Gaming

Its part of the game. Some people just want to run around mindlessly rushing to get the jump on people then complain when someone was watching that door or corner

It’s part of the game, some people enjoy playing that way or can’t win any other way. All devs can really do is find creative deterrents for the behavior that other players can use. (Drill charge for example in MWII)

If people can do it but it doesn't make the game fun, then it's a poorly designed game. Find another game. It's not up to the players to follow some unwritten rule. It's up to the devs to put appropriate rules into the code.

Legitimate strategies, regardless of variety of game or level of play. And although it's generally not my cup of tea, if doing that is how someone has fun in their video game, then so be it.

Spawn camping in old school deathmatches or other games with spawn closets are another story. Believe it or not, straight to jail.

It is as viable of a strategy as any other. People who complain about people "ratting" or being "bush wookies" crack me up... its like saying that chargin a point is a dumb way to play.. its not.. it is just the way people play. Some people are door kickers, some people want to sneak through a window, some people will camp an exit point. It all adds to the tension in a game. I think that if you are playing a game and dont like that people exit camp, like the do specifically in extraction shooters, then you might want to try a game that is more of a TDM.... Because extraction games are generally designed around chokepoints... ala EFT or Hunt to name the most dominant ones I can think of.

I have wondered if this concept of "playing the right way" stems from a generation of people who watch twitch streams. Those guys cannot really afford to play the flanking/ambush style, so people watch and think that pushing a point, or dropping into the hottest zones are the correct way to play. My old ass lacks the snap reflexes of a 15yo. I am for mid tier, or mid tier +1... So I try to play games that allow for me to push when I feel a tactical advantage, or snipe from the flanks when I dont. Which most people would never want to watch.

It depends on the game. For something like COD, it feels like it goes against the fast-paced nature of the game. However, in squad-based games like Battlefield it's a sensible tactic. You want to observe your surroundings and do some overwatch rather than running in guns blazing. (However if you're just sitting on a hill sniping other snipers for 30 minutes rather than playing the objective it can be annoying).

It really depends on the game. In Counter Strike, this is essentially how to play in any kind of competitive way. In a game that rewards aggression in some way it might not be viable at all. Anything people to do to win is fair as long as it's not blatant cheating. If the best way to win at a game is doing things you don't want to do or deal with, it's the wrong game rather than the wrong players.

If camping is too effective, then the map or weapon balance is what needs work.

For example, of people are camping spawn points, why is the spawn point so easily accessible at all? Why don't players spawn behind cover with multiple exit points? Do they not get temporary invulnerability?

Or camping objectives. Why is there only one, easily defended path to the objective? Why isn't there a path for you to sneak up and just stab the camper in the ass while he's staring down the scope? Or just walk around him and ignore him completely?

Watch some professional CS:GO. Those maps have been refined and balance-tweaked for decades. You can't just camp one objective because there are two objectives. Every good camping spot is still leaves you exposed to getting flanked. Even with arguably the most OP camper's weapon in any competitive game - the AWP, teams still only run 1 AWP, maybe 2 at most. Simply because camping alone isn't effective.

If you are defending an objective it is not camping. I am defending an objective.

It was hard for me to get into GTAO, because the first week I tried to play, I got sniped as soon as I spawned in from the intro mission.

In any good game, every valid strategy has a valid counter. If camping doesn't have a valid counter, then that just means it's not a very well designed game.

For instance in CSGO, "camping" is one of the main parts of the game for both teams during different phases of each round. There are dozens of strategies to clear campers out. You can lob a grenade, throw a flashbang, or throw a smoke to block their potential line of sight. You can send in two or more people at the same time to try to overwhelm them. You can wait til you hear them reload or unscope or walk away. You can try to come at the site from a different angle and get a flank on them.

Most of the time I find that if people are getting killed over and over to campers when so many valid strategies exist, it's less that the other person is camping and more so that you can't overcome that.

As a (former?) camper, I did it because I was never good at moving and shooting at the same time. I also wasn't the best camper either, that's why I never played online.

It has its uses but I can absolutely see how it's frustrating for other players in certain games like COD.

I don't care as long as your goal is to win

But in Hunt: Showdown for example you might run into players who are only doing it to farm KD and they don't even try to get the bounty

Haven't seen it in a year (I think they removed the leaderboard and that removed KD farming behavior)

No problem. Its a legitimate tactic. There are plenty of ways to deal with camping.

It is the designer’s responsibility to make the game fun. If the optimal strategy is to camp, and it isn’t fun, the game has a design problem. Players shouldn’t play games that aren’t fun.

As long as the game is balanced and there are enough counterplays to camping, I'm fine with it.