4 ms·

The Overwatch example reminds me of Playing to Win (http://www.sirlin.net/ptw http://www.sirlin.net/ptw), and in particular, "the scrub" section (http://www.sir

by huac 7y ago

The Overwatch example reminds me of Playing to Win (http://www.sirlin.net/ptw http://www.sirlin.net/ptw), and in particular, "the scrub" section (http://www.sirlin.net/ptw-book/introducingthe-scrub http://www.sirlin.net/ptw-book/introducingthe-scrub). "A scrub is a player who is handicapped by self-imposed rules that the game knows nothing about. A scrub does not play to win."

the_af 7y ago
I always liked the Scrub post by Sirlin, but I think it's too confrontational and likely to generate a negative reaction in the person you're mentioning it to. Nobody wants to be called a scrub. I'm not into card or videogames, but I like tabletop miniatures wargames (like Warhammer et al) and if you're familiar with them, you'll know there is this stereotype of a gamer derisively called a "WAAC" -- a "Win At All Costs" competitive gamer who will crush you and play in an unsportsmanlike manner and laugh while you lose, because he only cares about winning while you tried to play "thematically" and with honor. If you exclude outright cheaters (which this WAAC thing confusingly includes, even though I think that's a different thing), I think this falls well within the Scrub phenomenon Sirlin mentioned. Non-cheating WAAC players are playing the actual game, "thematic" players are playing a different game under self-imposed limitations not prescribed by the actual rules, and this mismatch results in a lot of grief. The few times I mentioned Sirlin.net to Warhammer players, it was not well received though. So don't try it... As a final word, I don't think the Overwatch example fits this phenomenon. The Overwatch thing is players who don't know they are playing badly because they don't get feedback, not players willingly playing under self-imposed limitations and complaining about others playing the actual game ;)
- h2odragon 7y ago
  If you're part of a community that expects newbies to adhere to rules that aren't published or articulated... where's the blame really lie? I have social handicaps, I could join your group and never realize that I upset people by failing to adhere to unwritten rules (its the story of my life, really)... I can't really tell when the "unwritten rules" are unwritten so that they may apply to some but not others, and when they're unwritten because everybody actually did agree they're good ideas, but prefers not to share that revelation.
  - the_af 7y ago
    To be clear -- and I see maybe my post wasn't -- I think many Warhammer* players are too trigger-happy about labeling other players "WAAC" simply because they don't follow the unwritten rules of what they consider "sportsmanlike" behavior. In the extreme case, they'll call WAAC anyone who plays to win using the actual written rules instead of playing thematically rich but underperforming armies or strategies, which they consider The Right Way To Play (but which is not what the actual rules dictate). That is, they are playing an arbitrarily different game where the objective is not to win, and dislike people who play to win. * I say Warhammer but I mean Warhammer, Age of Sigmar, Warhammer 40K and the whole family of games.

by huac 7y ago

the_af 7y ago

I always liked the Scrub post by Sirlin, but I think it's too confrontational and likely to generate a negative reaction in the person you're mentioning it to. Nobody wants to be called a scrub. I'm not into card or videogames, but I like tabletop miniatures wargames (like Warhammer et al) and if you're familiar with them, you'll know there is this stereotype of a gamer derisively called a "WAAC" -- a "Win At All Costs" competitive gamer who will crush you and play in an unsportsmanlike manner and laugh while you lose, because he only cares about winning while you tried to play "thematically" and with honor. If you exclude outright cheaters (which this WAAC thing confusingly includes, even though I think that's a different thing), I think this falls well within the Scrub phenomenon Sirlin mentioned. Non-cheating WAAC players are playing the actual game, "thematic" players are playing a different game under self-imposed limitations not prescribed by the actual rules, and this mismatch results in a lot of grief. The few times I mentioned Sirlin.net to Warhammer players, it was not well received though. So don't try it... As a final word, I don't think the Overwatch example fits this phenomenon. The Overwatch thing is players who don't know they are playing badly because they don't get feedback, not players willingly playing under self-imposed limitations and complaining about others playing the actual game ;)

h2odragon 7y ago
If you're part of a community that expects newbies to adhere to rules that aren't published or articulated... where's the blame really lie? I have social handicaps, I could join your group and never realize that I upset people by failing to adhere to unwritten rules (its the story of my life, really)... I can't really tell when the "unwritten rules" are unwritten so that they may apply to some but not others, and when they're unwritten because everybody actually did agree they're good ideas, but prefers not to share that revelation.
- the_af 7y ago
  To be clear -- and I see maybe my post wasn't -- I think many Warhammer* players are too trigger-happy about labeling other players "WAAC" simply because they don't follow the unwritten rules of what they consider "sportsmanlike" behavior. In the extreme case, they'll call WAAC anyone who plays to win using the actual written rules instead of playing thematically rich but underperforming armies or strategies, which they consider The Right Way To Play (but which is not what the actual rules dictate). That is, they are playing an arbitrarily different game where the objective is not to win, and dislike people who play to win. * I say Warhammer but I mean Warhammer, Age of Sigmar, Warhammer 40K and the whole family of games.