User:T0mmy/Competitive philosophy dissertation

Competition in the Smash Bros. community is a contest between multiple players of the Super Smash Bros. game for prestige, recognition, awards, and/or social status. At the heart of competition is winning and losing, with the goal of a competitor is to win (as declared at the end of a match); the philosophy behind playing to win is utilizing the skills developed by a player, having a fair match among all players involved, and performing within the parameters set forth by the game.

Standards
Most standards in competitive philosophy in the Smash community comes from long tradition of competitive sports. This includes fair play, sportsmanship, performance of skill, etc. Much of the standards of electronic sports philosophy has been adopted by what was set forth by game designer Sirlin in his book "Playing to Win". This includes the ethos on meta rules, like criteria for banning.

Ethos
Main points of competitive philosophy are:
 * Fair play to all competitors.
 * Performance of skill.
 * Minimizing luck, or circumstances which are outside the competitor's control.
 * Allowing for play exploiting and utilizing all game-play mechanics.
 * Minimizing out-of-game rules.

Specifications/clarifications
The concept of "fair" does not necessitate that all players MUST do something, but that all players have the option of doing anything all other competitors can do. An example is that it is still "fair" for certain stages to favor specific characters, as all players can choose any characters and thus make the choice what kind of advantages/disadvantages they have. An example of what is not fair is that a player must choose a character to play before a stage is chosen.
 * Fair play

The performance of technical and mental skills is of utmost importance in a competitive Smash Bros. event. The reason is because awards and accolades are given to a specific player; if circumstances are outside the players' control then it logically follows the circumstance won the match and we could argue a randomly spawned bomb should win the prize money (which is asinine). Thus, the competitive game should be focused to the point of maximizing the player who wins based on their own skills.
 * Skill

Despite what we may think of as "luck" in real-world events (e.g. winning the lottery, or getting hit by lightning) as being synonymous with "random", this kind of concept of luck does not function exactly the same in Smash Bros. The reasoning for this is that all "lucky" happenstances are calculated by the software/hardware of the game and can be argued that anything is within a "skill" of knowing/predicting a certain outcome. This is why "luck" is better defined in the Smash world as "outside control". It is not necessarily "luck" that a giant fish eats you and leaves your opponent unharmed, as that could be predicted/calculated/intuitively avoided/etc., but it is "outside control" of the players - they do not control that fish, therefore it is not bolstering skill, it is a factor of coincidence and therefore should be minimized as best as possible (e.g. turning that particular stage OFF).
 * Luck

In a competitive philosophy any and all game mechanics should be exploited to their fullest potential. According to Sirlin, exploits should not be banned unless it meets all three of the following criteria : "A ban must be enforceable, discrete, and warranted."
 * Exploits

Out-of-game rules Competitive Philosophy illicites that conduct of a match shall be played within the game's structure. That is to say that no rules should be enforced by the organizers of events onto the competitors that detract, impede, or otherwise conflict with competition. In other words, if it limits a players' performance, it should not be acknowledged by the player. This is more eloquently referred to as the "Nihil extra ludum regit" proclamation (or "No Outside Rules!") Rules such as ledge grab limits, limiting the number of grabs in a chain of grabs, and banning characters because they are "too good" are examples of violating the "No Outside Rules" proclamation.

The exception to this proclamation is the same as the criteria for exploits: Enforceable, Discrete, and Warranted.

Criticism
There have been some claims that the Smash Bros. game was never designed to be played competitively or that it is simply a party game, not a fighter. Some claim that the Smash Bros. designer himself has made statements saying such, however these claims have been shown to be unsubstantiated.


 * Party Games
 * Fighting Games

Masahiro Sakurai on competition:
Quote from Sakurai on competition here

Despite any criticism on the competitive design of the game, there is little to dispute about the competitive nature of the community...

Competitive vs Casual
According to t0mmy's article "Pro vs Scrub" there exists a schism of mindsets between two types of players: "Pros" and "Scrubs".

Pros and Scrubs
The Pro is a player who plays to win, adhering to a competitive philosophy (fair, skill-based, utilizing all game mechanics). The Scrub is a player who still competes to win, but by means outside the game (banning characters, limiting their opponent in any way, etc.).

Conceptual Arenas
The two different mindsets of competitive play and casual play are said to each manifest a conceptual "Arena" in which rules are set forth to be accepted or rejected by those entering into battle with the player.

Competitive Arena The Pro plays in a Competitive Arena which adheres to the Competitive Philosophy.

Casual Arena The Scrub plays in a Casual Arena where any rule is subject to change to give them a better chance at winning.

Although no Arena is said to be better than the other in the article, a distinct definition is set and the claim that professional players in a competition suitably held to adhere to the Competitive Philosophy is the Competitive Arena. This is the world in which competitive players adhere to skill, fairness, and the design of the game mechanics.

Debates and Conflicts
Problems arise when the desire to win by both a "Pro" player and a "Scrub" come together. Because there are conflicting philosophies between competitive and casual play there will be conflicts on how the game is played with two sides of the spectrum at the extremes. Competitive players will favor more conservative rules adhering to the Competitive Philosophy and Casual players will seek to insert out-of-games rules which inevitably require more rules to regulate the previous rulings into layers of rules.