Playing for fun - a question of philosophy?

[Procrastes]

Playing for fun

 

About a week ago, Jingles released a World of Warships youtube-video titled ”Playing for fun” (see below). In it, he replayed and commented on a battle on the ‘Two Brothers’ map, which started with a bunch of ships – one destroyer, one cruiser and two battleships – immediately going down the middle channel and meeting a sticky end, leaving the rest of the team to pick up the fight with a decided numerical disadvantage.

 

Jingles takes the replay as a basis for posing some questions of a philosophical nature, concerning the meaning and morality of a recurring phrase in the gaming world, namely “playing for fun”. What does “playing for fun” mean to different kinds of players? Is there a difference between playing for fun and playing to win? If so, is there some kind of moral imperative involved? Does anyone have the right to tell others how to play the game?

 

I find those questions to be rather interesting, and so I have posted this thread to encourage further debate. Here are some of my own thoughts on the matter.

 

I’ll start by declaring that I, personally, play the game only for fun. I do not compete either against myself (by trying to better my stats, for instance) or against other players.

This does not mean that I don’t try to get better at the game, or that I don’t try to win my battles – I most assuredly do! But it does mean, among other things, that I do not care a whit about such statistics as win rate, nor do I bother about those in-game missions or objectives that I feel would get in the way of my fun; such as for example getting a certain number of kills within a set amount of time. (There have been a number of posts in various threads outlining why those kinds of missions can affect gameplay in a bad way.)

 

When it comes to tactical choices in the gameplay during a given battle – which is, after all, what Jingles’ video is all about – my idea of playing for fun needs to be elaborated  a little more.

It should be said, firstly, that I like to win! Who doesn’t? And in a game like World of Warships, not trying to win a battle goes against the basic idea of the game as well as having the potential of ruining the game experience for the other players, allies and enemies alike. Consider playing a game of chess or Risk against an opponent that doesn’t have his or her heart in the game - how boring wouldn’t that be?

 

But winning is always less important to me than having a good time. It’s easy to see that those things do not necessarily coincide. For instance, I wouldn’t dream of issuing demands to allied players and tell them what they should or should not do, even in a situation where I could clearly see that a given maneuver would improve the chances for a win. (A polite suggestion in the battle chat is another thing entirely; I think we all know the difference here.) I reserve the right to try and win the battle in whatever way I feel is best, just as I will always give the other players the same privilege. If someone tries something that doesn’t work out and it results in a loss, then that’s no big deal at all – there’s always the next time. Just press the ‘battle’ button and try again!

 

And that brings me to my own take on the situation in the Jingles-video from ‘Two Brothers’. I have no problem at all with a couple of team members deciding to try and do something unusual and tactically questionable, just as long as it is done in good faith – by which I mean that it’s not done for the explicit purpose of losing the battle or otherwise sabotaging the game experience for the other players. One reason why I usually find the gameplay to be more enjoyable on the lower-to-middle tiers, is that battles on the top tiers can have a tendency to be rather predictable – everyone involved knows the best kind of maneuvers, and the battles unfold accordingly. Gameplay on the lower tiers is typically far less predictable (which admittedly has its drawbacks as well as its advantages).

 

To sum it all up

I play for fun, in order to have a good time either on my own or in a division with my friends. While winning is certainly a good thing in itself, the best games are the entertaining ones, especially those where the battle chat is used for constructive communication and friendly banter rather than complaining or abuse. War in real life is about conflict, where winning is by definition the ultimate goal. World of Warships is a game, and as such it is – for me at least – all about having fun in the company of fellow gamers.

 

 

[The_Tyke]

I cannot find a single point in the OP I disagree with, that is me to a 'T'.

 

I am not a good player, I acknowledge that. I like to win, but it is not the 'be-all-and-end-all' of the game. 

 

The easy test of playing for fun is if you ask yourself "would I rather be doing something else?". For me the answer (even after/during one of my regular long losing streaks) is generally "no" ergo I am having fun. 

[damo74]

Playing for fun is fine, but play to win and do your best. For the sake of the rest of your team.

 

if you don't play to win then go and play a single-player game.

[Vogel]

Playing for "fun" is all well and good if you don't do it constantly. Using "playing for fun" as an excuse to not at least try to improve is what caused the whole "I play for fun" to get a negative meaning. Disregarding that you will be better at the game, or self-improvement: when someone get's helpful and constructive advice, then bear it in mind. Don't do what some users have done in the past, cast it aside because "I play for fun".

 

That is at least my stance on the whole matter. I don't care if you are good or bad, just don't use "fun" as an excuse for not accepting more knowledge about the game.

[ColonelPete]

To have fun is probably the primary motivation to play games at all.

 

But different people find fun in different things.

Some people have fun to spoil the fun for others.

 

If you play a team oriented cooperative game, you should be at least willing to play together.

[Surmaaja]

Deleting cruisers is fun, exploiting braindead BB sailors making themselves look like a fool is fun.

However the ultimate goal that drives me forward is to be able to regularly carry the team. Seeing yourself at the top of the combined scoreboard of both teams game after game is where I want to be.

Ofcourse I wouldn't have the motivation to go for that goal if I didn't find the game enjoyable and worth my time.
 

[Blue_Bug]

Playing for fun

 

About a week ago, Jingles released a World of Warships youtube-video titled ”Playing for fun” (see below). In it, he replayed and commented on a battle on the ‘Two Brothers’ map, which started with a bunch of ships – one destroyer, one cruiser and two battleships – immediately going down the middle channel and meeting a sticky end, leaving the rest of the team to pick up the fight with a decided numerical disadvantage.

 

Jingles takes the replay as a basis for posing some questions of a philosophical nature, concerning the meaning and morality of a recurring phrase in the gaming world, namely “playing for fun”. What does “playing for fun” mean to different kinds of players? Is there a difference between playing for fun and playing to win? If so, is there some kind of moral imperative involved? Does anyone have the right to tell others how to play the game?

 

I find those questions to be rather interesting, and so I have posted this thread to encourage further debate. Here are some of my own thoughts on the matter.

 

I’ll start by declaring that I, personally, play the game only for fun. I do not compete either against myself (by trying to better my stats, for instance) or against other players.

This does not mean that I don’t try to get better at the game, or that I don’t try to win my battles – I most assuredly do! But it does mean, among other things, that I do not care a whit about such statistics as win rate, nor do I bother about those in-game missions or objectives that I feel would get in the way of my fun; such as for example getting a certain number of kills within a set amount of time. (There have been a number of posts in various threads outlining why those kinds of missions can affect gameplay in a bad way.)

 

When it comes to tactical choices in the gameplay during a given battle – which is, after all, what Jingles’ video is all about – my idea of playing for fun needs to be elaborated  a little more.

It should be said, firstly, that I like to win! Who doesn’t? And in a game like World of Warships, not trying to win a battle goes against the basic idea of the game as well as having the potential of ruining the game experience for the other players, allies and enemies alike. Consider playing a game of chess or Risk against an opponent that doesn’t have his or her heart in the game - how boring wouldn’t that be?

 

But winning is always less important to me than having a good time. It’s easy to see that those things do not necessarily coincide. For instance, I wouldn’t dream of issuing demands to allied players and tell them what they should or should not do, even in a situation where I could clearly see that a given maneuver would improve the chances for a win. (A polite suggestion in the battle chat is another thing entirely; I think we all know the difference here.) I reserve the right to try and win the battle in whatever way I feel is best, just as I will always give the other players the same privilege. If someone tries something that doesn’t work out and it results in a loss, then that’s no big deal at all – there’s always the next time. Just press the ‘battle’ button and try again!

 

And that brings me to my own take on the situation in the Jingles-video from ‘Two Brothers’. I have no problem at all with a couple of team members deciding to try and do something unusual and tactically questionable, just as long as it is done in good faith – by which I mean that it’s not done for the explicit purpose of losing the battle or otherwise sabotaging the game experience for the other players. One reason why I usually find the gameplay to be more enjoyable on the lower-to-middle tiers, is that battles on the top tiers can have a tendency to be rather predictable – everyone involved knows the best kind of maneuvers, and the battles unfold accordingly. Gameplay on the lower tiers is typically far less predictable (which admittedly has its drawbacks as well as its advantages).

 

To sum it all up

I play for fun, in order to have a good time either on my own or in a division with my friends. While winning is certainly a good thing in itself, the best games are the entertaining ones, especially those where the battle chat is used for constructive communication and friendly banter rather than complaining or abuse. War in real life is about conflict, where winning is by definition the ultimate goal. World of Warships is a game, and as such it is – for me at least – all about having fun in the company of fellow gamers

 

​I agree with you till a certain point. I like when players do unusual things, only the example is wrong. It is proven that going through the midle at the beginning of the game will result in a sudden death. I can't imagine that somebody could have fun in being slaughtered. There still is a litle responsability for the rest of the team. Having fun is great but not at all costs. It is even in the rulles, so you can like to kill your own teammates, but you will be punished for it eventually. To take risks that is proven very harmfull for the team falls in my opinion in the same category.

 

Ofcourse players do stupid things. Everybody has to learn. I find it very good if people warn teammembers politely against stupid misstakes. They can expect a compliment from me. It is up to the player to follow it or not.

[OiMateYouSankMyBattleShp]

Plays for fun, and fun only when my fun drys out I'll be gone quick and do something else with my time. Would be nice if more people would play for fun and be less salty in chat if they would lose.

[Loran_Battle]

Really difficult to say. I do NOT like people that use "I play for fun" as an excuse to not try to learn or win or anything. Too many people do in my opinion.

 

For me personally it is even difficult to say what is "fun". I like winning, sure. But winning 12-2 in 8 minutes without doing too much (or even having 6 kils or so in that) is not fun either. I get actually pissed off at the enemy team. I often even ask the enemy to come attack me in those instances. Cause those games are boring, and you can see it happening in the first 2 minutes (your team gets all 3 caps, the enemy is just 10km behind any of the caps for example).

 

I need divisions. I have played alone (lately in co-op even), but in general I don't have much fun playing alone. Nothing to do with winning/losing.

 

Bad plays by allies (and even enemies) can be unfun for me. Looking at Surmaaja saying that he wants to carry a team... well I don't really want that too often. Sometimes I just want to simply play and not having to do all my best to carry my team all the time. That gets me waaaay too stressed out.

 

All that being said: People have the freedom to do whatever they do... BUT, that freedom is constricted to NOT screw up the fun of other players. Like teamkillers for example. Or the people suiciding through the middle of Two Brothers cause "its fun". I cannot believe it is really funny, because you just die fast.

 

[Hedgehog1963]

I agree with OP on all points and I can offer proof.  In the games where I've invested money and time over the last five years my stats are pretty average, hovering either side of a 50% WR.  If I needed to win more I'd have to leave and find something else to play I'm better at.

[thestaggy]

Winning is fun ergo I play to win.

 

I do what I can to ensure my team has the best chance of winning. As with WoT, I lack the ability to consistently carry teams so I instead do my best to pull my own weight, setting targets to deal my own HP in damage and sink at least one ship. Also, as a BB player, I ensure that my team can use my armour and HP as well, so I don't hang back and snipe, I look to get as close to the enemy as possible so long as I am afforded support. As this is a team game, I expect the same of my ''allies''.

 

A side note here; I also favour active gameplay over inactive gameplay, so I am the type of player that will try and ''force'' a win or ''force'' an engagement and not the type that will let the game come to them. It is possible that my own way of playing can cause defeats and that I should head my own advice (below).

 

If people want to try weird things they can go do that in Co-Op. There are 11 other people in a random game and their gaming experience is affected by your actions or inaction.

[Syrchalis]

Winning and improving is fun to me. I don't always go for the win, because it's not always fun to do so. If winning means sitting behind an island for 5 minutes I might not do it.

 

I'm currently not even playing WoWs because it's no fun for me.

[Flavio1997]

Really difficult to say. I do NOT like people that use "I play for fun" as an excuse to not try to learn or win or anything. Too many people do in my opinion.

 

For me personally it is even difficult to say what is "fun". I like winning, sure. But winning 12-2 in 8 minutes without doing too much (or even having 6 kils or so in that) is not fun either. I get actually pissed off at the enemy team. I often even ask the enemy to come attack me in those instances. Cause those games are boring, and you can see it happening in the first 2 minutes (your team gets all 3 caps, the enemy is just 10km behind any of the caps for example).

 

I need divisions. I have played alone (lately in co-op even), but in general I don't have much fun playing alone. Nothing to do with winning/losing.

 

Bad plays by allies (and even enemies) can be unfun for me. Looking at Surmaaja saying that he wants to carry a team... well I don't really want that too often. Sometimes I just want to simply play and not having to do all my best to carry my team all the time. That gets me waaaay too stressed out.

 

All that being said: People have the freedom to do whatever they do... BUT, that freedom is constricted to NOT screw up the fun of other players. Like teamkillers for example. Or the people suiciding through the middle of Two Brothers cause "its fun". I cannot believe it is really funny, because you just die fast.

 

that is my same idea ( a part for the fact that i play alone). Many times this week i said in the game chat: that wasn't fun ! When we WON 12-2. On the  other hand i love when  you have that tight battle that are close up until the last salvo!

[YukiEiriKun]

The more of these threads and vids I see, the more fun I'll have sailing through the gap in two brothers shouting YOLO to all.

 

I play for fun.

 

For me fun is good battle. Winning after a good battle is bonus.

 

Good battle can be what ever rocks my boat at that spesific moment. It could be division-YOLO, or it could be stealthy cap or push with BB's.

 

But it will never be "tactical" snieping from the back row. Nor anything pre-planned. I'm not proactive person, I'm reactive and I go with the flow.

[Venatacia]

I saw that video and made a comment. I too like playing for fun and do like to win as you said OP but it's not the end goal, more about the fun you have to the end goal. Also I understand that other people fun might be slightly different to mine. Which is why I can't understand why we need stats to have fun, why we need a win rate because most people playing for fun don't care about stat and win rate. Win rate and stats are for competition.

 

This is what makes myself angry in matches when you see other people doing silly things like in Jingles video. You can't really be angry with them because they are having their fun their way. Now if I didn't have a win rate I wouldn't care if people go off and do their own thing for fun, but because WG give us stats and win rate and people do go and do silly things it's makes you angry at them because you know deep down they have messed your team up and your silly win rate. This is why playing for fun turns into playing for frustration and why you see so many people having a go at people.

 

Edit. Problem I see with WG is this. They think random battles are for fun and clan battles are for serious competition. That's are only two choices. But there needs to be other choices, there are people who don't care about team work or winning like in Jingles video but they are mixed in with others like the OP and myself, who like to play for fun and our fun is trying to win but not the end of the world if we do or not, long as we have had a team that tries to win. Does any of this make sense ?.

 

[Surmaaja]

Does any of this make sense ?.

Atleast for me, stats are a tool to measure my own progression. If there was no stats system, even a private one I doubt I'd be playing this game.

 

No sensible person cares about random person's stats in a random match. If you start worrying about your winrate and other stats just remember: no-one gives a crap about your stats.

The reason why people bring stats up in games and forums is because the person is arrogant, unwilling to accept mistakes and pretends to know better than others. It's far too common to cry for nerfs than ask for help.

[Culiacan_Mexico]

 What does “playing for fun” mean to different kinds of players? 

 

Each game I am interested in three things:

 

Having fun.

Causing damage.

Sinking ships.

 

Fun = winning.

 

Winning is the only thing that truly matters.

[WhiskeyWolf]

fun

 

[Venatacia]

 

 

​That made me laugh so much. Love that film.

[Sophia_Mus]

 

Well to me the important thing is not to destroy the fun of my fellow teammates. As such I play in coop mode 95%

of the time, (as I am a very bad random player). In that mode I can have fun=winning and even feel that I did make

a contribution, which is the direct opposite of when I am forced by WG to play random in order to complete ARP-Missions,

and the like.

However the definition of having fun is purely individual and as such can't be put into a formular and quantified.

But one thing is clear ALL PLAYERS SHOULD BE ALLOWED TO HAVE FUN, at least as long as it doesn't effectively

harm your team directly. If I as a horrible random player were to participate in random battles without reason, (missions),

no one would have any fun of it. A permanent acces to the training room, (where you can try everything without any worries), could be a solution,

as players who would like to try something fun could do so there without harming their team.

Go play the game mates and have as much fun as possible for your own and your fellow teammates sake.

[damo74]

[ThePurpleSmurf]

 It's only a game if you win but if you lose it's a stinking waste of time.

 

[olmedreca]

Obviously there is no need to tryhard all the time. That said, if you are going to YOLO suicide into enemy at start of match, then you are about as good teammate as merry fellows AFKer and BOT whom everyone loves to have in their team.

[KarmaQU_EU]

I think that "fun" is a luxury. I do not believe there can ever be a perfect, ideal, utopian game where there is nothing but "fun". In an unequal world, only the smart and the strong can afford to achieve "fun", after they transcend the mundane level of tedium. Even so, they cannot ever gain pure and pristine "fun". One must abandon and leave behind many things to even approach that untainted level. Being stronger only aids them in still having a support after they abandon prior prejudice. But even that is but for themselves, and only the truly strong can bring others with them. Thus what "fun" there does exist should be valued, and cherished, for it is sacred and rare. Only the most pristine of memories stay, evident of their ultimate nature. It's why when we do have fun, we will remember it clearly, forever. And forever, will we never cease our pursuit for it, and ourselves doth strengthen, whilst respecting this same longing in others, and all that it entails.

 

Before I retired from WoWs, I didn't have near-top 85% wr as one of the only AS Hakuryu for nothing. (Instead of the more commonly played "strike" decks).

[Syrchalis]

I think that "fun" is a luxury. I do not believe there can ever be a perfect, ideal, utopian game where there is nothing but "fun". In an unequal world, only the smart and the strong can afford to achieve "fun", after they transcend the mundane level of tedium. Even so, they cannot ever gain pure and pristine "fun". One must abandon and leave behind many things to even approach that untainted level. Being stronger only aids them in still having a support after they abandon prior prejudice. But even that is but for themselves, and only the truly strong can bring others with them. Thus what "fun" there does exist should be valued, and cherished, for it is sacred and rare. Only the most pristine of memories stay, evident of their ultimate nature. It's why when we do have fun, we will remember it clearly, forever. And forever, will we never cease our pursuit for it, and ourselves doth strengthen, whilst respecting this same longing in others, and all that it entails.

 

I see that applying to life, but not games. If you don't manage to make your game fun in most circumstances you failed as a game developer or as a customer. Here are some legit reasons why there might be a lack of fun in the game (developer and consumer can both be at fault):

• The game focuses too much on extrinsic rewards (items, loot, xp, achievements, prestige) (developer fault)
• The game tries to appeal to too many audiences (developer fault)
• There is no compelling gameplay (developer fault)
• Lack of balance (developer fault)
• The difficulty level is wrong (developer and customer fault)
• You bought a game with gameplay that doesn't appeal to you (customer fault)
• You're not actually in the mood for this game (customer fault)
• You expected too much or got hyped (customer fault)

Those are just some examples, but you already see that there are some more on the developers side - for a reason. You definitely can make a game be fun most of the time. E.g. Minecraft - if I play that, I have fun pretty much ALL the time, even doing something a bit tedious. Because it's maybe a bit tedious yet still fun.