Jump to content
You need to play a total of 5 battles to post in this section.
Sventex

The Joy of Losing - Learning to Have Fun

38 comments in this topic

Recommended Posts

21
[RST]
Members
180 posts
17,605 battles
3 minutes ago, Shadeylark said:

ever since this EC has lost all credibility to me.

Yeah. The gaming aspect of certain episodes I am not enjoying, but I do like the History episodes they do now. Also they have some good episodes on writers now. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,471
[REVY]
Members
6,143 posts
5,158 battles
5 minutes ago, Shadeylark said:

thus you should strive to do better to avoid losing

This is impossible when the game forces 50% of the players to lose at any given round.  Increasing skill will not chance that outcome and thus the negative consequences will always result.

 

5 minutes ago, Shadeylark said:

if you mitigate or eliminate the negative impacts of losing, you remove the incentive to win (and as an inevitable consequence of marginalizing winning, you concurrently marginalize the learning experience... nobody will learn to get better if playing badly and losing feels the same as playing well and winning does)

Negative consequence need not be the only incentive to win.  And other games like the Dark Soul series put priority on keeping the engagement factor of losing.  In Mass Effect 2, you earn unique cutscenes when you lose all your squadmates during the suicide run, which requires a fair bit of effort.  It is all too easy to make no mistakes and still lose in this game, and feel terrible about it.  And if you made no mistake, there's nothing to learn from that match.  I see this as a design flaw prevalent in many multiplayer games.  To put it bluntly, losing doesn't have to be so unengaging to make winning so desirable.

Edited by Sventex

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Beta Testers
1,944 posts
7,332 battles
23 minutes ago, Sventex said:

This is impossible when the game forces 50% of the players to lose at any given round.  Increasing skill will not chance that outcome and thus the negative consequences will always result.

for the population as a whole, yes.  but we're not talking about the population as a whole... we're talking about individuals.  individuals are capable of exceeding the 50%.  the fact that the system is unavoidably designed in a manner which drags down the best is not an excuse to exacerbate that error.

 

23 minutes ago, Sventex said:

Negative consequence need not be the only incentive to win.  And other games like the Dark Soul series put priority on keeping the engagement factor of losing.

yes, and such a game is fundamentally designed as a multiplayer competitive game.  the engagement from a competitive game comes from the competition; its the fundamental aspect of the game genre, and i suspect you'd be hard-pressed to find me a single example of a successful competitive multiplayer game that intentionally marginalized the competition aspect of its gameplay... outside of south park's sarcastaball.

 

23 minutes ago, Sventex said:

In Mass Effect 2, you earn unique cutscenes when you lose all your squadmates during the suicide run, which requires a fair bit of effort.

i played the crapout of the ME series.  think i completed something like a dozen full ME2 play-throughs.  wanna guess how many of those play-throughs i intentionally screwed up to get those cutscenes?  one.  such incentives are novelties and they only entice players to do it once and then never again because they've already seen it and doing it successive times grants nothing new.

 

23 minutes ago, Sventex said:

It is all too easy to make no mistakes and still lose in this game, and feel terrible about it.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dunning–Kruger_effect 

i counter your assertion by stating that it is impossible to make no mistakes and still lose.  if you lost, its because you made a mistake, and i you don't recognize the mistake, that's on you; success and failure are not products of your circumstances... they are products of your reaction to circumstances.  you are always responsible for the outcome, even if you don't recognize it.

23 minutes ago, Sventex said:

And if you made no mistake, there's nothing to learn from that match.

see above... if you lost, there's identifying the mistake that led to the loss and ensuring you don't make that mistake in the future.  there is always something to learn from a loss.  which brings me back to my original point... if you mitigate the pain of losing, you mitigate the incentive to identify the errors that led to that loss. 

 

no offense intended, but you create people like you who upon losing just say "well, i did everything the best i could (or even worse, i did everything perfectly!) and still lost, so there's no reason for me to put effort into getting better!"  which is all well and good when you're naturally above average... because it just encourages them to tread water and stay in their comfort zone.  but for the average mouth-breather it also encourages them into treading water... but the difference is that, unlike the naturally talented, the average mouth-breather will drown when he attempts to do so.

 

setting up a system that propagates acceptance of mediocrity, rather than the encouragement of exceptionalism, is the most effective way to ensure that the vast number of sub-mediocre people fail to achieve even mediocrity.

 

23 minutes ago, Sventex said:

To put it bluntly, losing doesn't have to be so unengaging to make winning so desirable.

to put it bluntly... yes it does.

Edited by Shadeylark

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,471
[REVY]
Members
6,143 posts
5,158 battles
11 minutes ago, Shadeylark said:

for the population as a whole, yes.  but we're not talking about the population as a whole... we're talking about individuals.  individuals are capable of exceeding the 50%.  the fact that the system is unavoidably designed in a manner which drags down the best is not an excuse to exacerbate that error.

Disagree.

11 minutes ago, Shadeylark said:

yes, and such a game is fundamentally designed as a multiplayer competitive game.  the engagement from a competitive game comes from the competition; its the fundamental aspect of the game genre, and i suspect you'd be hard-pressed to find me a single example of a successful competitive multiplayer game that intentionally marginalized the competition aspect of its gameplay... outside of south park's sarcastaball.

Ranked battles is an example where less than 50% of the players are marginalized because the top losing players keeps his star.  This is a small example, but one that shows some thought given to the losing condition of this game.

11 minutes ago, Shadeylark said:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dunning–Kruger_effect 

i counter your assertion by stating that it is impossible to make no mistakes and still lose.  if you lost, its because you made a mistake, and i you don't recognize the mistake, that's on you; success and failure are not products of your circumstances... they are products of your reaction to circumstances.  you are always responsible for the outcome, even if you don't recognize it.

I absolutely disagree.  Life isn't fair, that's why those who do no wrong still suffer.  I'd hardly blame the babies who died in childbirth for being responsible for their outcome.  Yes, that is not a video game, but it's the same fundamental principle of life.  People do not always lose because of mistakes they personally have made.  Video games are not exempt from this principle.

11 minutes ago, Shadeylark said:

see above... if you lost, there's identifying the mistake that led to the loss and ensuring you don't make that mistake in the future.  there is always something to learn from a loss.  which brings me back to my original point... if you mitigate the pain of losing, you mitigate the incentive to identify the errors that led to that loss. 

 

no offense intended, but you create people like you who upon losing just say "well, i did everything the best i could (or even worse, i did everything perfectly!) and still lost, so there's no reason for me to put effort into getting better!"

See above.

Edited by Sventex

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,030
Members
4,723 posts
7,859 battles

I have had soooo many "valuable" losing experiences I am, possibly, one of the most content and happy people on this planet. Happy happy! :Smile_sceptic:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Beta Testers
1,944 posts
7,332 battles
2 minutes ago, Sventex said:

Ranked battles is an example where less than 50% of the players are marginalized because the top losing players keeps his star.  This is a small example, but one that shows some thought given to the losing condition of this game.

yes it is... and look at the shitfest ranked is generally regarded as.  and one of the top reasons its regarded as a shitshow?  the keep a star mechanic that encourages players to stop playing to win and start playing just to keep a star.

 

this is not an example that helps your case.

3 minutes ago, Sventex said:

I absolutely disagree.  Life isn't fair, that's why those who do no wrong still suffer.  I'd hardly blame the babies who died in childbirth for being responsible for their outcome.  Yes, that is not a video game, but it's the same fundamental principle of life.  People do not always lose because of mistakes they personally have made.  Video games are not exempt from this principle.

i never said it was fair.  fair has nothing to do with it.  just because the odds are stacked against you, doesn't mean you are absolved of your actions that create the outcome, or in other words your responsibility for affecting the outcome is not absolved due to circumstances, even if those circumstances are unfair.

 

and of course im excluding random acts of God from this discussion.  or in WoW terms... rngjesus.  yes, there is that random element that you cannot control; though that random element, by its very nature, is the most fair thing in the game as it does not discriminate and equally affects both you and the other guy... which means it can be safely excluded from this discussion.  rng is the unavoidable element of uncertainty that affects both you and the other guy equally.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,471
[REVY]
Members
6,143 posts
5,158 battles
2 minutes ago, Shadeylark said:

yes it is... and look at the shitfest ranked is generally regarded as.  and one of the top reasons its regarded as a shitshow?  the keep a star mechanic that encourages players to stop playing to win and start playing just to keep a star.

 

this is not an example that helps your case.

I disagree.  While poorly implemented, it at least an example of fewer than 50% of players in a match being punished when they lose.  This is an example that absolutely helps my case.

Edited by Sventex

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Members
2,925 posts
1,365 battles

It depends on the nature of the loss.  If it was a good hard fought battle and it ended in a solid performance from all.  However, battles where it was crapperformance, or bad rng and its an [edited]whoopin, yeah, nothing to be happy about.  Alot of losses in these games are alot of the 2nd one.

Ive had 1 notable loss and it was on mechwarrior online.  Game ended at the last minute like 43-45 with the enemy killing our objective in the last 2m of the game.  Was great fun.  No losses in these games go like that though.  WG games its 3 afk, terrible rng, 4 total donuts and a 7 minute 15-2 [edited]whoopin

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,471
[REVY]
Members
6,143 posts
5,158 battles
48 minutes ago, Sventex said:

if you mitigate or eliminate the negative impacts of losing, you remove the incentive to win (and as an inevitable consequence of marginalizing winning, you concurrently marginalize the learning experience... nobody will learn to get better if playing badly and losing feels the same as playing well and winning does)

The problem with ranked is that the consequences of losing are too high, hence the toxicity.  I would even daresay that making the consequences of losing in ranked worse will not make "winning" any more incentivized.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
924
[H_]
Members
1,933 posts

Winning and losing is only relevant if there is "real value."   And, this is a silly game with very silly mechanics.  Worst of all, it is a FPS that is hidden in a quasi team format you have absolutely no control over......none.  And, the MM is so inane, it's a wonder there's anyone left playing....

If painting you ship bright yellow and running full speed into whomever gets in your way is fun for you, do it !!!  If you want to believe you are the incarnation of Lord Nelson, wander around the map reciting Sun Tzu and tape one hand to the desk and talk with a British accent......have at it !  "just go straight at them...."

The rest of us take an hour or two and get on coms with our family and friends and wander out to sea and try to not suck......to badly............or, accidentally zig instead of zag causing blue damage...or, etc.etc, etc....  Then we log off and agree to meet tomorrow night, same time, same channel and repeat till there is a better or new game to capture our imaginations....  And, that is in November....

Edited by Asym_KS

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Alpha Tester
2,232 posts
On 9/20/2018 at 3:00 AM, Sventex said:

Over the years, I've seen so many posts on the forums, attacking their fellow players, lamenting the lack of skill, or widespread calls for thousands of players to uninstall the game.  It's time to look into this phenomenon of why an entertainment video game can bring so much anger and misery.  You are supposed to be having fun after all, and half the players must inevitably lose because of the multiplayer format.

I blame WG for creating some of the toxicity in WoWS. The rewards for losing, even if you and your teammates showed effort, are meager especially in ranked where only the top loser retains a star. Losing in operations, particularly Ultimate FU, rewards less XP and credits than a co-op battle which is very frustrating. WG makes it very unforgiving when you lose.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×