So to start a new discussion that has been running through my mind a lot recently. There are two types of games, both usually involve a level of skill and grind, the ratio varies leaning to one side or the other. I've found myself contemplating this often, as a long-time on/off Runescape player, a very grind based game with a small ratio of skill in certain activates vs other games I enjoy such as Poxnora (and chess). As I can't bring myself to play RPGs anymore due to the feeling that I gain no actual skill or any mental exercise from such games, but then you realize how much fun it is regardless. with Poxnora, it is a very skill based game, now there is a grind ratio involved aka practice; But it certainly doesn't feel like a grind. (same for chess, theory study is very tedious, but practicing by playing is always enjoyable) ( Also same for games like league of legends) With Runescape/RPG, they are very grind-based, you need to train to achieve, and the training does feel tedious; but at the end you feel joy for achieving said goals. Furthermore, a very depressing reality of RPGs is the exact predictive Level to Hour ratio, you can know exactly how many hours it will take you to reach X level. It's just a matter of putting in the time. While with skill games it's much more realistic in terms of success, people learn at different rates, and there is no guarantee you will ever reach the top level end game. (League of legends ranks under this as well) Assuming you don't play in an unhealthy manner ( 24/7 no life), which is much more common in grind games than skill games. Do both games rank the same in terms of "is this game worth my time"? As in equally useless to your real-life success / equally useful to your real life happiness EDIT : (Not important to argument) Interestingly enough a following thought I had after writing this was how very similar this argument is to Sport vs Gym ( though realistically young people will do both if able) But if you had to choose one the concept would be similar, Sport = skill, might never reach peak Gym= Grind, just a matter of putting in the time ( not peak as in gene/drug pool top level, but a perfect physical state in terms of your body specifically.)
what I find curious is how competitive games generate a feeling of accomplishment in people. whatever it is youre doing, as long as you are doing it better than some other person its considered a 'worthwhile' activity. does anyone ever climb to the top of a mountain just to enjoy the accomplishment for themselves, or is it a waste of time unless you take a selfie and post it to your facebook page?
We're just genetically very competitive, even the idea of being successful, why do you want to be successful? logically to provide for your future/current family. Privately in the part of your mind you keep to yourself, to be better than other people, so people can somewhat respect your accomplishment. Of course, the idea of dropping the ego and being one with the self or however the philosophers put it is all great and dandy, and very admirable in it's own right ( which is ironic, because if you achieve such a state you wouldn't care if it was or not) But that's just not what comes naturally to us. Additionally, I think competitiveness gives great drive in learning hobbies, I mean everything I ever got good at in life (including thing I didn't even like such as math) was to out perform other people due to one thing or another. Without such drive we may all just do what we enjoy, at a very casual level, and lets face it; Not much important discoveries or progresses of human civilianization was caused by anyone casually doing anything. So ye, I guess competitiveness and the ego is a necessary evil to greatness. Ironically enough, once you reach said talent achieved by ego/competitiveness, then higher greatness/respect is gained by dropping the ego that took you so far. If there is a god, he truly is one of humor.
so when one is in that fog looking for a new game, what is it they are really looking for? I agree with what you said, and would suggest that the playerbase > the gameplay when it comes to satisfying the ego. how many threads have I read on Steam titled 'is this game dead', citing the players on line and ignoring the update history. but just popularity isn't enough either. millions play angry birds but I couldn't care less about that game. it has to be the 'right kind' of playerbase. so what kind of playerbase are you looking for?
Very good question, I never even considered that when thinking of games honestly. But I think it strays to a different topic of game types involving competitive vs none competitive games.,or maybe community centric vs lone wolf type games I'm not even sure honestly. This thread I'm more so trying to answer Skill vs Grind, which I suppose is a comparative question of A) Would you rather beat other people, to become better/best, hence in some sense beat the game. (skill) B) Beat the game (progess/level up), out progress other people, hence slowly being superior to other people as a result of beating the game. (Mindless grind) And the fact that option B logically seems like a bigger waste of time then option A, just because a skill based game would at the very least offer some sort of mental exercise. But is it really?
whether something is a grind or not is relative. games like hearthstone for example feel like a skill based competitive game to me early on as I'm figuring out deck construction and building my collection. but once ive gotten those things down, my ranking is more of a factor of how many times a day I'm willing to play, which to me feels like a grind, at which point I get bored and stop playing. but I play game like hearthstone like a hermit. I could be playing vs the AI for all I know. I'm not keyed into the community, or play in the tournaments etc. I dont make the effort to become part of the 'competitive playerbase'. I tend to lose my identity in big popular games like that. so perhaps that skill vs grind feeling is tied to how social you are with the other players.
Well sir, consider me enlightened with a new perspective. Here I was stuck in the thought that games inherently had a grind/skill/competitive ratio, but in reality it truly is up to how social you are in the community. As in if you play an RPG and don't talk to anyone, you don't really show anyone your achievements or need to compete so you can sort of enjoy the game and progress on your own pace never burning yourself out or playing when you don't want to. But being social, makes you competitive in that setting. So I guess the question is flawed to begin with, it's not skill vs grind games, it's how do you prefer to play your games; And you can't really say one is better than the other in gameplay sense, since if you play more casually you have more time for other possibly useful activities and if you play aggressively you gain the chance to achieve in the game. So it's a fair trade off of preference. I'm satisfied with this discussion's conclusion, thank you.
Grind is healthy only in pvp mmos, where you have to fight for the spot and only players with better skills (not only actual gameplay-wise, but also social, financial, endurance, etc) are able to progress. And if you can grind any time you want - it's a complete design failure.
well I'm in the same boat as you (I think). the games I'm currently playing are starting to feel very grindy and pointless. if you manage to find a scene that suits you, let me know, I might like it too.
Honestly i'm just really enjoying chess right now, I played on/off since I was a child but never truly joined the "competitive" or even social society, very much the hermit you speak of. But while back I started actually enjoying reading books/studying the game to play better. Very entertaining hobby, in terms of playing whenever you want/don't want each match. I usually play settings to max of 10mins per player (20mins); so it's not very time intensive if I don't want to waste time, and yet If I do I can read/watch videos about it for hours. ( even have a chess set on a small desk behind my main desk to kind of analysis position myself, a lot more entertaining to actually see moves as you read them.) Playing different openings truly feels like the pox equivalent of playing a new BG. Just sometimes when I've worked long hours (or simply currently mentally consumed by another current topic ) and my problem solving side of my brain is completely wiped, I want to play something mindless. ( I guess the grind type of playstyle, though I prefer the skill when I'm capable)
I did that with Chess Fundamentals by Capablanca. But once I understood the concepts of developing pieces, control of the center and how to win certain end game positions I preferred to wing it rather than memorizing a ton of opening positions.
You would enjoy this https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chess960 they have this gamemode on chess.com as well, it's same as normal chess, but every game the minor pieces are rearranged randomly(so no opening theory, just straight gameplay). Bobby Fischer invented it in his crazy old age when he was preaching chess was a boring game of memorization.
To be honest just put Runescape membership on my card again, figured I can play few times a week when I'm tired of chess, and the cash aspect isn't really an issue right now. So I guess, balance.
you could try to play Go for the deep strategy but less mechanical feeling than chess. or shogi, japanese chess. its like chess but you promote pieces and can put into play the pieces you capture, so it opens to a lot more variation
I learned how to play Go from a fellow graduate student from China. Took me 3 years to finally beat him. I was always his b1tch in ping pong though.
