I don't like action combat, and it could very potentially stop me from playing

We have not received permission from PenguinPaladin to share the quoted post.

Hell, I've killed literal thousands in L2 w/o any reason at all. I was just running towards a farming spot, saw a flagged dude and killed him. That's it. 0 competition.

We have not received permission from Mag7spy to share the quoted post.

Nope, it was literally just flagged people who were free targets for me to kill. Even if they fought back there was no competition because there was nothing to compete for. We just fought, someone died and the winner moved on with whatever they were doing.

You're trying to live a black&white life in a grey world.

NiKr wrote: »

We have not received permission from PenguinPaladin to share the quoted post.

Hell, I've killed literal thousands in L2 w/o any reason at all. I was just running towards a farming spot, saw a flagged dude and killed him. That's it. 0 competition.

Ok I'm left with a quandary now, because on the one hand, I know enough about Mag to want to tell y'all to lay off kinda, but I also don't have a way to explain it without possibly having the opposite effect.

So I'll see if I can be sort of ambiguous about it.

Awhile back Mag pointed out something that seemed a little incongruous to me, but it speaks to the core of perception when combined with one other thing.

"If you found matches of me it was of this high-rank player who uploads his wins."

Combine this with:
"Ranked isn't the same because you can't have a good chat with your opponent while you're fighting."

and:
"I'm not talking about elitists.".

See, the previous claim of 'being top 10 in Soul Calibur' or even 'Being in a top guild on New World', aren't 'bragging about being the best', they're 'indications of competence'. Imagine what happens when a self-aware competent player is having a conversation with an elitist. The competent player brings examples to demonstrate competence , not 'top percentile performance'.

Similarly, if challenged by an unknown, statistically, one could assume (since most players are not competent) that the challenger is also not competent, and therefore could be justified in claiming/expecting to win if one faced that challenger in battle, right?

In order to understand Mag's point, you have to start from the perspective that Mag does not assume that others are 'more than competent' until they prove it in some way that elevates them to 'elitist'. This is a foundation for a view of 'competitive' limited to 'competition between those of standard competence' that matches with the model, even if it does not match that of 'elitists'.

So in a way, we might be the ones 'building a strawman' too, because of being so used to people on the internet who speak LIKE Mag does but actually believe they are REALLY REALLY good at things, like, top level.

If Mag counters all this by going 'nah I definitely mean I'm one of the best don't insult me' or anything like that, well... carry on.

Azherae wrote: »

So in a way, we might be the ones 'building a strawman' too, because of being so used to people on the internet who speak LIKE Mag does but actually believe they are REALLY REALLY good at things, like, top level.

Could be. I was just trying to give an example of pvp not being competitive (at least in the general definition of competition). Though I then went to reassure my knowledge of that definition and one sub-meaning couuuld maybe include "just killed a dude w/o a reason" under its umbrella, but at that point it'd be more of a philosophical and psychological issue rather than a semantic one.

Mag just likes to argue between 2 extremes, disregarding the middle of the spectrum, which I find at least a bit silly

NiKr wrote: »

Azherae wrote: »

So in a way, we might be the ones 'building a strawman' too, because of being so used to people on the internet who speak LIKE Mag does but actually believe they are REALLY REALLY good at things, like, top level.

Could be. I was just trying to give an example of pvp not being competitive (at least in the general definition of competition). Though I then went to reassure my knowledge of that definition and one sub-meaning couuuld maybe include "just killed a dude w/o a reason" under its umbrella, but at that point it'd be more of a philosophical and psychological issue rather than a semantic one.

Mag just likes to argue between 2 extremes, disregarding the middle of the spectrum, which I find at least a bit silly

You sure though?

It's just a perspective that is often hard for either the top (actual consistent top 10 players) or 'bottom' (players who are so casual they don't even know mechanics) to understand.

I think it might ACTUALLY be totally valid, within MMOs. to say 'PvE isn't competitive' through this lens.

If you aren't at the top, and you aren't at the bottom, chances are you are not actually competing with anyone at all, you're acting opportunistically against an AI that the top have already told you how to win against.

In PvP, at least, this isn't the same. Mid-level PvP is still competitive partially because the players are 'good enough to know what is happening', but not necessarily 'good enough to know what is optimal'. They're trying, adapting, and learning.

If the competition for PvE is 'to be first' and you as the 'average player' are NEVER first, you're not competing. I believe this point's been made before, but you just have to put the perspective on. Mag IS saying 'yes, because I am not trying for World First, this is not competitive, no one like me is actually competitive about PvE'.

Sure, it may not be a meaningful take to someone who is explicitly talking about top level competitive PvE, but it makes more sense to believe the speaker when he repeatedly tells us 'that's not what I'm talking about'.

EDIT: tl;dr Marathon running isn't competitive for the middle of the pack, that's not why they are there.

Azherae wrote: »

EDIT: tl;dr Marathon running isn't competitive for the middle of the pack, that's not why they are there.

This is funny cause I wanted to bring up marathons to make my point Wanted to say that to most people marathons are just about completing the thing, while some people try going for best times and amongst themselves they are, in fact, competing.

Azherae wrote: »

In PvP, at least, this isn't the same. Mid-level PvP is still competitive partially because the players are 'good enough to know what is happening', but not necessarily 'good enough to know what is optimal'. They're trying, adapting, and learning.

This was what I tried addressing with my "thousands of meaningless pvp" post. I wasn't claiming that I was at the top of the server or even anywhere near top %ile, but exactly because of that the pvp in the middle could quite often be meaningless because people just had fun killing each other simply because they could.

And mag has contradicted himself from post to post.

We have not received permission from Mag7spy to share the quoted post.

We have not received permission from Mag7spy to share the quoted post.

We have not received permission from Mag7spy to share the quoted post.

It goes from "100% competitive" to "not always" to "if you're equal then it's definitely competitive".

So one might think that Mag understands that it's a spectrum rather than a binary, but every time pve competitiveness is brought up he immediately backtracks to "no, it ain't" and doesn't even interact the idea of competition in pve.

NiKr wrote: »

And mag has contradicted himself from post to post.

We have not received permission from Mag7spy to share the quoted post.

We have not received permission from Mag7spy to share the quoted post.

We have not received permission from Mag7spy to share the quoted post.

It goes from "100% competitive" to "not always" to "if you're equal then it's definitely competitive".

So one might think that Mag understands that it's a spectrum rather than a binary, but every time pve competitiveness is brought up he immediately backtracks to "no, it ain't" and doesn't even interact the idea of competition in pve.

Hm, I believe I stand corrected here. I do tend to look 'through' things people say too often.

In the end, if one is contradicting oneself, even if it doesn't feel that way internally, others should be able to call you out on it and at least request or require clarification.

Good 'luck' getting it. No sarc.

We have not received permission from Okeydoke to share the quoted post.

I know it, you know it, he knows it, everybody knows it.