He did it guys, he did it.

@maximusarael020 said in He did it guys, he did it.:

@goldsmen I mean, he assuredly is shaming him in Blurb's new YouTube video. Calls him rude names and whatnot. I get the guy was toxic, but I feel like this behavior from someone with as big an impact on the community as Blurbs will mean more people will be trying to "teach" other players about how PvPvE works instead of just reporting toxic behavior and moving on. That's the part that really got me, was his "I was just calmly trying to explain" blah blah blah. Like, that's not the time to try to "teach" anyone anything. PvP always gets adrenaline pumping, the guy was already upset he lost his loot and progress and got bested by another player. There's almost always negative feelings that come with being sunk, especially for players that try to avoid PvP. Blurb's role on the Seas is not to "teach" players against their will. If they want that kind of "education" they can go watch his YouTube videos.

It just felt really bad looking at the comments of Blurbs Twitter post and seeing people tear the guy down because he said "I'm not responsible for my own actions" when he clearly did not mean to say that. He was caught up in the moment and his mouth was moving faster than his brain, he most likely meant to say something like "I'm not responsible for your actions" or something, but then people just see this small clip of their interaction and start giving the guy grief. And I get he was toxic, and had apparently said really bad stuff earlier, but all that means is that he should be suspended or banned from the game for breaking the Terms of Service, not that he needs to become a lightning-rod for Blurb's fan boys to trash. We all make mistakes, I'm sure a lot of people here on the forums have said or done things on the Seas that when they matured or thought back on they were a bit embarrassed about how they handled a particular situation. Would anyone here want some big name Twitch Streamer with tens of thousands of viewers to highlight their worst moment on the seas, holding you up for public ridicule by the masses? I think not.

I mean I wouldn't exactly be devastated to be honest and I certainly wouldn't obsess over it. Streamer mode was on so his name wasn't even on display. I think some people are probably obsessing over this interaction way more than the guy in Blurbs' video.

There's quite a few posts that I've read in this thread that are projecting a lot of their own feelings and game experiences on top of the actual people involved in that clip/video. At this point it's almost begining to take on a narrative life of its own completely free of the original interaction.

@maximusarael020 said in He did it guys, he did it.:

2. Blurbs also could have captured this moment on his livestream and just left it there, or even edited it out of the VOD. No need to share the clip on Twitter AND his YouTube. He could have mentioned the interaction. "I met a player who was very hostile and said these words, and so I think there should be this pop-up." He didn't need to post the clip. That just invites ridicule on the guy who never asked for his gameplay to be seen by tens of thousands of people. Far fewer people would have seen it if it had just been left on his livestream. He made the active choice to throw this individual in front of the jury of public opinion. That's on Blurbs.

You're having issue with a player, who, without knowledge that 1: Blurbs is a partnered content creator and 2: is livestreaming/recording his playtime in the game to anyone willing to watch at that time, is getting embarrassed and put on blast for their thoughts and actions.

Think about why this specific player, who had their gamertag hidden, was put on blast. Most content creators put rude, abhorrent, heavily misinformed players on blast because that's not how you should be acting in a PvPvE video game, regardless of how many people are watching.

We move on from these situations, but that doesn't solve the problem put forward, we try to suggest and give feedback to the devs but they don't have enough evidence or reason to care. Then we have other users here on the forums denying they have these experiences because they deal with swabbies more often than hardcore dedicated sweats (and are also apparently stoic enough to not have issue with getting mercilessly murdered by players better than them), it's all a mess. All it took, was a passionate enough content creator in good standing with the devs, and a damn twitter post to get the PvPvE side of the community to want to take a stand to the issue being presented.

You're worried about the emotional and mental state of a person that, in all reasonable methods of judgement, should not have launched the game and sailed with an emissary flag. They probably don't know they were talking to a content creator that knows a lot more concrete details about the game than them, and were trying to guide them into not being constantly upset that they were sunk for a flag that, regardless of grade level, is valuable to anyone willing to shoot them down in the first place. The concern for the player put on blast has little weight, and if we don't show these scenarios, who is actually going to know, or even care that people are actively misunderstanding the Emissary system and its inherent risk?

If you want to put content creators on blast for making content out of a sandbox game and producing information for those that play daily, weekly, or monthly, you're gonna want to bark up a different tree.

@wolfmanbush said in He did it guys, he did it.:

They are still very disconnected from the organic experience, this whole thing is another example of that. If they think this sort of focus is what is going to actually lead a pvp update to success they are going to once again end up wondering why a major update lead to so little organic activity.

Whatever people feel about this specific case, it still shows that they are going down the same path that created the mess to begin with. Listening far too much to people that do not play organically and far too little to those that do.

and when the organic activity doesn't come back next season partner/pvper and dev will still be looking at those that produce to blame rather than examining what they are doing that keeps leading to less and less organic activity

it's because they run, it's because they don't lose right, it's because they red sea

nah it's because the quality of experience for those that actually produce loot in this game and take risks has steadily gone downhill while partner and dev thought they knew what was best for them. That hasn't shown to be accurate since the emissary update and the emissary update worked because people that now have completely opted out of the organic experience used to actually participate in the environment beyond montages and "this pver complained" videos.

Jack sparrow and shrines and that sort of thing get bumps but they never improved the organic risk/reward experience they let it die off in chaos and imbalances to serve content creation.

supplies supplies supplies, no investment chainshots, that's what we need, flood no risk/high reward activity for years, that's what the organic players need, ok

after all of this here comes a "pvp heavy update" lol

season 8 is gonna be streamer vs streamer in the game just like it's turning into now because now a lot of long term players are opting out themselves.

what are they gonna do? pay people gold to get chain shot up and spawn camped? pay people gold to want to be around pvpers? the divide runs deep with what dev and partner have thus far collabed on

Who do they think they are bringing in? people that already abandoned the game from negative organic experiences? at over 4 years and as a gamepass game a bunch of new players that already didn't like the game or avoid the game? people that left because of the milestone situation? It's not like there are people outside of the already existing social side of sot that care about a pvp update in this game to any degree where they would flood here/back here.

To me it seems like the developers aren't necessarily banking on somehow drawing in some sort of long lost colony of "PvPers" back into the game with Season 8. Season 8 seems to be about finally giving a clearly defined and focused path for PvP related gameplay.

I see a lot of people that don't like PvP or just don't engage with it are asking, "how will this improve PvE?" Well, it's rather simple. If PvP gameplay is going to be given some kind of new activity or some kind of end game quest loop or whatever then PvP focused players will flock to this new content. If PvP gets given an activity that is specific to PvP only then that frees up some of the pressure on PvE players who feel they are always being hunted by hardened PvP players whom they have no chance of defending against. These hardened PvPers would be a lot more likely to go fight fellow PvPers if Season 8 delivers on its premise.

The vibe I'm getting from the developers is that they want to redefine a pathway for PvP and PvE to coexist in a healthier state than what it is currently.

@wolfmanbush said:

Chainshots NEVER got balanced... Chain shots were brought in... to stop runners... Chain shots made running SIGNIFICANTLY more common while also killing off production... People aren't super hooked to captaincy organically speaking, that's a problem going into a pvp season as well if people just aren't that into the grind.

To be fair to chain-shots, they can be used to stop people from chasing just as much as they can be used to stop runners.

My issue with them was their overabundance, making naval stale and boring. I miss Arena. There was a limit to how many specials we had, and we had to use them carefully. Adventure naval is hilarious. Chain spam; curse spam.

I haven't played much since Season 7, as I definitely wasn't hooked to captaincy. And if Season 8 turns out to be opt-in special spam contests, I'll probably end up passing on that too. Did I say I miss Arena?

@wolfmanbush said in He did it guys, he did it.:

@vakrisone said in He did it guys, he did it.:

To me it seems like the developers aren't necessarily banking on somehow drawing in some sort of long lost colony of "PvPers" back into the game with Season 8. Season 8 seems to be about finally giving a clearly defined and focused path for PvP related gameplay.

I see a lot of people that don't like PvP or just don't engage with it are asking, "how will this improve PvE?" Well, it's rather simple. If PvP gameplay is going to be given some kind of new activity or some kind of end game quest loop or whatever then PvP focused players will flock to this new content. If PvP gets given an activity that is specific to PvP only then that frees up some of the pressure on PvE players who feel they are always being hunted by hardened PvP players whom they have no chance of defending against. These hardened PvPers would be a lot more likely to go fight fellow PvPers if Season 8 delivers on its premise.

The vibe I'm getting from the developers is that they want to redefine a pathway for PvP and PvE to coexist in a healthier state than what it is currently.

My issue being that they created the unhealthy state along with focusing heavily on partner wants

Chainshots NEVER got balanced, ever

They just let them wreck the risk/reward environment while enabling those using them through hopping more and more

Chain shots were brought in (in reality) because partners/popular pvp streamers wanted to stop runners. That's what they were actually for. Chain shots made running SIGNIFICANTLY more common while also killing off production.

My concern is that if they never figured that out, if they never stopped enabling hoppers, why would any organic player trust anything being said or advertised?

Their experience was sacrificed for clicks and engagement on pvp content.

Devs and partners are desperate for activity to return so now all of the sudden it's all about making a healthy pvp environment.

I've been talking about this for over a year and a half, since it could have actually made a difference.

This is like trying to repair a relationship after it has been destroyed by neglect and mistreatment, odds ain't great.

A lot of this camping stuff was amplified massively by how they handled chainshots. A couple years of unhealthy pvp, and now they are desperate.

Maybe it helps new players going forward but interest in this game is dwindling for a lot of people.

New player retention is a real struggle so running off so many proven contributors wasn't great. People aren't super hooked to captaincy organically speaking, that's a problem going into a pvp season as well if people just aren't that into the grind. Milestones being a real motivation killer for many and the fact a lot of it just didn't work for two months really got it off to a rough start. Milestones are something that you kinda gotta get hooked on early or the habit is never formed and people just do whatever.

I think you are seeing partnered streamers as villinaous robots who just hop around to sink people without saying a word.

While yes, there are SOME people like that, most of them play the game for the organic nature of it. They don't just server hop and kill people without saying a word. Most people like the fun mess around stuff more than the murder content anyway.

Chainshot one is complete nonsense. What makes you think Rare did not go:

"You know what? A new type of canonball that significantly damages certain parts of ships but really weak to any other parts would be really cool!"

Just like how they did with cursed canonballs. Besides, chainshots can be used to stop chasers too.

I agree that new player retention is horrible. Even though it came out of nowhere.

I kind of understand that Blurbs tried to "educate"; but it's useless to try educating a player who's just mad and doesn't wanna hear anything.
Not sure that showing that to a community in the internet was that intelligent either. Yes the player's behavior wasn't the best at all but.. no it was useless to show him to everybody in the internet. No one really deserve to be shamed or mocked like this.
People can be rude or mad, but the game isn't helping , maybe adrenaline during fights, it happens, I also do say stuff when my crew get attacked; but it's only from a sudden adrenaline rush maybe?

@wolfmanbush Well said.

And it's already having another effect that I feared when I saw Blurb's video. There are now numerous posts on Twitter and Reddit about PvPers "lecturing" them or tying to "teach" them after sinking the poster. Streamers saw Blurb's do it, and other streamers followed suit, and now other people watching these streamers think it's ok to start lecturing people on their play-style, or giving unsolicited advice or feeling like they need to argue with these other players to "set them straight". That's exactly what we don't need is people trying to lecture others after they sink them. That's not the time nor the place. It will only lead to more negative interactions. There's no need for it.

If someone is being toxic/harassing/homophobic/racist/etc or using inappropriate language or slurs:

1. Record enough evidence to submit to Rare for disciplinary action
2. Mute and block the player.
3. Move on.

That's it, and it's the best thing to do. If they are trolls, engaging them only gives them that adrenaline rush they crave. If they are simply upset at being sunk, trying to reason with them in that state isn't going to do anyone any good. Seriously, record, report, move on.

@maximusarael020 said in He did it guys, he did it.:

@wolfmanbush Well said.

And it's already having another effect that I feared when I saw Blurb's video. There are now numerous posts on Twitter and Reddit about PvPers "lecturing" them or tying to "teach" them after sinking the poster. Streamers saw Blurb's do it, and other streamers followed suit

That's not a very accurate assessment. Which streamers are you talking about here? There are many prominent and partnered streamers who already do this style of "educating" after a fight, long before this whole forum circus developed around this one clip.

This isn't the sudden start of some kind of new phenomenon or trend like you're making it out to be. There are partnered streamers who literally make YouTube guide videos for a living filled with footage where they grab a random encounter on the seas and use it as an example of a teaching moment.

and now other people watching these streamers think it's ok to start lecturing people on their play-style, or giving unsolicited advice or feeling like they need to argue with these other players to "set them straight".

Again, incorrect. This is not some new phenomenon that was kick started just because people who didn't previously know who Blurbs was are now suddenly rushing to copy that one specific clip he posted. People have been offering to teach others, throwing out unsolicited advice and arguing with each other after a fight since the game's launch.

That's exactly what we don't need is people trying to lecture others after they sink them.

I regret to be the one to inform you of this but this has been going on for way longer than Blurbs posting that clip. It's a thing some people do whether with good intentions or bad.

That's not the time nor the place. It will only lead to more negative interactions. There's no need for it.

If someone is being toxic/harassing/homophobic/racist/etc or using inappropriate language or slurs:

1. Record enough evidence to submit to Rare for disciplinary action
2. Mute and block the player.
3. Move on.

That's it, and it's the best thing to do. If they are trolls, engaging them only gives them that adrenaline rush they crave. If they are simply upset at being sunk, trying to reason with them in that state isn't going to do anyone any good. Seriously, record, report, move on.

In fairness, isn't this an example of you now lecturing others on how they should be expected to react? It's no different than what you are seemingly chastising others for. Giving unsolicited advice.

@wolfmanbush said in He did it guys, he did it.:

@vakrisone said in He did it guys, he did it.:

In fairness, isn't this an example of you now lecturing others on how they should be expected to react? It's no different than what you are seemingly chastising others for. Giving unsolicited advice.

It's a huge reach and outside of objectivity imo to use this in a thread that came after the streamer turned it public and after it lead to actual in game changes to suggest that it is in any way similar to deescalating an in game situation immediately after conflict happens.

There is nothing objective about this thread and most of the responses in it. Almost every post on here is a subjective viewpoint with a few examples of people outright imprinting their own subjective experiences and emotions and building a runaway narrative that is developing a life of its own separate to that of the actual interaction in that clip.

In that reply I made I am making a point of how hyperbolic and slightly hypocritical it is to criticise others for giving advice in a way you subjectively frown on while literally giving advice on how you prefer the situations to be handled.

@wolfmanbush said in He did it guys, he did it.:

@vakrisone said in He did it guys, he did it.:

@wolfmanbush said in He did it guys, he did it.:

@vakrisone said in He did it guys, he did it.:

In fairness, isn't this an example of you now lecturing others on how they should be expected to react? It's no different than what you are seemingly chastising others for. Giving unsolicited advice.

It's a huge reach and outside of objectivity imo to use this in a thread that came after the streamer turned it public and after it lead to actual in game changes to suggest that it is in any way similar to deescalating an in game situation immediately after conflict happens.

There is nothing objective about this thread and most of the responses in it. Almost every post on here is a subjective viewpoint with a few examples of people outright imprinting their own subjective experiences and emotions and building a runaway narrative that is developing a life of its own separate to that of the actual interaction in that clip.

In that reply I made I am making a point of how hyperbolic and slightly hypocritical it is to criticise others for giving advice in a way you subjectively frown on while literally giving advice on how you prefer the situations to be handled.

the runaway narrative that a partner's random encounter is no more important than anyone else's? runaway narrative that they should do what everyone else does, report and move on?

I'm mostly refering to people creating their own head cannon for the encounter such as running with an assumption that the player is traumatised or shamed by the clip, was incredibly hard done by having to actually talk to his attacker after a sink like some kind of human interacting with another human on an online game (the absolute horror!) or rhetorics like the "evil" streamer saw his chance for a "gotcha" moment for clicks or intimating that streamers shouldn't try to interact with people when they are recording because they simply hold too much power so they shouldn't do the things I see regular players doing on a daily basis, i.e. talk, exchange banter or discuss with players during and after fights. Or the false narrative that this one clip is now kick starting a huge wave of copycat offenders trying to be the next Professor SoT to people they sink.

This entire thing is based on using a gotcha clip to make a larger statement that an entire group of people are somehow represented by some random encounters streamers had, where possibly thousands of people at this point are running wild with it.

A few people that criticize the streamer's actions and suggest literally Rare's own suggestions for all the rest of us are building a runaway narrative?

You're putting words in my mouth here to create an argument that doesn't exist on my end. I'm not disagreeing with people criticising the streamer's actions. Nor have I suggested that putting forward Rare's own advice on conduct is building a runaway narrative. See my statement above for what I deem to be runaway narratives.

Whatever you disagree with you disagree with but the suggestions of deescalate, separate, report (if one wants to) and move on without carrying it on is pretty much what every platform/game/product runs with. Partners/streamers/popular personalities are no different, no more important than anyone else that participates and neither are their random encounters.

I've never disagreed with these sentiments. I don't think streamers are above everyone else. On the contrary, I think people are actually freaking out a little too much over this simply because a popular streamer is involved. It's lending far too much importance to what is otherwise an extremely average interaction in SoT.

If a random no-name person submitted such a clip publicly to Rare there would not be this much of a hullabaloo over it. Notice for example how the much lesser known streamer, Kota McKloud, is never being mentioned on here. Even though she actually has a much stronger case to make for how problematic players can get when they encounter PvP in SoT. Yet her clips were also submitted as evidence for a need for a response by Rare.

I watched the clip last night. Up until then, I was only interested in the main issue discussed in these threads, and Rare's idea of a solution (pop ups).

With all the talk about de-escalating and reporting, I was expecting some heated shout-fest. What I saw was pretty tame. Just two grown dudes disagreeing. I think its okay if people disagree or debate over hot-mic, as long as their arguments remain civil.

Also, I think prior to "de-escalate, separate, report," should be "use common sense." It's 2022. Times have changed. You're gonna get recorded. @wolfmanbush you often mention adapting to one's environment, and I think that applies here as well. Don't hot-mic anything you don't want clipped.

@wolfmanbush said:

this leaves out the part where the one with the power not only uploaded it to social media but also a youtube video where the streamer calls the other "an extremely toxic individual" in the video

As far as adapting goes people are adapting to this game by leaving the organic environment, sot streamers turning into variety streamers and sot players turning into variety gamers.

If they want to lean more and more into catering to partners and streamers and this sort of nonsense that is certainly their freedom but less people want to play this game and major updates aren't bringing people in.

So, there are two separate discussions going on in this thread. Players leaving and less activity ties more into the main topic. And I think we agree more than we disagree on the specifics of why that is, and acknowledge that pop-ups aren't going to magically solve the problem.

The second discussion is one on the ethics of clipping such interactions for content as opposed to, as you suggest, de-escalating and moving on.

Idk what Blurbs' motivations were; whether he actually intended to explain the game mechanics to this guy who didn't understand, or if he was baiting for a "gotcha" to use in supporting his narrative that we... idk... need pop ups, I guess?

What I'm saying is, either way, it doesn't matter. We're living in a time where everyone and their mother can be content creators. People clip things. When I meant adapting to the environment, I meant adapting to that reality. And this isn't a reality exclusive to SoT. In any game, don't hot-mic if you don't want to be clipped. Being aware of this is just as important as knowing when to de-escalate and report.

@wolfmanbush said:

...they pretty much built this game on open mic content, a communication system that is pretty much entirely built on new players and inexperienced players often times not even knowing how it works or that they are even talking publicly in many cases... it's the way it is but it's a dirty way to treat people that should be protected as participants... when it comes to the social side of the community sacrificing people's privacy and subjecting them to probable mass negativity as if that can't change by not participating in it is poison to a community imo.

You are voluntarily sacrificing a bit of your privacy when you hot-mic. I think either in this thread or the other one, someone likened the situation to one's behavior in the public being caught on CCTV.

And as important as it is to "protect" (retain?) inexperienced players, this wasn't a scenario in which some novice was unaware they were hot-mic'ed. Guy was in the PL ghost outfit & engaging in an argument lol.

Regardless of what you think about Blurb's handling of the situation, the fact remains that if that guy didn't want to be clipped, he shouldn't have hot-mic'ed.

@wolfmanbush said in He did it guys, he did it.:

Did someone say evil streamer?

Something I've seen a pattern with is you give the streamer a benefit of the doubt that you don't give to those that have criticized their actions.

That's a very interesting assumption. What you seem to have done to come to that conclusion is taken my comments into a vacuum where the original contexts no longer exist. That then makes it extremely easy for you to make a straw man argument which is of course easier for you to tear down but it isn't very nice nor is it very objective.

If we're going to bring the conversation into noticing patterns about the poster instead of keeping it strictly about their arguments... May I be so bold as to offer my own observation in return.

I've seen your comments on this forum for a long while now. Honestly I up-vote quite a few of them because for the most part they're almost always well mannered, rational and have thought put into them. A rare and commendable thing to see on the internet.

On this topic however I've seen you go through two of these threads now bringing a lot of bias into your arguments and not really staying as objective as I've seen you capable of being. Worse still you go on the attack like you did here with me. Instead of continuing an exchange of arguments you decided to take it to making a comment speculating upon my personal mannerism instead of sticking to only attacking my arguments.

Ultimately your goal with that comment was to paint me as sympathising more with the streamer than with the critics on here. To make the situation more black and white. The good guys vs the bad guys. Because it's easier to pigeonhole people into easy to digest categories.

Well, I disagree with and reject your hypothesis. I do not wholly agree with the streamer's actions nor do I wholly reject everyone who criticises them simply because I choose to challenge the extremes in those criticisms.

You've said things like those that criticize the streamer's actions are projecting, suggested bias, etc

Because some people are. Note the use of the word, "some".

Talked about hyperbole and added it to your counters.

Because some comments were over the top and hyperbolic.

Uploading a 40 second clip of someone with an extreme one liner in it (where we don't know if the person even intended to say that line) specifically to bring negative attention to a person and a larger group of people is literally what "gotcha" is when it comes to journalism/feedback/encounter whatever.

I'm not disputing that. I'm disputing the criticism that all of a sudden the use of straw man arguments and "gotcha" moments is distasteful because a streamer does it. Meanwhile this entire forum has an archive full of threads using gotcha tactics to attack a certain playstyle. More often than not, that playstyle is connected to PvP because this forum has a tangible bias against PvP due to the majority user demographic.

I understand that the streamer doing it is more high profile and thus gets out a negative stereotype to a wider audience. And yes, people might feel aggrieved that the devs basically responded to a gotcha tactic. But I'm still of the opinion that how is that any different than if the devs were to respond because a gotcha thread on the forum called them out?

Also, saying all of the mass negative attention is potentially dangerous and might lead to people being harmed emotionally, psychologically, etc (which we know to be a fact, as a risk) is not saying that it happened in this specific case.

No, but nothing in this clip will add to the already pretty toxic atmosphere that occurs in heated SoT interactions. This clip is a drop in that ocean and its not even that heated. It's a very average exchange from my experience.

The part I personally think is truly unnecessary is when Blurbs insults the guy in his follow up YouTube video. Nothing the guy said was that bad even going back to view the original livestream. The guy made a very dumb comparison between being attacked in a game and being "abused" (I can't use the actual term on here) in real life. It was extremely distasteful but hardly worth noting as super toxic in my opinion.

@wolfmanbush said in He did it guys, he did it.:

@vakrisone said in He did it guys, he did it.:

@wolfmanbush said in He did it guys, he did it.:
On this topic however I've seen you go through two of these threads now bringing a lot of bias into your arguments and not really staying as objective as I've seen you capable of being

Anyone that goes through either of the two threads on this topic and thinks I'm different or inconsistent on this topic didn't know me to begin with. Everything I have said is very consistent with principles and views I have.

As far as this specific streamer the only "bias" I have is that I've regularly seen them be condescending (imo) to people that disagree with them in their own chat which creates context to use to consider it condescending in the video.

I've literally publicly held this exact same position with this exact same streamer in a very similar scenario and relevant when they were on the other side of it 6+ months ago.

as far as any perceived bias goes when it comes streamers/partners go in general I have remained consistent with them as well which is documented here.

There are plenty of sot streamers that I like as people, as personalities, as entertainment, ranging from smaller channels to larger channels, I criticize the environment of streaming significantly more than I have ever criticized a specific streamer, in general I don't like talking about specific people.

You seemed to have no problem attempting to criticise me as a person just one reply ago. I admittedly only have a very cursory view of your posting style but it struck me as uncharacteristic for you to make criticisms on a person rather than their argument.