{{
`${userDetail.user.displayName}${userDetail.user.cachedBungieGlobalDisplayNameCode ? `#${standardizeBungieGlobalCode(userDetail.user.cachedBungieGlobalDisplayNameCode)}` : ""}`}}
{{getUserClans()}}
8/7/2016 5:41:24 PM
5
You know what? I'm right there with you. I understand that people are going to use the meta to be competitive, but I also think people have forgotten what 'fun' is. Winning really isn't everything in games, and if you're willing to exploit developer imbalances in order to win, then you're unfortunately part of a growing problem.
I completely welcome logical debate on this, but do it civilly, please.
English
-
So, (now keep in mind I'm not trying to be inflammatory) if you almost cheat to win, is it really winning? The rules say whomever scores the most points, but when you're doing it by using broken guns, that victory doesn't ring a bit hollow? Consider a twelve person archery tournament for fun. Everyone is using compound bows to hit targets. Three people show up with TrackingPoint XactSystem firearms. Those three people on one team win because they hit the most targets. However, it was bow skill that brought about hits and misses for the other team, while the TrackingPoint guns did most of the work for the team with three of them. Who won, and why? Is it a case of bringing a "better" weapon, or are they basically cheating?
