Many people online just slate people who are new to games as if they're terrible people.
Yes... they're hypocritical in that sense.
If you admit to being a noob you will get laughed at and insulted at.
"Noob", "Newbie" and "Newb" are widely regarded as bad terms. You say you're new to this game / genre / whatever and you generally do fine if their community isn't full of idiots - or people who you can easily incite rage into on said game like DOTA, where you being new can have the entire team fall.
I told people I was proud of being a noob on an online game called stick arena and this guy just had a go at me for thinking it is ok to be one.
Could be your wording... if you use the exact term "noob" then yeah, you will tilt some heads and pitchforks.
Proud to be one though? Not quite sure where you get that from ...
Is this really how online gaming should be portrayed?
I'd prefer the face of games, eSports and the like to be portrayed by
someone like this.Needless to say, this is not the case for everyone.
As a place that is overly competitive where people who are bad will get insulted no stop being people who think they're really hardcore with their 3.94 KDs?
For the record, if you're referring to an FPS community I should've just said that the community in itself are generally bad people, relative to what's actually good.
You see the true face of real life people, simply put - enjoy ^^
And then some other words I cannot say. All they do is rage over some dumb game and then go LOLPWNEDNOOB when they get kills. They're the most annoying idiots on the face of this planet, they think Earth revolves around them, and I want to beat the heck out of their self-centered faces.
Meet my brother-in-law. Best idea: Ignoring them, mute them if you can and then enjoy the peace you get when they're suffering negative emotional effects from what's supposed to be entertainment. The worse thing is that their parents allow this.
I think many people take games too seriously and think it's weird when they find out that someone is playing for fun and doesn't care about their K/D.
If it's an FPS, then I really don't care about anothers' opinion on this matter as unless they're in a public ProMod server on Call of Duty 4 playing with me, just killing time before they go for proper practice, they are truly not competitive but just looking for a 1-up on people they don't even know.
Taking games too seriously? Depends, relative to where they are in the game and what they're doing (which should be playing for fun) yes, they are absurdly competitive.
I bet they wouldn't say stuff like that if you were sitting right next to them, it's just the fact that they are safe from retaliation that makes them act it such a way.
The idiocy of people shown in true light - sadly it is that simple in so many scenarios.
I think this is just something that happens in FPS games.
No, you can find this occasionally in other genres of games - DOTA games like League of Legends I easily encounter people who take pleasure in saying "gc and dh" after I said "gl hf" (good luck & have fun), after I asked what was what they said was, they replied with "get cancer and die hard".
Really?
I will refer to Starcraft II when I get to Kasic's post on it.
The only time I feel the need to interact with others on online games besides my friends is to A) tell them off if their being annoying B) not playing the game right or as it was intended or C) if they gloat about themselves or are being an ***.
A) You have no control over them, it depends what you mean by this to determine how useful you are actually being, in most cases you could simply be feeding them.
B) If it works and is not to thank hacks, it's allowed. Glitches are because they are a part of the game that the developers' haven't fixed.
C) In which case you must be very busy ^^
Sometimes you'll get people who are cool to talk to,
Definitely, and it's very fun playing with them as well. I had a Scottish friend who I've known for 4 years now, for example.
but generally people make retards out of themselves, and if you can, avoid lowering yourself to argue/bicker with them.
Meh, it's barely an argument in my cases, I just ask questions that help my curiosity and help me see their stupidity - whilst taking minimal effort. "What do you think you're achieving?", being the primary question.
But yes, I do generally ignore most idiots... mostly on FPSs.
The reason why people generally don't like them is that they mess up the game.
One of the primary reasons DOTAs can be annoying - a poor teammate has much more influence, and now I'm on Kasic's post I can safely say an RTS like Starcraft II is the same. If you're against a half-decent team in 2v2 you cannot win by yourself.
Take Starcraft for example. You're in a 2v2 game. Your partner then asks, "What's a marine?" and "How do I play?"
I don't care about 2v2's however as the game isn't balanced around it, for one, and secondly I would be put with people in the same league. This can lead to differing skill levels being as I said the game isn't balanced around 2v2 but if I get Platinum or + then having a new player with me would be very unlikely.
They didn't take the time to learn how the play before going online and thus were inconsiderate of other players they might be teamed with because of it.
The game isn't balanced around 2v2's, so there is minimal loss anyways. Still, I see your point.
Learning how to play the game isn't something you should need to do before playing however - the main reason this could be a problem for Starcraft II is because all games on the ladder - and thus with random people can give or take away your points.
Being a "noob" isn't bad in itself, it just means you're new to the game, but you shouldn't be playing online if you really have no idea how to play yet,
It depends. The general Battlefield or CoD player isn't a player for the team (despite all the people on the BF forums consistently whimpering over the smallest things and how their teamplay is exceptional) and thus you can safely invest time doing whatever you want with no worries about if you're harming anyone. Sure, you might lose the team the game in a TDM match but by no means should you really care as they join with random people as much as you did, and are no means genuinely trying to play effectively. If they are - then their expectations of what actually happen are not realistic and are unfair to someone like a newbie.
According to my definition of 'noob', it's someone who doesn't listen to others, acts stupidly on purpose, and annoys everyone. Such people are not liked at all.
Not necessarily. I'd just consider it someone who is bad at the game despite having more than enough time to get grips and a decent amount of skill on the game. Whereas being unable to spot your problems in play, how to solve them and having what I call the "correct gaming attitude" - playing without getting annoyed (and getting off if it is becoming annoying), not reacting poorly to something you should expect (levelling another account on League of Legends and playing with relatively bad people), not raging (which is closely related to the two previous points) and not trying to call something that you simply put don't have the right to judge (such as a lower-level player on Starcraft II trying to say something is imbalanced - the game is balanced around professional-standard play and only that kind of level of players can accurately give a balance assessment).
They are new, but they learn.
Meh, a newbie that has invested enough time to actually know what the hell he / she is doing but doesn't would transition into a noob, I would say
Noobs can be 10 year vets and still play like crap while insulting everyone and everything because they are vets and obviously know everything, even if they die all the time.
General question: Why is it that only people who BM (bad-manner) are considered noobs? I consider most Call of Duty players noobs, especially the real life people I know on it and quite frankly I call them - what I think is quite accurate - newb gamers or measely gamers, because they rarely follow the previous gaming attitude.
Which I forgot to mention also pays attention to what gaming is. My real life "friends" think games are just for fun and if they want a game just for fun they have the right to get one - but what they don't understand is the effect buying a Call of Duty game has.
ChillzMaster, hit me up with that Homefront review!
Message to parents: It's okay if you think your child is mature enough for these games, or are just appeasing their whiny attitudes, DO NOT BUY THEM MICROPHONES OR LET THEM HAVE ACCESS TO THEM.
I'm 14, been gaming since I was... what? 6? I don't rage and I look at things very methodically as a game could be and benefit from it. I am more mature than most people I know and all real life people I know, my parents included. You could call me arrogant but of this I am fairly certain and there's no real way I could prove this to you, but you are generalizing an age base through what is actually just stereotypes. Back when I played Call of Duty (not anymore) I heard more teenagers and even grownups repeatedly bashing other players or the game for their lack of skill and thus lack of common sense.
Their attitude is probably just to blow off some steam, it's generally when they get more annoyed it can easily become pathetic, although I don't condone putting someone on a game to rage and let it out, because they're angry - there are much more productive ways to let out anger (and the first suggestion would be excercise).
Mature enough for these games would easily dissipate if they engage in insults etc to other players, or even just the machine... It's parent laziness I would imagine, as there are plenty of aspects a child can think about (specifically morality) that are left untouched by parents which is probably leaving the result of what is commonly seen.
Phew, long post.
- H
