Gaming World Forums
General Category => General Talk => Topic started by: Faust on February 20, 2011, 08:29:18 pm
-
There's been a huge discussion on IRC today on the topic of masochism in gaming. The debate got pretty heated, and it was suggested that it spill over this way, to give more people a chance to have their say in a much more organised manner than using caps at each other and bringing mothers into it.
For those that don't know the concept, masochism is a (usually) sexual pleasure in being degraded, whether in word or action. It can also be used in this sense to just mean a thrill of a game inflicting harshness upon you. There's better definitions online if you want to debate me on this, but let us MOVE ON! STOP STOP READ HERE: [Vellfire (http://www.saltw.net/member:identifier:vellfire) according to this definition i found it has to be physical pain, suffering or humiliation.
We'll use that definition rather than my saucier one if it makes more sense to the argument.
Can gaming be masochistic? Do you play games for the thrill of failure, or for the triumph of succeeding over a challenge? Do you get any buzz at all from dying in videogames? Does the rage that comes with throwing a control count as part of the buzz? What about sadism? Do you get any kind of release from inflicting virtual pain on your virtual enemies?
Speedruns were also mentioned - is this masochistic? What about Xbox games like Aban Hawkins and the Thousand Spikes, which give you a thousand lives to continuously fail at the game's insane challenge? What about 'The Impossible Game'?
Share your thoughts!
-
i can't find it but i read a pretty good thing on zynga games that's fairly relevant. basically, the goal of the game isn't to provide you with entertainment while you're playing, but to provoke anxiety when you're not playing, and it's much more effective (playing as a treat vs playing so you don't feel like garbage). in terms of games themselves the masochist element is only appealing when you overcome it, i.e. completing the game without using weapons, dying but getting to the next level, only using the glass ball etc. i don't think DIFFICULTY is masochism if it has a reward
-
Can gaming be masochistic? Do you play games for the thrill of failure, or for the triumph of succeeding over a challenge? Do you get any buzz at all from dying in videogames? Does the rage that comes with throwing a control count as part of the buzz? What about sadism? Do you get any kind of release from inflicting virtual pain on your virtual enemies?
You're being too specific and narrow about the role of masochism in games - it's not a specifically the pain itself that is the enjoyment, rather the masochism emerges from the process of playing the game (the "gameplay process").
There's an entire genre of games where the core of the gameplay and the game experience relies on the games ability to frustrate and humiliate the player for their mistakes, and this is the genre I will mainly be analysing, through the extreme of I Wanna Be The Guy, and also Super Meat Boy, a somewhat mellower game. In addition, take "player" to mean the player of these games, assuming the usual archetype of someone who plays games to be challenged.
There's a related observation to make about the role of the game developer in this. The intentions of the IWBTG developer are clear - he wants to create a game that is as close to impossible to beat as possible. He designs a game to humiliate the player at every turn. In one of the first few screens, the player has to edge forward, avoiding deadly falling apples, only to then be hit by an apple that flies *up*, with no way for the player to know this beforehand. This is obviously sadistic - he enjoys creating a cruel game, and enjoys people playing his cruel game. So we have a sadistic developer looking for players for his game, and he finds our player. Our player implicitly assumes the opposite role of the masochist: the receiver of punishment.
In these games the player undertakes the task of conquering a game designed to make them fail in order to achieve gratification. Players of these games are constantly bombarded with reminders of their own failure, causing real mental anguish. This is the pain, degradation and humiliation of masochism.
This pain is not specifically what evokes gratification in the player, however - the player does not enjoy the specific failures during gameplay. But we have to frame this in the entire gameplay process, and in doing so we realise that this pain cannot be truly separated from the gratification of finally "beating" the game.
Taking SMB for example, we have a rather simple game, the main bulk of which is taken up by "failure events", moments in gameplay where the player fails. If we were to modify this game by making one single change: the removal of failure events (or specifically the challenges that cause that failure), the dynamics of the gameplay process change significantly. We now have a game that contains no challenge and no failure events. Since the gratification upon completing a game is dependent upon the challenges conquered throughout the gameplay process (simply: our player does not enjoy playing games that present no challenge), by removing those challenges the gratification is reduced if not eliminated altogether. That is, the player must willingly subject himself to pain in order to achieve gratification.
This shows the masochism blatantly - without the pain there is no gratification, therefore it is integral to the gratification. The gratification clearly does not come solely from beating the game, it has a significant portion reliant on pain.
-
Frankly, this idea is extremely stupid and I was only entertaining the discussion on IRC because dom just wouldn't stop going on about it.
The entire premise is based on a logical fallacy to begin with:
- People like playing games
- Failure is part of playing games
- Therefore, people like failure
Not only that, but this is described as masochism, a very serious disorder that affects a very small part of the population. It's completely nuts to conclude that someone must be a masochist because they died in a game and then said "hey, this game is fun, I think I'll try again".
-
Not only that, but this is described as masochism, a very serious disorder that affects a very small part of the population. It's completely nuts to conclude that someone must be a masochist because they died in a game and then said "hey, this game is fun, I think I'll try again".
Of course they are not literal masochists, but the dynamics of the player/game relationship are showing some prominent masochistic tendencies.
-
That is, the player must willingly subject himself to pain in order to achieve gratification.
Here this is the flaw in your entire argument, right there. Masochism is the enjoyment of pain itself. But rather, you're saying that players accept the fact that they have to endure some pain (I wouldn't call it that, but I digress) in order to complete the game. But it's not about enjoying the pain itself, is it?
edit: man PROMINENT MASOCHISTIC TENDENCIES you just made that up on the spot. MASOCHISM IS ABOUT THE ENJOYMENT OF PAIN ITSELF how can you not get this.
-
Here this is the flaw in your entire argument, right there. Masochism is the enjoyment of pain itself. But rather, you're saying that players accept the fact that they have to endure some pain (I wouldn't call it that, but I digress) in order to complete the game. But it's not about enjoying the pain itself, is it?
My argument also depends on the game being considered in its entirity - the entire gameplay process, which consists mainly of pain. The player is a masochist because the gratification would not come if there was no pain. The gratification is entirely dependent on the existence of pain, therefore the gratification is clearly a reaction: the player enjoys the pain.
-
actually, i think you could say it's about enjoying the pain itself (i also wouldn't call it that but whatever) since a lot of people tend to complain if games are too easy so that means they do enjoy pain as part of their gaming experience??
-
For future reference a dictionary (and any other reasonable) definition of pain includes mental distress, and masochism includes various forms of mental distress, not just physical pain.
-
Every definition of masochism I saw specifically said physical pain, not just pain. Just putting that out there.
-
Can we not get into a discussion about the proper definition of masochism? It's completely pointless because I think everyone knows what it means in this context.
-
Every definition of masochism I saw specifically said physical pain, not just pain. Just putting that out there.
Look harder: http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/masochism
Psychiatry . the condition in which sexual gratification depends on suffering, physical pain, and humiliation.
Suffering obviously encompasses mental suffering and humiliation is purely mental distress. It's absurd to claim that masochism is only about physical pain.
Can we not get into the definition of masochism? It's completely pointless because I think everyone knows what it means in this context.
sure
-
i can't find it but i read a pretty good thing on zynga games that's fairly relevant. basically, the goal of the game isn't to provide you with entertainment while you're playing, but to provoke anxiety when you're not playing, and it's much more effective (playing as a treat vs playing so you don't feel like garbage). in terms of games themselves the masochist element is only appealing when you overcome it, i.e. completing the game without using weapons, dying but getting to the next level, only using the glass ball etc. i don't think DIFFICULTY is masochism if it has a reward
that's a pretty good observation. game's goal is to change the players relation to games/the game itself...one thinks of homer...simpson. *audience looks astonishedly to the smugly smiling zietsche- NIETZCHSES SMILE FREEZES AS HE SAW LOU REED SMILING SMUGLY IN THE AUDIENCE*
-
it doesn't just mean physical pain. as a psychological condition, it also includes psychological pain, which includes humiliation, degradation etc. off topic but yeah that's why things like GIMP STUFF is also classed as sadomasochism (ridiculous example but its the only one i can think of off the top of my head)
edit: oops didnt see drules post there sorry pal
-
Playing fighting games online is definitely a masochistic action. Just putting that out there.
-
one thinks of...adom. *indie gamers in the assembly hall are swept down by a sudden wind aaaa these jokes are getting out of hand i gotta stop!!*
-
Triumph is an inherently positive feeling that humans strive to reach because it validates the ego, and I would say that punishment in games is the byproduct of game designers simulating the effect of perseverance in order for the player to be able to triumph.
If we are to entertain the thought that people play games to be punished or that punishment carries some kind of enjoyment factor, then there must be a logical incentive for this attraction. On the contrary, I think people dislike being humiliated and subjected to punishment because it is harmful to the ego.
So yeah, I don't think there is much merit to the whole masochism sentiment.
-
Can gaming be masochistic?
apparently! (http://mightyjilloff.dessgeega.com/)
i don't know, sadism/masochism seems like a sort of crude and unhelpful framework for talking about difficulty in games i think. or at least sort of unwieldy when it comes to dealing with the uh more playfully perverse sense of selfconsious ridiculousness that i think characterises this stuff. it's that sense of laughing out loud at insanely hard or wilfully obnoxious game design, like those fanmade mario levels on youtube or the fact that literally everything in i wanna be the guy wants you dead. it's like a raucous cartoon parody of "real" game design which involves some idea of uh fairness and rewarding skill and so on being turned upside down into an exaggerated burlesque of cruelty.
i dont know, this doesnt really account for the level of investment required for people to actually play and beat these things but i don't think degradation is appropriate either, if only because a lot of this stuff deliberately goes for that sense of being too ridiculous to be taken seriously. maybe its just that the only thing more ridiculous is if you really do take them seriously and play them as if they were regular games. (im not trying to dismiss this stuff as one big joke btw, if anything i wish more games had some sense of deliberately fucking around with convention and exaggerated obnoxiousness!)
-
The gratification is entirely dependent on the existence of pain, therefore the gratification is clearly a reaction: the player enjoys the pain.
hey dom answer this please: is it masochistic to ride a rollercoaster?
what about reading a book?
I mean why do all books have like all these PAGES OF INFORMATION when it's really about the conclusion of the story. is reading through those pages masochistic? why don't people just look up IT WAS HIS SLED on wikipedia instead of watching Citizen Kane?
your entire point is that playing games is somehow a PAINFUL AND AWFUL EXPERIENCE and you're not even arguing that it's THIS which the players enjoy (which WOULD make it masochistic) but that because they play to avoid that pain it is therefore instrumental to the game itself and therefore the reason for playing. this is a leap of logic so gigantic it makes the analogy I posted before look benign.
the whole premise that anything other than THE GOAL or COMPLETION OF THE GAME is this awful chore that you have to go through is completely crazy. the reason why people enjoy playing difficult games is because it forces them to think and compete and test their ability to react to what they see on the screen. it's effectively about doing something which you know is within your reach, but requires your full attention to accomplish (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Flow_(psychology)). it's intrinsically rewarding. the fact that you can LOSE at games and that you can endure hardship during the process is true but you basically conclude, for some reason, that this is THE BASIS FOR EVERYTHING. the reason why you can lose is because there would otherwise be no challenge, and thus the game simply wouldn't be fun. but yeah somehow to you this means that PEOPLE ENJOY LOSING. and because losing is, for some reason, equal to pain, people who play games are therefore masochists.
playing games is intrinsically rewarding. i.e. fun. reading a book is fun. watching a movie is fun. riding a rollercoaster is fun. each in their own different way. each incorporate a reward of some sort, whether it's finding out that it was the butler or feeling weightless while in the middle of a looping.
hey dom answer this: if I go to the dentist and have him fix up that painful tooth, am I a masochist for feeling elated when I leave? does that mean I like the pain? if there was no pain, I wouldn't feel relieved because there would have been no reason for me to go there in the first place. does that mean the pain was the reason for why I'm feeling relieved?
goddam this is a crazy discussion
-
I'm so disappointed that this reached two pages that I'm going to never visit this topic again
-
I'm so disappointed that this reached two pages that I'm going to never visit this topic again
Supply and demand!!!
-
"shake it baby" I said as I pressed space to thrust a low res money into her jiggling bosomy sprite. I am 9 year old Mark and I have duke nuke 3D. "shake it baby".
-
ahaha I kind of implied this a couple topics ago because every once in a while sort of SAFARI game with no goals, just a world to explore and series of interesting events comes up, or like Pilotwings 64 where the goals/stages are pretty weakly conceived and everyone probably racked up more playtime just flying around randomly. Or maybe as another suggestion somebody could make an RPG where you're on the world of GUADIA or whatever but there is no horrible boss/satan to defeat and you're just left to your devices to explore and discover towns/people. But this never/rarely happens or is explored to some extent but few people are brave enough to completely remove the evil/conflict of the game and try and make the game still work. I especially like that most RPGs are still this lush sort of world with more of a LOOMING danger (maybe one or two towns have been destroyed by monsters/bad guy of the game)
-
ahaha I kind of implied this a couple topics ago because every once in a while sort of SAFARI game with no goals, just a world to explore and series of interesting events comes up, or like Pilotwings 64 where the goals/stages are pretty weakly conceived and everyone probably racked up more playtime just flying around randomly. Or maybe as another suggestion somebody could make an RPG where you're on the world of GUADIA or whatever but there is no horrible boss/satan to defeat and you're just left to your devices to explore and discover towns/people. But this never/rarely happens or is explored to some extent but few people are brave enough to completely remove the evil/conflict of the game and try and make the game still work. I especially like that most RPGs are still this lush sort of world with more of a LOOMING danger (maybe one or two towns have been destroyed by monsters/bad guy of the game)
man i started so many projects like this which was just uh EXPLORATORIUM and there were a few bad guys but no overruling sense of EVIL and the player just played the game and did what the flip they liked (within the boundaries of the limitations of RPG Maker 2000 Of COurse) but yeah i would really love to play a game like that and one that is done pretty well (hell even if it isnt done really well i'd still probably play it)
DERAIL but yeah i just wanted to throw that out there
-
I hate talking about things in terms of masochism and sadism or domination and submission and I don't like that it's inaccurately applied to so many things. are we becoming an anime.
-
we ARE aminé
and dragonx is our biggest fan
-
"shake it baby" I said as I pressed space to thrust a low res money into her jiggling bosomy sprite. I am 9 year old Mark and I have duke nuke 3D. "shake it baby".
I posted this because I thought the topic was misogyny in games. Sorry guys.
-
Vellfire has swirl glasses and a highpitch anime dub voice.
Meanwhile I drink her breast milk to get super powers. Also I have a long red scarf, sunglasses and a motorcycle also fueled by Vellfire's breast milk.
It's anime in here
-
man i started so many projects like this which was just uh EXPLORATORIUM and there were a few bad guys but no overruling sense of EVIL and the player just played the game and did what the flip they liked (within the boundaries of the limitations of RPG Maker 2000 Of COurse) but yeah i would really love to play a game like that and one that is done pretty well (hell even if it isnt done really well i'd still probably play it)
DERAIL but yeah i just wanted to throw that out there
actually I was going to add something about the RPG cliche of peaceful villages with sense of evil just over the horizon harmonizing with some natural human state or at least the current state of affairs and that's why it's an easy feel to achieve/college students with cushy lives looking up illuminati videos on youtube on their ipad
-
I hate talking about things in terms of masochism and sadism or domination and submission
You're obviously not as erotic as I first assumed!
-
hey dom answer this please: is it masochistic to ride a rollercoaster?
what about reading a book?
I mean why do all books have like all these PAGES OF INFORMATION when it's really about the conclusion of the story. is reading through those pages masochistic? why don't people just look up IT WAS HIS SLED on wikipedia instead of watching Citizen Kane?
No this isn't anything like what I'm saying. First, riding rollercoasters, reading books etc, do not involve any pain, you are not willfully exposing yourself to any pain. The entire experience of these things is enjoyable. This is massively different to masochistic games that force you to fail repeatedly during the course of the game.
your entire point is that playing games is somehow a PAINFUL AND AWFUL EXPERIENCE and you're not even arguing that it's THIS which the players enjoy (which WOULD make it masochistic) but that because they play to avoid that pain it is therefore instrumental to the game itself and therefore the reason for playing. this is a leap of logic so gigantic it makes the analogy I posted before look benign.
Again, not my point at all. The failure events are so ingrained in the concept of the game and the process of playing the game, that the gratification is only possible because of the pain. The gratification is a consequence of the pain because that is the only way it can exist. In order to achieve gratification, the player is subjecting himself to pain.
the whole premise that anything other than THE GOAL or COMPLETION OF THE GAME is this awful chore that you have to go through is completely crazy. the reason why people enjoy playing difficult games is because it forces them to think and compete and test their ability to react to what they see on the screen. it's effectively about doing something which you know is within your reach, but requires your full attention to accomplish (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Flow_(psychology)). it's intrinsically rewarding. the fact that you can LOSE at games and that you can endure hardship during the process is true but you basically conclude, for some reason, that this is THE BASIS FOR EVERYTHING. the reason why you can lose is because there would otherwise be no challenge, and thus the game simply wouldn't be fun. but yeah somehow to you this means that PEOPLE ENJOY LOSING.
In Super Meat Boy, do you really think players achieve flow? Ever? These games are designed to be constantly out of reach of your skill level. You're never on the right hand side of the mental state graph. You're constantly on the left. Even when you finally beat a screen, you're immediately put on to the next screen, with more challenges that throw you right back.
and because losing is, for some reason, equal to pain, people who play games are therefore masochists.
Losing evokes feelings of shame, humiliation, and worthlessness. To play games dedicated to making you feel these emotions is masochism!
hey dom answer this: if I go to the dentist and have him fix up that painful tooth, am I a masochist for feeling elated when I leave? does that mean I like the pain? if there was no pain, I wouldn't feel relieved because there would have been no reason for me to go there in the first place. does that mean the pain was the reason for why I'm feeling relieved?
You never willingly subjected yourself to that pain, the pain was entirely out of your control. This isn't the same thing at all. Please stop making bad analogies.
-
No this isn't anything like what I'm saying. First, riding rollercoasters, reading books etc, do not involve any pain, you are not willfully exposing yourself to any pain. The entire experience of these things is enjoyable.
What if I knowingly read a sad book and cry during it?
-
personally rollercoasters really hurt me
and ive gotten many papercuts from books
-
What if I knowingly read a sad book and cry during it?
You wouldn't consider exposing yourself to materials that make you feel sad to be masochistic?
I think you have this weird view where you are unable to consider even slight masochism in anything, and that for you masochism is an all or nothing concept. You're either not masochistic at all or you're a massive fetishist. Separate the masochism concept from the real life masochism fetish.
-
You wouldn't consider exposing yourself to materials that make you feel sad to be masochistic?
Nope.
-
Nope.
But you're reading a sad book, to make yourself feel sad, and gaining pleasure from that. That's classic masochism.
-
No, I'm reading a sad book knowing that it will make me sad, but not ONLY to feel sad. The enjoyment of the whole book experience is what I'm after, and the sadness is only an element of the book, not what I'm seeking.
-
No, I'm reading a sad book knowing that it will make me sad, but not ONLY to feel sad. The enjoyment of the whole book experience is what I'm after, and the sadness is only an element of the book, not what I'm seeking.
Why don't you read a book that doesn't contain the sadness element and only contains the other good elements? Presumably this would give you an even better experience since you're not enjoying feeling sad.
-
You read it because the book causes you to feel empathy towards a subject: you feel sad for them. This is something you enjoy or you wouldn't do it.
-
i'm open to the idea. i believe there is a slight element of masochism in a lot of things we do, but i think that the word "masochism" is a bad way to describe it as it brings with it a certain mindset, but seems to be the most apt word i guess.
a gross and probably poor example is popping a painful spot/zit, i think. you knowingly put yourself through the pain in order for the gratification... of a whole load of pus on your bathroom mirror (winning a level in super meat boy....). you wouldnt overtly describe this as a masochistic action, but the idea that there is a masochistic element to it is definitely worth exploring.
probably adding nothing i have a headache and will post something better later
-
i'm open to the idea. i believe there is a slight element of masochism in a lot of things we do, but i think that the word "masochism" is a bad way to describe it as it brings with it a certain mindset, but seems to be the most apt word i guess.
this is how i feel about it too. i mean people like to watch sad movies because they are sad and it contributes to the overall experience. same applies to books and games. i don't understand why it's so hard to admit you can actually enjoy this!! masochism is a very negative word though so i can understand why you wouldn't want to be associated with it but i can't really think of a better description right now.
-
this is how i feel about it too. i mean people like to watch sad movies because they are sad and it contributes to the overall experience. same applies to books and games. i don't understand why it's so hard to admit you can actually enjoy this!! masochism is a very negative word though so i can understand why you wouldn't want to be associated with it but i can't really think of a better description right now.
yeah and with horror movies too! being scared and whatnot adds to the overall enjoyment. it doesnt make you a FREAK or an outright MASOCHIST, but there are definite "masochistic" tendencies!
-
You're obviously not as erotic as I first assumed!
I don't like that it's considered such a large, almost overarching part of eroticism either but I guess that's just a byproduct of our awful society
-
it probably is masochism but the hip marketing word is 'cathartic'
-
BREAKING MY VOW.
I am seriously disturbed by the fact that people are buying into this crazy, Sigmund Freud wannabe theory of MASOCHISTIC GAMES. It's like saying that I'm "slightly mentally retarded" because I don't get how binary trees work. The definitions of pain and masochism are apparently malleable to be whatever dom wants them to mean so that it fits his narrative.
READING A SAD BOOK = MASOCHISM!!!
Congratulations dom you have successfully thrown around BIG WORDS while stretching their definitions so far that they now mean nothing.
I hate talking about things in terms of masochism and sadism or domination and submission and I don't like that it's inaccurately applied to so many things. are we becoming an anime.
Yes.
-
BREAKING MY VOW.
I am seriously disturbed by the fact that people are buying into this crazy, Sigmund Freud wannabe theory of MASOCHISTIC GAMES. It's like saying that I'm "slightly mentally retarded" because I don't get how binary trees work. The definitions of pain and masochism are apparently malleable to be whatever dom wants them to mean so that it fits his narrative.
READING A SAD BOOK = MASOCHISM!!!
Congratulations dom you have successfully thrown around BIG WORDS while stretching their definitions so far that they now mean nothing.
Yes.
i don't understand why it's such a crazy thought. like i said, masochism isn't the best word perhaps, but it is not a completely unfeasible idea!
-
I don't want to debate this at length anymore but we went on about this on IRC and here's what I think:
[23:32] < Dada> masochism means exactly one thing: (usually sexual) enjoyment of being physically or psychologically punished. this explicitly states that the enjoyment is derived from the punishment itself, yet nobody in the world is playing mario just to run up to the first goomba and die on repeat
[23:33] < Warlin> True, but if they weren't willing to experience any amount of failure, they probably wouldn't have turned it on at all.
[23:34] < Dada> warlin again people don't play games because they want to fail. they play games DESPITE the fact that they MIGHT fail. the possibility of failure is instrumental to the enjoyment, but it is not the enjoyment itself. there's a massive difference
[23:35] < Dada> I think sad movies/books have more merit to the claim of masochism than video games but even then it's a stupid word to use. people watch sad movies because they seek an emotional attachment, something they can think about and empathize with.
What's happening here is we're taking one concept (such as enjoying an emotional attachment to a sad movie) and extending it far enough to be able to use a word for it that just isn't meant for its purpose (enjoying something sad is like enjoying psychological punishment, therefore enjoying a sad movie is masochistic).
It's like earlchip said. We've become an anime... everything is grotesque.
I'll admit though that things like sad movies make a better claim to this narrative than video games but neither fit the bill and it's still a ridiculous equation.
I see a lot of people saying "yeah it makes sense but masochism is a poor word choice". That's exactly right. It's not like anyone's denying you can enjoy difficult games or watch sad movies and love them. The problem is this is being falsely equated with a desire for physical or psychological punishment when it's really far more easily and concisely explained by e.g. the desire for emotional attachment or adrenaline.
-
it's probably Hideo Kojima's fault we made that association
-
Well, the conclusion I've come to is that it's possible to contrive the argument enough to work, but if you have to force it to work, what's the point, right?
I guess, I mean, people do play games to experience challenges, but challenges aren't about experiencing pain, and the pleasure isn't derived from experiencing that pain, but rather being able to overcome it and beat the challenge. You can say that that's masochism in some way or another, but really, it's fuzzy and it doesn't really hold a lot of weight. Most people, and I say this as a general thing, won't play games exclusively to be punished. The idea that some people do isn't outlandish, but it's definitely not the general goal.
I'm probably just reciprocating repeating one of the points Dada is trying to make here, though. So I probably sound lame, but whatever.
-
what about people who listen to Merzbow and stuff
-
yeah, i'm not seeing this either. i can understand how some properties of the standard game experience are tangentially similar to masochism, i don't think the majority of people play games for that reason, which would kinda be a required factor for games to be labeled this way. you take out all sense of reward or accomplishment in a game and increase all PUNISHMENT in a game to some absurd degree, you're going to have a game on your hands that very few people fundamentally enjoy.
-
i don't think the majority of people play games for that reason, which would kinda be a required factor for games to be labeled this way.
i think this is the biggest point in this debate. it's been made a few times but this is it in a nutshell.
-
I'm on Dada's and Hundley's side here. People throw the term Masochism when it comes to game difficulty but it really is an inaccurate term. People want higher difficulty because it gives the victory more meaning. If you play a game that is won easily, it doesn't feel like much of an accomplishment. If you play a difficult game that many fail at or one that you had to struggle to defeat its much more satisfying.
The act of losing itself is still just as negative a feeling.
-
i get this weird boner whenever i lose at megaman 3 but i love that gmea... idgi
-
idgi.
aaaaaa i'm becoming a... RAGNAR. *nicholas cage in front of a mirror*
-
People don't like losing in games they just like winning in games that other people lose at. Wants to feel better than other people, or at least better than the game.
Dieting and exercising isn't masochistic, but is often painful. Pretty much everything worth doing in life is painful. Is having a job a masochistic act?
dom it's good to see you never change
-
People...like winning in games that other people lose at. Wants to feel better than other people, or at least better than the game.
This is certainly true. There's a rush that comes with triumphing over someone, in whatever form. I imagine it's as true in sports as it is in like MORTAL KOMBAT or whatever, but sadly I have no empirical data to base that on :<.
-
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LaJE-qdIdtQ
you might be a masochist if you consider yourself Lucky!! to be listening to this music
-
this is aural torture
-
I just like that it is supposed to be the rewarding music based on the structure of the game
-
That actually sounds really freakin cool.