|
On April 04 2010 23:18 baller wrote:
hello chess players. look at your game, now back at go. now back to your game, now back at go. sadly, chess isn't go, but if chess made every piece a pawn and doubled the board size, chess could be like go. look down, back up, where are you? you are in a chess club, playing the game chess could be like. what's in your hand? it's a chess piece. look again, the knight is now a go stone. anything is possible when you switch from chess to go. i'm on a starcraft forum.
A++ 5/5 bravo good sir.
|
On June 26 2010 05:22 koreasilver wrote:Show nested quote +On April 04 2010 23:18 baller wrote:
hello chess players. look at your game, now back at go. now back to your game, now back at go. sadly, chess isn't go, but if chess made every piece a pawn and doubled the board size, chess could be like go. look down, back up, where are you? you are in a chess club, playing the game chess could be like. what's in your hand? it's a chess piece. look again, the knight is now a go stone. anything is possible when you switch from chess to go. i'm on a starcraft forum. A++ 5/5 bravo good sir.
p-p-p-p-p-p-POWER!!!
|
I believe Go is much harder. It's very hard to grasps the concept of the game. There just so many formations it mind blowing and so many ways of playing. Chess is great too but I find it much easier to understand.
|
On June 26 2010 11:37 TunaFishyMe wrote:
I believe Go is much harder. It's very hard to grasps the concept of the game. There just so many formations it mind blowing and so many ways of playing. Chess is great too but I find it much easier to understand. Understand chess? Sure, take 5 minutes. Master it? Try 10 years of dedicated play. I have no opinions either way on go or chess but it annoys me how little people understand the games when trying to compare them. You can reduce anything to an incredibly oversimplified version and demean it but doing so means nothing. "Placing my stones around my opponents captures them means go is more complicated and harder to play than a bunch of different pieces trying to trap one of your opponents". As far as I can tell chess has enjoyed more success as a game, being played globally, but I can respect both as deceptively complex games of strategy, intellect, and ingenuity.
|
I played tournament chess and got interested in go when studying AI. Go is definitely a much more difficult game to master and I would say that humans aren't very good at it and that computers are worse. The current algorithms for games mostly rely on high number of iterations and humans are better at Go since they can analyze the game based on patterns they observe whereas computers right now do not understand patterns the way humans do. For example, you can look at something and instantly decide that it's a table. This task is almost impossible for a computer. There are a lot of factors that go into it.
As far as games to play, I find chess is still more interesting to play because it is easier to master and has been analyzed to death. Also strategically I believe there is a lot more depth because of the limited number of moves. In go there are simply so many possible moves each turn and visualizing the board even 4-5 moves ahead is impossible for anyone which is why the games last so long. I would say chess is more like a battle and go is more like a puzzle. All in all though I love both games.
In the end I think eventually Go will emerge as the more enjoyable game once computers can actually analyze the game. With computer aid human understanding of chess has drastically increased and with go being such a complicated game I think computers will help make go into the next popular game. I think that 19x19 Go will probably be too much and that to get attention in tournaments 13x13 go will be preferred since games can be played in a much shorter time period. In chess both players make around 30-60 moves each per game. In go its closer to 150 each. By shortening it to 13x13 that will lower games to about 50-60 each which can be played in a reasonable time.
|
Go is like starcraft, a better player will totally shit over you and in the end you have no fucking clue how you lost.
|
On June 26 2010 14:36 darmousseh wrote:
chess is more like a battle and go is more like a puzzle
i would argue for the opposite.
|
On June 26 2010 19:43 judochopaction wrote:Show nested quote +On June 26 2010 14:36 darmousseh wrote:
chess is more like a battle and go is more like a puzzle i would argue for the opposite.
I thought about it before I said this and you might be right but, chess has a very finite set of actions. There is a best possible move which will give you the best outcome, but in the end you still are trying to visualize a strategy like "attack queenside by pressing my pawns towards a certain square".
In go, the board almost looks like a picture at the end of the game. A puzzle that can never truly be understood. Ha maybe I should describe it as a painting instead. It does kinda feel like Go is an art.
|
On June 26 2010 19:57 darmousseh wrote:Show nested quote +On June 26 2010 19:43 judochopaction wrote:On June 26 2010 14:36 darmousseh wrote:
chess is more like a battle and go is more like a puzzle i would argue for the opposite. I thought about it before I said this and you might be right but, chess has a very finite set of actions. There is a best possible move which will give you the best outcome, but in the end you still are trying to visualize a strategy like "attack queenside by pressing my pawns towards a certain square". In go, the board almost looks like a picture at the end of the game. A puzzle that can never truly be understood. Ha maybe I should describe it as a painting instead. It does kinda feel like Go is an art.
I'd argue for the opposite as well. Your description of chess strategy isn't necessarily incorrect, but it's limited, and only describes part of what a player is thinking. Seriously, when players think "He castled kingside, so I want to castle queenside and throw pawns at him" or other such general strategies, it takes a fraction of a second, literally.
And now, as I write this, I realize that I'm actually arguing that chess is mostly tactics and less strategy, which isn't exactly what we're discussing. I guess you could say tactics are similar to puzzles and strategies are similar to battles, though.
But yeah, chess has actual chess puzzles, like chess.com's puzzle of the day. How is it not puzzle-like?
|
i find that the lessons that i've learned in chess are much more applicable to life than what i learned from go.
also, you are more likely to find amateur chess players everywhere and make good friends just chilling. but go players, you will need to go to specific clubs to play, and that kind of defeats the purpose at least in my opinion.
|
On June 26 2010 13:02 calgar wrote:Show nested quote +On June 26 2010 11:37 TunaFishyMe wrote:
I believe Go is much harder. It's very hard to grasps the concept of the game. There just so many formations it mind blowing and so many ways of playing. Chess is great too but I find it much easier to understand. Understand chess? Sure, take 5 minutes. Master it? Try 10 years of dedicated play. I have no opinions either way on go or chess but it annoys me how little people understand the games when trying to compare them. You can reduce anything to an incredibly oversimplified version and demean it but doing so means nothing. "Placing my stones around my opponents captures them means go is more complicated and harder to play than a bunch of different pieces trying to trap one of your opponents". As far as I can tell chess has enjoyed more success as a game, being played globally, but I can respect both as deceptively complex games of strategy, intellect, and ingenuity.
I've played chess competitively for about 2 years. I was not top but I have a good understanding of the game. It takes a lot of time to masters the game of chess obviously. I never said it was easy.
When I was playing chess, I kind of touched Go a little bit. I'm not proficient in it to say too much about it, but I found it more complicated to understand strategies.
I believe I've read somewhere that GM think like 10 moves ahead on the entire board? In Go, I think you have to go much deeper. Each stone has the same power, but it puts together a bigger picture. Whereas in Chess, if you win certain battles, you can come out ahead. It's not easy to explain but I do think Go is harder to become pro.
|
Both are really good games. Personally I prefer Go. Simple rules, but crazy amounts of thinking needed.
(Not trying to offend people who like Chess)
|
I have been perusing the responses here, and having been a manager at a game store with a Go/Chess/Shogi club, as well as working in the computer sciences world, I wanted to share my observations.
Conceptually, Igo/Weiqui/Paduk (Go) is a different type of game than Chess. Chess is a linear game with very distinct rules that control the game play. Go is a game that is played with some general rules and a lot of intuition and reading of your opponent. The reason that that are no Professionally challenging Go AI's is for that specific reason.
If you have a mind that likes specific rules of conflict, then Chess (or checkers) is the game for you. If you like a game that is full inconsistencies and varying patterns and play, with much more freedom, Go is for you.
Neither is truly better than the other, and Go was a "conflict resolution" training for military leadership and samurai, reportedly, for about 5000 years, where as Chess has been used for conflict resolution (with the idea of limited controlled environments) for only about 1500 years.
Microsoft and Apple two of the worlds major computer research companies, have professional and amateur teams for both games, as both have their place and value. Neither is seen as technically superior, as both can benefit you and you can learn valuable thinking, observation, and planning skills from both.
In IT/IS support situations, I like having people with a love of both. I like having a person that has a firm grasp of Chess and a person with a solid handle on Go. The good chess player can do much more in a more restrictive environment, where as a solid Go player tends to be more adaptive to broad scopes and consistent random changes.
So, as I mentioned before, neither is really a "better" game, and I feel that everyone should try both. Yet just like jobs and hobbies, or even shoes, it is a matter of personal choice based on what you feel you get the most out of.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
