| Sumario: | Patridge takes it as morally better that the transparent game-player with social ends will constantly monitor the other players and adjust their play-style to match. For such players, we may only able to detect the difference between striving players and achievement players in their extra-game behavior. I want to give novice players a chance to stretch their legs and figure out how the game works without hamstringing them at the first move.[1] So if opaquely layered striving players really were incapable of such adaptation, that would show that striving play lacked a capacity for a certain kind of social grace. Currie's example only makes sense if achievement players play with a more deathly grip on the win, and striving players play more lightheartedly. For example, Patridge worries that the transparent game-player will be able to adjust themselves mid-play to suit the social purpose (Patridge, 374-6).
|
|---|