|
It's just another way of competitive gaming. If you can't make it to the top anyways, don't waste your time but play another game if you have more fun with it.
After I made my first steps with weekly Counter-Strike LANs (starting with 1.2) I finally got internet and joined a Counter-Strike clan. Then I became a Guitar Hero-addict and got into the early competitive GH scene (No online back then - just PS2s). Then a friend convinced me of WH40K Dawn of War and I learned an RTS. After that I got into simulations (Falcon 4.0 etc.).
I always got some skills in every game, but never reached anything but being better than the local guys. The only tournament price money I got was in a simple arcade game called blobby volley which I played just for fun.
But I don't regret anything. I don't think I would have acomplished anything if I just concentrated on one title as there are always people who are way more talented and focused than me. Insteat I've always played the game I wanted to play at the time.
|
On April 26 2010 16:52 sArite_nite wrote:
I beg to differ. Any Starcraft player is not an average-skilled gamer, we who are D have learnt skills far beyond the comprehension of any average gamer.
I bet you, if you played WoW now you'd be one of the best on your server.
I hear this all of the time, and I don't really get it. I've played many games, some at very high levels, and I don't think SC takes more skill than a game like quake for example. Most games require a lot of the same skills - hand eye coordination and strategy. Except they're implemented in different ways.
An SC player isn't going to pick up an FPS or a fighting game and destroy everyone the same way that a top level FPS player isn't going to pick up Starcraft and destroy everyone. I think certain games within one genre might take more skill than another, but I wouldn't assume that SC requires more skill than any top-level game of any of the other popular genres. The level of thinking, multitasking, and hand-eye coordination in a game like Quake is mind-blowing, and happens at an insanely fast pace. The teamwork and tactics required for a game like Counter-Strike are equally mind-blowing. I don't think either are easier than the other, if you tried to pick up one of those games you would have a really, really steep climb to the top, just like you would with SC.
-edit-
Also, to the OP: I would just be content with being decent at a bunch of games and having fun. When you reach the top of the heap in any given game it gets to a point where it starts to become almost like a job. It's still very satisfying to get a win over top competition or to pull off something amazing, but it's not the same kind of carefree fun you have when you're just decent at a game and don't have much invested. It can be really draining playing games at the top tiers, because the amount of concentration that is necessary is pretty immense, and you need to keep it at the highest level throughout.
|
On April 26 2010 23:33 Aether wrote:Show nested quote +On April 26 2010 16:52 sArite_nite wrote:
I beg to differ. Any Starcraft player is not an average-skilled gamer, we who are D have learnt skills far beyond the comprehension of any average gamer.
I bet you, if you played WoW now you'd be one of the best on your server. I hear this all of the time, and I don't really get it. I've played many games, some at very high levels, and I don't think SC takes more skill than a game like quake for example. Most games require a lot of the same skills - hand eye coordination and strategy. Except they're implemented in different ways. An SC player isn't going to pick up an FPS or a fighting game and destroy everyone the same way that a top level FPS player isn't going to pick up Starcraft and destroy everyone. I think certain games within one genre might take more skill than another, but I wouldn't assume that SC requires more skill than any top-level game of any of the other popular genres. The level of thinking, multitasking, and hand-eye coordination in a game like Quake is mind-blowing, and happens at an insanely fast pace. The teamwork and tactics required for a game like Counter-Strike are equally mind-blowing. I don't think either are easier than the other, if you tried to pick up one of those games you would have a really, really steep climb to the top, just like you would with SC.
People who play quake and CS competitively aren't "average gamers".
|
On April 26 2010 23:49 sixghost wrote:Show nested quote +On April 26 2010 23:33 Aether wrote:On April 26 2010 16:52 sArite_nite wrote:
I beg to differ. Any Starcraft player is not an average-skilled gamer, we who are D have learnt skills far beyond the comprehension of any average gamer.
I bet you, if you played WoW now you'd be one of the best on your server. I hear this all of the time, and I don't really get it. I've played many games, some at very high levels, and I don't think SC takes more skill than a game like quake for example. Most games require a lot of the same skills - hand eye coordination and strategy. Except they're implemented in different ways. An SC player isn't going to pick up an FPS or a fighting game and destroy everyone the same way that a top level FPS player isn't going to pick up Starcraft and destroy everyone. I think certain games within one genre might take more skill than another, but I wouldn't assume that SC requires more skill than any top-level game of any of the other popular genres. The level of thinking, multitasking, and hand-eye coordination in a game like Quake is mind-blowing, and happens at an insanely fast pace. The teamwork and tactics required for a game like Counter-Strike are equally mind-blowing. I don't think either are easier than the other, if you tried to pick up one of those games you would have a really, really steep climb to the top, just like you would with SC. People who play quake and CS competitively aren't "average gamers".
I don't see what that has to do with what I wrote, to be honest. He said that a D level starcraft player would be an A level WoW players because the game is inherently harder. The reasoning I used applies for any level of player.
|
On April 26 2010 17:53 siv00 wrote:
10k hours is an insane amount of time. If you'd have put that much time into any of those, you would be good, no question.
Not many people are actually willing and able to put in that much time though. They get discouraged or bored and quit.
There's nothing wrong with that.
Hmm ask any trained musician or sportsman and 10k hours is probably a given simply to get competent, not to mention "good" or "competition worthy".
The problem is getting to that point in the 1st place, thats where passion, determination and blood+sweat+tears actually comes in. Imho I've dabbled in various hobbies and when i return to the ones that i've dedicated serious time and effort into those are the one's where i can honestly reflect upon and say that those are the defining times of my life =p
edit: love the last pic btw
|
I tried Starcraft BW but by then, everyone was too good. I would get raped by D players, and I would rape D- players. A lot of times I would lose matches because I would make huge retarded blunders at key situations. I don't think I ever stopped an early Zealot rush or a 5 pool. I'm not even sure I won a standard TvZ because if the mutas didn't outright destroy me, my micro against lurkers was atrocious. But I sure would have lots of troops because I had good APM! =\
Perfect description of me -.-
nice blog, enjoyed the read.
|
On April 26 2010 16:52 sArite_nite wrote:
I beg to differ. Any Starcraft player is not an average-skilled gamer, we who are D have learnt skills far beyond the comprehension of any average gamer.
I bet you, if you played WoW now you'd be one of the best on your server.
Games are..very different from each other. Most of your starcraft skills can't really be applied on WoW, only exception maybe would be the overall attention you have to what's going on on your screen. There's no macro or micro, no build orders or anything, you're gonna have to learn how the game works, how to heal and dps, skill rotations, your character's build, what's viable and what is not. You're gonna have to learn how to calculate your stats, how to gem right, how to choose your gear right, and so on. WoW might be much easier to learn/master, but that doesn't mean playing starcraft will make you automatically good at all other games.
|
I can sympathize with your, I've had my fair share of "competetive" scene back in the day. Tho I've only ever played 2 games on a level where we could talk about progaming. But the main difference between us was that I was playing these games from pure enjoyment, without the urge to go further, go pro (or atleast that's how I feel it from your post).
But you really have to sacrifice so much time in order to become somehow good at first, that many people will back off. When you've invested enough to move to the average level, you have to breakthrough the first wall, I've managed to do that only once and it was fucking painfull (Counter Strike). But once I've got on that "pro" level, things were a bit brighter again, we've played few european tournaments, even won some cash, I've played a couple of matches for our national team and we had the chance to spare with europe's best. But I had to pump even more time into practicing, hours and hours on aim maps, hours spent watching every single pro demo and in the end hours of TGs and CWs. I can't really say if it was worth it, looking back it's all clouded by nostalgia. By the time I was getting really burnt out from CS, I've gotten into a serious relationship, which only sped up my farewell to progaming (4ever). I'm playing SC2 now, I want to get better, but I have zero ambition for going pro, I know I can't do that anymore.
You should choose one game and go all out, even if you are not doing good at the moment, even if you struggle, you have to keep going. It's impossible not to improve. Sometimes you make progress which you can't really notice, but you are still getting better and better. Good luck!
|
On April 26 2010 23:58 Aether wrote:Show nested quote +On April 26 2010 23:49 sixghost wrote:On April 26 2010 23:33 Aether wrote:On April 26 2010 16:52 sArite_nite wrote:
I beg to differ. Any Starcraft player is not an average-skilled gamer, we who are D have learnt skills far beyond the comprehension of any average gamer.
I bet you, if you played WoW now you'd be one of the best on your server. I hear this all of the time, and I don't really get it. I've played many games, some at very high levels, and I don't think SC takes more skill than a game like quake for example. Most games require a lot of the same skills - hand eye coordination and strategy. Except they're implemented in different ways. An SC player isn't going to pick up an FPS or a fighting game and destroy everyone the same way that a top level FPS player isn't going to pick up Starcraft and destroy everyone. I think certain games within one genre might take more skill than another, but I wouldn't assume that SC requires more skill than any top-level game of any of the other popular genres. The level of thinking, multitasking, and hand-eye coordination in a game like Quake is mind-blowing, and happens at an insanely fast pace. The teamwork and tactics required for a game like Counter-Strike are equally mind-blowing. I don't think either are easier than the other, if you tried to pick up one of those games you would have a really, really steep climb to the top, just like you would with SC. People who play quake and CS competitively aren't "average gamers". I don't see what that has to do with what I wrote, to be honest. He said that a D level starcraft player would be an A level WoW players because the game is inherently harder. The reasoning I used applies for any level of player. SC, Q3, and CS are all games that are much harder to play at any sort of level of competence. He wasn't saying SC players could easily dominate those games, because they are just as hard to play. He was referring to SC players playing much easier games, such as WoW.
|
|
|
On April 27 2010 02:45 sixghost wrote:Show nested quote +On April 26 2010 23:58 Aether wrote:On April 26 2010 23:49 sixghost wrote:On April 26 2010 23:33 Aether wrote:On April 26 2010 16:52 sArite_nite wrote:
I beg to differ. Any Starcraft player is not an average-skilled gamer, we who are D have learnt skills far beyond the comprehension of any average gamer.
I bet you, if you played WoW now you'd be one of the best on your server. I hear this all of the time, and I don't really get it. I've played many games, some at very high levels, and I don't think SC takes more skill than a game like quake for example. Most games require a lot of the same skills - hand eye coordination and strategy. Except they're implemented in different ways. An SC player isn't going to pick up an FPS or a fighting game and destroy everyone the same way that a top level FPS player isn't going to pick up Starcraft and destroy everyone. I think certain games within one genre might take more skill than another, but I wouldn't assume that SC requires more skill than any top-level game of any of the other popular genres. The level of thinking, multitasking, and hand-eye coordination in a game like Quake is mind-blowing, and happens at an insanely fast pace. The teamwork and tactics required for a game like Counter-Strike are equally mind-blowing. I don't think either are easier than the other, if you tried to pick up one of those games you would have a really, really steep climb to the top, just like you would with SC. People who play quake and CS competitively aren't "average gamers". I don't see what that has to do with what I wrote, to be honest. He said that a D level starcraft player would be an A level WoW players because the game is inherently harder. The reasoning I used applies for any level of player. SC, Q3, and CS are all games that are much harder to play at any sort of level of competence. He wasn't saying SC players could easily dominate those games, because they are just as hard to play. He was referring to SC players playing much easier games, such as WoW.
I beg to disagree with CS reference here, if we are talking the average, it's very well possible that bad team will walk over significantly better team with some luck. When the difference is vast, it won't happen ofcourse. I've experienced quiete a lot of these screw moments (back when mr12 was in play), when noob and disorganized team beat much better team just because of retarded unpredictable rushes and lucky hs's. Aim servers were to blame. That won't happen in any RTS or games where the entry skill level required is higher (Quake, UT).
|
Really now? Good players losing to worse players would never happen in any RTS?
@OP: I am the same way, I tend to be able to pick up games easily and quickly become better than all my "casual" friends, and I generally will look for some competitive community online to further hone my skills, but that's about as far as I go. This usually ends up with me hovering around the equivalent of C level in any competitive game. But meh... I'm perfectly fine with being "that one guy who's good at video games" despite not putting very much work into it (or being any good relative to the competitive scene), and I suppose this total lack of ambition is what separates us 
|
Nice read. Makes me reflect too as a gamer :D
|
very cool read. this applies to myself in so many ways methinks
COOL >_<
|
Thanks for all the positive responses. It feels great since my first TL Blog post was absolutely horrendous and unfocused.
If there was a time for me to get really good and near the top, it was in my high school and college days when I had tons of free time and no money to go out. Now I'm working 9 to 5 and on top of that, have picked up some other hobbies that take away from gaming time. Because of that, I don't mind being just an average player now. I can't compete with a player like  Flash who sleeps for 3 hours and practices for 28 hours in a single day and although that's the extreme of the extremes, putting in an hour a day versus putting in 3 hours a day makes a big difference.
There's actually very little carry-over between games, so even if you are good at SC it won't even mean that you're good at another RTS. I was also decidedly average at Company of Heroes, and that game doesn't even have very many units or base management at all. I don't imagine being average at SC makes you great at WoW, just like how being average at SF4 didn't make me great at Super Mario Bros 3.
For that matter, switching characters or races has never made a game easier for me to win. If anything, it just makes it much harder since I have to relearn the fundamentals for that race/character.
|
i liked the read, and can totally relate. EXCEPT IM D+ OHOHO!
|
Something I don't see mentioned here is that there is such a thing as innate talent. No one questions that certain people are never going to be professional athletes, and most high-level college athletes simply don't physically have what it takes to compete at the highest level no matter how much they practice. Some people are physically and mentally extremely well-suited for competitive gaming, and some people aren't. Being a high-level (roughly, top 200?) player in a game where there are hundreds of thousands, if not millions, of players is going to be outside most people's grasp no matter what they do.
Enjoy playing games 'well' for whatever 'well' means to you, and admire the people who achieve greatness without considering yourself a failure.
|
Great read. Just playing Tetris Attack makes you a hero in my book. I'm not sure how many hours I spent playing that game in a friends basement, unfortunately I got too competitive and gradually they all quit. It's still an awesome fucking game.
|
Your post breaks my heart because you are limiting yourself. You already convinced yourself that you will never become better than an average gamer and it's true...because you are never gonna try hard enough to break out of mediocrity. Getting good is not easy and it requires a tremendous amount of effort even for those who are considered innately talented which I don't even believe in. Everyone thinks I'm innately talented because I can play lots of games, instruments, and other hobbies extremely well but it's only because I put in a ton of effort. I started out just as bad as everyone else.
|
Nice read. I feel ya bro. I pretty much strive for mediocrity at games these days :<
Atm I'm looking over omg.deus's post as I'm writing this. I'd like to say that yes, it does take a great deal of work to get good at some games. However I do believe in innate talent and quick learning, and I think we all can get pretty decent at least something if we try. But the real question is, do you want to commit to that? It's a risky move trying to make a living off of video games, and there are many greater priorities that can lead to a more stable life.
But if you're me, play the games for the fun of learning to play and for the sake of the game. If you're forcing yourself to trudge on while playing a game maybe it's not meant for you. This might not apply to people who get frustrated once in a while (or often.. I dunno) at a professional level, but not all of us have that kind of reputation.
For the sake of example, I've been playing Stepmania for a good deal of time now (2 years or so?) It's nowhere near as difficult as Beatmania imo in terms of finger rhythm games but I've gotten pretty decent. But decent is only decent, and I'll never be as good as some of the great players out there. (and hell, there's quite a bit of great players out there)
Starcraft I wanted to pursue D+ or even C- but I quit. Too hard and strenuous for me: I can't play Starcraft continuously for very long periods of time, especially solely melee/1v1 games.
Nice to know I'm one of the top at my high school though. lmao
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
