Poll: Have gamers lost touch with "playing for fun?"

[DarkNinja24k]

I only play games that i like and will have fun playing, so some people play to win but some still play for the challenge.

 

[ArcWinter]

I definitely have not. If I need to set goals (or try to accomplish preset goals) within the game to have fun, I generally don't play it. Also, I don't play games where it is only fun when you are winning.

I can be a completionist for games that I find naturally fun, like Fallout 3, New Vegas, Oblivion, or the two Bioshock games, but the "beating the game" comes after the "having fun" stage.

Most of my friends do not do this, since most of them still play Runescape (sadly, murder is illegal), and refuse to try any better games because they still have to finish whatever task by grinding for hours on end, or because they have too much imaginary stake in an imaginary world on an imaginary character.

 

[Onyx Oblivion]

Hey...Fun is subjective.

I found both GTA 4 and Saint's Row 2 fun...

So, yeah. I don't really see "fun" being gone.

My idea of fun is going away, though...Bayonetta, etc.

Of course fun is subjective, but the difference between playing for fun (win or lose, it's all fun) vs. playing to win (it's only fun if I win) is that playing to win is selfish and egotistical, and it would be a damn shame to gamers generally heading in that direction.

I've got good news for you, then. Your buddy in the OP is actually the one playing for fun. Learning combos and practicing is the route usually taken by someone playing to win. You ARE the one not playing for fun. Your buddies obviously don't care about winning that much, if they aren't going to practice.

 

[Snork Maiden]

My idea of fun is going away, though...Bayonetta, etc.

Ok I'm curious - what do you mean by this?

The era of the hack-n-slash is ending, that's all.

God of War is gone, probably. They filled the gap between 1 & 2 on PSP, along with a prequel. That story is told.

Devil May Cry is in the hands of a developer who has yet to put forward a decent battle system.(Ninja Theory did the narratively excellent, combat poor Heavenly Sword and Enslaved games)

Dynasty Warriors is still around, though. It's usually solid fun, but really simplistic combat-wise.

Ah right.

And heh, I'm a slave to Dynasty Warriors, but normally only once they've reached the bargain bins. I've never been really happy with any of them since DW3 however, although 7 does look pretty fly.

 

[razelas]

-Snip-

Sounds to me like you're the one who has stopped playing for fun. Did it ever occur to you that they didn't want to learn all the combos and playstyles, and just wanted to play?

Ugh, I never said anywhere that they should master the game! I just suggested learning a few new moves. And tbh, they're horrible when I play with them. Spamming got so annoying I threatened to kill my room mate is his sleep. Of course, it wasn't fun for him when I start counter-spamming him.

Well, maybe they don't want to learn a few new moves either. I find fighting games boring as hell when I start trying to learn moves and combos, and much prefer what pretty much amounts to random button mashing. I don't have to be good to enjoy a game.

Also, now you're complaining about others losing sight of fun when you threaten to kill your room-mate in his sleep because he spams you in Mortal Kombat? Really?

Truth be told, I feel that same way except with two series, Soul Calibur and Mortal Kombat.

And that's the point I'm trying to make: my friend, my room mate, was aggravating not just me, but his other friends, and it didn't matter as long as he won.

 

[SteinFaust]

Yeah i am losing my feeling of enjoyment as i keep playing.
Honestly, i continue to play simply because it was always something i did.
It's kind of like an amputee who can still feel the missing part; i can't enjoy it or get much use out of it, but the desire to use it is still commonplace for me.

I think i will try the Portal series. That seems like a 'fun' pair of games...

 

[Susan Arendt]

"I play the game (, and then I learn it)."

This is what my room mate said as he played Mortal Kombat. I'm watching him and some friends play Mortal Kombat's campaign mode, and I suggested (after getting their asses handed to them quite a few times) that maybe they should go into training mode, get a second controller, and learn some new moves/combos instead of button mashing and spamming. But apparently, getting frustrated and using the same approach is their idea of "fun." They say they like to "learn in the heat of battle" but all they're really doing is learning a few attacks/combos and then using those few moves over and over and over...

This kind of narrow-minded thinking upsets me a little. It seems that they aren't playing the game... they're just winning (or losing, mostly); in other words, it's a competition and winning is all that matters. While I've come to expect that from anonymous people playing competitively online, it's kind of hard to deal with now that it's in my face. What's even scarier is that there's no ranking/scoreboard to spur these guys on.

What about you, Escapists? Do you feel that gamers in general, or even some of the gamers around you, have lost touch with "playing for fun" and adopting "playing to win"? What ever happened to playing for fun?

Why is your idea of how they should play the correct one? Why are they wrong? So long as they are having fun, they're playing the right way - at least the right way for them. It seems like you're the one being narrow-minded, insisting that they subscribe to your personal view of gaming.

You're not wrong to disagree with their opinion - you prefer to play a certain way, and your preference is every bit as valid as theirs. If their method of play really bugs you, just leave the room while they're doing it.

 

[razelas]

Hey...Fun is subjective.

I found both GTA 4 and Saint's Row 2 fun...

So, yeah. I don't really see "fun" being gone.

My idea of fun is going away, though...Bayonetta, etc.

Of course fun is subjective, but the difference between playing for fun (win or lose, it's all fun) vs. playing to win (it's only fun if I win) is that playing to win is selfish and egotistical, and it would be a damn shame to gamers generally heading in that direction.

I've got good news for you, then. Your buddy in the OP is actually the one playing for fun. Learning combos and practicing is the route usually taken by someone playing to win. You ARE the one not playing for fun. Your buddies obviously don't care about winning that much, if they aren't going to practice.

I don't play to win, I play for fun. I lost every match except one, because I refused to spam and button mash. And of course they care about winning, because apparently for them the ends justify the means.

 

[Heathrow]

Oh no, they're horribly out-skilled by the AI on normal. It took them 30+ minutes of redundant spamming to get past single fight. And yeah, I did wait 30+ min. before suggesting going into training.

They were entertained for 30 mindless minutes, obviously they weren't having fun.

 

[Azure-Supernova]

I've got good news for you, then. Your buddy in the OP is actually the one playing for fun. Learning combos and practicing is the route usually taken by someone playing to win. You ARE the one not playing for fun. Your buddies obviously don't care about winning that much, if they aren't going to practice.

I was thinking this as I was reading the OP too. But maybe the two friends just have different ideas of fun. The OP enjoys getting a hang of the controls and combos so he can enjoy the game by advancing through the story; his room mates just like beating the shit out of opponents (and evidently getting the shit beaten out of them).

I had the same thing coming through Bayonetta. My first playthrough was riddled with accidental badassery when Witch Time was a viable method of winning. Second playthrough without Witch Time and I found that I had to master combos and timing; at first it was boring but then when I was prancing about and tearing shit up I was having even more fun than the first time around.

 

[razelas]

"I play the game (, and then I learn it)."

This is what my room mate said as he played Mortal Kombat. I'm watching him and some friends play Mortal Kombat's campaign mode, and I suggested (after getting their asses handed to them quite a few times) that maybe they should go into training mode, get a second controller, and learn some new moves/combos instead of button mashing and spamming. But apparently, getting frustrated and using the same approach is their idea of "fun." They say they like to "learn in the heat of battle" but all they're really doing is learning a few attacks/combos and then using those few moves over and over and over...

This kind of narrow-minded thinking upsets me a little. It seems that they aren't playing the game... they're just winning (or losing, mostly); in other words, it's a competition and winning is all that matters. While I've come to expect that from anonymous people playing competitively online, it's kind of hard to deal with now that it's in my face. What's even scarier is that there's no ranking/scoreboard to spur these guys on.

What about you, Escapists? Do you feel that gamers in general, or even some of the gamers around you, have lost touch with "playing for fun" and adopting "playing to win"? What ever happened to playing for fun?

Why is your idea of how they should play the correct one? Why are they wrong? So long as they are having fun, they're playing the right way - at least the right way for them. It seems like you're the one being narrow-minded, insisting that they subscribe to your personal view of gaming.

You're not wrong to disagree with their opinion - you prefer to play a certain way, and your preference is every bit as valid as theirs. If their method of play really bugs you, just leave the room while they're doing it.

\

Please state where I made any mention of the word "correct", "right", "true", etc.

And I'm not trying to convert them to my personal view... I'm pointing out the hypocrisy of them saying they play for fun but in reality are playing to win.

 

[DEAD34345]

-Snip-

Sounds to me like you're the one who has stopped playing for fun. Did it ever occur to you that they didn't want to learn all the combos and playstyles, and just wanted to play?

Ugh, I never said anywhere that they should master the game! I just suggested learning a few new moves. And tbh, they're horrible when I play with them. Spamming got so annoying I threatened to kill my room mate is his sleep. Of course, it wasn't fun for him when I start counter-spamming him.

Well, maybe they don't want to learn a few new moves either. I find fighting games boring as hell when I start trying to learn moves and combos, and much prefer what pretty much amounts to random button mashing. I don't have to be good to enjoy a game.

Also, now you're complaining about others losing sight of fun when you threaten to kill your room-mate in his sleep because he spams you in Mortal Kombat? Really?

Truth be told, I feel that same way except with two series, Soul Calibur and Mortal Kombat.

And that's the point I'm trying to make: my friend, my room mate, was aggravating not just me, but his other friends, and it didn't matter as long as he won.

Ok, you have a point with the multiplayer matches then. If his idea of fun is ruining other people's, then it becomes a problem. I still completely disagree with what you said about the campaign mode though.

 

[Onyx Oblivion]

I don't play to win, I play for fun. I lost every match except one, because I refused to spam and button mash. And of course they care about winning, because apparently for them the ends justify the means.

They are spamming moves, not caring about combos, and losing frequently. They are not "playing to win".

That guy camping in room with one entrance in the corner of the map in Team Deathmatch, waiting for someone to cross his field of vision so that he can get easily get a positive K/D ratio...he's playing to win.

 

[razelas]

I don't play to win, I play for fun. I lost every match except one, because I refused to spam and button mash. And of course they care about winning, because apparently for them the ends justify the means.

They are spamming moves, not caring about combos, and losing frequently. They are not "playing to win".

That guy camping in room with one entrance in the corner of the map in Team Deathmatch, waiting for someone to cross his field of vision so that he can get easily get a positive K/D ratio...he's playing to win.

Comparing spamming to camping? Two totally different concepts in two totally different games.
Apples to oranges.

So they're spamming and button mashing, but isn't that the means to an end, even if poorly thought out?

 

[razelas]

-Snip-

Sounds to me like you're the one who has stopped playing for fun. Did it ever occur to you that they didn't want to learn all the combos and playstyles, and just wanted to play?

Ugh, I never said anywhere that they should master the game! I just suggested learning a few new moves. And tbh, they're horrible when I play with them. Spamming got so annoying I threatened to kill my room mate is his sleep. Of course, it wasn't fun for him when I start counter-spamming him.

Well, maybe they don't want to learn a few new moves either. I find fighting games boring as hell when I start trying to learn moves and combos, and much prefer what pretty much amounts to random button mashing. I don't have to be good to enjoy a game.

Also, now you're complaining about others losing sight of fun when you threaten to kill your room-mate in his sleep because he spams you in Mortal Kombat? Really?

Truth be told, I feel that same way except with two series, Soul Calibur and Mortal Kombat.

And that's the point I'm trying to make: my friend, my room mate, was aggravating not just me, but his other friends, and it didn't matter as long as he won.

Ok, you have a point with the multiplayer matches then. If his idea of fun is ruining other people's, then it becomes a problem. I still completely disagree with what you said about the campaign mode though.

For my friends, apparently, there's no difference between multiplayer and campaign.

 

[Susan Arendt]

"I play the game (, and then I learn it)."

This is what my room mate said as he played Mortal Kombat. I'm watching him and some friends play Mortal Kombat's campaign mode, and I suggested (after getting their asses handed to them quite a few times) that maybe they should go into training mode, get a second controller, and learn some new moves/combos instead of button mashing and spamming. But apparently, getting frustrated and using the same approach is their idea of "fun." They say they like to "learn in the heat of battle" but all they're really doing is learning a few attacks/combos and then using those few moves over and over and over...

This kind of narrow-minded thinking upsets me a little. It seems that they aren't playing the game... they're just winning (or losing, mostly); in other words, it's a competition and winning is all that matters. While I've come to expect that from anonymous people playing competitively online, it's kind of hard to deal with now that it's in my face. What's even scarier is that there's no ranking/scoreboard to spur these guys on.

What about you, Escapists? Do you feel that gamers in general, or even some of the gamers around you, have lost touch with "playing for fun" and adopting "playing to win"? What ever happened to playing for fun?

Why is your idea of how they should play the correct one? Why are they wrong? So long as they are having fun, they're playing the right way - at least the right way for them. It seems like you're the one being narrow-minded, insisting that they subscribe to your personal view of gaming.

You're not wrong to disagree with their opinion - you prefer to play a certain way, and your preference is every bit as valid as theirs. If their method of play really bugs you, just leave the room while they're doing it.

\

Please state where I made any mention of the word "correct", "right", "true", etc.

And I'm not trying to convert them to my personal view... I'm pointing out the hypocrisy of them saying they play for fun but in reality are playing to win.

You called him "narrow-minded", and that it's all even "scarier" because there's no leaderboards. Seems like it's pretty obvious that you think they're in the wrong. Also, why can't "fun" and "winning" be the same thing?

 

[Onyx Oblivion]

Comparing spamming to camping? Two totally different concepts in two totally different games.
Apples to oranges.

So they're spamming and button mashing, but isn't that the means to an end, even if poorly thought out?

Exactly...it's a MEANS TO AN END.

It's NOT...a means to WIN You said yourself they are losing frequently.

Anyone playing to win would be exploiting errors in the AI, like playing chip away with long-range moves EVERY SINGLE MATCH or stuff like that.

 

[Juggern4ut20]

This kind of narrow-minded thinking upsets me a little.

What an interesting concept. So the fact that they aren't playing the way YOU think games should be played, they are the narrow-minded ones... Riiiight. Ever think that you are the narrow-minded one for not considering that their way is in fact how games should be played? The idea that they aren't playing for fun makes no sense. They are attempting to beat a challenge and having fun doing so. Most games present obstacles for the player to conquer, the more difficult the obstacle the more rewarding the completion is. Good games make the act of completing those obstacles fun and bad games make it tedious.

The facts that you provide fuel the idea that they WERE doing it just for fun. Since there was no leader boards or rankings shows that they weren't doing it for fame or getting paid to, so it's safe to say they were having fun playing a game. It sounds like you are upset because thats not how you approach the game. You think that learning moves in practice mode, turning the difficulty down, etc would be a more effective way to beat the game, but they don't. They want to play their way, not yours, which is what is the main problem. The story and the idea of gamers only "playing to win" is disconnected from each other.

 

[razelas]

"I play the game (, and then I learn it)."

This is what my room mate said as he played Mortal Kombat. I'm watching him and some friends play Mortal Kombat's campaign mode, and I suggested (after getting their asses handed to them quite a few times) that maybe they should go into training mode, get a second controller, and learn some new moves/combos instead of button mashing and spamming. But apparently, getting frustrated and using the same approach is their idea of "fun." They say they like to "learn in the heat of battle" but all they're really doing is learning a few attacks/combos and then using those few moves over and over and over...

This kind of narrow-minded thinking upsets me a little. It seems that they aren't playing the game... they're just winning (or losing, mostly); in other words, it's a competition and winning is all that matters. While I've come to expect that from anonymous people playing competitively online, it's kind of hard to deal with now that it's in my face. What's even scarier is that there's no ranking/scoreboard to spur these guys on.

What about you, Escapists? Do you feel that gamers in general, or even some of the gamers around you, have lost touch with "playing for fun" and adopting "playing to win"? What ever happened to playing for fun?

Why is your idea of how they should play the correct one? Why are they wrong? So long as they are having fun, they're playing the right way - at least the right way for them. It seems like you're the one being narrow-minded, insisting that they subscribe to your personal view of gaming.

You're not wrong to disagree with their opinion - you prefer to play a certain way, and your preference is every bit as valid as theirs. If their method of play really bugs you, just leave the room while they're doing it.

\

Please state where I made any mention of the word "correct", "right", "true", etc.

And I'm not trying to convert them to my personal view... I'm pointing out the hypocrisy of them saying they play for fun but in reality are playing to win.

You called him "narrow-minded", and that it's all even "scarier" because there's no leaderboards. Seems like it's pretty obvious that you think they're in the wrong. Also, why can't "fun" and "winning" be the same thing?

What I think is exactly what I said:

This kind of narrow-minded thinking upsets me a little.

I'd appreciate if you didn't use my words out of context or put words in my mouth.

"Fun" and "winning" can be the same, but:

the difference between playing for fun (win or lose, it's all fun) vs. playing to win (it's only fun if I win) is that playing to win is selfish and egotistical, and it would be a damn shame to gamers generally heading in that direction.