Professor griefs City of Heroes, writes report on response
by Griffin McElroy 
{ Jul 8th 2009 at 3:00AM } 
The study's findings are predictably grim: players' reactions to Myers' (or rather, his character Twixt's) dirty fighting styles have been pretty volatile, ranging from character defamation, cursing, rumor-mongering and even death threats. That seems a little overboard -- if only four kids from a small-town in Colorado could have teamed up to teach him a lesson the old fashioned way.
Reader Comments (Page 1 of 1)
Mike @ Jul 8th 2009 3:16AM
Still working in those WoW Southpark episode references eh? Fresh.
JTUSi @ Jul 8th 2009 8:54AM
Lol, I thought they were referencing Columbine. Then, I remembered that there were only two of them.
Snake Robot Podium @ Jul 8th 2009 9:28AM
I thought it was about Columbine as well. i was kind of scared to click the link.
justshovejayohbe @ Jul 8th 2009 4:48PM
I thought it was a reference to smearing poo on parents' walls by Cartman's company in the episode where the Marsh's hire an actor to pretend he's Stan's burnt-out future self.
The Dark Wayne @ Jul 8th 2009 4:10AM
I only played city of heroes for like 8 levels, so Im a bit confused at how he was able to teleport enemies infront of a robot firing squad, i dont remember any abilities like that. It is pretty awesome though that he was able to beat everyone who fought him, but that with the mentioned ability makes me wonder if he had developer help? He probably wouldnt have gotten flamed as much if he didnt make his character as ridiculously flamboyant and stupid as he did. Still it's surprising the reaction he got, it sounds basically equivalent to pvping in the field of strife in AV in WoW, whereas he got the kind of response you'd expect from a ninja looter
MowDownJoe @ Jul 8th 2009 10:39AM
He was using Teleport Foe in PVP zones to warp people into groups of enemies.
And I read the post on the CoH forums about this (I still browse it, even though my account has run out.). I find it funny that he quit the game around Issue 13, where they made some rather sweeping changes to PVP. To me, it sounds like he wrote his 20-page study to justify being a complete douchebag when he still played. Really, his study boils down to, "people hate you if you act like a jerk." That's not social science. Any kid can tell you that.
Azerael @ Jul 8th 2009 4:11AM
Guy plays the game the way it's supposed to be, and the players try and fix the game so he can't?
He's not griefing, they're just retarded.
ColossalHat @ Jul 8th 2009 4:40AM
He may have been playing by the explicitly stated rules, however, he did it in a manner that agitated people. Gloating over victories and using the exact same attack over and over tends to piss people off.
Azerael @ Jul 8th 2009 5:20AM
Maybe they should be less shite, then, and play the game properly. It's like playing CounterStrike and expecting everyone to play tag with the bomb or some stupid shit.
Giroro @ Jul 8th 2009 10:41PM
if everyone played the game the 'correct' way (like Twixt) there would never have been a problem.
Woo! Go good guys! kill them villains!!!
BananaBoat @ Jul 8th 2009 4:42AM
I think the outcome was predestined, and the study was a bit redundant, but still, this is an example of something I somewhat hate; Players making their own rules in a game (despite the developer created rules) and then complaining when those rules are broken. The obvious example of this is the "rocket launcher" in most FPS games. If you are using the rocket launcher, despite the obvious fact that it kills effectively, you are a noob, and you might be kicked off a server. Is it against the rules? No, but players have collectively come together and decided that they'd rather not have to play against people with the rocket launcher.
The real WTF I take from this is that City of Heroes is still going, despite me not having heard anything about it for years.
Peter R. @ Jul 8th 2009 11:27AM
Ah BananaBoat, it seems we are in pretty much total agreement on this subject. I also hate it when players ignore the rules of the developer, then proceed to enforce those rules as the standard in a game. Most FPS games (if not all) are a good prime example of this behavior ; you get "branded" as a noob for doing things which should be perfectly acceptable. Of course, there are certain types of d-bag behavior which is unacceptable at some point; betraying a teammate for no particular reason or betraying a teammate just to take his weapon. But a player should never be branded as a noob for using the weapons and vehicles available to him/herself. I really wish that instead of players whining about there "custom rules" being broken, they would get better at the game so a so-called "rocket noob" or "nade noob" doesn't bother them. Cause if your constantly getting killed by the same attack (or person), that shows that you either lack skill to play the game or there's no cooperation between you and your teammates.
From what I understand, City of Heroes is supposed be a game about Heroes fighting Villains. So why has the City of Heroes community come to hate a player for playing the game on the premise it was created for?! It's stupid for players to say you can't PvP in the PvP zone. That is a kill or be killed zone, it's not for idle communication. But in regard to his roleplay as a Hero (unless he deliberately wanted to be like the Punisher), he should have found someone who actually wanted to PvP (Heroes don't usually kill unsuspecting villains).
Nightbug @ Jul 8th 2009 5:03AM
Players coming up with arbitrary rules, and attempting to force them on other players is about as bad as deliberately playing in a way that will annoy other players, for that exact purpose.
Especially when players are paying a subscription, and dedicating their time to a leisure activity, while this guy is going out of his way to aggravate them.
Icing on the cake: He was basically studying "What happens when you play PK, in an online game"?
Some real uncharted territory, there(!)
Doug @ Jul 8th 2009 5:36AM
You should probably try reading the actual article before making half-assed assumptions. Half-assed because yes, he was playing PK. However, he was in a PVP zone. Furthermore, he was using a particular "power" that allowed him to teleport enemies into ultra powerful NPC's that killed them instantly. But for that power to work, they had to come into his range. In addition, there are other skills and powers that are made to counter the teleport move. So from what I understand from reading the source article and then reading his actual paper, and then reading his blog, and then searching the CoH forums; is that CoH players are going into his range with no counters and getting killed, then getting pissed about it. In a PvP zone, in a game based on heroes and villains fighting each other.
Nightbug @ Jul 8th 2009 5:52AM
It was stated that players use the region as a means to communicate between hero/villain. Therefore, while the original idea was for it to be a PvP area, players found another use for the area, unintended and unsupported, certainly.
Consider it as like the original lands of Ultima Online, which allowed fairly free PvP between players. That was the only area available to players, just as the PvP area is the (apparently) only area for H/V communication.
So, what he is doing is PKing people who aren't there for PvP.
But, you know that already, right?
Geoffrey Sper @ Jul 8th 2009 7:21AM
From the article:
"The professor was disturbed that game rules encouraging competition and varied tactics hardly mattered to gaming community members who wanted to preserve a deeply-rooted culture.
He said his experience demonstrated that modern-day social groups making use of modern-day technology can revert to 'medieval and crude' methods in trying to manipulate and control others.
'If you aren't a member of the tribe, you get whacked with a stick,' he said. 'I look at social groups with dismay.'"
I agree, he was playing the game by the rules... but isn't there a point where the rules become fluid? Where the players dictate the experience, especially of an MMORPG, and make it what they want it to be?
Myers walked into a functioning community of players and began to pick fights. By his own admission, after being asked to stop it, he continued to do it. At which point they started to band together to stop him... and he continued to do it. And, finally, they escalated it to the point where he was being threatened with things in real life.
This is not to excuse the fact that someone told him they would kill him, or that someone claimed he was a pedophile. However, knowing how people react on Internet forums, using the relative anonymity afforded to them to feel safe in doing outlandish actions or making stupid claims when their frustration levels reach a fever pitch, why is this reaction surprising? Any one of the readers here, without setting virtual foot in City of Heroes or City of Villains, could have easily predicted this outcome. I suspect Myers predicted this outcome, too.
So he views "social groups" with dismay... though I would argue this isn't truly a social group and the vast majority of folks are completely anonymous to one another. He claims that, not being a member of the tribe got him "whacked with a tick," yet he was the one going counter to the tribe - even after they tried to explain it to him.
Therefore, this is a poorly thought-out experiment getting way too much press that was doing nothing than baiting the group to produce predicted reactions that are only made from the safely anonymous confines of an MMORPG. Myers has proven himself to be nothing more than Jack Thompson with tenure. I have no respect for academics like this.
silverwolf761 @ Jul 8th 2009 10:49AM
"that was doing nothing than baiting the group to produce predicted reactions"
Never heard of making a Hypothesis and then testing for results before? It's fairly well-known among most of us that the seemingly vast majority of people on the internet are complete assholes, but stating such as fact doesn't work so well without some verified evidence. Yes, he may have been goading them into a response, but the type of response was completely theirs to decide
DrXym @ Jul 8th 2009 7:31AM
I read the paper and I'm most impressed by his persistance in the role. Given that he played COH for years beforehand, I rather suspect that his griefing may have been partly academic but mostly stemming from boredom and a need for personal amusement. I know that COH gets fairly boring after a time (I quit because it is so repeititious) so I can imagine if you did get to the top you might want to shake the tree a bit to see if you can wring something else out of.
At the same time, if his play style was so annoying to others, I think it should have fallen on NCSoft to fix the zone. I do not believe it would have been hard to limit or disable certain powers or to introduce a penalty for using them (e.g. longer cast time, power drain, paralysis etc.). Maybe the worst thing about this episode is that NCSoft allowed it to continue when its clear it was poisoning the experience so much.
Anyway, most griefers are immature boys or damaged adults. Someone who exploits a bug or broken gameplay feature and does so over and over again is not impressing anyone. I have a lot of respect for sophisticated griefing (e.g. goonsquad etc.) and games which are so dynamic and open that such behaviour can be seen as part of normal gameplay (e.g. EVE).
Giroro @ Jul 8th 2009 10:49PM
You're right, NCsoft should have fixed the zone so people would use it for PvP instead of chatting.
Because it is the PvP zone, and not a chatroom.
DrXym @ Jul 9th 2009 5:39AM
Don't be silly. It's clear from the description that porting people into NPCs for insta-kills was an cheap and annoying exploit that this guy used over and over and it ruined the experience for others. Its obvious that even people on his own side hated he did it since they wanted to win fairly, not through an exploit. Its obvious given the level of annoyance and repeated complaints that NCSoft should have fixed it. It wouldn't have been hard, and people wouldn't be sitting around chatting. They'd be playing the zone in the manner it was intended to be played.
Hyams @ Jul 8th 2009 8:20AM
Tmac?
LaughingTarget @ Jul 8th 2009 9:08AM
What riled the CoH players most was the silly agreement that no one would PvP in the PvP zone. All the professor did was take your classic Batman or Punisher role and took down the bad guys, image be damned. I'm personally surprised it didn't spark combat and cause the zone to be actual PvP.
He only did what his role was. He was a hero, they were villains. There's nothing written that requires heroes to be upstanding citizens, just look at my good buddy Rorchach.
ryanlward @ Jul 8th 2009 9:16AM
I read most of the paper. I like what he did, but he literally stol the whole concept from Fansy the Famous Bard.
http://www.notacult.com/fansythefamous.htm
It kind of pisses me off. He even steals Fansy's "Go Go Good Team" line. (Page 15 in the paper) and no where in the paper is fansy credited. Considering he is a college professor, he should at least give credit where credit is due, lest he be called out for plagarism.
In my opinion, he was a MMO playing prof, read about fansy, and decided he could replicate that and record it's social impact. I appreciate the work, but Fansy was an innovator!
Matt @ Jul 8th 2009 12:44PM
Now he talks about the reactions from those gamers who got very upset at them, but how did he respond to someone who tried to engage him in a more civil converstation? Did he just continue to be a dick and grief them to incite them to the point of rage or did he stop once a civil response was asked of him?
aggrazel @ Jul 8th 2009 9:33AM
You mean, if you are an asshole to people, they get mad?
Wow... that's a real stunning finding right there.
Where can I sign up to get a grant to test what happens if you hang out with scores of beautiful women?
Yan @ Jul 8th 2009 10:46AM
Being ignorant of the fact that death threats were thrown around due to the online happenings of a video game doesn't really help your case.
R (XBL: Esoteric Lord) @ Jul 8th 2009 9:55AM
Obvious misleading liberal journalism is obvious. This article is inaccurate as hell.
http://boards.cityofheroes.com/showflat.php?Cat=0&Number=13718988&page=0&fpart=1&vc=1
One of many CoH threads detailing how much bull this article is.
silverwolf761 @ Jul 8th 2009 11:02AM
The article in question is making the CoH community (somewhat unfairly) look bad, so of course they're trying to discredit him. Most of the arguments seem to devolve to "What he was doing doesn't take skill. What an idiot". Wow, they simultaneously missed the point, and are falling back into the behaviour outlined in the article (although in a lesser capacity). Yeah, they sure showed him....
Geoffrey Sperl @ Jul 8th 2009 11:06AM
The article itself comes from The Times-Picayune - not exactly a bastion of "liberal" thought. Their editorial direction tends to lead to the right wing.
Don't try to drag politics into something that's just bad journalism - you'll just start a flame war for no good reason.
R (XBL: Esoteric Lord) @ Jul 8th 2009 12:51PM
@Geoffrey:
No where did I say anything about any which way that particular site leans. That piece of journalism is liberal.
The Dark Wayne @ Jul 8th 2009 2:23PM
I like this guy's reply
"So..... he's a Professional Griefer? Where do I sign up!?!
EDIT: Actually READING the article.... let me sum this up and see if I understand.
He went into a zone where players are competing against each other, a zone where players are supposed to attack other players. A zone where the purpose is to be "mean" to each other. A zone where aggression is a VIRTUE.
And he's surprised when people get angry and aggressive at him?
Someone needs to take this guy's PhD away. Seriously."
lulz
Geoffrey Sperl @ Jul 8th 2009 10:57AM
"Never heard of making a Hypothesis and then testing for results before?"
Of course I have, but clearly Myers hasn't. Where's his control? Where is another player (or another character of his) in all of this to test the opposite reactions?
The guy wanted to whine about gamers, and that's what he set himself up for. Don't try and defend a poorly implemented experiment - he blew it, he knows it, and is now trying to make "social groups" take the blame. And, because of the anonymity that being a second-rate academic brings with it, the vast majority of the gaming community won't know what he did.
And thus, once again, someone (Myers) is going to try to pass himself off as an expert in a niche they clearly know nothing about.
I know what you're getting at, silverwolf, but the fact of the matter is that, if you RTFA, Myers is basically trying to make a name for himself using poorly implemented studies that will only serve to show gamers in a bad light.
Geoffrey Sperl @ Jul 8th 2009 10:59AM
ARRRGGHH!
I hit "reply", dammit. I know I did.
An edit button! Please...
silverwolf761 @ Jul 8th 2009 11:18AM
"Myers is basically trying to make a name for himself using poorly implemented studies that will only serve to show gamers in a bad light."
He could be trying to make a name for himself. but to be honest, not a lot of work needs to be done to cast us (generally) in a bad light. We also respond badly to any criticism towards gaming, and that certainly doesn't help either. The best thing we could do is either ignore articles of this sort, or respond to them clearly and concisely in a calm manner (that means no personal attacks, and for god's sake, don't call him a "noob"), and refrain from useless chest-beating. This, I think, is far too tough of a request for most to comply with.
His assertion that the blame falls upon "social groups" is suspect, but the "us and them" mentality does exist to a degree.
j.howlett @ Jul 8th 2009 11:27AM
i thought it was funny
portuga-man @ Jul 8th 2009 1:06PM
old. I've read about this months ago, somewhere else (in an article that also referred Adam Ant)
Apolo Imagod @ Jul 8th 2009 1:11PM
Why are all gaming blogs and news sites depicting this professor as the bad guy? Kotaku described him as a "troll", and now Joystiq talks about his "dirty fighting styles". As far as I've been able to find and read, he was just playing the game... he wasn't doing any exploits or anything against the game's rules.
No matter how you put it, there's no justification for the reaction of the COH community... is it expected? Of course it is! This is typical gang/horde/mob behavior. This is the same as a gang of kids that hang out in a park, taking over the swing set just talk and loiter... and then a new kid comes to town, comes to the park, and uses the swing for... well what do you know? swinging! Then they come around and explain that this where they hang out, and he has to go... the kid says "this is a swing, isn't it?", so they beat him up to teach him that they 'own' it, and he has to learn the local rules... except that in this case the kid had a gun, and beat the hell out of all of them.
Same thing... these groups have been hanging on COH for years, so they feel they own it... even though you're supposed to be fighting opposing factions in this game, and not just hang out showing off your outfit, this is how they do it... which is fine. But don't be surprised if someone shows up that wants to do what you're supposed to do here. So this guy comes along, starts fighting, then they explain how it is that "the people here actually do things"... and when he doesn't comply to the will of the masses... he's the bad guy, and they try take him down.
He's the bad guy only because he's the minority here. Just because there are more people that want to use this game as a huge social hub, rather than an actual action video game... that's it. Because they are the majority they decide that he's the bad one. And Joystiq and other gaming sites, are just complying to the majority as well, reinforcing this behavior. We're not talking about one angry guy saying bad things... we're talking some people were actually trying to organize to take down this guy.
Fnord @ Jul 8th 2009 4:50PM
They weren't angry with him for PvPing in a PvP zone. The other people were PvPing as well, or else they wouldn't have gotten close enough for him to use his little "trick".
They're pissed at him for griefing. His "trick" was to teleport people into NPCs, who would kill them and earn the player XP debt. If he had actually fought them and defeated them himself, no one would be saying a word about it.
It's kinda like what would happen if, in WoW, someone figured out a way to damage your equipment, and did it to you over and over and over again. Eventually you'd get pissed off at the guy, even if his "trick" was perfectly within the rules of the game. That is basically what this whole thing boils down to.
LaughingTarget @ Jul 8th 2009 5:52PM
If Blizzard put in an equipment damage feature, it's for a reason and if someone does nothing but damage equipment, that's their thing. People have forgotten what PvP is, beating the other guy using all available tools. Teleporting your enemy to the guards is a tool. If NCSoft had a problem with that, they'd disable teleporting within range of those guards, yet they haven't. The guy is an anti-hero, playing 100% within the rules of the world, not by some arbitrarily dictated societal rule created by a bunch of screaming care bears. If you don't like getting PvP'd, don't go into the PvP zone.
Rentaro @ Jul 8th 2009 3:02PM
Without discussing any of the flaws about his objectively. He's griefing, pure and simple and when people get annoyed he acts all surprised.
To defend my point, each of the PVP zones in CoH have an objective. Examples include stealing missile launch codes or activating base defense. However, he's not even following the so called "game design". The zones weren't design for his action, furthermore what he did is a reportable offense.
Another point is fighting other players will not incur a "XP Debt" which is the game's form of a death penalty. However, when he teleports players into an enemy mob, and they do kill the palyer; they will be penalized with the debt and he recieve no credit for the kill.
Let say that people are following the "game design' and are actually fighting other players. Suddenly out of nowhere, this guy teleports you into a group and you get smacked in the face with debt. Gee, it takes a PhD to realize that people will get upset?
Rentaro @ Jul 8th 2009 3:03PM
Blah. Curse this comment system. Meant this as a reply to Apolo
hobocop @ Jul 8th 2009 9:26PM
"When Twixt celebrated his victories, lobbing messages like "Yay, heroes. Go good team. Vills lose again," in the game's chat box, users like Hunter-Killed responded, "U are a major sh--bird."
This is going to be my victory slogan in online games from now on. "Yay, heroes. Go good team."
Enyu @ Jul 9th 2009 2:33AM
Wasn't Tmac also doing a behavioral study, allegedly? Not that I don't believe he was.