The Different Types of Players in Cardfight

So I’ve been meaning to address this for a while. I’m going to give everyone my thoughts on the different types of players, and what “fun” really means. It's a controversial subject to the general community, and a lot people probably won't agree with me, but here I go.

In the general community, there are many myths and misconceptions about a player and their personality because of what deck they play and how they play it. Sometimes it’s easy to hate on someone because they’re a “meta scrub” or “play to win”, but it is toxic to the community and usually sprouts from the assumption that a person is playing a meta deck only to win.

I’m going to explain this more, but first I want to show everyone this. It is made for MTG, but is just as relevant to Cardfight because the players usually fall into the same criteria.

Dis guy is Johnny.

"Johnny is the creative gamer to whom Magic is a form of self-expression. Johnny likes to win, but he wants to win with style. It’s very important to Johnny that he win on his own terms. As such, it’s important to Johnny that he’s using his own deck. Playing Magic is an opportunity for Johnny to show off his creativity.

Dis guy is Timmy.

Timmy is motivated by fun. He plays Magic because it’s enjoyable. Timmy is very social. An important part of the game is sitting around with his friends. Timmy cares more about the quality of his win than the quantity of his wins. For example, Timmy sits down and plays ten games. He only wins three games out of ten but the three he wins, he dominates his opponent. Timmy had fun. Timmy walks away happy.

Dis guy is Spike

Spike is the competitive player. Spike plays to win. Spike enjoys winning. To accomplish this, Spike will play whatever the best deck is. Spike will copy decks off the Internet. Spike will borrow other players’ decks. To Spike, the thrill of Magic is the adrenalin rush of competition. Spike enjoys the stimulation of outplaying the opponent and the glory of victory."

If you want to read the whole article on these players, you can find it here. I'm quoting these directly, so I didn't make them.

Anyway, everyone take a moment to decide what player you are. Maybe you are a mix of a couple, or maybe you don’t relate to them at all. These players are the most basic characters of players in the general community, and were made in the early stages of Magic.

The point of this post is to point out common misconceptions that breed hate in the community. First off, I’m going to start by saying this.

• Just because someone is Spike, or someone who plays exclusively to win, doesn’t mean that they are inherently a bad person or player.

Let me put it this way: people get enjoyment out of the game in different ways. Everyone has to admit, a game feels better if you win. This person gains most or all of their enjoyment by doing so, and there is nothing wrong with that. Salt will always be present in a community, but hating on a player for exclusively playing meta decks is ignorant and annoying. If Spike is a good and respectable player, then it shouldn’t matter when deck he/she uses, regardless if the deck is meta. You can argue that a person may be less-than-respectable if they repeatedly netdeck top decks and/or are snobby and think they automatically win when playing said deck, but it is a common and untrue misconception that metaplayer = douche.

• Just because someone plays a less combo-based deck (Metalborgs, or something that does basically the same thing every turn of every game) doesn’t mean that they are inferior or worse than someone who plays combo, or “skill” heavy deck, like Gavrail.

The google definition of skill is “the ability to do something well; expertise.” I have seen way too many people complain that simple decks are for bad players who can’t comprehend more complex decks. According to the definition I just pulled up, skill is a very flexible term. If someone has perfected Wiseman Loop, they aren’t at all a degenerate, it means that they are skilled with that deck. Same goes for any other deck. To be skilled is to perfect a deck. Therefore, complex decks don’t always = skilled player, and simple deck don’t always = unskilled, or bad, player.

• There is no universal definition of “fun”.

Ladies and gentlemen, although I kind of touched on this in my first bulletpoint, there is no universal definition of fun. My fun may not be your fun, and vice versa. Therefore, there cannot be a universal definition of fun. Whether you want to play a control deck to limit your opponent’s options, or spam attacks, or watch your opponent do their thing, or play simply to win, the only thing that matters is that you’re having fun. Don’t tell someone that they aren't having fun because of the fact that they have a different version of fun then you. Maybe they’re like Chang, and want to turbo the hell out of everything. Maybe they’re a blue/black player in MTG and just want to make you suffer. Regardless, it doesn’t matter.

Anyway, the overall point of my post is to bring awareness of the fact that the term “fun” is flexible, and please don’t be that guy at locals who gets salty over everything. Learn to accept the players around you for what their “fun” is, and you might have more fun yourself. Feel free to tell us what you think in the comments, and please try to understand the other players and abstain from resorting to salt.

I might keep doing these guides instead of doing deck profiles. We all know Chang is a better deckbuilder, and I enjoy making these kinds of posts, anyway. Maybe I could discuss things on YouTube videos instead of writing, but feel free to jump in with your opinions in the comments. Anyway, please don't die.

-JamesTheFenrirFanboi