Piece by piece then. With respect to what Eva had said, these are not intended to be jabs. Just a point-by-point discussion. Here we go:
Right. And that's what I addressed. Your initial point, if you'll remember, used the example of a division between "knights and thieves", suggesting that one group would intentionally avoid any kind of cooperation with another, opting to "fly solo" rather than unite under a common banner.
In contrast, a strawman fallacy is erecting a point, and then attacking it. Which isn't what happened. Not even kind of.
Now, if survival as a realm isn't a good enough IC reason to put the active shells in Eorzea under one tent, I don't know what is. It's not as if the military in the real world is made of front-line fighters, and nothing but. There's a huge swath of professions and skill sets that make the whole thing work, which means there's a whole swath of necessary professions to make said Free Company work. There's a lot of talk of this not making sense "IC'ly", but frankly, open competition between Free Companies when the world is falling apart makes even less.
We don't have any. That kind of concern is really not one we need to look at, given that there's...you know, no one in that corner.
First bit: Which is fine and dandy, save for that whole extinction event thing. No one's forcing anyone to hop on board this idea, so those that don't care, for whatever crazy reason, about life ending on the continent are free to abscond.
Second bit: How...do you figure that it limits the creation of future roleplaying shells? That's totally inexplicable. The creation of an umbrella group does not preclude things existing outside of said umbrella. Think on it this way: Your umbrella is Everwatch. Other shells exist outside of Everwatch. In fact, all other shells in the community exist outside of Everwatch. The existence of your shell does not make it impossible for other shells to exist.
Therefore, a larger organization, made of many shells, would not keep other organizations from popping up.
If you could explain this point of yours a bit further, I'd appreciate it.
Those are some incredibly large leaps of logic. Why does an umbrella organization equate to exclusivity to you? Where was that suggested? How are you arriving at that conclusion?
I can't even begin to penetrate the last half of this paragraph. It just straight doesn't make sense. Maybe you can elaborate?
To clarify, I never said "everyone", but a prominent force in the world composed of roleplayers and their linkshells raises our visibility to newcomers, and that is in the best interest of the community. Any argument to the contrary is either shortsighted, or straight false.
Without new people, the community as a whole dies. Without visibility, we don't catch the eye of new people. Simple. It's not my intention to marginalize anyone. Quite the opposite. Bringing folks together under a larger umbrella breaks down those sorts of self-imposed, cliquish barriers that naturally pop up from time to time. If someone doesn't want in? Well, no one's twisting their arm.
Not really what I asked, but ok, we'll go from here: To me, that sounds like a personal issue, and not one that needs to be aired in this discussion. I'm sure that there are people who would say the same of any kind of Everwatch event, what with the quality of storytelling being entirely subjective and all.
However, these folks who may think the same of your stuff? They all carry on just fine, from what I can see. You can do that too.
That's just melodramatic. No one's being pushed out, people are being invited in. The reason for unification makes sense. It's written plainly in the game's lore: You come together, you live. In an OOC sense? Who /doesn't/ benefit from this? Who looses out on a greater organization working toward a common goal? Sharing resources?
I think the issue you're running into is that the case against an in-game unification of players is just kind of flimsy. There's a ton of check marks in the "Pro" column, and one tiny mark being "Sometimes, I don't agree with stuff" in the "Con" column.
That being said? Once again, no one is making you sign on. No one is making anyone sign on.
Oskar Helvig Wrote:Isaac you are creating a strawman argument when you say that a group flying solo should be shunned, because no one made that case. I made a point against uniting everyone under a single Free Company, simply because of the OOC reason that we all self-identify ourselves as Role-Players in this game. I never made a case for solo groups. What I have said though, is that I aim to unify IC’ly. I am not apposed to multiple Linkshells sharing a Free company, it just has to make sense IC’ly.
Right. And that's what I addressed. Your initial point, if you'll remember, used the example of a division between "knights and thieves", suggesting that one group would intentionally avoid any kind of cooperation with another, opting to "fly solo" rather than unite under a common banner.
In contrast, a strawman fallacy is erecting a point, and then attacking it. Which isn't what happened. Not even kind of.
Now, if survival as a realm isn't a good enough IC reason to put the active shells in Eorzea under one tent, I don't know what is. It's not as if the military in the real world is made of front-line fighters, and nothing but. There's a huge swath of professions and skill sets that make the whole thing work, which means there's a whole swath of necessary professions to make said Free Company work. There's a lot of talk of this not making sense "IC'ly", but frankly, open competition between Free Companies when the world is falling apart makes even less.
Oskar Helvig Wrote:If a linkshell is a bunch of Imperials who aim to help the Empire, would they still be in this company? You speak of uniting people as if every character has the same goal.
We don't have any. That kind of concern is really not one we need to look at, given that there's...you know, no one in that corner.
Oskar Helvig Wrote:Some want to fight, others want to just live on without much care, while others prepare for post-war conditions… there are many possibilities there, and uniting everyone not only doesn’t make sense IC’ly it also limits future RP linkshells.
First bit: Which is fine and dandy, save for that whole extinction event thing. No one's forcing anyone to hop on board this idea, so those that don't care, for whatever crazy reason, about life ending on the continent are free to abscond.
Second bit: How...do you figure that it limits the creation of future roleplaying shells? That's totally inexplicable. The creation of an umbrella group does not preclude things existing outside of said umbrella. Think on it this way: Your umbrella is Everwatch. Other shells exist outside of Everwatch. In fact, all other shells in the community exist outside of Everwatch. The existence of your shell does not make it impossible for other shells to exist.
Therefore, a larger organization, made of many shells, would not keep other organizations from popping up.
If you could explain this point of yours a bit further, I'd appreciate it.
Oskar Helvig Wrote:For example we have no Imperial LS atm, but in the future if all Linkshells unite under one Free Company, there may never be one, if you define the members of that FC as your RP community. It would be pretty implausible for them to join and remain with some other groups. And we are not even sure how the FCs will work so it’s hard to say how much anyone will have to interact with one another, but if there are multiple FCs, why would one company join the same FC that has their opposition? It’s not like SE intends to imply that all people of Eorzea must join one FC to unite everyone under one flag… So the whole unite or die logic doesn’t quite work… it matters how you unite, why, with whom etc… because the fact that there can be a number of GCs/FCs indicates that the setting of the game isn’t as drastic, else there would theoretically be only one GC, and so on.
Those are some incredibly large leaps of logic. Why does an umbrella organization equate to exclusivity to you? Where was that suggested? How are you arriving at that conclusion?
I can't even begin to penetrate the last half of this paragraph. It just straight doesn't make sense. Maybe you can elaborate?
Oskar Helvig Wrote:You use the words “everyone†and “community’s best interest†in your OOC reply to this issue there… but I’ve not yet any poll up with significant number of voters to indicate community’s desire for any of this. Nor do I think popular opinion is automatically the right opinion. Even if 99% vote for something, it can still be wrong. Much like Momo, it seems you reply on the support of the ‘community’ behind you to cushion your point of view. Guess what? I am part of the community to. I feel like your entire post marginalizes those who are not on the same page with the premise of some of the things ‘in the name of the community’ that have been said here. That will only divide the RP community further, if you make people with different views feel like outsiders.
To clarify, I never said "everyone", but a prominent force in the world composed of roleplayers and their linkshells raises our visibility to newcomers, and that is in the best interest of the community. Any argument to the contrary is either shortsighted, or straight false.
Without new people, the community as a whole dies. Without visibility, we don't catch the eye of new people. Simple. It's not my intention to marginalize anyone. Quite the opposite. Bringing folks together under a larger umbrella breaks down those sorts of self-imposed, cliquish barriers that naturally pop up from time to time. If someone doesn't want in? Well, no one's twisting their arm.
Oskar Helvig Wrote:And yeah, mere existence of certain RP does rub me the wrong way at times. I know a number of people don’t mind, but I need for it to be at a certain quality (from my point of view) for me to enjoy it. It’s like watching a movie where you can see the awkward dialogue and the predictable plots and so on versus a movie which completely drags you in and hours fly by without you noticing. That’s one way I can describe how I feel about other styles of RP vs one I am comfortable with.
Not really what I asked, but ok, we'll go from here: To me, that sounds like a personal issue, and not one that needs to be aired in this discussion. I'm sure that there are people who would say the same of any kind of Everwatch event, what with the quality of storytelling being entirely subjective and all.
However, these folks who may think the same of your stuff? They all carry on just fine, from what I can see. You can do that too.
Oskar Helvig Wrote:But then, I am pretty satisfied with the RPC framing the picture, instead of being used as a brush. We can agree on basic changes, but beyond that, I think that as a community of role-players, it’s best to not try to regulate to a degree which people here propose. Much like Eva, I feel that I’ve nothing left to add, as this sort of discussion seems to be pushing out decent. I just hope you guys don’t take that dive, of putting a fence around whatever you think the community represents and pushing people out because they don’t agree. It’s arguably one of the reasons the RPC took a plunge some time in the past, and while specific points of arguments have changed, that ideology seems to be creeping up again, so I’ll just excuse myself and do whatever I think would work instead.
That's just melodramatic. No one's being pushed out, people are being invited in. The reason for unification makes sense. It's written plainly in the game's lore: You come together, you live. In an OOC sense? Who /doesn't/ benefit from this? Who looses out on a greater organization working toward a common goal? Sharing resources?
I think the issue you're running into is that the case against an in-game unification of players is just kind of flimsy. There's a ton of check marks in the "Pro" column, and one tiny mark being "Sometimes, I don't agree with stuff" in the "Con" column.
That being said? Once again, no one is making you sign on. No one is making anyone sign on.