Why is LTC hated?

[Rehab]

I've gotten the implication, though it might just have been poor/ambiguous communication, from this thread, the couple threads on what the basis of tier lists is "objectively" supposed to be a couple months back, and frankly so many in bits and pieces of posts all over the forum over a time span approaching.. I want to say possibly a year back or more? such that I'd have a hard time referring you to one in particular. But I might partially attribute that to "LTC" occasionally getting mixed up/used interchangeably with "efficient," not by everyone, but still enough that it's one impression of many floating out there. I do at least remember reading people trying to hash out the differences between ltc and "efficiency" and "reliabilite" many times, recently.

Edited June 5, 2013 by Rehab

[Junkhead]

um... I know immediately this post has nothing to do with me but I have to answer it any way. How many "casual" players do you see telling everyone that wasting their time grinding and such is the "best" way to play or the "only" good way to play? I've only come across 1-2 and they're obvious trolls from their posts (not on SF).

I consider the game "really easy" and I never grind. Just sayin'.

To be honest, I've never really encountered people stating LTC/Effeciency is the only way to go. Best, yes (I think of it myself, but I don't shove it down people's throats).

[The Fush]

Another problem is that some people here seem to think that if somebody is playing LTC, it means that they either can not be casual while doing it at all, or just don't know what casual means.

[Loki Laufeyson]

Goddamn it, SF, these quote tags are a pain to work with at times!

The rest of the LTC guys aren't acting the same way.

Arr. Most of them arent at all offended.

However...

I've honestly never seen an LTC player be elitist towards anyone.

Once upon a time in a Forest, long long ago, peeps were kind of assholish about this sort of thing. But somewhere along the line, sense was knocked into them, and they stopped being SHFG about it all. Some of the more vocal elitist members simply dont post anymore. I used to see it mostly in Ratings and Tier threads. Its mostly gone now but theres still a straggler here and there...

No. I define casual as when solely played for fun.

So...lemmie get this straight. You dont play LTC for fun? Really? I figured thats why people went with that playstyle. Because they found it fun. In fact, when hearing from Team LTC, they usually state that they enjoy that playstyle a great deal because they find the challenge fun. Thats basically what their attitudes are about it now. They find it fun to talk about maximizing their teams for turns and blazing through the game at Ludicrous Speed. They find it super enjoyable to go to Plaid and two-turn maps. How is that any different than the guy who pisses around with units to see what happens when they level, or turtle maps? Isnt it all for fun?

[Chiki]

It can also be to compete with others, to set records, etc.

It might ultimately be for fun, but what I'm trying to give importance to in my definition of "casual" is the motive. What differs between casual and challenge playthroughs is motive.

[Florete]

Once upon a time in a Forest, long long ago, peeps were kind of assholish about this sort of thing. But somewhere along the line, sense was knocked into them, and they stopped being SHFG about it all. Some of the more vocal elitist members simply dont post anymore. I used to see it mostly in Ratings and Tier threads. Its mostly gone now but theres still a straggler here and there...

To be fair, if you see it in a tier list, there shouldn't be a problem. It's where that kind of stuff belongs, after all.

So...lemmie get this straight. You dont play LTC for fun?

I'm speaking to anyone who has made some form of the above question/argument (there are others): people, read solely. He's saying that casual is when a person plays for only fun and not anything else. How does this lead to the conclusion that Aeine doesn't play LTC for fun?

[Loki Laufeyson]

Huh..?

But people find LTC to be fun. So arent they playing solely for fun as well even if its a challenge? It makes no sense to me that someone wouldnt play that to solely have fun.

[Chiki]

I don't play LTC solely for fun; I also play it because it's an accomplishment.

[Espinosa]

As somebody with chronic issues finishing things, I appreciate LTC as a process rather than a destination. Of course I do want to finish stuff, but I know pretty well that tomorrow I might want to do all sorts of other things that will distract me.

[Chiki]

Funny you should mention that. I'm speedrunning through FE9 JP right now for the bands for my Maniac LTC.

[Dark Sage]

When was this ever done? I haven't seen anyone insinuate that non-LTC = Casual.

I just ask that you specify what style of play you're working with if you decide to seriously rate/judge/comment on a unit or something like that. As for tier lists, it might be difficult to make a "casual" tier list, mainly because casual play is SO vague. And don't tell me it isn't -- there are no strict criteria which defines it (unlike LTC or speedruns or efficiency), just that it's everything that's not defined by any other category. If you feel like trying to make one, though, go right ahead -- it's not like LTC or efficiency players are going to invade the thread and bash you for it. Comments like this kind of strike me as mildly paranoid, frankly.

Bolded is mine for emphasis.

[Dragrath]

I only have an issue with the arguments that LTC tends to bring to the table... which is more of the endless perpetuated debates that argue back and forth amout LTC this caasual that... play the game the way you want and stop arguing/defending so agressivly and we can all have fun :)

[Florete]

Bolded is mine for emphasis.

Even if that were recent enough to be relevant, all it says is that Casual play isn't defined.

[Snowy_One]

IMO there are two different primary meanings for 'casual'. One as an insult and one as relational.

1) Insult: A person who plays by a 'lower' standard than that being used by the person using the term. EX: You use coin mode instead of stock? You must be a casual player.

2) Relational: When a person has a relaxed relationship with a game or method of play. EX: I play Farmville, but only casually. It's not my type of game.

The problem is that both meanings are insulting when applied by a speaker of one style of play to another style of play. It's insulting as it implies that the mode is, somehow, 'lower' than their own and insulting as it implies that the player, someone who may spend a lot of time playing and enjoying the game, has a similar relationship with the game as a child who pops it in just so he can goof off and doesn't have any deeper understanding of the game.

It's kind of like saying someone is in a 'casual' relationship with their GF because 'ugly girls like her don't deserve a full relationship' and 'you aren't serious about the relationship anyways' even if the person is genuine in their feelings.

Probably explaining it poorly though.

[eclipse]

Connotations are subjective and vary from person to person. I see no reason for others to be insulted by calling them a casual player. It's a video game.

I suggest you get out of your own skull and start trying to understand things from other people's points of view. You are doing the LTC community (and my sanity) no favors by continuing this line of thinking.

No one calls 0% playing casual, soloing casual, and so on.

Casual is when the sole purpose is for fun rather than for a challenge.

Why does "casual" play need another name? Why should it be separate from LTC/efficiency/etc.?

[Chiki]

A lot of other people agree that casual has no negative connotations in this thread as well. The people who think I'm elitist for saying "casual" fail to realize that I've posted a lot of threads in which I talk about my casual play. In this case, it obviously isn't I who needs to see from other people's point of view, because all I see is blind senstivity and refusal to acknowledge the truth.

Because LTC/0% etc. is played for an accomplishment as well? Casual playthroughs generally aren't.

Edited June 6, 2013 by Chiki

[MacLovin]

The pleasure of max stats? Girls only or mono-weapons only? Getting supports unlocked? Getting paired endings?

Or accomplishing what video games are meant to do.

Having fun and enjoying them.

[Da Bear]

To be honest, I've never really encountered people stating LTC/Effeciency is the only way to go. Best, yes (I think of it myself, but I don't shove it down people's throats).

There is no best way to play a video game... also you misspelled Efficiency

[Chiki]

I don't think getting paired endings and such is much of an accomplishment for a hardcore player.

There's a clear difference in terms of accomplishments between doing a 0% or LTC run than trying to fill your support library.

[Espinosa]

A lot of other people agree that casual has no negative connotations in this thread as well. The people who think I'm elitist for saying "casual" fail to realize that I've posted a lot of threads in which I talk about my casual play. In this case, it obviously isn't I who needs to see from other people's point of view, because all I see is blind senstivity and refusal to acknowledge the truth.

Because LTC/0% etc. is played for an accomplishment as well? Casual playthroughs generally aren't.

Calling a gamer "casual" will have negative connotations because of what users associate with this word, and it won't matter what sense you attach to it. It's how if you call somebody an idiot because the word 'idiot' denoted a self-sufficient individual in Ancient Greece, it won't be interpreted as such even if you honestly believe that this is the meaning you wish to convey by using this word.

Any misunderstanding can be resolved, true! - but here's 11 pages of this thread where you fail to carry out this task.

[Chiki]

Idiot and casual are two different things. Casual is when a person plays a game solely for enjoyment and to pass the time, and there's nothing wrong with that.

And I have already posted many threads in which I talk about my own casual play--so why are people offended over this when I myself like to as well? Why would I insult myself by calling myself casual?

It seems more and more people are moving away from using "vague" efficiency to tier units (efficiency which is ad hoc to prevent units some units from becoming bad because the tier list owner doesn't want them to be bad) and LTC efficiency, and that's a good thing.

[Paper Jam]

Casual is when a person plays a game solely for enjoyment and to pass the time, and there's nothing wrong with that.

More to the point, we all play our games primarily for our own enjoyment; that's what games are all about.

In other words, if you don't enjoy playing a game, then it isn't really a game.

I try to get S-rank in FE7 HHM because I enjoy it. When I don't enjoy it, I stop doing it.

As for LTC, I see no reason to adhere to it strictly if you don't enjoy that sort of thing, but some people do. I generally dislike "Stop Having Fun" guys on general principle, since as I said, the whole point of playing games is to have fun, but LTC doesn't necessarily mean "Stop Having Fun."

Edited June 6, 2013 by Paper Jam

[Chiki]

I don't think anyone would consider S-rank HHM to be casual. While you might play solely for fun, it's still considered a challenge and therefore not casual.

[Interceptor]

Oh look, it's this shit again. Another Chiki vanity thread, where we the innocent forum-goers are invited to participate in the spectacle of watching him insult people who dare have different values than he does. At least this isn't a mechanics thread, where we would additionally be subjected to watching him make all sorts of careless errors, covering everything from base stats to support partners.

It sounds like Interceptor wasn't going to the lengths Chiki was to shave turns. The only thing we can conclusively say is that they were both playing to have fun. For this reason, I consider both playthroughs to be equally good, since it sounds like they both had fun.

Give this man a prize. My playthrough very specifically was not designed to shave turns, it was intended to be a rough approximation of SDS's tier list criteria, e.g. a "brisk pace" with high reliability. At the same time, I threw some bad units into the mix, and tested a few hypotheses about certain match-ups. It's nothing more than a single brick in the wall, a set of data that people can use to either frame tier arguments or use as a base with which to build their own runs. Ashera forbid that someone detail their intentions, and then deliver on them.

There are several styles of play that I don't particularly care for personally; LTC is merely one of them. I also don't care to build perfect teams of children, or do completionist runs, or stat-maxing stuff, or "fun" runs with only certain characters, or casual "que sera, sera" strolls, nor do I dabble in overly self-restricted stuff like "Lunatic with no Sol" and the like. Despite that, I'm duly respectful of people who choose go their own way, or manage to accomplish difficult things.

Now, I thought that this was just basic common courtesy, but it appears that I am wrong. Apparently, tolerance is some kind of goddamn superpower on the level of being able to do backflips and spit fireballs. Who knew?

[dondon151]

The people who think I'm elitist for saying "casual" fail to realize that I've posted a lot of threads in which I talk about my casual play. In this case, it obviously isn't I who needs to see from other people's point of view, because all I see is blind senstivity and refusal to acknowledge the truth.

okay how about

every post in which you use "lol" as a totally unnecessary interjection