I played this game with my roomate and at first he wasn't understanding but once we got into it, it was pretty fun. I understand the principle of having your opponent get three in a row (thus them winning), but essentially by doing this you win. I noticed that when i played with my roomate, whoever got three in a row would get frustrated instead of what we assume should be happiness. This is because although in "real tic-tack-toe" you would be a winner, the ticc-tac-toe we played had the loser being the person with all three in a row. Great concept but depending on how you think about it, SOMEBODY will ALWAYS be the loser.
I played this game this morning with my boyfriend. It was interesting to change the object of the game to make the other person "win." I've played a lot of tic-tac-toe on road trips and such, and it was harder to switch "tactics" if you will. Eventually I was the "loser" by being forced into three in a row, but like we said on Monday, I still "won" in terms of the original object of tic tac toe... so we both won :)
At first, it was hard for me to switch the way I thought about tic tac toe. It was a completly different perspective, one that I was not accoustumed to, therefore making it difficult for me to let my roomate "win." It relates back to the map activity we did with Mike, when we saw the world from a different angle. This version of tic tac toe is still the same game, but we are thinking about it from a new perspective. It was fun to alter the way I've been playing for 21 years...it gives me a new outlook on "winning" the game.
I agree with kelly in that i saw the relationship between the world map view and the new way of playing tic tactoe. Also, Chris says that someone will always be the loser, but infact, someone is always the winner, depending on how your playing the game. Its interesting to see this from a different angle, and its a jump start to start seeing everything from a different angle. Playing tic tac toe this way is definitely a cool new way to play.
I thought that this game was very interesting. Having played this game for as far back as I can remember, it was strange to reverse the objective of the game. When playing the game normally, I can essentially map out the possible outcomes of the game after a few turns. This started to happen when playing this game after playing a lot. I know that the first move has a lot to do with the outcome of the game, and I found that in normal play the person who went first would have a better chance of winning, since they have 5 turns rather than the 4 turns that the second player has (adding up to 9 spaces). The strategy in normal play is to play in the "safe squares" if you are going first, or the center or corner spots. So, I reversed this strategy in playing tic tac ouch, and played my first move in one of the side spaces. I found that this is when I did the best and "won." I had less control over the outcome when I did not go first. However, I began to see patterns-the most difficult part of the game was getting over the mental block of the way I had learned to play the game. When I played quickly, it was purely reactionary, and I found that I would set myself up to get three in a row. So, I had to play more slowly and try to see the patterns in my head.
After playing tic-tac-ouch for awhile it was easy to see which moves give you a better chance at making three in a row. To lose tic tac ouch, its best not to start in the center or corner squares. There are less ways to win typical tic tac toe by putting your first move in a inner side box since there are less possible strategies with those moves. Playing tic-tac-ouch was a fun, new twist on the classic game. However, I agree with Chris about the fact that there is still a loser. Instead of the goal being to make three in in a row, it becomes to make sure you don't make three in row. So now the person who traditionally would be the winner now becomes the loser. I think it's important to use the idea of letting someone else "win" in certain situations because it makes them happy. But if the other person knows you lost on purpose it takes the joy out of it for them because they know you didn't try your best.
I've never played tic-tac-toe with the goal being to cause the other person to win. It's a much different situation than in the regular game. I've played the game regularly quite a few times and had developed a number of what I called "game plans" based on principles similar to the tree that we discussed in class. With these strategies and the possible moves and counter moves in mind, I could win in almost every case.
Changing the objective to forcing the other player to win was an intriguing switch. While I utilised the same knowledge of possible moves and counter moves, the end objective had changed and therefore though the possible moves and responses remained they had to be used in a different way with different patterns to produce the opposite result. It was a much bigger challenge to reverse my thinking from preventing three in a row to causing three in a row.
I found that if you started anywhere on the gameboard, aside from the center, and move like a knight does in chess (in an L formation) it is the easiest way to avoid making three in a row. After that, I am a poor strategist. It was hard to get the goal of making three in a row out of my head and it was even harder to find out how to ensure a victory by losing. But I do have to agree with my classmate who noted that even if you change the rules of a game, there will be a winner and a loser. I hope everyone had a good weekend!!!
My roommates and I played the "backwards tic-tac-toe game", (as one of them called it). At first it was a little unsettling to change how we played a game we knew so well for so many years. However, once we got used to it, once again there was a "winner" and a "loser" (as inevitably happens frequently in so many things in life). Even though this was true, I did find that the simple fact that the goal of the game was to get your opponent to "win" added a sense of congeniality to the experience that otherwise would not have existed. It is so interesting to think about things we have known and accepted in our lives, and how we might change them just for fun!
(PS - I blogged late because my computer was not working correctly earlier today. Sorry!)
I think that Dani put it best when he said that in the game everyone wins. It was a really neat twist from the original game and makes you think on a different level. It challanges the brain to redefine its original mindset on the game and explore new possibilities for moves. In this game you are working with your opponent instead of against them. You are trying to force them to succeed at your own expense. Granted its just a game of Tic-Tac-Toe but the ideals that it stands for are admirable in my opinion.
I had a great time showing this new concept of such an original game to my friends backstage at Hedda Gabler. The performances were this weekend and playing a game that occupied the mind in such a simple way was a relief from the stress and tension that usually fills the dressing rooms. At first people were reluctant to even play tic-tac-toe with such a different objective. It was like they refused to believe that losing could be winning because of their childhood and how they were brought up to believe what winning is. I liked showing them this game because it shows that winning does not always mean that you have to win. Once preconceived notions were dropped and their minds opened up to this new idea of winning, the competition began. It is necessary to think ahead while playing our new version of tic tac toe, much more than when playing the old school version. I believe this sharpens the mind and makes it a more challanging game. It reminded me of the plight of the computer versus the human brain discussed in "A Whole New Mind" and how the faster your brain can see all the possibilities, the better you will be at something. This is true not only with solving games, but art as well. The more options you give yourself, the more expansive your final work will be.
is it really a game were everyone wins? isn't it just a roll reversal, now the "winner" is the loser and the "loser" the winner. I could play devil's advocate, some people could argue that this role reversal could stunt a childs social growth in a competitive, winner takes all society like this one, encouraging a child to lose and therefore be a loser. BUT, I don't really feel that way. I think that this new take on a classic game is meant to teach empathy, and encourages a greater level of personal perception. your forced to put yourself in someone elses shoes and essentially root for the other team. I feel this could be an effective teaching tool for children, especially if paired with "classic" tick tack toe to really work their strategy skills on both sides.
I was playing this game with a few of my roomates for a little bit and everyone was struggling at first with the idea that you have to "lose" the game. I've been playing tic tac toe for atleast 15 years of my life and the "tic tac ouch" game was a complete curveball. At first when playing the game me and my roomates were tieing. Eventually we got the general hang of the game. If you plan ahead from your first move, you should be able to make your opponenet lose. I like the strategy that Jennifer uses by marking the positions like a knight in chess. The game was fun and my roomates enjoyed playing this game with me.
15 comments:
I wanted to explain what you can do:
remember: he goal of the player is to make its opponent put three items in a row or diagonal.
You can just play the game and have fun and get a better and better feel about it
You can start seeing some patterns and principles. Ideas will start crystallizing in your mind.
Eventually you may be able to understand the game fully, as a whole.
Write down what happened, what did you do, feel...
You can
I played this game with my roomate and at first he wasn't understanding but once we got into it, it was pretty fun. I understand the principle of having your opponent get three in a row (thus them winning), but essentially by doing this you win. I noticed that when i played with my roomate, whoever got three in a row would get frustrated instead of what we assume should be happiness. This is because although in "real tic-tack-toe" you would be a winner, the ticc-tac-toe we played had the loser being the person with all three in a row. Great concept but depending on how you think about it, SOMEBODY will ALWAYS be the loser.
I played this game this morning with my boyfriend. It was interesting to change the object of the game to make the other person "win." I've played a lot of tic-tac-toe on road trips and such, and it was harder to switch "tactics" if you will. Eventually I was the "loser" by being forced into three in a row, but like we said on Monday, I still "won" in terms of the original object of tic tac toe... so we both won :)
At first, it was hard for me to switch the way I thought about tic tac toe. It was a completly different perspective, one that I was not accoustumed to, therefore making it difficult for me to let my roomate "win." It relates back to the map activity we did with Mike, when we saw the world from a different angle. This version of tic tac toe is still the same game, but we are thinking about it from a new perspective. It was fun to alter the way I've been playing for 21 years...it gives me a new outlook on "winning" the game.
I agree with kelly in that i saw the relationship between the world map view and the new way of playing tic tactoe. Also, Chris says that someone will always be the loser, but infact, someone is always the winner, depending on how your playing the game. Its interesting to see this from a different angle, and its a jump start to start seeing everything from a different angle. Playing tic tac toe this way is definitely a cool new way to play.
I thought that this game was very interesting. Having played this game for as far back as I can remember, it was strange to reverse the objective of the game. When playing the game normally, I can essentially map out the possible outcomes of the game after a few turns. This started to happen when playing this game after playing a lot.
I know that the first move has a lot to do with the outcome of the game, and I found that in normal play the person who went first would have a better chance of winning, since they have 5 turns rather than the 4 turns that the second player has (adding up to 9 spaces). The strategy in normal play is to play in the "safe squares" if you are going first, or the center or corner spots. So, I reversed this strategy in playing tic tac ouch, and played my first move in one of the side spaces. I found that this is when I did the best and "won." I had less control over the outcome when I did not go first. However, I began to see patterns-the most difficult part of the game was getting over the mental block of the way I had learned to play the game. When I played quickly, it was purely reactionary, and I found that I would set myself up to get three in a row. So, I had to play more slowly and try to see the patterns in my head.
After playing tic-tac-ouch for awhile it was easy to see which moves give you a better chance at making three in a row. To lose tic tac ouch, its best not to start in the center or corner squares. There are less ways to win typical tic tac toe by putting your first move in a inner side box since there are less possible strategies with those moves. Playing tic-tac-ouch was a fun, new twist on the classic game.
However, I agree with Chris about the fact that there is still a loser. Instead of the goal being to make three in in a row, it becomes to make sure you don't make three in row. So now the person who traditionally would be the winner now becomes the loser.
I think it's important to use the idea of letting someone else "win" in certain situations because it makes them happy. But if the other person knows you lost on purpose it takes the joy out of it for them because they know you didn't try your best.
I've never played tic-tac-toe with the goal being to cause the other person to win. It's a much different situation than in the regular game. I've played the game regularly quite a few times and had developed a number of what I called "game plans" based on principles similar to the tree that we discussed in class. With these strategies and the possible moves and counter moves in mind, I could win in almost every case.
Changing the objective to forcing the other player to win was an intriguing switch. While I utilised the same knowledge of possible moves and counter moves, the end objective had changed and therefore though the possible moves and responses remained they had to be used in a different way with different patterns to produce the opposite result. It was a much bigger challenge to reverse my thinking from preventing three in a row to causing three in a row.
I found that if you started anywhere on the gameboard, aside from the center, and move like a knight does in chess (in an L formation) it is the easiest way to avoid making three in a row. After that, I am a poor strategist. It was hard to get the goal of making three in a row out of my head and it was even harder to find out how to ensure a victory by losing. But I do have to agree with my classmate who noted that even if you change the rules of a game, there will be a winner and a loser. I hope everyone had a good weekend!!!
My roommates and I played the "backwards tic-tac-toe game", (as one of them called it). At first it was a little unsettling to change how we played a game we knew so well for so many years. However, once we got used to it, once again there was a "winner" and a "loser" (as inevitably happens frequently in so many things in life). Even though this was true, I did find that the simple fact that the goal of the game was to get your opponent to "win" added a sense of congeniality to the experience that otherwise would not have existed. It is so interesting to think about things we have known and accepted in our lives, and how we might change them just for fun!
(PS - I blogged late because my computer was not working correctly earlier today. Sorry!)
I think that Dani put it best when he said that in the game everyone wins. It was a really neat twist from the original game and makes you think on a different level. It challanges the brain to redefine its original mindset on the game and explore new possibilities for moves. In this game you are working with your opponent instead of against them. You are trying to force them to succeed at your own expense. Granted its just a game of Tic-Tac-Toe but the ideals that it stands for are admirable in my opinion.
I had a great time showing this new concept of such an original game to my friends backstage at Hedda Gabler. The performances were this weekend and playing a game that occupied the mind in such a simple way was a relief from the stress and tension that usually fills the dressing rooms. At first people were reluctant to even play tic-tac-toe with such a different objective. It was like they refused to believe that losing could be winning because of their childhood and how they were brought up to believe what winning is. I liked showing them this game because it shows that winning does not always mean that you have to win. Once preconceived notions were dropped and their minds opened up to this new idea of winning, the competition began.
It is necessary to think ahead while playing our new version of tic tac toe, much more than when playing the old school version. I believe this sharpens the mind and makes it a more challanging game. It reminded me of the plight of the computer versus the human brain discussed in "A Whole New Mind" and how the faster your brain can see all the possibilities, the better you will be at something. This is true not only with solving games, but art as well. The more options you give yourself, the more expansive your final work will be.
is it really a game were everyone wins? isn't it just a roll reversal, now the "winner" is the loser and the "loser" the winner. I could play devil's advocate, some people could argue that this role reversal could stunt a childs social growth in a competitive, winner takes all society like this one, encouraging a child to lose and therefore be a loser. BUT, I don't really feel that way. I think that this new take on a classic game is meant to teach empathy, and encourages a greater level of personal perception. your forced to put yourself in someone elses shoes and essentially root for the other team. I feel this could be an effective teaching tool for children, especially if paired with "classic" tick tack toe to really work their strategy skills on both sides.
I was playing this game with a few of my roomates for a little bit and everyone was struggling at first with the idea that you have to "lose" the game. I've been playing tic tac toe for atleast 15 years of my life and the "tic tac ouch" game was a complete curveball. At first when playing the game me and my roomates were tieing.
Eventually we got the general hang of the game. If you plan ahead from your first move, you should be able to make your opponenet lose.
I like the strategy that Jennifer uses by marking the positions like a knight in chess.
The game was fun and my roomates enjoyed playing this game with me.
Post a Comment