Jump to content


Incompetence = aggression

Useless whine

  • This topic is locked This topic is locked
16 replies to this topic

psykadelisk #1 Posted 10 April 2014 - 06:20 AM

    Sergeant

  • Player
  • 19944 battles
  • 219
  • Member since:
    05-04-2013

http://www.techspot.com/news/56298-study-finds-violent-video-games-dont-make-players-aggressive-non-mastery-of-the-games-do.html

 

Does this explain alot of chat and general discussion forum content? :child:



Etova_Kala #2 Posted 10 April 2014 - 06:36 AM

    Staff Sergeant

  • Player
  • 8568 battles
  • 451
  • Member since:
    05-24-2011
I can definitely notice being more cheesed off after I fail to play on my own level. I'm not a great player by any means but I'm not a complete donkey either, so when I do play like a donkey I tend to rage noticeably more.

Furlock #3 Posted 10 April 2014 - 07:39 AM

    Warrant Officer

  • Player
  • 62162 battles
  • 666
  • [EWOKS] EWOKS
  • Member since:
    08-20-2012

View Postpsykadelisk, on 10 April 2014 - 06:20 AM, said:

 

 

Nice link. +1

 

So if we are allowed to say it, a system that automatically makes losers, produces a lot of rage and harm...



Kalkalash #4 Posted 10 April 2014 - 07:47 AM

    Warrant Officer

  • Beta Tester
  • 23673 battles
  • 500
  • Member since:
    07-09-2010

There was a bit of a contradiction in the text in my opinion. Parts

Block Quote

 As Dr. Andrew Przybylski from the Oxford Internet Institute points out, players have a psychological need to come out on top when playing.

 

Block Quote

 So the next time you’re playing Battlefield 4 or Call of Duty and someone in the chat is livid, it likely has more to do with the fact that they suck at the game than the violence involved.

 

So if you fail to do good, it automatically means you're bad at the game? I would certainly say that failing to come out on top due to any reason is the reason players get angry, not just sucking at the game. I certainly find myself raging more at the failures of others more than my own.



BauermitGewehr #5 Posted 10 April 2014 - 07:47 AM

    Warrant Officer

  • Player
  • 7167 battles
  • 844
  • Member since:
    02-25-2013
As long as someone thinks it "diversifies" a game to have a huge skill gap in every game, it will induce rage.

Cobra6 #6 Posted 10 April 2014 - 08:04 AM

    Field Marshal

  • Beta Tester
  • 16332 battles
  • 15,686
  • [RGT] RGT
  • Member since:
    09-17-2010

I get aggressive at the incompetence of my team-mates.

 

I seriously did notice that playing WoT makes me rage a lot more than for instance War Thunder where your team mates do not influence your income/xp that much as in WoT. In War Thunder if you do well you get rewarded, if you do crap you don't.

 

This is why I pretty much stopped playing WoT, the competence of the general player base is so stunningly low that when I play I have to carry the team in the majority of the matches if I want to win. This is supposed to be a game, not an unpaid job.

 

I love this game and have played it almost full on since closed beta whenever I had time but recently the flame just went out for me. The level of players is just so bad and atrocious, nothing but white and red players in most matches, complete teams leaving important points on the map unguarded, players with 5000 battles that don't know how to angle their tanks, players using their tanks in ways that don't work etc etc.

When I quite playing I had all my stats deep in the purple but my interest faded because the challenge is gone when pretty much everyone you come up against is (far) worse than you.

 

Cobra 6


Edited by Cobra6, 10 April 2014 - 08:11 AM.


anonym_kL7qtn3e52MB #7 Posted 10 April 2014 - 08:21 AM

    Lieutenant General

  • Player
  • 0 battles
  • 6,815
  • Member since:
    07-10-2018

From the article:

 

" If a player feels thwarted by the controls or the design of the game, they can wind up feeling aggressive."

 

 

 

So basically, it's not the people, it's the game mechanics/workings (I would inlcude bugs and glitches too)

 

MM makes me rage

RNG makes me rage

Lag makes me rage

Campers make me rage

AFK players make me rage.

 

 

All provided by WG b.t.w. and not the players of the game.

 


Edited by Costarring, 10 April 2014 - 08:23 AM.


jokobet #8 Posted 10 April 2014 - 08:22 AM

    Warrant Officer

  • Player
  • 31283 battles
  • 653
  • Member since:
    12-03-2012

View PostCobra6, on 10 April 2014 - 09:04 AM, said:

I get aggressive at the incompetence of my team-mates.

 

That's no indicator of how well you play yourself, i.e. it does neither support the research nor go against it. Even the worst players rage about bad teams while not realizing how bad their own play is. Got TKed in a T25/2 by my own arty and his Tiger I friend yesterday on El Hallouf after having done 1.8k dmg and spotting from a very forward passive scouting position when we were outnumbered 1:2. This platoon got so angry that they revealed my position and TKed me - they themselves had done a combined dmg of about 460 and WRs of 46% each.

 

Really, this article is very interesting (though I felt the need to check it itself first).



psykadelisk #9 Posted 10 April 2014 - 09:40 AM

    Sergeant

  • Player
  • 19944 battles
  • 219
  • Member since:
    05-04-2013

I say if the study is near the truth it can explain some levels of players in this game.

With the basics that PvP is a competitive genre or as mentioned in the study in mind "players have a psychological need to come out on top when playing. If a player feels thwarted by the controls or the design of the game, they can wind up feeling aggressive." (wants to win and game mechanics) this is my thoughts:

 

If you truly are bad at this game, you will start to show the aggressive behavior towards both other players and the creators of the game more frequently.

The examples are for example being convinced of conspiracy theories (hate towards WG), always blaming your teams (hate towards others).

At this level you are probably hating alot more everytime you play since you dont know how to progress and probably never will.

Many at these levels are not competitive by nature and many may not even want to get better (play for fun), but when it comes to rage and hate those are most probably competitive persons (incompetent rage).

 

At the same time they will struggle with game mechanics and show agression towards these but in most cases they dont even know how they truly work so its more about incompetence and denial here and they refuse to accept that they are wrong or put an effort to try even google about it.

Some are also to afraid to ask when they dont understand what they read.

I dont mean to flame these people by saying this, but its many times about incompetence and can be solved with better tutorials or at least a ingame easy to understand wiki just as the article say.

 

 

If you are in the middle on the skill level, you will show less frequent aggressive behavior since you understand more often that youre not perfect and cant blame something else everytime. These players might have a more extreme variety from day to day between aggression and calm and may sometimes even question the bad players claimed reasons such as the conspiracy theories if they might not be true after all. The ones here that gets their common sense back without getting stuck in denial will shake that state of mind of themselves and progress a bit more but will instead show aggression when they frequently discover their own mistakes.

Most is competitive players here, but they havent suffered the same way as the bad ones since they win a bit more but also wouldnt mind to get better.

 

These players know more about game mechanics and show more frustration towards something that is working as intended but not as they wish but also medium probability that they havent understood it completely correct yet but some does learn more and progress further. Random rage justified or not but they will occur when not doing well.

 

 

At the top level of the skill ladder, you will definitely not be spared from aggressive behavior. You have passed the earlier levels by learning and adjusting your mistakes so the aggression here is not about the same things as before. Here you will still show aggression from time to time towards your teams but the probability is higher that you have true reasons where the teams are really bad. Conspiracy theories are rare around these players.

There is full of competitive players here, some less serious than others. The most serious will tend to rage more often than the less serious when other players comment on their playstyle or if someone contribute to a loss. Some will also be arrogant but some is also humble.

 

These players know all game mechanics well, they will show aggression for complete different reasons than the other groups towards them. We have anything from RNG with low pen/dmg rolls that mess up that most important shot in the game to camping high camo/alpha TDs. They will be interested in development of mechanics and understand how they change when they change.

 

 

That being said, all are humans, every group has it share of bad sportmanship, arrogance and egoism, the picking goes either up or down in the ladder and as we know, if one is acting in one way, the rest has to be the same, right?

And whats your opinion on this wall of text? :eyesup:

 

(edited some language translation errors)


Edited by psykadelisk, 10 April 2014 - 11:34 AM.


Askorti #10 Posted 10 April 2014 - 10:35 AM

    Second Lieutenant

  • Player
  • 11776 battles
  • 1,137
  • Member since:
    06-24-2012

If you ask me, the article states an obvious thing. It doesn't take an Oxford professor to get to exactly the same conclusion. The difference is that they have probably spent thousands of pounds in order to conduct research and have proof.

Seriously, how stupid, narrow-minded and ignorant you have to be to blame gamers' aggression on violence in games? It is an obvious thing, that what makes gamers rage are mechanics and other players. But I guess it is easier that way, you don't have to think any more, just say that violence is bad and boom, you have your average sheep-citizen believing you...



jokobet #11 Posted 10 April 2014 - 11:06 AM

    Warrant Officer

  • Player
  • 31283 battles
  • 653
  • Member since:
    12-03-2012

View PostAskorti, on 10 April 2014 - 11:35 AM, said:

 

 

Did you even read the article? The article states that it's not so much the content of the game (display of violence) itself that induces aggressive behaviour. Instead, game mechanisms that give the player a feeling of getting "betrayed" by the game lead to aggression, i.e. his actions which he belives should result in success don't succeed due to some factor such as RNG in WoT.

 

The common sense is that violence in video games is copied by viewers/gamers due to imitation/incentive learning etc. This article is stating something entirely different and new. Moreover, the article is not blaming gamers' aggression for anything - it simply states that this aggression exists but does not draw a relationship to anything else.

 

TL;DR: Your comment doesn't make sense and shows that you didn't read the article properly. :sceptic:

 

 

 

@OP: I think your hypotheses make sense, would be interesting to test though I dare predict that WG would not be very happy about it. However, I think the tomatoe group might be split into two parts (not necessarily of equal size): One that indeed shows more aggressive behaviour but also another that has settled in uncompetitive "I wanna just drive tanks" low tier happy herp-a-derp mode. I guess those players realize they are bad but are at ease with that fact. I had one dude in my former clan like that - playing massive amounts of games, super badly but enjoyed it. Ofc this group of players could be so small that it's technically just a bunch of outliers, who knows.



5_InchFl0ppy #12 Posted 10 April 2014 - 11:24 AM

    Lieutenant

  • Player
  • 40720 battles
  • 1,641
  • [-MM] -MM
  • Member since:
    06-22-2012

There are too many players that are ignorant of the basics and that is what causes me to rage from time to time. I really do not understand how you can fail your way to tier 10 with a 45% win rate and 300 wn8 and still find the game fun, not to mention why players like that are even allowed to play tier 10.

 

I do not class myself as an amazing player but I do try to win as much as possible and I do offer advice and help to those that ask me in PM's and sometimes during the game to, providing it is an appropriate time to do so. There are also times where I call my team r3tards, ping the map excessively and type not so useful advice about where to shove certain everyday household items.

 

I don't think raging has anything to do with whether someone is bad or not, I think its more to do with the fact we are all human and all have our breaking points, whether or not that justifies rage in the first place I don't know. It is true that when I rage more I tend to play worse and I guess that is the same for a lot of people, but I still don't think that means getting angry=overall bad player as we are all prone to it.



Belizarius #13 Posted 10 April 2014 - 11:26 AM

    Second Lieutenant

  • Player
  • 15025 battles
  • 1,377
  • Member since:
    04-25-2011
I rage, therefore I am.

psykadelisk #14 Posted 10 April 2014 - 11:30 AM

    Sergeant

  • Player
  • 19944 battles
  • 219
  • Member since:
    05-04-2013

View Postjokobet, on 10 April 2014 - 12:06 PM, said:

 

...

 

@OP: I think your hypotheses make sense, would be interesting to test though I dare predict that WG would not be very happy about it. However, I think the tomatoe group might be split into two parts (not necessarily of equal size): One that indeed shows more aggressive behaviour but also another that has settled in uncompetitive "I wanna just drive tanks" low tier happy herp-a-derp mode. I guess those players realize they are bad but are at ease with that fact. I had one dude in my former clan like that - playing massive amounts of games, super badly but enjoyed it. Ofc this group of players could be so small that it's technically just a bunch of outliers, who knows.

 

I read my description again and see some errors due to my not 100% english. :hiding:

But what you say about the tomatoes is what I had in mind too, the non competitive ones are the ones you describe as play for fun and the competitive ones are revealed with their rage and whine.



xxlguru #15 Posted 10 April 2014 - 11:31 AM

    Colonel

  • Player
  • 40877 battles
  • 3,742
  • Member since:
    08-25-2011

+1 Belizarius

 

Now back to OP.

 

I guess it is true one way or the other.

 

Others people incompetence disapoints me at first and when it keeps persisting true long streak it does introduce some aggression.



Unknown_Lifeform #16 Posted 10 April 2014 - 11:37 AM

    Warrant Officer

  • Player
  • 27416 battles
  • 507
  • Member since:
    12-11-2012

Interesting article, seems kinda obvious when you think about it but unlike Askorti I think having actual evidence to back up a theory is always worth while. There are many right wing commentators who would claim it is "obvious" that violence in video games leads to actual violence.

 

I'm normally pretty calm and laid back but after losing 10 games in a row yesterday I punched a table, so my own study supports this research :smile:

 

It also explains why WoT induces so much rage (as seen in in game chat and on the forums). In most single player and co-operative games you don't fail - effort is almost always rewarded. WoT is a competitive zero sum game with significant random elements outside the players control (team mates, RNG etc.) so there is a lot of opportunity for things not to go the players way.



psykadelisk #17 Posted 10 April 2014 - 11:58 AM

    Sergeant

  • Player
  • 19944 battles
  • 219
  • Member since:
    05-04-2013

When it comes to WoT I guess rage caused by frustration is somewhat understandable. But when it comes to rage caused by incompetence I think its less understandable since its all about getting the info and not assuming you know if you havent even double checked how things work.

 

So I start to think of different questions about the bad to middle skill level players, do they actually really think they know when you can blame the team or not? Since there are players that do very well and players that do really bad and it seem that the lower you go, the more complaints and rage you get.

 

So what is it that makes these people think they are right to blame for example their teams? Is it real correct accusations or just what they think is correct?

What happens with the players that less frequently blame other things?

 

I think the ones that can see the true difference will both rage less and develop more. Self criticism lead to less rage. 







Also tagged with Useless, whine

1 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users