Reddit reviews Playing to Win: Becoming the Champion

I knew before I checked the comments that the ilk Blizzard games attracts would be at odds with this.

Having this as an option is not a bad thing. No one would be forced to use it. You can have your immersion and your screen clutter, but if you feel you're disadvantaged because others can choose to reduce those factors - you are a David Sirlin defined "scrub".

Regardless, this doesn't look like something Blizzard would implement, but I'd welcome the option.

https://www.amazon.com/Playing-Win-Becoming-David-Sirlin/dp/1411666798

Don't hate the players, hate the game. Either there's a strategy that beats turtling (or other strategy you find is degenerate/OP/whatever), in which case you should have used it to counter your opponent, or there isn't, in which case you should use turtling/OP strategy yourself or pick a game that's actually fun instead.

There's no point hating on players for playing the game as designed. Blame designers for making bad games.

I agree. I actually love the post. It's motivated me to make a post that is completely honest.

I'm successful at poker, but it's not the first game I was successful at. I was pretty high CAL-IM at CounterStrike 1.6. I was C+/B- on iCCup ladder playing StarCraft, I was a competitive chess player in my early/mid teens.

I don't know if I'd agree that you need these things to win, but it shows you know how to really learn a game, and you need to be ultra-competitive and want to win. You need to day-dream about the game. You need to be absorbed. You need to stand in the shower as the water is running over you and think if you extracted maximum value in that hand from your session last night. You need to think about the hand where you value bet the river only to get called by better, and you need to tell yourself that it was probably still a profitable play given his hand range. This is what I mean by learning, you have to LIVE it if you really want to be successful.

I have an addictive personality and this is why all of these competitive games have driven me throughout the years. In fact, even now, my interest in poker wains as I am too busy with school. I'm sure I'll come back to it. This addiction and thought is only half the puzzle, the other half is competitiveness.

I am better at my friends at (nearly) all games. Games I am not better at my friends bother me. I learn to get better. I take it with a sense of pride that there are a multitude of console and computer video games that I am the best at out of my circle of friends, and I am driven to be the best at poker. When they start playing something, I work my ass off to one-up them. Maybe I'm being an asshole about it, but I have that competitive drive.

You absolutely need this to be a successful chess player, or a backgammon player, or a professional gamer, or an athlete, or a poker player. This is the "killer instinct" he mentions. You need to want to win, badly. You need to hate losing, and you need to pour your heart and time into the subject until you are an expert.

Part of this can be learned, for me it is natural. You can still polish the skill and you can still improve learning how to win efficiently. Read any book on being successful in games, personally I'd recommend:

http://www.amazon.com/Playing-Win-Becoming-David-Sirlin/dp/1411666798

> The couple ENTJs I've known are/were serial entrepreneurs as well, but not because their ventures failed. It was more so because they were ready for a change of lifestyle or wanted to pursue another challenge.

I've seen this too; build a workable business, sell it, start another. I think an INTJ is more motivated to build one big scalable business he can run forever.

I definitely simplified/exaggerated, but I didn't mean to think ENTJs were slouches or negligent.

I mean that, if you take a sampling of ten INTJs, only one of those INTJs would decide to become an entrepreneur, and he would probably succeed in making a sustainable business on his first or second try.

If you take a sampling of ten ENTJs, four of them would become an entrepreneur, one would probably succeed out of the gate, the other three would have a few mediocre (then sold) or failed shots before succeeding on their second or third try.

ENTJs are generally better suited to it than us. We won't do it unless we're really sure.

(All numbers above completely made up, of course.)





I work a full time career job, and do real estate investments on the side. I live way below my means and save a ton of money. I came up with a model to be able to leverage my cash pile to get houses for $0 out of pocket if I can get them with 25%+ built in equity, so I buy houses that I can find undervalue and fix them up, then refi with a portfolio lender. I end up adding a ton of money to my net worth with each purchase, while spending nothing in the end.

I am researching potentially starting a hard money lending side business as well at the moment.

> You're well on your way to world domination...

That's the plan, my friend.

Also, like the name. As a competitive gamer, this book was one of my favorites. Strategy is strategy.

Focused on fighting games but using games across multiple genres for examples, Playing to Win by David Sirlin is a must-read that can improve any player's mentality. It's really powerful stuff, and even some really tough advice to take. I highly recommend it and bought some friends of mine copies.

-

You can read it online for free!

Playing to win - David Sirlin

> But the thing is, PS2's high sky ceiling is the only reason anyone spends any significant amount of time in ESFs.

Its also the reason why the overwhelming majority of people don't spend any time in ESFs at all.

> If there wasn't an allure to playing a high-skill playstyle, then anyone who would have piloted would have already moved on to another game.

You might find this book interesting http://www.amazon.com/Playing-Win-Becoming-David-Sirlin/dp/1411666798/ref=sr_1_3?ie=UTF8&qid=1451536713

> Getting nailed by undodgeable, uncounterable lockons is certainly punishment.

Thats really poetic, but you aren't actually being punished.

> Tribes Ascend failed because Hi-Rez abandoned it. ... I can go on and find people playing.

lol OK http://steamcharts.com/app/17080 If a game is struggling to keep as many players as a 20 year old text base MMO, I wouldn't exactly call that a success. http://www.aardwolf.com/ has more players than Tribes: Ascend.

for comparison http://steamcharts.com/app/218230

Bringing it back to the OP. I know a2am isn't fair, and isn't fun, but leaving them in the game while making them useless like the OP proposes only makes the air game's problems worse.

And I'm trying to tell you that was just people appropriating an established term from the days of Street Fighter 2. It most assuredly predates Warcraft 2, and has a meaning independent of how you used it or how you think others were using it.

You can read more about it in the book Playing to Win: Becoming the Champion or watch Day9's 400th 'daily' episode on eliminating assumptions. Or you can perpetuate the improper usage that's caused it to lose its meaning beyond 'bad'.

http://www.amazon.com/Playing-Win-Becoming-David-Sirlin/dp/1411666798/ref=sr_1_3?ie=UTF8&qid=1405106616&sr=8-3&keywords=playing+to+win

Read "Playing to Win". It will help you articulate and quantify strategy evolution (essentially what you are trying to encourage with your friends). It will probably also make you a better player regardless of skill level.

Is that making you angry? Personally, I don't care, at least I have a time to dry my hands and my controller. But if that makes you angry, it's good. Not that I would want to intentionally piss you. But if you are angry, your game is worse. Same with playing "shit (noob/cheesy/sweaty/whatever)" strategies. Does that work? Check. Does that make you angry? Check.


Playing to win by David Sirlin guys...