|
This is something that has interested me for a while now and it has to do with something very specific to Starcraft 2. Even other Blizzard games don't suffer from as much fear and anticipation of the 'next game' as Starcraft 2 is capable of generating. Why is that?
Well, I have a theory or rather, several pieces of information that look very neat together.
Keep in mind while reading this that I don't think the game needs to change. The game is teaching me patience. Huge quantities of patience. Sometimes I fall apart after just a few games and sometimes I can go all night. If you want to know how to avoid Tilt, you have to know why it happens. Being aware of each of these factors can allow you to consciously direct your mind away from certain lines of thought. The other player is not a cheating bastard. The units are not imbalanced.
I will list a few characteristics of other games which are present to help players deal with losing and encourage them to come back into the game.
1.To the victor go the spoils...and a little something for the loser too.
In Diablo 2, Call of Duty (pretty much all of the recent ones), and any one of a list of recent games there is a particular reward simply for playing. Even Team Fortress 2 rewards you for just staying in the game with regular drops so long as you're contributing a kill once in a while.
World of Warcraft is perhaps the apex of this idea. Even into the late game it is very difficult to just 'die completely'. You can't ever lose everything you owned from death and even if you die, you still gain a bit of experience. Starcraft 2 is very 'one or the other'. Death and loss or triumph and supreme domination. You get some points or you lose some but there is no middle ground.
2.Defeat costs nothing.
There is a certain creativity to assembling a functional base and organizing a strategy. If it works, it is the best feeling in the world. If it doesn't, it can feel like an indictment of your creativity and flexibility as a player. The 'replay' function feels like a looming weight hanging over your head, ready to show your every failing.
If you lose in Team Fortress or even World of Warcraft, you can quickly slip back to the situation you were in and try a new tactic. Starcraft doesn't allow you to do this. Every game will be completely different and losing costs you the entire build-up to the situation you were in.
3.Failure is a private thing.
Nobody can see how many times you've had your face ground into the dust at the click of a single button in Diablo 2. Win/Loss records are private in Team Fortress 2. World of Warcraft won't give away how many games you've lost in a row. You can be TERRIBLE and people will still play with you even if you suck miserably.
Starcraft has these right out there in public. Every crushing defeat is there to be mocked by the public at large.
4.God is touchable.
The most heavily kitted out World of Warcraft warrior with the absolute best armor he can possibly have can still be killed by a slightly crap mage of near equal level in the right circumstances. The longest running player of Team Fortress 2 will always die to a bullet in the head from a Sniper rifle or prolonged fire from the other end of the map. In Call of Duty, even the best cannot weather a hail of bullets.
In Starcraft 2, the odds that Mr.Bronzey Mc-Spacky pants is EVER going to kill Huk or Jinro are approximately zero. It just will not happen. The distance between a player like Idra or Huk and the lowest level Bronze player is so massive that persevering to improve feels like pissing off Niagra Falls. You won't ever 'get lucky' and manage to kill these player.
5.If I'm not winning then I can just go hang with friends! (this section is temporary until chat rooms are implemented)
Starcraft 2 is not a social game right now. It's a game of strict combat. You can't just sit and observe others playing or converse with them in large part.
The Public Test Realms allowed players to interact and to gather up a group of people to just come and enjoy watching another player's game. It was huge fun sitting and casting games while they were going on, describing the tactics and going over each element. You learn a lot from it. It's also very friendly.
This friendly interaction takes the competition down a notch and encourages experimentation and exchange of ideas. It makes players feel less isolated with their failures if they can head into a chatroom and say 'Damn, I screwed up'.
6.Losing requires no loss of pride.
Starcraft 2 requires you to surrender. No other major multi-player game I can think of off the top of my head except perhaps Warcraft 3 requires a surrender button to end the game quickly. You are either killed or you win. Surrender is a very powerful idea. It acknowledges defeat so complete that you don't even want to see the end of the battle.
This surrender is not just the loss of your base but of pride and of the effort you put in. In Starcraft 2 you can continue to play after the point you have been beaten, but the only reason to do so is to make the other player hate you.
--------------------------------------
Taken individually none of these things would make a player feel particularly uncomfortable but together they can add up to a sports event level feeling of pressure to perform. There are plenty of threads on how to 'deal' with Tilt but not many on why tilt happens so heavily in SC2. I figured the information might be helpful. None of these things is BAD for the game. This game will teach you not to fear failing. It just takes time. {edit to remove statements about chess}
|
Every game will be completely different and losing costs you the entire build-up to the situation you were in.
This is what makes this game so difficult, really. It's kind of like life, you can never be prepared for everything. The game is very bittersweet, though. Immense satisfaction upon victory, as it is the culmination of you focus, skill, planning whereas defeat is sometimes the worst because a single mistake can potentially lose you the game.
|
"Death and loss or triumph and supreme domination. You get some points or you lose some but there is no middle ground. "
Blizzard does award points for losses, hence the point inflation, in an attempt to reward players for losses as well. Is it effective? Probably not since I still usually hate myself after losing.
|
Mostly agree I suppose, but I'm going to have to disagree on the "God is touchable" point.
Noobs aren't going to be killing the TLO's of Call of Duty. Ever.
And if they did, it would be like a noob killing one zergling, but losing 50 - still not a shot in hell of victory.
Hopefully the social aspect is improved with chat rooms and group replays.
|
On January 03 2011 17:08 o29 wrote:
"Death and loss or triumph and supreme domination. You get some points or you lose some but there is no middle ground. "
Blizzard does award points for losses, hence the point inflation, in an attempt to reward players for losses as well. Is it effective? Probably not since I still usually hate myself after losing.
The point inflation still only comes into effect when a player wins games. If you go 0-100, all the bonus pool in the world won't do you any good.
I think this point holds water
|
In tournament chess, no one actually gets checkmated. People resign just like in Starcraft. I think every point you listed works against chess as well, yet I don't really know any tilt monkeys in chess.
|
On January 03 2011 17:08 o29 wrote:
Blizzard does award points for losses,
Wait...did I miss something?
Awesome OP. That sums it up nice and clear. This explains why I sometimes only play a single game all day and watch streams instead of playing myself. Or play custom games instead of laddering.
|
I think also the fact that people over time get closer and closer to a 50% win rate when they are very good. I know that some people like games they are talented at because they just roflstomp people over 90% of the time and they get joy out of crushing people. In this game there are few times where a person feels like they are unbeatable for a day, and not even the best can feel invincible. Every battle is suppose to be a challenge as you progress, where in other games you have the option of going on rampages against noobs. People that are really good at games also tend to be biased towards their play and the play of others (saying their loss was noob luck by the opponent and that their victories were deserved skilled wins). With a win rate between 30-70% people who play a lot are bound to have rough patches that also makes them tilt more and more.
|
On January 03 2011 17:13 alphafuzard wrote:Show nested quote +On January 03 2011 17:08 o29 wrote:
"Death and loss or triumph and supreme domination. You get some points or you lose some but there is no middle ground. "
Blizzard does award points for losses, hence the point inflation, in an attempt to reward players for losses as well. Is it effective? Probably not since I still usually hate myself after losing. The point inflation still only comes into effect when a player wins games. If you go 0-100, all the bonus pool in the world won't do you any good. I think this point holds water
Right, but it still gives players a reward just for playing more frequently. Even after a losing session you'll still often gain more points than you lost. It's just that you're often much more aware of the fact that you went 5-10 than you are that you ultimately just gained 50 points.
On January 03 2011 17:16 Semtext wrote:Wait...did I miss something?
Sorry, I stated that kind of strangely. By playing more frequently you'll gain points most of the time regardless of whether you came out with a winning record. So losses indirectly contribute to gaining points and therefore rank.
|
I really like this right up on tilt, gj
|
On January 03 2011 17:02 Twistacles wrote:
Every game will be completely different and losing costs you the entire build-up to the situation you were in.
This is what makes this game so difficult, really. It's kind of like life, you can never be prepared for everything. The game is very bittersweet, though. Immense satisfaction upon victory, as it is the culmination of you focus, skill, planning whereas defeat is sometimes the worst because a single mistake can potentially lose you the game.
If I'm understanding this correctly it's EXACTLY why I will tilt during/after a losing streak. It has little to do with everything else in the list with the exception of God Is Touchable, and Loss of Pride..
The main reason I'll tilt, is because of the quote above. It's because you work so hard to have impeccable timings, a perfect economy/army balance ratio, and etc. . . then something flips the game on its end and you're dead. All the time you spent in that game and your base is ruined, your army dead, and you lose. Bam. Just like that, the effort you put into the match is erased like it never happened except for some -points at the score screen.
God Is Touchable:
When I'm paired with someone who just kicks my ass hard, I feel completely helpless up until I gg. It's massively frustrating to know you're losing and there's very, very little you can do to stop it. This period of time can be mere moments, or last 10 minutes while my opponent sits in his base and puts the finishing touches on his devious master-plan. (muahahah?)
Loss of Pride:
I mean, it may be some guy I'll never (or rarely) be matched up with again. . . but I have to admit he's better than I am. Stupid, but as the loading screen comes up I'm sitting there thinking "Yeah! this guy is a stupid newb, I'm gonna wreck him!" I get all into that mindset and then have to kind of weakly whimper out a gg if I lose.
Only other one I want to touch on is Losing Is Private. I really think it IS a private thing in SC2. Granted, your record is on display for anyone to see over at SC2Ranks or in-game... However, losing is a private feeling because only YOU screwed up. Just you, and nobody else. Now you get to go watch the replay and see why your play didn't measure up. In 1v1, your team wasn't filled with idiots like it can be in other games. You're all alone against big scary red player on the other side of the map, and the outcome will reflect what you do. Losing in SC is very private.
My friends don't care if I have a couple losses in a row, they just want to play. So the public w/l doesn't mean much to me specifically. To others it might though.
I will agree 100% that the starcraft experience is unique to video games IMO. Lose or win at COD, Diablo, War3, whatever. Those games never bugged me much. But SC. . . wow, yeah it's crazy the ups and downs you feel after a match or in the heat of battle. Lose, and you drag your feet back to find match feeling like a total newb. Win, and you feel like the god of video games! Haha. So odd.
|
On January 03 2011 16:25 chessiecat wrote:
Even Chess requires that the other player defeat you before the game can end.
Just want to point out that surrender exists in Chess too, and is fairly common when a player recognizes a clearly lost position.
|
I don't think a game should be designed to induce the so called "tilt" this profoundly. Not for the non-pro at least.
I don't mean this in the general sense that a game should be noob-fest and I like SCII for this unique intensity. What I don't like is, the competition on ladder feels real at every skill level. What really should be is imho, bronze should be comparably light hearted to gold or whatever and so on. If you consider what's going on in games at low levels, it's quite laughable compared to high level games. What actually happens though is quite the opposite. While most diamond players are humbled out, calm and respectful, bronze is a rage fest. Therefore when a diamond guy tilts, most of the time it means something. On lower leagues though, it's stupid childish bm and kills most of the fun for serious grown up people who want a decent game with a presumably equal match.
I think this is a design fault and strengthens the general assumption that competition in a video game is for children.
My 50 year old dad plays quake and ut online, I got him into some team fortress and battlefield too. He plays chess and other competitive adult games IRL. However this guy running companies for 25 years couldn't be bothered with SCII ladder and admitted later he didn't have the nerves for it.
|
Hahaha I can sense some weak RTS souls in this thread.
What's the proposed solution? Anything introduced to the game to change it is...not a very appealing idea.
I think it's just an attitude problem. People tilt in all games. You could, for example, repeatedly lose a duel to the same guy in WoW, or never be able to complete a certain raid encounter. In WoW you change this by playing more and getting more, better equipment. You might change your spec.
In SC2 you do this by watching replays and playing more. It's the same general idea, and playing more in both games leads to improvement. It's bad attitude that leads to constant losses.
|
No solution. People need to know this stuff and why it happens and why they're affected the way they are. I didn't write this thread to complain. It's to just explain.
|
On January 03 2011 19:16 wherebugsgo wrote:
Hahaha I can sense some weak RTS souls in this thread.
What's the proposed solution? Anything introduced to the game to change it is...not a very appealing idea.
I think it's just an attitude problem. People tilt in all games. You could, for example, repeatedly lose a duel to the same guy in WoW, or never be able to complete a certain raid encounter. In WoW you change this by playing more and getting more, better equipment. You might change your spec.
In SC2 you do this by watching replays and playing more. It's the same general idea, and playing more in both games leads to improvement. It's bad attitude that leads to constant losses.
Actually you are right. I just felt sorry for my dad, lol.
|
I think an easy way to some-what remedy this situation would be for blizz to include a set of achievements which reward you simply for having played the game.
For instance, win or lose, if you play in 1000 ranked matches you unlock something new. Although I think the reward needs to be a bit cooler than a portrait, maybe they could unlock unique unit skins, or maybe even new units to use in the single player campaign or against an AI in a skirmish match.
I would also like to see a huge slew of achievements dedicated to rewarding creative play. There are already a few of them such as 'kill x amount of units with 1 high templar' but they should really extend it to all sorts of units, like 10 kill streak and 20 kill streak rewards for ALL units, and you can unlock something cool like that. This way even if you're in a losing situation, you may feel encouraged for instance to take a dark templar on a ninja raid and try to rack up kills for his kill-streak achievement. They could also include things like 'win a game without building unit x' where x could be something like a marine or a mule or a roach.
|
On January 03 2011 17:16 huameng wrote:
In tournament chess, no one actually gets checkmated. People resign just like in Starcraft. I think every point you listed works against chess as well, yet I don't really know any tilt monkeys in chess.
I think the difference is that Chess is a game of perfect information with no sudden surprises, and it's those surprises that trigger tilt. Unless you're really bad at Chess, you're never going to go from thinking you're going to win to being checkmated instantly. In Starcraft, you can go from playing a seemingly perfect game to dead from DTs in a second. In poker, you can get the money in good and lose to a 1 in 990 runner-runner.
|
On January 03 2011 19:45 ShadowDrgn wrote:Show nested quote +On January 03 2011 17:16 huameng wrote:
In tournament chess, no one actually gets checkmated. People resign just like in Starcraft. I think every point you listed works against chess as well, yet I don't really know any tilt monkeys in chess. I think the difference is that Chess is a game of perfect information with no sudden surprises, and it's those surprises that trigger tilt. Unless you're really bad at Chess, you're never going to go from thinking you're going to win to being checkmated instantly. In Starcraft, you can go from playing a seemingly perfect game to dead from DTs in a second. In poker, you can get the money in good and lose to a 1 in 990 runner-runner.
I understand what you're trying to say, but I have to disagree with your direct comparison between poker and starcraft. In a game of starcraft, if you think you were playing perfectly and then get owned by dts, fact is you weren't playing perfectly because you didn't account for the possibility of dt by either scouting and ruling it out, or preparing blindly (scouting is always better, preparing blindly sadly must be done sometimes despite its suboptimal efficiency).
In poker, when you get your money in good, you're good. You played perfectly. Your fate is now up to the luck of whatever cards come off the deck next. There is a distinct difference between SC and poker in this respect.
|
The fact that playing SC2 requires an investment (time and energy) with possibly no return (=loss) makes the game intriguing. The emotions evolved add a dimension. Whenever I rage it sucks at that moment but right now I'm smiling about it.
Oh yeah, and just do pushups after a loss that makes you rage. The endomorphins will actually make you feel better and you'll be actually working out quite a lot (my record: 300 pushups in two days). That turns every game into a win-win scenario 
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
