Jump to content


Play for Fun

play for fun

  • Please log in to reply
147 replies to this topic

FrozenKemp #21 Posted May 15 2018 - 16:10

    Major

  • Players
  • 46616 battles
  • 7,187
  • Member since:
    04-24-2011

9.  To win.  Not "for bragging rights", not "for stats" but for the enjoyment of outsmarting the enemy, executing a strategy well, or whatever. 

 

 

 


GenPanzer #22 Posted May 15 2018 - 16:21

    Major

  • Players
  • 38851 battles
  • 2,511
  • Member since:
    08-15-2011

View PostDuqe, on May 15 2018 - 09:56, said:

 

My participation ends when I choose to stop posting here, or when your thread gets locked and deleted.

 

Well I meant I don't care what you have to say anymore. You should learn to read.

Almighty_Johnson #23 Posted May 15 2018 - 16:21

    Captain

  • -Players-
  • 21204 battles
  • 1,619
  • [JOY] JOY
  • Member since:
    11-10-2014

View Post_Tsavo_, on May 15 2018 - 06:59, said:

I feel like I still make mad money and experience in frontline win or lose.  I don't get the same in pubs.

 

I still want to win any game I'm in, but frontline doesn't punish defeat like pub games.  That's where it's way more enjoyable.  Not the win or the loss, but the punishment for losing is taken away.

 

 

In the end, I play for fun, pubs or no.

 

I think another reason why FL doesn't feel as punishing is 2 other factors.  Respawn and 30 man teams make it far less likely you will draw an entire team of muppets, so the outcomes are far less likely to be ROFL-Stomps.  I feel like every game was a GG with plenty of opportunity and not just a club fest.

Deputy276 #24 Posted May 15 2018 - 16:24

    Major

  • Players
  • 19022 battles
  • 5,390
  • [3_NZ] 3_NZ
  • Member since:
    06-17-2013

View PostFrozenKemp, on May 15 2018 - 09:10, said:

9.  To win.  Not "for bragging rights", not "for stats" but for the enjoyment of outsmarting the enemy, executing a strategy well, or whatever. 

 

 

 

Probably. Certainly not a unanimous reason. Many folks get a great deal of enjoyment out of the game, even if they lose. Games that are "close" and lost often get a "GG". Players can do exceptionally well and still lose a game. So personal satisfaction can trump winning in that case. And of course, somebody has to LOSE a game. So being able to accept losses is part of growing up. Unfortunately, schools nowadays are teaching that bullcrap about "everyone is a winner". Only in real life everyone ISN'T a winner and you have to be able to mentally accept losing. Part of growing up. You lose, brush the dust off, and move on. Try again maybe.

 

Yes, you try to win. But in WOT it often isn't a priority. Especially if someone is trying to do a Personal Mission. I have seen way too many folks just stop any more effort at anything once they complete a Personal Mission.    


Edited by Deputy276, May 15 2018 - 16:25.


_Tsavo_ #25 Posted May 15 2018 - 16:34

    Major

  • Players
  • 40961 battles
  • 16,840
  • [PBKAC] PBKAC
  • Member since:
    02-16-2011

View PostGenPanzer, on May 15 2018 - 08:19, said:

 

So, if you played only premium tanks in pubs, would you say that would eliminate the credit issue. And if you played premiums, then the XP really isn't that big a deal. It's the grinding of stock tanks that make winning in pubs that much more important and stressful and rage inducing to those that don't perform well enough to get the win? But, just like you and many others not caring about winning or losing FL, why can't anyone else not care about the same things you care about in pubs? Why are they they "bad guys"?

 

Nope, there's a huge credit bonus for winning pubs as well as experience.  I'm still in it to win it since that's the point of fighting other players: to kick their butts and win.

 

Anymore I'm not really grinding any tanks and have most of the ones I want (only current "grind" is the IS-3 and it's an IS-3 which is LOLOP so it's not really a grind in that sense) and the ones I enjoy playing are just all around fun.  Go out, kill, get them dimdams, and win.  Thems my jobs.

 

As for the "bad guys" it's really only targeted at the ones who, despite equal battle counts or more, go on about ply for fun as an excuse and suggesting that anyone who isn't god awfully bad can't possibly also be playing for fun


Edited by _Tsavo_, May 15 2018 - 16:36.


Cognitive_Dissonance #26 Posted May 15 2018 - 16:35

    Major

  • Players
  • 38363 battles
  • 5,927
  • [ANASS] ANASS
  • Member since:
    01-31-2013

View Poststalkervision, on May 15 2018 - 06:59, said:

So what some people are actually saying here, once their argument is deconstructed a bit, is that people should play much better becase it ruins their stats if they don't and they can't have any " fun" whatsoever  without good stats because of some kind of insecurity about playing arcade games in a casual manner. The argument that people can't have fun without winning at a higher level would obviously be moot for them if the people posting that argument were not affected by other players win ratios and xvm stats.  I say play exclusivly in clans battles then if ones win ratio and stats in a arcade game are so importent to ones self. Don't saddle your insecurity on others.

 

Just saying..

 

Nope.

 

Games, as a whole, from the beginning of time have but one simple premise. Pitting one opponent against another, where one wins and one is defeated. Even Tic Tac Toe is based on this premise. Put out a list of games based on winning, and then list games whose premise is not based on winning and you will have a lopsided ratio with one numbering in the thousands, and the other barely a list by comparison.

 

So winning, regardless of other stats, is the very foundation of WoT. Even the terms used in it's advertising, clicking into the game, and the very way the game is pitched all invokes "combat" and "win vs. defeat". So all the other arguments about playing for fun and other stuff are just ways to obfuscate that someone is there to enjoy the game on their terms, but not really put any effort into the very premise of the game which is to defeat the enemy, and come out on top as the winner. The winners, even the ones that did poorly get more XP. The entire system is built around favoring those who do better. Win, more XP, as a winner more damage, more spotting etc. more money more XP, crew XP etc.

 

It has nothing to do with epeen for many many people, it has more to do with folks who want to participate with how the game was actually designed and the fact that some will join to play to "have fun" by derping around, looking at the sky, shooting teammates, or sitting idly at cap and or exploring vs. fighting.

 

So instead of always turning it into an epeen swaggering thing for folks that do want to win, as you are rewarded for doing so, I think everyone else who is just there to durp around and not really contribute should just say that and admit by doing so, they are making things harder for folks who are at least trying to contribute the the very premise of the game - to win, in combat, by clicking the Battle button. Instead of long drawn out explanations as to why it is okay to "enjoy" the game by exploring the map and not contributing to the actual goal the game was built around.

 

So lets do away with epeen and ego arguments, and let's just have everyone admit that plays only for their own version of enjoyment that doesn't contribute toward the goal of winning, at least admit they are making it harder for their team to accomplish the very outcome the game was built on - to win, in combat, against an enemy. Instead of these long drawn rationalizations as to why "I play for fun" is a valid tenant in a game designed around winning or losing.

 

 


Edited by Cognitive_Dissonance, May 15 2018 - 16:38.


Deputy276 #27 Posted May 15 2018 - 16:46

    Major

  • Players
  • 19022 battles
  • 5,390
  • [3_NZ] 3_NZ
  • Member since:
    06-17-2013

View PostCognitive_Dissonance, on May 15 2018 - 09:35, said:

 

Nope.

 

Games, as a whole, from the beginning of time have but one simple premise. Pitting one opponent against another, where one wins and one is defeated. Even Tic Tac Toe is based on this premise. Put out a list of games based on winning, and then list games whose premise is not based on winning and you will have a lopsided ratio with one numbering in the thousands, and the other barely a list by comparison.

 

So winning, regardless of other stats, is the very foundation of WoT. Even the terms used in it's advertising, clicking into the game, and the very way the game is pitched all invokes "combat" and "win vs. defeat". So all the other arguments about playing for fun and other stuff are just ways to obfuscate that someone is their to enjoy the game on their terms, but not really put any effort into the very premise of the game which is to defeat the enemy, and come out on top as the winner. The winners, even the ones that did poorly get more XP. The entire system is built around favoring those who do better. Win, more XP, as a winner more damage, more spotting etc. more money more XP, crew XP etc.

 

It has nothing to do with epeen for many many people, it has more to do with folks who want to participate with how the game was actually designed and the fact that some will join to play to "have fun" by derping around, looking at the sky, shooting teammates, or sitting idly at cap and or exploring vs. fighting.

 

So instead of always turning it into an epeen swaggering thing for folks that do want to win, as you are rewarded for doing so, I think everyone else who is just there to durp around and not really contribute should just say that and admit by doing so, they are making things harder for folks who are at least trying to contribute the the very premise of the game - to win, in combat, by clicking the Battle button. Instead of long drawn out explanations as to why it is okay to "enjoy" the game by exploring the map and not contributing to the actual goal the game was built around.

 

So lets do away with epeen and ego arguments, and let's just have everyone admit that plays only for their own version of enjoyment that doesn't contribute toward the goal of winning, at least admit they are making it harder for their team to accomplish the very outcome the game was built on - to win, in combat, against an enemy. Instead of these long drawn rationalizations as to why "I play for fun" is a valid tenant in a game designed around winning or losing.

 

 

 

LOL...who the [Edited] died and made you the dictator of why people play WOT? Sorry, but no. You can swim in De Nial all you want, but many folks have reasons other than "winning", when they play WOT. Heck, WG even INTRODUCED reasons other than winning to play the game. Personal Missions often don't require a win in order to complete one. Team? ROFLMAO! Dood...team play is a joke in WOT. Teams practice together. They work together for a single goal. But people have multiple goals in this game. Grinding tanks, earning credits, earning free XP. Do you "hang out" with the "team" after a game? Go to the bar and have a few drinks? I doubt it. Team play only exists in clans or MAYBE platoons. Otherwise, it is 15 players with 15 different reasons for playing. 

Do people want to win? Of course! Is it their primary reason for playing...maybe. 



I_QQ_4_U #28 Posted May 15 2018 - 16:59

    Major

  • -Players-
  • 17047 battles
  • 2,974
  • Member since:
    10-17-2016
I love the players that play for fun by sitting at the back of the map hiding behind a rock. Don't they know they can do that in the proving grounds?

GenPanzer #29 Posted May 15 2018 - 17:02

    Major

  • Players
  • 38851 battles
  • 2,511
  • Member since:
    08-15-2011

View Post_Tsavo_, on May 15 2018 - 10:34, said:

 

Nope, there's a huge credit bonus for winning pubs as well as experience.  I'm still in it to win it since that's the point of fighting other players: to kick their butts and win.

 

Anymore I'm not really grinding any tanks and have most of the ones I want (only current "grind" is the IS-3 and it's an IS-3 which is LOLOP so it's not really a grind in that sense) and the ones I enjoy playing are just all around fun.  Go out, kill, get them dimdams, and win.  Thems my jobs.

 

As for the "bad guys" it's really only targeted at the ones who, despite equal battle counts or more, go on about ply for fun as an excuse and suggesting that anyone who isn't god awfully bad can't possibly also be playing for fun

 

Interesting. I don't think I have ever read a post from someone saying they play for fun and have crap stats that those with good stats can't or don't play for fun. I might have missed those. I usually see the good stat players claim that it is not possible to play for fun and be that bad, or that playing for fun and being that bad cannot be fun. Or that playing for fun means you have to be winning, yet here we are talking about FL and even those with great stats have stated they don't care if they win or not.

 

I get there are possibly other factors that go into the goals of playing FL and not caring about winning. But is it possible, even as remotely as one might think, that someone that is so bad statistically, they can really be playing just for fun as most are in FL? Perhaps their goals with any mode are completely out of line with your goals for each mode that they really are, and can, just play for fun? Why is that philosophy so looked down upon, yet it's ok in FL?



Cognitive_Dissonance #30 Posted May 15 2018 - 17:14

    Major

  • Players
  • 38363 battles
  • 5,927
  • [ANASS] ANASS
  • Member since:
    01-31-2013

View PostDeputy276, on May 15 2018 - 09:46, said:

 

LOL...who the [Edited] died and made you the dictator of why people play WOT? Sorry, but no. You can swim in De Nial all you want, but many folks have reasons other than "winning", when they play WOT. Heck, WG even INTRODUCED reasons other than winning to play the game. Personal Missions often don't require a win in order to complete one. Team? ROFLMAO! Dood...team play is a joke in WOT. Teams practice together. They work together for a single goal. But people have multiple goals in this game. Grinding tanks, earning credits, earning free XP. Do you "hang out" with the "team" after a game? Go to the bar and have a few drinks? I doubt it. Team play only exists in clans or MAYBE platoons. Otherwise, it is 15 players with 15 different reasons for playing. 

Do people want to win? Of course! Is it their primary reason for playing...maybe. 

 

I am not dictating anything.

 

I am pointing out obvious truths about the game, and then I am pointing out the obvious fact that those who play for enjoyment that don't directly contribute to the goal of the game (winning) should at least admit they are a detriment to the goal while doing their own thing. That is closer to the truth, than anyone who tries to turn the argument against people who get upset about folks that don't work at winning are "stat" and "epeen" obsessed.

 

So if I am wrong, go to a local park where folks are playing chess, randomly as they do with folks that just drop in to play against any opponent, and just sit there listening to the birds. When the guy on the other "team" complains that you are not contributing toward the goal of the game, tell them that the game of chess (or any game) has nothing to do with winning or losing, but just however you want to enjoy it . . . see how far you get.

 

 


Edited by Cognitive_Dissonance, May 15 2018 - 17:48.


Nunya_000 #31 Posted May 15 2018 - 17:14

    Major

  • Players
  • 20993 battles
  • 12,352
  • [PACNW] PACNW
  • Member since:
    09-20-2013

View PostCognitive_Dissonance, on May 15 2018 - 07:35, said:

 

Nope.

 

Games, as a whole, from the beginning of time have but one simple premise. Pitting one opponent against another, where one wins and one is defeated. Even Tic Tac Toe is based on this premise. Put out a list of games based on winning, and then list games whose premise is not based on winning and you will have a lopsided ratio with one numbering in the thousands, and the other barely a list by comparison.

 

So winning, regardless of other stats, is the very foundation of WoT. Even the terms used in it's advertising, clicking into the game, and the very way the game is pitched all invokes "combat" and "win vs. defeat". So all the other arguments about playing for fun and other stuff are just ways to obfuscate that someone is there to enjoy the game on their terms, but not really put any effort into the very premise of the game which is to defeat the enemy, and come out on top as the winner. The winners, even the ones that did poorly get more XP. The entire system is built around favoring those who do better. Win, more XP, as a winner more damage, more spotting etc. more money more XP, crew XP etc.

 

It has nothing to do with epeen for many many people, it has more to do with folks who want to participate with how the game was actually designed and the fact that some will join to play to "have fun" by derping around, looking at the sky, shooting teammates, or sitting idly at cap and or exploring vs. fighting.

 

So instead of always turning it into an epeen swaggering thing for folks that do want to win, as you are rewarded for doing so, I think everyone else who is just there to durp around and not really contribute should just say that and admit by doing so, they are making things harder for folks who are at least trying to contribute the the very premise of the game - to win, in combat, by clicking the Battle button. Instead of long drawn out explanations as to why it is okay to "enjoy" the game by exploring the map and not contributing to the actual goal the game was built around.

 

So lets do away with epeen and ego arguments, and let's just have everyone admit that plays only for their own version of enjoyment that doesn't contribute toward the goal of winning, at least admit they are making it harder for their team to accomplish the very outcome the game was built on - to win, in combat, against an enemy. Instead of these long drawn rationalizations as to why "I play for fun" is a valid tenant in a game designed around winning or losing.

 

 

 

While I do agree with your base premise, your presentation seems to imply that your are a bit out of touch with the reality of most players.

 

Not everybody is competitive to the point where "winning is everything".  Sure, tic-tac-toe can be considered a competitive game where one wins and one is defeated, but nobody plays tic-tac-toe in order to drown their opponent in defeat.  In fact, if 2 skilled tic-tac-toe players engage in a battles of wits, there will be no winner or loser as every game will be a draw.

 

While the bases of games is to compete, they are also meant to provide entertainment.  No sane person engages in a family night of Monopoly with the intent on grinding their other family members into a crying pile of dust.  Any wins or loses in WOT are meaningless.  They will not put food on your table.  They will not help you in your job.  They will not help you in real life.  Some may disagree and claim that winning in WOT may help a person's self-esteem, but I'm sorry, if that person's self-esteem is so small that winning in a computer game is so important to them, then maybe they should seek some professional help.

 

10 or 20 years from now, the number of wins a person achieved playing this game will not matter and will likely not even be remembered.  However, since this is a team game, I do agree that those that do not participate and/or actively attempt to help their team win their battles should not even hit the battle button to begin with.



_Tsavo_ #32 Posted May 15 2018 - 17:15

    Major

  • Players
  • 40961 battles
  • 16,840
  • [PBKAC] PBKAC
  • Member since:
    02-16-2011

View PostGenPanzer, on May 15 2018 - 11:02, said:

 

Interesting. I don't think I have ever read a post from someone saying they play for fun and have crap stats that those with good stats can't or don't play for fun. I might have missed those. I usually see the good stat players claim that it is not possible to play for fun and be that bad, or that playing for fun and being that bad cannot be fun. Or that playing for fun means you have to be winning, yet here we are talking about FL and even those with great stats have stated they don't care if they win or not.

 

I get there are possibly other factors that go into the goals of playing FL and not caring about winning. But is it possible, even as remotely as one might think, that someone that is so bad statistically, they can really be playing just for fun as most are in FL? Perhaps their goals with any mode are completely out of line with your goals for each mode that they really are, and can, just play for fun? Why is that philosophy so looked down upon, yet it's ok in FL?

 

I've had a few back and forth moments with some of the more... interestingly weird members of the forum who insist that you can't work and be good and that if you are good you aren't playing it for fun.

 

On the level, most of the "I play for fun" statements have been used as an excuse.  I don't by it when used as an excuse.  I don't buy excuses in general.  That's why it's looked down upon because, in the end, it's a game and games are supposed to be played for enjoyment.

 

 



Cognitive_Dissonance #33 Posted May 15 2018 - 17:18

    Major

  • Players
  • 38363 battles
  • 5,927
  • [ANASS] ANASS
  • Member since:
    01-31-2013

View PostNunya_000, on May 15 2018 - 10:14, said:

 

While I do agree with your base premise, your presentation seems to imply that your are a bit out of touch with the reality of most players.

 

Not everybody is competitive to the point where "winning is everything".  Sure, tic-tac-toe can be considered a competitive game where one wins and one is defeated, but nobody plays tic-tac-toe in order to drown their opponent in defeat.  In fact, if 2 skilled tic-tac-toe players engage in a battles of wits, there will be no winner or loser as every game will be a draw.

 

While the bases of games is to compete, they are also meant to provide entertainment.  No sane person engages in a family night of Monopoly with the intent on grinding their other family members into a crying pile of dust.  Any wins or loses in WOT are meaningless.  They will not put food on your table.  They will not help you in your job.  They will not help you in real life.  some may disagree and claim that winning in WOT may help a person's self-esteem, but I'm sorry, if that person's self-esteem is so small that winning in a computer game is so important to them, then maybe they should seek some professional help.

 

10 or 20 years from now, the number of wins a person achieved playing this game will not matter and will likely not even be remembered.

 

LOL thank you. You did make me laugh. Yes you are correct, but I missed the mark.

 

I am not trying to "grind anyone into dust", that is for sure. I am just pointing out the fact that one could make the argument that folks who are there do do thier "own thing" in WoT are a detriment to the central tenant of the game, and they might as well admit it vs. turning it into an epeen or stat elitist argument.

 

But thanks for pointing out the seeming extremity of my diatribe, you are correct, I don't want to reduce people to piles of blubbering tears . . . I just want a good effort from everyone and a chance to win based on a common goal vs. "I am just here to durp around and drive into the water cya!!" - which happens more often than I would like in this game.



stalkervision #34 Posted May 15 2018 - 17:20

    Major

  • Players
  • 58597 battles
  • 8,887
  • Member since:
    11-12-2013

View PostDeputy276, on May 15 2018 - 10:03, said:

An old adage that I will modify..."fun is in the eye of the beholder". For those who are still in school and will probably never understand what that means, the translation is nobody can tell you or judge for you what is fun. A long time ago I used to post a list of "why people play WOT". Fun was on the list, but the list included 25 other reasons and there are probably more than that. Why people play varies greatly, many times depending on the age of the person as well as what he wants to get out of the game. Here's a partial list...

 

People play for:

1. The historical reasons, limited as they may be.

2. For the nice-looking maps.

3. To hear the guns go BOOM and other special effects

4. For "stats"

5. For strategy reasons

6. For bragging rights and to be able to feel superior to others (this is linked to stats)

7. Because they haven't got the testicular fortitude to actually join the military and become a tanker (REAL tankers will understand that one):teethhappy: 

8. Because they need something to "let off steam" after a day at work

 

There is just 8 reasons from my old and failing memory. As to Frontline, I am not a fan of it and have no urge to play even one game of it. I have tried other modes of WOT and they all left me with a meh opinion of them. I also don't like the idea of zombie game play. In Random, when you are dead, you're dead. No coming back to life over and over. Frontline adds too much "gaminess" to WOT for my tastes. 

 

Very relevent post. Too gamey for me also.

Hurk #35 Posted May 15 2018 - 17:24

    Major

  • Players
  • 50519 battles
  • 16,471
  • [KGR] KGR
  • Member since:
    09-30-2012

IPFF and "lol who cares" are not the same thing. 

 

play with sportsmanship. thats all. i dont care *why* you play, i care that you play appropriately. that you compete properly, and that you participate with the intent of helping the team reach the objective and win. 

 

a frontline match yesterday, where we were assault and a player in a tiger II camps 400 meters behind the team to snipe constantly. complete misuse of his tank, completely ignoring the objective to simply farm.  this is an example of a player that is not playing with sportsmanship. he has no intent to actually help the team win, just to farm.  regardless of how good his "score" is at the end of the match, the game was won or lost without him. 



Nunya_000 #36 Posted May 15 2018 - 17:30

    Major

  • Players
  • 20993 battles
  • 12,352
  • [PACNW] PACNW
  • Member since:
    09-20-2013

View PostHurk, on May 15 2018 - 08:24, said:

IPFF and "lol who cares" are not the same thing. 

 

play with sportsmanship. thats all. i dont care *why* you play, i care that you play appropriately. that you compete properly, and that you participate with the intent of helping the team reach the objective and win. 

 

a frontline match yesterday, where we were assault and a player in a tiger II camps 400 meters behind the team to snipe constantly. complete misuse of his tank, completely ignoring the objective to simply farm.  this is an example of a player that is not playing with sportsmanship. he has no intent to actually help the team win, just to farm.  regardless of how good his "score" is at the end of the match, the game was won or lost without him. 

 

When I first started playing, I was probably considered to be a "camper".  I did not camp because I wanted to farm damage, I camped, because if I got too aggressive, my tank would be a smoking pile of rubble in a short time.  I felt I was able to do more damage and live longer by sniping than I could if I went to the front....even if I was in a HT.....however, I would select my campsites so that I could likely have plenty of targets to shoot at.

 

My point is that there could be many different reasons why someone "camps".  Maybe they are just not an aggressive player.  Maybe they feel they can survive longer.  Maybe they are burdened with bad ping quite often and do not want to be in the front when it spikes.  Maybe it is just the easiest way for them to play and they fail to grasp that different tanks are more effective if used in different fashions.



Red_Ensign #37 Posted May 15 2018 - 17:32

    Major

  • Players
  • 7328 battles
  • 6,411
  • [WCTNT] WCTNT
  • Member since:
    02-14-2013

View Post__Mystic, on May 15 2018 - 07:28, said:

I dont understand how theres people that average 500 damage a game at tier 10 and think its fun. Thats the same as saying you enjoy getting your [edited]kicked every 5 minutes.

 

that sounds like your problem not theirs

Ape_Drape #38 Posted May 15 2018 - 17:40

    Captain

  • Players
  • 39711 battles
  • 1,810
  • [SOT] SOT
  • Member since:
    06-13-2011

View PostGenPanzer, on May 15 2018 - 12:43, said:

So, with Frontline, can everyone, even the most hardened stat lover out there, see how it is possible to play this game JUST for fun?

 

I have read many posters about the new FL say it's great fun and they don't care if they win or lose because it doesn't show up on their records.

 

This is the mentality of about 80% of the player base in pubs, except they don't care if it shows up on their record. I really hope this overall FUN mentality carries over to pubs when this FL mode is over.

 

There is no credit or exp penalty for losing in FL. This is why "play for fun" works in FL. You want to drag the match out for as long as possible in order to farm more credits and exp. Don't get me wrong, I'd still like to win the match, but I'm not having salt rubbed into the wound of losing.

 

Now in RB, you are penalized for losing. I don't want penalized. Losing is not fun. Winning is fun. This is a concept that the Playforfuns don't seem to understand. 

 

So what I have to say to the Playforfuns is this... When you log into the game and join a match, you are on OUR time. If being a loser is "fun", go have your fun on your own time.



stalkervision #39 Posted May 15 2018 - 17:45

    Major

  • Players
  • 58597 battles
  • 8,887
  • Member since:
    11-12-2013

View PostCognitive_Dissonance, on May 15 2018 - 10:35, said:

 

Nope.

 

Games, as a whole, from the beginning of time have but one simple premise. Pitting one opponent against another, where one wins and one is defeated. Even Tic Tac Toe is based on this premise. Put out a list of games based on winning, and then list games whose premise is not based on winning and you will have a lopsided ratio with one numbering in the thousands, and the other barely a list by comparison.

 

So winning, regardless of other stats, is the very foundation of WoT. Even the terms used in it's advertising, clicking into the game, and the very way the game is pitched all invokes "combat" and "win vs. defeat". So all the other arguments about playing for fun and other stuff are just ways to obfuscate that someone is there to enjoy the game on their terms, but not really put any effort into the very premise of the game which is to defeat the enemy, and come out on top as the winner. The winners, even the ones that did poorly get more XP. The entire system is built around favoring those who do better. Win, more XP, as a winner more damage, more spotting etc. more money more XP, crew XP etc.

 

It has nothing to do with epeen for many many people, it has more to do with folks who want to participate with how the game was actually designed and the fact that some will join to play to "have fun" by derping around, looking at the sky, shooting teammates, or sitting idly at cap and or exploring vs. fighting.

 

So instead of always turning it into an epeen swaggering thing for folks that do want to win, as you are rewarded for doing so, I think everyone else who is just there to durp around and not really contribute should just say that and admit by doing so, they are making things harder for folks who are at least trying to contribute the the very premise of the game - to win, in combat, by clicking the Battle button. Instead of long drawn out explanations as to why it is okay to "enjoy" the game by exploring the map and not contributing to the actual goal the game was built around.

 

So lets do away with epeen and ego arguments, and let's just have everyone admit that plays only for their own version of enjoyment that doesn't contribute toward the goal of winning, at least admit they are making it harder for their team to accomplisngh the very outcome the game was built on - to win, in combat, against an enemy. Instead of these long dra. wn rationalizations as to why "I play for fun" is a valid tenant in a game designed around winning or losing.

 

 Oww

You actually proved my point in a very round about way. Btw all the convoluted rationalizations  about games just about winning and losing shows how little you uunderstand  games in general



Kenshin2kx #40 Posted May 15 2018 - 17:45

    Major

  • -Players-
  • 18111 battles
  • 6,138
  • Member since:
    07-20-2014

View PostFrozenKemp, on May 15 2018 - 05:10, said:

9.  To win.  Not "for bragging rights", not "for stats" but for the enjoyment of outsmarting the enemy, executing a strategy well, or whatever. 

 

 

 

I guess, for me it boils down to this ... If I truly wanted to play in an individualistic manner devoid of the potential for consideration for the desires of others ... I'd honestly play a single player game.  

Edited by Kenshin2kx, May 15 2018 - 18:02.






Also tagged with play for fun

1 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 1 guests, 0 anonymous users