Guild Wars 2 have the worst PvP community of all MMORPGS - Sharing for new players.

[Nymeria.1653]

Idk, I'm a new pvp player, just arrived in ranked few days ago. I can say in unranked people were actually a bit hysterical version of sergeant Hartman sometimes, even when there was no reason at all and the team was winnig. I was afraid to get to ranked because I thought it would have been worse, but actually it's better. Of course I didn't play it a lot and I play only this pvp mode, but so far I can say it's better.

Edited March 7, 2023 by Nymeria.1653

[Dr Meta.3158]

5 hours ago, Multicolorhipster.9751 said:

I gotta disagree here.

While yes, it could definitely and should be argued that real life circumstance might be a part of their behavior, Arenanet and the gamemode itself cannot be exempt from blame; having actively encouraged it, and having given these people an outlet to be their worst selves.

I think that is absolutely not preferable at all, and I'm not just saying that from the perspective of the tired, scarred veteran, but as a human being that has to interact with people in the real world.

Containment has been a historical recipe for disaster, just look at the history of Germany. By reinforcing how they think and coddling them in their echo-chambers, one would begin to normalize the behavior already present, and that could absolutely bleed into the real world.

Through containment there's also the potential for radicalization of the existing community by extreme outliers in the toxic player pool. They will multiply, they will spread. Such is the nature of heresy.

 

I think everyone still has a unifying purpose in this case and that is re-integration. Re-integrating the toxic players back into the greater community by for once in their lives telling them "NO" 👺
By telling them what they cannot do and reminding Arenanet that they were the ones that originally said these people cannot do these things until they take action, or kill their game off & send these future criminals they've created out into the real world all dazed, confused, and terribly unhinged.

The scientific literature, as in the non-opinionated and non-anecdotal evidence done by research scientists, done on the subject of antisocial behavior has shown for a long time that all various forms of attempted behavior modification of antisocial behavior does not work. Antisocial behavior manifests in infant years due to lack of proper social conditioning and sticks with the antisocial person for life. It's tragic but it is what it is. 

Telling an antisocial person "no" does nothing. They're are specifically characterized by having abysmal levels of trait agreeableness meaning that they could care less about your opinions of them and your wants and needs. They will do what they want, when they want as they please regardless of what you try to do about it. That is why that trait being so long is a strong indicator of likelihood of being incarcerated, especially men of whom composes all of the most disagreeable people.

So I would say no, most people wouldn't like antisocial disordered people running around threatening the safety of others in real life over being nuisances in a video game.

Lastly arenanet is a company, not a bastion of morality. Any statement made under a moral facade is done for the purposes of making money. Any action taken in game is done for the purposes of making money. If it does not lead to making money, it will not be done. It is as simple as that. They are not good, they are not evil, they are a business.

[Dr Meta.3158]

Gotta love the forum lag.

Edited March 7, 2023 by Dr Meta.3158
Double post

[Greyrat.2378]

Worst is a bit overstatement.
PvP is garbage but for other reasons then community, mainly because of how ANet decided to neglect it and keeps acting surprised why the mode is not popular every time it gets brought to their attention, and proceeds to ignore it again. 

Community wise it's probably same as in any other competitive game/mode where you directly compete against other people. Only issue is that it's much more prevalent here due to how small the pvp playerbase is, which makes it appear that every second person is toxic kitten, since there is much higher chance that you will run into one.

Thing is that people are not held accountable for their behaviour, and never will be due to how internet works, so it's much easier to vent and flame other people since you don't know them, and they don't know you.
You would hardly act in a same way against your teammates in real life, where there are some actual consequences.

Solution? There is none.
Best you can do is move the pvp chat into separate tab, turn yourself invisible so they can't whisper you, interact with your team only when needed (or don't interact with them at all), and ignore the rest.

Everything else like win trading, people being AFK etc. is out of your control anyway.

[Dawdler.8521]

1 hour ago, Greyrat.2378 said:

Only issue is that it's much more prevalent here due to how small the pvp playerbase is, which makes it appear that every second person is toxic kitten, since there is much higher chance that you will run into one.

True.

In terms of scale its like if GW2 on the whole is brand of cars, WvW is a particular model people like, then sPvP is the cult following that's formed around the magical button by the cup holder that extends a little arm to hold smaller cups.

[Gibson.4036]

5 hours ago, Nymeria.1653 said:

 I was afraid to get to ranked because I thought it would have been worse, but actually it's better. 

This is my experience, too. My time in unranked was far more toxic. People want me to "try out" new builds or professions in unranked? Nuh-uh. I'll practice them on the golems to get a feel, and then it's straight to ranked.

As to the OP, my experience is that open world PvP games are many orders of magnitude more toxic than GW2 PvP. Open world PvP brings out the absolute worst in people.

[Jski.6180]

It dose seem is where the "toxic" of gw2 seems to go but gw2 is kind of low "toxic" so it seem worst then it is compared to other pvp games.

If an pvp player can get in some ones head with just words then they will take ever advages that they can in an fight.

[Equinox.1463]

On 3/5/2023 at 8:43 AM, kroxx.1032 said:

Well, already 6 months into this game or maybe some more, so im going to share my experience on the PvP scene as a "new" player.

First of all, I played other mmorpgs before gw2, all pvp wise, and never seen such toxicity from OLD players towards new ones.

 

Basically, your first months, while you are a clueless noob, you will get flamed for everything. The rate aprox is for every 10 games, you will have at least 1 lunathic 3/10 times. Ye block him sure sure..

After a while, when you are not a complete noob and you know whats up, you decide to go to the PvP arena to try out some "duels"

 

What you will find there is mostly a civil war, where no one respects the 1vs1, where basically fresh new players interrupt all the duels, and OLD players even more.

 

I can understand the new players being that, just new players. But people who played 10 years and their only fun is interrupt people duels, and when you try to stand up to the bully, they will perma farm you, taunt, etc etc.

 

So, as a "new" PvP player, what should i do? Conquest is terrible, a toxic kitten show where half of the matches are decided before game it even starts. PvP Arena same, even worst. You cant even learn a class without getting bullied the kitten out of you.

 

And for anyone who thinks im wrong, go make a new character you dont have experience at all. Just do some conquest games and play the PvP arena for couple weeks. Im sure you will have a great experience in Gw2 😉 😉

 

In conclusion, from all mmorpgs I played, gw2 pvp community is the most toxic and the worst i ever seen by far from OLD players.

 

1. Deactivate Team, Say, Emoji, and Map chats. A competent player in a match will find ways to communicate meaningfully in other means (specific pings on the map, numerical showing how many enemies are on the map).

 

2. Don't go in the FFA. It is a toxic mess of people who truly need help. For 200g you can get a private server - or you can hop in any particular one and duel in there. You will learn so much more from fighting in actual Conquest maps.

 

3. Deactivate #1's chats - I can't stress this enough. The toxicity in games may feel unreal if you read chats, so trust me when I say, after 5 years of PvP, it's much more efficient to communicate on the minimap directly. People might get confused but we humans adapt surprisingly fast to confusing scribbles on a map ^^ You can replace the chatter dialogue with combat numerical by selecting the "combat" item in the chat creation menu. (It's shift or ctrl and left or right click, tbh I do it by habit now so I really don't remember my key binds for it XD)

 

4. Not really another point, but I'd love to see the FFA removed. Its whole existence makes no sense in the current state of the gamemode since heck, even when you're having a duel and no one is harassing you, there's always that one monthly winner going around activating waves, fire paths, and Chieftain Utahein and Svanir (they're usually nice enough to stop when you ask them, but knowing where they are in the first place isn't even common knowledge). Add to that that players who've maxed out the Commander's masteries have an insane advantage over other players because they PASSIVELY WILL RUN FASTER... Finally, the FFA is probably where the most toxicity is brewed because of your aforementioned reasons - and I'm not one to say I haven't fallen into that trap because I've been toxic my fair share of times in there. I,d love it if they could replace the FFA with a Private Arena selection island that explains the trope of both Conquest and Private Arenas; it would make so much more sense. (I want scrims okay)

 

And I want to thank you for your honesty about the veterans of this game mode. I agree that I've rarely come across one who's kind when they feel wronged - myself included.

[Multicolorhipster.9751]

12 hours ago, Dr Meta.3158 said:

The scientific literature, as in the non-opinionated and non-anecdotal evidence done by research scientists, done on the subject of antisocial behavior has shown for a long time that all various forms of attempted behavior modification of antisocial behavior does not work. Antisocial behavior manifests in infant years due to lack of proper social conditioning and sticks with the antisocial person for life. It's tragic but it is what it is. 

I can't really argue that because I agree with that. I think to try and change who the toxic person is fundamentally is expecting some kind of outcome that one can never expect to have any control over, especially as just players of this game, that would be totally unreasonable.

However, I think the counter to expecting things to go a certain way is to instead provide everyone including toxic players equal- opportunity to arrive at that outcome, whatever it might be. That's why I said containment was a terrible solution.
You cannot force someone to be better, but you can give them the means to be better, or even worse, and allow their actions and deeds to decide the rest. Which they are definitely responsible for, I'd never coddle someone who is acting antisocial without deference.

12 hours ago, Dr Meta.3158 said:

Telling an antisocial person "no" does nothing. They're are specifically characterized by having abysmal levels of trait agreeableness meaning that they could care less about your opinions of them and your wants and needs. They will do what they want, when they want as they please regardless of what you try to do about it.

Well it depends on who is saying "no." If me or you said no, obviously that doesn't carry much weight.

I get that Arenanet is not a bastion of morality, but they are the top authority in our specific demographic. Equality of opportunity could be afforded to these toxic players if Arenanet would just punish them like everyone else. Even if it doesn't do anything; it removes them from a place to be their worst selves, it doesn't feed them, and you have to know for sure that it drives them absolutely mad.

12 hours ago, Dr Meta.3158 said:

That is why that trait being so long is a strong indicator of likelihood of being incarcerated, especially men of whom composes all of the most disagreeable people.

So I would say no, most people wouldn't like antisocial disordered people running around threatening the safety of others in real life over being nuisances in a video game.

I'm just saying that containment to a video game isn't likely to do anything at all to keep you safe. I think it's a rather defeatist, cynical point of view to say "let's just drop these people here and forget about it."
It's a game. They're going to get out there in the real world eventually. You're going to run into them in the real world. Quite frequently too, if you make every effort to avoid them.

 

All containment achieves is giving toxic players an outlet to reinforce the worst parts of themselves while damning the existing community to radicalization at their hands. That invariably comes with grading evils and saying "sticking them in a video game isn't as bad as sticking them in the real world." I think this is an incredibly dangerous way to think, a slippery slope. If you grade evils then you, or anyone else could be tempted to kinship with what you consider the least worrisome. 

I think it is an inconsistent method worthy of reconsideration.

12 hours ago, Dr Meta.3158 said:

Lastly arenanet is a company, not a bastion of morality. Any statement made under a moral facade is done for the purposes of making money. Any action taken in game is done for the purposes of making money. If it does not lead to making money, it will not be done. It is as simple as that. They are not good, they are not evil, they are a business.

I agree with that, and to think otherwise would be kind of whimsy, I feel like. They are business, a company, they're here to make money.

So yes I think it is reasonable to not expect good or evil out of them, but rather; professionalism & competence, because if you're placing your faith in a company, that's what I want out of them as a consumer.

And I think it demonstrates some unprofessionalism and incompetence for a developer to write their own rules and ToS and then to enforce(or not) those rules inconsistently. Justice was the greatest gift from the divine, and it does not play favourites in its deliverance.

Edited March 7, 2023 by Multicolorhipster.9751

[Dr Meta.3158]

17 minutes ago, Multicolorhipster.9751 said:

I can't really argue that because I agree with that. I think to try and change who the toxic person is fundamentally is expecting some kind of outcome that one can never expect to have any control over, especially as just players of this game, that would be totally unreasonable.

However, I think the counter to expecting things to go a certain way is to instead provide everyone including toxic players equal- opportunity to arrive at that outcome, whatever it might be. That's why I said containment was a terrible solution.
You cannot force someone to be better, but you can give them the means to be better, or even worse, and allow their actions and deeds to decide the rest. Which they are definitely responsible for, I'd never coddle someone who is acting antisocial without deference.

Well it depends on who is saying "no." If me or you said no, obviously that doesn't carry much weight.

I get that Arenanet is not a bastion of morality, but they are the top authority in our specific demographic. Equality of opportunity could be afforded to these toxic players if Arenanet would just punish them like everyone else. Even if it doesn't do anything; it removes them from a place to be their worst selves, it doesn't feed them, and you have to know for sure that it drives them absolutely mad.

I'm just saying that containment to a video game isn't likely to do anything at all to keep you safe. I think it's a rather defeatist, cynical point of view to say "let's just drop these people here and forget about it."
It's a game. They're going to get out there in the real world eventually. You're going to run into them in the real world. Quite frequently too, if you make every effort to avoid them.

 

All containment achieves is giving toxic players an outlet to reinforce the worst parts of themselves while damning the existing community to radicalization at their hands. That invariably comes with grading evils and saying "sticking them in a video game isn't as bad as sticking them in the real world." I think this is an incredibly dangerous way to think, a slippery slope. If you grade evils then you, or anyone else could be tempted to kinship with what you consider the least worrisome. 

I think it is an inconsistent method worthy of reconsideration.

I agree with that, and to think otherwise would be kind of whimsy, I feel like. They are business, a company, they're here to make money.

So yes I think it is reasonable to not expect good or evil out of them, but rather; professionalism & competence, because if you're placing your faith in a company, that's what I want out of them as a consumer.

And I think it demonstrates some unprofessionalism and incompetence for a developer to write their own rules and ToS and then to enforce(or not) those rules inconsistently. Justice was the greatest gift from the divine, and it does not play favourites in its deliverance.

Equal opportunity to arrive at what outcome?

Arenanet does give equality in punishing the apphrension of toxic behavior. You are free to be toxic, you are not free to call people out on being toxic publicly.

Its leave them to play video games and be an annoyance or leave them to hurt/kill/steal from people and contain them in prison. Most people avoid antisocial disordered people, not doing so is dangerous. Trying to engage them in the idea of trying to gain resilience in one's self is foolish and I do not recommend anyone to attempt to do so. Trying to avoid them reduces your chances of having to deal with them and it works well.

Competence was the old video game model in which you had to develop a game that is good enough to drive sales. Now you don't anymore. You just need microtransactions and well set up secondary currency models, psychologically setup UI to drive attention and sales, FOMO tactics, and extortion of whales. Everyone hates it but there are enough people that accept it for it to become the normal business model. That is exactly why arenanet was trying to shaft Guild Wars 2 for the mobile market before failing, laying off a lot of people, and making false public statements about caring about the guild wars 2 community. And additional tactic being more commonly used is to extort the new common desire for people to appear morally righteous to defend the underlying extortative practices of a business. This is most obvious with Hollywood but otherwise, if you don't agree then you're "x"-ist.

Discussion of these sorts of practices eventually leads to the forum moderator coming through to silence the discussion in a similar vein as would occur if one would call out the toxicity of other players. Its nothing personal, but no one cares. Its all business. Be quiet, buy the gems, consume content, keep your head down.

 

 

[viquing.8254]

I'm the only one to find the in game community less toxic now than at the beginning ?

Mean when I read that the launching community was all butterfly and go mad as years pass, it's absolutly not what I have experienced. Mean when I look at old elitists egocentrics streamers who represented well the in game state before versus the streamers from last 5 years, there is less segregation and we worry a lot less than before. (Or maybe I get used to whiners over years 😄 .)

IMO the community at the start was elitists toxic pro players while now people mostly play for fun (which can mean it's in bad state in a competitive view.).

That said gw2 community is far from being toxic in regards to overall mmorpg.

[cutiefruitydanger.8952]

On 3/5/2023 at 9:43 AM, kroxx.1032 said:

Well, already 6 months into this game or maybe some more, so im going to share my experience on the PvP scene as a "new" player.

First of all, I played other mmorpgs before gw2, all pvp wise, and never seen such toxicity from OLD players towards new ones.

 

Basically, your first months, while you are a clueless noob, you will get flamed for everything. The rate aprox is for every 10 games, you will have at least 1 lunathic 3/10 times. Ye block him sure sure..

After a while, when you are not a complete noob and you know whats up, you decide to go to the PvP arena to try out some "duels"

 

What you will find there is mostly a civil war, where no one respects the 1vs1, where basically fresh new players interrupt all the duels, and OLD players even more.

 

I can understand the new players being that, just new players. But people who played 10 years and their only fun is interrupt people duels, and when you try to stand up to the bully, they will perma farm you, taunt, etc etc.

 

So, as a "new" PvP player, what should i do? Conquest is terrible, a toxic kitten show where half of the matches are decided before game it even starts. PvP Arena same, even worst. You cant even learn a class without getting bullied the kitten out of you.

 

And for anyone who thinks im wrong, go make a new character you dont have experience at all. Just do some conquest games and play the PvP arena for couple weeks. Im sure you will have a great experience in Gw2 😉 😉

 

In conclusion, from all mmorpgs I played, gw2 pvp community is the most toxic and the worst i ever seen by far from OLD players.

 

this has been since forever.....us veteran players should train and help the new players ...we all been there we were all new once....not all veteran players are toxic ..i for one help when i can. dont let that discourage you from playing pvp ignore the toxicity  and have fun !

[Multicolorhipster.9751]

1 hour ago, Dr Meta.3158 said:

Equal opportunity to arrive at what outcome?

I don't know what outcome. Do you know what outcome?

I believe that's the purpose of equal-opportunity is to give people the individuality to arrive at any outcome decided by their own actions/deeds. You cannot know the outcome, but you can influence it. This is one of the basic principles of faith and belief.

1 hour ago, Dr Meta.3158 said:

Arenanet does give equality in punishing the apphrension of toxic behavior. You are free to be toxic, you are not free to call people out on being toxic publicly.

That's equity, not equality. Equality would extend others the freedom to criticize and engage with "toxic" behavior both socially and publicly.

Equality of opportunity would rely on players being held accountable for their "toxic" behavior by more than just the parent company, especially if the company has shown reluctance in doing anything to stop or address it.

 

To contain every "toxic" player into a video game would be a decision made expecting equality of outcome, in that if "toxic" people are contained to a "toxic" virtual environment that reinforces how they think, that will have no impact on their social interactions outside of the game itself. That just isn't reasonable, it's anti-individual, it more or less gives the "toxic" people exactly what they want and need to continue being "toxic."

1 hour ago, Dr Meta.3158 said:

Its leave them to play video games and be an annoyance or leave them to hurt/kill/steal from people and contain them in prison. Most people avoid antisocial disordered people, not doing so is dangerous. Trying to engage them in the idea of trying to gain resilience in one's self is foolish and I do not recommend anyone to attempt to do so. Trying to avoid them reduces your chances of having to deal with them and it works well.

How can you claim to be trying to avoid them, when your strategy for dealing with them is to stick them with an entirely different group of people to corrupt and make "toxic?"

That's avoidance, and avoidance is not a reasonable solution to a conflict. Avoidance is how you create conflict. Avoidance is what Arenanet has done to PvP for years, and it only leads us down a path of bitterness, resentment, and eventually escalation.

1 hour ago, Dr Meta.3158 said:

Competence was the old video game model in which you had to develop a game that is good enough to drive sales. Now you don't anymore. You just need microtransactions and well set up secondary currency models, psychologically setup UI to drive attention and sales, FOMO tactics, and extortion of whales. Everyone hates it but there are enough people that accept it for it to become the normal business model. That is exactly why arenanet was trying to shaft Guild Wars 2 for the mobile market before failing, laying off a lot of people, and making false public statements about caring about the guild wars 2 community.

Guild Wars 2 was released in the era of competence by competent people. Competence is also the virtue by which trust is formed. While it's a true a leader or company can be incompetent and still be successful by exploitation of the ignorant, in Gw2's case it has the standard of competence and care that went into its creation to live up to.

For them to change gears years into the game's lifecycle would be a betrayal of the trust of the people who originally bought into it, and I cannot see any universe in which this is a sustainable model for growth. Show of hands, who'd buy a Guild Wars 3? How was that last story patch?

1 hour ago, Dr Meta.3158 said:

And additional tactic being more commonly used is to extort the new common desire for people to appear morally righteous to defend the underlying extortative practices of a business. This is most obvious with Hollywood but otherwise, if you don't agree then you're "x"-ist.

This I agree with and I find new Arenanet to most certainly be guilty of doing.

1 hour ago, Dr Meta.3158 said:

Discussion of these sorts of practices eventually leads to the forum moderator coming through to silence the discussion in a similar vein as would occur if one would call out the toxicity of other players. Its nothing personal, but no one cares. Its all business. Be quiet, buy the gems, consume content, keep your head down.

Not personal? If you saw how my warning points read, you might just change your mind.

Anyway, I don't want to drown out other discussion with too much philosophy, so I'll say this in conclusion:

I think containment of "toxic" people to one area is a slippery slope to tread on. I think it's a restriction placed on free will and autonomy that should scare us given the historical implications, as "toxic" tends to be defined by the one experienced perceived toxicity. By feeling rather than any fact.

I do not think that toxicity is something to be punished or contained, but rather openly discussed and condemned in a civil manner. That's the only real long-term strategy for dealing with anyone who is perceived to be a "toxic" influence on an environment, even if that confrontation is difficult and the results not immediate.

One thing is for certain though. We'll keep fighting, and we'll win! o7

Edited March 8, 2023 by Multicolorhipster.9751

[Dr Meta.3158]

1 hour ago, Multicolorhipster.9751 said:

I don't know what outcome. Do you know what outcome?

I believe that's the purpose of equal-opportunity is to give people the individuality to arrive at any outcome decided by their own actions/deeds. You cannot know the outcome, but you can influence it. This is one of the basic principles of faith and belief.

That's equity, not equality. Equality would extend others the freedom to criticize and engage with "toxic" behavior both socially and publicly.

Equality of opportunity would rely on players being held accountable for their "toxic" behavior by more than just the parent company, especially if the company has shown reluctance in doing anything to stop or address it.

 

To contain every "toxic" player into a video game would be a decision made expecting equality of outcome, in that if "toxic" people are contained to a "toxic" virtual environment that reinforces how they think, that will have no impact on their social interactions outside of the game itself. That just isn't reasonable, it's anti-individual, it more or less gives the "toxic" people exactly what they want and need to continue being "toxic."

How can you claim to be trying to avoid them, when your strategy for dealing with them is to stick them with an entirely different group of people to corrupt and make "toxic?"

That's avoidance, and avoidance is not a reasonable solution to a conflict. Avoidance is how you create conflict. Avoidance is what Arenanet has done to PvP for years, and it only leads us down a path of bitterness, resentment, and eventually escalation.

Guild Wars 2 was released in the era of competence by competent people. Competence is also the virtue by which trust is formed. While it's a true a leader or company can be incompetent and still be successful by exploitation of the ignorant, in Gw2's case it has the standard of competence and care that went into its creation to live up to.

For them to change gears years into the game's lifecycle would be a betrayal of the trust of the people who originally bought into it, and I cannot see any universe in which this is a sustainable model for growth. Show of hands, who'd buy a Guild Wars 3? How was that last story patch?

This I agree with and I find new Arenanet to most certainly be guilty of doing.

Not personal? If you saw how my warning points read, you might just change your mind.

Anyway, I don't want to drown out other discussion with too much philosophy, so I'll say this in conclusion:

I think containment of "toxic" people to one area is a slippery slope to tread on. I think it's a restriction placed on free will and autonomy that should scare us given the historical implications, as "toxic" tends to be defined by the one experienced perceived toxicity. By feeling rather than any fact.

I do not think that toxicity is something to be punished or contained, but rather openly discussed and condemned in a civil manner. That's the only real long-term strategy for dealing with anyone who is perceived to be a "toxic" influence on an environment, even if that confrontation is difficult and the results not immediate.

One thing is for certain though. We'll keep fighting, and we'll win! o7

This is a bit of a derailment but I'm noticing something specific here in your writing. I've had to grade many papers and have seen this trend a lot. It is the instance in which a person writes utilizing the thought process of another person but fragmented and forced to fit into their own argument. This leaves the paper looking as though it is talking about two different, unrelated things at once. It is often a great sign of plagiarism but it can also be haphazard emulation of some famous intellectual thinker which is becoming more common nowadays. 

Also I believe you have the definitions of equality and equity confused. Equity requires giving each individual a different treatment in order to force the same outcome among all of them. Equality requires giving each individual the same treatment regardless of the response. Equity is used when concerned with fairness while equality is concerned with sameness.

 

Quote

To contain every "toxic" player into a video game would be a decision made expecting equality of outcome, in that if "toxic" people are contained to a "toxic" virtual environment that reinforces how they think, that will have no impact on their social interactions outside of the game itself. That just isn't reasonable, it's anti-individual, it more or less gives the "toxic" people exactly what they want and need to continue being "toxic."

No one is forcing them nor has suggested forcing them to play videogames. I said it is preferable for them to cheat and antagonize in videogames than for them to commit crimes in real life due to the difference in consequences. It'd be preferable overall if they weren't toxic to begin with, but you can't help that nor reform them.

Quote

How can you claim to be trying to avoid them, when your strategy for dealing with them is to stick them with an entirely different group of people to corrupt and make "toxic?"

That's avoidance, and avoidance is not a reasonable solution to a conflict. Avoidance is how you create conflict. Avoidance is what Arenanet has done to PvP for years, and it only leads us down a path of bitterness, resentment, and eventually escalation.

Again, no one said anything about forcing them to do anything or "sticking" them anywhere.

Quote

For them to change gears years into the game's lifecycle would be a betrayal of the trust of the people who originally bought into it, and I cannot see any universe in which this is a sustainable model for growth. Show of hands, who'd buy a Guild Wars 3? How was that last story patch?

Avoiding an antisocial person to avoid being a victim of a crime is vastly different from avoiding a specific player-base because they don't pay as much as another.

Quote

Guild Wars 2 was released in the era of competence by competent people. Competence is also the virtue by which trust is formed. While it's a true a leader or company can be incompetent and still be successful by exploitation of the ignorant, in Gw2's case it has the standard of competence and care that went into its creation to live up to.

For them to change gears years into the game's lifecycle would be a betrayal of the trust of the people who originally bought into it, and I cannot see any universe in which this is a sustainable model for growth. Show of hands, who'd buy a Guild Wars 3? How was that last story patch?

Masses of people buy into games with far more heinous monetization strategizes. Plenty of people would buy Guild Wars 3 even if it were twice as bad as Guild Wars 2.

Quote

I think containment of "toxic" people to one area is a slippery slope to tread on. I think it's a restriction placed on free will and autonomy that should scare us given the historical implications, as "toxic" tends to be defined by the one experienced perceived toxicity. By feeling rather than any fact.

Again, hopefully so it isn't brought up again, no one has said this or anything remotely close to this.

Quote

I do not think that toxicity is something to be punished or contained, but rather openly discussed and condemned in a civil manner. That's the only real long-term strategy for dealing with anyone who is perceived to be a "toxic" influence on an environment, even if that confrontation is difficult and the results not immediate.

I'm just going to paste this below once because I do not like answering the same question repeatedly.

Quote

The scientific literature, as in the non-opinionated and non-anecdotal evidence done by research scientists, done on the subject of antisocial behavior has shown for a long time that all various forms of attempted behavior modification of antisocial behavior does not work. Antisocial behavior manifests in infant years due to lack of proper social conditioning and sticks with the antisocial person for life. It's tragic but it is what it is. 

 

[Avead.5760]

In ff14 new players have the sprout icon next to their name and are legit worshipped by old players in all aspects of the game. They treat you like princes and princesses to make you stick around with their game🙃. I wish it was the same here..

Keep in mind that if the game node can't retain new players and grow in population then your omega skillz mean nothing. Unless of course you already know that your omega skillz mean nothing cause you never get to compete with talented players since they would never bother to put hours in gw2 .. and so you don't want pvp to thrive in order to keep feeding your delusions! It's all fine!

Edited March 8, 2023 by Avead.5760

[Madam Pussycat.6153]

There are definitely some unhinged people in this game who tend to gravitate to the pvp lobby, the only thing you can really do is block them for your own peace of mind(and maybe report them and hope for the best). It would be very helpful if there was some type of chat monitor in the pvp lobby since some of them just seem to stay in the lobby 24/7 harassing people, but yea as it is if you enjoy pvp you can just put them on block  and continue playing in peace, I still think there's more nice people around than the unhinged ones.

Edit: If something drastically happens and the 1 shot meta ever ends, and premade teams stop getting put against solo player teams the pvp game mode would go back to being more new player friendly.

Edited March 8, 2023 by Ellie.5913

[Multicolorhipster.9751]

2 hours ago, Dr Meta.3158 said:

This is a bit of a derailment but I'm noticing something specific here in your writing. I've had to grade many papers and have seen this trend a lot. It is the instance in which a person writes utilizing the thought process of another person but fragmented and forced to fit into their own argument. This leaves the paper looking as though it is talking about two different, unrelated things at once. It is often a great sign of plagiarism but it can also be haphazard emulation of some famous intellectual thinker which is becoming more common nowadays. 

I think that's a fairly accurate assessment and serves as a good example of how those around us and those we look up to influence what we say or do. I wouldn't care about the presence of "toxic" people in this game otherwise.

Ultimately I'm just some dude on video game forum, I don't know what you're expecting exactly as someone who is in a position to grade papers on subjects like this. I would argue that there's a difference between plagiarism; the deliberate theft of ideas and passing them off as one's own, and application of the ideas of another in one's own argument.

One is just pretentious and crumbles under any rational debate, the other is an integral part of of rational debate because every idea ever conceived was built upon the ideas of others and so using the ideas of others to inform your own arguments is a key element of being an independent, critical thinker, however I agree that you should always be able to clearly articulate the ideas which inform your own, and you should always acknowledge any major ideas which you take on from someone else.

2 hours ago, Dr Meta.3158 said:

Also I believe you have the definitions of equality and equity confused. Equity requires giving each individual a different treatment in order to force the same outcome among all of them. Equality requires giving each individual the same treatment regardless of the response. Equity is used when concerned with fairness while equality is concerned with sameness.

I don't think that's completely true, as that sounds almost biased. Both Equity and Equality are concerned with sameness to some degree. The major difference being; like you said, down to outcome and response.

Personally I don't think equity is fair at all in that respect, because the outcome has the potential to benefit just one individual or group, whereas equality is fair, because it grants the right to pursue without a need for response.

To apply this to what we've discussed so far; I'm saying toxic players should be treated  equally and judged as though they were anyone else in game, and that people should be able to criticize them for their toxicity openly without fear of being censored for harassment.

2 hours ago, Dr Meta.3158 said:

No one is forcing them nor has suggested forcing them to play videogames. I said it is preferable for them to cheat and antagonize in videogames than for them to commit crimes in real life due to the difference in consequences. It'd be preferable overall if they weren't toxic to begin with, but you can't help that nor reform them.

Again, no one said anything about forcing them to do anything or "sticking" them anywhere.

I don't want to misunderstand you, I want to understand. To me; that just sounds like you're saying to contain "toxic" players to video games. If I am a wrong in that assessment, I apologize, and I welcome any clarification in good faith.

Some easy questions to ask would be what the link is between these "toxic" gamers and real life acts of crime & antisocial behavior?

How would them being allowed to cheat and antagonize others in games remove or address the threat of them employing the same behavior in real life?

What about the people who are not "toxic" who play video games?

Who defines "toxic?"

2 hours ago, Dr Meta.3158 said:

Masses of people buy into games with far more heinous monetization strategizes. Plenty of people would buy Guild Wars 3 even if it were twice as bad as Guild Wars 2.

That is a pretty optimistic view on things, I respect that.

2 hours ago, Dr Meta.3158 said:

Again, hopefully so it isn't brought up again, no one has said this or anything remotely close to this.

I'm just going to paste this below once because I do not like answering the same question repeatedly.

I understand. I assure you I debate in good faith and out of respect for your intellect. If you feel I am wasting your time, I will understand completely if you feel the need to cut this off.

Ultimately I agree that the toxic people you're describing cannot be changed, but I feel like they should still be banned from video games if they break rules within, and be entitled to criticism and judgement from their peers in regards to their toxicity. If you can't talk about it, then of course nothing would ever get done about it.

Edited March 8, 2023 by Multicolorhipster.9751

[garkos.2973]

Funnily the "old" or "veteran" players almost never use the chat. 

I did a new account and I noticed it is mostly the intermediate hard capped gold players who are the most entitled and toxic players. They seem to have 0 awareness and the need to go full toxic mode vs any random gamer to feel better. 

The most funny thing I saw was someone in gold flaming someone in the top 10 without knowing it.

 

 

As for the duels, you mistook the free for all arena with the duel arenas. 

[Hologram.2810]

20 hours ago, Avead.5760 said:

In ff14 new players have the sprout icon next to their name and are legit worshipped by old players in all aspects of the game. They treat you like princes and princesses to make you stick around with their game🙃. I wish it was the same here..

Keep in mind that if the game node can't retain new players and grow in population then your omega skillz mean nothing. Unless of course you already know that your omega skillz mean nothing cause you never get to compete with talented players since they would never bother to put hours in gw2 .. and so you don't want pvp to thrive in order to keep feeding your delusions! It's all fine!

Because Japanese and Western video game fan communities are like night and day. Speaking from years of experience lol

 

 

 

 

Edited March 8, 2023 by ContessaMinxa.2461

[Spellhunter.9675]

On 3/6/2023 at 5:47 AM, RedAvenged.5217 said:

nothing you say is new players ruining pvp lol

I think GW2 pvp was made forsomewhat hardcore pvp audience. While the rest of the game is a casual's paradise. At start PvP playerbase was really big. But anet failed to keep it. And after that they tried to bring players from other modes to pvp. While other modes and pvp mode itself have no ways to prepare casuals for pvp. Casuals start crying and anet tried to make pvp suitable for them. They failed obv. Now noone wants to play pvp in gw2 besides 200 addicted to gw2 combat old players.

 

So for some vet pvp player it may look like new players is ruining pvp.

[Greyrat.2378]

1 hour ago, Spellhunter.9675 said:

I think GW2 pvp was made forsomewhat hardcore pvp audience. While the rest of the game is a casual's paradise. At start PvP playerbase was really big. But anet failed to keep it. And after that they tried to bring players from other modes to pvp. While other modes and pvp mode itself have no ways to prepare casuals for pvp. Casuals start crying and anet tried to make pvp suitable for them. They failed obv. Now noone wants to play pvp in gw2 besides 200 addicted to gw2 combat old players.

 

So for some vet pvp player it may look like new players is ruining pvp.

 

It's more tied to the combat, rather then PvP itself.

GW2 in general is very casual friendly in terms of progression etc.

Combat is definitely not casual friendly due to how fast paced it is, which gets even more apparent in PvP where you have that unpredictability factor due to fighting other people.
That might also be one of the reasons why new people have wrong expectations when trying PvP, since rest of the game is pretty forgiving and casual towards new people. PvP is exact opposite due to how steep the learning curve is right from the start.
With that being said, part of the blame lies on ANet not introducing PvP mechanics to new players properly, and part of it lies on new people as well for not willing to learn the basics and not willing to invest their time to learn the ropes.

[Goldilock.2584]

This issue with pvp today for a new player is u are starting when most poeple already understand pvp their class and so on. You will get farmed even by a gold player so you wont learn how to play it like most did as everyobe else was new and you learnt togher as u went. My best advice is to learn with soneone else and really speak about pvp classes role play and movement. And the best tip is to watch pvp streamers and ask them many questions.