I agree 100% and for the record I’m decent at my best days on most online FPS games that I play. It’s not the outcome that irritates me it’s the “why” behind it. In R6S for example “I’m not opening rotation holes because I don’t know where to open them/forgot about them” and “I don’t care about rotation holes because I’m here for my K/D” both have the same outcome. One is an honest play style while the other actively ignores a core part of the game. This I why I’m left wondering if some players like the game itself or they’re just jumping in to jump in. Despite everything it’s still an online game and other players are players not NPCs.

Using competitive online games as an example in my post was a mistake. Think D&D. You can’t really play the game 100% how you want. You need to keep the other players (+DM) in mind. If your rolls suck or your plans don’t work out in the end doesn’t annoy me at all -its just a game after all. What I do find annoying is a player treating D&D as a single player RPG, running around on their own, trying to make the story resolve around themselves and not cooperating with the party. If that’s how a player wants to play the game maybe they should stick to living room D&D or Roll20. If said player joins a table at a local hobby shop some form of etiquette and understanding of the game is required. If they decide to play as a murderhobo that constantly ruins the experience of the other players they will be reprimanded or even kicked out. Instead they should either choose to join murderhobo games, stick to aforementioned living room D&D or start up a videogame. Play the game how you want by all means I don’t mean to take it away from anyone. Just know the when and how is my point. Just because you bought siege doesn’t mean you HAVE to play ranked. You like the game casually or play off work/college then join unranked or quick-play. Gamers today feel like they have to fit tightly in their respective communities instead of playing the games how they want to and that ends up ruining their teammates and ,most importantly, the player themselves.

No man, by all means you bought the game enjoy it however you want. But be real, if you play Ranked in a competitive online game then are expected to at least understand the games mechanics. If not, why not stick to standard? That’s what irritates me.

Totally understandable, and I don’t mean to drive people away from online games or put their skill set through a purity test. My point is: Hey if you don’t like sweaty games, don’t play sweaty games (or their sweaty game modes like ranked in most games) and if you do try to meet the game halfway. If I play Outward the way I play Fallout I’m going to have a bad time. That goes double for online games.

Yeah I don’t post stuff on the internet so it does come off a little ramble-y not gonna lie.

Like I’ve said it the post it’s not the “playing bad” that makes irritates me, everyone has a different skill level. What I’m trying to say is that people that run head first into the safe room in L4D and abandon their team, or people that play games like HD2 on the hardest difficulty and just run off from their team and spam stratagems. Clearly these types of players don’t want to engage in cooperating with other players yet choose co-op games. They end up not having fun as solo diving enemies ends up in death while the rest of the team has to cover for a +1 .

A server browser similar to Arma would have been a godsend as it allows people to set up unique rules, experiment with different game modes and play around the map itself. While BF isn’t a milsim sandbox game a server browser is what keeps older BF games alive especially on console and the removal of that does make you wonder if we’ll be playing BF6 a decade down the line.

It’s not even a “remaster” conversation anymore, a simple port to modern consoles to rejuvenate the game’s soul should be more than enough. Too bad we’ll probably never see that happen neither :/ .