|
On March 08 2011 23:41 PJA wrote:Show nested quote +On March 08 2011 19:03 TheBlueMeaner wrote:
People can keep holding on to the naive idea that practice will make you a pro, there is a reason why there are a few select players at the pro level out of the millions of players that comprise the player base... Just have fun, stop the competitive crap specially if you are diamond or below, just have fun and if you make it to masters league having fun so be it... What makes you think that the difference is anything other than practice and dedication? Obviously some level of mental and physical ability is required, but anyone intelligent enough to get into college and not physically disabled in some way had plenty of "natural aptitude" or whatever else you want to call it.
How do you explain people being stuck in silver-diamond with 1000 games played?
|
For all those who are agianst this ubergamer vs noob thing id like to say that ur probly a noob, in the sense that this video is talking about. Yes there is a casual gameing audiance out there but there is also the more hardcore game players, we call them GAMERS..... so you can be a part of the cauasal gaming crowed or you are a gamer. there is a difference and gamers are better at games that casual gamers. Gamers have the mindset t improve and the thought patterns that make very hard games seem easy to them. Not to say someone of the casual gameing crowed cant become a proffessional, but the gamers have been playing games so long they can practically read the minds of the developers and can figure out the best of the best. I myself am a gamer, i play games for their difficulty and mechanics. But i am also a noob at spelling and sentince structure. we cant be good at everything
|
On March 09 2011 01:05 gogogadgetflow wrote:
I don't know why people are having a problem with this. The video told me that it would be ideal if video games returned to emphasizing gameplay over story, graphics, and other "consumerability" factors, and I think most of us at this elitist gaming website would agree. It also said that people uninterested in being competitive shouldn't wag their fingers at people who dedicate their life to gaming and I think most of us would agree with that as well. Maybe Torte just doesn't like the guys accent?
I just hate the use of the term gameplay. Link to why: http://insomnia.ac/commentary/gameplay/. Things like better and more intuitive controls add to "consumerability" and also improve games. The OP's summary's use of "gameplay" seems to be a camouflaged use of the word "difficulty." At least come out and say you're lamenting the loss of the skill gap in gaming these days.
|
On March 09 2011 01:11 TheTenthDoc wrote:Show nested quote +On March 09 2011 01:05 gogogadgetflow wrote:
I don't know why people are having a problem with this. The video told me that it would be ideal if video games returned to emphasizing gameplay over story, graphics, and other "consumerability" factors, and I think most of us at this elitist gaming website would agree. It also said that people uninterested in being competitive shouldn't wag their fingers at people who dedicate their life to gaming and I think most of us would agree with that as well. Maybe Torte just doesn't like the guys accent? I just hate the use of the term gameplay. Link to why: http://insomnia.ac/commentary/gameplay/. Things like better and more intuitive controls add to "consumerability" and also improve games. The OP's summary's use of "gameplay" seems to be a camouflaged use of the word "difficulty." At least come out and say you're lamenting the loss of the skill gap in gaming these days.
Seemed to me that he was talking about difficulty, variety, and a rewarding experience. For me those things are the key components of games. Intuitive controls are nice but like graphics and story they are secondary to the key components.
|
I really hate coming to TL because of people like the guy with the first response, douchebaggery at its finest.
|
On March 09 2011 01:17 nGBeast wrote:
I really hate coming to TL because of people like the guy with the first response, douchebaggery at its finest.
It be the internet, and it's not like he represents the entire site.
|
On March 09 2011 01:08 Mercury- wrote:Show nested quote +On March 08 2011 23:41 PJA wrote:On March 08 2011 19:03 TheBlueMeaner wrote:
People can keep holding on to the naive idea that practice will make you a pro, there is a reason why there are a few select players at the pro level out of the millions of players that comprise the player base... Just have fun, stop the competitive crap specially if you are diamond or below, just have fun and if you make it to masters league having fun so be it... What makes you think that the difference is anything other than practice and dedication? Obviously some level of mental and physical ability is required, but anyone intelligent enough to get into college and not physically disabled in some way had plenty of "natural aptitude" or whatever else you want to call it. How do you explain people being stuck in silver-diamond with 1000 games played?
playing a lot of games does not equal practice
Practice can make you a pro, granted a large amount of natural aptitude will certainly make the process easier. People seem to think that just grinding out games can be considered practice. This is simply not true. Getting good at anything (any game, any sport, whatever) is about the quality of work that you put in, not the quantity. You have to play a lot of games, identify the things you need to to work on, play customs to improve those things, watch film, go to a lot of local tournaments, rinse and repeat.
Getting on every night and playing a ton of games back to back and not thinking about it afterwards will not allow you to reach the level of play that most people are capable of.
|
On March 09 2011 01:17 nGBeast wrote:
I really hate coming to TL because of people like the guy with the first response, douchebaggery at its finest.
You disagree with what someone said and don't bother to respond with your opinion but just call him a douchebag? Hypocrite much, no?
I never thought about it before, but I suppose what this thread taught me most is the empty word 'gameplay'. I suppose it is just an easy abbreviation for the challenge the game gives, how good the mechanics are and so on, quite seperate from story and graphics/shinyness etc.
I suppose a good game (apart from SC1 and BW) for emphasising gameplay over story and graphics/shinyness would be Portal. The Portal mechanism was unique and fun, but the story (while also fairly unique) was far from as immersive as, say, Mass Effect or Half-Life 2 (or Ep1/Ep2), and the graphics were nothing special.
To all the doomsayers (always find these on forums), if shinyness/gimmickery was so important over solid gameplay, would Portal 2 be released, and look as awesome as it does?
|
On March 09 2011 01:27 nastyndog wrote:Show nested quote +On March 09 2011 01:08 Mercury- wrote:On March 08 2011 23:41 PJA wrote:On March 08 2011 19:03 TheBlueMeaner wrote:
People can keep holding on to the naive idea that practice will make you a pro, there is a reason why there are a few select players at the pro level out of the millions of players that comprise the player base... Just have fun, stop the competitive crap specially if you are diamond or below, just have fun and if you make it to masters league having fun so be it... What makes you think that the difference is anything other than practice and dedication? Obviously some level of mental and physical ability is required, but anyone intelligent enough to get into college and not physically disabled in some way had plenty of "natural aptitude" or whatever else you want to call it. How do you explain people being stuck in silver-diamond with 1000 games played? playing a lot of games does not equal practice Practice can make you a pro, granted a large amount of natural aptitude will certainly make the process easier. People seem to think that just grinding out games can be considered practice. This is simply not true. Getting good at anything (any game, any sport, whatever) is about the quality of work that you put in, not the quantity. You have to play a lot of games, identify the things you need to to work on, play customs to improve those things, watch film, go to a lot of local tournaments, rinse and repeat. Getting on every night and playing a ton of games back to back and not thinking about it afterwards will not allow you to reach the level of play that most people are capable of.
Ofcourse. But there is still something called talent. To me talent is the rate in wich you learn. How come there are many programers who practice just as much and just as good as Flash, but will never become as good as him? Because he has talent for Starcraft, he learns faster then the other players so he willl always be the best. With 10 hours he accomplishes things other people need 15 hours for.
|
ROFL THE END!! hahahaha so fucking mint
But the part he said about cod rehashed over.. i disagree on the basis that MW1 is far better then any of the others since then
|
On March 09 2011 01:15 gogogadgetflow wrote:Show nested quote +On March 09 2011 01:11 TheTenthDoc wrote:On March 09 2011 01:05 gogogadgetflow wrote:
I don't know why people are having a problem with this. The video told me that it would be ideal if video games returned to emphasizing gameplay over story, graphics, and other "consumerability" factors, and I think most of us at this elitist gaming website would agree. It also said that people uninterested in being competitive shouldn't wag their fingers at people who dedicate their life to gaming and I think most of us would agree with that as well. Maybe Torte just doesn't like the guys accent? I just hate the use of the term gameplay. Link to why: http://insomnia.ac/commentary/gameplay/. Things like better and more intuitive controls add to "consumerability" and also improve games. The OP's summary's use of "gameplay" seems to be a camouflaged use of the word "difficulty." At least come out and say you're lamenting the loss of the skill gap in gaming these days. Seemed to me that he was talking about difficulty, variety, and a rewarding experience. For me those things are the key components of games. Intuitive controls are nice but like graphics and story they are secondary to the key components.
Then he should just say that he perceives those as the critical components of game design, rather than lumping them together under some nebulous umbrella of "gameplay." The concepts themselves are also far less clear-cut-take your example of variety and a rewarding experience. Story, graphics, and controls all play a critical role in making those components of a game better. Story is, in fact, one of oldest ways to make a player feel more rewarded! In Super Mario World, the reason the player doesn't "stop" when finishing a level is because the princess is an another castle. Different people enjoy different aspects of different media. Saying that a given medium is in your opinion worse is okay, but saying the design is suffering because it doesn't is shortsighted at best.
|
as sad as it is the last 30 sec are kinda right..... talent is talent... very rarely will hard work beat talent but thats rare but you got to bust your ass
take me for EXP: ^_^ i am 5'7' and white and i went to 3A high school state track meet FOR HURDLES! 300 hurdles...=)
I was the only person there out if 15 people that was under 6 foot.... and hell i got my ass burnt... but the fact that i got there was an accomplishment on its own
|
I disagree that gameplay is the sole thing that people look for in a game and i definitely think that story when done right can add a lot to the game.
i think having a more modern example could be something like half life 2. for me half life 2 is probably the best game ever made, certainly the best i've ever played and i would certainly regard the story as having a fair sized part in why that is. there are numerous counter examples of games where no story is even really offered and pure gameplay makes a game truly great, quake 1 Doom etc could be examples of this but i think used right story can add to a game and not be unnecessary.
To change to a different genre RPGs basically aren't possible without story and this came from stuff coming well before games even existed but stuff like choose your own adventure books. the thing is about the story is that it is not just experiencing a story as you would in a book which is fun but also some interaction within the story can really for some people increase fun. i don't think that kind of story has necessarily to be matched up against great works of fiction since they are aiming to do completely different things.
To specifically comment on GTA while i've never played 4 i have played San andreas and i thought it was an excellent game despite being, gameplay wise, a somewhat weak game. comparing its storyline to the godfather completely misses the point, its like comparing Dr Strangelove with Full Metal Jacket or a bond film with all the presidents men. it is satirical, parodying gangster cliches and making a few occasional minor points of social commentary and a hell of a lot of dick jokes and other immature humour which i think is pretty damn funny and made the game a hell of a lot of fun to play.
I think also commenting that games aren't unique enough and developers aren't trying enough new ideas and then slapping a big 'meh' on portal is pretty bizarre, i mean maybe the guy making this video just didn't like that game but surely he could at least appreciate how different it is and how hard it is to come up with new gameplay challenges like that is these days.
To put what i agree with yeah its probably true a lot of games are getting dumbed down to appeal to a mass audience and maybe thats not a good thing. However to completely impose his own view of what a good game is on people and say that if they don't agree its because they aren't as good as him is totally wrong, ridiculously arrogant and misses the point completely. games can be great fun for a number of reasons he just completely dismisses.
|
Really don't get people who go on rants liks this. Jesus, I like being engaged in good graphics and good storyline. The purpose of the game is engaging entertainment, that entertains me far more than movies or books. A good video game for me needs to have good graphics, and a semi-decent storyline, and if you're seriously upset enough about that to make a 5 minute long rant and post it on the Interwebz, god help you.
|
I've seen this a hundred times. I just realized this is just QQ short film from purepwnage =/
|
what if I'm a ubergamer and a fag no-lifer bm moron at the same time?
|
On March 08 2011 19:30 Axeinst wrote:+ Show Spoiler +On March 08 2011 19:03 TheBlueMeaner wrote:
People can keep holding on to the naive idea that practice will make you a pro, there is a reason why there are a few select players at the pro level out of the millions of players that comprise the player base... Just have fun, stop the competitive crap specially if you are diamond or below, just have fun and if you make it to masters league having fun so be it... Argh people like this attitude so make me mad. I am honest, it is fucking stupid to think like that because there is absolutely no reasoning or evidence. Your though process goes like this: There is few people at the top -> not everybody cannot become top because there is only few people at the top. The fact is, that to become top of starcraft you need only normal intelligence and body with no disabilities. There is no known natural born factors that makes those gsl-players apart from others. If you are going to claim that in order to become gsl material you need to have some special and natural things that others dont have, you need to have evidence for that. In basketball, there is clear evidence of those kind of factors, like tallness.
On March 08 2011 19:30 Axeinst wrote:+ Show Spoiler +On March 08 2011 19:03 TheBlueMeaner wrote:
People can keep holding on to the naive idea that practice will make you a pro, there is a reason why there are a few select players at the pro level out of the millions of players that comprise the player base... Just have fun, stop the competitive crap specially if you are diamond or below, just have fun and if you make it to masters league having fun so be it... Argh people like this attitude so make me mad. I am honest, it is fucking stupid to think like that because there is absolutely no reasoning or evidence. Your though process goes like this: There is few people at the top -> not everybody cannot become top because there is only few people at the top. The fact is, that to become top of starcraft you need only normal intelligence and body with no disabilities. There is no known natural born factors that makes those gsl-players apart from others. If you are going to claim that in order to become gsl material you need to have some special and natural things that others dont have, you need to have evidence for that. In basketball, there is clear evidence of those kind of factors, like tallness.
Let me tell you something. I am an economist so my frame of thought might not meet yours but I'll try to explain my reasoning.
If anyone could achieve greatness in starcraft with just hard work, everyone would do it. If we asume that practice time is an independent variable that has a positive correlation with skill, we must also assume the fact that practice time will have diminishing returns. If we asume this we also can asume that you will eventually peak and reach stability or equilibrium. If practice was the only variable we would not have different individuals with the same ammount of practice at different levels, clearly there must be other variables...
There is no gosu secret or quantity of games you have to grind to become the best. Some people just have the reflexes and the dexterity to play with 400 apm while others dont. No matter how hard you practice you won't get to Flash level or Jaedong level. Korean progamers grind games with the same passion and discipline and not everyone gets to be a bonjwa, many just make it to b-team and stagnate, some become coaches... not everyone has it in them to become a professional.
Blizzard does its best to hide this fact, they are removing the losses bar in the lower leagues, they make pretty icons, make you feel good because you are a "gold" player, when the truth is you are awful. Some people made it to diamond in the first day they played the game, some with rts experience, others without.
Stop tricking yourself into thinking you will become a pro with practice if you are 6 months into the game and still cant hit diamond, sure there are no studies to prove there are especific factors that determine success in starcraft but just stare at the evidence. If everyone that wanted to be a pro could, then being a pro would not be special. All these guys at the top have tons of practice and a natural inclination to succeed in these types of tasks. You can practice all you want but the law of diminishing returns will slap you in the face and you will finally understand the impotence of your position. You could eventually hit pro level with enough practice even with diminishing returns, but since we dont have INFINITE time but limited time you will never practice enough, just have fun man, just play for fun...
|
On March 09 2011 01:25 k20a wrote:Show nested quote +On March 09 2011 01:17 nGBeast wrote:
I really hate coming to TL because of people like the guy with the first response, douchebaggery at its finest. It be the internet, and it's not like he represents the entire site.
Exactly. I'm just another opinion.
It's not my kind of humor and I feel the video cut the meat the wrong way.
That's my opinion, feel free to post yours.
|
On March 08 2011 17:59 legatus legionis wrote:
So the people who are not good at games, who play these abominations of games are the ones that allowed for this industry to flourish and bring even more of them in.
Now, I would't actually care that much but as it turns out, these people are poor sports and hate on us! The gamers who play the games for gameplay. And so we are subject to the endless abuse of idiotic whiners, "rusherfag, no life loser, hacker, imbalance" (overpowered should be there aswell)
But the only imbalance is that you are just worse than other people. Maybe you weren't good at sports in school but that's no reason to cry when you're getting raped in game.
If I look at LR threads & most of the strategy section, I can only agree with this.
Always everything is "imbalanced". Protoss are OP, Terran are OP, Zerg are OP. Or someone is using a "lame/OP" strategy. "Supid allin".
It's always the race/playstyle of the other player. Players almost never lose because they just had a bad day, or because the opponent just was better / had the superior strategy. No - he just abused something and used a "lame" strategy.
"Everyone who's worse than me is a noob, and everythin who's better is a cheater/nolifer" is sadly the truth as the predominant internet mentality.
|
On March 09 2011 01:08 Mercury- wrote:Show nested quote +On March 08 2011 23:41 PJA wrote:On March 08 2011 19:03 TheBlueMeaner wrote:
People can keep holding on to the naive idea that practice will make you a pro, there is a reason why there are a few select players at the pro level out of the millions of players that comprise the player base... Just have fun, stop the competitive crap specially if you are diamond or below, just have fun and if you make it to masters league having fun so be it... What makes you think that the difference is anything other than practice and dedication? Obviously some level of mental and physical ability is required, but anyone intelligent enough to get into college and not physically disabled in some way had plenty of "natural aptitude" or whatever else you want to call it. How do you explain people being stuck in silver-diamond with 1000 games played?
Playing this game a lot isn't the same as playing this game a lot trying to improve.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
