Roleplay Dismay No Way!!!

[Sangwa]

The answer is obvious, like I've been telling you guys for a while now.

[Farren Kutter]

I try to keep personal OOC to myself, and if OOC overtakes the RP, I sometimes suggest a group for OOC discussion. Obviously I slip up sometimes, but then, I'm human (even if my characters aren't)

I said yes as my answer, not because I have anything against grinders and so-called PLers, but because I believe that RP should be more prevalent. Leveling and RPing can coexist. Right now it can be a little hard because grinding takes up a lot of time, but even still, I think everyone should be expected to remain in character, whether they choose to RP or not. I also think maybe an 'OOC' channel may be an idea? With an option to show it in the 'Main' tab. However, brackets should still be used just in case. But this would rid people of OOC in RPs if they wished, and Non-RPers could live in peace without RPers getting annoyed at them for being OOC. There could be a setting in the ingame chat options to choose the channel your normal text shows in, with 'OOC' or the 'Main' channel. This way, Non-RPers could easily use that as their 'Main' while RPers have 'Main' nice and clean, and can use the 'OOC' channel just like anyone else.

If that were implemented, I think regulating the OOC at GM events and such would be easier, and RPers would be happier, and Non-RPers would be left in relative peace.

There would of course be some room for error for new players who wouldn't necessarily know of this. Perhaps, rather than suggesting roleplay in the tutorial, saying that staying in character is a RULE, and that OOC chat must go into the OOC channel is a RULE.

I'm not certain how hard/easy any of that would be to create, but maybe as a future idea...

Enforcing roleplay directly, like, telling a non-RPer he can't play because he is not a roleplayer, would be rather rude and a little to far. After all, roleplay is not the ONLY purpose of the game, it is just highly encouraged, and I believe it should remain that way. What should be focused on is the encouragement of RP. There are many people that would be willing to RP if it was explained to them more thoroughly. I doubt that most people actually read that part of the tutorial (I didn't, really, when the tutorial was first made). So perhaps more of something you have to read before the tutorial or after it, and you have to wait a certain amount of time AND scroll to the bottom to go through. Make the words somewhat large, people would be more likely to read it (unlike EULAs when installing software, which most people never read).


EDIT: Wow, I think that's one of my longest posts on these kinds of threads yet >.>

[Mathy Stockington]

I forgot to mention I did not vote. It is just like voting for the president, it does not really matter, we all know who will win even if we do not vote. Just as we know the outcome of this pole. In any case it is just a senseless thing to do.

[khoridor]

we all know who will win ...

'we' minus one, thank you

[Vonor]

If no one voted for any president candidate (and I mean no one), who would win the election? I'm not much into politics, but I guess with absolutely no votes at all none of the candidates would win...

Anyways, those polls do make sense, they help the devs see what the players think about the topic at hand and the devs can then consider working on those things. If no one voted on those polls, or everyone voted for snorks, then it indeed would be senseless to even have those polls.

[Socius Rockus]

I forgot to mention I did not vote. It is just like voting for the president, it does not really matter, we all know who will win even if we do not vote. Just as we know the outcome of this pole. In any case it is just a senseless thing to do.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=M-vCyQRBEwU

[Mathy Stockington]

How vulgar your link is Socius Rockus!

Vonor past experience shows that the Devs will do as they please no matter what we think or say anyway.

[Socius Rockus]

Youtube doesn't censor it, so it's not vulgar
Don't talk bad about devs.
Besides, this question involves more the GMs then the Devs.

[Mathy Stockington]

Not bad, Socius Rockus, just truthful.

The GM team does try to do their best. It is not an easy job that I would ever want. Sometimes how they handle things are not always to everyone's liking. As I said it is a hard job.

[Sangwa]

Besides, this question involves more the GMs then the Devs.

Hardly. Roleplaying consistently means roleplaying according to the setting. If RP is to be enforced in a better way, Devs and GMs will both be held accountable for the success of the moderation, the previous responsible for the actual space allowed for roleplay and the latter considering how people are kept within those limits.

I don't understand why someone would excuse themselves for saying "Yes." Play the game for a week, now tell me how many characters you've seen that have demonic features or magical shadows of doom around them.
Then, I don't think we need to invent anything to get a better RP enforcement. It's as simple as warning the GM's to the new types of behaviour they should be looking for. This obviously means that GM's would have to be completely aware of the setting. If they were, then it would be obvious to them when people are abusing (by exaggeration or complete distortion of the settings, or by bypassing/automating other character's actions).
All in all, this "extra" (I'd call it "necessary" though) moderation would not introduce anything new. "Being OOC" and "behaving good" are all as subjective concepts as "Roleplaying Consistently" is. So, this is not about setting a new type of moderation, but just implementing "consistency" into the current moderated behaviours, therefore only increasing the volume of work and not its nature (as some lazy-minded-individuals imply by saying it's impossible to know who roleplays consistently or not.) As always what constitutes "Roleplaying Consistently" is a field left to the Developers and GM's, just like "Being OOC" and "Behaving Good" is.

[Dajoji]

I forgot to mention I did not vote. It is just like voting for the president, it does not really matter, we all know who will win even if we do not vote. Just as we know the outcome of this pole. In any case it is just a senseless thing to do.

Of course, why vote when you can dismiss the devs' efforts to get to know what the community thinks. This attitude is not constructive, Mathy. You keep talking and talking about being nice to each other, building a better community, bringing back the good vibe... well, guess what? not gonna happen if you already think PS is doomed and players can't do anything about it. Now, how about we all pitch in to make this a better game and try to be a bit more constructive?

How vulgar your link is Socius Rockus!

Vonor past experience shows that the Devs will do as they please no matter what we think or say anyway.

And past experience shows that players will complain no matter what devs do, think, or say anyway, especially about things devs, GMs and mods have got nothing to do with.

[Mathy Stockington]

I forgot to mention I did not vote. It is just like voting for the president, it does not really matter, we all know who will win even if we do not vote. Just as we know the outcome of this pole. In any case it is just a senseless thing to do.

Of course, why vote when you can dismiss the devs' efforts to get to know what the community thinks. This attitude is not constructive, Mathy. You keep talking and talking about being nice to each other, building a better community, bringing back the good vibe... well, guess what? not gonna happen if you already think PS is doomed and players can't do anything about it. Now, how about we all pitch in to make this a better game and try to be a bit more constructive?

How vulgar your link is Socius Rockus!

Vonor past experience shows that the Devs will do as they please no matter what we think or say anyway.

And past experience shows that players will complain no matter what devs do, think, or say anyway, especially about things devs, GMs and mods have got nothing to do with.

Maybe the loss of so many good people lately has made me give up the old fight for what I thought was right at the time. So maybe I do have a bad attitude towards things, Dajoji. It is the circumstances that make it so. Yet I did feel compelled to make my post here, yes I did. There are so many things yet to say and maybe it is best not to voice them. Right not all I feel is sadness and I hope PS is going in the right direction for the players that are left so no one else feels they must leave do to conflicts also.

[Parallo]

By making such posts you're hardly helping your stated cause. "I'm all for improvement but it can't be done."

[Mythryndel]

So, is everyone that is posting here, seemingly in agreement that:

1. The rules cover conduct expected in-game, and should be enforced with respect to rudeness, non-settings compliant names (guild and character), etc.

2. Forcing people to "actively" RP is a bad idea.

3. Expecting PLAYERS to be courteous and in-character should be the norm. Players must be courteous, even if their character is rude.

4. How on earth do you enforce "better" RP beyond the obvious netspeak or rudeness issues addressed in 1 above?

Did I miss anything?

[zanzibar]

If no one voted for any president candidate (and I mean no one), who would win the election? I'm not much into politics, but I guess with absolutely no votes at all none of the candidates would win...

Anyways, those polls do make sense, they help the devs see what the players think about the topic at hand and the devs can then consider working on those things. If no one voted on those polls, or everyone voted for snorks, then it indeed would be senseless to even have those polls.

In some countries, you can turn in a blank ballot if you don't like any of the candidates.  If "no vote" gets the most votes, then a new election with new candidates is called.