4 ms·

I have a similar feeling regarding PvP games. Not so much for any simulated violence, but rather for reinforcing the zero-sum philosophy of, "For me to win, ano

I have a similar feeling regarding PvP games. Not so much for any simulated violence, but rather for reinforcing the zero-sum philosophy of, "For me to win, another human being has to lose." However, I don't feel the same about many non-RPG, zero-sum games, like chess or poker. Maybe because it's easier to be detached from cards and plastic pieces, than from a character in an RPG - who has a name, 'friends', a pet, a history of achievements, etc. You can call me a "care bear", but I personally don't feel that reinforcing such a limited world-view is how I want to use my time and energy. And it's not something I describe as fun.

michaelochurch 13y ago
Chess and Go and Bridge and Ambition (self-plug, why the fuck not: https://docs.google.com/document/d/1S7lsZKzHuuhoTb2Wj_L3zrhHZh5IEKBDf56ExgErv4o/edit https://docs.google.com/document/d/1S7lsZKzHuuhoTb2Wj_L3zrhH... ) aren't truly zero-sum because the hedonic payoff is based on the quality of the game ("the game" meaning the immutable artifact as well as "the game" meaning the specific contest among players) not winning or losing. You still enjoy a truly great game if you lose, just slightly less than if you win. There's an emergent art to the game that is appealing and interesting regardless of the outcome. Poker is in the middle. I feel like it's more of a zero-sum game because it just sucks to lose. At real stakes, I find losing humiliating. At low stakes or for free, I don't care. The game itself I am not that into. I see what you mean about PvP. The culture of them (at least, as usually played) makes it hard to enjoy the game for its own sake.
- __david__ 13y ago
  > You still enjoy a truly great game if you lose, just slightly less than if you win. There's an emergent art to the game that is appealing and interesting regardless of the outcome. Sigh, and that of course applies to PvP games as well. Back when I played a lot of FPS deathmatch I quite enjoyed a good match, even if I didn't come out on top.

michaelochurch 13y ago

Chess and Go and Bridge and Ambition (self-plug, why the fuck not: https://docs.google.com/document/d/1S7lsZKzHuuhoTb2Wj_L3zrhHZh5IEKBDf56ExgErv4o/edit https://docs.google.com/document/d/1S7lsZKzHuuhoTb2Wj_L3zrhH... ) aren't truly zero-sum because the hedonic payoff is based on the quality of the game ("the game" meaning the immutable artifact as well as "the game" meaning the specific contest among players) not winning or losing. You still enjoy a truly great game if you lose, just slightly less than if you win. There's an emergent art to the game that is appealing and interesting regardless of the outcome. Poker is in the middle. I feel like it's more of a zero-sum game because it just sucks to lose. At real stakes, I find losing humiliating. At low stakes or for free, I don't care. The game itself I am not that into. I see what you mean about PvP. The culture of them (at least, as usually played) makes it hard to enjoy the game for its own sake.

__david__ 13y ago
> You still enjoy a truly great game if you lose, just slightly less than if you win. There's an emergent art to the game that is appealing and interesting regardless of the outcome. Sigh, and that of course applies to PvP games as well. Back when I played a lot of FPS deathmatch I quite enjoyed a good match, even if I didn't come out on top.