|
game/sport/competition
I think my number one would have to be tennis. Especially in grand slams, you almost never see a higher ranked player in the top end lose to a lower ranked player, even if its like #2 vs #3, and semi finals usually consists of the top 4 seeds. And I've seen a Elo ranking of tennis players somewhere and it had the highest peaks I had ever seen(even higher than chess) which was over 2900 for Federer.
Id have to put chess in second. But I think it is reaching its limits nowadays a game between two grandmasters ends up in a draw more often than not, and if not that then its whoever had white side that wins.
And id put Starcraft in third. Both sc2 and bw but mainly broodwar because I think random factor in sc2 is higher but I'm confident blizzard will change that in future expansions though.
EDIT: OK people I realised what I had in mind is what is the game with lowest random factor. As "most skilled-based" is pretty damn nebulous and subjective and probly not a good way to phrase it
|
|
|
So this is not about the skill involved but about how measurable the skill is?
|
|
|
GRAND OLD AMERICA16375 Posts
1)BW
2)Quake
3)Chess
.
.
.
10282)SC2
User was warned for this post
|
On November 28 2011 01:46 kafkaesque wrote:
So this is not about the skill involved but about how measurable the skill is?
I think a game in which a player can win games on a clearly better player shows the game has an higher random factor
|
On November 28 2011 01:48 HardMacro wrote:
Life.
/Thread.
Was gonna say that lol.
That game is so hard, there are too many mechanics and bugs and glitches; that game needs so many patches but they never seem to come. I rage so much when I play it, god... there are also a crap tonne of addicts of that game, more players than all Blizzard games combined. Very time consuming too, its hard to find time to do anything else but to play it.
|
On November 28 2011 01:52 sorrowptoss wrote:Was gonna say that lol. That game is so hard, there are too many mechanics and bugs and glitches; that game needs so many patches but they never seem to come. I rage so much when I play it, god... there are also a crap tonne of addicts of that game, more players than all Blizzard games combined. Very time consuming too, its hard to find time to do anything else but to play it.
That and its not very balanced >.<. Whoever made this game better l2balance!
|
I don't think tennis is most skilled as style match up and the surface being played on plays a big factor and i've seen plenty of times where the better player skill wise has lost due to these factors. In my opinion some kind of athletics spot would be the most skilled.
|
I think the OP is going by highest probability of superior player winning, which I don't really agree with if you're talking about "most skillful." For highest probability of superior player winning, you just need a game with a pretty high sample size of sorts (the longer the match and the more key actions per unit time, the better), low randomness, and so on.
|
|
|
Chess
There are many many people who put in more work and have greater minds than Flash and never stand out in Chess
|
Tic Tac Toe. (Just to prove that if a game is only skill-based, that doesn't mean that game is good).
|
|
|
On November 28 2011 01:52 ShineOnYou wrote:Show nested quote +On November 28 2011 01:46 kafkaesque wrote:
So this is not about the skill involved but about how measurable the skill is?
I think a game in which a player can win games on a clearly better player shows the game has an higher random factor
But how do you measure who the better player is? Consistency in winning? Im not arguing with you that say Federer was by far he best tennis player. But theres no "measurable" skill that you can use to define it. Some other guys serve harder, move faster etc..
If winning a lot is the only way you can define who the better player is, then of course a "better player" will win more often over a "lesser player" because thats how you defined he was better in the first place.
|
|
|
Maybe something extremely simple.
Tetris? Rng involved but I don't think there is so much you could lose because of it.
Go? I prefer this to Chess when talking about skill. Even when I prefer chess itself to play and enjoy, but I don't think it's harder.
Or maybe a race where 2 persons solve sudoku problem and faster wins.
It depends alot from which perspective you look 'most skill based game'.
e; most ppl here are very biased.
|
Running and swimming takes most pure skill. Basketball and MMA takes most skills.
|
Norway28781 Posts
mostly all sports with both technical and physical demands are virtually indistinguishable in terms of "skill required". the best players in all these sports are basically exceptionally talented people who have played said sport for the entirety of their lives. now, like myrmidon said, it kinda seems like you're asking for what has the highest probability of a superior player winning, and then honestly, you're probably looking for some endurance/speed based sport that only measures physical ability, as any sport involving a ball is always going to have an element of randomness.
|
Well I was a wc3 player for a long time and only played a handful of games in both BW and SC2 but I certainly pick Brood War as the videogame that requires most skill, although it is in big part because of the huge popularity in korea drew tons of money making people work harder, thus increasing the skill ceilling.
In sports this is a hard one, but having practiced soccer and swimming while kid and boxing and Jiu jitsu as an adult, I'll say that Boxing/MMA are a hardcore sports, maybe it takes a lot to be good in the NBA or NFL and that's fine, but in boxing/MMA you not only have to work incredibly hard but also you get punched, and once you get rocked really it's all survivor instinct and heart, you wouldn't understand if you haven't practiced. Fighters are by far the better atletles, period.
Competition, I deffinevitely go with enuit-eskimo ear pulling. It takes some fucking ballz.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ear_pull
1. BW.
2. Boxing/MMA
3. Enuit-eskimo ear pulling.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
