Have you seen this article?

[Rooflesstoofless]

What a childish little douche.

Maybe if he (or others) don't want to deal with the "I play for fun" mindset then they should only group with people they know that have the same mindset as them.

[Deleted]

because playing competitively is more fun than mashing buttons/sucking and losing all day.

Except that all you've said is that people who play competitively enjoy playing competitively and that those who don't don't know if they would. A lack of evidence for something doesn't prove the opposite.

No, it doesn't. Everybody that don't play games as a job (like reviewers and beta testers) play for fun. The sentence "I play for fun" is meaningless in the context discussed by the article.

Just because the literal interpretation of a sentence is meaningless doesn't mean the meaning behind it is.

[Dasffion]

It means you are doing everything you can to win and not allowing self barriers/limitations from preventing you from getting better - like Sirlin points out that "scrubs" avoid certain tactics because they are "cheap", even if they maximize chance of success.

And as I said, this is a subjective viewpoint. "Doing everything I can to win" isn't fun to me. Fun to me is playing the game and being as good as I'm going to be. Doing everything I can would be looking up strats, builds, ect. ect. That is not fun to me.

[bals]

It's a very poor article.

most hobbies everyone does for fun. As long as you enjoy the time you put into there's nothing wrong with it. "Oh sometimes I like to write poems for fun." "OMG YOU HAVE TO WRITE POEMS TRYING TO WIN (some poetry prize here) OTHERWISE IT'S POINTLESS." "Oh I like to a pick up game of basketball with my friends for fun." "OMG IF YOU'RE NOT TRYING TO BE THE #1 PLAYER IN THE NBA YOU ARE BAD AND SHOULD FEEL BAD."

The only problem is that videogames tend to pair up people randomly so you get people who take things super seriously with people who don't. Of course you should always be trying to win, that's human nature. But the effort and the extent of caring people put into winning varies dramatically.

Also the internet culture exacerbates this problem. It's perfectly acceptable online to just completely belittle and yell at someone for some very minor thing. In real life that isn't done by normal people.

[Remilia]

Honestly, fun for me for some game is doing retarded things in game. Climbing up walls where you're not supposed to, that was funny.

In Counterstrike 1.6 some 8 years ago, I'd run around pistol only, LMG or shotgun just for shits and giggles than play competitively for me.

If the process getting to that 'win' (or lost) involves raging, high blood pressure, and screaming / flaming at others, it's not really... fun for me. Just seems more of a hassle at that point.

Nowadays I just play single player games more as I prefer not dealing with others. If I play multiplayer it tends to be some co-op or like a group of 8 doing 4v4 in L4D2 PvP, it just ends in hilarity most of the time.
It's supposed to be a hobby for entertainment, not OIGMGJOEGMJPSJROKejwaokrjakldfkalea RAAAAGEEEEE type of thing. Really just my view on things.

[Gangplank]

So he takes a phrase with a potentially wide meaning, puts it in a certain situation and from there, concludes that the entirety of the phrase is dumb.

What other meanings could it actually have? I've been playing LoL since beta, and I've heard this line used a number of times. No one ever uses "I play for fun" after having a great game. It's implied that you had fun. If you have to state it to everyone in the game, you're trying to make an excuse for lacking skill and/or effort to try to win. There's absolutely no reason someone needs to state "I play for fun" in a game that's meant to be played for fun. We know you're playing for fun. Saying it only makes you sound like you're not applying yourself in trying to do well.

What it's mostly about is people who put their primary emotional investment in games on winning and those who don't.

In most competitive games, the GOAL is to win, so why shouldn't that be the primary focus? People who have the attitude of "I don't care if I win or not, I'm playing for fun" really don't belong in competitive games. And they are certainly not being considerate of their teammates who are giving their best effort. Bottom line is people should be held accountable for not playing games the way they are intended to be played (ie, competitively to win).

I don't flame people when I lose, I don't blame my enemy for being "tryhard" or being way more experienced. I rarely, if ever, get angry at games.
I also don't really care if I win or not, as long as I enjoyed myself.

It's great that you enjoyed playing, win or lose, but is your performance affecting your teammates, or even the overall mood of the game? I've been in countless games where someone isn't playing for objectives, and is only playing to be silly (their version of fun). They are not working with their team, and in most cases, are playing to the benefit of the enemy. This is where a line needs to be drawn. There are dozens of games or other activities you could be having fun with -- if you choose to play a competitive game with actions that contradict the spirit of the game, you're ruining at the experience of others at the enjoyment of your own. And not to say that YOU in particular are the one with this issue, but certainly you can understand how frustrating it is to play competitive games and be paired up with people who are going to have "their fun" at your expense.

So you only have fun playing something if you're good at it?

No, but let's be real here -- how much enjoyment is someone having to die over and over and over without improvement? If you really put your best effort forward over a reasonable period of time but can't get better at a game, how enjoyable is the game for you? As said above, "fun" is relative to the person playing. Losing is typically not fun. Getting your ass handed to you is definitely not having fun. So if you are losing and/or getting owned repeatedly, then the only fun you can truly have is playing counter to the objectives and essentially "screwing around" at your team's expense.

It's a very poor article.

It's not a poor article for the realm of competitive gaming.

most hobbies everyone does for fun. As long as you enjoy the time you put into there's nothing wrong with it

With exception to having fun at the expense of others. As said, in the realm of competitive gaming (or sports), people want to play with other like-minded individuals. People who want to win, want to improve, etc. Same goes for sports. It's fine to shoot hoops in your driveway, alone, in any manner you choose. It is not fine to show up to a pick-up game at the park and start firing half-court shots because you feel it's fun.

TL;DR -- if you aren't playing in the spirit of competitive gaming, you should try something else. This world has TONS of games and activities to pick from... please don't settle on a competitive game if you have no intention of playing it properly or are incapable of improving your own performance.

[Dasffion]

It's not a poor article for the realm of competitive gaming.

TL;DR -- if you aren't playing in the spirit of competitive gaming, you should try something else. This world has TONS of games and activities to pick from... please don't settle on a competitive game if you have no intention of playing it properly or are incapable of improving your own performance.

Read his last three paragraphs, he makes it clear that he's not just talking about the competitive gaming world but everyone who plays "competitive" video games. Basically he's saying that if you're going to play a multiplayer game you must strive to be better rather than just playing the way that you want to. That's utter nonsense, as is what you are saying. If you buy my games for me then you can tell me what games I can play, otherwise mind your own fucking business.

[benadryl]

you know that people who "play for fun" are chickenshits who are terrified to try. they're bad because they fear failure

they know it too

it's not worth getting mad over or arguing about, you know they're full of shit, they know they're full of shit, etc
they're full of shit. it's fun to win. it's not fun to lose. this is universal.

- - - Updated - - -

Read his last three paragraphs, he makes it clear that he's not just talking about the competitive gaming world but everyone who plays "competitive" video games. Basically he's saying that if you're going to play a multiplayer game you must strive to be better rather than just playing the way that you want to. That's utter nonsense, as is what you are saying. If you buy my games for me then you can tell me what games I can play, otherwise mind your own fucking business.

then stop doing things that REQUIRE that others carry you. in real life your teammates would beat the uselessness out of you. your coach would grab you by your throat and drop you like the sack of shit you are or you'd get kicked off the team. in real life you pull your weight or people hate you and whether you like it or not, that applies to real life. people HATE you folks who are too damn lazy and scared to give it your all. if your all isn't good enough, you have failed, no doubt, but you tried and you will learn something about yourself in the process. people will still hate you, but they can't say you didn't try

Infracted

[Wildtree]

An immature gaming nerd writes an article, overthrowing the basic principle of what a game is with an insult...
I sure agree with that, right away...

/sarcasm off.

Truth of the matter: Games exist for about as long as mankind. Games have always been a matter of a fun activity. Just because we have computer games in this times and age, doesn't mean they are not games in it's initial meaning. Anyone failing these facts disqualifies themselves right there.
Fun. completely subjective... One thinks something is fun, the next one cannot detect any fun at all. There are as many levels of fun as there are human beings.
Again, failing that fact also disqualifies.
Any game can be taken to a competitive level, which is then played by a small minority. It doesn't mean the remaining majority cannot play the game for their personal fun anymore.
Let's use an example of non computer games.... Chess, countless millions play this game, and everyone plays it for fun and relaxation. Few people excel in this game, and play it professionally. It doesn't mean all the countless millions are not entitled to play the game now anymore, or that they are less worth of anything.
Many games excelled this way, by spinning of a small community of professionals. But only on the level of video games the fact of playing the game for fun seems to become an issue for some. Well, I got news for you if you think like that.
The world and the games within it don't work like that. It didn't work like that for thousands of years, and it won't work like that for another thousands of years.

[-Raer-]

There were a few statements I agree with in there, but overall 95% of that is just one big QQ about people making excuses.

[Daymanmb]

I gave up on this biased, poorly written article at

"It’s an excuse that would never be tolerated in any other form of recreation and only gets a free pass because “it’s video gamez lol why are you takign this so seriously??”"

Clearly he's never played in any co-ed rec leagues... a lot of people who are bad "play for fun."

[Hraklea]

A lack of evidence for something doesn't prove the opposite.

Exactly. That's why scrubs can't say their way to play is the most fun way to play. The difference is that all competitive players were scrubs once, so they can actually have an opinion about it, while scrubs can't, but they insist to cry "have fun, what a virgin!!!" when people call them scrubs.

Just because the literal interpretation of a sentence is meaningless doesn't mean the meaning behind it is.

It is meaningless in the context of the article. A casual gamer saying they play for fun to a hardcore player is either meaningless or a wrong use of the word "fun".

[Kelimbror]

Clearly he's never played in any co-ed rec leagues... a lot of people who are bad "play for fun."

Or generally any activity that is done as a hobby. Having hobbies doesn't require you be a wunderkind. In fact, if people were so talented in their hobby they would typically find a way to make a living off of it instead of having a boring job and then needing hobbies.

That's like...the entire point of recreation.

[Deleted]

What other meanings could it actually have?

I don't have the time/energy to invest into becoming experienced in this game.
I don't particularly mind losing.
My enjoyment largely stems from the actions I take within the game and watching them unfold rather than the 'win screen'
Loosen the fuck up

In most competitive games, the GOAL is to win, so why shouldn't that be the primary focus?

The goal is only to win if you make it so.

Bottom line is people should be held accountable for not playing games the way they are intended to be played (ie, competitively to win).

>Gangplank name and avatar.
>Gangplank is scrub tier.

Really though, at what point do you draw the line? At some point, everyone sacrifices tiny increases in win ratio for the sake of fun.

No, but let's be real here -- how much enjoyment is someone having to die over and over and over without improvement?

Depends on what happened between and during these deaths. Nobody has fun watching their death counter tick up, fun isn't quantifiable like that.

If you really put your best effort forward over a reasonable period of time but can't get better at a game, how enjoyable is the game for you?

I'm utterly terrible at Touhou and it's pretty fun, idk about you.

So if you are losing and/or getting owned repeatedly, then the only fun you can truly have is playing counter to the objectives and essentially "screwing around" at your team's expense.

Says who, you?

Exactly. That's why scrubs can't say their way to play is the most fun way to play. The difference is that all competitive players were scrubs once, so they can actually have an opinion about it, while scrubs can't, but they insist to cry "have fun, what a virgin!!!" when people call them scrubs.

It's still mostly about mindset though. People who play a game with a competitive mindset probably had that mindset from before they even started playing and apply it to very many other things in life.

[Kelimbror]

Exactly. That's why scrubs can't say their way to play is the most fun way to play. The difference is that all competitive players were scrubs once, so they can actually have an opinion about it

You just tried to use logic to justfy why someone's opinion is invalid. That's a riot.

[Yohassakura]

I think that the majority of people mean to say, that they cba to get better at a game, which they only play casually, when they say that "I play for fun".

Personally, I try to find out some good tips and tricks for games that I play casually to help me to win, but I rarely play CoD for example and can still have fun when winning and losing. I just play to waste some time on CoD.

However, I take WoW more seriously, and have more fun with people if i'm killing bosses than wiping on the same boss continually for weeks (particularly if it's a relatively simple fight) because someone can't move from the fire or something.

Not to mention that everyone starts out as a bad player, or transfer skills over from another, similar game so may have some sort of experience.

- It is annoying when people won't even look up or can't figure out the basic of basics though (or won't take some friendly advice to improve).

[Rooflesstoofless]

Wow, some of these replies make me embarrassed to be a gamer.

I seriously question the mental stability of anyone who rages so hard about how other people choose to play a video game. Letting something that is going to make zero difference in your life 10 minutes from now have such a huge emotional toll on you means perhaps you should seek some professional help.

[Pony Soldier]

To me that person who made that article sounds like some MLG elitist douche. Games were made to just have fun and to be entertained not to make a sport out of it. Games were not made with the idea of it becoming some kind of e-sport, the consumers made games like Street Fighter and Halo into that and from that developers started to think "hey lets make a multiplayer mode where friends can shoot/fight each other". Even then it's still only meant for fun not MLG competition and what I mean by that is not making it into something stupid like MLG. Now games where it's strategic and makes you think instead of just mashing 3 buttons to kill everything (example: Xcom vs. Devil May Cry) is a different story.

This is exactly why I stay away from competitive games because with competitive games comes elitist douchebags who think just because you suck at a game you're the stupidest person in the world and shouldn't be playing video games. There's a difference between having fun and being competitive and when you're competitive about everything chances are you're an elitist about it.

[Vespian]

Games are not made to have fun, Games are made to complete or fail while trying. It's in the challenge where the player finds fun.

There's a difference between the objective OF a game and the objective WITHIN the game.

The objective OF the game could be anything the developer wants to sell it as. The objective WITHIN the game is always to reach a certain level, beat a certain boss, or finish a storyline. The objective within the game is NEVER to have fun. That's only an objective OF the game.

So yeah, the message is quite crude, but in theory and practice, the writer is actually completely right. There are no people in the world, except like, mentally challenged people like my little sister, that can find enjoyment in a game that has no challenge. (And even she can't help but try to win at Mario Kart).

[Dasffion]

Games are not made to have fun, Games are made to complete or fail while trying. It's in the challenge where the player finds fun.

There's a difference between the objective OF a game and the objective WITHIN the game.

The objective OF the game could be anything the developer wants to sell it as. The objective WITHIN the game is always to reach a certain level, beat a certain boss, or finish a storyline. The objective within the game is NEVER to have fun. That's only an objective OF the game.

So yeah, the message is quite crude, but in theory and practice, the writer is actually completely right. There are no people in the world, except like, mentally challenged people like my little sister, that can find enjoyment in a game that has no challenge. (And even she can't help but try to win at Mario Kart).

This is as much nonsense as the article. What people find fun varies from person to person. You're absolutely correct that an objective within the game isn't to have fun but I'm not sure what that has to do with anything. Of course it's not an objective within the game, how would you even do that? However, you can't say that no one finds fun in games with no challenge. That's like saying that no one ever plays a game on easy mode. It does happen. There ARE people that enjoy games with little to no challenge. People have different levels of enjoyment for challenges, this is why 90% of games have an easy, normal and hard mode.