Poll: What Do You Think About "Playing To Win"?
- Thread starter Et3rnalLegend64
- Start date
Recommended Videos
Here's my take on it. There's 2 "bad" kinds of players.
Those who undertake to do unsporting activity because it helps them win. (Exploiters, Goldbuyers)
Those who undertake to do unsporting activity because they find it fun. (Griefing, Teamkillers)
Everyone else is cool to play with, whatever their personal motivations and I personally play to win and have fun depending on how I am feeling, and how "into" a given game I am. Typically, I start at the playing for fun, I progress into competitive playing to win.
Those who undertake to do unsporting activity because it helps them win. (Exploiters, Goldbuyers)
Those who undertake to do unsporting activity because they find it fun. (Griefing, Teamkillers)
Everyone else is cool to play with, whatever their personal motivations and I personally play to win and have fun depending on how I am feeling, and how "into" a given game I am. Typically, I start at the playing for fun, I progress into competitive playing to win.
Other:
As a competitive gamer (I'm a member of a former #1 ranked clan in TGL and TWL, and we made sums of money all of which we use to further the clan), I always play by the house rules. If server rules dictate that there is to be no grenade camping or RDX bunnyhopping, I do neither. If they say no "base raping," I do not. If they do not specify, they better be prepared to die 1/2 second after they spawn. I fully expect the same thing to happen to me in return. The same goes when playing games at a friend's house. He says that character [X] is unbalanced, no one uses him.
What I'm trying to say is that any tactic is just fine as long as there are no server/house rules against it. I will try to abide by general codes of conduct in games that do not have specific rules posted. IE I do not glitch the AI in L4D.
As a competitive gamer (I'm a member of a former #1 ranked clan in TGL and TWL, and we made sums of money all of which we use to further the clan), I always play by the house rules. If server rules dictate that there is to be no grenade camping or RDX bunnyhopping, I do neither. If they say no "base raping," I do not. If they do not specify, they better be prepared to die 1/2 second after they spawn. I fully expect the same thing to happen to me in return. The same goes when playing games at a friend's house. He says that character [X] is unbalanced, no one uses him.
What I'm trying to say is that any tactic is just fine as long as there are no server/house rules against it. I will try to abide by general codes of conduct in games that do not have specific rules posted. IE I do not glitch the AI in L4D.
Playing to win is fine so long as you don't play cheap. I don't care what the guy in the article says, if you play games as seriously as you play football like he seems to suggest, you're doing it wrong. Massively unfair/ unbalanced gameplay is no fun for the other side, and sometimes even for the winning side.
Ok, ok.
Winning is fun. Obviously. I won't hear a single person telling me that he finds more enjoyment in defeat than victory. However, the quality of the game experience for everyone can be swiftly reduced by using cheap tactics. And yes, I'm looking to use his terms without the brackets, because obviously I am a scrub, according to him. Additionally, his views on fun, professionalism and such are entirely skewed in comparison to what is considered "normal".
Let me pop up some examples:
Age of Empires 2: I love AoE2. Best RTS ever, IMO. I have a group of friends that I sometimes game with through LANs or Hamachi, however, there's one of them I'd rather not play against. Why? Because he plays entirely to win, so a game that usually involve intricate tactics from both me and my opponents and gets an immense depth because of that gets reduced to either 1: A game where I get surprised once again by a rapid force of footsoldiers that level my village before I can even finish planning my beautiful architechture, or 2: A game where we're stuck in a clash of producing as many units as possible and constantly sending them at eachother without no real tactics to it other than "go there and kick some ass please".
Call of Duty 4: CoD4 is my heartie. There's only one game that I spend more MP time with (Toribash, I've earlier posted a review of it). And there are several strategies that people will claim to be 'unfair'. Some are sillier than others. However, I don't find most of them particularly hard to work against, so maybe in this particular notion I agree with that...book...guy.
- "Bunny jumping": Ok, so there's a guy that jumps around corners. So what? If you were suprised by it it's likely that you were waiting for him, which means that there's a pending danger that you can be put in the category of;
- Campers: The definition of the word "camping" varies pretty much from server to server. The most extreme loathers think of this as simply standing still behind cover, shooting at people that are moving around without cover. I think of it as finding an isolated corner, hoping for people to pass by a couple of times during a match. It's not...bad, but I don't get it. I find it much more entertaining to roam around and cap people in the noggin than staying out of the action to shoot stray dogs. Thus, the -fun- part comes to mind again.
Winning is fun. Obviously. I won't hear a single person telling me that he finds more enjoyment in defeat than victory. However, the quality of the game experience for everyone can be swiftly reduced by using cheap tactics. And yes, I'm looking to use his terms without the brackets, because obviously I am a scrub, according to him. Additionally, his views on fun, professionalism and such are entirely skewed in comparison to what is considered "normal".
Let me pop up some examples:
Age of Empires 2: I love AoE2. Best RTS ever, IMO. I have a group of friends that I sometimes game with through LANs or Hamachi, however, there's one of them I'd rather not play against. Why? Because he plays entirely to win, so a game that usually involve intricate tactics from both me and my opponents and gets an immense depth because of that gets reduced to either 1: A game where I get surprised once again by a rapid force of footsoldiers that level my village before I can even finish planning my beautiful architechture, or 2: A game where we're stuck in a clash of producing as many units as possible and constantly sending them at eachother without no real tactics to it other than "go there and kick some ass please".
Call of Duty 4: CoD4 is my heartie. There's only one game that I spend more MP time with (Toribash, I've earlier posted a review of it). And there are several strategies that people will claim to be 'unfair'. Some are sillier than others. However, I don't find most of them particularly hard to work against, so maybe in this particular notion I agree with that...book...guy.
- "Bunny jumping": Ok, so there's a guy that jumps around corners. So what? If you were suprised by it it's likely that you were waiting for him, which means that there's a pending danger that you can be put in the category of;
- Campers: The definition of the word "camping" varies pretty much from server to server. The most extreme loathers think of this as simply standing still behind cover, shooting at people that are moving around without cover. I think of it as finding an isolated corner, hoping for people to pass by a couple of times during a match. It's not...bad, but I don't get it. I find it much more entertaining to roam around and cap people in the noggin than staying out of the action to shoot stray dogs. Thus, the -fun- part comes to mind again.
Very true.stinkychops said:
If you are playing for fun on say BF: 1943 and your team is just dicking around eventually it's going to stop being fun, because you won't be alive enough to do what you want.
(I really hope that made sense. Tired, so tired...)
ok im gonna have to relate this to the game stick arena, I relatively small but still fun multiplayer game on addicting games. It was ruled by hackers. So much so that people playing because they enjoyed the game couldnt play anymore. That wasnt fair, people who couldnt die, could walk through walls and could use the hammer 5 times in a second ( the hammer one shots, but has a really slow recharge time). But it is fun when a hacker forgets to put on his invulnerability hack because no one can get near him anyways and you kill him 
But its still fine to play to win to a point.
But its still fine to play to win to a point.