Vincent may not have won Devastation 2011, but he certainly won our hearts, and this despite being a known Canadian. After clutching out an impressive victory against LP (and avenging a loss from the day before in the process), he was given the stream mic and used his moment in the sun to grace us all with two nuggets of unadulterated profundity: "I just want to get laid," and "we played casuals . . . I lost like fifteen in a row to him, but then I won two."
While the aspirational element of the first statement is both powerful and moving, I'll set it aside for another day. The second statement, however, is a perfect example of the attitude necessary to succeed in Soul Calibur--or any game, for that matter--at the highest levels.
While great skill and tournament experience are both necessary conditions for success, they're not sufficient in themselves to do so. The final required element is what I will term the competitive mindset. My definition of the competitive mindset is comprised of three parts, each of which we'll examine in turn, starting with:
Defining Trait 1: Perseverance
Think for a moment about what Vints did here. Having lost to LP in pool play on Saturday, he actively sought LP out for more games. Choking back a veritable tidal wave of hormones and sexual frustration, he sat down and took his beatings like a man until he figured out how to overcome his opponent. Developing skill isn't an easy thing, and it necessarily involves a great deal of failure. For you supernatural geniuses in the audience, think back to when your precocious little brains were trying to figure out the secret to walking. Even something that basic requires that we fall on our faces over and over again, and Calibur is hardly any different. Players with the proper competitive mindset don't view losses as wholly bad; personally, I'm never happier than when I am playing someone who is routinely out-thinking me, because I know that pushing through those difficulties will make me a stronger player. Adversity in this sense can become a valuable learning experience for, as Vints showed us, it can pay serious dividends.
Defining Trait 2: Confidence
This bit seems self-evident, but it’s a particularly vicious brand of confidence that I’m recommending here, so it’s worth unpacking. I respect a large number of my fellow players’ skill. Maybe—and I stress maybe—if you found me in an appropriately inebriated state, I might be pushed to confess that some of them are nearly my equal. All that changes, though, as soon as we sit down to play. Don’t be reckless, and never underestimate the person sitting next to you in a tournament scenario, but take care not to err too far in the other direction. Players with enough of a reputation can often get away with murder based on their name alone, which is why it’s important, for the duration of a match, to nourish a healthy contempt for your foe. Irrespective of the situation, it’s important to have a well-cultivated belief that you will win because, frankly, all you need is one point of health and a string of intelligent decisions to come back from any deficit.
Defining Trait 3: Ruthlessness
This aspect might be the most abstract. The word ruthlessness, taken literally, seems merely to be a darker way of invoking confidence in the manner that I did above. For our purposes, however, I mean it to represent a willingness to do anything within the rules of the game in order to secure a victory. Put colloquially: “cheap it up.” There’s an inexplicable tendency within certain parts of the fighting game world to develop things akin to codes of honor. Barring that, we see often enough contrition on the part of successful players who use characters or tactics that others feel are less than sporting.
Ruthlessness deserves a bit more attention from us because I feel like it gets an unduly negative reputation. Seth Killian somewhat vitriolically characterized this reaction as part of the “scrub mentality” (Article HERE). That particular territory having been thoroughly covered, we’ll approach it from a different angle today: being unwilling to utilize “cheap” tactics limits every aspect of your game.
First, and most obviously, eschewing the most brutally effective tactics limits your ability to win both in and out of tournaments. Second, it limits your growth as a player. I first picked up Soul Calibur in Tulsa, Oklahoma. The Tulsa scene had very strong feelings about turtling and backdashing. Very, very strong feelings. For a long time I shared this opinion until I fell in with the Dallas-area reprobates who blocked and ran away so damn much that I had to adapt in order to survive. This was a revelation to me. Tactics I had previously thought to be boring or cheap became filled with dramatic tension as I grew to understand the much larger mindgame taking place. Interestingly, and importantly, as my turtling skills grew, I found myself with more and more opportunities to employ the tendency toward frenetic offense I had picked up in Tulsa.
Rather than artificially limiting myself to that single facet of the game, however, I discovered an inclusive attitude toward gameplay that both allowed and, in fact, necessitated extremely precise offense and defense. Third, as I just alluded to, refusing cheapness limits your enjoyment of the game. When both players are truly going all-out, fighting games provide an incredibly rich experience. What’s more, when you’re both being cruel bastards, it’s far less likely that one particular tactic will become so dominant as to choke off the fun of a game.
But what about when that does happen? In the formal study of game design, these tactics are referred to as “degenerate strategies.” According to Katie Salen & Eric Zimmerman, "[a] degenerate strategy is a way of playing a game that takes advantage of a weakness in the game design, so that the play strategy guarantees success." (p.271 of THIS book). Game-breaking glitches, massively-lopsided matchups, and Hilde all seem to fall into this category. If that’s the case, well, ban ‘em. If there exist too many in a particular game, go find a better game. In all cases, though, be absolutely certain that you are drawing the line at a legitimate degenerate strategy and not something that’s merely strong, but not broken.
Develop your competitive mindset, keep that competitive mind open, and judge accordingly. In the meantime, go crush your friends and save those pennies so you can make it out to NEC.
Homework:
Tell me what “competitive mindset” means to you. What’s the right attitude necessary to achieve success?
Extra Credit:
Go to Canada and take Vincent out on the town for some good old-fashioned romance.
While the aspirational element of the first statement is both powerful and moving, I'll set it aside for another day. The second statement, however, is a perfect example of the attitude necessary to succeed in Soul Calibur--or any game, for that matter--at the highest levels.
Vints has gone through a few nicknames over the years, but MoneyMuffins is the worst.
While great skill and tournament experience are both necessary conditions for success, they're not sufficient in themselves to do so. The final required element is what I will term the competitive mindset. My definition of the competitive mindset is comprised of three parts, each of which we'll examine in turn, starting with:
Defining Trait 1: Perseverance
If at first you don't succeed, cheat and use warp zones.
Think for a moment about what Vints did here. Having lost to LP in pool play on Saturday, he actively sought LP out for more games. Choking back a veritable tidal wave of hormones and sexual frustration, he sat down and took his beatings like a man until he figured out how to overcome his opponent. Developing skill isn't an easy thing, and it necessarily involves a great deal of failure. For you supernatural geniuses in the audience, think back to when your precocious little brains were trying to figure out the secret to walking. Even something that basic requires that we fall on our faces over and over again, and Calibur is hardly any different. Players with the proper competitive mindset don't view losses as wholly bad; personally, I'm never happier than when I am playing someone who is routinely out-thinking me, because I know that pushing through those difficulties will make me a stronger player. Adversity in this sense can become a valuable learning experience for, as Vints showed us, it can pay serious dividends.
Defining Trait 2: Confidence
Vints is almost as confident as this kitty kat right here! Ladies, take note.
This bit seems self-evident, but it’s a particularly vicious brand of confidence that I’m recommending here, so it’s worth unpacking. I respect a large number of my fellow players’ skill. Maybe—and I stress maybe—if you found me in an appropriately inebriated state, I might be pushed to confess that some of them are nearly my equal. All that changes, though, as soon as we sit down to play. Don’t be reckless, and never underestimate the person sitting next to you in a tournament scenario, but take care not to err too far in the other direction. Players with enough of a reputation can often get away with murder based on their name alone, which is why it’s important, for the duration of a match, to nourish a healthy contempt for your foe. Irrespective of the situation, it’s important to have a well-cultivated belief that you will win because, frankly, all you need is one point of health and a string of intelligent decisions to come back from any deficit.
Defining Trait 3: Ruthlessness
You will need to be even more ruthless than the negative effect this picture has on the male brain.
This aspect might be the most abstract. The word ruthlessness, taken literally, seems merely to be a darker way of invoking confidence in the manner that I did above. For our purposes, however, I mean it to represent a willingness to do anything within the rules of the game in order to secure a victory. Put colloquially: “cheap it up.” There’s an inexplicable tendency within certain parts of the fighting game world to develop things akin to codes of honor. Barring that, we see often enough contrition on the part of successful players who use characters or tactics that others feel are less than sporting.
Ruthlessness deserves a bit more attention from us because I feel like it gets an unduly negative reputation. Seth Killian somewhat vitriolically characterized this reaction as part of the “scrub mentality” (Article HERE). That particular territory having been thoroughly covered, we’ll approach it from a different angle today: being unwilling to utilize “cheap” tactics limits every aspect of your game.
First, and most obviously, eschewing the most brutally effective tactics limits your ability to win both in and out of tournaments. Second, it limits your growth as a player. I first picked up Soul Calibur in Tulsa, Oklahoma. The Tulsa scene had very strong feelings about turtling and backdashing. Very, very strong feelings. For a long time I shared this opinion until I fell in with the Dallas-area reprobates who blocked and ran away so damn much that I had to adapt in order to survive. This was a revelation to me. Tactics I had previously thought to be boring or cheap became filled with dramatic tension as I grew to understand the much larger mindgame taking place. Interestingly, and importantly, as my turtling skills grew, I found myself with more and more opportunities to employ the tendency toward frenetic offense I had picked up in Tulsa.
Rather than artificially limiting myself to that single facet of the game, however, I discovered an inclusive attitude toward gameplay that both allowed and, in fact, necessitated extremely precise offense and defense. Third, as I just alluded to, refusing cheapness limits your enjoyment of the game. When both players are truly going all-out, fighting games provide an incredibly rich experience. What’s more, when you’re both being cruel bastards, it’s far less likely that one particular tactic will become so dominant as to choke off the fun of a game.
Redheads always ruining the fun for everyone
But what about when that does happen? In the formal study of game design, these tactics are referred to as “degenerate strategies.” According to Katie Salen & Eric Zimmerman, "[a] degenerate strategy is a way of playing a game that takes advantage of a weakness in the game design, so that the play strategy guarantees success." (p.271 of THIS book). Game-breaking glitches, massively-lopsided matchups, and Hilde all seem to fall into this category. If that’s the case, well, ban ‘em. If there exist too many in a particular game, go find a better game. In all cases, though, be absolutely certain that you are drawing the line at a legitimate degenerate strategy and not something that’s merely strong, but not broken.
Develop your competitive mindset, keep that competitive mind open, and judge accordingly. In the meantime, go crush your friends and save those pennies so you can make it out to NEC.
Homework:
Tell me what “competitive mindset” means to you. What’s the right attitude necessary to achieve success?
Extra Credit:
Go to Canada and take Vincent out on the town for some good old-fashioned romance.
