On Mon, 13 Dec 1999
silky@... wrote:
>
> This is where the difference between play and competition comes in. I play
> to PLAY not compete.
Actually, I don't play to compete either.
> Competition by it's nature has a winner and loser -
> play does not. Does the first one to lvl 50 get a cookie that no one told
> me about?
The measure I'm using is the total sum of enjoyment across all
players. You are mistaking that for competition. Because I'm
taking into consideration the other guy's enjoyment of the
game, you are mistakenly thinking I'm worrying about him to
compete with him (or he with me).
> Again, you are looking at this as a competition. So what if it's crowded? I
> hunt what I can, when I can - if someone else gets it, oh well. Mobs are
> good little trains - another is along every X min. like clockwork. If an
> area is so massively crowded that I can't move - I just log - or find
> somewhere else to hunt.
This is self-contradictory. On the one hand, you say "so what
if it's crowded?" On the other you say if it's too crowded,
you just logout. If your attitude towards it is "so what,"
then why do you logout? You are trying to claim this isn't a
problem, when your actions clearly indicate you feel it can
be enough of a problem for you not to play the game.
> I regularly visit areas that are WAY under my level. I also regularly save
> low level players from trains or certain death - I ENJOY doing that. Is my
> presence depriving them of the joy of death? Do you think my presence there
> is resented? If it is, I've never heard anyone remark on it.
:) I enjoy doing that too. But I hardly think we're
representative of the majority of the playerbase. EQ is a
game about killing mobs, and that's what most players do. The
benefit or harm due to a change in the game has to be judged
based primarily on that.
> If you let what another has affect YOUR enjoyment - that is a problem of
> yours you need to address. Does your neighbor having a nicer car than you
> bother you? A bigger house? A better income? Does it really affect you
> adversely?
You're still missing my point - that direct and indirect
interactions are unavoidable and affect the overall enjoyment
of the game by the playerbase. You pretend that it is an
internal problem, or that it's too small to matter ("affect
you adversely). Like I said, I'm thinking based on the sum of
the enjoyment of all players. Something that a significant
number of players (who may or may not think like you) perceive
(internally) to be a problem, IS a problem. Something that an
individual player may not perceive to be an adverse problem,
may in fact be an adverse problem with the game as a whole.
--
John H. Kim
kim@...