Volcynika said:
I'm marking this to remember to look later, because my memory is hazy and I'd have to verify if some of vert's comments (might even be in the L4D thread) might be contradictory of this.
I'll be honest, I started playing L4D with GAF very late, like September or so. I don't know what the story was before that. But "everyone" was always "vert only plays with you if you're like totally awesome", and that wasn't my personal experience.
I still sucked the first time I played with them, and I remember vert explaining me where I could do better as a SI, instead of going "omg, you suck so much, get out of my matches" like some people make it seem he does.
It's mostly just that.
I don't know what the backstory is with Blizzard, and I'd have to agree that there's no reason to tell someone that they suck, and yes, you're being a douche if you tell them directly.
But in a way, not from previous L4D experience, but from when I played MMOs, I know how frustrating it can be when a whole team loses because someone is just there to play how they feel like it, caring little to nothing about success and their team.
And I'm not saying that Blizzard was like that, just how I feel when that happens.
I know, it's a damn game, you're supposed to have fun with it. And that's where I understand where it may vary from person to person.
With me, I rarely have fun when I'm not playing at my best or when someone in the team couldn't care less about the rest of the people playing, and isn't even doing the minimum (and I mean it here as if someone could do better without much effort, but simply doesn't feel like it, I like to play with casual people, and I like to be helpful to them when they're willing to learn).
Maybe it's me taking some games too seriously, and I guess Twig had a point then, but I don't see it like that.
I want games to challenge me, or else I'd be just watching movies.
I'm not saying vanilla is for noobs, or that playing vanilla kills the competitiveness. I understand some people would rather play it like that.
I'm only giving my opinion on why I feel like modded is better, in a competitive situation.
vertopci said:
No it's not competitive. The whole point of being competitive is to decide who the best team is. The larger the gap between good and very good, the better it is for competitive play. Getting kits everywhere is absolutely stupid because every team will survive almost every map. It doesn't prove who the better survivors are at all. Also it helps to erase any mistakes made. If you make a mistake, YOU should have to live with it, not erase it and pretend it never happened.
I'm pretty sure everyone of us started with the eventual playing on Normal/Hard and finishing maps barely surviving, even with all the medkits around. So I don't agree that it isn't competitive at all.
It is competitive, until a certain level is reached. Then you do have the problem of distinguishing the good and the very good teams. Which is where modded configs start to be useful to keep the competitive side of things.
vertopci said:
You don't know who they are because YOU know nothing about the competitive side of L4D. Which is why you should stop arguing these things with me. I have played vanilla L4D and the several mods, whereas you haven't. It's like saying how GameX sucks when you haven't even played it.
I don't think knowledge with the tourney level stuff is required to give your personal opinion.
Maybe you'll be bitching about things when you aren't simply "getting it" when it comes to why they use it at that level, but a personal opinion should be just that.
If one prefers to play with vanilla settings it shouldn't be blamed on not knowing how the best players play, just on how that person plays, without trying to present their opinion as the only valid one, so, in a way, trying to understand what others see as advantages.