• Log InLog In
• Register

Is SC skill natural or trained? - Page 7

Post a Reply Prev 1 5 6 7 8 9 30 Next All

Penecks United States600 Posts March 21 2011 17:01 GMT #121 Depends on what you see as "natural" talent. I never really played a competitive RTS before SC2, but I progressed quite quickly anyway: this is probably due to me just having played hours and hours and hours of other games at high levels of play. It's hard to name this specifically, but after having played games (any genre) for so long, a player starts to gain sort of this "awareness" of gaming and just what the hell is actually going on. Not just SC2 but this can be attributed across the board. So I don't quite feel it's natural talent specifically, just skills learned elsewhere, how to react fast, how to pay attention to key things, how to improve, and how to look for advantages over your opponent.

vahgar.r24 India465 Posts March 21 2011 17:02 GMT #122 Genius is 1% inspiration and 99% perspiration. Altho Im a noob silver , i practise a shit load but I know that If I do it rite and stop messing with races I would be diamond. Wait am i contradicting myself TT

hmsrenown Canada1263 Posts March 21 2011 17:03 GMT #123 I think everyone can be very good player, but only those who have favoured circumstances would take the next step into stardom.

darmousseh United States3437 Posts March 21 2011 17:04 GMT #124 I don't believe in skill, the only thing I believe in is how quickly someone can learn. For example, I don't have natural ability in sports, I realized that in high school, but I grew up playing soccer and baseball from age 6. I was terrible at baseball at 9, after a year of playing i was good enough at 10 to be on a good team. I slowly got better in junior high making some all star teams, finally I ended up having the highest batting average in the county and making the county all star team. It wasn't because I had some magical ability, but because I played a lot. It took me 10 years to be one of the best, not easy. Some people just learn really quickly, either they grew up with sports or have someone to teach them.

Slix36 United Kingdom145 Posts March 21 2011 17:14 GMT #125 You'll find a few people saying that it's natural born skill or talent, and while it's quite possible there are genes that could contribute in some way to the "talent", for lack of a better word, of a gamer, or anyone else for that matter, they are in no way nessecary for people to become that good. While it's true there have been genes linked to specific traits it's been proven that if you take subjects without these traits and put them in a much more enriched environment for whatever behaviour or skill you want them to learn then given enough time they completely overcome not having that gene and can even surpass those that do, and this isn't just when people are young either, it's throughout the entirety of one's life. So, my answer to you is it is all trained. That being said, a person with certain genes or certain experiences that have defined their current skills or behaviours may pick it up faster or slower than everyone else, meaning less of said training is actually required to get to that level. You just need to stick in there and eventually, if you train in the right way and in the right environment then you'll get there provided you don't die or lose your ability to play starcraft in any way before you get there.

Sablar Sweden880 Posts March 21 2011 17:22 GMT #126 Yes.. at a top level it would end up with almost all "natural" skill. Like in pretty much any area. But it also depends on how far you take it. For example being able to practise hard would in part be a natural skill as well. Decision making would also be more or less natural, in the sense that two people with the same information won't necessarily reach the same conclusion. I kind of dislike the implication that natural talent > hard work, because you can still become really good at something regardless. But if we just administed an IQ test or something, I would be very suprised if there wasn't a fairly strong correlation between that and SC2 performance. Parts of the test would probably be even more predictive. Things like raven's matrices can predict performance in so many areas, and I don't see why SC2 would be an exception. On an individual level there would of course be many exceptions, so it doesn't say everything. And what we call natural talent can be trained (more or less) but if your starting level is really high you are more likely to be able to make it extremely high instead of say normal->high.

EggYsc2 620 Posts March 21 2011 17:26 GMT #127 Starcraft 2 is not different than a school subject you need a) a brain b) time to practise/memorize /thread

Whitewing United States7483 Posts March 21 2011 17:26 GMT #128 The vast majority of it is training, but at a certain point, you need some amount of natural talent with regards to decision making. I believe the skill cap is higher for those with natural talent than those without, and it takes training to realize your skill cap.

Sablar Sweden880 Posts March 21 2011 17:35 GMT #129 I think saying "it's all the environment" is kind of naive in terms of any human behavior or performance. In order to say that "it's all training" you pretty much have to claim that "genes have no effect on us", and the amount of research you would have to completely disregard is staggering. That being said, the environment has a large effect. But even if we claim that training is 99.9% of the importance behind SC2 skill, once you reach the top 0.0001% of players, that 0.1% skill difference suddenly becomes significant.

nipZ United States5 Posts March 21 2011 17:35 GMT #130 so as any college student who went through their first year of gen psych would know, this is a matter of nature v nurture. in essence a very controversial subject to this day, but obviously in need of both sides. there is natural skill one can receive from their parents in form of ingenuity or quick wits, but a larger part would have to be trained even then. there are going to be naturals in anything but thats not to say that with enough proper practice and dedication that no one can make it to rank 1 masters or the gsl.

revy United States1524 Posts March 21 2011 17:39 GMT #131 I believe Flash picked up Starcraft 2-3 years before he first debuted. He undoubtedly worked hard but an awful lot of his good play was just natural talent. I don't believe your random bronze player can be in the GSL.

Ponyo United States1231 Posts March 21 2011 17:42 GMT #132 99% trained imo. Some people who play videogames before starcraft may have some small advantage of being able to react quicker to the screen lay out, but anyone can reach the highest level of play with enough practice/dedication.

N3rV[Green] United States1935 Posts March 21 2011 17:49 GMT #133 It's a mixture of both. Ya you can play 10000 games and you will be better, no matter what. But if you're just not fast minded, quick handed, accurate with the mouse and many other things you will just never be as good. I'd say I'm pretty much just born this way. Sure I play a lot (over 2k in 1v1 games played) but I screw around a LOT, switch races almost every day, and have very very few actual "build orders", I just play it by feel for the most part.

KevinIX United States2472 Posts March 21 2011 17:51 GMT #134 It's trained, but not everyone has the willpower and dedication to make it to the GSL. The skill can be learned by anyone, but you have to have the mental fortitude to go through with it.

Stanlot United States5742 Posts March 21 2011 17:58 GMT #135 I believe there is a sense of natural skill at play here. Some people are just faster in terms of mechanics and finger speed and others are better at being able to adapt to his or her situation more quickly. Those who are poor at both make it up by practicing and playing a lot. I'd have to say that for the mass populace, practice is responsible for >90% of what we see when we observe varying "skill levels" and at higher levels of play, one's innate ability to play the game better is what separates a relatively skilled pro from a tip-top pro. Just my two cents but I don't think that if two people practice the same amount but one is better at decision making that the two will be equally matched.

Raiznhell Canada786 Posts March 21 2011 18:03 GMT #136 Any skill can be trained. The person with the natural talent for it will just have an easier time progressing and will most likely surpass the non-talented person in time ie: Flash, Jaedong. Relates to anything from arts, academics and athletics.

Poopi France12794 Posts March 21 2011 18:06 GMT #137 I think until the very very top good training & dedication is what you need. Then it comes to talent.

Neino Norway295 Posts March 21 2011 18:08 GMT #138 I don't see starcraft 2 being different than getting good in a subject at school, chess or whatever really. People have to put in different ammounts of work to reach the same level of skill. Wether this is something you obtain while you're being raised or are born with I don't know. But for example, a couple of years ago, I was exceptionally lazy at doing homework or even showing up for class, even so, I got grades far over the averege. This is just because I was lucky enough to have been born with parrents who were rather intellegent, so I understand stuff quicker than a lot of people. Now obviously you can argue that I was a complete moron for skipping school and such, but that's not the point! :p I do believe that people will have a very different time to get to a higher level of starcraft, but after all, you have to work for it to reach the top no matter what. I met a guy once that was extremly talented at playing the piano, and someone said "You're so lucky that you are able to play so beautifully" he just responded with "Yes, i'm very lucky that I can stand playing for five hours a day", I think he had a pretty good point.

Ksyper Bulgaria665 Posts March 21 2011 18:15 GMT #139 You can train yourself to be a Master or even a Grandmaster player, but you can't become a pro if you don't have some talent imo.

Blurio Germany288 Posts March 21 2011 18:15 GMT #140 Natural Skill is just a stepping stone that puts you above others without it at the start of your carreer. It is the same with everything. Some people can paint awesome pictures without much training, others cant. But to get really good both have to study. The lesser skilled person just has to study a bit more to overcome the natural skill of the skilled person. You can train everything. Everyone can paint the Mona Lisa or play in the GSL, it just needs a fuckton of work.

Prev 1 5 6 7 8 9 30 Next All

Please log in or register to reply.