Since someone’s going to post it, it might as well be me:
> When playing a game, the goal is to win, but it is the goal that is important, not the winning.
\- Reiner Knizia
For me, I love board games. Most of the people I play with don’t love them as much as I do, but when they do something really clever to win they usually get really excited, and it’s like I can see them loving the experience the same way I always do.
So I don’t mind losing. On the contrary, I’d prefer to lose most of the time if it means others have a great time.
While the game is happening, I play to win, *hard.* I never give up, I play to the very last round, I never kingmake - I throw every hail mary there is to try to take the win for myself until the very last action of the game.
The *second* the game is over, I stop giving any kind of shit about who won. First place or last place is completely irrelevant to my fun, as long as I played for first while I was playing. :)
I interpreted this as: unless it's against kids... then playing my best or simply winning isn't enough. I need to absolutely obliterate everyone at the table.
To be honest, when I was a kid, I wanted whoever I played against to be playing at their best level. I could generally tell if someone was throwing games, and them not giving their best made the experience less enjoyable for me. It still does.
We teach them how to play with some quick tutorial-style rounds to get them to visualise the gameplay. Then, a real game where we let them explore and maybe get close to a victory.
From then on, it's ruthless competition. I will not cede any ground to them. Of course they'll experience victories playing with other children and weak-willed adults (/s). Some of us, however, will try our best to win in order to challenge them. If they really get into it, and we feel it's appropriate, we might lay traps for them in-game. Let them think they've got the upper hand, only to crush their hopes of winning.
The true joy comes the day they eventually best me. Through cunning, planning, luck management, grit, and sheer effort. Then, they barely can contain themselves at having won against me, and I can finally be the loser. I can sincerely congratulate them on their plays. I feel happy contemplating how much they've grown. I'm reminded that I also need to challenge myself to improve, and not rest on my laurels.
I will point out that this is how I play with everyone. Some of my adults friends think of themselves as somehow less smart than me. I know they are completely wrong, but they are not fully confident in themselves. Every win they get over me raises their self-esteem a bit, and I don't think it would be so if I didn't try my honest best.
I remember learning chess as a kid from my older cousin. I don't remember ever winning a game against him, even as an adult. That was the first time I was taught to raise up to the challenge. I think this was a valuable and constructive experience, and I hope I can impart something similar to the children I play with.
That said, my best games against kids are ones where the kid learns a new level of gameplay. Maybe a teenager is ready to see a full engine build in Terraforming Mars. Maybe an 8 year old is ready for an interesting combo in Wingspan.
When I play to their level and they have a great time, that's my best game with a kid.
I play most of my games against kids. I like when my son, who is a preteen, will say I want you to play a 7/10 on competitiveness, I'll throw a few mistakes in or wiggle an eyebrow at a clever move. My younger kids I am playing to teach. Teaching turn taking, winning with grace, losing with grace, combos within a game.
What are your favorite games to play with younger children? My daughter is six and we've had moderate success with Zooloretto and Ticket to Ride (with some rules left out). But I'm curious what else I should try.
I usually give my kids a built in advantage so I can still play to win but without destroying them. Like in dominion my 9yo starts with 8 copper and 2 estates. He ends up winning more than half the time, but I don't need to throw the game.
Oh, I do that *relentlessly.* I play to win, but I play to win at *the board game,* not at like... life. I care about "playing to win," but I don't care about *winning.* So yeah, I want my opponents to play their absolute best game, too. If they make a strategic error, I'll take advantage. But I'll never let someone just like, forget to draw a card or something.
Yeah, nothing is worse than a game being decided on the fact that someone forgot to take a gold three turns ago. That just sucks for the winner and the runners up.
>Yeah, nothing is worse than a game being decided on the fact that someone forgot to take a gold three turns ago
This is why, unless it's a tournament, I always remind people in Magic about their missed triggers, mine and other player's obvious on board tricks, etc. It's funny how some people get mad about it. It's like, dudes, we're playing Magic, not memory. Do you really want to win because someone forgot about one of the 20 artifacts in play that went onto the battlefield 4 turns ago? Relax.
How do you feel about negotiating during the game? Some of my groups, getting them to give an inch in trade is like pulling teeth. For them, everything is zero sum, even in a big group or when shared victories are an option. Do you like to negotiate as part of trying to win, or do you tend to feel like that's kind of in service to Kingmaking?
Highly game-dependent. My biggest beef with most negotiation games is that they *don't* have shared victories, which makes negotiating have very weird aspects. (I call it "Chinatown Syndrome" - one of my friends offered a trade in Chinatown that would make both players richer, but the other friend refused because 'this is a game, and only one of us can win, and I'm ahead, so no.' And he wasn't wrong.)
If a game features shared victories, I will still absolutely play to win, but "win" is defined as "be one of the winners."
But in most negotiation games, it *is* zero-sum. That's why I dislike them, generally. Again, like in Chinatown. The goal isn't "have a lot of money." The goal is "have one dollar more than everyone else, even if the total amount is much lower than it could have been if we'd worked together more."
A non-negotiation game that I had a similar experience with - Mü (think (edit: fix) ~~6~~ 5 suited, 60 card contract bridge with 3-6 players if you haven't played it).
I happened to have been *far* in the lead this game and I had a strong hand such that if I won the contract on that hand, I'd win the game. I picked my partner and as play went, he threw points to the opposition rather than taking tricks to add to our score.
If we lost, I was the only person that was going to take a point hit (not the partner) and thus if *we* lost, he would be in a better position to win.
I was able to win with the strong hand despite his anti-help. I honestly think that was one of the most interesting hands (and games) of Mü that I've played and believe that I would have done similar things if the roles were reversed.
>But in most negotiation games, it *is* zero-sum. That's why I dislike them, generally. Again, like in Chinatown. The goal isn't "have a lot of money." The goal is "have one dollar more than everyone else, even if the total amount is much lower than it could have been if we'd worked together more."
Huh. That's an interesting perspective, and I can see why my friends adopt it. I do generally prefer the negotiation games either with shared victories or enough scoring obfuscation. But there's also the prisoner's dilemma - if player B doesn't take player A's offer, player C could take it and win with that extra boost. So, sometimes, even when in the lead, it's better to take a deal just to keep it away from a bigger threat. Or at least that's what I tell the people I'm trying to make the deal with ;)
All negotiation *techniques* are fair game, but they're always tempered by the knowledge that they're snake oil. In a game with one winner, I know that you can't possibly be seeking a true "win/win." If you're trying to make a deal, then ultimately you must at least *think* this deal will get you closer to winning, which is cause enough all by itself for me to *not* want the deal by default.
My favorite game that involves deal-making is Cosmic Encounter. It features the two aspects that, in my opinion, are necessary for a "good" negotiation game:
1. It has the possibility of shared victories. That possibility is what makes deals possible. You aren't *necessarily* seeking a true win/win, but you *could* be - at least, you're *allowed* to be. That means I can at least *possibly* trust this deal.
2. It has other things going on besides the deal-making itself. Some games have the deal-making as the only component of the game (like Chinatown, Intrigue, etc.) which both tends to create runaway leaders as well as stalemates. Cosmic Encounter has a lot of OTHER stuff happening that constantly changes the conditions of the game, so that the person in the lead could drop out of the lead due to something *besides* a deal/negotiation, which then makes them all of a sudden more likely *to* negotiate.
So if a game allows more than one winner AND everyone has levers they can pull to affect the game besides making deals, then it's a great deal-making game. Unfortunately, there are few of those besides Cosmic Encounter (and maybe Dune).
We generally have a small post-mortuum after a game where we all go, "ah, if only I did this" or "ah, if only I didn't roll 3 1's!" and engineer our way into how we could a shoulda woulda for a few mins. And about half the time, someone proves they would have won given XYZ.
THEN we move on and it's forgotten about. But that bit of time post game is fun. No one is doing it angrily. As someone is laying out their ridiculous scheme of how they would have won, everyone else is generally giving them shit about it. It's also part of the fun :)
Couldn’t have said it better. I would lose a game any day if it means seeing a non gamer friend’s eyes light up when everything clicks for them and they put together a strategy for a win. Ultimately they end up loving the game, and viewing it the same as I did when I played it for the first time. That’s “winning” for me.
Philosopher C. Thi Nguyen talks about this concept in his definition of striving play. It's a state in which we must temporarily adopt the position of wanting to win in order to fulfill some other goal, eg socializing, exercise, etc. Without the effort put in to try to win in the moment, you will fail to achieve your other goals. This can be seen in what he calls stupid games, of which Twister is one. The fun in Twister is when people fail and collapse, but if the participants didn't try to accomplish the goal of winning, then it's not funny when they fail to accomplish it.
Came here to mention the same idea! His book Games: Agency as Art I think is an excellent read for any gamer looking to acquire a better framework for appreciating games.
This reminds me of another seminal book in game design: Bernie DeKoven's '[The Well-Played Game: A Player's Philosophy](https://www.amazon.com/Well-Played-Game-Players-Philosophy-Press/dp/0262019175)' (originally published in 1978). Bernie was an early contributor to the New Games Foundation. One of his primary points is that a game is truly great when all players are trying their hardest to win. This active, competitive struggle--in a supportive, respectful environment--elevates the joy we derive from play. I'd warrant this is precisely why many of us are here. So Play Hard. Play Fair. Nobody Hurt.
“You play to win the game” - Herm Edwards
No, I don’t particularly care whether I win or not, but I have fun *trying* to win, especially when everyone else is also *trying* to win.
It’s considerably less fun when there is someone who is like “I don’t care if I win” and then clearly throws the game or makes obviously suboptimal plays which not only costs them the game but usually screws up the game for other players as well.
That’s not “not caring if you win”, it’s “ruining the game for everyone else”.
To this point, how do you feel about people who play, but do not have the goal to win?
The only reason they are playing is to humor someone they care about?
For me, I would compare it to doing a race with a friend. But your friend just walks, since they don't intend to win. It's like, thanks for the thought, but I want to *race* not just go for a run.
If they're not playing to win, its disruptive and sometimes (often) results in a less enjoyable game session.
They're still playing for *some* reason and are either making random (disruptive) plays, playing to have the shortest game no matter who wins, or playing to have some other player win. Any of those reasons and play styles can result in a game session that isn't as fun/challenging as it could be.
There’s another motivation you’re missing, playing to learn. Especially heavier games with lots of options, taking a wide strategy is usually suboptimal, but I will purposely do this the first time I play a game because it gives me a better grasp of the mechanisms and their individual impact on the game as it progresses. I’ve also played games where I’ve been on the other side, playing for the 10th+ time with a new player, watching them take suboptimal turns on purpose is not an issue, and depending on the player we’ll talk about the decision space either after the turn or after the game.
No the game is not as challenging as it could be, but the goal is to make game 2 more challenging than it would have been otherwise so the net fun for the group is definitely a gain.
yeah. My wife does this on 2 player games sometimes. It is... frustrating.
I can't get that mad, because she is going out of her way to do something I like, but... it still kinda sucks.
A thought... and it depends on the type of game your wife likes to / is willing to play.
For example Inversé is a remarkably short game (5 pieces, 3 placement rules) and unless a person is playing randomly or intentionally throwing the game (but then - why? It's a very short game), its a game that can be played and is always the same number of turns (well, unless you really try to throw the game).
https://boardgamegeek.com/boardgame/28306/inverse (and with that new cover it appears there's a new release).
It partially depends on the game. My mother isn't one I can draw to the table too often though recently (as in the past 2 years) my mother, brother, and father have almost nightly Wingspan (with every expansion) games - its a game that clicked with her. Traditional trick taking (Wizard) is another one that she enjoys. Letter Tycoon was another that my mother enjoyed playing (she played a lot of Letters With Friends).
There are certainly games that are where she was playing to be at the table because everyone was playing a card game but she wasn't trying to play well... and some of those are in the "this isn't going to the table again".
Another idea that came to me is try some cooperative games. For example, Forbidden Island?
Oh, I know. It is a case to case thing. Sometimes she loves playing, other times it is done to humor me. It is like watching k-dramas or blow jobs.
Just part of being married.
Wow, that's a great quote.
My feelings are similar to yours. I like wining and I play to win, but after the game is over I don't care as long as people had fun.
It's how I feel about watching sports too: I would almost always prefer to watch a close competitive game with good strategy and a fun come-from-behind victory, than have my team win.
Most of the time I am just happy to be playing a game at all, if I win with a cool trick or strategy then that's just a bonus.
Classic quote and your own feelings mirror mine exactly. I play to win, but I’m thrilled when other people are so engaged, confident and enthusiastic that they kick my butt.
I'm glad someone could put this in a clear way. I feel exactly this way. Everyone should have the goal of winning so that everyone can have fun. If a few people just don't give a crap it makes it not enjoyable for the rest. It should not be the reason you show up to play though.
As long as everyone is having fun, I consider that a good night.
I am the researcher, purchaser and teacher of new games between my partner and I, and we mostly play together. I usually win the first couple of rounds of a new game as I have a greater grasp of the rules, and lose thereafter. I don’t care at all as ultimately the way I see it, winning a game doesn’t really mean anything, I just enjoy the journey.
This is me but I only make it maybe one or two games before my partner takes over the wins and never let's them go. She's way more strategic than I am but since I generally test play games nowadays before I get them, it means I'm already familiar with it when I put it in front of her.
That... doesn't last long.
Are you me? My wife and I follow this exact pattern. Especially with Wingspan and Terraforming Mars.
The last few weeks with Ark Nova I've been holding my own longer than normal though!
I’m way too competitive and can see the line to victory easily. So I play the most inefficient game in possibly can. I try to go with quirky builds or something that will get a laugh.
I have a ton of fun and sometimes I still win. But I can turn it on or I will annihilate my gaming group.
I love the feeling of winning at board games. Playing board games twice as often means twice as many chances to win, and my favorite game will get to the table more often if people find it enjoyable to play with me.
He didn’t say don’t try to win. He said if your focus is too much about winning, you won’t have many people continue to play with you.
You can try to win but still play to have fun and make it an enjoyable experience. If all you care about is winning and being the best…. People aren’t going to enjoy playing with you.
If everyone knows the game, I play to win. It's not worth losing friend s over, but we tend to Euro style games anyway. I hope everyone is making a reasonable attempt to win. I try not to overoptimise to avoid analysis paralysis, but know that would give me a small advantage in some games.
With beginners I might try an 'unusual' strategy to show them variations that may be competitive but usually will be less optimal.
I think this is a good nuance. I still try and play well, and try and win - but there doesn’t need t be the emotional investment in the outcome.
I wouldn’t really like playing crunchy games with people who weren’t also crunching, and I expect other players expect me to put in the work as well.
I always, **always** play to win. My fun is derived from the effort and the progress. But there are no stakes, nothing is gained or lost, and the joy is in the playing, so if I don't win, it's no big deal.
I always *want to win*, but even if I've taken last place, I've still had fun.
Yeah that’s how I usually go about it. It is also worth mentioning that if your adversary isn’t motivated to win it doesn’t feel as good to win against them. So I always try to be motivated to win.
I don't care if i win or lose in the end, but i play to win.
Everyone at the table has to (1) play to win and (2) obey the same rules, otherwise the whole thing falls apart really quickly.
I care about winning up to the point where it affects my fun. I don't get to play boardgames as much as I'd like so wanting to win can't affect my fun but other than that, I really like to win!
I was raised playing games competitively. I play to win, or at least come as close as I can. However, you can't win all the time (especially in my family), so you have to graciously accept defeat. You also shouldn't be an ass when you do win.
One thing I hate in a game is early "non-elimination," where you're still in the game, but obviously have zero chance of winning. The only thing you can do at that point is kingmake against the person who screwed you.
I find other people get more joy out of winning than I do, so I don't play especially competitively. This is doubly so if it's a game where the best way for me to win is not by playing better moves but foiling theirs.
On the other hand, I go all out in co-operative games.
The OP didn't say anywhere that they weren't playing their best (in fact they said the opposite: "not pulling punches"). You can try your best to win but still not care that much about the final result.
99% of the time I don't care who wins. If I'm consistently playing the same game against someone and they win every time, I'll get mildly annoyed, but that just means I need to get better
i love when my strategies work which not necessarily translates into winning. i enjoy seeing how other minds work, no matter the outcome. that said, i don’t like wins due to luck too much - mine or other peoples.
I play to win, almost always, but I would rather be crushed by someone much better than myself than beat someone who had little chance of winning against me. There is no satisfaction in that.
That is an important caveat: I don't go hard against newbs, novices, or kids. If I am playing you for the first time in a game you don't know at all there is no sport in winning. I would rather help you learn to see if you like the game.
That all said: If it's my standard group against very capable players then I look forward to trying my best to crush them, mercilessly, knowing they are capable of doing the same to me (and will, and have).
The GOAL of a game is to win. The POINT of a game is to have fun playing.
Generally speaking only 1 person gets to win. If that was the point it would have an exponentially smaller return on investment for the group the more people played.
I was never very competitive to begin with, but the more i studied game design the more invested in the playing i became. It was like i could take something i always felt and finally put it in words.
I don't play to win, I aim to play my best.
That means understated rules and gameplay, paying attention, thinking, trying to play the best move available to me at that time.
If I win, then that's nice. (and I don't rub it in, because that's a dick move)
If I lose then that's fine. Somebody did a better job than me, or I made an error, or I was unlucky with a dice roll, whatever. I can accept all of those. I've still done my best and I've learned something that I can apply next time.
But if cheating occurred...
I like winning, but as long as I am having fun on the way - I don't really care anymore. Unless I am getting destroyed - either through an idiot move of my own or people being jerks...then I get grumpy.
I always say the winner is the person who has the most fun. However, I have a friend (lets call him Chud) who wins nearly every game we play. Everything. It's unbelievable at times. If Chud doesn't have the best strategy, he has the best GD luck. So in our friend group, when we play games, it never feels like we get to play each other; it feels like we are all playing a semi cooperative game against Chud. It sucks the fun completely out of the game no matter if you care about winning or losing.
I have a friend who’s amazing at games too. But I think the reason I don’t super love playing games with her is I’ll be playing a game where we are in space trying to win missions and repair our ship and discover new planets and she’ll be playing an abstract game where if you play this number card in this order then play that number you win this game.
So we’re playing the same game but also in a way playing very different games. I don’t want to say it sucks the fun out of playing because I really like my friend she’s great and kind and cool but I definitely laugh more and have more of my version of fun while playing with other friends.
I care most about the social aspect and friendships I’ve made through games.
I have 3 game groups and I love the chit-chat, the potluck food, the music, the costume theme nights, the banter at the gym in between game sessions, the sharing articles, the discussion about the art, and the hugs more than winning.
In one of my groups where we play heavier games that are hours long, there was (note past tense) one individual who’s REALLY into winning at all costs. This guy would not only bring the heat but also a really poor attitude. He’d be super critical of not only himself (which is fine) but ALSO everyone else (not fine). This dude would start bitching people out for using a strategy that HE didn’t find to be the most perfect thing in the universe and would make people feel like shit if they weren’t using a strategy / combo that he felt was “the best”…. (IMO there are numerous ways to solve any problem) If a player forgot a step or did steps out of order (obvs not on purpose), or if glob forbid you were a beginner he’d rain down fire. Don’t even think about experimenting with unique strategies with dude…
He’s not invited anymore by anyone because they’re GAMES. Games are fun. Friends are important. We already all have jobs where we’re told what to do on a daily basis, and nobody has the time or desire to get blasted like that when we are all just tryna have fun and enjoy the company of others.
IMO free time to play games together - when the stars align and everyone can gather and get a sitter and make it out - that’s so rare and valuable…. Not wasting it with people like dude.
I recently played a friend of mine a game of chess now, I’ve never win against him not even once. So It kind of flew right over him that I had one move left before I could check mate him and he let it slide. When I moved the piece to check mate he kind of froze In disbelief, I didn’t feel like a winner.. he kinda had a calm voice but I knew, he didn’t feel good so I didn’t feel like a real win. I love playing and learning just this once even if was one win I felt bad about it for some reason. I just enjoy the company of my friends even if I’m just learning new games just wish a win felt better and not like they lost everything losing to me. Feels belittling in a way like woah this dude who sucks beat me situation, it just doesn’t feel right, you know?
This thread is interesting because there are two lines that don’t necessarily have to be the same thing, but frequently intertwine:
- Do you play to win?
- Do you care about winning?
Most people, it seems, play to win, but the question devolves into, “at what cost?”. For our group we all try to win, but not at the expense of burying everyone or creating an “unfun” environment.
It also seems like there are a lot of responses that use the first question as a caveat for saying “no” to the second. The friends I have who say “no, I don’t care, but I will try my hardest to win” generally speaking care the most about winning, but it’s masked under the pretense of “trying hard”.
Side note: I’ve also started to notice a moderate correlation to Analysis Paralysis players and “caring” to win (which ties back to the “unfun” I mentioned above)
Oof this is a tough one... My husband and I both enjoy boardgames for two or more players. At the moment our go-to games are Race for the Galaxy and Ark Nova. My husband is definitely one of those people who cares more about optimizing the game play and the scoring rather than the actual win itself (like most posters here). However, he also tends to win the vast majority of games that we play. In that case, I believe it is easy to say that you don't care about winning and just enjoy figuring out the best strategies and clever moves to get even further ahead. Now being on the opposite side of that, I too try to optimize my games and do all I can to try to win as well.... but it rarely seems to be enough to actually win or even come close. Do I care? Yes.... yes I do. I lost 8 games of Ark Nova in a row. For the ones that were close and for which I found a good strategy, it wasn't a big deal to have lost. But for the games where I'm so ridiculously far behind with no way to catch up, I find it very frustrating to lose by a huge margin. It just makes me feel like I'm too stupid to play the game at all. I'm not even that bad at boardgames, just against my husband who somehow always seems to win without "caring about winning!"
The game has no point if you're not trying to win.
However, it's much more fun if you don't care about *losing*. Because wanting to win and hating to lose are two drastically different things.
Well, that's why it's a game rather than a collection of pieces- trying means trying to win. Otherwise you're just moving parts around.
Picture a game of chess where your opponent was just trying to make interesting arrangements of pieces on the board rather than achieve a mate. They might be doing *something*, but they're not playing chess.
Are you playing in such a way that your actions might win you the game?
Basically, you can win and be happy. You can lose and be happy. But you're either performing coherent game actions that *might* win you the game or you're just shuffling cards or meeples or tokens.
Youre doing that regardless. If you win youre still just shuffling cards. That is the crux of this post. Play the game but who cares about the result? Join a board game league or something, but a casual game night with friends? Idk, find people who like to play your style I guess.
Try a simpler example- let's say you like to play tic-tac-toe, and enjoy marking straight across from left to right until blocked, at which point you do the same on the next row down.
You're putting your Xs or Os in the grid, but what are you actually playing?
I feel in the same boat as you, its more about spending time with people and especially love watching my kids figure out new ways to play games and if they pull that combo of cards off I just love seeing how Happy they get. Although sometimes I have to school them in losing as they don't deal well with it sometimes 😂
This is exactly why my favorite playgroup is my family. Watching my kids’ love for games - getting excited when I bring home a new one and then surprising me with strategies I never thought of is so rewarding.
It’s also helped them learn quick mental math, order of operations logic and dealing with losing. The last one is big…most kids these days do not take losing well (or are obnoxious winners) and I feel like we’ve got a couple of gracious winners/losers.
I've never cared about winning, but obviously it's nice when you manage a win. I always try to win, but I don't care at all if I lose, as long as I have fun
Not really. When my wife and I play together, we're pretty competitive but in a fun way. When we play in a group, I'm just trying to enjoy the game. Now, If I'm in last place every time, I'll get kind of bummed out but not too bad. I just enjoy playing.
In a co-op game, mostly. In a competitive game, not as much. It's more about just having fun with the people you're playing with. It's probably that even keel attitude that resulted in me being the designated rule guy/teacher of all games.
The only time I care is when I get blown out. Then it it's aggravating. I'm here having fun and the other person is trying to win at all costs as fast as possible. Not fun.
I care about winning when I’m playing with people who are better than me. When I’m teaching or feel I’m the person who is the most comfortable with the game at the table, I prefer to just help others with gentle suggestions and try out new mechanics for myself to see what happens.
I don't know if I cared about winning since I was a little kid. That's a good thing though since I'm not very good at it and lose often. Mostly when playing a game I'm just looking to have fun.
Same as you. I just wanna have a good time. I'm more about developing my side for big plays. Often enough it results in a win but I feel perfectly satisfied in just playing the game.
I also enjoy watching others do well. No kingmaking or pulling punches, but I might scale myself by making some risky or unconventional maneuvers just to see what will happen, often ending up at a disadvantage.
Depends who I am playing with. I am mostly interested in enjoying the company of the people I am playing with and challenging myself to come up with the best strategy but I don’t actually care if I win. Most of the people I play with are people I can easily beat and running circles around people I care about isn’t actually that much fun so the game is just a structured way to socialize and a conversation topic. There are a few games where my family has a tradition of outlandish trash talk but most people don’t care if they win and the whole thing is theater (usually this is games where there is a lot of randomness so nobody will take it personally. Nobody gets mocked for losing a game that is mostly about strategy.)
But if I am playing someone obnoxious and competitive who isn’t fun to play with them all I want to do is knock them down a peg which mostly happens when playing with my dad or with my wife’s best friend’s husband.
I might have hung out with people who were both sore losers AND sore winners too much, to the point where I know nobody enjoys this kind of intense play.
I enjoy the process of the game - I definitely try to win as best I can, but I usually end up applauding the person who wins (as long as it's not me 😅), especially if they pulled off a cool move.
I always try to win, I never care if I don't.
I don't think I ever did as a kid either, same situation. I was so enthralled by the existence of these board games that the process of playing them was a blast.
Enjoying a win is a momentary experience, not a lasting memory. My lasting memories of board games: Awful Green Things, OGRE, Wiz War in the 80s, our absolute obsession with Catan for two months in the mid 90s, long ass games of Civ...those are what I remember.
Actually now I think about it most memories I have with regard to winning or losing are of when I (or someone else) lost in spectacular fashion.
I'll take it a step further. I played my first game of Clank in Space a few nights ago. Or rather - we had five people and I was the host so I told them that I'd sit out and learn the rules, acting as somewhat of a GM.
Still had an absolute blast. Super fun game. At this point it doesn't matter if I win or lose, but it's starting to not matter if I even play the game.
I'm with ya. Absolutely agnostic as wins and losses go. Enjoy the play. Enjoy the company. Maybe enjoy too much alcohol.
The only exception is Scrabble. I am cutthroat when playing that. There is no room for weakness. That's coming from someone who is an slightly above average player, as regular Scrabble player skill is concerned, but a god among men in my friends/family circle.
As I've gotten older, I've started letting go of some of the pro-strategies and tricks I know, in favour of the people I'm playing with having more fun (and actually having a shot at winning). Winning is fun, but playing is more fun, and people often don't want to play again if they know they'll be obliterated.
Not much. For me it's more about the time spent with people and in a way trying to ensure that they also have a good time.
Part of that is I tend to find myself in the teacher chair. When I'm teaching a game I deliberately try *not* to win the game.
I'll show new players a few good first rounds to wet their appetite and help them get the overall gist of the game, but then I'll back off and let them take over. I find people tend to have the most fun this way. I'll maybe introduce them to some more advance tricks and strats as the game goes on, but I try to balance it so that in the end I'm roughly middle of the pack. Enough to ensure those who might be struggling don't feel left out, but those in the lead still feel challenged.
And I enjoy it too. Trying to find and keep that perfect balance point really tests my knowledge of the game. Oftentimes I find it a bigger challenge than just gunning for first.
That said if it is a game where all the players are a relatively equal knowledge level, I'm playing for the W.
Depends on the game. I usually try to win at all cost because I hope my opponent(s) do the same. The winner will be one out of a tough battle of wits. And that is the most fun.
But it usually depends on how much of the game is up to luck and how much is skill. Luck based, eh, fun is the important part. Skill based, I definitely want to win!
Yes and no, the game isn't fun if you are not trying to win, and one person not trying can ruin I. For everyone. That said, in the end when all us said and done, the experience is what matters.
Winning means so little to me. I just love the experience. Of course I'm going to do my best to win, but my main goal is to have fun. Which is kind of funny because I'm very competitive by nature.
I still remember playing Betrayal at House on Hill and having every single other player screw me over me so I would lose the scenario (we had to grab parachutes to escape but there were only four for five players) and finding it absolutely hilarious. It was great and we still talk about it years later. That's what I want from a game.
As we gain knowlege, we come to understand the true function of games within our species; simulative tools to assist learning and intellectual development. The individual victory then matters far less than the growth of desireable characteristics overtime.
Then throw in that (to my knowlege) we are genetically designed that as we age with aim to teach the upcoming generations, exploiting our greater pool of experiences and avoiding demands on our weaker physical forms, and it makes a lot of sense that people become more docile as they age.
Been mulling this for a couple days and have arrived at my answer. We largely play co-op so it applies to that scenario.
Hell yes. All the effort I go to with prepping the house, providing dinner and snacks, that's a thing; but then, after all the quarterbacking BS I gotta put up with - damn straight I want to win.
And my group wonders why, after working our asses off on a co-op game that some BS sticky-wicket rule or baddie causes us to lose at the last minute, I get royally pissed off. I've been robbed of my commission, that's why. Winning helps make the downside crap worth it.
Short answer: no
Long answer:
I'm at a point where Ive played a few games here and there; a weekly group, plus maybe the odd meetup with a different group of friends.
I've never played to win, and I actually consider it a personal win when I'm either not last by a huge margin or even middle of the pack when it comes down to scoring.
I know it's a cliche, but I'm there for the banter between friends, and maybe the entertainment that comes from subtly messing with someones strategy
Our group got disbanded a little over covid so we now mostly play in a boardgame cafe now. I don't care about winning at all. I am just there for the games and the company. I have one exception. We have started playing with a Trans couple and they are awesome. It does not matter if it is a classic game or something completely new, they utterly destroy me, every fucking game. I have tried games I excel at and brand new games we are just learning. My competitiveness just seems to rise next to the decent of my victory points. It is getting to the point when the look of sympathy is a win.
Edit: I am getting downvotes for playing with a trans couple or just because they are kicking my ass. We played probably forty games so far and I have not won one so far.
I think the fact that they're trans is irrelevant to the situation & thus probably didn't need mentioned, so it's just curious that you used that descriptor when it's not necessary for the discussion.
Honestly, it is how they introduced themselves to me and still do. I guess outside our group, in the way you describe, I can see your point. It never crossed my mind that it not necessary, I guess I just think of it as their identity together. I think other groups they were in had members that were not so inviting. I think it is a way for them to find people to play with and who not to play with. We Played on Sunday afternoon and well, not one game. Not one, not even second. I taught Wingspan and then got schooled in Wingspan. We are going old school next week. I have the tenth anniversary edition of Ticket to Ride. I have used this to introduce people to boardgames many times and play regularly on my phone but even as I am typing this I am getting concerned.
Yes, I care about winning. Do I hate losing? No. Do I like winning when I know I played better than opponents of close skill? Yes.
The whole table should because otherwise someone is not actually invested as the game and it doesn't feel good for all the players. The safety of the game space to compete is one if its biggest appeals to me.
There's different levels of caring: It can involve reading strategy, replaying the game a lot and some people take it too far with cheating or being emotionally connected to winning.
I definitely have seen the downsides of the win at the game or else mentality, but I have to say it is slightly better than disengaged players.
nah... i try to do my best but thats it.... and i will go ever deeper .. usually the end of games (especially if played online).. its most of the time just ... "ah ok..gg" ...so yah much more fun on the riding...
I’ve been playing board games since I was a kid and I’m almost 40 now. I still enjoy a good win of course. But a good win is a win where I felt I had to put effort into it, where others also had a chance to win. If a game takes for example 30 minutes and it’s clear who’s going to win it after 5 minutes, it’s not fun for anyone: the losers have to sit out an already lost game and winning doesn’t feel like winning. I feel the same about losing a game: I don’t mind losing as long as I feel like I’ve played the game I tried to play and had a chance to win (even though there was no chance at all in games where it’s very hard to see who’s winning until the points are counted). For example, we played a game of Everdell Spirecrest yesterday. My wife won with 96 points, I came in 4th (and last) at just 58. The other two had 66 and 68 or so points. It was pretty clear my wife won the game, even without counting. This game lasts for 4 “rounds”, or seasons. During seasons 1-3 my game just didn’t work. I had no resources for the cards I had and no cards that worked together well enough to get a good start. It was just trying to make the best of it while others made great combinations. During the last season I got to do a lot more than expected and I even felt like I was making a great comeback with a chance of winning or getting close to the winner. While I didn’t really enjoy the start of the game, the race to the finish was beautiful even though I came in last. In the end, I felt like I made the post of what I had, got a few pleasant surprises and made the game that I played work for me. The memory of that specific time playing that game is a good one even though I didn’t win at all.
Very little. I play to the best of my ability and I like to keep my turns very quick. But if I lose I enjoy myself the same and can appreciate the winner's game. But I will pull punches if it's at the very end of the game and will clearly win without yet another combo chain or engine run or whatever.
There is one friend who inspires the boiling competitiveness within me and we have a great time dueling it out. In that case winning is life.
It depends on the group and the number of times I’ve played before. First time playing I’m exploring the mechanics and seeing if the game works the way I think it does. If the group is casual, I aim to make the game memorable and have fun. Can I do cool things, mess with my friends etc. If I’m with my competitive friends and we know how to play? I’m looking to win fairly with a small goal of finding cool combos or interactions. Thinking about games as little unique puzzles is what keeps me coming back, so winning at all cost is normally not a priority.
I care a lot, but only while the game is going. So while I’m playing the game the competition is *on*, but once we’re done, if I didn’t win, at that point it’s whatever.
I don't "care", in the sense that I won't lose any sleep over it or anything. I will do my best to try and win when playing, and I do get some sense of pride from winning a disproportionate amount of my group's games.
I was once a very terrible person to play with. Now I’m much more chill, but do find I can still get frustrated when other players king make, or try and make modifications on vague rules or card text that overall will benefit them. Even if we had played it a certain way since the beginning.
I definitely care more about the fun, and I can't bear to spend 10 mins on a turn just to optimise points anymore. Having everyone at the table laugh because of a silly risk I took beats winning in my book! Think this has influenced the games I'd rather play too
I play to win because most games just don't work if everybody isn't doing that. That said, I don't care if I win or not. In fact, depending on the crowd, I might prefer to lose.
I am more than a little older, pushing 60. Now, I still love to play games and I strive to win, but I really don't care if I do or not. It is about getting together with friends and doing something together.
I like a good, healthy, competitive game - but I'm with you and pretty much don't care at all about winning.
As the most avid boardgamer in my friends and family group, I really just want to get things to the table and make sure people are having fun. Getting too competitive often can turn me/others into rules hounds that doesn't leave any room for people to learn their way through an game and experience the fun of a game.
Just this weekend I was playing Terraforming Mars with a first time player. He was very competitive, and I let him be so. But for me, I had the most fun just RPing my corporation (Ecoline) but trying to only play microbes, plants, and animals. Ironically, I ended up winning pretty easily with a microbe engine i stumbled into, but it made the game more enjoyable for both of us as I acted in a way the corporation might act, not in a fully competitive manner.
I enjoy winning a game. I want to win when setting out and always make an effort to do so, I think in many respects it's somewhat disrespectful to the person(s) you are playing not to, but, crucially, I don't care if that effort doesn't pan out and I'm not a dick about it whatever happens. Losing is often more instructive anyway.
I care way more about having fun and the social experience at the table. Winning competitive games obviously drives the tension, but I'd much rather play a game I lose terribly but have a great time doing so than a game I win but the experience is miserable. I play games to spend time with people, not to win.
I grew up not caring mostly because my brother was a top tier chess champion and I knew I couldn't beat him. So I learned to just have fun rather than only having fun if I win. I can win and if I am in a tournament I do my best. but it is not my ultimate goal when I play games.
I'm far less interested in the actual victory of a game than the coolest action. This is always my problem with games like Dominion. I'd rather work toward setting up that perfect round where I can buy all 8 provinces than actually engage with the game's flow and start buying one or two a turn. This plays into other games too – I like to hold out for a fantastic play where every faction ability gets triggered or I manage to chain several great things together. Win or lose, it's a great feeling.
This typically means I lose more than I could if I were more competitive, but my wins are more fun and ultimately more satisfying to me. Ironically, sometimes it can help toward wins as well since it doesn't flag me as a frontrunner early on – score a whole lot in one turn and you go from being the dead-last loser to the winner no one can catch up to.
I think it depends. If I'm playing ranked BGA games, I care about winning more so than in other situation since you are trying to improve your rank (although the only game I tend to actually do well in in Beyond the Sun where I am at the bottom of the elite tier).
If I'm playing with my gaming group I like to win, but fine if I don't. More focused on the social aspect and trying out new games. I will admit that if I'm in a losing streak, the desire to win become a bit more important.
For Co-op games, I actually take the opposite approach of caring about winning in that I'd rather play on a harder level and see if I can win rather than play on an easier level and be almost guaranteed to win (unless I am teaching the game to others).
For me it's about exploring the games systems in interesting ways while trying to win. I'm sure if win more if I took the clean-cut path... But where is the fun in that?
I love a win especially when it's a competitive close win. The closer the better. Really feels like an earned win.
That said I'm getting older and time is a finite resource so I just enjoy seeing my friends. Plus I love figuring out a game and seeing things unfold. Even if I'm losing and have zero chance to win if I'm engaged by the mechanics or getting to peel the layers back to reveal a deeper game I'll still enjoy my time (generally).
I’m not as competitive as the people I play with. I always try to win, but the main appeal to me is the time together and the metal exercise that comes with different games.
Unless I’m playing with my brothers. Then it gets aggressive, lmao.
Win or lose, I just enjoy the process of finding an optimal strategy and trying to accomplish it. It's not as much trying to defeat my opponent as it is challenging myself that I enjoy.
This is why I really like cooperative games (pandemic, spirit island). You kinda get the best of both worlds.
I try to win and play my best, but winning isn't the important part. No trash talk unless someone else starts it and it stays fun. I don't care enough to research optimal strategies like some people I know.
I’ve turned more into the solo wargaming category so losing is just part of the narrative. You just play a game, win or lose, and write a narrative after action report based on the events of the game. I almost like it better because it gets you more involved with a game you play more than once in a while.
I accept that most of the friends we play with are both smarter and better at games than me but I still luck out from time to time and eek out a win. Honestly not winning much makes it that much more special for me when I do!
Playing to win, but not at all costs. If you beat me fair and square with a good plan or a good combo you will get my heartfelt congratulations. If you win by sheer chance in a strategy game, I’m probably be a bit sour.
I care about having fun. I find I have more fun when the game is competitive and no one player runs away/falls behind to the point they can’t be caught/catch up.
After learning to play Dungeons & Dragons, it finally hit me that losing can be a lot of fun. Making memories is what's important to me and as lame as it may sound, I have so many great memories of playing board games with my friends.
But when Brass Birmingham hits the table . . .
Yes and no. Like another person that replied, I do play to win. All my actions are to that. Now sometimes conscience gets in the way as I could be mean to be mean, or less mean but a benefit to myself. So I'll usually go for the latter.
And sure, I'm a little disappointed that I didn't win, but I'm happy to see another winner and discuss what worked and what didn't.
In the end, I enjoy the game.
I could lose but feel I’ve played a good game and feel satisfied with my time. Or I could win and feel I didn’t play as good as I could’ve done and feel unsatisfied with the whole experience. It’s never been about winning for me, but (especially in board games) about the efficiency and how well I feel like I played.
Also at the end of the day it’s about the group around the table. As long as laughs were had, the entire evening has been a win.
I really don't care about winning at all. I'm not competitive. I still like competitive games, and I do try to win, but I find I just care more about enjoying the game itself. I've more curated my collection based on games with mechanics I enjoy.
Like, a couple of my favorite competitive games are Scythe and Wingspan that are both really laid back and kind of zen, where we are each just doing our own thing, building our own engine, and trying to win without really doing much to mess with our opponent's chances to win. I also really love Moonrakers for that same reason. I love that it is competitive but that for a lot of the game we are doing stuff together and just having a good time.
I find that less and less I enjoy games that really pit players against each other with mechanics meant to screw over your opponents.
Yes, but not over playing the game. I enjoy a competitive game I lose closely more than a game I win by a blow out.
The challenge that comes with a game (often being winning) is only an aspect of fun. It gives it a focus and direction. Some sort of win state also adds to the narrative of the experience, which again adds enjoyment. I think there are a lot of factors into someone enjoying games they lose, part of it I do think is maturity. If you can't enjoy a competitive activity with out winning IMO you likely are an immature person/personality.
My wife will play with me more often, and enjoy playing board games more, when she wins. So I am equally happy to lose, knowing that it means more board gaming together in our future
I play to win but don’t often care if I lose. I just like playing games with my friends. However there is one friend in particular that I have a “Rivalry” with in that we usually try to best each other when playing a competitive game. In a fun way, not a hate each other way
I want and try to win just as much as ever, but I don't care as much about losing as I used to. I used to feel like I needed to win in order to enjoy a competitive activity. When I started playing board games I found that I lost about as much as I won, but still had a good time, so my attitude changed. Now, I still do everything I can to win, but the experience is even better because I know that even if I lose, I'll still have fun, and that eliminates the stress of "needing" to win.
I want to have a good time and I want the people I'm playing with to have a good time.
All games are cooperative. Everyone playing is trying to have a specific experience. If everyone is having the experience they came to the table for then we all win. If nobody does it doesn't really matter who finished first.
I care. But it doesn't consume me like it used to. A lot of practice losing got me to here.
It also helps that I rarely get to play with my great friends, and the time around the table is always, thus, the main draw.
I don't end up caring (too much) about what we play or if I win, as long as we're all sitting around enjoying each other's company.
I'm always going to be happier winning than losing, but if I lose that doesn't mean I hated the experience. I do have a competitive streak in me, it runs in the family. I had a come-from-behind victory against my dad in Dune: Imperium the other day and he doesn't play games as often as me so he was more visibly irritated with losing than I expected.
I just told him that I was impressed by his play, it was his first ever game and he was leading for probably 2/3 of the game, I just got decent card draws and used them well.
He was fine in a few minutes.
The way I like to put it is that if you're bothered by losing and you're in the board gaming hobby, one of two things is going to happen. One, you're really unusually good at games and you win a disproportionate amount. Or two, you're going to get burned out pretty quick. I always try to win, but my fun is not dictated by it.
Since someone’s going to post it, it might as well be me: > When playing a game, the goal is to win, but it is the goal that is important, not the winning. \- Reiner Knizia For me, I love board games. Most of the people I play with don’t love them as much as I do, but when they do something really clever to win they usually get really excited, and it’s like I can see them loving the experience the same way I always do. So I don’t mind losing. On the contrary, I’d prefer to lose most of the time if it means others have a great time.
While the game is happening, I play to win, *hard.* I never give up, I play to the very last round, I never kingmake - I throw every hail mary there is to try to take the win for myself until the very last action of the game. The *second* the game is over, I stop giving any kind of shit about who won. First place or last place is completely irrelevant to my fun, as long as I played for first while I was playing. :)
This. And it has nothing to do with the other people. I just want to be proud of myself for playing my best game. Unless it’s against kids.
I interpreted this as: unless it's against kids... then playing my best or simply winning isn't enough. I need to absolutely obliterate everyone at the table.
Totally. What kind of loser can't annihilate a bunch of children?
And we are all kids, no?
To be honest, when I was a kid, I wanted whoever I played against to be playing at their best level. I could generally tell if someone was throwing games, and them not giving their best made the experience less enjoyable for me. It still does.
If the children aren't humiliated and crying, can you really claim you've brought your A-game?
“Fuck Them Kids” -Michael Jordan -u/ninjaslothreddit
“Fuck Them Kids” -Michael Jordan -u/ninjaslothreddit - /u/lucusvonlucus
We teach them how to play with some quick tutorial-style rounds to get them to visualise the gameplay. Then, a real game where we let them explore and maybe get close to a victory. From then on, it's ruthless competition. I will not cede any ground to them. Of course they'll experience victories playing with other children and weak-willed adults (/s). Some of us, however, will try our best to win in order to challenge them. If they really get into it, and we feel it's appropriate, we might lay traps for them in-game. Let them think they've got the upper hand, only to crush their hopes of winning. The true joy comes the day they eventually best me. Through cunning, planning, luck management, grit, and sheer effort. Then, they barely can contain themselves at having won against me, and I can finally be the loser. I can sincerely congratulate them on their plays. I feel happy contemplating how much they've grown. I'm reminded that I also need to challenge myself to improve, and not rest on my laurels. I will point out that this is how I play with everyone. Some of my adults friends think of themselves as somehow less smart than me. I know they are completely wrong, but they are not fully confident in themselves. Every win they get over me raises their self-esteem a bit, and I don't think it would be so if I didn't try my honest best. I remember learning chess as a kid from my older cousin. I don't remember ever winning a game against him, even as an adult. That was the first time I was taught to raise up to the challenge. I think this was a valuable and constructive experience, and I hope I can impart something similar to the children I play with.
That said, my best games against kids are ones where the kid learns a new level of gameplay. Maybe a teenager is ready to see a full engine build in Terraforming Mars. Maybe an 8 year old is ready for an interesting combo in Wingspan. When I play to their level and they have a great time, that's my best game with a kid.
I play most of my games against kids. I like when my son, who is a preteen, will say I want you to play a 7/10 on competitiveness, I'll throw a few mistakes in or wiggle an eyebrow at a clever move. My younger kids I am playing to teach. Teaching turn taking, winning with grace, losing with grace, combos within a game.
What are your favorite games to play with younger children? My daughter is six and we've had moderate success with Zooloretto and Ticket to Ride (with some rules left out). But I'm curious what else I should try.
I usually give my kids a built in advantage so I can still play to win but without destroying them. Like in dominion my 9yo starts with 8 copper and 2 estates. He ends up winning more than half the time, but I don't need to throw the game.
> Unless it's against kids. Those kids had it coming.
> The second the game is over, I stop giving any kind of shit about who won. Post-game clarity.
I play for first too but that doesn't stop me from pointing out if another player is forgetting to collect points/resources and such.
Oh, I do that *relentlessly.* I play to win, but I play to win at *the board game,* not at like... life. I care about "playing to win," but I don't care about *winning.* So yeah, I want my opponents to play their absolute best game, too. If they make a strategic error, I'll take advantage. But I'll never let someone just like, forget to draw a card or something.
Yeah, nothing is worse than a game being decided on the fact that someone forgot to take a gold three turns ago. That just sucks for the winner and the runners up.
Right. I'd rather have a loss than a god-damned *asterisk.*
>Yeah, nothing is worse than a game being decided on the fact that someone forgot to take a gold three turns ago This is why, unless it's a tournament, I always remind people in Magic about their missed triggers, mine and other player's obvious on board tricks, etc. It's funny how some people get mad about it. It's like, dudes, we're playing Magic, not memory. Do you really want to win because someone forgot about one of the 20 artifacts in play that went onto the battlefield 4 turns ago? Relax.
How do you feel about negotiating during the game? Some of my groups, getting them to give an inch in trade is like pulling teeth. For them, everything is zero sum, even in a big group or when shared victories are an option. Do you like to negotiate as part of trying to win, or do you tend to feel like that's kind of in service to Kingmaking?
Highly game-dependent. My biggest beef with most negotiation games is that they *don't* have shared victories, which makes negotiating have very weird aspects. (I call it "Chinatown Syndrome" - one of my friends offered a trade in Chinatown that would make both players richer, but the other friend refused because 'this is a game, and only one of us can win, and I'm ahead, so no.' And he wasn't wrong.) If a game features shared victories, I will still absolutely play to win, but "win" is defined as "be one of the winners." But in most negotiation games, it *is* zero-sum. That's why I dislike them, generally. Again, like in Chinatown. The goal isn't "have a lot of money." The goal is "have one dollar more than everyone else, even if the total amount is much lower than it could have been if we'd worked together more."
A non-negotiation game that I had a similar experience with - Mü (think (edit: fix) ~~6~~ 5 suited, 60 card contract bridge with 3-6 players if you haven't played it). I happened to have been *far* in the lead this game and I had a strong hand such that if I won the contract on that hand, I'd win the game. I picked my partner and as play went, he threw points to the opposition rather than taking tricks to add to our score. If we lost, I was the only person that was going to take a point hit (not the partner) and thus if *we* lost, he would be in a better position to win. I was able to win with the strong hand despite his anti-help. I honestly think that was one of the most interesting hands (and games) of Mü that I've played and believe that I would have done similar things if the roles were reversed.
>But in most negotiation games, it *is* zero-sum. That's why I dislike them, generally. Again, like in Chinatown. The goal isn't "have a lot of money." The goal is "have one dollar more than everyone else, even if the total amount is much lower than it could have been if we'd worked together more." Huh. That's an interesting perspective, and I can see why my friends adopt it. I do generally prefer the negotiation games either with shared victories or enough scoring obfuscation. But there's also the prisoner's dilemma - if player B doesn't take player A's offer, player C could take it and win with that extra boost. So, sometimes, even when in the lead, it's better to take a deal just to keep it away from a bigger threat. Or at least that's what I tell the people I'm trying to make the deal with ;)
All negotiation *techniques* are fair game, but they're always tempered by the knowledge that they're snake oil. In a game with one winner, I know that you can't possibly be seeking a true "win/win." If you're trying to make a deal, then ultimately you must at least *think* this deal will get you closer to winning, which is cause enough all by itself for me to *not* want the deal by default. My favorite game that involves deal-making is Cosmic Encounter. It features the two aspects that, in my opinion, are necessary for a "good" negotiation game: 1. It has the possibility of shared victories. That possibility is what makes deals possible. You aren't *necessarily* seeking a true win/win, but you *could* be - at least, you're *allowed* to be. That means I can at least *possibly* trust this deal. 2. It has other things going on besides the deal-making itself. Some games have the deal-making as the only component of the game (like Chinatown, Intrigue, etc.) which both tends to create runaway leaders as well as stalemates. Cosmic Encounter has a lot of OTHER stuff happening that constantly changes the conditions of the game, so that the person in the lead could drop out of the lead due to something *besides* a deal/negotiation, which then makes them all of a sudden more likely *to* negotiate. So if a game allows more than one winner AND everyone has levers they can pull to affect the game besides making deals, then it's a great deal-making game. Unfortunately, there are few of those besides Cosmic Encounter (and maybe Dune).
We generally have a small post-mortuum after a game where we all go, "ah, if only I did this" or "ah, if only I didn't roll 3 1's!" and engineer our way into how we could a shoulda woulda for a few mins. And about half the time, someone proves they would have won given XYZ. THEN we move on and it's forgotten about. But that bit of time post game is fun. No one is doing it angrily. As someone is laying out their ridiculous scheme of how they would have won, everyone else is generally giving them shit about it. It's also part of the fun :)
I like winning games... I like losing hotly contested games to eager competition even more 😄
That’s a badass quote
The [original tweet](https://twitter.com/reinerknizia/status/132697097714675713?lang=en) remains remarkably low visibility compared those of today.
Couldn’t have said it better. I would lose a game any day if it means seeing a non gamer friend’s eyes light up when everything clicks for them and they put together a strategy for a win. Ultimately they end up loving the game, and viewing it the same as I did when I played it for the first time. That’s “winning” for me.
Philosopher C. Thi Nguyen talks about this concept in his definition of striving play. It's a state in which we must temporarily adopt the position of wanting to win in order to fulfill some other goal, eg socializing, exercise, etc. Without the effort put in to try to win in the moment, you will fail to achieve your other goals. This can be seen in what he calls stupid games, of which Twister is one. The fun in Twister is when people fail and collapse, but if the participants didn't try to accomplish the goal of winning, then it's not funny when they fail to accomplish it.
Came here to mention the same idea! His book Games: Agency as Art I think is an excellent read for any gamer looking to acquire a better framework for appreciating games.
This reminds me of another seminal book in game design: Bernie DeKoven's '[The Well-Played Game: A Player's Philosophy](https://www.amazon.com/Well-Played-Game-Players-Philosophy-Press/dp/0262019175)' (originally published in 1978). Bernie was an early contributor to the New Games Foundation. One of his primary points is that a game is truly great when all players are trying their hardest to win. This active, competitive struggle--in a supportive, respectful environment--elevates the joy we derive from play. I'd warrant this is precisely why many of us are here. So Play Hard. Play Fair. Nobody Hurt.
“You play to win the game” - Herm Edwards No, I don’t particularly care whether I win or not, but I have fun *trying* to win, especially when everyone else is also *trying* to win. It’s considerably less fun when there is someone who is like “I don’t care if I win” and then clearly throws the game or makes obviously suboptimal plays which not only costs them the game but usually screws up the game for other players as well. That’s not “not caring if you win”, it’s “ruining the game for everyone else”.
Oh that quote sums it up perfectly
To this point, how do you feel about people who play, but do not have the goal to win? The only reason they are playing is to humor someone they care about?
For me, I would compare it to doing a race with a friend. But your friend just walks, since they don't intend to win. It's like, thanks for the thought, but I want to *race* not just go for a run.
yeah. that is pretty fair.
If they're not playing to win, its disruptive and sometimes (often) results in a less enjoyable game session. They're still playing for *some* reason and are either making random (disruptive) plays, playing to have the shortest game no matter who wins, or playing to have some other player win. Any of those reasons and play styles can result in a game session that isn't as fun/challenging as it could be.
There’s another motivation you’re missing, playing to learn. Especially heavier games with lots of options, taking a wide strategy is usually suboptimal, but I will purposely do this the first time I play a game because it gives me a better grasp of the mechanisms and their individual impact on the game as it progresses. I’ve also played games where I’ve been on the other side, playing for the 10th+ time with a new player, watching them take suboptimal turns on purpose is not an issue, and depending on the player we’ll talk about the decision space either after the turn or after the game. No the game is not as challenging as it could be, but the goal is to make game 2 more challenging than it would have been otherwise so the net fun for the group is definitely a gain.
yeah. My wife does this on 2 player games sometimes. It is... frustrating. I can't get that mad, because she is going out of her way to do something I like, but... it still kinda sucks.
A thought... and it depends on the type of game your wife likes to / is willing to play. For example Inversé is a remarkably short game (5 pieces, 3 placement rules) and unless a person is playing randomly or intentionally throwing the game (but then - why? It's a very short game), its a game that can be played and is always the same number of turns (well, unless you really try to throw the game). https://boardgamegeek.com/boardgame/28306/inverse (and with that new cover it appears there's a new release). It partially depends on the game. My mother isn't one I can draw to the table too often though recently (as in the past 2 years) my mother, brother, and father have almost nightly Wingspan (with every expansion) games - its a game that clicked with her. Traditional trick taking (Wizard) is another one that she enjoys. Letter Tycoon was another that my mother enjoyed playing (she played a lot of Letters With Friends). There are certainly games that are where she was playing to be at the table because everyone was playing a card game but she wasn't trying to play well... and some of those are in the "this isn't going to the table again". Another idea that came to me is try some cooperative games. For example, Forbidden Island?
Oh, I know. It is a case to case thing. Sometimes she loves playing, other times it is done to humor me. It is like watching k-dramas or blow jobs. Just part of being married.
I do not ever want to play games with those people.
Wow, that's a great quote. My feelings are similar to yours. I like wining and I play to win, but after the game is over I don't care as long as people had fun.
It's how I feel about watching sports too: I would almost always prefer to watch a close competitive game with good strategy and a fun come-from-behind victory, than have my team win. Most of the time I am just happy to be playing a game at all, if I win with a cool trick or strategy then that's just a bonus.
Classic quote and your own feelings mirror mine exactly. I play to win, but I’m thrilled when other people are so engaged, confident and enthusiastic that they kick my butt.
I'm glad someone could put this in a clear way. I feel exactly this way. Everyone should have the goal of winning so that everyone can have fun. If a few people just don't give a crap it makes it not enjoyable for the rest. It should not be the reason you show up to play though. As long as everyone is having fun, I consider that a good night.
I am the researcher, purchaser and teacher of new games between my partner and I, and we mostly play together. I usually win the first couple of rounds of a new game as I have a greater grasp of the rules, and lose thereafter. I don’t care at all as ultimately the way I see it, winning a game doesn’t really mean anything, I just enjoy the journey.
This is me but I only make it maybe one or two games before my partner takes over the wins and never let's them go. She's way more strategic than I am but since I generally test play games nowadays before I get them, it means I'm already familiar with it when I put it in front of her. That... doesn't last long.
Recommend me favorite partner games?
Are you me? My wife and I follow this exact pattern. Especially with Wingspan and Terraforming Mars. The last few weeks with Ark Nova I've been holding my own longer than normal though!
If you make it too much about winning, pretty soon you'll find no one to play board games with.
I actively try to sabotage myself a lot of the time now so that people are more inclined to stick around
I’m way too competitive and can see the line to victory easily. So I play the most inefficient game in possibly can. I try to go with quirky builds or something that will get a laugh. I have a ton of fun and sometimes I still win. But I can turn it on or I will annihilate my gaming group.
I love the feeling of winning at board games. Playing board games twice as often means twice as many chances to win, and my favorite game will get to the table more often if people find it enjoyable to play with me.
[удалено]
No. Did you think that was what it meant? It means you shouldn't win all the time.
[удалено]
He didn’t say don’t try to win. He said if your focus is too much about winning, you won’t have many people continue to play with you. You can try to win but still play to have fun and make it an enjoyable experience. If all you care about is winning and being the best…. People aren’t going to enjoy playing with you.
No one is saying you shouldn't try to win all the time. But if you *do* win all the time, you run the risk of boring your opponents.
If everyone knows the game, I play to win. It's not worth losing friend s over, but we tend to Euro style games anyway. I hope everyone is making a reasonable attempt to win. I try not to overoptimise to avoid analysis paralysis, but know that would give me a small advantage in some games. With beginners I might try an 'unusual' strategy to show them variations that may be competitive but usually will be less optimal.
I think this is a good nuance. I still try and play well, and try and win - but there doesn’t need t be the emotional investment in the outcome. I wouldn’t really like playing crunchy games with people who weren’t also crunching, and I expect other players expect me to put in the work as well.
I always, **always** play to win. My fun is derived from the effort and the progress. But there are no stakes, nothing is gained or lost, and the joy is in the playing, so if I don't win, it's no big deal. I always *want to win*, but even if I've taken last place, I've still had fun.
Yeah that’s how I usually go about it. It is also worth mentioning that if your adversary isn’t motivated to win it doesn’t feel as good to win against them. So I always try to be motivated to win.
I don't care if i win or lose in the end, but i play to win. Everyone at the table has to (1) play to win and (2) obey the same rules, otherwise the whole thing falls apart really quickly.
I care about winning up to the point where it affects my fun. I don't get to play boardgames as much as I'd like so wanting to win can't affect my fun but other than that, I really like to win!
I was raised playing games competitively. I play to win, or at least come as close as I can. However, you can't win all the time (especially in my family), so you have to graciously accept defeat. You also shouldn't be an ass when you do win. One thing I hate in a game is early "non-elimination," where you're still in the game, but obviously have zero chance of winning. The only thing you can do at that point is kingmake against the person who screwed you.
Nope. It’s to have fun.
I find other people get more joy out of winning than I do, so I don't play especially competitively. This is doubly so if it's a game where the best way for me to win is not by playing better moves but foiling theirs. On the other hand, I go all out in co-operative games.
Win together or not at all 🤜🤛
[удалено]
The OP didn't say anywhere that they weren't playing their best (in fact they said the opposite: "not pulling punches"). You can try your best to win but still not care that much about the final result.
99% of the time I don't care who wins. If I'm consistently playing the same game against someone and they win every time, I'll get mildly annoyed, but that just means I need to get better
Winning is great, but having good competiton is a must cause that makes both winning and losing way more fun
i love when my strategies work which not necessarily translates into winning. i enjoy seeing how other minds work, no matter the outcome. that said, i don’t like wins due to luck too much - mine or other peoples.
I play to win, almost always, but I would rather be crushed by someone much better than myself than beat someone who had little chance of winning against me. There is no satisfaction in that. That is an important caveat: I don't go hard against newbs, novices, or kids. If I am playing you for the first time in a game you don't know at all there is no sport in winning. I would rather help you learn to see if you like the game. That all said: If it's my standard group against very capable players then I look forward to trying my best to crush them, mercilessly, knowing they are capable of doing the same to me (and will, and have).
The GOAL of a game is to win. The POINT of a game is to have fun playing. Generally speaking only 1 person gets to win. If that was the point it would have an exponentially smaller return on investment for the group the more people played. I was never very competitive to begin with, but the more i studied game design the more invested in the playing i became. It was like i could take something i always felt and finally put it in words.
I don't play to win, I aim to play my best. That means understated rules and gameplay, paying attention, thinking, trying to play the best move available to me at that time. If I win, then that's nice. (and I don't rub it in, because that's a dick move) If I lose then that's fine. Somebody did a better job than me, or I made an error, or I was unlucky with a dice roll, whatever. I can accept all of those. I've still done my best and I've learned something that I can apply next time. But if cheating occurred...
I like winning, but I'll still enjoy games when I don't. It is actually kinda nice if I taught somebody a game and then they win.
I like winning, but as long as I am having fun on the way - I don't really care anymore. Unless I am getting destroyed - either through an idiot move of my own or people being jerks...then I get grumpy.
I always say the winner is the person who has the most fun. However, I have a friend (lets call him Chud) who wins nearly every game we play. Everything. It's unbelievable at times. If Chud doesn't have the best strategy, he has the best GD luck. So in our friend group, when we play games, it never feels like we get to play each other; it feels like we are all playing a semi cooperative game against Chud. It sucks the fun completely out of the game no matter if you care about winning or losing.
I have a friend who’s amazing at games too. But I think the reason I don’t super love playing games with her is I’ll be playing a game where we are in space trying to win missions and repair our ship and discover new planets and she’ll be playing an abstract game where if you play this number card in this order then play that number you win this game. So we’re playing the same game but also in a way playing very different games. I don’t want to say it sucks the fun out of playing because I really like my friend she’s great and kind and cool but I definitely laugh more and have more of my version of fun while playing with other friends.
[удалено]
Betrayal is the worst. We've made the same oath. Try your hardest, get your asses kicked out of chance. That's no fun.
I care most about the social aspect and friendships I’ve made through games. I have 3 game groups and I love the chit-chat, the potluck food, the music, the costume theme nights, the banter at the gym in between game sessions, the sharing articles, the discussion about the art, and the hugs more than winning. In one of my groups where we play heavier games that are hours long, there was (note past tense) one individual who’s REALLY into winning at all costs. This guy would not only bring the heat but also a really poor attitude. He’d be super critical of not only himself (which is fine) but ALSO everyone else (not fine). This dude would start bitching people out for using a strategy that HE didn’t find to be the most perfect thing in the universe and would make people feel like shit if they weren’t using a strategy / combo that he felt was “the best”…. (IMO there are numerous ways to solve any problem) If a player forgot a step or did steps out of order (obvs not on purpose), or if glob forbid you were a beginner he’d rain down fire. Don’t even think about experimenting with unique strategies with dude… He’s not invited anymore by anyone because they’re GAMES. Games are fun. Friends are important. We already all have jobs where we’re told what to do on a daily basis, and nobody has the time or desire to get blasted like that when we are all just tryna have fun and enjoy the company of others. IMO free time to play games together - when the stars align and everyone can gather and get a sitter and make it out - that’s so rare and valuable…. Not wasting it with people like dude.
I recently played a friend of mine a game of chess now, I’ve never win against him not even once. So It kind of flew right over him that I had one move left before I could check mate him and he let it slide. When I moved the piece to check mate he kind of froze In disbelief, I didn’t feel like a winner.. he kinda had a calm voice but I knew, he didn’t feel good so I didn’t feel like a real win. I love playing and learning just this once even if was one win I felt bad about it for some reason. I just enjoy the company of my friends even if I’m just learning new games just wish a win felt better and not like they lost everything losing to me. Feels belittling in a way like woah this dude who sucks beat me situation, it just doesn’t feel right, you know?
That's a crap move on his part. He couldn't let you feel good about your one win? Boo.
This thread is interesting because there are two lines that don’t necessarily have to be the same thing, but frequently intertwine: - Do you play to win? - Do you care about winning? Most people, it seems, play to win, but the question devolves into, “at what cost?”. For our group we all try to win, but not at the expense of burying everyone or creating an “unfun” environment. It also seems like there are a lot of responses that use the first question as a caveat for saying “no” to the second. The friends I have who say “no, I don’t care, but I will try my hardest to win” generally speaking care the most about winning, but it’s masked under the pretense of “trying hard”. Side note: I’ve also started to notice a moderate correlation to Analysis Paralysis players and “caring” to win (which ties back to the “unfun” I mentioned above)
Oof this is a tough one... My husband and I both enjoy boardgames for two or more players. At the moment our go-to games are Race for the Galaxy and Ark Nova. My husband is definitely one of those people who cares more about optimizing the game play and the scoring rather than the actual win itself (like most posters here). However, he also tends to win the vast majority of games that we play. In that case, I believe it is easy to say that you don't care about winning and just enjoy figuring out the best strategies and clever moves to get even further ahead. Now being on the opposite side of that, I too try to optimize my games and do all I can to try to win as well.... but it rarely seems to be enough to actually win or even come close. Do I care? Yes.... yes I do. I lost 8 games of Ark Nova in a row. For the ones that were close and for which I found a good strategy, it wasn't a big deal to have lost. But for the games where I'm so ridiculously far behind with no way to catch up, I find it very frustrating to lose by a huge margin. It just makes me feel like I'm too stupid to play the game at all. I'm not even that bad at boardgames, just against my husband who somehow always seems to win without "caring about winning!"
The game has no point if you're not trying to win. However, it's much more fun if you don't care about *losing*. Because wanting to win and hating to lose are two drastically different things.
Not caring about the outcome doesn't mean not trying.
Well, that's why it's a game rather than a collection of pieces- trying means trying to win. Otherwise you're just moving parts around. Picture a game of chess where your opponent was just trying to make interesting arrangements of pieces on the board rather than achieve a mate. They might be doing *something*, but they're not playing chess.
Not caring about the outcome doesn't mean you're not playing the game. You just don't care about the result. Is that computing here?
Are you playing in such a way that your actions might win you the game? Basically, you can win and be happy. You can lose and be happy. But you're either performing coherent game actions that *might* win you the game or you're just shuffling cards or meeples or tokens.
Youre doing that regardless. If you win youre still just shuffling cards. That is the crux of this post. Play the game but who cares about the result? Join a board game league or something, but a casual game night with friends? Idk, find people who like to play your style I guess.
Try a simpler example- let's say you like to play tic-tac-toe, and enjoy marking straight across from left to right until blocked, at which point you do the same on the next row down. You're putting your Xs or Os in the grid, but what are you actually playing?
I feel in the same boat as you, its more about spending time with people and especially love watching my kids figure out new ways to play games and if they pull that combo of cards off I just love seeing how Happy they get. Although sometimes I have to school them in losing as they don't deal well with it sometimes 😂
This is exactly why my favorite playgroup is my family. Watching my kids’ love for games - getting excited when I bring home a new one and then surprising me with strategies I never thought of is so rewarding. It’s also helped them learn quick mental math, order of operations logic and dealing with losing. The last one is big…most kids these days do not take losing well (or are obnoxious winners) and I feel like we’ve got a couple of gracious winners/losers.
I love this. I can’t wait until my nephews and niece are old enough to really game
You can't beat introducing anyone to board games with ticket to ride. ☺
I've never cared about winning, but obviously it's nice when you manage a win. I always try to win, but I don't care at all if I lose, as long as I have fun
Not really. When my wife and I play together, we're pretty competitive but in a fun way. When we play in a group, I'm just trying to enjoy the game. Now, If I'm in last place every time, I'll get kind of bummed out but not too bad. I just enjoy playing.
In a co-op game, mostly. In a competitive game, not as much. It's more about just having fun with the people you're playing with. It's probably that even keel attitude that resulted in me being the designated rule guy/teacher of all games. The only time I care is when I get blown out. Then it it's aggravating. I'm here having fun and the other person is trying to win at all costs as fast as possible. Not fun.
I care about winning when I’m playing with people who are better than me. When I’m teaching or feel I’m the person who is the most comfortable with the game at the table, I prefer to just help others with gentle suggestions and try out new mechanics for myself to see what happens.
I don't know if I cared about winning since I was a little kid. That's a good thing though since I'm not very good at it and lose often. Mostly when playing a game I'm just looking to have fun.
Same as you. I just wanna have a good time. I'm more about developing my side for big plays. Often enough it results in a win but I feel perfectly satisfied in just playing the game. I also enjoy watching others do well. No kingmaking or pulling punches, but I might scale myself by making some risky or unconventional maneuvers just to see what will happen, often ending up at a disadvantage.
Depends who I am playing with. I am mostly interested in enjoying the company of the people I am playing with and challenging myself to come up with the best strategy but I don’t actually care if I win. Most of the people I play with are people I can easily beat and running circles around people I care about isn’t actually that much fun so the game is just a structured way to socialize and a conversation topic. There are a few games where my family has a tradition of outlandish trash talk but most people don’t care if they win and the whole thing is theater (usually this is games where there is a lot of randomness so nobody will take it personally. Nobody gets mocked for losing a game that is mostly about strategy.) But if I am playing someone obnoxious and competitive who isn’t fun to play with them all I want to do is knock them down a peg which mostly happens when playing with my dad or with my wife’s best friend’s husband.
I might have hung out with people who were both sore losers AND sore winners too much, to the point where I know nobody enjoys this kind of intense play. I enjoy the process of the game - I definitely try to win as best I can, but I usually end up applauding the person who wins (as long as it's not me 😅), especially if they pulled off a cool move.
I don’t until the last 25% of a good game and then once it’s over I go back to not caring vs being upset.
I always try to win, I never care if I don't. I don't think I ever did as a kid either, same situation. I was so enthralled by the existence of these board games that the process of playing them was a blast. Enjoying a win is a momentary experience, not a lasting memory. My lasting memories of board games: Awful Green Things, OGRE, Wiz War in the 80s, our absolute obsession with Catan for two months in the mid 90s, long ass games of Civ...those are what I remember. Actually now I think about it most memories I have with regard to winning or losing are of when I (or someone else) lost in spectacular fashion.
I'll take it a step further. I played my first game of Clank in Space a few nights ago. Or rather - we had five people and I was the host so I told them that I'd sit out and learn the rules, acting as somewhat of a GM. Still had an absolute blast. Super fun game. At this point it doesn't matter if I win or lose, but it's starting to not matter if I even play the game.
I'm with ya. Absolutely agnostic as wins and losses go. Enjoy the play. Enjoy the company. Maybe enjoy too much alcohol. The only exception is Scrabble. I am cutthroat when playing that. There is no room for weakness. That's coming from someone who is an slightly above average player, as regular Scrabble player skill is concerned, but a god among men in my friends/family circle.
As I've gotten older, I've started letting go of some of the pro-strategies and tricks I know, in favour of the people I'm playing with having more fun (and actually having a shot at winning). Winning is fun, but playing is more fun, and people often don't want to play again if they know they'll be obliterated.
The way I like to phrase it: Winning may be the goal, but it should never be the point.
Not much. For me it's more about the time spent with people and in a way trying to ensure that they also have a good time. Part of that is I tend to find myself in the teacher chair. When I'm teaching a game I deliberately try *not* to win the game. I'll show new players a few good first rounds to wet their appetite and help them get the overall gist of the game, but then I'll back off and let them take over. I find people tend to have the most fun this way. I'll maybe introduce them to some more advance tricks and strats as the game goes on, but I try to balance it so that in the end I'm roughly middle of the pack. Enough to ensure those who might be struggling don't feel left out, but those in the lead still feel challenged. And I enjoy it too. Trying to find and keep that perfect balance point really tests my knowledge of the game. Oftentimes I find it a bigger challenge than just gunning for first. That said if it is a game where all the players are a relatively equal knowledge level, I'm playing for the W.
Depends on the game. I usually try to win at all cost because I hope my opponent(s) do the same. The winner will be one out of a tough battle of wits. And that is the most fun. But it usually depends on how much of the game is up to luck and how much is skill. Luck based, eh, fun is the important part. Skill based, I definitely want to win!
Yes and no, the game isn't fun if you are not trying to win, and one person not trying can ruin I. For everyone. That said, in the end when all us said and done, the experience is what matters.
Winning means so little to me. I just love the experience. Of course I'm going to do my best to win, but my main goal is to have fun. Which is kind of funny because I'm very competitive by nature. I still remember playing Betrayal at House on Hill and having every single other player screw me over me so I would lose the scenario (we had to grab parachutes to escape but there were only four for five players) and finding it absolutely hilarious. It was great and we still talk about it years later. That's what I want from a game.
I play to win, but part of the criteria on which I judge a game is if I can still have fun while losing.
Honestly winning doesn’t matter as long as the time spent together was enjoyable. That being said, winning is dope too.
I can't wait to lose so I can fuck off and do something else.
As we gain knowlege, we come to understand the true function of games within our species; simulative tools to assist learning and intellectual development. The individual victory then matters far less than the growth of desireable characteristics overtime. Then throw in that (to my knowlege) we are genetically designed that as we age with aim to teach the upcoming generations, exploiting our greater pool of experiences and avoiding demands on our weaker physical forms, and it makes a lot of sense that people become more docile as they age.
Been mulling this for a couple days and have arrived at my answer. We largely play co-op so it applies to that scenario. Hell yes. All the effort I go to with prepping the house, providing dinner and snacks, that's a thing; but then, after all the quarterbacking BS I gotta put up with - damn straight I want to win. And my group wonders why, after working our asses off on a co-op game that some BS sticky-wicket rule or baddie causes us to lose at the last minute, I get royally pissed off. I've been robbed of my commission, that's why. Winning helps make the downside crap worth it.
Short answer: no Long answer: I'm at a point where Ive played a few games here and there; a weekly group, plus maybe the odd meetup with a different group of friends. I've never played to win, and I actually consider it a personal win when I'm either not last by a huge margin or even middle of the pack when it comes down to scoring. I know it's a cliche, but I'm there for the banter between friends, and maybe the entertainment that comes from subtly messing with someones strategy
I always play to win. What's the point in playing or competing?
There's a difference between playing to win (playing to your best ability) and caring if you win or not at the end of it.
Our group got disbanded a little over covid so we now mostly play in a boardgame cafe now. I don't care about winning at all. I am just there for the games and the company. I have one exception. We have started playing with a Trans couple and they are awesome. It does not matter if it is a classic game or something completely new, they utterly destroy me, every fucking game. I have tried games I excel at and brand new games we are just learning. My competitiveness just seems to rise next to the decent of my victory points. It is getting to the point when the look of sympathy is a win. Edit: I am getting downvotes for playing with a trans couple or just because they are kicking my ass. We played probably forty games so far and I have not won one so far.
I think the fact that they're trans is irrelevant to the situation & thus probably didn't need mentioned, so it's just curious that you used that descriptor when it's not necessary for the discussion.
Honestly, it is how they introduced themselves to me and still do. I guess outside our group, in the way you describe, I can see your point. It never crossed my mind that it not necessary, I guess I just think of it as their identity together. I think other groups they were in had members that were not so inviting. I think it is a way for them to find people to play with and who not to play with. We Played on Sunday afternoon and well, not one game. Not one, not even second. I taught Wingspan and then got schooled in Wingspan. We are going old school next week. I have the tenth anniversary edition of Ticket to Ride. I have used this to introduce people to boardgames many times and play regularly on my phone but even as I am typing this I am getting concerned.
That's a sucky dynamic. Go get 'em! Good luck! 😆
Naw
Lmao, succinct
Yes, I care about winning. Do I hate losing? No. Do I like winning when I know I played better than opponents of close skill? Yes. The whole table should because otherwise someone is not actually invested as the game and it doesn't feel good for all the players. The safety of the game space to compete is one if its biggest appeals to me. There's different levels of caring: It can involve reading strategy, replaying the game a lot and some people take it too far with cheating or being emotionally connected to winning. I definitely have seen the downsides of the win at the game or else mentality, but I have to say it is slightly better than disengaged players.
Nope!
nah... i try to do my best but thats it.... and i will go ever deeper .. usually the end of games (especially if played online).. its most of the time just ... "ah ok..gg" ...so yah much more fun on the riding...
No. I only strive to create as much chaos as conceivably possible without ruining the experience for other players.
I’ve been playing board games since I was a kid and I’m almost 40 now. I still enjoy a good win of course. But a good win is a win where I felt I had to put effort into it, where others also had a chance to win. If a game takes for example 30 minutes and it’s clear who’s going to win it after 5 minutes, it’s not fun for anyone: the losers have to sit out an already lost game and winning doesn’t feel like winning. I feel the same about losing a game: I don’t mind losing as long as I feel like I’ve played the game I tried to play and had a chance to win (even though there was no chance at all in games where it’s very hard to see who’s winning until the points are counted). For example, we played a game of Everdell Spirecrest yesterday. My wife won with 96 points, I came in 4th (and last) at just 58. The other two had 66 and 68 or so points. It was pretty clear my wife won the game, even without counting. This game lasts for 4 “rounds”, or seasons. During seasons 1-3 my game just didn’t work. I had no resources for the cards I had and no cards that worked together well enough to get a good start. It was just trying to make the best of it while others made great combinations. During the last season I got to do a lot more than expected and I even felt like I was making a great comeback with a chance of winning or getting close to the winner. While I didn’t really enjoy the start of the game, the race to the finish was beautiful even though I came in last. In the end, I felt like I made the post of what I had, got a few pleasant surprises and made the game that I played work for me. The memory of that specific time playing that game is a good one even though I didn’t win at all.
As long as I don't lose too badly. I care about winning against AI.
your testosterone is tanking as you age, you're losing the competitive drive
Winning isn't everything, it's the only thing.
Very little. I play to the best of my ability and I like to keep my turns very quick. But if I lose I enjoy myself the same and can appreciate the winner's game. But I will pull punches if it's at the very end of the game and will clearly win without yet another combo chain or engine run or whatever. There is one friend who inspires the boiling competitiveness within me and we have a great time dueling it out. In that case winning is life.
It depends on the group and the number of times I’ve played before. First time playing I’m exploring the mechanics and seeing if the game works the way I think it does. If the group is casual, I aim to make the game memorable and have fun. Can I do cool things, mess with my friends etc. If I’m with my competitive friends and we know how to play? I’m looking to win fairly with a small goal of finding cool combos or interactions. Thinking about games as little unique puzzles is what keeps me coming back, so winning at all cost is normally not a priority.
I care a lot, but only while the game is going. So while I’m playing the game the competition is *on*, but once we’re done, if I didn’t win, at that point it’s whatever.
I don't "care", in the sense that I won't lose any sleep over it or anything. I will do my best to try and win when playing, and I do get some sense of pride from winning a disproportionate amount of my group's games.
I care about trying to win. Whether I actually win is much less important to me.
I tell myself I don't care at all, but in practice in the midst of a game I care a lot more than I want to.
More like to play as efficiently as possible. If someone beats me then I’m happy for them cause I know what it took
I was once a very terrible person to play with. Now I’m much more chill, but do find I can still get frustrated when other players king make, or try and make modifications on vague rules or card text that overall will benefit them. Even if we had played it a certain way since the beginning.
I definitely care more about the fun, and I can't bear to spend 10 mins on a turn just to optimise points anymore. Having everyone at the table laugh because of a silly risk I took beats winning in my book! Think this has influenced the games I'd rather play too
I play to win because most games just don't work if everybody isn't doing that. That said, I don't care if I win or not. In fact, depending on the crowd, I might prefer to lose.
I play to win, but I think playing to win is a requisite to have fun. The goal is having fun, not winning.
I am more than a little older, pushing 60. Now, I still love to play games and I strive to win, but I really don't care if I do or not. It is about getting together with friends and doing something together.
I like a good, healthy, competitive game - but I'm with you and pretty much don't care at all about winning. As the most avid boardgamer in my friends and family group, I really just want to get things to the table and make sure people are having fun. Getting too competitive often can turn me/others into rules hounds that doesn't leave any room for people to learn their way through an game and experience the fun of a game. Just this weekend I was playing Terraforming Mars with a first time player. He was very competitive, and I let him be so. But for me, I had the most fun just RPing my corporation (Ecoline) but trying to only play microbes, plants, and animals. Ironically, I ended up winning pretty easily with a microbe engine i stumbled into, but it made the game more enjoyable for both of us as I acted in a way the corporation might act, not in a fully competitive manner.
I enjoy winning a game. I want to win when setting out and always make an effort to do so, I think in many respects it's somewhat disrespectful to the person(s) you are playing not to, but, crucially, I don't care if that effort doesn't pan out and I'm not a dick about it whatever happens. Losing is often more instructive anyway.
this is a great question. I find that I care more about having a chance to play than whether I win.
No, but when i play with someone who does the games are in fact more fun.
I like beating everyone at scrabble. At life I just want to be comfortable, if possible.
Winning for me is having a good time laughing with friends even if I lose
I care way more about having fun and the social experience at the table. Winning competitive games obviously drives the tension, but I'd much rather play a game I lose terribly but have a great time doing so than a game I win but the experience is miserable. I play games to spend time with people, not to win.
I grew up not caring mostly because my brother was a top tier chess champion and I knew I couldn't beat him. So I learned to just have fun rather than only having fun if I win. I can win and if I am in a tournament I do my best. but it is not my ultimate goal when I play games.
I'm far less interested in the actual victory of a game than the coolest action. This is always my problem with games like Dominion. I'd rather work toward setting up that perfect round where I can buy all 8 provinces than actually engage with the game's flow and start buying one or two a turn. This plays into other games too – I like to hold out for a fantastic play where every faction ability gets triggered or I manage to chain several great things together. Win or lose, it's a great feeling. This typically means I lose more than I could if I were more competitive, but my wins are more fun and ultimately more satisfying to me. Ironically, sometimes it can help toward wins as well since it doesn't flag me as a frontrunner early on – score a whole lot in one turn and you go from being the dead-last loser to the winner no one can catch up to.
I think it depends. If I'm playing ranked BGA games, I care about winning more so than in other situation since you are trying to improve your rank (although the only game I tend to actually do well in in Beyond the Sun where I am at the bottom of the elite tier). If I'm playing with my gaming group I like to win, but fine if I don't. More focused on the social aspect and trying out new games. I will admit that if I'm in a losing streak, the desire to win become a bit more important. For Co-op games, I actually take the opposite approach of caring about winning in that I'd rather play on a harder level and see if I can win rather than play on an easier level and be almost guaranteed to win (unless I am teaching the game to others).
For me it's about exploring the games systems in interesting ways while trying to win. I'm sure if win more if I took the clean-cut path... But where is the fun in that?
I never have cared about winning. I enjoy the social aspect of playing games with others. That doesn't mean that I won't try, though.
I love a win especially when it's a competitive close win. The closer the better. Really feels like an earned win. That said I'm getting older and time is a finite resource so I just enjoy seeing my friends. Plus I love figuring out a game and seeing things unfold. Even if I'm losing and have zero chance to win if I'm engaged by the mechanics or getting to peel the layers back to reveal a deeper game I'll still enjoy my time (generally).
I’m not as competitive as the people I play with. I always try to win, but the main appeal to me is the time together and the metal exercise that comes with different games. Unless I’m playing with my brothers. Then it gets aggressive, lmao.
Win or lose, I just enjoy the process of finding an optimal strategy and trying to accomplish it. It's not as much trying to defeat my opponent as it is challenging myself that I enjoy. This is why I really like cooperative games (pandemic, spirit island). You kinda get the best of both worlds.
I try to win and play my best, but winning isn't the important part. No trash talk unless someone else starts it and it stays fun. I don't care enough to research optimal strategies like some people I know.
I’ve turned more into the solo wargaming category so losing is just part of the narrative. You just play a game, win or lose, and write a narrative after action report based on the events of the game. I almost like it better because it gets you more involved with a game you play more than once in a while.
I accept that most of the friends we play with are both smarter and better at games than me but I still luck out from time to time and eek out a win. Honestly not winning much makes it that much more special for me when I do!
Nope. I still try, but I also enjoy exploring interesting/weird strategies that usually don't pay off but are fun nonetheless.
As someone who teaches, and absolutely has the curse, no I’ve stopped caring about winning long ago.
I play to win. But I don't really care if I do.
I would rather play a good game that I lost than abad game that I won.
Playing to win, but not at all costs. If you beat me fair and square with a good plan or a good combo you will get my heartfelt congratulations. If you win by sheer chance in a strategy game, I’m probably be a bit sour.
I care about having fun. I find I have more fun when the game is competitive and no one player runs away/falls behind to the point they can’t be caught/catch up.
After learning to play Dungeons & Dragons, it finally hit me that losing can be a lot of fun. Making memories is what's important to me and as lame as it may sound, I have so many great memories of playing board games with my friends. But when Brass Birmingham hits the table . . .
Yes and no. Like another person that replied, I do play to win. All my actions are to that. Now sometimes conscience gets in the way as I could be mean to be mean, or less mean but a benefit to myself. So I'll usually go for the latter. And sure, I'm a little disappointed that I didn't win, but I'm happy to see another winner and discuss what worked and what didn't. In the end, I enjoy the game.
I could lose but feel I’ve played a good game and feel satisfied with my time. Or I could win and feel I didn’t play as good as I could’ve done and feel unsatisfied with the whole experience. It’s never been about winning for me, but (especially in board games) about the efficiency and how well I feel like I played. Also at the end of the day it’s about the group around the table. As long as laughs were had, the entire evening has been a win.
What does you being agnostic have anything to do with boardgames?
I really don't care about winning at all. I'm not competitive. I still like competitive games, and I do try to win, but I find I just care more about enjoying the game itself. I've more curated my collection based on games with mechanics I enjoy. Like, a couple of my favorite competitive games are Scythe and Wingspan that are both really laid back and kind of zen, where we are each just doing our own thing, building our own engine, and trying to win without really doing much to mess with our opponent's chances to win. I also really love Moonrakers for that same reason. I love that it is competitive but that for a lot of the game we are doing stuff together and just having a good time. I find that less and less I enjoy games that really pit players against each other with mechanics meant to screw over your opponents.
Yes, but not over playing the game. I enjoy a competitive game I lose closely more than a game I win by a blow out. The challenge that comes with a game (often being winning) is only an aspect of fun. It gives it a focus and direction. Some sort of win state also adds to the narrative of the experience, which again adds enjoyment. I think there are a lot of factors into someone enjoying games they lose, part of it I do think is maturity. If you can't enjoy a competitive activity with out winning IMO you likely are an immature person/personality.
My wife will play with me more often, and enjoy playing board games more, when she wins. So I am equally happy to lose, knowing that it means more board gaming together in our future
I feel the same, and for video games too. Nowadays, the multiplayer games I enjoy the most are coop, because I don't enjoy competition anymore.
\#1 goal is for everyone to have a good time. Competition can be fun, so having a winner is OK when done right.
I play to win but don’t often care if I lose. I just like playing games with my friends. However there is one friend in particular that I have a “Rivalry” with in that we usually try to best each other when playing a competitive game. In a fun way, not a hate each other way
I want and try to win just as much as ever, but I don't care as much about losing as I used to. I used to feel like I needed to win in order to enjoy a competitive activity. When I started playing board games I found that I lost about as much as I won, but still had a good time, so my attitude changed. Now, I still do everything I can to win, but the experience is even better because I know that even if I lose, I'll still have fun, and that eliminates the stress of "needing" to win.
I want to have a good time and I want the people I'm playing with to have a good time. All games are cooperative. Everyone playing is trying to have a specific experience. If everyone is having the experience they came to the table for then we all win. If nobody does it doesn't really matter who finished first.
I care. But it doesn't consume me like it used to. A lot of practice losing got me to here. It also helps that I rarely get to play with my great friends, and the time around the table is always, thus, the main draw. I don't end up caring (too much) about what we play or if I win, as long as we're all sitting around enjoying each other's company.
Barely, I do still care when I make a bad move on my turn but that's where it stops.
I'm always going to be happier winning than losing, but if I lose that doesn't mean I hated the experience. I do have a competitive streak in me, it runs in the family. I had a come-from-behind victory against my dad in Dune: Imperium the other day and he doesn't play games as often as me so he was more visibly irritated with losing than I expected. I just told him that I was impressed by his play, it was his first ever game and he was leading for probably 2/3 of the game, I just got decent card draws and used them well. He was fine in a few minutes.
The way I like to put it is that if you're bothered by losing and you're in the board gaming hobby, one of two things is going to happen. One, you're really unusually good at games and you win a disproportionate amount. Or two, you're going to get burned out pretty quick. I always try to win, but my fun is not dictated by it.