Seignar wrote:Not true Mildred. Duels take place under a general agreement that Estus is not used, invaders don't use mobs and SL caps are made for the purpose of finding people of the same SL or very near yours. In a sense, it is not perfectly balanced, but all it takes is to make a tournament with the rules "Only SL X" and both players can be on perfectly equal grounds.
But that is setting up a fixed fight, 99% of fighting in darksouls is random, so you should only play to win in a pre arranged tournament?
No, you should play to win in the forest so when you play to win in a tournament you can go all out because you don't have a dozen disadvantages holding you down.
I call it intensive training.
Besides, random fighting is the complete definition of Playing to Win because no one is playing with self-imposed rules. In a sense, tournaments are for scrubs in Dark Souls.
It's just that Dark Souls wasn't build with fairness in mind.
I will quote you again because you point is not clear.
It was stated that this play anyway to win only works with balanced fights.
I said darksouls is not a balanced fighting game... To which you said....
Seignar wrote:Not true Mildred. Duels take place under a general agreement that Estus is not used, invaders don't use mobs and SL caps are made for the purpose of finding people of the same SL or very near yours. In a sense, it is not perfectly balanced, but all it takes is to make a tournament with the rules "Only SL X" and both players can be on perfectly equal grounds.
But then you turn around and say that balanced pre arranged tournaments are for scrubs.
Which is it? You can't play both sides.
The reason that some ppl set limits on what can and can't be used is to try make an unbalanced RPG into a fighting game that is balanced and then you get down to the skill lvl.
I think the whole problem with this debate is that the quote the OP posted is based on fighting games that are 99% balanced... And darksouls is not that.
TehInfamousAmos wrote:playing to win makes the game extremely easy
This statement deserves to be mocked. I see this sentiment echoed again and again. I wonder how these players do not realize that handicapping themselves is a terrible way to generate challenge in a PvP game. If you want a challenge, find better opponents. Playing to win is the hardest thing you can do in a competitive game because it means fighting other people who are playing to win.
I'd like to point out that if you go and read the whole book, the very first thing its author writes is:
"Imagine a majestic mountain nirvana of gaming. At its peak are fulfillment, “fun,” and even transcendence. Most people could care less about this mountain peak because they have other life issues that are more important to them, and other peaks to pursue. There are a few, though, who are not at this peak, but who would be very happy there. These are the people I’m talking to with this book."
While I think anybody who plays PvP games can learn from it, the book Playing to Win is not written for most players. It's written for people who want to participate and win in tournaments. Playing to Win even encourages playing by 'imaginary' rules as long as they are rules that are enforced in tournaments. So with that in mind, here are some things that are not playing to win:
-TWoD'ing/Chugging/Ganking/Twinking. Using it in any reasonable tournament would either be infeasible or would result in disqualification. Using it outside of a tournament will not improve your ability to win tournaments. -Picking top-tier champions in LoL then stomping people in normals. If somebody is playing to win, they're going to be picking the top-tier champions, then fighting in tournaments against crazy Koreans who sit down and practice 16 hours a day and also use top-tier champions. I guarantee you this is orders of magnitude more difficult than beating up normals with a low-tier champion. Possibly somebody who wants to PTW will grind the ladder at some point, but their ultimate goal is not to wreck random normal-queue scrubs, their ultimate goal is to get 2k+ Elo and start winning tournaments.
Just quoting so it's not missed as it has some good points and I would hate it to be missed because of cops off topic tangent..... Ok and my off topic tangent.
Saturday-Saint wrote:
TehInfamousAmos wrote:playing to win makes the game extremely easy
This statement deserves to be mocked. I see this sentiment echoed again and again. I wonder how these players do not realize that handicapping themselves is a terrible way to generate challenge in a PvP game. If you want a challenge, find better opponents. Playing to win is the hardest thing you can do in a competitive game because it means fighting other people who are playing to win.
I'd like to point out that if you go and read the whole book, the very first thing its author writes is:
"Imagine a majestic mountain nirvana of gaming. At its peak are fulfillment, “fun,” and even transcendence. Most people could care less about this mountain peak because they have other life issues that are more important to them, and other peaks to pursue. There are a few, though, who are not at this peak, but who would be very happy there. These are the people I’m talking to with this book."
While I think anybody who plays PvP games can learn from it, the book Playing to Win is not written for most players. It's written for people who want to participate and win in tournaments. Playing to Win even encourages playing by 'imaginary' rules as long as they are rules that are enforced in tournaments. So with that in mind, here are some things that are not playing to win:
-TWoD'ing/Chugging/Ganking/Twinking. Using it in any reasonable tournament would either be infeasible or would result in disqualification. Using it outside of a tournament will not improve your ability to win tournaments. -Picking top-tier champions in LoL then stomping people in normals. If somebody is playing to win, they're going to be picking the top-tier champions, then fighting in tournaments against crazy Koreans who sit down and practice 16 hours a day and also use top-tier champions. I guarantee you this is orders of magnitude more difficult than beating up normals with a low-tier champion. Possibly somebody who wants to PTW will grind the ladder at some point, but their ultimate goal is not to wreck random normal-queue scrubs, their ultimate goal is to get 2k+ Elo and start winning tournaments.
Ps. Cop you have good reason to be paranoid around me. :suspect:
Last edited by Maneater_Mildred on Fri Apr 26, 2013 5:31 pm; edited 2 times in total
TehInfamousAmos wrote:playing to win makes the game extremely easy
This statement deserves to be mocked. I see this sentiment echoed again and again. I wonder how these players do not realize that handicapping themselves is a terrible way to generate challenge in a PvP game. If you want a challenge, find better opponents. Playing to win is the hardest thing you can do in a competitive game because it means fighting other people who are playing to win.
I'd like to point out that if you go and read the whole book, the very first thing its author writes is:
"Imagine a majestic mountain nirvana of gaming. At its peak are fulfillment, “fun,” and even transcendence. Most people could care less about this mountain peak because they have other life issues that are more important to them, and other peaks to pursue. There are a few, though, who are not at this peak, but who would be very happy there. These are the people I’m talking to with this book."
While I think anybody who plays PvP games can learn from it, the book Playing to Win is not written for most players. It's written for people who want to participate and win in tournaments. Playing to Win even encourages playing by 'imaginary' rules as long as they are rules that are enforced in tournaments. So with that in mind, here are some things that are not playing to win:
-TWoD'ing/Chugging/Ganking/Twinking. Using it in any reasonable tournament would either be infeasible or would result in disqualification. Using it outside of a tournament will not improve your ability to win tournaments. -Picking top-tier champions in LoL then stomping people in normals. If somebody is playing to win, they're going to be picking the top-tier champions, then fighting in tournaments against crazy Koreans who sit down and practice 16 hours a day and also use top-tier champions. I guarantee you this is orders of magnitude more difficult than beating up normals with a low-tier champion. Possibly somebody who wants to PTW will grind the ladder at some point, but their ultimate goal is not to wreck random normal-queue scrubs, their ultimate goal is to get 2k+ Elo and start winning tournaments.
If rules are not in place then Dark Souls is not balanced.
Having rules against items that are over powered creates an equilibrium.
Playing to win does not apply to Dark Souls....unless money is involved, in which case a HUGE rule list would be created.
I realize you said, "Follow rules that would be in tourneys", but then you make it seem as if discussing those rules extensively is counter-productive.
Also, no comment deserves to be "mocked" only corrected...like yours.
Maneater_Mildred wrote:Just quoting so it's not missed as it has some good points and I would hate it to be missed because of cops off topic tangent..... Ok and my off topic tangent.
Saturday-Saint wrote:
TehInfamousAmos wrote:playing to win makes the game extremely easy
This statement deserves to be mocked. I see this sentiment echoed again and again. I wonder how these players do not realize that handicapping themselves is a terrible way to generate challenge in a PvP game. If you want a challenge, find better opponents. Playing to win is the hardest thing you can do in a competitive game because it means fighting other people who are playing to win.
I'd like to point out that if you go and read the whole book, the very first thing its author writes is:
"Imagine a majestic mountain nirvana of gaming. At its peak are fulfillment, “fun,” and even transcendence. Most people could care less about this mountain peak because they have other life issues that are more important to them, and other peaks to pursue. There are a few, though, who are not at this peak, but who would be very happy there. These are the people I’m talking to with this book."
While I think anybody who plays PvP games can learn from it, the book Playing to Win is not written for most players. It's written for people who want to participate and win in tournaments. Playing to Win even encourages playing by 'imaginary' rules as long as they are rules that are enforced in tournaments. So with that in mind, here are some things that are not playing to win:
-TWoD'ing/Chugging/Ganking/Twinking. Using it in any reasonable tournament would either be infeasible or would result in disqualification. Using it outside of a tournament will not improve your ability to win tournaments. -Picking top-tier champions in LoL then stomping people in normals. If somebody is playing to win, they're going to be picking the top-tier champions, then fighting in tournaments against crazy Koreans who sit down and practice 16 hours a day and also use top-tier champions. I guarantee you this is orders of magnitude more difficult than beating up normals with a low-tier champion. Possibly somebody who wants to PTW will grind the ladder at some point, but their ultimate goal is not to wreck random normal-queue scrubs, their ultimate goal is to get 2k+ Elo and start winning tournaments.
Ps. Cop you have good reason to be paranoid around me. :suspect:
My point is that Yorick is not a top tier champion. My point is that AP nunu brings nothing to the team other than denying to enemy top laner. The lack of skill required to play these champions amuses me. I certaintly would not call them top tier.
Top tier jungle: Xin, Nasus, Voli, Mundo, Amumu, J4 etc; Top tier top laners: Renekton, Jayce, Irelia, Rumble, Elise etc;
You understand what I am saying.
Heck, I play FOTM cause I own all top laners and junglers so it is beneficial to me to exploit the imbalance that occurs due to certain tweaking in patching. Also, Saint - I would consider solo q doesn't really help anything other than your mechanical skill. The way to test ones abilities in LoL truly would be to create a 5's ranked team with other like-minded people. Train and then climb the ladder.
Right. I haven't played LoL in ages, I don't know who's good or not right now. My point is that playing Yorick/Nunu to stomp solo queues because they're easy to use isn't an example of playing to win.
By the author's logic, games are designed for you to be the biggest jerk ever.
Every play Goldeneye, and your friend picks Oddjob?
Not a fair fight, he's shorter and hard to hit.
And then by this logic, this video shows a skillful player who plays well.
Tell me that's fair play. Tell me that you'd do that, and it's enjoyable to you, and it makes you a skilled player.
By his definition, scrub means someone who handicaps themselves.
So why is that bad?
Why would handicapping myself have a negative connotation, while using Smough's armor and a Gold Tracer is given a positive connotation?
To avoid a big large post, I don't like the article, because it promotes people playing the same way, because it works. It kills diversity, instead of trying to learn counters to what is considered cheap, it says, be the bigger jerk.
If someone uses a Zweihander on you, instead of trying to parry or roll bs his slow weapon, stack poise and spam Dark Bead, because it works.
It just feels like I'm being told that playing for fun isn't the right way to play, playing the way that makes you win is the right way to play.
By the author's logic, games are designed for you to be the biggest jerk ever.
Actually, no, he didn't say that. But Seth Killian, who was the lead designer for Street Fighter 4, said something to that effect that I liked a lot. He said, in reference to playing a competitive game, something along the lines of, "It is my job to make the game as unfun as possible for my opponent, and it is his job to do the same to me. If we both do our job well, and we are still having fun, then it is a good game."
The point isn't so much that you're supposed to be a jerk. The point is that you should be able to play your hardest and not hold back, and if doing that makes you feel like a jerk, then it's a bad game.
And pretty much everything you wrote is the standard strawman response to PTW that I see every time it gets brought up. Again, keep in mind that PTW is written for people who want to compete in TOURNAMENTS. It is not written for casual PvP, as in Goldeneye or killing people in the forest.
So it is an elitist message meant so that people who are good at a game can look down upon people aren't good in their mind and demonize them, only to be read by elitists so they can inflate their egos?
That hateful speech directed at people new to the scene is absolutely disgusting to me, if it is indeed designed just for people who want to get into tourneys rather than having a concept that everyone can be fine with that doesn't demonize any playstyle.
Just a heads up, if you want people to understand the competitive mentality this sort of stuff just makes said people come off as egotistical rather than interested in simply playing at the highest level of skill.
It just feels like I'm being told that playing for fun isn't the right way to play, playing the way that makes you win is the right way to play.
That isn't what the article is saying. What it is saying that if you're ever serious about competitiveness, you should really consider to stop using your own "made-up rules" to handicap yourself because it is going to get you nowhere.
It isn't saying: "You aren't being serious, so you aren't playing right!", it is saying what is right to do in the competitive scene.
It is not condoning "fun" behavior. It is condoning trying to bring "newbish" behavior in a competitive scenario. There are people that don't want to take a game completely seriously and there are people that want to take it to the next step and be the top. From experience, getting to the top while competing with skilled opponents is indeed fun, in fact, isn't that why we love Dark Souls?
In a sense, the article wants to promote players getting better rather than sticking at a point. It says how instead of complaining immediately about something being broken, you should instead look for counters to solve your problem and get the upper hand. This raises your skill level because now tactic X no longer works on you, and it also forces player B to get better by adapting new strategies. This situation technically would increase variety instead of hampering it.
Again, let's take the example of Backstabs. Early in the game's life, backstabs were broken as hell. Later, instead of soft-banning the use of backstabs, we have adapted and created a technique called the "counter backstab" and "backstab cancel". So, now what happened? Backstabs became acceptable and all players gain 2 new tactics they can use to mindgame and balance out backstabs.
Dark Souls in not a pvp game. Games are designed to be fun. People shouldn't ruin another's gaming experience for their own fun. Respecting your opponent and not being antagnostic/a douche/whatever you want to call it is the first step for making an enjoyable experience for all. @Swordiris "The experts are having fun on a higher level than the scrubs can ever imagine." A more wrong statement has never been said. Both parties are equally having fun. Because they are playing the game how it is enjoyable to them.
I regret this is even being considered on the forum. I'm only returning to post this after this was shown to me.
Tolvo wrote:So it is an elitist message meant so that people who are good at a game can look down upon people aren't good in their mind and demonize them, only to be read by elitists so they can inflate their egos?
That hateful speech directed at people new to the scene is absolutely disgusting to me, if it is indeed designed just for people who want to get into tourneys rather than having a concept that everyone can be fine with that doesn't demonize any playstyle.
Just a heads up, if you want people to understand the competitive mentality this sort of stuff just makes said people come off as egotistical rather than interested in simply playing at the highest level of skill.
Uh...?
I don't know where you are getting this from.
EDIT: Just for the record, Seignar, counterstab has been in use since 2009.
By the author's logic, games are designed for you to be the biggest jerk ever.
Actually, no, he didn't say that. But Seth Killian, who was the lead designer for Street Fighter 4, said something to that effect that I liked a lot. He said, in reference to playing a competitive game, something along the lines of, "It is my job to make the game as unfun as possible for my opponent, and it is his job to do the same to me. If we both do our job well, and we are still having fun, then it is a good game."
The point isn't so much that you're supposed to be a jerk. The point is that you should be able to play your hardest and not hold back, and if doing that makes you feel like a jerk, then it's a bad game.
And pretty much everything you wrote is the standard strawman response to PTW that I see every time it gets brought up. Again, keep in mind that PTW is written for people who want to compete in TOURNAMENTS. It is not written for casual PvP, as in Goldeneye or killing people in the forest.
But they're valid points.
I don't care if my argument has been said before.
I'm not holding back if I'm spamming R1 with a Katana or the Gold Tracer until my opponent drops. By this logic, I can be a jerk, I can do as I please, when I please, so I can be "teh mastur trolle" by making "stupid kids online" mad because I can't do things for fun, I have to give it my all based off equipment, even if it means I'm making the game more dull then Friday night Bingo club with grandma.
It's not fun, it's boring.
If I decided we were going to duel, so I brought a Zweihander along and just stunlocked you to pieces, I'm not holding back.
What he's saying is, find something that the entirety of the community hates, and do it because it works.
He's saying have no respect for the other player, and just be an ***.
It's just sugarcoated with nicer words.
The experience should be enjoyable for all, not just me, trying to ruin your opponents experience shouldn't be your main goal. A loss shouldn't be a bad experience, nothing in a game should be a bad experience, because the game has failed to deliver what it's intended to do. And that would be keep you entertained.
They are not valid points. Do you know what is a "strawman"? It means you are responding to an argument that isn't being made. You are misrepresenting PTW and attacking this fictional version of it instead of responding to what it is actually saying.
by 
back to the discussion....
