I would suggest trying to diversify the "tags" given to players. It's just my opinion, but I'll throw it down here for consideration anyway.

Most people whose posts I have read in this thread seem to encompass a very wide spectrum of traits under the "good player" definition they use. Then, by extension, the opposite would need to be attributed to the "bad player". However this is very destructive to discussions and, more importantly, disrespectful to players that do not match either. Majority of the players do not. The definitions used here are so wide that barely anyone could possibly match them.

They encompass traits like "pleasant", "friendly", "skilled", "experienced", "knowledgeable", "social" and more. Basically they are idealizations. However, the terms "good" and "bad" player used in very serious discussions about strictly specific topics. This muddles those discussions and leads to misunderstandings and eventually to arguments.

Best definitions are short definitions, applying to as few aspects as possible. The ones present here are more suited for discussion about what is considered mandatory for an "ideal" player or "desired" player in my opinion. This all makes them also universal. The definitions used by many here apply only onto specific games (MMO's, and ones with little competitiveness to boot), while they ideally should be applicable to all games, including single-player games.


Well, this is my input. My definition is few posts up, so I won't repeat that. Please consider this as "food for thought" more than an attack of any sort. But...to each their own. If the above won't convince the one reading it...so be it.