Yes you read it , im a fictional villain now on lichess, im gonna be amateur champ, and steal your crown, ...
Role playing game is popular online. For variety sake, some choose to be a Villain 😜
People who are unfair in this game don't trust themselves. In my experience, they just wanna win and prove that they are who they think they are in their head but not in reality. The game, for them, is evaluating something about their ego and they cannot tolerate.
Being unfair is one thing but being hostile is another, to be clear.
Hostile players tend to enjoy the humiliations and control that the game can give you over other opponent. The issue with enjoying that is being on the other side does not feel equally good. But also, there is contextual hostility. Someone who loses 7 times in a row is more likely to channel his own frustration at his opponent instead of taking the job to work it out himself. That's call displacement in psychology.
Sadly, you can blame most of internet violence because of low self esteem issues and feelings of inadequacy, narcissisms and sadism but sometimes it is particularly complicated.
For example, I am no angel but I am no devil. I can be extremely friendly in this game but there is a certain kind of player that sets me off. I can even win against them but I can be angry because they play extremely poor because of a "criterion" they are using. And that criterion is what really makes me angry. So there is no universal answer as to why someone can be hostile. There are some cues and general lines but, sometimes, can be deeply personal. In my case, I think it is. Although, I am pretty sure I am not the only one who gets angry against that kind of players.
Being unfair is one thing but being hostile is another, to be clear.
Hostile players tend to enjoy the humiliations and control that the game can give you over other opponent. The issue with enjoying that is being on the other side does not feel equally good. But also, there is contextual hostility. Someone who loses 7 times in a row is more likely to channel his own frustration at his opponent instead of taking the job to work it out himself. That's call displacement in psychology.
Sadly, you can blame most of internet violence because of low self esteem issues and feelings of inadequacy, narcissisms and sadism but sometimes it is particularly complicated.
For example, I am no angel but I am no devil. I can be extremely friendly in this game but there is a certain kind of player that sets me off. I can even win against them but I can be angry because they play extremely poor because of a "criterion" they are using. And that criterion is what really makes me angry. So there is no universal answer as to why someone can be hostile. There are some cues and general lines but, sometimes, can be deeply personal. In my case, I think it is. Although, I am pretty sure I am not the only one who gets angry against that kind of players.
@Litost7 , what do you mean by "criterion"?
OP, what do you mean by "some"?
Told yas, villains get dislikes, thanks, i love it, coz i know i will be on top of the game, at any cost.
Throw the rulebook out the window, ill beat them fair and square. (Lol)
Tell ya though , youd never find me in a Chess Club with this behaviour.
Its my Online Chess style, only.
Cant wait , few weeks and the Club reopens.
Throw the rulebook out the window, ill beat them fair and square. (Lol)
Tell ya though , youd never find me in a Chess Club with this behaviour.
Its my Online Chess style, only.
Cant wait , few weeks and the Club reopens.
@Foolacious I mean a general philosophy to play the game in a certain way. In my case, the general philosophy that I despise are two: "Cowardice" and "Memorization". People who insist in a passive style even though there is no real advantage to it. Too afraid of taking initiative because of fear of losing , they develop a poor's man strategy of waiting for the other play to make mistakes. Their game is to wait for a mistake, which is rather a quite unproductive way of learning to play this game. Don't get me wrong, passivity sometimes can be a good strategy (sometimes) but not as a general rule or as a whole style. I get that I tend to play offensive and that force the opponent to defend but you can recognize the style if you know what I am talking about. The key is the "unnecessary passivity". In the end, you spent the whole game playing while your rival defines their action by yours. I just can't understand cowardice in an online game. Worst, I can't understand why someone would choose to demean the possibility of learning (trying and losing, learning from the mistakes) because of fear.
And the second criterion, is memorization and that sometimes comes in hand with cowardice. DON'T GET ME WRONG HERE. I am not talking about knowing openings and lines and etc. We all memorize and such. I am talking about clinging to memorize tactics and cheap tricks as an excuse for a game. The best example are those guys that ALWAYS are trying to force the possibility of the fork with the knight to take the rook. Their whole game becomes unnatural and force because it revolves around the c2 and/or h3 square. I can continue to exemplify but I think you get the point.
These kind of players, even though I've won or whatever, they tend to set me off. Of course, there is a long personal reason regarding as to why. I can explain it too. But, the point is, hostility sometimes is complex but is never right. Of course there are shades of hostility and human kind isn't perfect, but I think, that in the end, if you tend to get angry, the best thing one can do is nip it in the bud. Is not easy but you can't let yourself to become angry. That only feeds a bad habit.
And the second criterion, is memorization and that sometimes comes in hand with cowardice. DON'T GET ME WRONG HERE. I am not talking about knowing openings and lines and etc. We all memorize and such. I am talking about clinging to memorize tactics and cheap tricks as an excuse for a game. The best example are those guys that ALWAYS are trying to force the possibility of the fork with the knight to take the rook. Their whole game becomes unnatural and force because it revolves around the c2 and/or h3 square. I can continue to exemplify but I think you get the point.
These kind of players, even though I've won or whatever, they tend to set me off. Of course, there is a long personal reason regarding as to why. I can explain it too. But, the point is, hostility sometimes is complex but is never right. Of course there are shades of hostility and human kind isn't perfect, but I think, that in the end, if you tend to get angry, the best thing one can do is nip it in the bud. Is not easy but you can't let yourself to become angry. That only feeds a bad habit.
Just don't accept take backs unless you think it's really a micsclick
This topic has been archived and can no longer be replied to.