|
On June 03 2024 19:01 Poopi wrote:
There is more to intelligence than just IQ.
And IQ can have a lot of variance for a single individual (sleep / mood / motivation etc.)
I mean didn't Richard Feynman proved already that iQ is kinda bullshit to gauge intelligence? it's a tool, and like other tools, it's decent for some usages and not as good for others
Yes, I never said that IQ is the end all and be all of intelligence, or intellectual accolade. However, if you look at what IQ does measure, it measures all the criteria necessary to excel in SC2, from pattern recognition, short-term memory, spatial reasoning, to mathematical reasoning, etc.
Richard Feyman had an IQ well north of average, so I don't know what you mean by him proving the concept "kinda bullshit." It's not like a 115 IQ person cannot out-perform a 130 person in an intellectual field, unless all other personal traits are equal. Einstein himself was estimated at only 150, and there are many, many uni professors beyond that level currently, nevermind throughout history, and yet Einstein is by far the greatest contributor to science, besides Newton.
What I'm saying is I'm sure there are quite a few viewers with <100 IQ enjoying Starcraft, but the middle of the bell curve of the population of SC audience will skew somewhat to the right of the curve. I don't think this is an unreasonable presumption to make.
|
On June 03 2024 16:23 Branch.AUT wrote:Show nested quote +On June 03 2024 15:32 iRkSupperman wrote:On June 03 2024 08:50 Perceivere wrote:On June 03 2024 08:39 ZAWGURN wrote:
I do wonder if a continued Serral dominance could hurt the game, if it might become boring to watch the same person win every tournament. Of course Serral is the best and he deserves it, I just wonder if it’s a possibility. Each time Serral is playing, the viewercount for the stream sharply rises. When he's not playing, it sharply falls. When he's knocked out of the tournament, the viewercount falls off a cliff. Every youtube-uploaded video where Serral is featured gets a massive view bump over all other players. I think Serral has the opposite effect on the game, overall. Of course, there's the sad fanboys who will tune out while Serral's playing, because they can't stand to see him dominate again, but they're in the small minority. Twitch had 15k, Twitch costreamers a few thousand, and Youtube 6k viewers during the grand final. That's laughably low really. It happened in the middle of the night for europe. Before a business day. What did you expect?
The finals were at 10-11PM CET. Similar hours as for instance La Liga, the 2nd biggest football league.
But I understand that you were not part of the 20k grand finals viewership 
|
On June 03 2024 19:16 Perceivere wrote:Show nested quote +On June 03 2024 19:01 Poopi wrote:
There is more to intelligence than just IQ.
And IQ can have a lot of variance for a single individual (sleep / mood / motivation etc.)
I mean didn't Richard Feynman proved already that iQ is kinda bullshit to gauge intelligence? it's a tool, and like other tools, it's decent for some usages and not as good for others Yes, I never said that IQ is the end all and be all of intelligence, or intellectual accolade. However, if you look at what IQ does measure, it measures all the criteria necessary to excel in SC2, from pattern recognition, short-term memory, spatial reasoning, to mathematical reasoning, etc. Richard Feyman had an IQ well north of average, so I don't know what you mean by him proving the concept "kinda bullshit." It's not like a 115 IQ person cannot out-perform a 130 person in an intellectual field, unless all other personal traits are equal. Einstein himself was estimated at only 150, and there are many, many uni professors beyond that level currently, nevermind throughout history, and yet Einstein is by far the greatest contributor to science, besides Newton. What I'm saying is I'm sure there are quite a few viewers with <100 IQ enjoying Starcraft, but the middle of the bell curve of the population of SC audience will skew somewhat to the right of the curve. I don't think this is an unreasonable presumption to make.
Commenting on IQ in 2024 is a low IQ move. It's a debunked narcissistic concept. Move on.
|
France13023 Posts
On June 03 2024 19:16 Perceivere wrote:Show nested quote +On June 03 2024 19:01 Poopi wrote:
There is more to intelligence than just IQ.
And IQ can have a lot of variance for a single individual (sleep / mood / motivation etc.)
I mean didn't Richard Feynman proved already that iQ is kinda bullshit to gauge intelligence? it's a tool, and like other tools, it's decent for some usages and not as good for others Yes, I never said that IQ is the end all and be all of intelligence, or intellectual accolade. However, if you look at what IQ does measure, it measures all the criteria necessary to excel in SC2, from pattern recognition, short-term memory, spatial reasoning, to mathematical reasoning, etc. Richard Feyman had an IQ well north of average, so I don't know what you mean by him proving the concept "kinda bullshit." It's not like a 115 IQ person cannot out-perform a 130 person in an intellectual field, unless all other personal traits are equal. Einstein himself was estimated at only 150, and there are many, many uni professors beyond that level currently, nevermind throughout history, and yet Einstein is by far the greatest contributor to science, besides Newton. What I'm saying is I'm sure there are quite a few viewers with <100 IQ enjoying Starcraft, but the middle of the bell curve of the population of SC audience will skew somewhat to the right of the curve. I don't think this is an unreasonable presumption to make.
I mean, do you realize / know that there are different scales / methods for IQ etc.?
If you are arguing in good faith, I think you are a bit out of your depth (in terms of knowledge on the subject matter of IQ)
|
On June 03 2024 19:25 iRkSupperman wrote:Show nested quote +On June 03 2024 16:23 Branch.AUT wrote:On June 03 2024 15:32 iRkSupperman wrote:On June 03 2024 08:50 Perceivere wrote:On June 03 2024 08:39 ZAWGURN wrote:
I do wonder if a continued Serral dominance could hurt the game, if it might become boring to watch the same person win every tournament. Of course Serral is the best and he deserves it, I just wonder if it’s a possibility. Each time Serral is playing, the viewercount for the stream sharply rises. When he's not playing, it sharply falls. When he's knocked out of the tournament, the viewercount falls off a cliff. Every youtube-uploaded video where Serral is featured gets a massive view bump over all other players. I think Serral has the opposite effect on the game, overall. Of course, there's the sad fanboys who will tune out while Serral's playing, because they can't stand to see him dominate again, but they're in the small minority. Twitch had 15k, Twitch costreamers a few thousand, and Youtube 6k viewers during the grand final. That's laughably low really. It happened in the middle of the night for europe. Before a business day. What did you expect? The finals were at 10-11PM CET. Similar hours as for instance La Liga, the 2nd biggest football league. But I understand that you were not part of the 20k grand finals viewership
Which is 11-12 CEST which is what most of europe runs on now.
Which is 12-1am in EEST.
You do grasp the concept of "middle of the night" don't you?
|
On June 03 2024 19:55 Poopi wrote:Show nested quote +On June 03 2024 19:16 Perceivere wrote:On June 03 2024 19:01 Poopi wrote:
There is more to intelligence than just IQ.
And IQ can have a lot of variance for a single individual (sleep / mood / motivation etc.)
I mean didn't Richard Feynman proved already that iQ is kinda bullshit to gauge intelligence? it's a tool, and like other tools, it's decent for some usages and not as good for others Yes, I never said that IQ is the end all and be all of intelligence, or intellectual accolade. However, if you look at what IQ does measure, it measures all the criteria necessary to excel in SC2, from pattern recognition, short-term memory, spatial reasoning, to mathematical reasoning, etc. Richard Feyman had an IQ well north of average, so I don't know what you mean by him proving the concept "kinda bullshit." It's not like a 115 IQ person cannot out-perform a 130 person in an intellectual field, unless all other personal traits are equal. Einstein himself was estimated at only 150, and there are many, many uni professors beyond that level currently, nevermind throughout history, and yet Einstein is by far the greatest contributor to science, besides Newton. What I'm saying is I'm sure there are quite a few viewers with <100 IQ enjoying Starcraft, but the middle of the bell curve of the population of SC audience will skew somewhat to the right of the curve. I don't think this is an unreasonable presumption to make. I mean, do you realize / know that there are different scales / methods for IQ etc.? If you are arguing in good faith, I think you are a bit out of your depth (in terms of knowledge on the subject matter of IQ)
Sure. Also, irrelevant. I don't need to be an expert on the subject to know how the construct generally applies to disciplines. Every discipline has an IQ curve. I'm merely suggesting that intellectual disciplines will have curves whose means skew above average. This should be obvious to anyone with a modicum of reasonability. You're countering with...irrelevant ad hom, while completely missing the point. Not really surprising, given your post history.
|
On June 03 2024 20:49 Perceivere wrote:Show nested quote +On June 03 2024 19:55 Poopi wrote:On June 03 2024 19:16 Perceivere wrote:On June 03 2024 19:01 Poopi wrote:
There is more to intelligence than just IQ.
And IQ can have a lot of variance for a single individual (sleep / mood / motivation etc.)
I mean didn't Richard Feynman proved already that iQ is kinda bullshit to gauge intelligence? it's a tool, and like other tools, it's decent for some usages and not as good for others Yes, I never said that IQ is the end all and be all of intelligence, or intellectual accolade. However, if you look at what IQ does measure, it measures all the criteria necessary to excel in SC2, from pattern recognition, short-term memory, spatial reasoning, to mathematical reasoning, etc. Richard Feyman had an IQ well north of average, so I don't know what you mean by him proving the concept "kinda bullshit." It's not like a 115 IQ person cannot out-perform a 130 person in an intellectual field, unless all other personal traits are equal. Einstein himself was estimated at only 150, and there are many, many uni professors beyond that level currently, nevermind throughout history, and yet Einstein is by far the greatest contributor to science, besides Newton. What I'm saying is I'm sure there are quite a few viewers with <100 IQ enjoying Starcraft, but the middle of the bell curve of the population of SC audience will skew somewhat to the right of the curve. I don't think this is an unreasonable presumption to make. I mean, do you realize / know that there are different scales / methods for IQ etc.? If you are arguing in good faith, I think you are a bit out of your depth (in terms of knowledge on the subject matter of IQ) Sure. Also, irrelevant. I don't need to be an expert on the subject to know how the construct generally applies to disciplines. Every discipline has an IQ curve. I'm merely suggesting that intellectual disciplines will have curves whose means skew above average. This should be obvious to anyone with a modicum of reasonability. You're countering with...irrelevant ad hom, while completely missing the point. Not really surprising, given your post history.
You're the one making a point about SC2 players/fans be smarter than the average. Or even the average eSports enthusiast. You are rather light on evidence, and picking a fight with people pointing out that in addition to not having any evidence, you are using a meaningless number to even make your point. I strongly suggest you fix the [citation needed] problems of your statement rather than whatever gishgallop you're on right now.
|
On June 03 2024 19:41 Gescom wrote:Show nested quote +On June 03 2024 19:16 Perceivere wrote:On June 03 2024 19:01 Poopi wrote:
There is more to intelligence than just IQ.
And IQ can have a lot of variance for a single individual (sleep / mood / motivation etc.)
I mean didn't Richard Feynman proved already that iQ is kinda bullshit to gauge intelligence? it's a tool, and like other tools, it's decent for some usages and not as good for others Yes, I never said that IQ is the end all and be all of intelligence, or intellectual accolade. However, if you look at what IQ does measure, it measures all the criteria necessary to excel in SC2, from pattern recognition, short-term memory, spatial reasoning, to mathematical reasoning, etc. Richard Feyman had an IQ well north of average, so I don't know what you mean by him proving the concept "kinda bullshit." It's not like a 115 IQ person cannot out-perform a 130 person in an intellectual field, unless all other personal traits are equal. Einstein himself was estimated at only 150, and there are many, many uni professors beyond that level currently, nevermind throughout history, and yet Einstein is by far the greatest contributor to science, besides Newton. What I'm saying is I'm sure there are quite a few viewers with <100 IQ enjoying Starcraft, but the middle of the bell curve of the population of SC audience will skew somewhat to the right of the curve. I don't think this is an unreasonable presumption to make. Commenting on IQ in 2024 is a low IQ move. It's a debunked narcissistic concept. Move on.
I couldn't facepalm harder at this comment. The irony in it is too much. "Narcissistic" only applies to persons—not concepts; there is no such thing as a "narcissistic concept." IQ has been misapplied by narcissistic/arrogant circles, sure. That doesn't invalidate it as a useful concept. Militaries have used various cognitive ability tests to filter their applicants since WWI. Funny enough, one of my high school math teachers said the SAT exam is more of an IQ test than a test of knowledge of subjects, and I agreed. There's probably a reason for that...
|
On June 03 2024 20:56 Acrofales wrote:Show nested quote +On June 03 2024 20:49 Perceivere wrote:On June 03 2024 19:55 Poopi wrote:On June 03 2024 19:16 Perceivere wrote:On June 03 2024 19:01 Poopi wrote:
There is more to intelligence than just IQ.
And IQ can have a lot of variance for a single individual (sleep / mood / motivation etc.)
I mean didn't Richard Feynman proved already that iQ is kinda bullshit to gauge intelligence? it's a tool, and like other tools, it's decent for some usages and not as good for others Yes, I never said that IQ is the end all and be all of intelligence, or intellectual accolade. However, if you look at what IQ does measure, it measures all the criteria necessary to excel in SC2, from pattern recognition, short-term memory, spatial reasoning, to mathematical reasoning, etc. Richard Feyman had an IQ well north of average, so I don't know what you mean by him proving the concept "kinda bullshit." It's not like a 115 IQ person cannot out-perform a 130 person in an intellectual field, unless all other personal traits are equal. Einstein himself was estimated at only 150, and there are many, many uni professors beyond that level currently, nevermind throughout history, and yet Einstein is by far the greatest contributor to science, besides Newton. What I'm saying is I'm sure there are quite a few viewers with <100 IQ enjoying Starcraft, but the middle of the bell curve of the population of SC audience will skew somewhat to the right of the curve. I don't think this is an unreasonable presumption to make. I mean, do you realize / know that there are different scales / methods for IQ etc.? If you are arguing in good faith, I think you are a bit out of your depth (in terms of knowledge on the subject matter of IQ) Sure. Also, irrelevant. I don't need to be an expert on the subject to know how the construct generally applies to disciplines. Every discipline has an IQ curve. I'm merely suggesting that intellectual disciplines will have curves whose means skew above average. This should be obvious to anyone with a modicum of reasonability. You're countering with...irrelevant ad hom, while completely missing the point. Not really surprising, given your post history. You're the one making a point about SC2 players/fans be smarter than the average. Or even the average eSports enthusiast. You are rather light on evidence, and picking a fight with people pointing out that in addition to not having any evidence, you are using a meaningless number to even make your point. I strongly suggest you fix the [citation needed] problems of your statement rather than whatever gishgallop you're on right now.
I'm not offering evidence, because evidence doesn't exist. It was merely an easily believable suggestion to explain why SC2 is such a niche product. It's fine if you don't agree. It's rude to say I'm "out of (my) depth" on a complex psychological construct, and therefore the most basic application of it is incorrect. I don't need to be a mathematician to surmise that accountants require more mathematical prowess than cab drivers. Do I have evidence for that? No. Who cares? Why are people getting so antsy about a mere suggestion?
|
France13023 Posts
On June 03 2024 20:49 Perceivere wrote:Show nested quote +On June 03 2024 19:55 Poopi wrote:On June 03 2024 19:16 Perceivere wrote:On June 03 2024 19:01 Poopi wrote:
There is more to intelligence than just IQ.
And IQ can have a lot of variance for a single individual (sleep / mood / motivation etc.)
I mean didn't Richard Feynman proved already that iQ is kinda bullshit to gauge intelligence? it's a tool, and like other tools, it's decent for some usages and not as good for others Yes, I never said that IQ is the end all and be all of intelligence, or intellectual accolade. However, if you look at what IQ does measure, it measures all the criteria necessary to excel in SC2, from pattern recognition, short-term memory, spatial reasoning, to mathematical reasoning, etc. Richard Feyman had an IQ well north of average, so I don't know what you mean by him proving the concept "kinda bullshit." It's not like a 115 IQ person cannot out-perform a 130 person in an intellectual field, unless all other personal traits are equal. Einstein himself was estimated at only 150, and there are many, many uni professors beyond that level currently, nevermind throughout history, and yet Einstein is by far the greatest contributor to science, besides Newton. What I'm saying is I'm sure there are quite a few viewers with <100 IQ enjoying Starcraft, but the middle of the bell curve of the population of SC audience will skew somewhat to the right of the curve. I don't think this is an unreasonable presumption to make. I mean, do you realize / know that there are different scales / methods for IQ etc.? If you are arguing in good faith, I think you are a bit out of your depth (in terms of knowledge on the subject matter of IQ) Sure. Also, irrelevant. I don't need to be an expert on the subject to know how the construct generally applies to disciplines. Every discipline has an IQ curve. I'm merely suggesting that intellectual disciplines will have curves whose means skew above average. This should be obvious to anyone with a modicum of reasonability. You're countering with...irrelevant ad hom, while completely missing the point. Not really surprising, given your post history.
That’s a lot of fancy big words to admit that you are wrong 
Given the ludicrous writing, it’s probably some young guy trolling with a GPT. A boring way to spend time in my opinion, but to each his own
Trolls in my days were more creative than this 
|
On June 03 2024 20:10 Branch.AUT wrote:Show nested quote +On June 03 2024 19:25 iRkSupperman wrote:On June 03 2024 16:23 Branch.AUT wrote:On June 03 2024 15:32 iRkSupperman wrote:On June 03 2024 08:50 Perceivere wrote:On June 03 2024 08:39 ZAWGURN wrote:
I do wonder if a continued Serral dominance could hurt the game, if it might become boring to watch the same person win every tournament. Of course Serral is the best and he deserves it, I just wonder if it’s a possibility. Each time Serral is playing, the viewercount for the stream sharply rises. When he's not playing, it sharply falls. When he's knocked out of the tournament, the viewercount falls off a cliff. Every youtube-uploaded video where Serral is featured gets a massive view bump over all other players. I think Serral has the opposite effect on the game, overall. Of course, there's the sad fanboys who will tune out while Serral's playing, because they can't stand to see him dominate again, but they're in the small minority. Twitch had 15k, Twitch costreamers a few thousand, and Youtube 6k viewers during the grand final. That's laughably low really. It happened in the middle of the night for europe. Before a business day. What did you expect? The finals were at 10-11PM CET. Similar hours as for instance La Liga, the 2nd biggest football league. But I understand that you were not part of the 20k grand finals viewership Which is 11-12 CEST which is what most of europe runs on now. Which is 12-1am in EEST. You do grasp the concept of "middle of the night" don't you?
10-11 Central European.
Go back in the thread and see when most posts were made, when ESL Twitter announced the winner etc.
You're just digging a bigger hole for yourself
BTW the average ro24 ro16 group stage of ASL has 2x-3x the live viewership of these grand finals
|
On June 03 2024 10:18 Perceivere wrote:
I would like future interviews of Clem and Oliveira to have questions on how much they practice, and whether it gives them hand discomforts. We already know Maru suffers this, but I'm not sure how well Clem/Oli fares in this regard. I've seen Reynor flick his wrist after games, and he's definitely one of the fastest players.
Maru constantly beating up on lower tier guys in tvz such as solar, shin, and dark gave him the false sense of confidence.
That’s what happens when you are the big fish in a small pond, when you release that same fish to the ocean, he will soon release he ain’t all that. Which is what we see every time Maru competes internationally especially against Serral
|
On June 03 2024 22:13 LukaMav wrote:Show nested quote +On June 03 2024 10:18 Perceivere wrote:
I would like future interviews of Clem and Oliveira to have questions on how much they practice, and whether it gives them hand discomforts. We already know Maru suffers this, but I'm not sure how well Clem/Oli fares in this regard. I've seen Reynor flick his wrist after games, and he's definitely one of the fastest players. Maru constantly beating up on lower tier guys in tvz such as solar, shin, and dark gave him the false sense of confidence. That’s what happens when you are the big fish in a small pond, when you release that same fish to the ocean, he will soon release he ain’t all that. Which is what we see every time Maru competes internationally especially against Serral
I don't think Maru ever had any illusions about how strong Serral is. He's not that clueless. In any case, not sure how your reply addresses anything in the post. Seems you're not here to engage in any real dialogue, judging by your prior comments.
|
On June 03 2024 21:30 Poopi wrote:Show nested quote +On June 03 2024 20:49 Perceivere wrote:On June 03 2024 19:55 Poopi wrote:On June 03 2024 19:16 Perceivere wrote:On June 03 2024 19:01 Poopi wrote:
There is more to intelligence than just IQ.
And IQ can have a lot of variance for a single individual (sleep / mood / motivation etc.)
I mean didn't Richard Feynman proved already that iQ is kinda bullshit to gauge intelligence? it's a tool, and like other tools, it's decent for some usages and not as good for others Yes, I never said that IQ is the end all and be all of intelligence, or intellectual accolade. However, if you look at what IQ does measure, it measures all the criteria necessary to excel in SC2, from pattern recognition, short-term memory, spatial reasoning, to mathematical reasoning, etc. Richard Feyman had an IQ well north of average, so I don't know what you mean by him proving the concept "kinda bullshit." It's not like a 115 IQ person cannot out-perform a 130 person in an intellectual field, unless all other personal traits are equal. Einstein himself was estimated at only 150, and there are many, many uni professors beyond that level currently, nevermind throughout history, and yet Einstein is by far the greatest contributor to science, besides Newton. What I'm saying is I'm sure there are quite a few viewers with <100 IQ enjoying Starcraft, but the middle of the bell curve of the population of SC audience will skew somewhat to the right of the curve. I don't think this is an unreasonable presumption to make. I mean, do you realize / know that there are different scales / methods for IQ etc.? If you are arguing in good faith, I think you are a bit out of your depth (in terms of knowledge on the subject matter of IQ) Sure. Also, irrelevant. I don't need to be an expert on the subject to know how the construct generally applies to disciplines. Every discipline has an IQ curve. I'm merely suggesting that intellectual disciplines will have curves whose means skew above average. This should be obvious to anyone with a modicum of reasonability. You're countering with...irrelevant ad hom, while completely missing the point. Not really surprising, given your post history. That’s a lot of fancy big words to admit that you are wrong Given the ludicrous writing, it’s probably some young guy trolling with a GPT. A boring way to spend time in my opinion, but to each his own Trolls in my days were more creative than this
I'm honestly fascinated that you're actually a TLnet writer. Then again, I've seen the level of intellectual honesty of corporate "journalists," especially in the gaming sector.
I don't troll, but I do dish back what is given. It's very clear here that I'm replying to a rude, condescending person who habitually projects: first, assigning bad faith for no reason, and then accusing of trolling for calling out your attitude. I won't bother with you any longer.
|
On June 03 2024 22:02 iRkSupperman wrote:Show nested quote +On June 03 2024 20:10 Branch.AUT wrote:On June 03 2024 19:25 iRkSupperman wrote:On June 03 2024 16:23 Branch.AUT wrote:On June 03 2024 15:32 iRkSupperman wrote:On June 03 2024 08:50 Perceivere wrote:On June 03 2024 08:39 ZAWGURN wrote:
I do wonder if a continued Serral dominance could hurt the game, if it might become boring to watch the same person win every tournament. Of course Serral is the best and he deserves it, I just wonder if it’s a possibility. Each time Serral is playing, the viewercount for the stream sharply rises. When he's not playing, it sharply falls. When he's knocked out of the tournament, the viewercount falls off a cliff. Every youtube-uploaded video where Serral is featured gets a massive view bump over all other players. I think Serral has the opposite effect on the game, overall. Of course, there's the sad fanboys who will tune out while Serral's playing, because they can't stand to see him dominate again, but they're in the small minority. Twitch had 15k, Twitch costreamers a few thousand, and Youtube 6k viewers during the grand final. That's laughably low really. It happened in the middle of the night for europe. Before a business day. What did you expect? The finals were at 10-11PM CET. Similar hours as for instance La Liga, the 2nd biggest football league. But I understand that you were not part of the 20k grand finals viewership Which is 11-12 CEST which is what most of europe runs on now. Which is 12-1am in EEST. You do grasp the concept of "middle of the night" don't you? 10-11 Central European. Go back in the thread and see when most posts were made, when ESL Twitter announced the winner etc. You're just digging a bigger hole for yourself BTW the average ro24 ro16 group stage of ASL has 2x-3x the live viewership of these grand finals
CS2 Dallas finals were on at the same time and had like 200k on the twitch mainstream with at least 500k more on restreams.
SC2 just isn't popular (anymore). Doubt it has anything to do with Serral or any player in particular.
|
On June 03 2024 23:09 Harris1st wrote:Show nested quote +On June 03 2024 22:02 iRkSupperman wrote:On June 03 2024 20:10 Branch.AUT wrote:On June 03 2024 19:25 iRkSupperman wrote:On June 03 2024 16:23 Branch.AUT wrote:On June 03 2024 15:32 iRkSupperman wrote:On June 03 2024 08:50 Perceivere wrote:On June 03 2024 08:39 ZAWGURN wrote:
I do wonder if a continued Serral dominance could hurt the game, if it might become boring to watch the same person win every tournament. Of course Serral is the best and he deserves it, I just wonder if it’s a possibility. Each time Serral is playing, the viewercount for the stream sharply rises. When he's not playing, it sharply falls. When he's knocked out of the tournament, the viewercount falls off a cliff. Every youtube-uploaded video where Serral is featured gets a massive view bump over all other players. I think Serral has the opposite effect on the game, overall. Of course, there's the sad fanboys who will tune out while Serral's playing, because they can't stand to see him dominate again, but they're in the small minority. Twitch had 15k, Twitch costreamers a few thousand, and Youtube 6k viewers during the grand final. That's laughably low really. It happened in the middle of the night for europe. Before a business day. What did you expect? The finals were at 10-11PM CET. Similar hours as for instance La Liga, the 2nd biggest football league. But I understand that you were not part of the 20k grand finals viewership Which is 11-12 CEST which is what most of europe runs on now. Which is 12-1am in EEST. You do grasp the concept of "middle of the night" don't you? 10-11 Central European. Go back in the thread and see when most posts were made, when ESL Twitter announced the winner etc. You're just digging a bigger hole for yourself BTW the average ro24 ro16 group stage of ASL has 2x-3x the live viewership of these grand finals CS2 Dallas finals were on at the same time and had like 200k on the twitch mainstream with at least 500k more on restreams. SC2 just isn't popular (anymore). Doubt it has anything to do with Serral or any player in particular.
I agree that its not about the current players. They're the best (and most skilled to ever play) in a massively downsized scene.
|
By the way, are we all just going to ignore the obvious and tremendous advantage Serral has, competing in a tournament in his home state?
It is Texas, after all.
|
France13023 Posts
On June 03 2024 23:03 Perceivere wrote:Show nested quote +On June 03 2024 21:30 Poopi wrote:On June 03 2024 20:49 Perceivere wrote:On June 03 2024 19:55 Poopi wrote:On June 03 2024 19:16 Perceivere wrote:On June 03 2024 19:01 Poopi wrote:
There is more to intelligence than just IQ.
And IQ can have a lot of variance for a single individual (sleep / mood / motivation etc.)
I mean didn't Richard Feynman proved already that iQ is kinda bullshit to gauge intelligence? it's a tool, and like other tools, it's decent for some usages and not as good for others Yes, I never said that IQ is the end all and be all of intelligence, or intellectual accolade. However, if you look at what IQ does measure, it measures all the criteria necessary to excel in SC2, from pattern recognition, short-term memory, spatial reasoning, to mathematical reasoning, etc. Richard Feyman had an IQ well north of average, so I don't know what you mean by him proving the concept "kinda bullshit." It's not like a 115 IQ person cannot out-perform a 130 person in an intellectual field, unless all other personal traits are equal. Einstein himself was estimated at only 150, and there are many, many uni professors beyond that level currently, nevermind throughout history, and yet Einstein is by far the greatest contributor to science, besides Newton. What I'm saying is I'm sure there are quite a few viewers with <100 IQ enjoying Starcraft, but the middle of the bell curve of the population of SC audience will skew somewhat to the right of the curve. I don't think this is an unreasonable presumption to make. I mean, do you realize / know that there are different scales / methods for IQ etc.? If you are arguing in good faith, I think you are a bit out of your depth (in terms of knowledge on the subject matter of IQ) Sure. Also, irrelevant. I don't need to be an expert on the subject to know how the construct generally applies to disciplines. Every discipline has an IQ curve. I'm merely suggesting that intellectual disciplines will have curves whose means skew above average. This should be obvious to anyone with a modicum of reasonability. You're countering with...irrelevant ad hom, while completely missing the point. Not really surprising, given your post history. That’s a lot of fancy big words to admit that you are wrong Given the ludicrous writing, it’s probably some young guy trolling with a GPT. A boring way to spend time in my opinion, but to each his own Trolls in my days were more creative than this I'm honestly fascinated that you're actually a TLnet writer. Then again, I've seen the level of intellectual honesty of corporate "journalists," especially in the gaming sector. I don't troll, but I do dish back what is given. It's very clear here that I'm replying to a rude, condescending person who habitually projects: first, assigning bad faith for no reason, and then accusing of trolling for calling out your attitude. I won't bother with you any longer.
If you are arguing in good faith, then my biggest advice would be:
Ce qui se conçoit bien s’énonce clairement, et les mots pour le dire arrivent aisément from Nicolas Boileau.
English version:
Whatever we conceive well we express clearly, and words flow with ease.
[Fr., Ce que l'on concoit bien s'enonce clairement,
Et les mots pour le dire arrivent aisement.]
Nicolas Boileau-Despreaux
If you use overcomplicated words to argue, it is harder to understand your argument, which might make the other person think you are trying to bullshit him. On the other hand, if you try to convey the meaning of your argument in the simplest way possible (think ELI5 subreddit, where you try to explain a difficult complex to a 5 year old), even though it is difficult to do, it makes you seem genuine in your argument.
|
On June 03 2024 22:02 iRkSupperman wrote:Show nested quote +On June 03 2024 20:10 Branch.AUT wrote:On June 03 2024 19:25 iRkSupperman wrote:On June 03 2024 16:23 Branch.AUT wrote:On June 03 2024 15:32 iRkSupperman wrote:On June 03 2024 08:50 Perceivere wrote:On June 03 2024 08:39 ZAWGURN wrote:
I do wonder if a continued Serral dominance could hurt the game, if it might become boring to watch the same person win every tournament. Of course Serral is the best and he deserves it, I just wonder if it’s a possibility. Each time Serral is playing, the viewercount for the stream sharply rises. When he's not playing, it sharply falls. When he's knocked out of the tournament, the viewercount falls off a cliff. Every youtube-uploaded video where Serral is featured gets a massive view bump over all other players. I think Serral has the opposite effect on the game, overall. Of course, there's the sad fanboys who will tune out while Serral's playing, because they can't stand to see him dominate again, but they're in the small minority. Twitch had 15k, Twitch costreamers a few thousand, and Youtube 6k viewers during the grand final. That's laughably low really. It happened in the middle of the night for europe. Before a business day. What did you expect? The finals were at 10-11PM CET. Similar hours as for instance La Liga, the 2nd biggest football league. But I understand that you were not part of the 20k grand finals viewership Which is 11-12 CEST which is what most of europe runs on now. Which is 12-1am in EEST. You do grasp the concept of "middle of the night" don't you? 10-11 Central European. Go back in the thread and see when most posts were made, when ESL Twitter announced the winner etc. You're just digging a bigger hole for yourself BTW the average ro24 ro16 group stage of ASL has 2x-3x the live viewership of these grand finals
Obviously not. Thanks for your opinion! Have a nice day.
|
Northern Ireland27473 Posts
On June 03 2024 21:08 Perceivere wrote:Show nested quote +On June 03 2024 20:56 Acrofales wrote:On June 03 2024 20:49 Perceivere wrote:On June 03 2024 19:55 Poopi wrote:On June 03 2024 19:16 Perceivere wrote:On June 03 2024 19:01 Poopi wrote:
There is more to intelligence than just IQ.
And IQ can have a lot of variance for a single individual (sleep / mood / motivation etc.)
I mean didn't Richard Feynman proved already that iQ is kinda bullshit to gauge intelligence? it's a tool, and like other tools, it's decent for some usages and not as good for others Yes, I never said that IQ is the end all and be all of intelligence, or intellectual accolade. However, if you look at what IQ does measure, it measures all the criteria necessary to excel in SC2, from pattern recognition, short-term memory, spatial reasoning, to mathematical reasoning, etc. Richard Feyman had an IQ well north of average, so I don't know what you mean by him proving the concept "kinda bullshit." It's not like a 115 IQ person cannot out-perform a 130 person in an intellectual field, unless all other personal traits are equal. Einstein himself was estimated at only 150, and there are many, many uni professors beyond that level currently, nevermind throughout history, and yet Einstein is by far the greatest contributor to science, besides Newton. What I'm saying is I'm sure there are quite a few viewers with <100 IQ enjoying Starcraft, but the middle of the bell curve of the population of SC audience will skew somewhat to the right of the curve. I don't think this is an unreasonable presumption to make. I mean, do you realize / know that there are different scales / methods for IQ etc.? If you are arguing in good faith, I think you are a bit out of your depth (in terms of knowledge on the subject matter of IQ) Sure. Also, irrelevant. I don't need to be an expert on the subject to know how the construct generally applies to disciplines. Every discipline has an IQ curve. I'm merely suggesting that intellectual disciplines will have curves whose means skew above average. This should be obvious to anyone with a modicum of reasonability. You're countering with...irrelevant ad hom, while completely missing the point. Not really surprising, given your post history. You're the one making a point about SC2 players/fans be smarter than the average. Or even the average eSports enthusiast. You are rather light on evidence, and picking a fight with people pointing out that in addition to not having any evidence, you are using a meaningless number to even make your point. I strongly suggest you fix the [citation needed] problems of your statement rather than whatever gishgallop you're on right now. I'm not offering evidence, because evidence doesn't exist. It was merely an easily believable suggestion to explain why SC2 is such a niche product. It's fine if you don't agree. It's rude to say I'm "out of (my) depth" on a complex psychological construct, and therefore the most basic application of it is incorrect. I don't need to be a mathematician to surmise that accountants require more mathematical prowess than cab drivers. Do I have evidence for that? No. Who cares? Why are people getting so antsy about a mere suggestion?
To be fair you have to have a very high IQ…
It’s a hypothesis that makes much more sense if SC2 was always pulling in the numbers it is now, or other stereotypically cerebral pursuits like chess weren’t actually growing in popularity.
I imagine there’s a whole bunch of other more pertinent reasons for it
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
