The pros and cons of Messages

[Elden King]

I'm sure that what I'm going to say isn't going to be very popular, but I have to get it off my back. I have been a huge fan of the "Souls" games since the beginning. I love almost everything about them. The messaging system is awesome. BUT... a LOT of the messages are just crap. The constant obsession with "rumps" and "holes" and "pickles" and "fingers" is just really juvenile. These games are very dark, and serious, and have an amazing atmosphere that is shattered when you read such stupid comments. Like a bunch of elementary school kids. Same with the "liar ahead" when there is no illusory wall. It would be great if people could leave messages that were truly informative, rather than just silly, dumb things. I have given up reading messages, only to find out that I missed an important clue that would have really helped, but it was buried under all the silliness. I have no doubt that some of you really enjoy these things, and I'm no "Karen", but it just detracts from such a great series of "adult" oriented games. Ok, flame away.

[zero]

Originally posted by ressenmacher:

I think that disparaging messages actually doing something would help with that. Right now, disparaging a message is literally no different than commending it; the author gets a heal, the message increases in rating (which I believe makes it more likely to appear to others), and the only difference at all from saying it's good is that the author can see how many goods/poors that message has.

As a result, right now with a message any interaction is positive and the only tool of negative reinforcement you have is to not interact at all. This incentivizes people to be sensationalist, to be rude or crude or crass or annoying, anything that makes you do something to the message. The worst thing you can do is not to have a bad message, it's to have a boring or overlong one. This is why all those asshats put them over graces and ladders and very non-secret walls: because players getting mad and disparaging them is just as good as them liking it, so why not?

If disparagement instead reduced rating, provided no heal, and made the message less likely to appear, it would go a long way towards attention-starving the trolls, griefers, and juvenile asshats.

have you considered the other side of that, in which people downvote "helpful" ones and only upvote the funny ones you don't approve of?

cause if it ever turns into an "us vs them" moment that will ultimately become that.

[ressenmacher]

Originally posted by zero:

have you considered the other side of that, in which people downvote "helpful" ones and only upvote the funny ones you don't approve of?

cause if it ever turns into an "us vs them" moment that will ultimately become that.

I mean, sure; if that's what the community overall enjoys writing and reading that's how it should work. The point here is to get people trying to write things that other people will like instead of things that will get attention in any way possible, not shutting down messages I don't personally enjoy.

[zero]

Originally posted by ressenmacher:

Originally posted by zero:

have you considered the other side of that, in which people downvote "helpful" ones and only upvote the funny ones you don't approve of?

cause if it ever turns into an "us vs them" moment that will ultimately become that.

I mean, sure; if that's what the community overall enjoys writing and reading that's how it should work. The point here is to get people trying to write things that other people will like instead of things that will get attention in any way possible, not shutting down messages I don't personally enjoy.

i mean i dont see how you dont consider it an attempt to shut down messages you dislike if your trying to suggest a system that does just that instead of well, ingoring the messages you dislike and moving on? or joining a group of friends that aren't as silly so theirs highlight.

i dont really see the logic of changing it from a system in which everyone wins into a weird ♥♥♥♥ measuring content between tryharding and clownery, when it could just be both, as thats a fair represenation of the people who play

[mpcgannon]

I don't remember as many stupid messages in ds1/3. Rose colored glasses, less options, or less main stream?

[John Titor]

Originally posted by mpcgannon:

I don't remember as many stupid messages in ds1/3. Rose colored glasses, less options, or less main stream?

Amazing chest ahead, try two-handing

[ressenmacher]

Originally posted by zero:

i mean i dont see how you dont consider it an attempt to shut down messages you dislike if your trying to suggest a system that does just that instead of well, ingoring the messages you dislike and moving on? or joining a group of friends that aren't as silly so theirs highlight.

i dont really see the logic of changing it from a system in which everyone wins into a weird ♥♥♥♥ measuring content between tryharding and clownery, when it could just be both, as thats a fair represenation of the people who play

Remember that it isn't shutting down messages I personally dislike. It's shutting down messages that are disliked on the whole by the community.

I think you're still coming at me from the assumption that this system is explicitly there to squash all silly messages and turn Elden Ring messages into one big No Fun Allowed zone, and that isn't the case. I don't know how you're getting there from the proposal I've made. A voting system reflects what people enjoy seeing, nothing more, nothing less. If they like silly messages, great, silly messages will remain and serious messages, if they're disliked in the same degree, would actually get less common.

The point of the change at all is so that players can be disincentivized from making messages commonly found to be annoying. What exactly constitutes "annoying" is uncertain; maybe serious, maybe silly, maybe (as in my opinion) just boring or bad uses of either + messages placed deliberately to try and hinder interaction with the environment.

[EF_Neo1st]

Originally posted by zero:

Originally posted by ressenmacher:

I mean, sure; if that's what the community overall enjoys writing and reading that's how it should work. The point here is to get people trying to write things that other people will like instead of things that will get attention in any way possible, not shutting down messages I don't personally enjoy.

i mean i dont see how you dont consider it an attempt to shut down messages you dislike if your trying to suggest a system that does just that instead of well, ingoring the messages you dislike and moving on? or joining a group of friends that aren't as silly so theirs highlight.

i dont really see the logic of changing it from a system in which everyone wins into a weird ♥♥♥♥ measuring content between tryharding and clownery, when it could just be both, as thats a fair represenation of the people who play

Maybe if there was a "limited amount of downvotes and upvotes" it would not be so wildly use as a stupidman tool

[John Titor]

Originally posted by EF_Neo1st:

Originally posted by zero:

i mean i dont see how you dont consider it an attempt to shut down messages you dislike if your trying to suggest a system that does just that instead of well, ingoring the messages you dislike and moving on? or joining a group of friends that aren't as silly so theirs highlight.

i dont really see the logic of changing it from a system in which everyone wins into a weird ♥♥♥♥ measuring content between tryharding and clownery, when it could just be both, as thats a fair represenation of the people who play

Maybe if there was a "limited amount of downvotes and upvotes" it would not be so wildly use as a stupidman tool

Maybe if frogs had wings they wouldn't bump their ass when they hopped.

[EF_Neo1st]

Originally posted by John Titor:

Originally posted by EF_Neo1st:

Maybe if there was a "limited amount of downvotes and upvotes" it would not be so wildly use as a stupidman tool

Maybe if frogs had wings they wouldn't bump their ass when they hopped.

or they would bump their heads somewhere higher

[Ratselhaft]

Graffiti existed in Roman times and before and after....

It's nothing new.

For example, famously found at Pompeii and in the Hagia Sophia chiselled in the stone by a bored Norseman who was part of the Varangian Guard

That's how I view it, some juvenile or bored tarnished leaving their mark, as we are apt as a species, to do.

I.e. the graffiti should add to the immersion because that's what it would be like, especially from Tarnished who come from a stock of warriors that were kicked out of "paradise" and given the tools to leave such graffiti.

[Clail]

Poor rating should delete the message after a certain threshold imo.

[John Titor]

Originally posted by Clail:

Poor rating should delete the message after a certain threshold imo.

The only messages left would be from youtubers with relatively big followings. No thanks.

[Omastar]

Originally posted by Clail:

Poor rating should delete the message after a certain threshold imo.

Just make a negative rating deal damage to the player who left the message.

"May chaos take the world!"

[The Spirit of Jazz]

try horseback battle

[UnholyDentist]

I don't recommend to rely on people from gaming community. There are too many kids, mankids and life time dedicated trolls. Either solve the problems yourself or look them up on wiki.