What is the heart of traditional gaming?

What is the heart of traditional gaming?

Is it friendship? Or perhaps competition?

Dunno, but the heart of Veeky Forums is making pointless threads just to have an excuse to post a picture of a cute girl, so you're right where you should be.

>girl

boy do i have news for you

Imagination.

Anybody who thinks it's competition is the cancer slowly eating all tabletop hobbies alive.

It's both cooperation and competition. The term you're reaching for is interdependence.

As for the heart of gaming, I'd say that the real heart is traditional storytelling.

I agree with you, but this statement is going to trigger a storm of autists and ruin any semblance of conversation in this already shitty thread

I think the heart of gaming is a combination of Imagination and Socialization. It's about coming together to do some cool shit with your friends, but having an external system bind you and guide you.

Social dynamics are the heart of Veeky Forums. Cooperative or competitive, mechanical or narrative, the games we enjoy all rely on creating relationships with other people.

co-operation

backstabbing can be fun, but you still need to do it behind the scenes and cooperate in the meantime, also classes

its not the only one at heart but i would argue that its one of the most important ones

Hate.

For me it's friendship. Spending time cooperating with others I'm fond of.

I like proving my character and judging that of my opponents.

Yeah you idiot, that's clearly a heart.

>co-operation

Structured co-operation makes a bit more sense if you think about it.

The dick.
Through dick, unity.

Even in competitive games, you could argue there's an element of cooperation.

You're both there to enjoy the experience of the game, and part of that enjoyment comes from having a challenging opponent. Through working your hardest to win, you create the best experience for your opponent.

At least, that's the theory. The unfortunate fact that in a lot of games the optimal way to play is no fun at all kinda undermines the concept.

>Chess game
>Co-operate with your opponent
>Grasp his plan and do what you can to help him achieve it
>Lose the game

Is this truly the best way to play?

Depends on the setting

Autism

>optimal way to play

Best not to invoke such things

In competitive games, there is always an optimal way to play, the way that most efficiently achieves victory. That shouldn't be a controversial statement.

The problem is when people try to apply that same thought to non-competitive games, or act as though playing optimally is inherently superior to playing casually.

I'm casual as fuck, but I'm not insecure enough to deny that I am playing, in objective terms, badly. But my friends and I enjoy making 'bad' decks, armies or what have you and toying with the rulesets and systems involved in the game, rather than using them as efficiently as possible.

Different playstyles appeal to different people for different reasons. The problems come when one person assumes their playstyle is 'right', or people with different playstyles play together without communicating and understanding the differences, leading to an unsatisfactory experience for everyone involved.

>boy do i have news for you
Is it that you're a memeing retard? Because we already knew about that.

$$$

Good show.

It's talking about problems.

What are you, autistic?

It's all about the cones.

Transwomen are girls too. ^_^

Except you're both wrong that is an actual woman holding a pigs heart for dissection.

It is friendship, but it is, more broadly cooperation. Sometimes cooperation is under the guise of competition, not unlike in a sport, but sometimes it is overcoming the problems as a group, or building the story with your GM.

I would say, for me at least,

Creating interesting characters, allowing them to grow and develop, and interact with a dynamic world, and other dynamic characters.

Tactility