Skip to main content

Why is "playing the game" taboo?

Tim strikes me as a rare kind of person with great entertaining abilities; endearing and polarizing qualities; and a strength of character, confidence, strategic capability and self empowerment that enables him to play many different situations any way he wants, for the most part. He walks his own path more strongly than any of the others I've seen, and likes to break the rules (aka a rebel). Somewhat uncontrollable to anyone who tries to, and gets away with it too. Last year to the tune of $250K!
 
alien8 said:
It's definitely more accepted now, even encouraged. I look for the housemates who observe and strategise and try to support them.
I think the reason its stigmatised is because the other housemates assume that if you're playing the game, your actions aren't genuine and the relationships you've developed aren't organic.
Click to expand...
But, you aren't being yourself anyway. You aren't in your natural element. You are placed in front of cameras and told to enteract with people, you may not like. The tasks are set up to stress you. You don't have food. All of it is set up so that you behave in a way you never would outside. So if that is the case, why not go all out for the cash?
 
Ellie Mae said:
But, you aren't being yourself anyway. You aren't in your natural element. You are placed in front of cameras and told to enteract with people, you may not like. The tasks are set up to stress you. You don't have food. All of it is set up so that you behave in a way you never would outside. So if that is the case, why not go all out for the cash?
Click to expand...
I think the whole objective is to manipulate people into showing their true character - which is most often revealed when they are under duress etc. In life that's when you often learn the most about people. Maybe in their natural environment (some) people are generally more comfortable and able to get their needs met (not under duress) so certain aspects of character remain somewhat invisible???
 
Bluefin said:
I think the whole objective is to manipulate people into showing their true character - which is most often revealed when they are under duress etc. In life that's when you often learn the most about people. Maybe in their natural environment (some) people are generally more comfortable and able to get their needs met (not under duress) so certain aspects of character remain somewhat invisible???
Click to expand...
But if their true nature is to strategize and manipulate to get what they want, shouldn't that be rewarded and applauded. Or is that too much like giving a sociopath the keys to your house?
 
What irritates me the most about the phrase "playing the game" is that it's heavily utilised by absolute knobheads such as Travis. It's become a buzz-term used to incite suspicion and questioning of an opponent with no substantial argument on behalf of the person claiming it. It reminds me of that episode of the Simpsons where Homer calls Lisa a witch and the whole town chases after her. It's an easy form of deflection to target someone you dislike for whatever reason.

In the early days it was a fairly effective way of establishing that you think someone is being deceptive, or lying, or backstabbing in order to get a one up over you - I'm mainly thinking Ben 03. Reggie mentioned how when she went to the square house with him he had completely changed his personality. THAT was a substantiated claim. She SAW him change his behaviour between environments, which lead her to question the legitimacy of their time in the round house together.

Now everyone just throws it around willy-nilly because they kinda sorta don't like someone, and they don't even attempt to explain WHY.
 
Ellie Mae said:
But if their true nature is to strategize and manipulate to get what they want, shouldn't that be rewarded and applauded.

Or is that too much like giving a sociopath the keys to your house?
Click to expand...

1) It would appear so.

2) I guess it relies on being able to make very accurate character judgments.....

(Still haven't worked out how to manage double quotes!!!)
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Ellie Mae said:
But if their true nature is to strategize and manipulate to get what they want, shouldn't that be rewarded and applauded. Or is that too much like giving a sociopath the keys to your house?
Click to expand...

This is another thing. I think most of the people in there don't perceive strategy as a "genuine" characteristic. They judge people on a superficial level - whether or not how they're acting matches up to how they would act in the "real world". But there are so many layers that alter the reality of the situation: the cameras, the audience, the cash prize, the tasks, etc. It's not the real world, and from my perspective it shouldn't be treated as such. In the early days it was more about the social aspect, but I think it's been gradually warped to more of a competition. We recognise that, but the mentality of the house hasn't caught up.

I also understand the dynamic of living with someone is a lot different than watching someone; so viewers are more comfortable with viewing strategists as smart, but HMs are more likely to perceive it as threatening. But if you can't beat 'em, may as well join 'em.
 
Rubberduck said:
What irritates me the most about the phrase "playing the game" is that it's heavily utilised by absolute knobheads such as Travis.
Click to expand...

Love this comment! And now that I think about it and not that I'm a huge fan of Travis, I do find it somewhat endearing....the fact that Travis is so unashamedly a knobhead at times and can't see it :)
 
Ellie Mae said:
But, you aren't being yourself anyway. You aren't in your natural element. You are placed in front of cameras and told to enteract with people, you may not like. The tasks are set up to stress you. You don't have food. All of it is set up so that you behave in a way you never would outside. So if that is the case, why not go all out for the cash?
Click to expand...
In the hypothetical that a housemate is not playing the game.

They are still being themselves. Yes, they may not act the way they would in the real world, but it is still who they are in that situation.

Someone who plays the game, has a different agenda to being themselves. For example, they know that they can't win on their own personality alone. So they create drama they would not usually do, they voice opinions that they would not usually have, they create friendships or enemies with people that don't align with how they feel.

That is playing the game, but it's also not them.

From our perspective, most of us wouldn't care. But of course the housemates would care.
 
Deja said:
Yes, but I'm okay with not knowing who the real Tim was because he was very entertaining. Can you hear that, Tully?:p
Click to expand...

Loved that. Classic Tim! Probably one of the most highly replayed sound bites out of the entire show.
 
"Playing the game" was heavily stigmatised in the 2006 series.

Though it has been 'appropriated' in the recent seasons, including this one.
 
because they will all get nommed for 'playing the game' week after week after week. its a cop out.play hard get nommed for "" playing" or lie low and get nommed for 'under the radar' depends if your eating nightshade stems or eating tomato plants. = =
 
Are you saying that "playing the game" can be used as a catchall excuse for getting out someone you don't like?
 
The problem I have with that phrase in BBAU is there is actually very little game to play. Nominations are supposed to be kept secret, so alliances are purely based on friendship, and nowadays with half the house up there is very little influence housemates have over the process - with the viewers saving from 5-6 HMs it's pretty much impossible to get a genuine threat evicted from the game. At least with 3 nominees there is the chance to get three potential favourites nominated and one evicted.
 
Tahan said:
Someone who plays the game, has a different agenda to being themselves. For example, they know that they can't win on their own personality alone. So they create drama they would not usually do, they voice opinions that they would not usually have, they create friendships or enemies with people that don't align with how they feel.
Click to expand...

This sentence made me think... In some warped way I wonder if Cat's strategy was to take out of contention someone who would have been an early favorite to win this year by encouraging Lawson to cheat. If so that is one gutsy strategy! Unfortunately I don't think it will help her game, but it has potentially helped someone else to.... Maybe she is in a secret alliance with Skye? #conspiring #overthinking
 
madambec said:
I guess when Tim succeeded last year with playing the game it was a game changer.

But Tim was an entertaining and charismatic personality so it worked for him. He also never forgot about the audience watching him.
Click to expand...

That's what I loved about @Timdomer he told everyone he was playing the game.

Watching Tim & his antics, it was like the viewers were in the house with him. (well for me it was like I was a HM)
 
Isee said:
This sentence made me think... In some warped way I wonder if Cat's strategy was to take out of contention someone who would have been an early favorite to win this year by encouraging Lawson to cheat. If so that is one gutsy strategy! Unfortunately I don't think it will help her game, but it has potentially helped someone else to.... Maybe she is in a secret alliance with Skye? #conspiring #overthinking
Click to expand...
No, I think it's genuine, and also because it would be one very stupid strategy :p

It makes Gemma look smart.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top