Camping. A Legitimate Strategy?

[Matrilwood]

I read an article that reckoned that the Camping issue is an example of the conflict that occurs between different types of players, who have different goals in what they're are trying to achieve. On one side you've got the players who pay their $50 so they can sit down and enjoy a game, and couldn't care less what the score tables say. On the other side of the coin you've got players who take their score board seriously, if it's not cheating and it raises the number next to their name they'll do it. These types of players don't play nice together (Though it's usually the hardcore players that rage), and unfortunately FPSs are very good at bringing these players together.

Because of the number of people on each side, most FPSs are accessable to both Hardcore and Casual gamers because they grey out the line between winning and losing. Of course each team can win or lose but the victory for each individual player is metaphorical at best. Since there are no set winning conditions for players, what they attempt to achieve can be very different.

[Thu'um]

i don't play FPS to often, but insted play battle field stratgy, in which camping doesn't really matter if you bring artillery.

but for the fps i do play, campeing is a bad idea, and campers are easily solved with a few grenades

[Matrilwood]

I remember a guy who could camp and move around at the same time, regardless of where you went he'd gettcha, like Hockey Mask Dude he was.