EPTThe very best players in the world are forced to push themselves further than their intrinsic desire would take them, but you are not in a position to wisely make that commitment yourself.
How many SC2 hours/day is the most efficient? - Page 7
| Forum Index > SC2 General |
|
Failsafe
United States1298 Posts
The very best players in the world are forced to push themselves further than their intrinsic desire would take them, but you are not in a position to wisely make that commitment yourself. | ||
|
Sabresandiego
United States227 Posts
On July 26 2010 06:19 Cpt.Nasty wrote: Echoic, you have a couple problems there with your argument. 1) Sports/physical activity can also harm you if you do it too much. Just as much, if not more so, than sitting down for 12 hours. This point isn't very valid because nobody does sports 12 straight hours a day because the human body isn't capable of that kind of activity. There is also evidence that games like chess/go help with mental diseases like Alzheimer and dementia. Games are just as important for health as sports are. They provide exercise for our brains and bodies, which is absolutely necessary. 2) Playing a sport for a full 12-16 hours is more than an accomplishment, it's a feat worthy of the Guiness book of world records. I would argue that playing chess/go at a high level for 16 hours is just as consuming as playing sports for a long time. We already know that it's physically possible to sit longer than it is to exercise, so I'm not sure what the major point here is. There is just as much struggle to become good at internationally recognized games (Poker, chess, go) as there is in sports. I could even make the argument that the competition for chess players is rougher than it is for most people who play sports. Not everyone is born with the capacity to be great at a specific sporting position. But you can be a quadriplegic and be a chess master. Your sphere of competition is much, much wider. You might argue that since a cripple can play chess, that means chess is "easier" to play or practice. Do you want to make that argument? 3) Sports skills carry over into real life just as much as skills gained from learning chess, go, and other mentally intensive games. Your arguments are pretty biased and that makes them pretty ineffective. I don't disagree with the benefits/good things to come from sports, but please, stop making comparisons between playing sports and video games. Echo, to make the argument that SC2 won't make the American scene because it's "bad for your body" is a horrible argument. McDonald's, Cigarettes, Coffee, Donuts, removing gym class from schools, etc. etc. "Being bad for your health" is not a concern for most of America. America loves things that is bad for them physically. There are good things you get from gaming, I don't deny this. Gaming is a form of mental exercise. Overdoing anything is bad for you though and spending the majority of you day playing a game is simply unhealthy both mentally and physically. | ||
|
iEchoic
United States1776 Posts
On July 26 2010 06:19 Cpt.Nasty wrote: Echoic, you have a couple problems there with your argument. 1) Sports/physical activity can also harm you if you do it too much. Just as much, if not more so, than sitting down for 12 hours. This point isn't very valid because nobody does sports 12 straight hours a day because the human body isn't capable of that kind of activity. You're right, I actually mentioned that in my above post (you probably wrote this before I posted). There is also evidence that games like chess/go help with mental diseases like Alzheimer and dementia. Games are just as important for health as sports are. They provide exercise for our brains and bodies, which is absolutely necessary. This is true, but the end point of your argument is absurd. Being physically fit your entire life is a million times more valuable than reducing the chance of Alzheimer and dementia for the last 1/6th of your life. 2 I would argue that playing chess/go at a high level for 16 hours is just as consuming as playing sports for a long time. Only on the TL forums would someone write something like this... This statement is completely insane. I could even make the argument that the competition for chess players is rougher than it is for most people who play sports. Not everyone is born with the capacity to be great at a specific sporting position. But you can be a quadriplegic and be a chess master. Your sphere of competition is much, much wider. You might argue that since a cripple can play chess, that means chess is "easier" to play or practice. Do you want to make that argument? This brings up a good point - there's a really important point I'd like to make here. Chess is an excellent competitive game, but the main difference between it and SC2 is that a large part of SC2 skill is defined by what we call 'mechanics'. Mechanics are usually repetitive motions, muscle-memory skills that can be developed simply with practice. This is what makes SC2 take such a huge devotion of time to master. Chess is a purely mental game. Just like you said, a quadriplegic can be a chess master, because how fast you move the pieces isn't a factor in your skill level. If moving the chess pieces as fast as possible was an important skill, we'd have something more similar to Starcraft, and we'd see the opposite of your argument once again. Practicing chess 16 hours a day isn't a huge competitive advantage because it doesn't involve the muscle-memory repetition of what we call 'mechanics'. | ||
|
Winks
United States78 Posts
There's a MMO called FlyFF that I was obsessed with for 2 years. There are 6 character classes in the game, and after the first year that I was playing, I was well known as the best Ranger on any server (there are about 4.5 million players worldwide) and I accomplished things that were unheard of for the Ranger class which was typically considered the weakest pvp class. I've been away from the game for 6 months now, but I just checked and STILL no one has touched my world records for damage. To do this, I literally almost wasted away spending 100% of my free time on the game and a lot more time that WASN'T free, I played as well. I failed 3 courses during the time I was playing, lost touch with my social life, and found myself out of shape, underweight, and on a terribly unpredictable sleep schedule. The fact was that getting to the top and staying at the top required nothing less, though. Now, let me tell you a happy story about my own life. Eventually something snapped in my head and I realized that it wasn't worth it to keep playing FlyFF. I sold my accounts and quit forever and simultaneously began to wonder... what would happen if I took the time I had been spending playing FlyFF and spent half of it working out and half of it studying? 6 months later, I'm now in my last semester of college getting great grades, I've gained 30 pounds of pure muscle and am back to having lean, ripped abs, bulky arms, a tan, and I spend the majority of my free time going out with friends and STILL have time to play SC2 about 1-2 hours a day, maybe 3 on weekends. I'm much, much happier... and all I did was reallocate the majority of the time I spent gaming to other things. Oh... and I'm getting laid again now after a 2 year dry spell! So anyways, you can play anywhere between zero and 24 hours a day... just make sure that you've spent a good amount of time thinking about what your values and priorities are and don't forget to consider what your values and priorities will be in the future. If you determine that SC2, a game that you have next to no chance at all of ever being the best at, is truly worth sacrificing the other things you could accomplish with your time... then go for it, you have my permission. FYI - 8 hours a day at lets say just 5 days a week is 40 hours a week, 160 hours a month, and 2080 hours a year of Starcraft 2... imagine what other goals you could accomplish in your life with 2080 extra hours to spend. | ||
|
vnlegend
United States1389 Posts
And in most games nowadays, execution is usually 90% of the battle. Most top-level pros already have a good understanding of strategies and how the game works. The difference is in the execution. So basically, dedicate 8-10 hrs to becoming a mechanics robot and hire somebody to analyze strats and coach you. | ||
|
billyX333
United States1360 Posts
On July 26 2010 05:48 Sabresandiego wrote: Why waste your life playing a game 8 hours a day. Sure its a good game, but there are much better things to do in life. You need to go out, socialize, get exercize, meet women. If you start playing games more than 4 hours a day your life will fall apart. Look how awful most of the sc2 pros look, its because they never go outside and get sun or exercize or socialize. Humans are not meant to live like that. Once in awhile it is ok to play all day long but dont make a habit of it. Get a job, a girlfriend, and a gym membership and you will be much happier in life. On July 25 2010 16:18 MuTT wrote: I find it horrifying that people are actually trying to be pro gamers. Such a terrible idea! Get a degree in computer science or engineering and you will have a better income for the rest of your life with less work. Being a progamer takes the fun out of the game because you are playing because you have too. If you get burned out it must be like working 12 hours a day at any other shitty job. Let's assess the gains and risk +'s -small chance of earning 6 figure / famous among nerds -enjoy what you play (best case) -'s - zero social life -most likely will be making less than minimum wage -not a good future for after sc2 - Most likely will postpone getting laid by years -Stressful/ not a steady income - Good chance of not liking the game you play - Cannot go on extended breaks - Competing with other people who are fanatical to get that small sum of money -list goes on and one but i don't wanna stretch this out TL;DR: Being a pro gamer is one of the worst 'careers' imaginable I think posts like these are hilarious. These guys are essentially trying to tell us that their desires are more important than those of another, but in reality both are equally meaningless/worthless. Who are we to tell another that his goals are more worthless than our own? Just because society has told us what is and is not attractive/admirable? A venerable Buddhist monk would look at both goals (money, status, social life, girls vs gaming skills) as equally worthless and not worth our time. Westerners always see happiness as something you can attain through external conditioning (girls, big house, fancy car, status; ego driven goals essentially) while ancient eastern philosophy sees happiness as something attained through internal conditioning (no desire = no suffering/dissatisfaction = happiness) We're all operating on western philosophy, and I cant help but laugh when one of us tries to tell another that his/her goals are pointless. Unless you're a venerable monk or a spiritual guru, dont fucking tell me or anybody else what is or is not worthwhile. If you enjoy what you're doing and you arent jeopardizing your own/others' health/future existence (death vs life) then keep doing what you're doing. Don't let others tell you what is or is not important. | ||
|
Two
United States95 Posts
| ||
|
Cpt.Nasty
53 Posts
Pro/gaming =/= unhealthy living. It's all about lifestyle. I've done plenty of physical/mental activities. Marching band, wrestling, Kung Fu (more like MMA but that's what the sign said lol), learned chess, etc. To say what is "more consuming" is a personal thing. I like physical activity. It's not a big thing for me to work myself to exhaustion and want to go again. I love combat sports most of all. I can get beat up and go back again for more no problem. I love it. Did I just get choked out? AWESOME HOW"D YOU DO IT OMG!1! Someone just pop me in the nose? Let's get back to work. Did I just tear my ACL? Give me a few months and I'll be back. Unfortunately I can't really do much of that anymore. Point being, Kungfu/wrestling was by far the most physically demanding thing I've done, but it wasn't hard. Marching band? Physically demanding (I was in percussion, so I got to carry the heavy shit), maybe not as much as wrestling or KF, but imagine trying to playing 5+ songs from memory while having marched several miles in 95+ wheather. The songs have to be absolutely perfect and since you're playing percussion, you also have to make sure your rhythm is %100 correct or you fuck up the whole band. It's easy for the first few miles. But that's the thing, you're never competitively judged for your first half of the marching, oh no. You go for miles and miles, and at the very end, when you are so exhausted you can't even think, when the only thing keeping you moving is muscle memory, and all your mind is devoted to trying to stay in step, on beat, and hitting the right notes? That's pretty damn consuming. But to play game after game of chess while losing to middle school students? Ugh, it takes real willpower to continue. To say that physical sports are necessarily more consuming shows another huge bias IMO. It depends on the kind of person you are. Since the majority of Americans seem to shy away from any physical activity I guess I could see a certain amount of smugness that would come from playing a sport. After all, what would they know about "consuming" if they never even played a sport. But to say it is "insane" to think that a game could be more consuming than a sport? Maybe for you that is true, but some of us have different outlooks. Sports are awesome, and I think everyone should find some kind of physical activity they enjoy doing in a group. | ||
|
Deleted User 47542
1484 Posts
I don't believe in "progaming." The amount of time and dedication you have to put into the game is ridiculous, having to play at least 8 hours per day. Very few will make any sort of living playing this game in favor or finishing a degree or having any social life in general. There really is no stable future in playing video games. | ||
|
Eben
United States769 Posts
On July 25 2010 15:19 Vessel wrote: dunno man. i have a gf and i can tell you its definately not good for SC2. even 4 hours a day would be way out of the question for me same here. Can probably get in 2 hours on a good day. | ||
|
Sabresandiego
United States227 Posts
-Low productivity -Poor Social Life -Poor Health -Ugly from lack of exercize and sun -No girlfriend -No self esteem -No job, bad grades However if you dont value any of the above things than feel free to game all day long every day. Its the same with fat people. If they would rather eat whatever they want and eat all the time, rather than look good and have good health it is the choice they made. When they are in the hospital with heart disease 20 years later, they can only blame themselves. As for the gamer, when you are 40-50 and broke with no wife or gf and no longer a progamer you have only yourself to thank. | ||
|
kzn
United States1218 Posts
On July 26 2010 06:45 Sabresandiego wrote: -No self esteem -bad grades wrong as all fuck | ||
|
iEchoic
United States1776 Posts
It is impossible to play SC2 12 hours a day and get good grades while doing a hard degree. Almost all the people who claim they do are women's studies majors or english majors. | ||
|
kzn
United States1218 Posts
On July 26 2010 06:55 iEchoic wrote: It is impossible to play SC2 12 hours a day and get good grades while doing a hard degree. Whether a degree is hard or not is subjective as fuck. | ||
|
Sabresandiego
United States227 Posts
Thanks for just proving the point of my last post. | ||
|
kzn
United States1218 Posts
On July 26 2010 06:57 Sabresandiego wrote: Thanks for just proving the point of my last post. I'd say you're welcome if I did anything of the sort. But I suppose you have zero argument so you're just going to spout off conclusions. | ||
|
iEchoic
United States1776 Posts
On July 26 2010 06:56 kzn wrote: Whether a degree is hard or not is subjective as fuck. It's actually not subjective at all. Have you gone to college? Different majors have to take different amount of credits, and different classes take different amounts of hours to succeed in. You can actually call up a school's advising department and ask them. Obviously when I say 'hard' I am talking about amount of time required to succeed in. | ||
|
Two
United States95 Posts
On July 26 2010 06:45 Sabresandiego wrote: You cant convince nerds to stop gaming 8 hours a day just like you cant convince fat people to stop eating all day (trust me I have tried). The bottom line is this: Excessive Gaming has the following negative effects on most people. -Low productivity -Poor Social Life -Poor Health -Ugly from lack of exercize and sun -No girlfriend -No self esteem -No job, bad grades However if you dont value any of the above things than feel free to game all day long every day. Its the same with fat people. If they would rather eat whatever they want and eat all the time, rather than look good and have good health it is the choice they made. When they are in the hospital with heart disease 20 years later, they can only blame themselves. As for the gamer, when you are 40-50 and broke with no wife or gf and no longer a progamer you have only yourself to thank. I'm pretty sure this is all wrong. I'm 19 and have been playing Blizzard games since 98. I do play competatively and it hasn't changed my life in any way, if anything it's made my life better. If you let the game become your reality, it might change you. I have a girlfriend, I get straight A's in my Univeristy classes, I'm tan, I have an above average ripped body. All of what you said I have to disagree on. I plan on playing starcraft 4-6 hours a day of solid competative play. -High productivity -Active social life (Starcraft community and real life) -Great Health (Eating right, Working out, Staying away from parties [NOT KILLING MY LIVER]) -Sexy from lots of exercize and sun ;D -Awesome girlfriend -High self esteem -Good job, Good grades Now what you posted might of been describing you, but not most of us here imo. Try not being a jerk, it's not nice =] | ||
|
Ganondorf
Italy600 Posts
On July 26 2010 06:45 Sabresandiego wrote: ...As for the gamer, when you are 40-50 and broke with no wife or gf and no longer a progamer you have only yourself to thank. That's when you switch to poker! :D | ||
|
kzn
United States1218 Posts
On July 26 2010 07:00 iEchoic wrote: It's actually not subjective at all. Have you gone to college? Yes it is, and yes I have. Different majors have to take different amount of credits, and different classes take different amounts of hours to succeed in. A given piece of economics homework/study/whatever could easily take one person 2-3 hours while someone else (namely, me) could knock it out in 30 minutes. You can actually call up a school's advising department and ask them. Obviously when I say 'hard' I am talking about amount of time required to succeed in. And that is subjective, because people have different interests, talents, abilities, speeds, and so forth. And its not like you have to take a hard degree anyway. | ||
| ||
