LCRP "Ambience"

[Tyrant]

One of the most common arguments when it comes to roleplaying your surroundings is that the player base is often tore between reality and fantasy in regards to making decisions based on an atmosphere. By atmosphere I mean the "setting" in which we chose to acknowledge when there are certain decisions to be made, or certain elements that should "realistically" be a factor in a character's judgment. Often a smaller (player) population ruins immersion for one or two reasons, one, players disregard any sense of realism or portrayal and conclude that an area or neighbourhood is empty based on a lack of players in the vicinity and two, the aforementioned players base their next move off of the fact that the area is "empty" at that particular time.

 

That was an example: the same logic would apply to a situation involving an area full of players. The context behind it, in layman's terms, would be "would I realistically do this here?"

 

I think @Cypher's thread on "my criminal is stupid" made me contemplate about actions and consequences. The reason the aforementioned excuse can be legitimized on GTA is because of a lack of repercussions and factors they don't take into account because "there was nobody there, so there was nobody there." When murder or crime is committed, none of the "what ifs" are anticipated. By what if, I mean the questions that would often make these criminals rethink their choices. The "what if" that building has CCTV? Or the "what if" somebody saw me? The "what if I'm caught" doesn't come to mind because there is a lack of imagination or consideration for logical conditions: all they see is an unobstructed path.

 

This is not a suggestion nor am I looking for enforcement on this issue, I'm simply trying to gauge perspectives. On previous servers, there was never a sense of a time and a place: the climate was never considered and all murders, robberies and confrontations in general were very seek-and-destroy esque. It didn't matter when it happened, where it happened, or who it happened in front of, it was happening. 

 

Ultimately, my question is: when making decisions, whether criminal or everyday, should real life "scenery" and common sense be taken into account?

 

[Michaud]

You know what. You are completely right. I've seen this and heard of stuff like this all the time. I wish it wasn't so but, I feel like it is something unavoidable. I do think that real life "scenery" and common sense should be taken into account. This is supposed to be serious/strict/heavy/realistic roleplay right? (One of those lol) So don't you think characters actions and stuff should be based on what that character would do in real life? Isn't that like the whole premise of roleplaying in a server like this? Just about as real as it gets within RP. 

[Tyrant]

Just for the record, I agree. I go into every situation with a sense of prudence and I think that this perspective should be the general consensus, but I'm interested in hearing the opinions of the majority. I think that thought-process should be universally applied to every situation: whether it be bars, restaurants, the port or the precincts, a level of rationality and reality should always take priority. 

[Cypher]

You're going to get two schools of thought here.

 

School A) People (like us) who agree that we should be playing as if we are in a real city. Our actions are dictated by common sense and the fact that the city would be populated like a real city. People act accordingly and don't run around acting like the amount of online players is the actual population.

 

School B) People who think its powergaming to pretend that there are entities there when they aren't really there. These people act as if the streets are dead, take the amount of players online as the IC population and act accordingly. If the street right down the road from LCPD is empty with no witnesses? Crime is free game. Nothing is applied here as if we are living in a real city with CCTV's everywhere, people that would realistically be on the streets, etc.

 

You're never going to get these two groups to agree with one another lol. Good luck though

[Biography]

In my opinion, people should be punished for let's say robbing or killing other people on a sunny afternoon in times square. I just don't find that to be a great thing. I think that maybe safe zones have to be established at certain locations but that won't be a solution for all.

[Macares]

A rule that I see people follow is pretty much using "Imaginary" people to understand if this is something that you would do in a public place.
Meaning that you act as if there is people around you, so it would make sense to not do certain actions on a street etc, even though there are no physical players there.
You wouldn't casually walk around on a street with a M4 in your hand, just cause you don't see any players, because in reality, you'd have someone most likely dial the emergency number and report it.

[Paisan]

I do think that players need to be punished for making unrealistic assumptions in certain role-play scenarios. Obviously, if the example is a murder in broad daylight and there is a completely justified reasoning to it where both parties agree, then sure. But for the most part you cannot have unrealistic murders and other crimes being committed where they wouldn't be in real life. The idea of safe zones is quite OOC but at the same time it does help shelter certain areas which would have a low crime rate as it is. Just because there are no actual role-players at certain times of the day at the hospital or LCPD, doesn't mean you should be RPly able to commit a crime there.

[Tyrant]

And it's the same old song and dance every time a pragmatic approach to the situation is taken -- those of us arguing for realism will offer commonsensical solutions and those arguing against will rebuttal with videos, articles and material of shootings happening in populated streets in broad daylight, or generally any altercation that is relatively theatrical. Whilst the argument that "it happens in real life" might be viable, what they left out that "happens in real life" is the consequences that stem directly from transgressing in congested areas. 9/10 times they are caught because of the environment -- the people, the cameras and the witness statements, something that isn't a concern for the most part on GTA. When weighing up the options of "it happens in real life," those arguing against don't use the same logic when it's applicant to the aftermath.

 

I feel like "safezones" are the areas that should be considered as populated, but I don't think they should be completely free of crime because often times "touristy" locations are riddled with low-level crime too. I just feel that, from our experiences on other servers, movements and actions based on the emptiness of an area or neighbourhood (with commercial and social aspects) should be looked at with non-fictional point of view for immersive purposes. Ultimately I think it's entirely situational, and differs from case to case.

 

There is much more realism involved when the environment is taken into account.

 

 

 

[Ras]

On 7/30/2021 at 1:04 AM, Cypher said:

You're going to get two schools of thought here.

 

School A) People (like us) who agree that we should be playing as if we are in a real city. Our actions are dictated by common sense and the fact that the city would be populated like a real city. People act accordingly and don't run around acting like the amount of online players is the actual population.

 

School B) People who think its powergaming to pretend that there are entities there when they aren't really there. These people act as if the streets are dead, take the amount of players online as the IC population and act accordingly. If the street right down the road from LCPD is empty with no witnesses? Crime is free game. Nothing is applied here as if we are living in a real city with CCTV's everywhere, people that would realistically be on the streets, etc.

 

You're never going to get these two groups to agree with one another lol. Good luck though

I tend to support "School A", as people should be more cautious when committing crime rather than freely roaming the area without a single care in the world. Yes, you can shoot a man in Times Square, during rush hour, as this exists in real life. However, one must assess "why" it was conducted and "how" it was conducted. Was this the suspect's only opportunity to shoot their target? Was it an impulsive and "in the heat of the moment" situation where the suspect was too intoxicated to think logically? Was the suspect taking into consideration that they should use any means necessary to avoid getting caught (masked up, gloves, unlicensed firearm, and concealed plated etc...)? Would it be reasonable for one's character to portray those acts? etc... These are the things that should be taken into consideration.

Every action has a reason. It's just a question as to whether it was reasonable.

[Biography]

I've updated this - 

Based on the feedback provided so far. We'll keep this discussion open for any concerns or additional feedback!