rockstar forces you to do your businesses in public sessions specifically so you will get interference from other players. How could you not see what's right in front of your face?

 

People looking for GTA to be a utopia of choice are failing to pin the blame exactly where it belongs--on the designers who decided that it was best to funnel everyone into the same lobbies, with no real option to opt out of PvP play (aside from passive mode, which disables the majority of the playable content). When you start a business mission, a global timer goes off notifying people to come hassle you. You yourself are notified of this notification. Players are paid and given ammo for destroying your sh*t. Weapons and homing missiles lock onto you most of the time (there are exceptions but it seems like they were added just for some semblance of balance rather than to discourage PvP play). There is only positive reinforcement--and absolutely no punishment, no negative reinforcement not to do it, at all. Maybe the worst that will happen is you reporting them for griefing, but honestly at that point you're being as bad as they are. They, after all, are playing the game as designed, and you're reporting them just because you're mad that the game was made the way it was. Not to mention, reporting does basically jack and sh*t unless they get reported by the entire lobby twice over. One report is meaningless.

 

The game is the game. Please stop lying to yourself that it's not. You can whinge on for eternity about toxicity in the GTA fanbase and I agree that it is rampant. But the main reason it is so toxic is because Rockstar built a sandbox that was more for them than for you. That has been the case since fall 2013 and will continue to be the case until they shut down the servers. So the next time little Psycho SuzyXxX or her barcode friend blow up your supply run, remember, the order of blame falls first on Rockstar, then on you for opting in, and last on the mouthbreathers who are doing exactly what the game invites, encourages, congratulates, and rewards them for doing, while forcing you to put yourself in their crosshairs. That is... unless you OPT OUT.

 

I agree with this. There are many aspects of the game I find deplorable but never gave any thought of trying to change anything. I find it simply a waste of time to try to affect what a huge company does whether it be rockstar, walmart or hollywood. Companies like people in my opinion change organically and anything I say/do makes no impact. I engage in things I enjoy more than loathe no matter the product. Some may view this as a defeatist mentality and that's their right. I am not a shareholder, not on the board and not even in a focus group. I am just a guy sharing my thoughts with fellow enthusiasts. I don't expect anything to change. I don't like vehicles that shoot rockets and passive mode and OTR. I can't stand that RDRO has nothing to do. But all these things are far beyond my control in my estimation. I am in my mid 40s and my age definitely affects my viewpoint. I got a grandbaby now and it really mellowed me out. Along with the medical marijuana card. I do enjoy reading the differing views as a past time. But I don't expect anything to change. I hope everyone has a great weekend and appreciates the little things.

 

Take care.

[LostReacher]

If you have everything you want and do not want to be toxic, start giving money to players who need it.

 

For instance do the perico heist and give 85% to your buddy, it will boost his account a lot and you can give him advise on how to spend it, which him grow. 

[Octane]

Limit the amount of time you play per week.

[Nutduster]

19 hours ago, Black-Dragon96 said:

The order of blame falls first on the mouthbreather who makes the decision to blow that stuff up for sh*t and giggles, then on R* for designing that crapfest and last on the player who just wants to do what he bought the bloody game for - to play it.

 

You do you, but I disagree with this and I've already explained why. You want to be the game to be something it's not. It is incumbent on you to either accept it for what it actually is, or put your energy into effecting change using all the tools available to you (e.g. complain to Rockstar, complain to Take Two, start petitions, make YouTube videos, stop supporting their games financially, organize boycotts, and so on).

 

The amount of delusion that goes on sometimes when people complain about "griefing" is obnoxious to me. And I say that as someone who finds the fundamental design (businesses only allowed in public free roam, combined with a game that doesn't even have friendly/PvP-less lobbies) to be abhorrent. It's like you're all going to play football and then getting mad that the other team keeps tackling you and won't let you score. Maybe football isn't the game for you, and maybe GTA Online (at least the public free roam aspect of it) isn't for you, either.

[Nutduster]

17 hours ago, Yellow Dog with Cone said:

There's a difference between expecting responsability from experienced players who at this point should know better than putting themselves in a position of being griefed, and outright victim blaming.

 

 

99% of the people who keep on complaining about griefing are indeed experienced players. I won't blame newbies for getting blown up when they literally don't know better yet, but that is a slim percentage; it only has to happen once or twice before you should learn from it. And up to that point, the blame lies almost entirely with Rockstar again, for A) forcing them into public sessions with mixed ranks (i.e. a free-for-all scrum of players from level 1 to 8000 with ZERO skill- or rank-based matchmaking), and B) not giving players enough of a warning of how stacked against them the deck really might be. I don't look with admiration at high levels who choose to blow up the business runs of low levels, and choose never to do that myself; but really, why does the game even allow it in the first place? Why does it flat-out encourage them to do it? And in the end, why waste your breath trying to get toxic assholes not to be toxic, when they found the PERFECT game for them to be toxic in? They aren't breaking the rules, they're following them. To the letter.

 

17 hours ago, Yellow Dog with Cone said:

This "it is what it is" mentality is exactly why we're stuck in this terrible state of affairs in the first place, the reason why nothing has changed is because not enough people push for change

 

 

That's not the spirit of that comment. When I say "the game is the game," what I mean is, don't deny reality. The very term "griefer" suggests someone who is playing the game contrary to its intended design. And they aren't! They're playing it EXACTLY as designed. That they also are doing it primarily to cause others grief is kind of beside the point, because that is the purpose of quite a lot of the free roam experience in GTA Online.  When you send someone hate mail, or report them, or gripe about them on this forum, all because they blew up your business mission--you don't have the moral high ground here. You walked into a game that is expressly designed for assholery, then acted affronted because an asshole acted like an asshole. Your energy would be better spent trying to get Rockstar to improve the game and protect players who want to enjoy all the playable content without the PvP aspect. Or if, like many of us, you realize that is never going to happen, then you should stop playing this game and stop supporting them financially until they make a multiplayer game that isn't as inherently toxic as this one is.

 

17 hours ago, Yellow Dog with Cone said:

You have the order wrong though, first it's Rockstar from enabling griefers, then it's the griefers from engaging in said behavior and that's it, unless the player willingly put themselves in a position of being griefed, he can't be guilty from it.

 

As stated above, I think the vast majority of players are willingly and knowingly putting themselves into that position, basically gambling that "this time won't be the time I get blown up." And then when it IS that time, rather than accepting any responsibility for it, they only blame the assholes. I can rattle off metaphors for this all day, but here's another: imagine that someone invited you to play a friendly chess game, and then when you got to the designated location, you realized the chess board was set up in the back of a biker bar notorious for daily drunken fist fights. Now, if you go in anyway and play chess, who are you going to blame when you end up catching a beating from a drunken biker? Is it the bikers, doing what they always do in a place where they are encouraged to do that? Is it the guy who hosted a chess match in that environment? Or is it yourself, for choosing to go in anyway and crossing your fingers? For me, the bikers are the least culpable. They are bad people who live unenviable and squalid lives, but you're the one trying to play a peaceful game on their violent turf. Well, in this case--Rockstar made the turf, and they made it violent. And this isn't a democracy no matter how much we wish it was one. The illusion of choice is exactly that--an illusion.

[Yellow Dog with Cone]

27 minutes ago, Nutduster said:

The very term "griefer" suggests someone who is playing the game contrary to its intended design. And they aren't! They're playing it EXACTLY as designed. That they also are doing it primarily to cause others grief is kind of beside the point, because that is the purpose of quite a lot of the free roam experience in GTA Online. 

Griefing doesn't have anything to do with breaking the game's rules or not, but rather about the intent behind the actions done.

 

I mean, by your logic, joining someone's Minecraft server and blowing everything up with TNT doesn't count as griefing because, well that's how TNT works ingame, nevermind the fact that whoever made that action most likely did it with malicious intent.

 

Same with GTA Online, sure, people who attack other's shipments are technically playing by the rules (and that's if they're not actually abusing an exploit or glitch, like godmode), but being realistic, they're doing it out of a desire to annoy, bully and harass other players, that's why it's considered griefing in the first place.

 

35 minutes ago, Nutduster said:

When you send someone hate mail, or report them, or gripe about them on this forum, all because they blew up your business mission--you don't have the moral high ground here. You walked into a game that is expressly designed for assholery, then acted affronted because an asshole acted like an asshole.

Actually, yeah, I do have the high ground, I wasn't the asshole in this case.

 

37 minutes ago, Nutduster said:

imagine that someone invited you to play a friendly chess game, and then when you got to the designated location, you realized the chess board was set up in the back of a biker bar notorious for daily drunken fist fights. Now, if you go in anyway and play chess, who are you going to blame when you end up catching a beating from a drunken biker? Is it the bikers, doing what they always do in a place where they are encouraged to do that? Is it the guy who hosted a chess match in that environment? Or is it yourself, for choosing to go in anyway and crossing your fingers?

Well, unless I decided to somehow provoke them, the bikers are in the wrong here, not me. Just because their culture allows and promotes violence doesn't excuse them from their actions.

 

If I walk through some bad neighborhood and I get assaulted, robbed or killed, is it really my fault? Sure, that could be avoided, but sometimes that's not really possible (think about how Xbone players now can't make solo public sessions through the NAT type method anymore) and even then, it's not like I'm asking for it or anything, to imply otherwise is literally victim blaming.

[Aquamaniac]

1 hour ago, Yellow Dog with Cone said:

Griefing doesn't have anything to do with breaking the game's rules or not, but rather about the intent behind the actions done.

 

I mean, by your logic, joining someone's Minecraft server and blowing everything up with TNT doesn't count as griefing because, well that's how TNT works ingame, nevermind the fact that whoever made that action most likely did it with malicious intent.

 

Same with GTA Online, sure, people who attack other's shipments are technically playing by the rules (and that's if they're not actually abusing an exploit or glitch, like godmode), but being realistic, they're doing it out of a desire to annoy, bully and harass other players, that's why it's considered griefing in the first place.

 

 

 

I think you're going too far, most players are kids who like to blow things up, and to be honest GTA Online being a warzone is part of the thrill, I can remember setting up the night club in a full lobby, driving a moving target through the night but nobody came after me, but it was thrilling though, I do not want to have this all the time but sometimes I like it. Nobody forces you to do businesses, you could just play missions, heists, races whatever. When you do businesses or want to be part of the endless battles going on you expose yourself to griefers and it is your decision to do so. The problem with the organisations anyways is that it are no organisations in most cases but one man companies, so what do you expect to happen when you drive a moving target through a full lobby with nobody supporting you.

 

If I were on PC and had the aiming I had years ago I would snipe people from rooftops, not with evil intent to ruin their day but just because this is something I like in video games. Playing a violent game and lamenting the violence is somewhat strange.

[MostlyPonies]

There's nothing you can do. Either you're the type of person who will become toxic or you aren't. Others have said to target griefers instead of non-hostile players but interacting with griefers is a complete waste of time. Sounds more like you're just bored of the game.

[Black-Dragon96]

6 hours ago, Nutduster said:

You want to be the game to be something it's not.

Oh really? Strange. Thats exactly what I thought about the people claming that it is a PvP game.

 

6 hours ago, Nutduster said:

It's like you're all going to play football and then getting mad that the other team keeps tackling you and won't let you score.

Except this example does not apply here.

In a match of football the opposite team is benefitting directly from stopping you from scoreing just like you benefit from stopping them.

The regular gta griefer does not benefit atleast not in the same way you would do (if you really wanna call 2k and a bit of ammo benefitting.

 

A football match with gta online bussines mission rules would look like this:

One team is always on defense. It has only 1 player. To win that one player has to keep the other team from scoreing. The only way he can move around is by walking on his own feet.

The other team plays with 29 players, starts 10 inches away from the touchdown area and needs only one point to win. They can use atvs to move about and are armed with baseball bats.

[Nutduster]

1 hour ago, Black-Dragon96 said:

Oh really? Strange. Thats exactly what I thought about the people claming that it is a PvP game.

 

 

But they are right and you're not. It is unfortunately as simple as that. You're going into public free roam sessions (strike 1) and running business missions (strike 2) and pretending it's not PvP even though the game warns you up and down that players are going to attack you (strike 3, you're out). What on Earth makes you think you aren't playing a PvP game at that point? If you want to do an MC or CEO business, here's how it goes down:

 

1. The game forces you to be in public. (Only purpose of this is to make you vulnerable to PvP)

2. Because it's an open session, other players' guns lock onto you (aside from free aim of course), and in at least half of missions, their missiles lock onto your vehicles as well. (Only purpose of either of these is to encourage PvP)

3. The game alerts other players you are buying or selling, puts a special icon on your stuff, and tells them they will be rewarded for interfering. (All blatant PvP design)

4. And while we're at it, let's list the rewards you get for "griefing":

- Many missions: paltry amounts of cash and ammo (admittedly, not much)

- Nightclub promotion: your own club's popularity goes up without you having to do a mission

- Heist preps: complete setups without having to actually do them

- Air freight: can steal for yourself without having to do a mission

- Import/export: can steal cars for yourself without having to do a mission

 

Notice a pattern? A lot of these actually offer a fairly significant incentive for people to kill you.

 

This is all PvP. Expressly and undeniably. But even more important, and the real bottom line here:

 

The game is PvP because in a world where you can "choose" to play PvP or not, the choice is an illusion. I keep using that phrase, illusion of choice, because it's key to what makes GTA Online work the way it does. It presents the illusory idea that you can choose to play it however you want. But as long as you are in public free roam and not in passive mode, the choice actually is not yours. It's the other guy's, every single time. So really, all of the above points I mentioned pale in comparison to something that has been true since launch day: it is a PvP game if the other guy chooses for it to be. And you are at his mercy. You can only opt out by staying passive (and not getting access to lots of content thereby), or avoiding public free roam altogether (ditto). But if you want to do all this stuff, especially business missions only available in public and not in passive, then you have *forfeited* your choice to every other player in the session. Whether you like it or not, that's how the game was made.

1 hour ago, Black-Dragon96 said:

A football match with gta online bussines mission rules would look like this:

One team is always on defense. It has only 1 player. To win that one player has to keep the other team from scoreing. The only way he can move around is by walking on his own feet.

The other team plays with 29 players, starts 10 inches away from the touchdown area and needs only one point to win. They can use atvs to move about and are armed with baseball bats.

 

That's only a problem with the rulebook, not with the players. Again this goes back to Rockstar and how they made their game. When you complain about this, what you really don't like is the unfair design. The fact that those 29 players are all too happy to beat your ass is not exactly a glowing recommendation of their moral character, but they and you all agreed to play under these crazy-ass rules, and then for some reason you only complained about it after the obvious result occurred.

[Nutduster]

7 hours ago, Yellow Dog with Cone said:

Griefing doesn't have anything to do with breaking the game's rules or not, but rather about the intent behind the actions done.

 

 

I think you might want to do a little extra research on that one. Start here: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Griefer

 

"A griefer or bad faith player is a player in a multiplayer video game who deliberately irritates and harasses other players within the game (trolling), using aspects of the game in unintended ways, such as destroying something another player made or built.^[1] A griefer derives pleasure primarily or exclusively from the act of annoying other users, and as such is a particular nuisance in online gaming communities. To qualify as griefing, a player must be using aspects of the game in unintended ways to annoy other players"

 

Notice the repetition of "using aspects of the game in unintended ways." A GTA Online player using a jet or Mk II or anything else to blow up your business mission vehicle isn't doing anything "unintended." They are doing exactly what the game asks them to do with exactly the tools it provides for them to do it. That their primary aim is (usually) to make you mad becomes irrelevant. Which brings me back to my point: in the land of griefing, no one is truly a griefer. This game's public free roam experience is at least half players trying to make each other mad. And rather than doing anything to really combat it much, Rockstar fully endorses it and made the game explicitly based on the whole idea. Why else would they send me messages requesting I nuke a sale you probably put hours of work into setting up..? It's completely plain that they know you will be furious if your stuff is destroyed, and they go out of their way to make that happen. There's nothing unintended about any of it.

 

Hell, the most common tool of so-called griefing in this game is the Oppressor Mk II. Do they take it away from us, or significantly nerf its firepower? Hell no, of course not. They put ads in the game telling us we can afford one if we buy a shark card. This is the disease Rockstar has: those PvP assholes pay the bills, and they want us all to join in the carnage, and have to pay for the ability to afford the weapons we need. It's completely f*cked up. And once you recognize this, it becomes clear that the toxic players are the lesser of the evils at play here. Nobody forced Rockstar to make GTA a trolling paradise. They did it because it's profitable.

[Yellow Dog with Cone]

2 hours ago, Nutduster said:

 

I think you might want to do a little extra research on that one. Start here: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Griefer

 

"A griefer or bad faith player is a player in a multiplayer video game who deliberately irritates and harasses other players within the game (trolling), using aspects of the game in unintended ways, such as destroying something another player made or built.^[1] A griefer derives pleasure primarily or exclusively from the act of annoying other users, and as such is a particular nuisance in online gaming communities. To qualify as griefing, a player must be using aspects of the game in unintended ways to annoy other players"

Except that Wikipedia article's opening quote is actually taken out of context from a paper about griefing in World or Warcraft of all things:

Quote

 

Intentional harassment of other

players is called “griefing,” which utilizes aspects of

the game structure or physics in unintended ways to

cause distress for other players.

 

Quote

Some of the most prevalent methods of griefing in 
WoW involve killing other characters or preventing 
access to resources by using aspects of the physics 
of the game world for unintended purposes.

As you can see, this article talks about using glitches and exploits in order to grief players (hence the "unintended ways" part).

 

2 hours ago, Nutduster said:

Notice the repetition of "using aspects of the game in unintended ways." A GTA Online player using a jet or Mk II or anything else to blow up your business mission vehicle isn't doing anything "unintended." They are doing exactly what the game asks them to do with exactly the tools it provides for them to do it. That their primary aim is (usually) to make you mad becomes irrelevant.

 

Most griefers in GTAO are technically playing by the rules, but that doesn't mean that what they do isn't griefing, but actually the opposite, they're griefing indeed. Griefing isn't defined about abuse of game mechanics, but rather about the intent of turning the playing experience of others as unpleasant as possible.

 

2 hours ago, Nutduster said:

in the land of griefing, no one is truly a griefer. This game's public free roam experience is at least half players trying to make each other mad. And rather than doing anything to really combat it much, Rockstar fully endorses it and made the game explicitly based on the whole idea. Why else would they send me messages requesting I nuke a sale you probably put hours of work into setting up..? It's completely plain that they know you will be furious if your stuff is destroyed, and they go out of their way to make that happen. There's nothing unintended about any of it.

 

Actually, certain behaviors can be directly intended, allowed and endorsed by the developers and still count as griefing, ever heard of EVE Online or Rust?

 

Hell, I would argue that, since Rockstar has done a terrible job at defining what do they consider griefing in this game, then it's the playerbase who decides that instead and if the playerbase at large considers the act of destroying cargo griefing, then it's griefing. Even players who destroy cargo call themselves griefers nowadays.

 

2 hours ago, Nutduster said:

it becomes clear that the toxic players are the lesser of the evils at play here.

Those toxic players are just as responsible for the toxic environment this game has become as Rockstar themselves for promoting the creation of said environment in the first place.