Forced emotes - worse than ever

[Radhruin_EU]

I don't know who RossMcColl2 is but what does he have to do with Turbine? You're not making sense. I'm saying that Turbine made the decision to create and implement emotes.

It's really quite simple: RossMcColl2 said that it was intended gameplay for those emotes to be used regardless of situation. Now, where do Turbine say that? Do they encourage anyone to go around interrupting people who are clearly doing something else? No - that's down to the individual player. So RossMcColl2 was just putting words in Turbine's mouth, and you'd decided to go along with that - hence the comments you were getting.

[Murky_Majare]

And I mean really, if you're doing a synchronized dance/band performance, it doesn't take long to get it started again. Not everyone is using these skills/items to be rude, or to be disruptive. So just have a laugh at it, and continue on.

I suppose it does not take long to change clothes and take a shower if someone throws rotten eggs on you just as you are leaving for prom, either I suppose. Just because it does not take long to correct / restart does not make it any less disruptive. In fact, that you have to *re*start directly means that the original start was disrupted.

Even if it is quick to fix, it does not make it right and certainly does not make it any less harrashment or bullying.

As for Turbine 'intends for it to be used to bully' as someone (more or less) have written;

Well, gun manufactors makes gun for them to be used, and to fire bullets even, but that does not mean that gun manufactors intentionally intends for us to go around and shoot everyone we see.
(Ignoring any metaphysical reason for the gun's very meaning for being).

I cannot speak for Turbine's mind and intention here, but is it not just as possible that their intention was for the items to be used when there was concent? Normally it is poor taste to go to the local cafe and start tossing cakes at everyone, but boy it can be fun to do so at a cake throwing party.

There is a place and time for everything, and using FE when not agreed on is rude and is bullying.

And really,*why* are some people so against having an opt-out option? If you find it fun that someone randomly FE you, then just leave such opt-out alone.
How can it possibly make it less fun for someone using it on you, that others are protected from it? It is not like you are in anyway involved when person A use FE on person B.
I am suspecting that "you" are just worried that your bullying toys will be taken away from you and I have yet to have heard a single good argument against such an opt-out option.

[Defiant1]

Let me apply some logic to your illogic and see if it helps.

Determination is a trait in the game collected by doing a deed, just as getting a deed for forced emotes. Now, one thing you can do to advance determination is to kill salamanders in Evendim. Can you advance determination by killing salamanders in Bree? Of course not, because to play the game, you have to go to Evendim to do so. That's a limitation placed on gaining the determination trait, even though it's in the game and Turbine has not removed it. It still has limitations. You have to go to Evendim if you want to kill salamanders for determination.

Forced emotes, by rule, also have limitations. You advance the deed by casting them on other players. But if you cast your forced emote on a player who does not want to be disrupted by you, you are in violation of rule number one.. In order to advance the deed and not be in violation of rule number one, you have to find someone who won't feel disrupted by your forced emote.

In the case of the determination trait, you are forced to obey the game's demands. In the case of the forced emotes, you should obey rule number one. If you won't, you'll likely find yourself on the receiving end of negative reaction even if you don't know it: people get put on ignore without being told so.

Lol. No matter how many times and different ways you say it, it won't make it true. Actually, your analogy proves what I'm trying to say. Yes you can only kill Salamanders in so and so for the deed, just like you can use emotes anywhere. That's the way both were made and intended by Turbine. I think they should change this and perhaps make them only available for use in certain areas or place some sort of limitation on them much like the deed in your cute little story.

I've said it very, very, clearly....as of now Turbine considers it a fun part of the game. It doesn't matter what you feel or what I feel. It's all up to Turbine and ToS are dictated by them and the violations come from that. It just needs to be explicitly stated and defined. I think you may believe yourself to be a bit more important than you are. Also, I'm pretty sure that people don't actually care if you put them on ignore to be quite honest.

[Korrigan]

You're all twisting stuff and arguing big words, but there's a simple fact I already reminded in my previous post that can't be disputed: the in game /ignore feature is NOT working properly and should be fixed to include those emotes. Problem fixed, /thread, everybody is happy.

[Defiant1]

It's really quite simple: RossMcColl2 said that it was intended gameplay for those emotes to be used regardless of situation. Now, where do Turbine say that? Do they encourage anyone to go around interrupting people who are clearly doing something else? No - that's down to the individual player. So RossMcColl2 was just putting words in Turbine's mouth, and you'd decided to go along with that - hence the comments you were getting.

Where does Turbine say you can't use them? I go along with that because I agreed with his points and I stand by it. As of now it's not against the ToS to use emotes obviously implemented by Turbine, but I hope they will amend that to appease those that are offended by them. However, these aren't some sort of hack that people are exploiting and I'm so confused by those that aren't understanding this.

[Dworin]

Where does Turbine say you can't use them?

In the Code of Conduct, within the Terms of Service. Rule number one says not to use them on people who don't want them used upon them. Turbine wrote rule number one of the CoC. Conduct, in case you don't understand, supposedly governs how you are to act. And rule number one says you are not to act in a way that interferes with my enjoyment of the game.

Ancedotal evidence suggests that Turbine has chosen to selectively enforce rule number one. I've heard that the GMs apply it vigorouosly at times, and turn a blind eye at other times. If that is so, I'd like to know why.

But enforced or not, a rule is still a rule, and those who violate such rules to bully and harass other players trying to enjoy the game should be dealt with under the rules.

Anyway. Thanks for the laugh.

[Damojo]

Where does Turbine say you can't use them? I go along with that because I agreed with his points and I stand by it. As of now it's not against the ToS to use emotes obviously implemented by Turbine, but I hope they will amend that to appease those that are offended by them.

It doesn't say you can't use them. If it did, they would never have been introduced, and if they were, the GMs would action every complaint about them.
Rule 1 of the CoC can be applied to anything it is so woolly. I could decide that a warden's shout ruins my enjoyment of the game, or the colour purple, or trees, and apply rule 1.
The rule is woolly because it has to be, to specifically list out every breach of conduct that has, does, or will upset various players isn't vaguely practical.
Reading beyond the literal wording of rule 1 to the intention, I would interpret it as saying (with reference to FEs) it is not against the code of conduct to use FEs. It is, however, contrary to the code of conduct to repeatedly use them on the same person if they have asked you not to (aka griefing).
But as has been said, the GMs get the final call. It doesn't matter if my interpretation of the rule is right or wrong, or yours, or any other player. As long as they (the GMs) interpret it correctly and consistently.

[Dworin]

It doesn't say you can't use them. If it did, they would never have been introduced, and if they were, the GMs would action every complaint about them.
Rule 1 of the CoC can be applied to anything it is so woolly. I could decide that a warden's shout ruins my enjoyment of the game, or the colour purple, or trees, and apply rule 1.
The rule is woolly because it has to be, to specifically list out every breach of conduct that has, does, or will upset various players isn't vaguely practical.
Reading beyond the literal wording of rule 1 to the intention, I would interpret it as saying (with reference to FEs) it is not against the code of conduct to use FEs. It is, however, contrary to the code of conduct to repeatedly use them on the same person if they have asked you not to (aka griefing).
But as has been said, the GMs get the final call. It doesn't matter if my interpretation of the rule is right or wrong, or yours, or any other player. As long as they interpret it correctly and consistently.

Would you not agree that interfering with people doing /dance is an obvious and observable violation of rule number one?

Yes, how I would interpret rule number one is stricter than you choose to. A warden's shout is not directed at a player. A forced emote is.

[manstan]

"I will repeat myself again at the risk of being cruel".

Do you fish? Why not? With some of the arguments presented here you're supposed to. Turbine put fishing in the game for you to do, it is part of the game mechanics, so apparently you're supposed to be fishing.
Do you role play? Why not? Turbine built the game for role playing, it is part of the game mechanics, there is a chat channel specifically for it, so apparently you are supposed to be role playing.
Do you walk everywhere you go? Why not? Turbine gave you the option to walk everywhere, it's part of the game mechanic so apparently you are supposed to walk everywhere.
Do you jump off cliffs? Why not? Your character can jump, there are cliffs, it's part of the game mechanics, so apparently you are supposed to jump off cliffs.


Do I need to go on with this or was that sufficient to get my point across?

The interesting part is everyone ignored that and continued on with the "turbine put it in the game so I MUST do it" argument. Some people are so convinced they are right they will ignore any proof they are wrong.

My point being Turbine isn't forcing you to use them, that is your choice, you chose to use them, you chose to harass your fellow players, and you chose to blame it on Turbine. Man up and take some responsibility for you own actions. You are the one that makes the choice, Turbine did not make it for you, so they are not responsible. Only children blame some on else for their actions.

[modernlife]

Turbine put chat channels in the game. Does that mean anything said on them can't be considered harassment?

Prior to RoR, Turbine made it so tapping a mob would cause XP loss to the person fighting that mob. Would following a person round constantly tapping all their mobs not have been considered harassment?

The fact that Turbine put a mechanic into the game matters not. It's the intent of the person using it that matters. If someone is deliberately disrupting the play of someone else then as far as I'm concerned that could be considered harassment.

[Defiant1]

It doesn't say you can't use them. If it did, they would never have been introduced, and if they were, the GMs would action every complaint about them.
Rule 1 of the CoC can be applied to anything it is so woolly. I could decide that a warden's shout ruins my enjoyment of the game, or the colour purple, or trees, and apply rule 1.
The rule is woolly because it has to be, to specifically list out every breach of conduct that has, does, or will upset various players isn't vaguely practical.
Reading beyond the literal wording of rule 1 to the intention, I would interpret it as saying (with reference to FEs) it is not against the code of conduct to use FEs. It is, however, contrary to the code of conduct to repeatedly use them on the same person if they have asked you not to (aka griefing).
But as has been said, the GMs get the final call. It doesn't matter if my interpretation of the rule is right or wrong, or yours, or any other player. As long as they interpret it correctly and consistently.

Thank you.

[manstan]

And they we go, any excuse you can use to allow you to harass other players, people will use. Just like children "oh I'm not responsible for it Turbine is, they put them in game so it is their fault I'm using them".

Be an adult, take responsibility for your actions.

[Whart]

You're all twisting stuff and arguing big words, but there's a simple fact I already reminded in my previous post that can't be disputed: the in game /ignore feature is NOT working properly and should be fixed to include those emotes. Problem fixed, /thread, everybody is happy.

Yes and no. I'd be happy with this as a first step in the right direction (assuming they greatly expanded the number of people who could be put on the list), but would still much prefer the opt-out toggle. The one situation not addressed by the /ignore option would be a character that you've never encountered before: that character could still target you with an FE before you have an opportunity to /ignore. In a group performance, three out of four band members may have that person /ignored but the 4th may never have encountered him, and the performance can therefore still be disrupted by the emote.

[Dworin]

Yes and no. I'd be happy with this as a first step in the right direction (assuming they greatly expanded the number of people who could be put on the list), but would still much prefer the opt-out toggle. The one situation not addressed by the /ignore option would be a character that you've never encountered before: that character could still target you with an FE before you have an opportunity to /ignore. In a group performance, three out of four band members may have that person /ignored but the 4th may never have encountered him, and the performance can therefore still be disrupted by the emote.

Agreed. Having ignore also impede forced emotes would be better than nothing, but it's not ideal.

[maxjenius]

I've said it very, very, clearly....as of now Turbine considers it a fun part of the game.

That is certainly true.

It doesn't matter what you feel or what I feel.

It does matter. Pranks are not part of the fun part of the game for some. Unless and until Turbine aligns itself with that notion, those who want an opt out will continue to advocate for one. The only valid reason not to implement an opt out is "Too complex to program correctly without hosing up 8 zillion other things."

It's all up to Turbine and ToS are dictated by them and the violations come from that. It just needs to be explicitly stated and defined.

Even if Turbine's rules explicitly stated "Festival consumables are a fun part of the game" that would not somehow disallow requests for an opt out. Everything is a fun part of the game (it is, after all, a game) until it's used as a tool for disrupting other players.

Also, I'm pretty sure that people don't actually care if you put them on ignore to be quite honest.

I doubt people give a fig, too. When I put someone on ignore, I don't bother with the grandiose, self-important "Welcome to my ignore list."

[Gripn]

"Instead of putting your energy into discussing issues amongst yourselves start talking to Turbine and their community managers Sapience and Celestrata. They are the ones whose task it is to bring forth issues of the playerbase to the actual game developers and thus they are your address to turn to." Glenwin

"The best way to get a response is to send them a PM." Glenwin

I only wish that were true. I sent two PMs to Sapience concerning an earlier thread on forced emotes. They were polite PMs asking for clarification of Turbine's policy on the use of forced emotes. Sapience didn't deign to reply to either of them. I know he's a busy guy, but frankly I think that's downright rude.

I've just sent Sapience another PM concerning this thread. If he doesn't reply in a few days, I'll post my PM as an open letter.

[Dworin]

I doubt people give a fig, too. When I put someone on ignore, I don't bother with the grandiose, self-important "Welcome to my ignore list."

Most of the time I don't bother, either. But once in awhile, it just makes me feel good. And since the jerk is using my character to make himself feel good, I figure I can in return.

But in truth, we've gone 7 pages and gained practically nothing. Maybe absolutely nothing. I suppose it is something that the positive rep I have received has outweighed the negative rep, so maybe.

The only thing the argument has truly done is demonstrate (once again) that the community is divided, and severely so. I don't know if that is a concern of Turbine, or if Turbine is even paying attention. If I had to guess, I'd guess the only thing Turbine is paying any attention to at all is the bottom line. So long as they are providing a product people will pay for, nothing else matters. That would be my suspicion surrounding the silence.

If that's the case (and they are a business first and formost), then they have to be spoken to in an area they are paying attention to.

To paraphrase Gandalf, I am but one small person in a wide world, after all. My actions, alone, will have little effect, I know. But I do get one vote, with my wallet.

[Vhivi]

I don't know who RossMcColl2 is but what does he have to do with Turbine? You're not making sense.

LOL! You keep quoting that line from RossMcColl2 over and over again, not me.

I'm saying that Turbine made the decision to create and implement emotes.

Perhaps you're the one not listening and you're actually doing more talking than me. The fact that you're accusing me of twisting your words.....*shakes head* lol.

You did more than that. But, it's pointless now. I ignored the first ad hominem and tried to give you the benefit of the doubt. Now you've compounded the first one by repeating it. An ad hominem in a debate is the equivalent of an admission of defeat. Thank you.

I say all of this with no ill will toward anyone, I'm just perplexed that this concept is not understood.

Oh, I understand you completely. In one respect we are in violent agreement. I do see that. You don't. Unfortunately you're missing a key point in my argument that addressed the point you're trying to make. I even pointed out, again, the key line from that argument. You've ignored it both times and jumped on the minutiae. So be it.

[Gripn]

The only thing the argument has truly done is demonstrate (once again) that the community is divided, and severely so. I don't know if that is a concern of Turbine, or if Turbine is even paying attention. If I had to guess, I'd guess the only thing Turbine is paying any attention to at all is the bottom line. So long as they are providing a product people will pay for, nothing else matters. That would be my suspicion surrounding the silence.

If that's the case (and they are a business first and formost), then they have to be spoken to in an area they are paying attention to.

To paraphrase Gandalf, I am but one small person in a wide world, after all. My actions, alone, will have little effect, I know. But I do get one vote, with my wallet.

Dworin, I agree with you.

The OP wrote that people had used forced emotes to disrupt his concerts. To my mind, that's a clear violation of the LOTRO Code of Conduct. I don't see how anyone could argue that Turbine intended players to use forced emotes to disrupt concerts. I'm very frustrated that Turbine seems unwilling to enforce its own Code of Conduct.

The situation where a player uses a festival emote on a player who doesn't want to be the subject of the prank is much less clear-cut, to my mind. The prankster may have intended the emote to be a bit of fun, and had no intention of spoiling his target's enjoyment of the game. I would like to see an opt-out option in the UI to cater for this situation.

I'm getting sick and tired of Turbine turning a blind eye to griefers and cheats. I think Turbine does an extremely poor job compared to the excellent support we European players used to receive from Satine and her team at Codemasters. I'm getting very close to voting with my wallet, too.

[maxjenius]

The only thing the argument has truly done is demonstrate (once again) that the community is divided, and severely so. I don't know if that is a concern of Turbine, or if Turbine is even paying attention. If I had to guess, I'd guess the only thing Turbine is paying any attention to at all is the bottom line. So long as they are providing a product people will pay for, nothing else matters. That would be my suspicion surrounding the silence.

I imagine there are only 2 things keeping an opt out out of the game: technical ease implementation and "someone important enough at Turbine thinks festival pranks are a real hoot of a great idea and how dare those killjoys not see the truth of it."

[manstan]

Thing is if you ask someone why they cast an FE they aren't going to say "for the fun of it", they are going to say "to complete a deed". "Fun" doesn't seem to enter in to it.

And something that gets me is people assuming Turbines intent. Some how I doubt seriously Turbines intent was to harass other players. Their intent may simply have been for friends to prank each other, not to hit everyone that walks by; which is the way they are used now.

[Abiyah]

Spot on in my books. The level that some are reacting to this whole forced emote is just...wow.

They're meant to be joke items/skills to liven things up. I always laugh if someone uses one of the festival items on me. And if I can I return the favour.

And I mean really, if you're doing a synchronized dance/band performance, it doesn't take long to get it started again. Not everyone is using these skills/items to be rude, or to be disruptive. So just have a laugh at it, and continue on.

This is good for you; it's your game and your style. Me, I'd rather not have the opportunity to "just have a laugh at it, and continue on", so I've asked for and continue to support the opt-out toggle. That allows you to play the game you want which includes the forced emotes, and it allows me to play the game I want, which is forced-emote-free. win-win for both sides of the issue. Peoples' negative reaction to an opt-out is just... wow.

[Radhruin_EU]

Where does Turbine say you can't use them? I go along with that because I agreed with his points and I stand by it. As of now it's not against the ToS to use emotes obviously implemented by Turbine, but I hope they will amend that to appease those that are offended by them. However, these aren't some sort of hack that people are exploiting and I'm so confused by those that aren't understanding this.

Your own common sense should tell you that if someone's doing something else then maybe, just maybe, they're not going to be at all entertained by being FE'd. At no point did Turbine encourage anyone to spam the damn things willy-nilly; they left it up to the players to show a modicum of self-restraint. How wrong they were.

The point, again, is that line of RossMcColl2's pretending that it's somehow really okay to spam them any time you feel like it ('regardless of situation') just because Turbine haven't explicitly said you shouldn't. Sorry, but that attitude's antisocial (basically it's not giving a toss about other players) and nobody should really need Turbine to tell them that it's neither big nor clever to spam FE's. Some people here seem to have mistaken permissiveness for a license (even outright encouragement) to be annoying.

Now I don't think that's you, but you might want to be a little more careful which arguments you choose to agree wholeheartedly with. That 'regardless of situation' bit is damning.

[Rampagingdeath]

You're all twisting stuff and arguing big words, but there's a simple fact I already reminded in my previous post that can't be disputed: the in game /ignore feature is NOT working properly and should be fixed to include those emotes. Problem fixed, /thread, everybody is happy.

I must admit I love to see when someone cuts all the hysteria and hyperbole and waffle and just cuts to the chase with some common sense +rep sir

In the Code of Conduct, within the Terms of Service. Rule number one says not to use them on people who don't want them used upon them <snip>

Er, sorry but again like so many things you choose to come to that conclusion to suit your own view, rule number one is vague at best, but keep on twisting it however you like.

Anyway. Thanks for the laugh.

Do you not think even for a brief second that some (not all) are choosing to disagree with you because they've figured out how to push your buttons and are laughing their head off? and before you tear into me again thats not telling you not to respond or to just be quiet, it's a third party observation made by my wife who never posts. Oh and if people are doing that then grow up - to some this matter is serious.

I doubt people give a fig, too. When I put someone on ignore, I don't bother with the grandiose, self-important "Welcome to my ignore list."

You must spread some more reputation around before giving it to maxjenius again - lousy rep system

Most of the time I don't bother, either. But once in awhile, it just makes me feel good

Thanks for proving the last point so well *shrug*

The situation where a player uses a festival emote on a player who doesn't want to be the subject of the prank is much less clear-cut, to my mind. The prankster may have intended the emote to be a bit of fun, and had no intention of spoiling his target's enjoyment of the game.

Try and stay on track here please, any kind of festival emote is the direct work of beelzebub himself and by using one someone immediately becomes a jerk/griefer/server pariah etc. /irony_off for those that can't see it *sigh* why do I have to state that /facepalm.

Their intent may simply have been for friends to prank each other, not to hit everyone that walks by.

Yes it may, but as I've said to people before, that's merely a case of choosing to find the interpretation that suits your particular view, theres nothing wrong with that - we all do it I guess and at least you personally inculde the word 'may' rather than stating a view as hard fact, that's far more reasonable than the norm here and whilst I might disagree with you I respect you for that.

This is good for you; it's your game and your style. Me, I'd rather not have the opportunity to "just have a laugh at it, and continue on", so I've asked for and continue to support the opt-out toggle. That allows you to play the game you want which includes the forced emotes, and it allows me to play the game I want, which is forced-emote-free. win-win for both sides of the issue. Peoples' negative reaction to an opt-out is just... wow.

I support it too, and for one I just laugh and get on with it if it happens to me, there is one player on Eldar that's black silk gloved me 4 times now then jumped on a horse - I can wait, i'll get ya back eventually of course as I've stated before but it gets roundly ignored because it suits people to do so, my playstyle involves bashing stuff and achieving goals - not standing around playing in a band or dancing infront of one - different playstyles and were mine the same as roleplayers I'd probably be screaming from the rooftops about it but finding common ground between the two player types is like trying to thread a needle in the dark, whilst drunk, with gloves on and with people throwing rocks at you - a healthy dose of seeing the others side might help everyone.

[Radhruin_EU]

Spot on in my books. The level that some are reacting to this whole forced emote is just...wow.

They're meant to be joke items/skills to liven things up. I always laugh if someone uses one of the festival items on me. And if I can I return the favour.

And I mean really, if you're doing a synchronized dance/band performance, it doesn't take long to get it started again. Not everyone is using these skills/items to be rude, or to be disruptive. So just have a laugh at it, and continue on.

Maybe the whole thing's gotten old, having long since ceased to be funny? There's a thought.

As for griefing by interrupting events, well. That's just so hilarious! My sides are splitting!