The point is a discussion. There are perspectives people do not consider, so I point them out; there are people that claim ‘fact’ when they haven’t; there are people that try to use “reason” when they’re putting the cart before the horse.
People use the expression “no reason” when they haven’t figured out why something happened. Since “reason” is the explanation why something happened, there is always a “reason”. However, since people commonly confuse cause and effect, they ‘reason’ away ‘reasons’ because reasons ≠= reasoning.
Effectively untrue, but it’s an easy thing for people to claim. A lot of people try to ‘reason’ that “games are fun” or activities need some modicum of pleasure to it. That sort of thing even flew from Neil DeGrass Tyson and he’s a scientist, or a particular field of knowledge so even ‘smart’ people will overlook the inherent flaw with that claim.
There are several kinds of motivations people have, even for recreation, and if the goal is ‘enjoyment’ then “there are much simpler methods” than sitting through a Dota-like game.
There’s probably some 10 catagories of responses people have to aram/mirrors instead of the polarized projection people assume. However, since select people aren’t getting their way, they’re ‘ruining’ the mode for others and demanding conformity while complaining about the very issue they’re making.
As an aside, if this was just limited to 5 v 5 games, that’d be one thing, but these types of complaints and leavers plague 1 v1 games such that players demand devs make ‘punishments’ to deter people not-playing a game as being better than playing it. (If they’re not going to play it, then they should do something else instead of ‘wasting’ their time)
Examples of not-players on these forums include chronic complainers that generally indicate they don’t actually enjoy HotS (they leave games beyond just mirror aram;) there are other aspects of the game to remotely get them to think they ‘enjoyed’ it, but when pressed for details, it isn’t the game or the usual experience that they actually get. That’s not uncommon because this genre is rife with things that frustrate ‘enjoying’ the game.
When people are ‘cart before the horse’ they aren’t drawing a conclusion from a ‘reason’, so the reasons they put behind their complain don’t align. If people were ‘logical’ – we generally aren’t – then they might map out their Modus tollens and notice they haven’t set a correct “condition” on their “If P therefore Q”, or rather “Not P, therefore not Q”
Poll people and run a tally if there’s “enjoyment” in losing. If people don’t enjoy losing, then they wouldn’t participate in doing it or rather, the risk/reward is a compromise they have to consider. In this sort of game, at least 50% of the people are going to lose, and if they don’t ‘enjoy’ that risk, they try to rationalize away getting in games that they “know” that they’re going to lose and pretend it is a ‘reward’. Is “not P” (not losing) therefore “not q” (not playing) hold up as the reverse that they ‘know’ when they’re going to win, and therefore justify inaction?
These players tend to be “ends justify the means” so they rationalize the end, leaving a game, with erroneous means as the point isn’t to be “reasonable” for them, otherwise they’d probably do a different activity anyway. The ‘reason’ for playing the game requires people to have to do it for more than impulsive “enjoyment” otherwise there’s “simpler methods” that’ll do it faster, better, cheaper, more consistently. But realizing that takes more honestly, self-awareness, than is common for people to do because they haven’t learned how to ‘enjoy’ reflection and improvement. Instead, they look for something to blame when they don’t get what they want, and then fault others who don’t agree with their double-standards.
And they they keep repeating it because they don’t care about ‘facts’ or ‘truth’, they just convince themselves of an imaginary one instead. My hot take, if they’re going to be investing in that much “make believe” then they would be better suited for doing something else that has “simpler methods” for actually enjoying what they end up doing, instead of lying about it.
