Re: Player Ethics, e.g. Olympia From: desj@ccr-p.ida.org (David desJardins) Date: Thu, 21 Mar 1996 00:00:00 +0000 Mark Hendrickson <mrhendri@aldebaran.oac.uci.edu> writes: > In other words, if someone attacks my game entity, & I experience > this attack as an attack on Mark, then I've failed to differentiate > myself & my game entity. The inability to differentiate between something that happens in a game (e.g., another player attacking your position and killing your nobles), and an attack on you yourself (e.g., someone punching you in the nose), is indeed a sign of a serious psychological disorder. As far as I can tell, no players in Olympia suffer from such problems. If there are such players, I haven't encountered them. > Inversely, if my game entity does well & I think that this means that > I have done well, I've made the same mistake. This, on the other hand, is a completely different matter. The very essence of a game of skill is that good play tends to produces good results. If your goal in playing the game is for your position to prosper, and you, through skillful play, achieve this result, I don't understand why you would not be pleased with that result. The essence of strategy gaming is that players attempt to optimize their play, in a game of skill, to achieve the best possible results. This is as opposed to role playing, in which players do not necessarily attempt to achieve the best possible results, but attempt to play according to a role that they have chosen for themselves, and may choose actions which produce less good results but which conform better to the role. Being interested in strategy gaming does not indicate a psychological problem. David desJardins -- Copyright 1996 David desJardins. Unlimited permission is granted to quote from this posting for non-commercial use as long as attribution is given. Up