this post was submitted on 01 Dec 2025
653 points (98.1% liked)
Microblog Memes
9788 readers
1446 users here now
A place to share screenshots of Microblog posts, whether from Mastodon, tumblr, ~~Twitter~~ X, KBin, Threads or elsewhere.
Created as an evolution of White People Twitter and other tweet-capture subreddits.
Rules:
- Please put at least one word relevant to the post in the post title.
- Be nice.
- No advertising, brand promotion or guerilla marketing.
- Posters are encouraged to link to the toot or tweet etc in the description of posts.
Related communities:
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
I'll never forget an old MTG article about the 3 different types of players. I've found that it applies to most games and a lot of life too. There are Spike, Timmy, and Johnny.
Spike players just want to win. They don't care if the way they win isn't fun or interesting. All they care about is the W.
Timmy players are all about style. They don't care if they lose as long as they do something big, flashy, and cool.
Johnny players are in between. They want to win with style. They want the big flashy move to win them the game.
All three players are having fun but they define "fun" in their own ways. Games should try to have ways to satisfy all three types of players.
You forgot the funnest two, Melvin and Vorthos!
Melvin is the mechanics guy, he plays because he loves the complex interaction between different parts. This is the guy building fully automated redstone in Minecraft.
Vothos is the lore master. He might not even be good at the game but he can recite the history of Tamriel in elder scrolls verbatim.
You are forgetting about Steve. Steve doesn't care about winning, Steve only wants you to suffer. He will play a mono blue deck (or red with tons of removal) full of counters and spells to bounce back permanents to your hand. He will have a single 1/1 flier to poke at you every turn while he stops you from playing the game completely. Go fuck yourself Steve. (also Teemo main in league)
Shuckle is the best pokemon
Jigglypuff flashbacks intensify
Former Teemo troll here, and all I can say is "watch out for mushrooms"๐
That was just CounterPost.
Also Winter Orb and Icy Manipulator.
Isn't there like a Winston?
Winston is a filthy casual. Complicated rules, paragraphs on the card, any automation, doing too many things in a single turn are all reasons he doesn't have fun. He isn't very bright. He is the antithesis of Spike. He has fun by playing the game for a reasonable length of time.
Losing on turn 1 is the culmination of everything Winston hates.
Source: Am a Winston...
Right now Winston stops playing every CGC because of incessant power creep.
I'm definitely johnny. I find a playstyle/character/build/whatever applies I like and then I'll minmax the shit out of it. But I won't just switch to what's meta.
Almost everyone is Johnny. Spike and Timmy are caricature types - the uncompromising extremes. If Johnny was on the list you'd have to choose if you are more similar to Spike to more similar to Timmy, but since he is there - representing the entire range between the other two - you, a complex real-life (I hope?) person and not a shallow 1D character, are bound to meaninglessly identify as a Johnny.
Yea it's more I'd say if it's a scale from 0 to 1 I'm somewhere in the interval from 0.45 to 0.55. I'm hella competitive but I also have no fun just following a meta.
This is a great thread. I'll add Jesse.
Jesse is there to hang out with his buddies and wants to just BS.
The game is just common ground for a Jesse or group of Jesse's to shoot the shit for an hour or two at the end of a long day. Previous generation would find your Jesse hanging out at the bar, or sports ball games. Jesse's really started appearing in games en masse during covid. They aren't necessarily good at the game, often bad, but that doesn't matter.
My gaming group are all Jesse's.
Who is the guy that shows up on time and just wants to have fun, no matter the outcome; win, lose, or draw?
For reasons I can't explain I'm certain that's a Ted.. a cool Todd, basically.
What about Mark?
My brother, who is the worst video game player I've known in my entire life. Takes games more seriously than any human being I know but is horrendous at them. Every thing he does is defended as the clearly correct choice no matter how conspicuously wrong it is; Continually grieves not being included in groups, complains that he's not durable or DPS enough, but will reject out of hand the mildest hint, statement, suggestion, instruction, or commandment. Hated by every guild he's ever been a part of; Only functional carrying characters an order of magnitude of lower power, and that makes him feel like Ultra Eternity King Lord Of All Games.
That's an Incel subclass
You know what, that completely tracks
You forgot the funnest two, Melvin and Vorthos!
Melvin is the mechanics guy, he plays because he loves the complex interaction between different parts. This is the guy building fully automated redstone in Minecraft.
Vothos is the lore master. He might not even be good at the game but he can recite the history of Tamriel in elder scrolls verbatim.
I am Vothos when it comes to Warhammer 40k. I don't play the table top, I just like the minis and lore
Same. Affording a set and having a friend to play it with? Too rich for my blood.
See I'm just not super into board games
Edit: but yeah also having friends that are also into warhammer is tough lol. Especially when you live in a rural place like Maine
Here in Kansas people still think dungeons and dragons will get you into Satanism.
Games shouldn't satisfy people who just crave winning no matter what.
It's as absurd as saying that some people want art to be beautiful, some want it to be meaningful, and some want it to just be boobs, and that you should satisfy all of them.
Games should have a point, and winning is not a point on its own. People who focus on winning are typically and almost exclusively the ones that make games become shittier and shittier. And not just games but anything that can remotely have a "win".
Why not? Is wanting to win not a valid motivator to play a game?
It is, but if it is your only motivator, the games shouldn't cater to you.
I'd argue there's room for both - however, the real enemy is capitalism as any game could have a well-balanced casual and competitive modes, but they take time and care which costs money and most games forced to extract money not support fun at the behest of boards, shareholders and c-suites.
Yes they should. Playing competitively and with a focus on winning is just as good as any other reason to play games.
Here's an alternative perspective.
Uh, citation needed.
I don't like that this article seems to be written by a Type-A 22-year-old whining that none of his friends want to play Settlers of Catan with him anymore.
There is a point to be made here about people having a self-improvement mindset, about not letting their frustrations take over, about not jumping to conclusions regarding which game tactics are unfair or not in an obvious bid to cover for some self-made injury to their self-esteem. And I would love to make that point.
But, there is something really important that seems to be missing from this discussion entirely: sportsmanship.
Dominating the board with move choices that are optimal but which do not respect the other players, their time, or the spirit of fair-play
Is rude.
This is sort of fine in an online context where anyone who doesn't like you can find another lobby, but you would really struggle to do things like "gain a minor lead and then run out the timer" every match in the living room with six of your cousins, and you know exactly why.
Anyway, I strongly disagree with this article, even though we might come to a lot of the same conclusions about the.. pragmatism of tournament rules, or whatever.