5 ms·

It took decades until they realized that people like cooperative games more than competitive games. It is so funny to me how we don't really understand humans a

It took decades until they realized that people like cooperative games more than competitive games. It is so funny to me how we don't really understand humans and what makes things fun to them. Apparently pack animals likes to do things with the pack instead of against the pack.

voisin 3y ago
Almost like the entire economy shouldn’t be a cutthroat competition of misery but perhaps a cooperative system designed for human flourishing?
- jj999 3y ago
  Is there authors who described such a system?
  - jfoutz 3y ago
    I like this one, https://marshallbrain.com/manna1 https://marshallbrain.com/manna1 more of a story than a specification though.
  - sciarc 3y ago
    [dead]
- eru 3y ago
  Where is that cutthroat competition of misery that you describe? Serving customers is a rather cooperative affair between, supplier, workers and customers etc. Have you ever participated in the economy? Of course, all parties are generally free to choose who they want to cooperate with. Customers can switch coffee shops, if they like the offerings of the other guy better. Workers can switch jobs, too.
makeitdouble 3y ago
Playing Overcooked with one's partner is a thing on its own. It can be wonderful, or something you try once to never even mention it again.
- Nursie 3y ago
  It’s a fine line isn’t it? We enjoyed the overcooked stuff, but came close to arguments a few times. Worked best when we communicated what each of us was doing. “It Takes Two”, OTOH, was really good and worked very nicely, at least in part because division of labour is built into the game mechanics in various places.
dragonwriter 3y ago
> It took decades until they realized that people like cooperative games more than competitive games. People have lots of different tastes, and some like coop more than competitive, some like competitive more, and some prefer a robust mix of the two. Also, I’m not sure who “they” are and which decades are at issue: pute cooperative board and computer games have been around for a long time, and games that mix coopeative and competitive elements either via symmetrical teams or all-against-one play are even older, or at least widely seen earlier.
- Jensson 3y ago
  > cooperative board and computer games have been around for a long time I'm not aware of any cooperative board games that are older than 20 years. If there are any they must be really obscure. People did jigsaw puzzles for the cooperative experience, but those are really dull and I don't think people really consider them board games.
  - eru 3y ago
    https://boardgamegeek.com/boardgame/438/scotland-yard https://boardgamegeek.com/boardgame/438/scotland-yard was released in the 1980s. And it's far from the first. (This one has teams that cooperate internally and compete externally.) In general, board games and card games with teams have a long and proud history. See eg Bridge. See also https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cooperative_board_game#History_and_development https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cooperative_board_game#History...
    - Jensson 3y ago
      Scotland yard is a competitive game, I played that, it isn't cooperative. It is a team based competition. Cooperative games doesn't have an enemy team. Forcing one person to be the enemy team is not very nice, I'm not aware of any game that didn't have that competitive part that is that old.
      - eru 3y ago
sfink 3y ago
All competitive games (well, the nonfatal ones) can be cooperative games to the players determined to cooperate. Even if there's a clear winner and people are trying to win, people can collaborate and cheer each other on even when in play terms it's at their own expense. All cooperative games can be competitive games to the players determined to compete. Even if there's a shared goal that requires everyone to contribute, someone is going to contribute the most (even if only in their own mind) and can withhold or adjust their support to undercut someone else without sacrificing the end goal. And sufficiently competitive people may not even mind if the supposed goal is lost, if it provides an opportunity to noticeably excel. To some people, the word "game" implies competition. To others, it implies cooperation. I, like most, prefer to get a mix of both from any game. I enjoy watching the Halloween Baking Competition, and particularly enjoy the parts where bakers help each other even as they're trying to come out on top. (Though there has been a suspicious amount of it this season, which makes me wonder if it's somewhat staged....)
deleted 3y ago
[deleted]
wrp 3y ago
This is an interesting question, why it took cooperative gaming so long to become popular. I remember looking into cooperative games about 20 years ago, and they were rare. The whole genre was generally regarded as a boring activity that parents forced on their kids for ideological reasons. Now many of the most popular games are cooperative. What happened? Did society change?
- kuboble 3y ago
  I think the main points are that -it's much harder to design a good cooperative game as opposed to a good competitive game - there are much more games designed today - it's much easier to build a good coop game and more people are trying these days because there is a precedent that it can be done
- GaelFG 3y ago
  Hot take : fully cooperatives board games are either bad wargames or bad role playing games. But good social activities neither less and good introductions to the genre. And yes, it's totally ok to only play theses. They are, I think still 'rares' today because game wise they are less intense and deep, so people really into gaming will prefer other games. But they are still a lot less rare than 40 years ago because there are more positively presented in culture and common and it's a lot more easy to convince people to join a board game night, especially if tell them they can avoid human competition and role playing.
- Fire-Dragon-DoL 3y ago
  Coop games of good quality are still very rare. Me and my wife "ate" most of ehat is available. We don't play fpses, that excluded a good chunk
livrem 3y ago
Here is an article from 1982 arguing that more video games should have a coop mode: https://archive.org/details/Softline_Magazine_Issue_1.5/page/n49/mode/2up https://archive.org/details/Softline_Magazine_Issue_1.5/page... Also there was a bit of a solo boardgame boom around 1980 with some games also supporting (or at least suggesting) playing together with others, but it was somehow forgotten and then someone rediscovered around 2010 or so. I find it strange that I never saw a coop game from before the late 1970's though, and it is not because I have not been searching for them.

voisin 3y ago

Almost like the entire economy shouldn’t be a cutthroat competition of misery but perhaps a cooperative system designed for human flourishing?

jj999 3y ago
Is there authors who described such a system?
- jfoutz 3y ago
  I like this one, https://marshallbrain.com/manna1 https://marshallbrain.com/manna1 more of a story than a specification though.
- sciarc 3y ago
  [dead]
eru 3y ago
Where is that cutthroat competition of misery that you describe? Serving customers is a rather cooperative affair between, supplier, workers and customers etc. Have you ever participated in the economy? Of course, all parties are generally free to choose who they want to cooperate with. Customers can switch coffee shops, if they like the offerings of the other guy better. Workers can switch jobs, too.

makeitdouble 3y ago

Playing Overcooked with one's partner is a thing on its own. It can be wonderful, or something you try once to never even mention it again.

Nursie 3y ago
It’s a fine line isn’t it? We enjoyed the overcooked stuff, but came close to arguments a few times. Worked best when we communicated what each of us was doing. “It Takes Two”, OTOH, was really good and worked very nicely, at least in part because division of labour is built into the game mechanics in various places.

dragonwriter 3y ago

> It took decades until they realized that people like cooperative games more than competitive games. People have lots of different tastes, and some like coop more than competitive, some like competitive more, and some prefer a robust mix of the two. Also, I’m not sure who “they” are and which decades are at issue: pute cooperative board and computer games have been around for a long time, and games that mix coopeative and competitive elements either via symmetrical teams or all-against-one play are even older, or at least widely seen earlier.

Jensson 3y ago
> cooperative board and computer games have been around for a long time I'm not aware of any cooperative board games that are older than 20 years. If there are any they must be really obscure. People did jigsaw puzzles for the cooperative experience, but those are really dull and I don't think people really consider them board games.
- eru 3y ago
  https://boardgamegeek.com/boardgame/438/scotland-yard https://boardgamegeek.com/boardgame/438/scotland-yard was released in the 1980s. And it's far from the first. (This one has teams that cooperate internally and compete externally.) In general, board games and card games with teams have a long and proud history. See eg Bridge. See also https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cooperative_board_game#History_and_development https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cooperative_board_game#History...
  - Jensson 3y ago
    Scotland yard is a competitive game, I played that, it isn't cooperative. It is a team based competition. Cooperative games doesn't have an enemy team. Forcing one person to be the enemy team is not very nice, I'm not aware of any game that didn't have that competitive part that is that old.
    - eru 3y ago

sfink 3y ago

All competitive games (well, the nonfatal ones) can be cooperative games to the players determined to cooperate. Even if there's a clear winner and people are trying to win, people can collaborate and cheer each other on even when in play terms it's at their own expense. All cooperative games can be competitive games to the players determined to compete. Even if there's a shared goal that requires everyone to contribute, someone is going to contribute the most (even if only in their own mind) and can withhold or adjust their support to undercut someone else without sacrificing the end goal. And sufficiently competitive people may not even mind if the supposed goal is lost, if it provides an opportunity to noticeably excel. To some people, the word "game" implies competition. To others, it implies cooperation. I, like most, prefer to get a mix of both from any game. I enjoy watching the Halloween Baking Competition, and particularly enjoy the parts where bakers help each other even as they're trying to come out on top. (Though there has been a suspicious amount of it this season, which makes me wonder if it's somewhat staged....)

deleted 3y ago

[deleted]

wrp 3y ago

This is an interesting question, why it took cooperative gaming so long to become popular. I remember looking into cooperative games about 20 years ago, and they were rare. The whole genre was generally regarded as a boring activity that parents forced on their kids for ideological reasons. Now many of the most popular games are cooperative. What happened? Did society change?

kuboble 3y ago
I think the main points are that -it's much harder to design a good cooperative game as opposed to a good competitive game - there are much more games designed today - it's much easier to build a good coop game and more people are trying these days because there is a precedent that it can be done
GaelFG 3y ago
Hot take : fully cooperatives board games are either bad wargames or bad role playing games. But good social activities neither less and good introductions to the genre. And yes, it's totally ok to only play theses. They are, I think still 'rares' today because game wise they are less intense and deep, so people really into gaming will prefer other games. But they are still a lot less rare than 40 years ago because there are more positively presented in culture and common and it's a lot more easy to convince people to join a board game night, especially if tell them they can avoid human competition and role playing.
Fire-Dragon-DoL 3y ago
Coop games of good quality are still very rare. Me and my wife "ate" most of ehat is available. We don't play fpses, that excluded a good chunk

livrem 3y ago

Here is an article from 1982 arguing that more video games should have a coop mode: https://archive.org/details/Softline_Magazine_Issue_1.5/page/n49/mode/2up https://archive.org/details/Softline_Magazine_Issue_1.5/page... Also there was a bit of a solo boardgame boom around 1980 with some games also supporting (or at least suggesting) playing together with others, but it was somehow forgotten and then someone rediscovered around 2010 or so. I find it strange that I never saw a coop game from before the late 1970's though, and it is not because I have not been searching for them.