It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
So we'll be in a game right, and I'll look and see that the base turrets are being attacked and one person will continue pushing into the enemy base and I'll back off and go back to our base. Meanwhile the other two players choose to go with him or me.
Like what made me want to do one thing and what made them want to do another?
originally posted by: eathis
I hate how, in games 'Kill death ratio' (KDR) has kind of ruined the spirit of competitive gaming.
For instance in the game Blade Symphony (sword fighting game), a lot of people create a fighting style soley based off 'winning'. They end up manifesting a boring style that includes running away and doing cheap # that ends up giving a dull boring experience for both parties.
Where as the most controversial players, with abstract ways of thinking, employ a much more richer experience, calling on much more mental faculties than it takes to face off against a mundane ordinary fighter.
My observation is, that the fun fights are because we both are fighting for the fun, we end up creating much more interesting styles, because we are not basing out game off of winning. We are not afraid to die or care for our stats or KDR and thus take more risks and find out things that passive players will never know or experience.
In essence, I've noticed newer games promote KDR (older games never even told you how many deaths you had) and people's pride and ego often manifest in their play-style. People end up letting the team down so at the end of the match, their score says "6 kills, 0 deaths" and that their profile will maintain this pretty ratio of bull#. Meanwhile time after time the team loses the fight because of weekend warriors init for themselves.