Unrealistic Expectations

IÂ'm under the distinct impression that most people live hopelessly hopeful lives of constant futility.  IÂ'm also not convinced thatÂ's a bad thing.  People have the admirable tenacity to dream big in spite of any reassuring evidence that those dreams might ever be fulfilled.  And despite the realistic certainty that most of us are more likely to approach the speed of light in a Â'73 Gremlin than the kind of success we set as our gold standard, we press on anyway imagining that our own lives must be so charmed, so unique, so dramatic that the impossible is inevitable given enough calendar.  And, IÂ'm no exception.  This futility is the hand pressing at my back, pushing me toward unreasonable expectations, whispering in my ear that the dramatic turn for the indescribably better is already coming for me, which pretty much gets me through my day.

My personal futility, is that I want to be better than everyone else at whatever I set my mind to.  Which is why, through a logic that is both strange and twisted, I should not be allowed to play online video games!

ItÂ's not just a matter of dreaming big, but having the audacity to expect those dreams to be certain.  And, thereÂ's no folly in that.  Anything else seems to me like a kind of hopelessness, a despairing complacency.  It may be all well and good to wish for a sandwich and then trumpet your satisfaction when thatÂ's exactly what you get (see: Calvin and Hobbes) while those who dream of the lottery slap down fruitless dollar bills at the Texaco, but every time IÂ've purchased a lottery ticket – which is really not that often – IÂ'm at least imaginary-rich for a day or two.  In that moment before the first painted ping-pong ball dispels my Powerball dreams, IÂ'm knee-deep in financial security, plotting the fiscally responsible ways in which IÂ'll divvy up my wealth.  By God, in that moment before the twenty-seven that I donÂ't have rolls to a stop, IÂ'm alive!

And, IÂ'm still alive after I lose as well.  The disappointment lingers a moment, and then I make myself a sandwich, and itÂ's over.  So, see!  We all get our sandwich in the end anyway; why not dream big first?

But, like I said, itÂ's not the lottery that drives me.  ItÂ's perfection: incomprehensible accomplishment, mind-boggling aptitude, the kind of jaw-dropping performance that seems so effortless but can never be duplicated.  I want it.  I want it when I write, when I work, when I play video games, hell I even want it when IÂ'm driving down the road.  I want the guy in the Altima behind me to think, Â"˜Man, that guy can really drive.  ItÂ's like heÂ's one with the road, totally aware of the traffic.  That is some badass precise steering.  Guy can drive like a mofo!Â"Ã‚ 

This is a particularly conspicuous problem, considering my universal adequateness.  If I were to realistically describe myself, IÂ'd characterize myself as great at nothing, sorta-ok at everything.  Competent with moments of accomplishment, that is the life I lead.  Above all else, it is writing at which I am probably most accomplished, which, considering the canon of work IÂ've produced as evidence, is the kind of achingly sad statement that might have several of you wondering how IÂ've not yet thrown myself from a bridge into murky waters.

In conjunction with my terminal mediocrity, IÂ'm endowed with an unhealthy competitiveness enhanced by a tendency toward irrational outbursts.  I despise losing.  It genuinely pains me.  I realize there is a perverse philosophy floating about where a victory is considered hollow unless the battle was hard-fought, and the chance for defeat persistently real.   This is a kind of nonsense to me that I categorically reject. 

I donÂ't just want to win.  I want to win easy.  I want to win big.  I want my tanks to roll into a town powered by flint technology.  I want scoreboards to break.  I want there to have never been a moment when the inevitability of the outcome was questioned.  I want to be Muhammad Ali standing over Sonny Liston.  I want the margin of victory to be measured in orders of magnitude.  I want to be the God-Emperor of kicking ass!

This is why I really need to stop playing video games online; games like Counter-Strike Source which has been my most recent relapse.  For one thing, IÂ've come to the conclusion that growing older destroys whatever brain mechanics control being good at video games.  I donÂ't just mean tediously difficult side-scrolling exercises in frustration from Japan, but all of them right down to turn based games, puzzle games, and quickly slapped together games based on somewhat popular cartoon franchises.  ItÂ's not that IÂ'm bad at the games – remember, I am Captain Mediocre – as much as IÂ'm not as good as I imagine I used to be, which really wasnÂ't all that great to begin with.

This is unfortunate, because the only games I can put up with for any length of time are those that are intensely competitive to begin with.  Co-op modes are for sissies, unless you are co-operatively competing against someone else, and even then thatÂ's only fun if my team contribution is worth writing songs about.  Like my articles, my video-game experiences tend to be completely egocentric.  If thereÂ's no I in Team, then someone sure ought to slap one in there.

Ultimately, I donÂ't have any way to adequately resolve my conflict.  I donÂ't see myself becoming any less competitive, or losing my desire to channel that competitiveness through video gaming.  At the same time, I imagine my brightest days of gaming are far behind me, leading toward an ever accelerating spiral of self-loathing. 

I know the easy answer is to not take it all so seriously, recognize that I have limitations, and accept that gaming is supposed to be an enjoyable hobby and not mortal conflict.  I shouldnÂ't expect to win every time I step on the field, and understand that the seeds of success are sowed in the knowledge gained through defeat.  I should just come to terms with the fact that it doesnÂ't matter anyway. 

I should just wish for a sandwich.

Except Â"…

IÂ've got a dollar in my pocket.  And, IÂ'm feeling lucky.

- Elysium

Comments

Excellent Read!

I have been having conflicting thoughts about this exact subject for the last few weeks. I was pleasantly suprised (or weirded out) to see this tonight, especially since I can relate to this article a lot. (Even the part about driving in traffic. =P )

I guess I'm just lucky. My desire for intense competition can be turned on or off at will, like flipping a switch. I usually leave it turned off.

If there's no I in Team, then someone sure ought to slap one in there.

I'll call Steve Jobs in the morning. If anyone can cram spurious I's into words, it's Apple.

You know, we just had a slot open up in GWJFL 2005. I'm sure 11-5 will get you in the playoffs.

I used to get very competitive in online gaming as well. Then I realized to be the best or even in the top tier of players, you pretty much have to sacrifice your life and play that game every moment you have. The best online players are unemployed or people in school as their commute and work don't take up precious gaming moments. Then I think to myself which would I rather have?

I'm ok with being just adequate.

But there is an I in meatpie, wich is an almalgram of team.....

Sorry, quote from Shaun of the Dead.

I was just contemplating this last night while playing Legend of Zelda: Wind Waker, I feel like I can't even contemplate some of the quests, where as when I was younger, I just had to make sure to get every single item and every single heart container.....

Elysium, it's like you read my mind with this article!

The same thoughts have been knocking around in my head for quite a while now. For some reason I cannot quite figure out yet, I share that need to be really good at something. I guess I'm lucky in that my efforts are currently centered around online gaming. It's when these desires/obsessions boil over into real life that things can go all pear-shaped.

For the morbidly curious, I offer up my humble tale:

My obsession currently centers around Unreal Tournamen 2004, specifically Onslaught. I was never really able to jump into anything online before this, but with Onslaught being a completely new gametype I was finally able to start off on an equal footing to others. It also helped that I was (and still am) simply smitten by the joys of Onslaught.

Anyway, I played Onslaught as much as possible (though we're not talking 12-hour slogs or anything extreme like that). Steadily my skills improved until one day I found myself amongst the better players in my (arguably small) country. This, of course, felt awesome. I could join a match and (most of the time) swing it my team's way.

Now the thing is: I was never really that good (IMO). I think I just slid into Onslaught easier than the rest of my UT2k4 community because they came from predominantly deathmatch-based games. So, naturally, as time went by these other guys starting catching up to me. I found myself having less and less fun the better the other players got. Matches would suddenly be frustrating instead of fun and I started to feel that I was loosing any edge I might have had.

A spoonful of introspection later and here I am. I still play Onslaught regularly, sometimes having fun, sometimes not. What I did learn from the experience though, is that being good at something is both a blessing and a curse. A blessing because you can get greater gratification from the matches you play; a curse because you feel you have a certain standard of play to live up to, and when you don't, frustration sets in.

The funniest thing of all is that the community around me still regard me as one of the best players around. (I cringe when I hear that. I'm no superman - just an average Joe trying to get his game on :).) It is a humbling gesture, and one I appreciate deeply. And perhaps that is the most worthwhile thing to strive for - not dominance over others, but rather mutual respect and camaraderie.

Bravo Ellie. It's exactly these kinds of existential ruminations that keep me awake at night, digesting my own stomach lining and contemplating my own mortality. Thanks!

I hate losing to my friends. Strangers are OK to lose against since I don't know them and it's easy to imagine that they are big losers who play 24/7 and smell like a 10 year old hockey bag. But it sucks when I have to admit that a friend is just plain better than me at game X. This is mostly only true about Counter-strike at the moment. I can't even get anyone I know to go 1v1 in any RTS.

You what irks me more than anything at the moment? My 2 best gaming friends are still students and single. How can I compete with that? They have so many more hours than me to play.

Nice article. A few thoughts ....

As a Packer fan, I blame my eternal desire for greatness on their victory in the super bowl. Up until that time, I had lived my life surrounded and enveloped by the mediocrity that was the Green Bay Packers. Having been born in 69, I had no recollection of the glory days. I had learned to embrace and appreciate this mediocrity and never really strived for anything more. An occasional playoff appearance was enough to satisfy me. Then, it happened. The Packers got good. Shockingly, they won the super bowl and my world was turned upside down. Was there something more? Could I, likewise, acheive greatness? Yes! If the Packers could do it, then so could I.

I exaggerate of course, but Packer fans will get my point.

As far as the online gaming thing goes, I always take comfort in the fact that, if they are better than me, then they have no life. You should do the same.

In conjunction with my terminal mediocrity, I'm endowed with an unhealthy competitiveness enhanced by a tendency toward irrational outbursts.  I despise losing.  It genuinely pains me.  I realize there is a perverse philosophy floating about where a victory is considered hollow unless the battle was hard-fought, and the chance for defeat persistently real.   This is a kind of nonsense to me that I categorically reject. 

"It is not the critic who counts;
Not the man who points out how the strong man stumbled or where the doer of deeds could have done them better. The credit belongs to the man who is actually in the arena, whose face is marred by dust and sweat and blood; Who strives valiantly; who errs, and comes up short again and again, because there is no effort without error and shortcomings.

Who does actually try to do the deed; who knows the great enthusiasm, the great devotion and spends himself in a worthy cause; Who, at the worst, if he fails, at least he fails while daring greatly.

Far better it is to dare mighty things, to win glorious triumphs even though checkered by failure; than to rank with those poor spirits who neither enjoy nor suffer much because they live in the gray twilight that knows neither victory nor defeat."

-Theodore Roosevelt

Awesome Elysium, I've recognized myself a lot in that article. Well I don't mean the article was awesome because of that but... you know what I mean.

You need to make good friends to play games online, and by good friends I mean guys a little less skilled than you are. And that means you'd better stay as far away from Certis as you possibly can, and when you can't avoid confrontation and therefore, humiliation, just pretend that he's just a kido that works like 5 hours a week in his PJ's and spend the rest of the time playing videogames. Works for me.

You know, I have a pretty narrow range of skill that I like to play against. Either a little bit better than me, or at most a notch below me. Once you get outside of that range, I get frustrated, bored, or both and I quit. I've always been like that, everybody else wants to win, and I'd always let people catch up or let them score a few points until the match became interesting again. I like the challenge, winning against people who really suck just bores me to tears, it feels cheap.

That said, I still like to win, I just want to fight for it. I think that's one of the reasons I like to play against the GWJ crew (besides the great commentary), we're all on comparable skill levels. We're just average guys who like to play games, not some 12 year old with nothing better to do than practice his railgun shot 8 hours a night.

I have a similar issue. For years, I simply avoided competition because of my hatred for losing (until figuring out that wasn't the answer, although I still have issues with it).

I think it is well summed up by a quote from Neil Stephenson, which I cannot find. Therefore, I will paraphrase:

Every man, until about the age of 25 or 30, secretly is sure that if he were to give up his life, head to some eastern mystic temple, and train hard, that he could become the most badass motherf*cker to walk the earth.

I think this concept is at least partially responsible for the theme of your article. We grow up in a society reading books and watching television shows about superheros, ultimate warrior types, criminal masterminds, etc. We cannot handle that we are normal and will never acheive that level of expertise and power. It is not good enough to be competent or even excellent at something. Our heros we grow up with are simply skilled at an uncanny level that none can match. Our ego tells us that we must have that hidden capability, that it can be unlocked. When we play games, we somehow expect it to come out if we try hard enough (thought to be blunt, we should not be surprised, as we do not put in the effort and hard work to unlock it even if it were there). When it doesn't, we are quietly disappointed.

Everyone wants to be the hero. No one wants to be the valet.

Somtimes just getting up every morning and being you makes a hero.

Being the most badass motherf*cker to walk the earth, I can't quite grasp what you're saying. What is this thing you call "losing"? It is a strange sounding word....lew. zing. Hmm. Go figure.

The only games that make me feel less than able to win are strategy games like Rise of Nations. Where I used to be one of the oft-mentioned young ones who did nothing but play games, and I was great at Starcraft, I can't seem to keep up in them anymore.

I used to build/manage 3 bases while carrying on two simultaneous base assaults in Starcraft and I could win almost every single time. I had a disgusting battle.net game record with over a thousand wins and less than a hundred losses.

Now I play RoN which is in all actuality a much slower game and I find myself completely unable to keep up with what's going on, much less actually manage most of it. I re-installed Starcraft a couple of months ago and found myself unable to finish the first campaign without lots of re-loading saves and frustration.

The only games I still do really well with are shooters, and I think that largely involves the fact that you only have one simple thing to do. Shoot things until they die. That one I can handle. I supposed that's why I enjoy Halo 2 and it's ilk so much more than most other games lately. Even at their most complicated, they're still far simpler than many of the games I used to love.

I'm with Thin_J on the strategy games thing. I just can't keep track of everything, get my ass kicked by the computer on the Easy difficulty, and get frustrated.
It doesn't help that I want to be instantly good at any game I play. I don't want stratospheric mad sk33lz or anything, I just want to be competant. The older I get, the less patience I have for games with a learning curve. I mostly play FPS and adventure games these days, as they very rarely come with a card listing all 200 keyboard shortcuts the game has.

Hee hee! Fun. (And yes, I too will take an installation of the "I Win Now" button, please.)

The older I get, the less patience I have for games with a learning curve. I mostly play FPS and adventure games these days, as they very rarely come with a card listing all 200 keyboard shortcuts the game has.

Amen, it seems like the more things I have to do in a given day, the more unlikely it is that I'm going to spend time playing a game I don't yet understand. It's my number one gripe with games as I've gotten older, I used to be able to sit down and read the enitre manual on the way home from the game store. Now, I'm too busy driving. I used to sit through several games before getting the hang of it, now if I can't get it in 15 minutes, I'm spent and I go play something else.

Coop is for sissies ? Blasphemy. I love coop, I adored its magic since my highschool buddy and I got Doom 1.2 to work over a modem link with a third-party version of sermodem.exe. Three years ago when both my sister and I had a cold, we blasted through Quake 2 in co-op fashion and it was an absolute blast too. There's nothing quite like being with another human being inside a fictional world, and knowing that this person both shares the experience and has your back.

I generally don't like it if the competition is too hard or too easy. I guess because it doesn't matter much how good or bad I do. The result is mostly in the bag.

I like being good at a game, but I also don't have a lot of time to play. So I tend to stick primarily with one online game for a long period of time. 6 months. 1 year. 2 years. When you stick with a game this long you tend to discover some nuances that you hadn't noticed before. And I like this more in-depth learning as opposed to constantly learning the basics of a bunch of different games.

Nice article Too-Tall, I'm starting to see why you're all "Oh yeah Certis, we totally need to get online and play something soon. Totally"

For myself I'm pretty happy just being competent for the most part. I actually like playing big deathmatch games like UT2K4 with players better than me so reaching third place or even managing to kill them a few times is very satisfying. That said, the better I know someone the more I want to trample their spirits and bathe in their despair. Hockey and football especially has produced some great (friendly) rivalries so far.

Coop is for sissies ? Blasphemy. I love coop, I adored its magic since my highschool buddy and I got Doom 1.2 to work over a modem link with a third-party version of sermodem.exe. Three years ago when both my sister and I had a cold, we blasted through Quake 2 in co-op fashion and it was an absolute blast too. There's nothing quite like being with another human being inside a fictional world, and knowing that this person both shares the experience and has your back.

Absolutely.

Like most people, I don't much like losing. Unlike a lot of people, I'm kind of uncomfortable winning as well. Beating someone, regardless of whether the battle was hard-fought or a blowout, makes me feel kind of bad for the person I've just beaten.

Working cooperatively with someone to accomplish something can be the height of gaming nirvana.

So many familiar thoughts here...

That quote about believing that you can still be the top dog if you actualy try really hard before you're 30 is a jewel. Well, sad fact is that I am 31. My illusions are finaly shattered. But, I found a fix and it works great for me.

Competitivenes be damned, my fix is team play, co-op and I like to take support role. Battlefield 1942 is a perfect example. I play engineer. I set mines and once out of ten times that sucker in Tiger is gonna get one up his ass. I set remote controled explosives in the jeep and hide in the bush. One time out of ten, enemy player will jump into that jeep, I'll let him drive a couple of yards, just to let him think that he got away with it and then I'll blow his sorry avatar to kingdom come. And it feels good.

As another example, in Call of Duty there is this mod called Total War. It gives you options to play like a grunt, medic or engineer. I always play medic. Guess what, after a week or two, all my team mates from server that I usualy play on started screaming my name to heal them when they get wounded. It feels good.

My point is, I rarely have top score, but I'm never useless. Call that mediocree if you want, but hey, if I'm not the master killer, at least you will know me as a guy that died again and again while trying to heal you, or a guy that got run over by a tank while trying to jump under it with a landmine in his hands. For me, that is enough.

That said, the better I know someone the more I want to trample their spirits and bathe in their despair.

Yes, I've noticed.

I realize there is a perverse philosophy floating about where a victory is considered hollow unless the battle was hard-fought, and the chance for defeat persistently real. This is a kind of nonsense to me that I categorically reject.

And the kind of "nonsense" I enthusiastically embrace. Otherwise it's just not fun. When I am playing CS or TFC or BF I always pick to the losing team (if auto-balance doesn't that for me already). The battles are just more visceral and engaging, and your contribution to the team may weight much more than if you're on a side of a team that is already winning.

Nonsense!

Nonsense!

Poppycock!

Jellyfish !

Jellyfish?