|
|
|
I can't watch it now, at work T_T but I agree with most people when they say that some people take "becoming a progamer" way too lightly, like it's a switch they can flick and suddenly they're trying to be one.
Look forward to watching the vlog, wowwow u are handsome
|
I expected this blog to be something along the lines of,
"Can I be a progamer?"
"If you have to ask, no."
Did not expect a long vblog. Nice!
|
On October 20 2011 17:48 Funnytoss wrote:
I expected this blog to be something along the lines of,
"Can I be a progamer?"
"If you have to ask, no."
I'm not sure if you actually watched it or not, but he actually said that.
|
On October 20 2011 17:53 Game wrote:Show nested quote +On October 20 2011 17:48 Funnytoss wrote:
I expected this blog to be something along the lines of,
"Can I be a progamer?"
"If you have to ask, no." I'm not sure if you actually watched it or not, but he actually said that.
Yeah, but he kinda explained why and not just say "No you can't"
|
On October 20 2011 17:57 MarCoon wrote:Show nested quote +On October 20 2011 17:53 Game wrote:On October 20 2011 17:48 Funnytoss wrote:
I expected this blog to be something along the lines of,
"Can I be a progamer?"
"If you have to ask, no." I'm not sure if you actually watched it or not, but he actually said that. Yeah, but he kinda explained why and not just say "No you can't"
Uhh, not trying to argue about it, but he physically stated those lines. Despite his explanation further (which is helpful to all of the ignorant people), he said it.
|
On October 20 2011 17:59 Game wrote:Show nested quote +On October 20 2011 17:57 MarCoon wrote:On October 20 2011 17:53 Game wrote:On October 20 2011 17:48 Funnytoss wrote:
I expected this blog to be something along the lines of,
"Can I be a progamer?"
"If you have to ask, no." I'm not sure if you actually watched it or not, but he actually said that. Yeah, but he kinda explained why and not just say "No you can't" Uhh, not trying to argue about it, but he physically stated those lines. Despite his explanation further (which is helpful to all of the ignorant people), he said it.
That is true indeed. He used those exact words.
|
He says that if you're a low level player and want to be the best you can't, but if your high level you can care about being the best??
I won't necessarily agree with everything in this video but most of it.
You made some really interesting points :=)
|
saying that you can do something if you put the effort protects you from the responsibility of having to actually do it. It's a self-created lie to avoid cognitive dissonance. applicable point
feedback on actual video:
you say umm a lot, look away a lot, fumble over words and lilt forward through the entire thing. its obvious your bright and eloquent, so some recommendations to clean everything up and make it wholesome viewing experience:
write out what you're going to say. like not exactly, but a progression of ideas so you can look over and know. talk through it, hit major points, things will pop up, things will be hard to say, time it. do it twice with mental revisions if necessary
you're good at thinking of a lot of things at once. look at the filming device for 7 of every 10 seconds, then look away for 3 (at the paper :D) or whenever you need to pause or appear you're pausing.
another way of thinking about this is
10 seconds = ~25 words, and the spoken sentence is like on average ~10 words. So every two sentences or so, look away
this was worth the time to watch. good luck!
|
Blazinghand
United States25560 Posts
On October 20 2011 18:54 Celadan wrote:
He says that if you're a low level player and want to be the best you can't, but if your high level you can care about being the best??
He's saying that if you've got what it takes to be the best, you're just gonna become a pretty good player anyways just from regular play. The kind of guy who goes pro doesn't start thinking about it when he's like, Gold or whatever. He starts wanting to go pro when he's master or GM, because he's so talented that that's how good he'll get from casual play.
If you can't get to the high level on your own, without wanting to be a professional, you probably lack the raw talent to succeed. If ordinary play takes you to only silver league, that's who you are-- AND THAT'S OK. Go be an artist or a writer or a salesman and have a happy life. Play sc2. Follow esports.
|
I'm sorry but I have a hard time agreeing with this, saying you are either good at thinking strategically or not. Now while some may be better than others there is no reason that those that work hard can't achieve the same results.
for example are generals just born?
from what I can gather you seem to think so and if that is the case why do we have military training? Why don't we have 1 test for strategic aptitude and if someone does well on it just slap some stars on them and send them to war?
and why do all officers start as lieutenant? if they are any good at all why not just give them an entire battalion?
because people need experience and if someone is just starting rts games with sc2 there is no reason that they shouldn't be able to get to the same places professionally as people who started out with bw
also can't the comparison between brain activity between pros and non pros be contributed to the fact that the pros are focusing on the game differently, for example say the non pro need to think about aiming the weapon over the enemies head whereas for the pro that is second nature?
in short this just seems very elitist (it might not have been meant that way and I'm sorry if it wasn't but I'm just saying how it seems) it kind of gives off this "well if you aren't X the you will never be Y" well thats not always true, remember that Einstein dropped out of school at 16 because he was told he'd never be anything and school was a waste of his time
also about smaller people having a better edge all I have to say is nestea is what 6'2" ? and he is kicking all sorts of ass
also I assume then that the same would be true of piano players, that bony hands = better but elton john has fingers that are like sausages
TL:DR talent means you need less practice, not that you are somehow instantly better
so if no talent than practice more, if less practice than you need more talent to stay at the same skill level
and I could only get to the 10:15 mark before I couldn't watch anymore so if you address anything that I say here then just let me know and I'll edit it out
exactly what the guy below me said, he just put it better than I did
|
I remember a study on SC BW players where they studied their brain activity during games and as far as i recall the result didn't really show that they processed information faster perse, rather it showed that almost all the decisions where made on instinct. So if for instance a Zerg player goes lurker against a Toss, then the Toss player would as an instinct build observers.
The study actually showed that instead of "thinking about what to do" the pro gamer would make the decision based on instincts and not as a result of thinking about it. That actually showed why some of the progamers reacted so fast.
Haven't heard of the study on the Halo players he is mentioning but I do think it's somewhat of a contraditcion in a way because the way I see it, for a brain to act on instincts it needs to be familiar with the situation as u would be if u had massed games and practiced a lot. The study kind of indicated that this specific situation had nothing to do with an especially strategic brain or mindset, rather it had everything to do with the brain recognizing situations and reacting per instinct.
I'm sure other aspects of being a progamer requires a special understanding of strategies but i'm not sure that its something u need to be born with. Like a god given talent. Maybe if u wanna be the very very best like the Michael Jordan example, but then again there's a ton of players in the NBA or Euroleague who are not as gifted as Michael jordan and are still professionals because they just worked really really hard. I think the same goes for gaming.
|
|
|
I don't agree with your idea about not being able to work to become a professional at something. I respect your opinion though.
Personally I think that people can accomplish a lot of very difficult tasks if they have true dedication and drive to reach their goals. It is hard to reach that level however which is why it is done rarely.
I wouldn't really call this a vlog as much as it seems like a QnA. Hopefully the next ones are more alike to your first vlog (at least I enjoyed the first one more then the second one). Just my opinion.
Cheers and Good Luck in Korea.
|
On October 20 2011 20:00 Vortigan wrote:
Maybe if u wanna be the very very best like the Michael Jordan example, but then again there's a ton of players in the NBA or Euroleague who are not as gifted as Michael jordan and are still professionals because they just worked really really hard. I think the same goes for gaming.
Correct, except the harsh reality is in the progaming world, if you're not a michael jordan, or close to it, you get paid absolutely terribly, and need to rely off the "glamour" (streaming, showmatches, low-scale tournaments) to make money, in which case, you're not a "real" pro-gamer like the Koreans etc.
It's like in sc1, you had the icons getting 6-figure salaries, the "just below them" getting higher-five figure, and then the rest getting somewhat mediocre salaries.
People also aren't taking into account, to be that extremely good, requires 7days a week of at minimum 8hrs of practice, let alone the VOD/replay watching you do in spare time.
|
On October 20 2011 19:48 Sega92 wrote:
I'm sorry but I have a hard time agreeing with this, saying you are either good at thinking strategically or not. Now while some may be better than others there is no reason that those that work hard can't achieve the same results.
for example are generals just born?
from what I can gather you seem to think so and if that is the case why do we have military training? Why don't we have 1 test for strategic aptitude and if someone does well on it just slap some stars on them and send them to war?
and why do all officers start as lieutenant? if they are any good at all why not just give them an entire battalion?
because people need experience and if someone is just starting rts games with sc2 there is no reason that they shouldn't be able to get to the same places professionally as people who started out with bw
also can't the comparison between brain activity between pros and non pros be contributed to the fact that the pros are focusing on the game differently, for example say the non pro need to think about aiming the weapon over the enemies head whereas for the pro that is second nature?
in short this just seems very elitist (it might not have been meant that way and I'm sorry if it wasn't but I'm just saying how it seems) it kind of gives off this "well if you aren't X the you will never be Y" well thats not always true, remember that Einstein dropped out of school at 16 because he was told he'd never be anything and school was a waste of his time
also about smaller people having a better edge all I have to say is nestea is what 6'2" ? and he is kicking all sorts of ass
also I assume then that the same would be true of piano players, that bony hands = better but elton john has fingers that are like sausages
TL:DR talent means you need less practice, not that you are somehow instantly better
so if no talent than practice more, if less practice than you need more talent to stay at the same skill level
and I could only get to the 10:15 mark before I couldn't watch anymore so if you address anything that I say here then just let me know and I'll edit it out
exactly what the guy below me said, he just put it better than I did
Addressing the military statement, this isn't a good analogy, because military needs man-power. Addressing the general statement, experience is needed for even progamers yes, however none of these generals turn into the next Alexander of Macedonia, now do they?
About the Nestea thing, surely you would agree that taller players have an advantage in basketball, whereas larger/stronger men have an advantage in football depending on their position, and vice-versa for skinny/thin. It was just a simple statement meant to say there can obstacles in the way due to physical fitness (relating only to progaming)
I'll use my teammate Oasis as a example (was going to use Minigun but I don't [fully] know his history). He played sc1 for two months and achieved the B rank on iccup (a feat that would take normal players 1yr to achieve, given the hardness of sc1 and having 0 rts experience). He's also now a top GM on korea server with only 9months of sc2 playtime. Why is it he is able to achieve these results (and not just him, I could list other examples, such as Minigun(?) ) while other foreigners/players try to play just as hard/possibly even harder, and yet can't? It comes down to the "talent", however there is no way to measure exactly "how much" talent someone has I guess. I had this long talk with SeleCT/SLoG a little while ago actually :D about flash/jaedong vs other people.
|
On October 20 2011 20:48 lastshadow wrote:Show nested quote +On October 20 2011 19:48 Sega92 wrote:
I'm sorry but I have a hard time agreeing with this, saying you are either good at thinking strategically or not. Now while some may be better than others there is no reason that those that work hard can't achieve the same results.
for example are generals just born?
from what I can gather you seem to think so and if that is the case why do we have military training? Why don't we have 1 test for strategic aptitude and if someone does well on it just slap some stars on them and send them to war?
and why do all officers start as lieutenant? if they are any good at all why not just give them an entire battalion?
because people need experience and if someone is just starting rts games with sc2 there is no reason that they shouldn't be able to get to the same places professionally as people who started out with bw
also can't the comparison between brain activity between pros and non pros be contributed to the fact that the pros are focusing on the game differently, for example say the non pro need to think about aiming the weapon over the enemies head whereas for the pro that is second nature?
in short this just seems very elitist (it might not have been meant that way and I'm sorry if it wasn't but I'm just saying how it seems) it kind of gives off this "well if you aren't X the you will never be Y" well thats not always true, remember that Einstein dropped out of school at 16 because he was told he'd never be anything and school was a waste of his time
also about smaller people having a better edge all I have to say is nestea is what 6'2" ? and he is kicking all sorts of ass
also I assume then that the same would be true of piano players, that bony hands = better but elton john has fingers that are like sausages
TL:DR talent means you need less practice, not that you are somehow instantly better
so if no talent than practice more, if less practice than you need more talent to stay at the same skill level
and I could only get to the 10:15 mark before I couldn't watch anymore so if you address anything that I say here then just let me know and I'll edit it out
exactly what the guy below me said, he just put it better than I did Addressing the military statement, this isn't a good analogy, because military needs man-power. Addressing the general statement, experience is needed for even progamers yes, however none of these generals turn into the next Alexander of Macedonia, now do they? About the Nestea thing, surely you would agree that taller players have an advantage in basketball, whereas larger/stronger men have an advantage in football depending on their position, and vice-versa for skinny/thin. It was just a simple statement meant to say there can obstacles in the way due to physical fitness (relating only to progaming) I'll use my teammate Oasis as a example (was going to use Minigun but I don't [fully] know his history). He played sc1 for two months and achieved the B rank on iccup (a feat that would take normal players 1yr to achieve, given the hardness of sc1 and having 0 rts experience). He's also now a top GM on korea server with only 9months of sc2 playtime. Why is it he is able to achieve these results (and not just him, I could list other examples, such as Minigun(?) ) while other foreigners/players try to play just as hard/possibly even harder, and yet can't? It comes down to the "talent", however there is no way to measure exactly "how much" talent someone has I guess. I had this long talk with SeleCT/SLoG a little while ago actually :D about flash/jaedong vs other people.
alright then, why does it become you can't play at a high level unless you have talent? i agree that in order to be flash you need talent but I don't think that natural talent is the only way to get to to the top and that is how it came across to me, I may have interpreted your meaning wrong, and if I did I apologize
also what the guy below me said
|
Hard work and dedication are talents. True talent is shown after hard work. Not everyone can merely decide to spend 8 hours a day, 7 days a week to go pro. This might be why the blogs of peoples paths to becoming pro don't seem to last very long.
|
I think the point lastshadow is trying to reach is that if you don't have the talent you wont be able to make enough money to support yourself and your future from progaming. This is because the people with talent are putting in just as much hard work as anyone else can. Don't read too much into that last sentence... I know you could probably do a few extra minutes or hours, but the point stands. Ideally a progamer concerned about his/her future would want to be able to make enough money to live and hopefully go to university with minimal loans after their career is done (assuming they don't already have a degree). If you don't have the talent you wont be able to make it far enough into tournaments to achieve this result.
|
On October 20 2011 21:20 yawn wrote:
Hard work and dedication are talents. True talent is shown after hard work. Not everyone can merely decide to spend 8 hours a day, 7 days a week to go pro. This might be why the blogs of peoples paths to becoming pro don't seem to last very long.
I agree with this. Behind all of the talent, there still has to be a drive and strong work ethic to produce the results capable of matching the talent. Some of these new players (silver/gold/plat) might very well have the talent inside of them to become great, but are stopped by the insane amount of practice and dedication needed to exploit that talent.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
