So, I crush my BF in most games...

[rong]

I like to think of it this way. There are challenges for which there is 1 and only 1 result that you must achieve. And there are challenges for which a whole rainbow of outcomes are possible.

And a game for me suggests that winning and losing isn't much of a distinction at all.

I'm gonna need some examples here.

[a500lbgorilla]

I'm gonna need some examples here.

How far apart can the examples be?

I'm thinking that we're playing NHL '83 on some such and both of us are new to the game. Our competition is both to the top final score, but also in discovering the nuances of this primitive game that allow us to reach that top final score more easily/consistently/delightfully. How can I abuse the design of the game to get the result I want? Once I find that abuse, what keeps you from playing monkey-see monkey-do? Eventually I'll need to find an abuse on the abuse which is delightful, but before I get there, there will be a period where the results of games might come down to who can smash the A-button more per second or some other such foolishness. This would be a game where I don't care if I win but I do care that I learn about the game-breaking glitches.

Now let's say that some clever motherfucker down the road has crafted an interesting puzzle with a solution and given it to us. It could even be a physical board puzzle if you so choose. Now there is only one possible outcome. I will solve this puzzle. If you solve it first, I'd like to use your solution as my own, but the most important aspect of this 'game' to me is that I get the solution eventually.

For a game, winning and losing seem like an aside unless you put prize money and trophies behind the result. For a real challenge, the result is what you're really after.

edit ooh! Or let's say that we we're going to race in like a Tough Mudder competition. The result is that you must finish. I don't care if you finish first, but I do care that I finish. That would be a game where I care about the result.

[rong]

How far apart can the examples be?

I'm thinking that we're playing NHL '83 on some such and both of us are new to the game. Our competition is both to the top final score, but also in discovering the nuances of this primitive game that allow us to reach that top final score more easily/consistently/delightfully. How can I abuse the design of the game to get the result I want? Once I find that abuse, what keeps you from playing monkey-see monkey-do? Eventually I'll need to find an abuse on the abuse which is delightful, but before I get there, there will be a period where the results of games might come down to who can smash the A-button more per second or some other such foolishness. This would be a game where I don't care if I win but I do care that I learn about the game-breaking glitches.

This only works when we are both shit at it. Once we are both good at the game, say, I dunno, FIFA or ProEv over here, we can have fun playing each other and both trying to win, or we can have some fun playing against each other and both just playing around and trying out new skills and shit. But if I am playing to win and you are just pissing around trying out new skills then my game is spoilt, because my win would be worthless.

[a500lbgorilla]

This only works when we are both shit at it. Once we are both good at the game, say, I dunno, FIFA or ProEv over here, we can have fun playing each other and both trying to win, or we can have some fun playing against each other and both just playing around and trying out new skills and shit. But if I am playing to win and you are just pissing around trying out new skills then my game is spoilt, because my win would be worthless.

I guess. I'd like to believe I'd still be trying to win against you because fuck you, but even if I lose, it'll mean nothing to me. Because even if I win, it'll mean nothing to me. Fuck you still though. That's what really matters.

edit I did just edit my before post too with an additional positive example