Competitive Gaming: A debate

[RobinStarwing]

Recently, Nintendo announced the VGCS 2012 Winter Battle for the 5th Gen games at the Pokemon Global Website and Pokemon Website (link) and I've been asking around the places I frequent on line to see who else is taking part and what they are using so I got an idea for my team.

It turns out apparently that people who play games like this competitively either suck or are untolerable for a variety of reasons. I will go over some of the more common complaints I've heard and than we can all discuss it.

First complaint I've heard is leveled at the banning of certain aspects of the game or tier systems like what Smogon has for Pokemon. I find this complaint valid in my view as anyone who truly plays a game should either find what they are good at in the game and master it or be the Jack of All Trades in a game. I've had this complaint leveled against me when I played C&C Generals ZH online and people would ragequit and bitch at me for turtling. I find this just means I did my job well and they are sore they couldn't kill me in under 2 minutes. Even things that are game breaking (like Wobbufett with Shadow Tag) can be defeated if you know what makes them game breaking and how to counter it.

The second complaint I've heard is about the general impression of personalities. It seems Competitive Gamers are thought of as Elitists and look down on other gamers or newbies to their club. I find this is too much of a generalization and that while you will find elitists, how much of an influence and how many there are varies from community to community. I've run into fewer elitists in the Pokemon community for example while the Elitist attitudes in the C&C games drove me from ever playing them online.

These are the two complaints I've heard more about than any others. I'm hoping maybe we can figure out what is true and what is not or maybe find out how we all think and feel on this matter. Thank you and good day.

[Professor Smarmiarty]

I play snakes and ladders for keeps.

[Kim]

Some people are assholes who are no fun to play with. Some people aren't. As much as there are definitely problems with the competitive gaming scene, most of them are merely facets of gaming community in general that become more obvious in a public, competitive environment.

[Geminex]

In regards to banning certain aspects of the game, I consider that totally valid. The point of a game is to have fun. Pokemon is fairly strategic, in that you have to select your team, moves, items, you have to plan ahead for various situations. In competitive multiplayer, much of the game's fun stems from that strategic depth. The enjoyment lies in figuring out new strategies, then using them against opponents.

Thing is, if some strategies are vastly superior to others, those strategies will generally be favored. If those strategies are few in number, then, in an unrestricted game, variety will slowly get squashed, as people use what works. Sure, you can counter even the top strategies, but a counter to something classified as OP will generally be far more situational than the thing it's countering.

So, sure, Nintendo COULD say anything goes. But then it'd turn from a game of variety and skill into a mass of people throwing legendaries at each other according to two or three pre-selected strategies. Sure, it'd still be a tournament, but it'd be a lot less fun.

This may be where your turtling complaint comes in. Sure, turtling may be effective, it might even be more effective than aggression, but if both players just turtled, you'd hardly have a rewarding game. Turtling is valid, but it's certainly a lot less fun to play against than a balanced gameplay style.

I'm not sure what you mean under the elitist complaint. Yes, sometimes, players who are very good will look down on those who are less good at a game. The point of the competitive scene is to measure skill, and some players will conflate skill at a game with personal value. Just as some ocmpetitive players will be nice and friendly. What's the discussion?

[Bells]

I really only have 3 questions for you

1- Each Evee evolutions are you putting into your evee-only team?
2- Why are you not playing a full evee team?
3- Vaporeon over Flareon? What!? Are you fucking nuts?

[RobinStarwing]

e

Originally Posted by Bells

I really only have 3 questions for you

1- Each Evee evolutions are you putting into your evee-only team?
2- Why are you not playing a full evee team?
3- Vaporeon over Flareon? What!? Are you fucking nuts?

I've faced Vaporeons before and they are Hit Point Monsters with good Defense and offense in both Physical and Special. Throw in Wish or Rest with Sleep Talk and/or Chesto Berry along with their special ability (Water Absorb which allows them to regain HP from Water-type moves...even Soak) makes them hard to kill. If you want to knock one down, you need good Electric that can either hit very hard (Choice Specs Magnezone or Choice Band Electrivire) or can outlast them on Recovery with either the same abilities OR have a higher defenses.

Now you could use Ferrothorn (it's Defenses are higher, it's a Grass/Steel type and it can outlast on recovery with Rest) and attack with Power Whip while using Leech Seed to boost it's recovery+Leftovers. Breloom might be able to outspeed it and recover thanks to Toxic Orb+Poison Heal and Sub and either use Facade to really pack a punch or go to one of it's Grass-type moves after using Spore. But other Grass-types run the risk of running into Ice Beam on Vaporeon and it hurts, and don't even think about throwing Torterra in without a Yache Berry and hope to Arceus your Stone Edge Crits.

[Bells]

well, yeah, but Flareon is cuter....

[Flarecobra]

One competition I saw at one San Diego Comic-Con drew some frustration from some competitive gamers... namely it was a Gen-1 "Retro" battle.

Never before have I heard people whining because they cannot use items, or do EV training. It's funny.

[Arcanum]

Complaining about things being banned in pro competition isn't a valid complaint at all. Things are banned for many reasons, all of them valid. In the case of pokemon, they ban the pokemon that they do because they affect the meta game too drastically. It forces everyone to either play the overpowered pokemon, or play a specialized counter against them, leaving little to no room for variety. Sure the meta could sway so you counter the counter, but then that leaves room for the overpowered pokemon again, and the cycle repeats. This is bad because it means anyone not following that strategy is at an unfair advantage.

Magic the Gathering bans cards from competitive play all the time (although if I remember correctly, there are various MTG "formats" with different card regulations, but there are still banned cards in almost all the formats). Back when MTG first came out there was a card called Mox Jet/Ruby/Sapphire/etc. It was an artifact that cost 0 to play, and acted like a land. So people would run double or triple color decks, slap in 8 or 12 Moxies (in addition to a few lands), and you could get an unfairly powerful creature out on your first or second turn. It broke the game, so they banned the cards.

Yet another example is in Starcraft, where pro maps have a lowered (meaning you can walk over it) neutral supply depot (recently changed in the expansion beta to a built in piece of destructible terrain) at the base of the ramp leading to their base. The reason for this was because before players would put three pylons at the base of their ramp and a cannon at the top, or wall in the base with two bunkers. This would effectively shut down the Zerg early game, and give Terran and Protoss an unfair advantage. So they added the supply depot/destructible terrain so Zerg still have that early window to attack, whereas a determined protoss or terran player could destroy the depot and finish their lower ramp wall, but it would cost them in economy.

Are using overpowered pokemon, 8 moxies, or a bottom ramp wall legitimate strategies? Yes, they were built into the game. That's not what's called into question when something is banned. The real question is: Does it unbalance the game, does it ruin the idea of fair play and strategic variety? The answer, in all these cases, is yes.


The personalities thing is a bit of a grey area. If someone is naturally an asshole, then becoming a pro gamer could just inflate their ego and become and even bigger asshole. The first one that comes to mind is Idra, from the StarCraft pro gaming circuit. He bitches and whines constantly when he plays against newer players who don't follow the meta game, and often rage quits when they do something he doesn't expect because he only focuses on the meta game strategies (at least that's how he was the last time I looked in on him). He's notorious in the pro StarCraft fandom for being a rage-quitting jerk (he would often rage quit out of pro games because the other player did something unexpected, or if things didn't go exactly how he wanted them to, even though he currently still had the upper hand and could have recovered).

And then on the other hand there are players like Day9 who makes videos to help out and teach new players, and WhiteRa who is generally an aces guy.

Basically, fame can easily go to someone's head. Coupled with the affirmation that pro gamers are the best in that game (because that's the whole point of a pro tournament, to see who is the best), anyone's ego can easily be boosted to assholish levels. So yeah, the assholes might be more common, but that's why the humble and awesome pro players are even more awesome.

[Doc ock rokc]

I personally am okay with competitive gaming...as long as they know they are not the center of the gaming universe. If someone wants to play the game in such a way that they do all that competitive stuff....then Let them. However if theya re bastards that try to force the competitive nature onto people that don't want to play that way then I draw the line.

For instance I know a few people that are competitive video gamers mostly street fighter or recently UMvC3. They know all the teirs and infinites and other things. but when they play with my brother and me who have no interest in those things they play like a normal person (that can activate hypers at the drop of a hat) They realized that there is a Competitive scene and the people that Play the game for fun.

However In Team Fortress 2 I run into the opposite group. The people that think Competitive opinion is the only opinion. They bitch and moan every time I use a weapon that is banned in their books (including the ones they disqualified because they were "useless"). They complain about the public players being happy with their low scores or unskilled games (and complain whenever the unskilled "pubbers" get off their asses and start wiping the floor with them). Honestly they bring down those that are actually competitive and friendly in their community.

So My opinion is competitive is fine if they want to play that way. I don't always agree with what they do (teirs, glitches, infinites) but I do think that they sometimes do good for the game at times. They are a nice source of information for developers (when they play by developer standards) and sometimes they are fun to watch.