Forced emotes - worse than ever

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Artizzy

Do you understand that this is a game afterall? And since some time ago a ftp game!

---

I still pay my VIP subscription, though I'm wondering more and more what benefit I get out of it. I've mostly been paying to support Turbine so that they continue to support the game, but Turbine doesn't seem prepared to reciprocate the gesture.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Artizzy

Now any 12-year-old can make a free account, get those festival consumables and spam them all over the place? There's not much to do about, just to deal with it.

---

That's precisely why Turbine should do something about it. This situation was of their own making.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Artizzy

I'm myself actually a fan of that Black Silk Glove. So be carefull with you RP events and park em in your homesteads.

---

Why should people do that? The Turbine Code of Conduct was written so that players would not have to put up with harrasment. It seems to me that Turbine is not interested in enforcing their own Code of Conduct. Sapience seems to be more interested in producing expensive YouTube videos than in providing an adequate level of customer support.

I would gladly pay double the current subscription to revert to Satine and her excellent team at Codemasters, and to have the servers moved back to Europe so that I would no longer have to endure so much lag.

Last week I was at a concert. They had free beer and weed and the band had a nice repetoire so getting a bit merry I started dancing.
At some point I noticed two bouncers standing at the side of the stage. They were scanning the audience and I saw their facial expression turn sour. They were looking at another partygoer who just stood their silently looking at the band in her own thoughts.
Then an angry commanding voice said:"CHEER YOU FOOL! THIS IS A PARTY!"
now I knew this wasn't adressed to me, but the voice had said it in such a threatening way that I stopped dancing on the spot and threw my hands in the air. Looking around I saw every single person in the audience was raising his/her hands in the air. As if no one could resist the command.
Hoping things were solved now I tried to get back into the music and started my danceroutine.
Before the last note of the song was played I heard the same commanding voice again:
"CHEER YOU FOOL! OR DO YOU THINK THE BAND IS NOT GOOD ENOUGH FOR YOU!?"
Again the audience raised their hands as one man, but looking at the facial expressions around me I saw no joy, only fear and I think I saw a small lass trying to hold back her tears while throwing her hands in the air.
Then I sneaked away from the concert, carefully avoiding those bouncers who would probably even want to get tipped for their work.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Artizzy

Do you understand that this is a game afterall? And since some time ago a ftp game! Now any 12-year-old can make a free account, get those festival consumables and spam them all over the place? There's not much to do about, just to deal with it.
I'm myself actually a fan of that Black Silk Glove. So be carefull with you RP events and park em in your homesteads.

---

Do you understand that this is a game after all, and people should be free to play the game as they wish, not as you wish them to play? Sure, some people are a little too sensitive when it comes to their character being pranked, but you gain nothing from using silk glove on someone's character (unless you want to be annoying). That's why the opt out toggle is ideal: everyone gets what they want.

I have said it before in regard to other games and I will say it again here.

NO ONE should ever be able to make my character (the representative of ME in the game) do ANYTHING without my express permission to do so.

If that's a box that pops up saying something like "So-and-so would like to animate your character using x emote. Yes or No" then great. If that is a checkbox is preferences to opt out of all such emotes then great. But it has to be there.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Kalderic

Then an angry commanding voice said:"CHEER YOU FOOL! THIS IS A PARTY!"

---

Thanks a lot. Now I'm picturing Gandalf shouting 'Cheer you fools, cheer!' just before he gets dragged into the depths of Moria, and the fellowship glumly complying, arms raised in despair as they mumble a sorrowful Huzzah! at the edge of the shattered bridge.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Mirarian

I have said it before in regard to other games and I will say it again here.

NO ONE should ever be able to make my character (the representative of ME in the game) do ANYTHING without my express permission to do so.

If that's a box that pops up saying something like "So-and-so would like to animate your character using x emote. Yes or No" then great. If that is a checkbox is preferences to opt out of all such emotes then great. But it has to be there.

---

Man, this gave me such a fun idea: what if you could choose your response?

So and so just showed you a firebreath trick that went awry. Do you a) stop, drop and roll, b) run about with your arms flailing or c) duck while holding a marshmallow on a stick aloft?

So and so just dropped a jar of creepy crawlies by your feet. Do you a) try to avoid them or b) rescue them?

There is potential for a lot of fun here...

Are you complaining about those awesome skills classes get(like the Champion's heroic pose) or are there actually forced emotes I'm not aware of(haven't played in a long time).

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Fainecarth

Are you complaining about those awesome skills classes get(like the Champion's heroic pose) or are there actually forced emotes I'm not aware of(haven't played in a long time).

---

There are also several festival items (and deeds associated with them) that force other peoples characters to do things. Personally I think the deeds are what are taking this past just a prank. Too many times while sitting and chatting with family I have been repeat force emoted by the same person even after being asked to stop.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Fainecarth

Are you complaining about those awesome skills classes get(like the Champion's heroic pose) or are there actually forced emotes I'm not aware of(haven't played in a long time).

---

Some people are equally angry about those. I can understand that, but at least they "just" animate you for 1-2 seconds and leave you in exactly the same state as before.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Mirarian

I have said it before in regard to other games and I will say it again here.

NO ONE should ever be able to make my character (the representative of ME in the game) do ANYTHING without my express permission to do so.

If that's a box that pops up saying something like "So-and-so would like to animate your character using x emote. Yes or No" then great. If that is a checkbox is preferences to opt out of all such emotes then great. But it has to be there.

---

Pretty much THIS. I am sick to my stomach about Turbine thinking this sh.. is ok. It's damn not. I reported one idiot who repeatedly used this on me after being specifically told not to do it, and nothing happened. What a surprise. If I ever quit the game this WILL be one of the contriburing factors.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by The-Walrus

Some people are equally angry about those. I can understand that, but at least they "just" animate you for 1-2 seconds and leave you in exactly the same state as before.


Pretty much THIS. I am sick to my stomach about Turbine thinking this sh.. is ok. It's damn not. I reported one idiot who repeatedly used this on me after being specifically told not to do it, and nothing happened. What a surprise. If I ever quit the game this WILL be one of the contriburing factors.

---

Actually it seems that there is quite a lot of S that WB/T thinks is just fine. You can pick from any of the following:

• /FE
• /Festival Grind
• /Festival Grind Deeds
• /Expired Festival Tokens
• /Hobby Horse
• /LI items not in game but IN THE STORE (surprise!)
• /WS Bridle items not in game but IN THE STORE (surpise!)
• /Hytbold (nothing more needs to be added there)
• .... the list is really too long now

Some folks don't think that WB/T listens, they do. They just don't listen and do what's <right> they do what's profitable. There is a rather large gap there.

For all the improvements they make, for me, I play more and more away from others, I don't group with others, I leave areas with other players are standing and I pass by a lot of <opportunities> they offer up. Their improvements often lead to me playing against their offering. It's almost a new mini game for me: How to avoid WB/T improvements. :)

ymmv of course

Well, you do understand since they went free to play the only way they're getting money is the store and subscriptions(and a few people are cancelling the subscription because of the store) so it's not Turbine killing off Turbine, it's players. But we're getting off topic.

Plus, since WB came in, this annoying stuff has been popping up.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Fainecarth

Well, you do understand since they went free to play the only way they're getting money is the store and subscriptions(and a few people are cancelling the subscription because of the store) so it's not Turbine killing off Turbine, it's players. But we're getting off topic.

Plus, since WB came in, this annoying stuff has been popping up.

---

I don't understand your logic. Before they went free to play, the only way they were getting money was through subscriptions. After they went free to play, they're getting money through subscriptions AND the store.

Now I accept that many people have cancelled their subscriptions since LOTRO went free to play, so they have to make enough money from the store to compensate for the drop in subscriptions. In fact, I just cancelled my VIP subscription. The reason for that was that I just didn't feel that I was getting value for money from my subscription any longer. I was still being coerced into visiting the store, even as a VIP player. I reasoned it was better value to drop to premium and to buy what I need from the store.

Sorry, I just don't see that it's players that are killing off LOTRO.

I'd gladly pay a monthly subscription provided if it meant I could play the game without being harassed into visiting the store (you know, the way it used to be). In fact, I'd pay twice the current subscription if we could return to European servers and a CS team that didn't spend all its time creating YouTube videos. At the moment, the VIP subscription just doesn't seem value for money.

Sadly the entire forced emotes issue is going no where, I have yet to see a response positive or negitive from turbine. Honestly, if someone was doing things the right way, anyone that intentionally disrupted an event like yours, should be at the very least given a warning about this behavior by a GM and in the best case banned from the game for a few days. Neither case is going to happen and that saddens me to the point of actual tears. Lately we have seen the aftermath of intent versus usage with the withdrawl of some of the hytbold dailys as they were being abused, Emotes have been being abused far longer.

I would like to lend my support to all those investing time and effort creating wonderful events for everyone to enjoy. I would like to see players protected against the untrained in manners. An opt out surely is the answer.

I wonder if any one manager at Turbine exercises primary creative control over this game. It appears two opposing factions exist. One desires to create J.R.R. Tolkien's Lord of the Rings Online. The other desires to create Monty Python's Lord of the Rings Online. The former group gives us the landscape, the artistry, the quests, and the instances--the fundamental atmosphere of the game. The latter group gives us things like forced emotes, hobby horses, and skeletal mounts. I see the point of adding a certain amount of fun to the game, as the subject matter is deathly serious. Yet, in my mind, forced emotes and hobby horses stray so far from the fundamental theme they mock and undermine it.

In Arthurian legend and Celtic mythology, brave warriors often"grief" one another in the form of challenges and boasts. The in game dueling mechanic very nicely allows players to engage in challenges of arms. Another form of challenge involved one warrior taking control of a bridge. The bridge holder would deny passage to everyone until defeated.

If a warrior used a Black Silk Glove on another, it would convey terrible disrespect and almost certainly precipitate a duel to the death. The same goes for most of the other forced emotes. In my opinion, players who take the subject matter seriously appreciate this. For the rest, it is just a game, and such things matter not. These two groups will never see eye to eye.

This creates a problem for the creative manager at Turbine. I understand the desire to appeal to a broader demographic and attract more players. Monty Python sells. I find the forced emotes and hobby horse and skeletal horses amusing, on a certain level. Yet, when these things become common, they completely undermine the serious nature of the subject matter. They mock and belittle it. Further, they drive away people who take the game seriously. These are the same people who hold events, build community, and bring the world alive in a way static programming can never do. Is there wisdom in alienating that group?

Before turning J.R.R Tolkien's Lord of the Rings Online into Monty Python's Lord of the Ring Online, I suggest the development team seriously consider the ramifications of such a decision. Are you creating a classic, a satire, or a base comedy?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Vexendynamus

Before turning J.R.R Tolkien's Lord of the Rings Online into Monty Python's Lord of the Ring Online, I suggest the development team seriously consider the ramifications of such a decision. Are you creating a classic, a satire, or a base comedy?

---

At 5 years in I think we are at Satire drifting toward comedy but either can become a classic given individual perspective.

I dislike the notion of others affecting peoples game play negatively without their consent. Its the Libertarian side of me I guess, why this is even an issue is baffling to me I just dont understand why the option to not partake in it dosent exsist?

Everyone wins in a scenario where there is a toggle or some check box to click.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Vexendynamus

I wonder if any one manager at Turbine exercises primary creative control over this game. It appears two opposing factions exist. One desires to create J.R.R. Tolkien's Lord of the Rings Online. The other desires to create Monty Python's Lord of the Rings Online. The former group gives us the landscape, the artistry, the quests, and the instances--the fundamental atmosphere of the game. The latter group gives us things like forced emotes, hobby horses, and skeletal mounts. I see the point of adding a certain amount of fun to the game, as the subject matter is deathly serious. Yet, in my mind, forced emotes and hobby horses stray so far from the fundamental theme they mock and undermine it.

In Arthurian legend and Celtic mythology, brave warriors often"grief" one another in the form of challenges and boasts. The in game dueling mechanic very nicely allows players to engage in challenges of arms. Another form of challenge involved one warrior taking control of a bridge. The bridge holder would deny passage to everyone until defeated.

If a warrior used a Black Silk Glove on another, it would convey terrible disrespect and almost certainly precipitate a duel to the death. The same goes for most of the other forced emotes. In my opinion, players who take the subject matter seriously appreciate this. For the rest, it is just a game, and such things matter not. These two groups will never see eye to eye.

This creates a problem for the creative manager at Turbine. I understand the desire to appeal to a broader demographic and attract more players. Monty Python sells. I find the forced emotes and hobby horse and skeletal horses amusing, on a certain level. Yet, when these things become common, they completely undermine the serious nature of the subject matter. They mock and belittle it. Further, they drive away people who take the game seriously. These are the same people who hold events, build community, and bring the world alive in a way static programming can never do. Is there wisdom in alienating that group?

Before turning J.R.R Tolkien's Lord of the Rings Online into Monty Python's Lord of the Ring Online, I suggest the development team seriously consider the ramifications of such a decision. Are you creating a classic, a satire, or a base comedy?

---

I think that's probably the most sensible, non-biased, balanced and intelligent post on the subject yet, pity that it'll mostly fall on deaf ears, as you quite rightly say the two views on this are vey far apart and will never agree.

Regardless of which way anyone sways on this it's been debated, argued and discussed to death, it's really down to the people with the ability to do so to make a decision one way or another and make it stick but as yet there has been a wall of silence, we don't even know if it's on Turbines radar.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Rampagingdeath

I think that's probably the most sensible, non-biased, balanced and intelligent post on the subject yet, pity that it'll mostly fall on deaf ears, as you quite rightly say the two views on this are vey far apart and will never agree.

---

There's nothing to agree on. No one loses anything with an opt-out toggle which still allows the user to advance the deed. The only thing stopping it is Turbine's unwillingness or inability to implement it.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by SabrielofLorien

Some folks don't think that WB/T listens, they do. They just don't listen and do what's <right> they do what's profitable. There is a rather large gap there.

---

Unfortunately you are partially right, even though it makes all the sense in the world for a commercial company to maximize its profit. However... There doesn't seem the be any balance whatsoever.

They do listen. Sadly, I don't remember any dev heartily thanking the community for absolutely awesome feedback about anything......like they did when they added the damn hobby horse to the store on BR. I can only think of three words here: W. T. F.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Vexendynamus

...
If a warrior used a Black Silk Glove on another, it would convey terrible disrespect and almost certainly precipitate a duel to the death. The same goes for most of the other forced emotes. ...

---

What a great idea: put people who use forced emotes into some sort of open PvP with a major debuff. Then they can be killed by any player (who is strong enough) for the next 30 minutes - but cannot initiate an attack. We would have some chivalrous players who would help to rid Middle-earth of evil griefers.

Great post. Thank you.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Cindir

What a great idea: put people who use forced emotes into some sort of open PvP with a major debuff. Then they can be killed by any player (who is strong enough) for the next 30 minutes - but cannot initiate an attack. We would have some chivalrous players who would help to rid Middle-earth of evil griefers.

Great post. Thank you.

---

LOL!! This in of itself, if left unpublicised as most of TBs changes often tend to be, would be a griefing mechanism at its finest if ever there was one, hehe :P

Me likes the way you think.... ;)

Yikes. Can you imagine? The QQing would be deafening.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Cindir

What a great idea: put people who use forced emotes into some sort of open PvP with a major debuff. Then they can be killed by any player (who is strong enough) for the next 30 minutes - but cannot initiate an attack. We would have some chivalrous players who would help to rid Middle-earth of evil griefers.

Great post. Thank you.

---

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Myiat

LOL!! This in of itself, if left unpublicised as most of TBs changes often tend to be, would be a griefing mechanism at its finest if ever there was one, hehe :P

Me likes the way you think.... ;)

Yikes. Can you imagine? The QQing would be deafening.

---

I think that would be a very very appropriate solution.

As an /FE can target anyone out of the tutorial instance, have the caster debuffed to L5 with a PVP(OpenTap) flag added. Then everyone else can Have-At, maybe with a new /FE -> rotten tomatoes which adds 30min (cummulative) to the debuff timer.

And if they put said /FE rotten tomatoes in the WBT Store, I can just imagine the avalance of orders that would occur. Plus PVP players have been clamoring for open world PVP for many moons now. It's a TOTAL WIN!

Way way better than the Hobby Horse! ROFL!!!

Let the punishment fit the crime...
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Retributive_justice

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by SabrielofLorien

I think that would be a very very appropriate solution.

As an /FE can target anyone out of the tutorial instance, have the caster debuffed to L5 with a PVP(OpenTap) flag added. Then everyone else can Have-At, maybe with a new /FE -> rotten tomatoes which adds 30min (cummulative) to the debuff timer.

And if they put said /FE rotten tomatoes in the WBT Store, I can just imagine the avalance of orders that would occur. Plus PVP players have been clamoring for open world PVP for many moons now. It's a TOTAL WIN!

Way way better than the Hobby Horse! ROFL!!!

Let the punishment fit the crime...
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Retributive_justice

---

From that article:

Quote:

---

There are two distinct types of retributive justice. The classical definition embraces the idea that the amount of punishment must be proportionate to the amount of harm caused by the offence. A more recent version advocated by the philosopher Michael Davis dismisses this idea and replaces it with the idea that the amount of punishment must be proportionate to the amount of unfair advantage gained by the wrongdoer.

---

By the classical definition, the FE user would also be forced to suffer the effects of the FE and no more. The whole "turn them into a gankable level 5 and let everybody kill them" idea is well beyond justice and into the realm of vengeance.

The second definition, advocated by Mr. Davis, would likely result in no penalty for the FE user, unless the FE user managed to gain a resource node by his actions, in which case the FE user would be forced to relinquish the gains from that node. There may be other examples in which an FE user gains an unfair advantage, but I can't think what they might be - especially with open tapping soon to be worldwide.

So yes, I agree with you. Let the punishment fit the crime! (And let's not forget that crimes also tend to have an element of intent. Should the curious person who's never seen what the FEs do and is merely trying them out for the first time be punished to the same degree as the person who knows exactly what they do and is using them to disrupt a large event?)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by SabrielofLorien

I think that would be a very very appropriate solution.

As an /FE can target anyone out of the tutorial instance, have the caster debuffed to L5 with a PVP(OpenTap) flag added. Then everyone else can Have-At, maybe with a new /FE -> rotten tomatoes which adds 30min (cummulative) to the debuff timer.

And if they put said /FE rotten tomatoes in the WBT Store, I can just imagine the avalance of orders that would occur. Plus PVP players have been clamoring for open world PVP for many moons now. It's a TOTAL WIN!

Way way better than the Hobby Horse! ROFL!!!

Let the punishment fit the crime...
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Retributive_justice

---

Hehe. Very amusing... in theory, lol. Seriously though I am with the folks who request a an opt out and cannot get my head around why for heaven's sake does TB not implement it... oh wait... forgot... the disable "Christmas tree light fest" toggle for my inventory bags doesn't work so maybe.... oh nvm :)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Thorgrum

At 5 years in I think we are at Satire drifting toward comedy but either can become a classic given individual perspective.

I dislike the notion of others affecting peoples game play negatively without their consent. Its the Libertarian side of me I guess, why this is even an issue is baffling to me I just dont understand why the option to not partake in it dosent exsist?

Everyone wins in a scenario where there is a toggle or some check box to click.

---

Words of wisdom