EPTOn July 25 2011 10:26 TheBeau wrote:
I think you also have to consider who the criticism is coming from. It's obviously harder on the internet to see what credentials any commenter or player has when they criticise you, and I think that plays a big part too. It's somewhat similar to your point about not attacking the person but I think the difference is that it affects your reaction. No one appreciates being criticised by those who they believe are or performed significantly worse than them.
You can argue your criticism is perfectly valid, which it may be and is usually true, but the fact you are not 'on their level' is what, I think, will cause people to explode. Unfortunately, there's not much you can do here, even the best criticism can be ignored. My point here is that you can accept criticism from a friend, but not listen to it because you think yourself better than them. Whilst you may not accept nor listen to a stranger who you believe yourself better than. Personally, I believe that people (on the internet) are much more likely to listen to criticism from people who are significantly more skilled than them or at least at the same level, regardless of quality or positivity.
I also couldn't help but notice the HoN/DotA references whilst reading. My problem with criticism in those type of games where there are things which you cannot explain and go far beyond things like "harassment" or just "positioning", vague terms which don't really contribute to improving (I imagine you would agree here, not trying to call you out on an example). However it is supposedly unfair to criticise someone by saying, "You just don't get it" even though it may be completely true (There are times when it is not of course!).
For example, in Football (soccer) I can't really say "you're kicking it wrong" nor can I explain how I'm able to be better (I'm not it's just an example
), it's just a feeling I get that has come naturally and with experience. This feeling is probably what has given rise to the quite amusing term "gamesense", though people would have you believe it's some sort of in-game telepathy.
Personally, I think it's really difficult to write a 'guide' on criticism because of how different people are and how they won't react as you might expect, so props to you. Following the guidelines you've set out will undoubtedly result in less rage but there always those who react differently. I enjoyed reading nonetheless and I hope you continue.
I think you also have to consider who the criticism is coming from. It's obviously harder on the internet to see what credentials any commenter or player has when they criticise you, and I think that plays a big part too. It's somewhat similar to your point about not attacking the person but I think the difference is that it affects your reaction. No one appreciates being criticised by those who they believe are or performed significantly worse than them.
You can argue your criticism is perfectly valid, which it may be and is usually true, but the fact you are not 'on their level' is what, I think, will cause people to explode. Unfortunately, there's not much you can do here, even the best criticism can be ignored. My point here is that you can accept criticism from a friend, but not listen to it because you think yourself better than them. Whilst you may not accept nor listen to a stranger who you believe yourself better than. Personally, I believe that people (on the internet) are much more likely to listen to criticism from people who are significantly more skilled than them or at least at the same level, regardless of quality or positivity.
I also couldn't help but notice the HoN/DotA references whilst reading. My problem with criticism in those type of games where there are things which you cannot explain and go far beyond things like "harassment" or just "positioning", vague terms which don't really contribute to improving (I imagine you would agree here, not trying to call you out on an example). However it is supposedly unfair to criticise someone by saying, "You just don't get it" even though it may be completely true (There are times when it is not of course!).
For example, in Football (soccer) I can't really say "you're kicking it wrong" nor can I explain how I'm able to be better (I'm not it's just an example
), it's just a feeling I get that has come naturally and with experience. This feeling is probably what has given rise to the quite amusing term "gamesense", though people would have you believe it's some sort of in-game telepathy.Personally, I think it's really difficult to write a 'guide' on criticism because of how different people are and how they won't react as you might expect, so props to you. Following the guidelines you've set out will undoubtedly result in less rage but there always those who react differently. I enjoyed reading nonetheless and I hope you continue.
Will be in another part on "how to receive/ask for advice".
I wrote about the idea of giving criticisms and how the person would receive it. If you give someone tips but your background is poor, no matter what you say; they will deflect and stubbornly disagree without compromise or intent on actually learning. To which you should just give up, not because he is a lost cause but because your position is neither appreciated nor ultimately changing anything in the end. The fact that you cared enough to help, should be sufficient to tie you over or moving towards another game someone else. In due time, that person will realize he might need some help and you can be there if he ever refers to you.
I think when you get criticism that you can respectfully acknowledge, you should do just that. Give them the decency of acknowledgement and then simply claim you respectfully disagree (with as much justified details as you want) or end there. Criticisms were/are meant to help, of course it depends on the person :B
I used HoN as an example a lot because it is very hard to decipher communication there. People will criticize you with vague lines such as: "You didn't harass enough or at this engagement, you fucked up". But I mention in the entry that without detail or a specific solution, the ultimate point of the criticism is lost. I've had a lot of people tell me these similar lines and when I press for more details or information, they'd give me a cop-out such as: "Don't suck" or something that is intentionally ambiguous and passive-aggressive, you can then safely discredit the person and emotionally distraught after a loss. That doesn't mean the loss of a match wasn't in part or fully your fault. But to understand why it is your fault, you might have to seek advice elsewhere (someone unassociated with the event, will be in my next part). Often times, HoN players will simply blame one person or scenario that was the "turning point" of the game and ultimately leading towards one failure because it is easier to identify one crucial mistake from another, than collectively admit that a series of problems lead to your demise. Blaming or scapegoating isn't something uncommon as I'm sure you know.
In the end it's a guide. A bar in case you have trouble going up the steps of voicing yourself clearly and with a respectable tone/intent. Those who like it can use it and those who don't can safely move on without a problem.
Thanks a lot for your viewpoint, it was enlightening! I hope I was clear in my response too!
