4 ms·

I wonder how much of this is due to match making, squads, and the social aspect of the game. In many other games, if you win a few rounds (or do well at all),

I wonder how much of this is due to match making, squads, and the social aspect of the game. In many other games, if you win a few rounds (or do well at all), you're quickly pitted against semi-professional players and lose horribly. Semi-professional and professional players simply do not care about their costumes or outfits, and often choose the skin that offers the most visual clarity or blends in the most. You specifically _do not_ want to standout in a -competitive- shooter game. But, in Fortnight, because only 1 player wins, and because of the chaotic and random nature of the game, and because of the social aspect (playing with a group of friends), I wonder if most kids ever experience a user 10x or 20x or 200x their skill level. It's very likely most players never really improve their skill levels over time. Watching professional StarCraft or Counter-Strike, graphics and details are turned down to the lowest setting, skins and such are not used, etc etc. If you were never aware of the "ladder of skill" in front of you, or your place on it, it seems more reasonable to focus on cosmetics. What really interests me is that a few years ago games started actively removing "leaderboards" and "ranking positions" UI pieces - specifically to make new players and poorly skilled players feel more comfortable and happy. There is absolutely a balance here. Recently my 7 year old nephew said a game (RayMan) was boring because "we always win", and I had a great conversation with him about difficultly in life - things that are always easy and always fun are dangerous. Games with intense difficulty are rewarding and memorable - it's about the accomplishment, not the reward. This applies to video games, drugs, relationships, food, and just about everything else in life. I absolutely am glad his mother doesn't allow FortNight, but allows me to play Chess, Rocket League, and StarCraft with him.

dunstad 7y ago
Relationships with intense difficulty are rewarding and memorable?
- erulabs 7y ago
  Well, maybe not "Relationships with intense difficulty", but it's a very common and very naive assumption that the perfect person for you will "just work" and there will be no fights and no difficulty. Loving someone is a lot of hard work - and it's extremely rewarding. Teenage relationships where everything "just works" and everyone is in bliss tend to end with a lot of tears. Anyways, yes, it's not a set-in-stone rule - but typically, anything that's extremely easy also has a disappointing side. The best stuff in life takes work.
- DoreenMichele 7y ago
  There is a reason we have expressions like "Good Time Charlie." Relationships based solely on shallow, easy and fun experiences tend to be weak relationships that aren't likely to withstand the inevitable storms of life. On the one hand, you don't want the person to be the primary source of trouble in your life. On the other hand, if there isn't some kind of inherent friction, the odds are good that everything will fall apart at the first strong wind, so to speak. Strong relationships tend to be relationships where the personal bond is sufficient to withstand some stress. This is very often due in part to inherent friction within the relationship. People who need to work at it and actually do tend to have stronger relationships than those with so-called chemistry. Relationships that "start with a bang" often soon end with one.

dunstad 7y ago

Relationships with intense difficulty are rewarding and memorable?

erulabs 7y ago
Well, maybe not "Relationships with intense difficulty", but it's a very common and very naive assumption that the perfect person for you will "just work" and there will be no fights and no difficulty. Loving someone is a lot of hard work - and it's extremely rewarding. Teenage relationships where everything "just works" and everyone is in bliss tend to end with a lot of tears. Anyways, yes, it's not a set-in-stone rule - but typically, anything that's extremely easy also has a disappointing side. The best stuff in life takes work.
DoreenMichele 7y ago
There is a reason we have expressions like "Good Time Charlie." Relationships based solely on shallow, easy and fun experiences tend to be weak relationships that aren't likely to withstand the inevitable storms of life. On the one hand, you don't want the person to be the primary source of trouble in your life. On the other hand, if there isn't some kind of inherent friction, the odds are good that everything will fall apart at the first strong wind, so to speak. Strong relationships tend to be relationships where the personal bond is sufficient to withstand some stress. This is very often due in part to inherent friction within the relationship. People who need to work at it and actually do tend to have stronger relationships than those with so-called chemistry. Relationships that "start with a bang" often soon end with one.