[QUOTE=Senyin;270545]While you have the freedom to play as honourably as you wish, your opponents have the same freedom not to.
[/QUOTE]
This is predicated on the belief that both players hold the same values to what is “honourable”.
Many people operate under the illusion that the entire universe perceives and defines the world as they do which only causes trouble when people do not act according to their values.
This then creates a holier than thou attitude which the ego loves. It gives them this false sense self worth, to the point where they can say - “hey im really bad at this game, but at least I play honourably, you dont”
“The unskilled therefore suffer from illusory superiority, rating their own ability as above average, much higher than in actuality; by contrast, the highly skilled underrate their abilities, suffering from illusory inferiority. This leads to a perverse result where less competent people will rate their own ability higher than more competent people.”
I’m not getting this argument (or the side Jess is taking, his arguments swings both ways like a metronome). Areas of the map have high ground, on purpose and by design… and people think that there should be something done to stop people using these vantage points?
[QUOTE=Humate;270548]This is predicated on the belief that both players hold the same values to what is “honourable”.
Many people operate under the illusion that the entire universe perceives and defines the world as they do which only causes trouble when people do not act according to their values.
This then creates a holier than thou attitude which the ego loves. It gives them this false sense self worth, to the point where they can say - “hey im really bad at this game, but at least I play honourably, you dont”[/QUOTE]
But that was just what I was saying: I do not hold it against others if they do not act according to my personal values.
Per example: I never chatfrag. At least not on purpose.
But I’m fine with others chatfragging me. No judgement made.
As long as people are respectfull on a personal level, human to human, I’m fine
with every dirty , sneaky and not so honourable game tactic in the book
I was wondering about the mechanic. My question was answered. And then it turned into a debate about other things.
Me myself I don’t think I’m an amazing gamer. But I’m skilled enough to hang with most players. But I do feel bad for other gamers who are inexperienced and get slaughtered so I play devil’s advocate even against myself.
[QUOTE=Humate;270548]This is predicated on the belief that both players hold the same values to what is “honourable”.
Many people operate under the illusion that the entire universe perceives and defines the world as they do which only causes trouble when people do not act according to their values.
This then creates a holier than thou attitude which the ego loves. It gives them this false sense self worth, to the point where they can say - “hey im really bad at this game, but at least I play honourably, you dont”[/QUOTE]
I hope that’s not the impression that I’m giving off. I just don’t like to do things the easiest way. If my opponents aren’t even standing a chance against me I’ll switch to a slightly less effective weapon. If I’m still slaughtering them maybe my side arm. And so on. I feel bad when I feel like I haven’t at least artificially given someone less skilled then me just a slight chance to compete.
I would only use cheap tactics on more seasoned/skilled players if I knew they could counter it. I guess there’s really no way to know if someone’s a noob or an expert though. Unless the whole team you’re facing is terrible and your team is destroying them like pitbulls eating puppies. I’ll jump from game to game to game until I find one that’s pretty evenly matched because I enjoy the sport of it as much as winning as lame as that sounds. I won’t joined a team that’s stacked higher then the other.
If my opponents aren’t even standing a chance against me I’ll switch to a slightly less effective weapon. If I’m still slaughtering them maybe my side arm. And so on. I feel bad when I feel like I haven’t at least artificially given someone less skilled then me just a slight chance to compete.
Well, in freeplay matches, you can switch teams. This is a feature I missed in BC2, since I usually always switch teams if the one I’m on is dominating.
I do this too (I usually practice my weaker classes when our team is winning by a high margin). The science of happiness and gaming bear it out also. Games are only fun when they are a challenge (or when you take pleasure in someone else’s pain).
HORSE : that was clearly a dumb choice, forcing people to do only ONE switching of team. Especially when you have used it, and your friend becomes autobalanced… Or when you want to even the teams.
BFBC2 has a LOT for lamers like Carl Gustav and Mortar Strike, I don’t really understand blocking the switch : they fear that more skilled players will all go to the same team ? But I digress, sorry.
Battlefield has always been about broken **** countering broken ****. Since you admit there is a LOT for lamers you’re acknowledging this, you just need to go a step further and realize that that is the entire game.
Seriously, I love that thing. Its one of the few weapons with no spread and only slight drop, so in addition to the annoying close range no-skill kills with it, you can do some pretty awesome counter-sniping and trickshots. Of course, no hill hugging sniper ever appreciates just how hard it is to CG someone from across the width of Heavy Metal, they just type CG noob and go back to the same place.
I feel kind of railroaded into the class though, CG engi is the only class that can be a vehicle, fight vehicles, fight infantry and fight buildings and trees. I hate having to ignore an enemy just because they’re a “counter class”. Engi means I don’t have to.
I’m trying to wrap my head around that inferiority/superiority complex thing. I think I’m fairly good, definitely above average. I think this because I usually do well in games despite virtually never using the “best” setups, and despite having a crappy connection. Which complex do I suffer from!? :U
Not everyone suffers from it, and it stems from the fact that “highly skilled” and “unskilled” are very subjective terms.
The assumption is that those who know nothing assume that they are doing as good as a normal person possibly could be, but those who know a lot about a certain field realize how far away the skill ceiling really is.
“Highly skilled” compared to the masses, but “unskilled” compared to where they wish to be. vs “Unskilled” to the knowledgeable but “Highly skilled” within their own understanding.
Its akin to two people, one who only knows that gravity pulls things down, while the other grasps the basic concepts behind Membrane theory and everything leading up to it. The one who knows very little sees no depth behind the force, there is nothing more to know about it other than things fall. The other sees all the unanswered questions about the force. The unskilled thinks he knows everything, the skilled realizes that he knows very little.
But looking for the complex in yourself assumes that you fall into one group or the other. There are plenty of people who are in the middle ground, or who have a healthy idea of where they really stand.
Coolio, I guess that means I fall under the inferiority complex side, but just barely, as I can still recognize that I’m a pretty good player. I just also realize that I have a lot of room for improvement and am far, far from being the best. Interesting stuff.
No, thats the thing, its difficult to accurately judge yourself. Its not a hard and fast rule allowing you to diagnose yourself as highly skilled, just because you have an inferiority complex.
