Guild Wars 2

I’m going to leave a quote here from my old FGC days (it’s not mine). I would also like to put on record that I enjoy build diversity rather than forcing myself to play a meta build, I don’t do this because I have a sense of honor, value or superiority over anyone who chooses to play meta, I do it because I enjoy playing what I play and that’s what this should be about regardless of your reasoning. If you enjoy playing meta builds, more power to you.

I think it’s blind for one person to say that they play for fun whilst others play to win. This is a competitive game, player vs player offers the most rewards to those who win, APs/Titles are awarded for winning, PvP at its core is about winning. It’s absurd to think that someone playing to win does not derive any enjoyment from winning or playing the game.

I don’t agree with his use of the word “scrub” in this context, but I’m too lazy to edit it, anyway….

A common call of the scrub is to cry that the kind of play in which ones tries to win at all costs is “boring” or “not fun.” Let’s consider two groups of players: a group of good players and a group of scrubs. The scrubs will play “for fun” and not explore the extremities of the game. They won’t find the most effective tactics and abuse them mercilessly. The good players will. The good players will find incredibly overpowering tactics and patterns. As they play the game more, they’ll be forced to find counters to those tactics. The vast majority of tactics that at first appear unbeatable end up having counters, though they are often quite esoteric and difficult to discover. The counter tactic prevents the first player from doing the tactic, but the first player can then use a counter to the counter. The second player is now afraid to use his counter and he’s again vulnerable to the original overpowering tactic.

The first step in becoming a top player is the realization that playing to win means doing whatever most increases your chances of winning. The game knows no rules of “honor” or of “cheapness.” The game only knows winning and losing.

What you must remember is that sure, some people play for fun, but I’ll wager you’re not having a lot of fun if you’re losing hours of matches over and over and getting sandbagged leading some of those players to boycott game modes, but I digress. Others enjoy the competitive edge, the feeling that comes with winning no matter how it was done, or in this case what build they have used, this is where they gain satisfaction and their sense of fun.

Keep an open mind.

bhagwad.4281:

Because if I don’t the other team will. So many times I’ve had to log out and log back in with my decap just to counter another decapper.

This is just FYI for those who wonder why people play these builds. It’s the prisoner’s dilemma. Logical people making logical decisions.

You do know the result of the Prisoner’s Dilema is that cooperation is best, right? Everyone who kittens up that game says the same thing (translated into gw2) “I played decap cause i thought the other team would”. The whole point is if everyone together says “No i won’t play that kitten” then everyone wins.

Coulter.2315:

bhagwad.4281:

Because if I don’t the other team will. So many times I’ve had to log out and log back in with my decap just to counter another decapper.

This is just FYI for those who wonder why people play these builds. It’s the prisoner’s dilemma. Logical people making logical decisions.

You do know the result of the Prisoner’s Dilema is that cooperation is best, right? Everyone who kittens up that game says the same thing (translated into gw2) “I played decap cause i thought the other team would”. The whole point is if everyone together says “No i won’t play that kitten” then everyone wins.

In a perfect world, this would be the case, this is not a perfect world. Were the world at war, not all countries would apply the same rules of engagement, someone fires a missile another fires a nuke.

Yes, this is a video game not a world war, but the same reasoning applies. Because you have a sense of honor – and I’m not knocking you for that – does not mean the rest of the playerbase cares or will apply any sense of honor in return, this does not make them bad players/people or anything else, siimply that people are different. I personally believe that honor is not something that exists in a video game.

Even if these rigid meta builds didn’t exist, there would always be something to complain about: theif is cheese, stealth is cheese etc, where is the line drawn?

“Everyone wins” when balance happens, sure some will complain that their builds have been destroyed, but the smarter more creative player will still find a way to make their classes great – someone had to actually tweak a build to come up with what are current metas and share them with the community, these are the creative players, others will sit back moaning because they cannot make a decent build for themselves until a new build has been shared and then try and emulate it and bandwagon on to it.

Static.9841:

Coulter.2315:

bhagwad.4281:

Because if I don’t the other team will. So many times I’ve had to log out and log back in with my decap just to counter another decapper.

This is just FYI for those who wonder why people play these builds. It’s the prisoner’s dilemma. Logical people making logical decisions.

You do know the result of the Prisoner’s Dilema is that cooperation is best, right? Everyone who kittens up that game says the same thing (translated into gw2) “I played decap cause i thought the other team would”. The whole point is if everyone together says “No i won’t play that kitten” then everyone wins.

In a perfect world, this would be the case, this is not a perfect world. Were the world at war, not all countries would apply the same rules of engagement, someone fires a missile another fires a nuke.

Yes, this is a video game not a world war, but the same reasoning applies. Because you have a sense of honor – and I’m not knocking you for that – does not mean the rest of the playerbase cares or will apply any sense of honor in return, this does not make them bad players/people or anything else, siimply that people are different. I personally believe that honor is not something that exists in a video game.

Even if these rigid meta builds didn’t exist, there would always be something to complain about: theif is cheese, stealth is cheese etc, where is the line drawn?

He invoked the Prisoner’s Dilema not me, he’s using it incorrectly to justify bad actions. As for your statements on missiles you know the Cold War remained cold because people didn’t make the kittenty choice and everything ended better than it could have. If you don’t value the consequences of your actions in a game thats fine, I’m just pointing out the flawed logic in using Game Theory or real life models to justify ‘no honour’ choices when those very subjects show the honourable road is better.

I recommend you go on youtube and type “Richard Dawkins Nice Guys Finish First” its a lovely old documentary (45mins) about this very topic and how it is seen in the animal world.

Its a good watch and I would recommend it to any friend.

Static.9841:

Even if these rigid meta builds didn’t exist, there would always be something to complain about: theif is cheese, stealth is cheese etc, where is the line drawn?

I can draw the line easy enough : the cheese is in my sandwich. I don’t eat thieves, how kittened up are you?

Coulter.2315:

He invoked the Prisoner’s Dilema not me, he’s using it incorrectly to justify bad actions. As for your statements on missiles you know the Cold War remained cold because people didn’t make the kittenty choice and everything ended better than it could have. If you don’t value the consequences of your actions in a game thats fine, I’m just pointing out the flawed logic in using Game Theory or real life models to justify ‘no honour’ choices when those very subjects show the honourable road is better.

I recommend you go on youtube and type “Richard Dawkins Nice Guys Finish First” its a lovely old documentary (45mins) about this very topic and how it is seen in the animal world.

Its a good watch and I would recommend it to any friend.

World War II, America dropped a nuke on Japan and caused them to surrender.

It’s not about valuing consequences in a game or not, you just said yourself about applying real life models into video games, the same goes for a sense of honor and ‘fairness’ when the game only knows winning and losing.

Uhtameit.2413:

I can draw the line easy enough : the cheese is in my sandwich. I don’t eat thieves, how kittened up are you?

Now I want a sandwich

Static.9841:

Coulter.2315:

He invoked the Prisoner’s Dilema not me, he’s using it incorrectly to justify bad actions. As for your statements on missiles you know the Cold War remained cold because people didn’t make the kittenty choice and everything ended better than it could have. If you don’t value the consequences of your actions in a game thats fine, I’m just pointing out the flawed logic in using Game Theory or real life models to justify ‘no honour’ choices when those very subjects show the honourable road is better.

I recommend you go on youtube and type “Richard Dawkins Nice Guys Finish First” its a lovely old documentary (45mins) about this very topic and how it is seen in the animal world.

Its a good watch and I would recommend it to any friend.

World War II, America dropped a nuke on Japan and caused them to surrender.

It’s not about valuing consequences in a game or not, you just said yourself about applying real life models into video games, the same goes for a sense of honor and ‘fairness’ when the game only knows winning and losing.

Uhtameit.2413:

I can draw the line easy enough : the cheese is in my sandwich. I don’t eat thieves, how kittened up are you?

Now I want a sandwich

If you make the environment toxic to play in with that rationale you’ll be sorry in the end. If you want to complain about something that you find ugly in the future you will have no basis to make the point from. Not partaking in bad things allows you a moral ground to speak from.

As far as Japan goes they didn’t have nukes to respond with so it can’t be compared to a situation where the other team can use the OP thing too.

Coulter.2315:

If you make the environment toxic to play in with that rationale you’ll be sorry in the end. If you want to complain about something that you find ugly in the future you will have no basis to make the point from. Not partaking in bad things allows you a moral ground to speak from. These apply to you and you alone, if you wish to bring them into a game, that’s all fine, but you cannot rationally expect every other player to do so.

As far as Japan goes they didn’t have nukes to respond with so it can’t be compared to a situation where the other team can use the OP thing too.

If the environment is toxic in a video game, this is where balance is required, this is NOT the responsibility of any player or set of players that you have decided do not have the same moral values and opinions you do in your actual life that you are trying to force into a game.

Anything outside of a video game in any sense of morals, fairness or otherwise, yes, I certainly can. Applying your personal values/morals/honor to a video game expecting millions of other players (depending on the game) to do the same is an exercise in futiliity and merely a utopian dream.

The difference between you and I is that I can look at the matter at hand objectively without bringing my personal morals and values into it. This is a video game, not real life. I play what I find to be fun and I am respectful towards my fellow player, but I do not expect the same in return, especially not in a PvP environment where winning is what is rewarded.

It can be applied when you’re talking about fairness and honor.

Static.9841:

Coulter.2315:

If you make the environment toxic to play in with that rationale you’ll be sorry in the end. If you want to complain about something that you find ugly in the future you will have no basis to make the point from. Not partaking in bad things allows you a moral ground to speak from.

As far as Japan goes they didn’t have nukes to respond with so it can’t be compared to a situation where the other team can use the OP thing too.

Anything outside of a video game in any sense of morals, fairness or otherwise, yes, I certainly can. Applying this to a video game expecting millions of other players (depending on the game) is an exercise in futiliity and merely a utopian dream.

Er… it can be applied when you’re talking about fairness and honor.

No it can’t, you and I are talking about when both sides have a choice to use something kittenty and both sides would have a better experience if neither of them took that choice. You seem to be fixating on something thats more complicated than you think and doesn’t relate to the subject we’re discussing. Go watch the documentary, you’ll learn stuff and its good to learn. Coming out with “utopian dream” when the best rule we have for human beings interacting is “don’t do kitten to me and I won’t do kitten to you” seems to be like clutching for straws.

Watch the doc

Coulter.2315:

No it can’t, you and I are talking about when both sides have a choice to use something kittenty and both sides would have a better experience if neither of them took that choice. You seem to be fixating on something thats more complicated than you think and doesn’t relate to the subject we’re discussing. Go watch the documentary, you’ll learn stuff and its good to learn. Coming out with “utopian dream” when the best rule we have for human beings interacting is “don’t do kitten to me and I won’t do kitten to you” seems to be like clutching for straws.

Watch the doc

No. Your documentary has zero value here. Again, heed your own words in applying real life models into a video game environment. Stop forcing your personal morals and values into a video game environment where you are encountering people from all walks of life with differing views from your own on how to play and what builds to use.

Static.9841:

Coulter.2315:

No it can’t, you and I are talking about when both sides have a choice to use something kittenty and both sides would have a better experience if neither of them took that choice. You seem to be fixating on something thats more complicated than you think and doesn’t relate to the subject we’re discussing. Go watch the documentary, you’ll learn stuff and its good to learn. Coming out with “utopian dream” when the best rule we have for human beings interacting is “don’t do kitten to me and I won’t do kitten to you” seems to be like clutching for straws.

Watch the doc

No. Your documentary has zero value here. Again, heed your own words in applying real life models into a video game environment. Stop forcing your personal morals and values into a video game environment where you are encountering people from all walks of life with differing views from your own on how to play and what builds to use.

Wow I really tried to help you, so be it.

Static.9841:

If the environment is toxic in a video game, this is where balance is required, this is NOT the responsibility of any player or set of players that you have decided do not have the same moral values and opinions you do in your actual life that you are trying to force into a game.

I beg to differ : yes, this is not IRL. Yes, we are not supposed to display morals on a daily basis in a video game. Still, a player can choose to play another game mode (HJ) or to try and find funny yet somewhat viable instead of choosing the cheese. Since the usual player won’t try another solution and will go for the easiest one available, part of the responsability for the toxic environment is his, since he made a choice to go along with the meta.

Coulter.2315:

Wow I really tried to help you, so be it.

This is not a therapy session nor are you qualified to judge someones real life values against their viewpoint and objectivity in a video game. You are wildly straying from the point here.

What this boils down to is that you and I disagree, and that’s fine, but you have a hard time accepting that as if I have a corrupted set of values in and out of a game.

Static.9841:

Static.9841:

If the environment is toxic in a video game, this is where balance is required, this is NOT the responsibility of any player or set of players that you have decided do not have the same moral values and opinions you do in your actual life that you are trying to force into a game.

I beg to differ : yes, this is not IRL. Yes, we are not supposed to display morals on a daily basis in a video game. Still, a player can choose to play another game mode (HJ) or to try and find funny yet somewhat viable instead of choosing the cheese. Since the usual player won’t try another solution and will go for the easiest one available, part of the responsability for the toxic environment is his, since he made a choice to go along with the meta.

That’s not what I’m saying and I feel a lot of words are being glossed over in favour of others that might be serving as a knee-jerk reaction and thus a bigger focal point. If you want to apply morals and values into a video game, that is fine, but it’s blind to think that everyone else should as well.

My viewpoint is exactly that, my own. I don’t expect others to abide by it, especially in a video game which is the difference. Human nature is exactly what it is. If everyone in the world held the same values of honor, morals etc there would be zero conflict, this is not the case and I don’t expect it to be so in a video game. I’m not attacking anyone for their sense of morals or otherwise, again, I just think it’s futile to expect all others to follow anothers sense of them.

Again, as I’ve said before, if you choose to play the non-meta builds you enjoy (as we have spoken about and ascertained that we both do) then great, but others choose to play these build to win and gain their enjoyment from winning, there’s also the concept that they might not actually play these builds and find them as boring as you or I may. Yes, there is a number of players who bandwagon on to these builds because of them being the strongest and most effective and simply think they can win just by selecting them.

I’ll concede that it’s in part the responsibility of the bandwagoner type mentioned above that adds to the toxicity of the environment, but the only people who can change that are the creators of the game itself and the ultimate responsibility lies with them by providing balance and creating more build diversity.

I don’t really apply my values to any game since it’d be a waste of time. I’m not changing human nature on my own, and it’s not like anyone can do it. I agree with pretty much everything you said otherwise.

The devs can change things on a large scale but if more players tried to promote fun in PvP, it would be that much better. On the contrary, most experienced players will play cheesy builds even when it’s not necessary (HotJoin) and that is a shame.

Besides all that, I still question the players who have their fun by winning regardless of the means used. I mean, even in good teams there are players who are determined to only play the class they prefer and who still are somewhat successful with it (phantaram, for instance). Playing for winning just doesn’t look like a very healthy behaviour to me. If someone needs to feel happy about winning without enjoying the game’s gameplay, you have to admit it’s pretty kitten weird (I’m not talking about the people who like the current meta gameplay, those are something else and obviously don’t like a challenge).

Uhtameit.2413:

I don’t really apply my values to any game since it’d be a waste of time. I’m not changing human nature on my own, and it’s not like anyone can do it. I agree with pretty much everything you said otherwise.

The devs can change things on a large scale but if more players tried to promote fun in PvP, it would be that much better. On the contrary, most experienced players will play cheesy builds even when it’s not necessary (HotJoin) and that is a shame.

Besides all that, I still question the players who have their fun by winning regardless of the means used. I mean, even in good teams there are players who are determined to only play the class they prefer and who still are somewhat successful with it (phantaram, for instance). Playing for winning just doesn’t look like a very healthy behaviour to me.

It is disappointing encountering so many builds used in tPvP in hotjoin and from some of the threads in the forums we know very well that there are players who do this simply to rank up fast rather than “this is the most fun I have in the game”.

Some get enjoyment from playing the builds they enjoy, some from winning (whether they use a meta or not), some do it purely for ego and because they think it gives them bragging rights and/or troll others regarding their achievements or having a deluded sense of superiority as if it should mean anything to the other player. The latter to me is a bigger contribution to making the environment more toxic.

I don’t really know, I find it dfficult to question people who enjoy winning in a PvP environment, whilst it’s not in regards to winning the game, do I enjoy winning the fights and get satisfaction out of it? Of course I do. It’s not sPvP, but I used to enjoy solo roaming Wv3 and finding other players to challenge, I’ve had some seriously enjoyable fights out there on my own and it’s definitely satisfying when I’m not the one who ends up dead on the ground, but it’s the fight itself that I’m enjoying the most when it’s against a skilled player or players. If I can learn something whilst being challenged by another player, hell yeah, bring it on!

A lot of what I’m saying is from playing tPvP because I rarely HJ (It’s been months actually), so you’re probably a better judge of what happens there than I am because that’s the game mode you’ve said you’ve mostly been playing lately.