Ok, so let’s say I’ve determined that I want to have fun. I conclude from this that I should play in such a way as to make me have the most fun. What now? How does this help me?
This isn’t the situation we’re talking about, though, we’re talking about you advising someone how to better complete the game’s intended goals when they already know that they’d prefer to play less conventionally. In that case, it helps them because it tells them to not follow your advice because it would reduce the amount of fun they have.
clarify something for me, please: are you disputing that the conditional statement is true? If so, why? If not, what is your objection?
No, I’m not disputing that the conditional is true. My objection is that your top comment doesn’t clarify what “playing effectively” means, and it seems that you think that players placing a value on personalization is wrong because it makes them less effective. It sounds like a case of Lost Purposes. You find out that someone’s gameplay preferences are different from those of “optimal play”, and you consider that a problem instead of an equally valid taste.
we’re talking about you advising someone how to better complete the game’s intended goals when they already know that they’d prefer to play less conventionally
Where are you getting this? (The italicized part especially is something that is, as far as I can tell, untrue of the situations I am describing.)
and it seems that you think that players placing a value on personalization is wrong because it makes them less effective
This directly contradicts what I said here:
If your fun depends on doing things other than accomplishing the goals presented to you by the game, then sure, go for it. My comments are not targeted at those people.
Here:
Finally, there’s a crucial difference between deliberately choosing this or that play style, and just being bad at the thing you are trying to do.
Here:
My advice on optimal play assumes that you want to be good at accomplishing the goals that the game places before you. If you don’t, then the advice obviously does not apply to you.
And here:
Also, the question is not “does the personalization value outweigh the reduction in efficiency”; the question is whether the person recognizes the fact that there is a reduction. If you say “yes, I know this is strictly less efficient, but I choose to take the efficiency hit, because I value the roleplaying benefit more” — then fine. If you say “this isn’t any worse! and I like it better like this!” — that’s something else.
In short: I am not the straw man you are arguing against. I am a different person.
“at most this is doing no good, and it’s how I like to play”
Meaning that they’ve found a way that they like to play.
I appreciate the clarification of your position. It seems at odds with what you said originally, though. Personally, I often play games in unintended ways, and I’ve often been told that the way I’m playing is suboptimal or wrong. It annoys me (significantly, if they’re persistent), and I suspect that other unconventional players feel the same way. So, for future reference, I recommend that if someone tells you that they like to play the way they’re playing, you should leave them alone—don’t play with them (if your preferred method of playing is incompatible with theirs) and don’t advise them.
Ok, I see where you got that perception of my view. (I apologize for what, in retrospect, seems like a somewhat more confrontational tone than I intended.)
The thing about the comment “at most this is doing no good, and it’s how I like to play” is that the part of it that makes a factual claim about the world outside the speaker’s head… is, in fact, wrong. The approach in question may be how they like to play — fine and well — but it’s doing worse than no good. That’s the bias described in the OP: believing that something is worthless, when in fact it is worse than worthless (where “worth” means “contribution to effectiveness” or something similar, not taking into account enjoyment value, etc.).
So what the person is saying is “I prefer this play style, which is not any less effective than the one you advocate”. If that were actually true, then I wouldn’t have any issues with it. I also (in a different way) would not have any issues if the person instead said “I prefer this play style, which I acknowledge is less effective than the one you advocate”. But as it is, the person labors under a misapprehension, and it affects their decisions; and insofar as we are interacting in the context of D&D (or whatever game), it also affects me.
I describe in this comment what exactly “the problem” is with being less than optimally effective. I’d be curious to hear your thoughts on that.
I think that we’re actually envisioning two different scenarios, and I think that difference is behind a lot of arguments similar to this one. You are thinking (yes?) of an experienced player, who has found a play style he enjoys; is aware of the tradeoffs, but judges them to be acceptable or inapplicable to his play context; and who plays with people who accept (and even possibly share) his play style.
In that case, if someone comes up to you and says “Hey, you’re doing it wrong! Your character could be doing better by selecting X, Y, and Z more powerful option!”, your reaction, quite naturally, is to say “I know what I want out of this game and I’m getting it, please go away”.
But that’s not the situation I’m thinking of. Instead, I’m thinking of an inexperienced player (or someone who’s less experienced/skilled than they think they are), who is not aware of the tradeoffs, possibly suffers from the sort of bias described in the OP, and, even more importantly, is playing with people in whose group the “alternative” (but actually just badly-thought-out) play style creates the sorts of problems I outline in my above-linked post.
My reaction to the former sort of player is to chat amiably about play style differences, and then not play with them. My reaction to the latter sort of player is to try to fix them.
We were imagining different scenarios, and I recognize that an inexperienced player who’s playing suboptimally can be detrimental to the team. It’s good to be aware that the tradeoffs exist, though I personally don’t like being lectured much about them. Even new players may not want to be fixed, either because they prefer to learn by themselves, or have already found a way to play that seems fun to them. Again to only speak for myself, when I’m learning a game and I’m not asking for help, I don’t want any, and advice would be detrimental to my enjoyment. But you are correct in saying that it’s good to correct misapprehensions. I guess this hits a bit close to home for me.
I have not yet become so advanced a gamer that I can min/max people. ;)
I didn’t mean I try to fix their characters (although I do help them do that as well, if they ask for my help/advice). I mean I try to fix them; that is, explain how the game works, dispel misconceptions, etc.
This isn’t the situation we’re talking about, though, we’re talking about you advising someone how to better complete the game’s intended goals when they already know that they’d prefer to play less conventionally. In that case, it helps them because it tells them to not follow your advice because it would reduce the amount of fun they have.
No, I’m not disputing that the conditional is true. My objection is that your top comment doesn’t clarify what “playing effectively” means, and it seems that you think that players placing a value on personalization is wrong because it makes them less effective. It sounds like a case of Lost Purposes. You find out that someone’s gameplay preferences are different from those of “optimal play”, and you consider that a problem instead of an equally valid taste.
Where are you getting this? (The italicized part especially is something that is, as far as I can tell, untrue of the situations I am describing.)
This directly contradicts what I said here:
Here:
Here:
And here:
In short: I am not the straw man you are arguing against. I am a different person.
-
Meaning that they’ve found a way that they like to play.
I appreciate the clarification of your position. It seems at odds with what you said originally, though. Personally, I often play games in unintended ways, and I’ve often been told that the way I’m playing is suboptimal or wrong. It annoys me (significantly, if they’re persistent), and I suspect that other unconventional players feel the same way. So, for future reference, I recommend that if someone tells you that they like to play the way they’re playing, you should leave them alone—don’t play with them (if your preferred method of playing is incompatible with theirs) and don’t advise them.
Ok, I see where you got that perception of my view. (I apologize for what, in retrospect, seems like a somewhat more confrontational tone than I intended.)
The thing about the comment “at most this is doing no good, and it’s how I like to play” is that the part of it that makes a factual claim about the world outside the speaker’s head… is, in fact, wrong. The approach in question may be how they like to play — fine and well — but it’s doing worse than no good. That’s the bias described in the OP: believing that something is worthless, when in fact it is worse than worthless (where “worth” means “contribution to effectiveness” or something similar, not taking into account enjoyment value, etc.).
So what the person is saying is “I prefer this play style, which is not any less effective than the one you advocate”. If that were actually true, then I wouldn’t have any issues with it. I also (in a different way) would not have any issues if the person instead said “I prefer this play style, which I acknowledge is less effective than the one you advocate”. But as it is, the person labors under a misapprehension, and it affects their decisions; and insofar as we are interacting in the context of D&D (or whatever game), it also affects me.
I describe in this comment what exactly “the problem” is with being less than optimally effective. I’d be curious to hear your thoughts on that.
I think that we’re actually envisioning two different scenarios, and I think that difference is behind a lot of arguments similar to this one. You are thinking (yes?) of an experienced player, who has found a play style he enjoys; is aware of the tradeoffs, but judges them to be acceptable or inapplicable to his play context; and who plays with people who accept (and even possibly share) his play style.
In that case, if someone comes up to you and says “Hey, you’re doing it wrong! Your character could be doing better by selecting X, Y, and Z more powerful option!”, your reaction, quite naturally, is to say “I know what I want out of this game and I’m getting it, please go away”.
But that’s not the situation I’m thinking of. Instead, I’m thinking of an inexperienced player (or someone who’s less experienced/skilled than they think they are), who is not aware of the tradeoffs, possibly suffers from the sort of bias described in the OP, and, even more importantly, is playing with people in whose group the “alternative” (but actually just badly-thought-out) play style creates the sorts of problems I outline in my above-linked post.
My reaction to the former sort of player is to chat amiably about play style differences, and then not play with them. My reaction to the latter sort of player is to try to fix them.
We were imagining different scenarios, and I recognize that an inexperienced player who’s playing suboptimally can be detrimental to the team. It’s good to be aware that the tradeoffs exist, though I personally don’t like being lectured much about them. Even new players may not want to be fixed, either because they prefer to learn by themselves, or have already found a way to play that seems fun to them. Again to only speak for myself, when I’m learning a game and I’m not asking for help, I don’t want any, and advice would be detrimental to my enjoyment. But you are correct in saying that it’s good to correct misapprehensions. I guess this hits a bit close to home for me.
I am not at all sure that all inexperienced players need to be “fixed” by minmaxing them.
I have not yet become so advanced a gamer that I can min/max people. ;)
I didn’t mean I try to fix their characters (although I do help them do that as well, if they ask for my help/advice). I mean I try to fix them; that is, explain how the game works, dispel misconceptions, etc.