EPTThe truth is, people who have gotten really good are people who have hit a lot of road blocks, but know how to get past them and put in the extra amount of hard work to overcome those road blocks. You feel like you've reached a ceiling, but don't let that make you feel like you couldn't be getting better. You might not be willing to put in the effort and analyze yourself to the extent that you need to in order to improve, but don't fool yourself by thinking its your "ceiling", as if its some kinda physical barrier.
reach your skill ceiling = give the game up? - Page 12
| Forum Index > SC2 General |
|
Mohdoo
United States15743 Posts
The truth is, people who have gotten really good are people who have hit a lot of road blocks, but know how to get past them and put in the extra amount of hard work to overcome those road blocks. You feel like you've reached a ceiling, but don't let that make you feel like you couldn't be getting better. You might not be willing to put in the effort and analyze yourself to the extent that you need to in order to improve, but don't fool yourself by thinking its your "ceiling", as if its some kinda physical barrier. | ||
|
cmgillett
United States335 Posts
| ||
|
Cyro
United Kingdom20343 Posts
On March 11 2012 04:33 romelako wrote: the skill ceiling is nonexistent. there is always going to be something in your game that you need to improve...unless you're flash lol. Flash has to improve his non-turret-cancelling kills so he doesnt break his next 14 winstreak in proleague | ||
|
NexUmbra
Scotland3776 Posts
| ||
|
TORTOISE
United States515 Posts
| ||
|
Mohdoo
United States15743 Posts
On March 11 2012 06:25 TORTOISE wrote: If you can't enjoy the game without "improving," maybe it is time for a break. SC2 should be an enjoyable experience in itself. Can anyone confirm that this is the case for some people? lol  I've tried 100 times to just enjoy SC2, but the competitive spirit always ruins it for me! T_T | ||
|
Penecks
United States600 Posts
For example I'm a mid-ish masters player and I usually play 1-2 games a day, sometimes not even. I just don't find the game that fun to play any more than that, simply because I know that high masters/GM players are so much better than me I would have to invest hours of time everyday to reach that level. It can be pretty demotivating. Have I reached my overall skill ceiling? Probably not. Is it the skill ceiling of how much time I am willing to invest into the game? Likely. Of course there are exception of people playing like 3 games a week and being in GM, but I imagine those are pretty talented, outlier individuals. | ||
|
forsooth
United States3648 Posts
On March 11 2012 06:28 Mohdoo wrote: Can anyone confirm that this is the case for some people? lol I've tried 100 times to just enjoy SC2, but the competitive spirit always ruins it for me! T_T If you're not playing SC2 for money, I fail to see why you'd bother with it if you don't find it fun. | ||
|
Lysenko
Iceland2128 Posts
On March 11 2012 04:14 Competent wrote: Compared to Pros, I have a brain defect/learning disability, however subtle. Compared to me, OP has a brain defect/learning disability, however subtle. It's ludicrous and offensive for someone who's performing in the top 2% of all players to say that anyone who doesn't reach that point has a "brain defect." | ||
|
Akta
447 Posts
A lot of talented athletes quit during those periods because it can of course be very hard to stay motivated when it doesn't feel like you are improving, sometimes for a whole year or longer. On the other hand, I agree with what many already said. If you aren't a pro-gamer or plan to become one, shouldn't having fun be what matters most? | ||
|
vnlegend
United States1389 Posts
| ||
|
Grobyc
Canada18410 Posts
| ||
|
Dalavita
Sweden1113 Posts
| ||
|
radscorpion9
Canada2252 Posts
On March 11 2012 06:31 Penecks wrote: I don't think the proper term is exactly "skill ceiling" though I understand what the OP means, for me personally its the place in your progression where a much greater amount of time/effort must be invested than ever before, and since this is a simple hobby for many rather than a lifestyle, it can be difficult to break through. For example I'm a mid-ish masters player and I usually play 1-2 games a day, sometimes not even. I just don't find the game that fun to play any more than that, simply because I know that high masters/GM players are so much better than me I would have to invest hours of time everyday to reach that level. It can be pretty demotivating. Have I reached my overall skill ceiling? Probably not. Is it the skill ceiling of how much time I am willing to invest into the game? Likely. Of course there are exception of people playing like 3 games a week and being in GM, but I imagine those are pretty talented, outlier individuals. Yes...I agree with this. So many people are saying there is no skill ceiling. But its ridiculous because its backed up by almost no evidence or reasoning. What if people are simply born with slower reflexes than others? Are you going to tell me that I can overcome my genetic limitations through sheer will? I mean sure you may be able to rewire your brain via brain plasticity...but does that apply to your reflexes as well? Can I choose to become a theoretical physicist through sheer will too, and transform myself into a genius? A similar argument holds for SC2. How do you know that people can force their minds to become super-capable of multitasking and quick thinking, to the extent that other players like Stephano are capable of? Because this is precisely what's being supported when one says there is *NO* skill ceiling. Even if it were possible, its exactly as you say. It would require an absurd amount of time and effort to become as good as other players; which for all practical intents and purposes is the equivalent of a skill ceiling. All of these poetic statements are just pleasant sounding nonsense. "Destroy the floor and lay a new foundation". Yes that sounds nice. Too bad it doesn't make any logical arguments based on evidence as to why the skill ceiling doesn't exist...and so is of no practical use to anyone. But I'm sure it'll motivate some people who assume its true just because it sounds poetic | ||
|
Lysenko
Iceland2128 Posts
On March 11 2012 11:04 radscorpion9 wrote: I mean sure you may be able to rewire your brain via brain plasticity...but does that apply to your reflexes as well? While I agree with you that there's a range of inherent reaction time in various people, I would say it's likely that focused practice can improve people's reaction time, to a point. It's also true that most casual SC2 players don't engage in the type of practice that would bring about that specific improvement. | ||
|
zefreak
United States2731 Posts
On March 11 2012 11:04 radscorpion9 wrote: Yes...I agree with this. So many people are saying there is no skill ceiling. But its ridiculous because its backed up by almost no evidence or reasoning. What if people are simply born with slower reflexes than others? Are you going to tell me that I can overcome my genetic limitations through sheer will? I mean sure you may be able to rewire your brain via brain plasticity...but does that apply to your reflexes as well? Can I choose to become a theoretical physicist through sheer will too, and transform myself into a genius? A similar argument holds for SC2. How do you know that people can force their minds to become super-capable of multitasking and quick thinking, to the extent that other players like Stephano are capable of? Because this is precisely what's being supported when one says there is *NO* skill ceiling. Even if it were possible, its exactly as you say. It would require an absurd amount of time and effort to become as good as other players; which for all practical intents and purposes is the equivalent of a skill ceiling. All of these poetic statements are just pleasant sounding nonsense. "Destroy the floor and lay a new foundation". Yes that sounds nice. Too bad it doesn't make any logical arguments based on evidence as to why the skill ceiling doesn't exist...and so is of no practical use to anyone. But I'm sure it'll motivate some people who assume its true just because it sounds poetic You would have to have a pretty immense brain deficit to hit your ability cap in sc2. Yes, practice improves reaction time/multitasking. There are studies that show this, one as recent as a week or so ago. There was a thread about it and the findings are being published in an academic journal. Genetics play such a minor role in videogames. It's all about learning and muscle memory. So long as you don't have a learning disability and put in the hours, you WILL get better. | ||
|
Lysenko
Iceland2128 Posts
On March 11 2012 11:20 zefreak wrote: Genetics play such a minor role in videogames. It's all about learning and muscle memory. But there are many types of learning, many types of cognitive skills, and genetics absolutely play a role in at which ones a person is stronger. Video games depend a lot on reaction time, which varies quite a bit among all kinds of people with all kinds of other mental skills. I had an SAT (college admission test, for those not in the U.S.) score that was 20 points away from perfect at age 14, but I've played about 3500 ladder games of Starcraft 2 (as Zerg) and I'm still hovering around high gold, low plat. I can tell you exactly what my issues are -- they're ultimately a matter of imprecise control and slow reaction time when I *can't* rely on muscle memory for success. At no point in my life have I been that great at tests of reaction time or manual dexterity. Meanwhile, my half brother, who shares a quarter of my genes, and with whom I did not grow up, is at this point very likely to match my performance on the SAT. These things are influenced by genetics, as well as environment, including practice. Very focused practice might help on the purely mechanical front, but it's hard to spend the time doing something that's tedious when there are other things going on. | ||
|
MysteryMeat1
United States3292 Posts
I remember reading in Gheeds blog that the bronze person he played improved slowly after repeated worker rushes. The reason this person is in the bottom of bronze is because he improves so slow for w/e reason. If you keep on playing SC2 for one more year and remain in Platinum you are getting better. Gold at the begining of beta was a lot worse than it is now. A lot worse trust me on that. You are in fact getting better and you have not reached your skill ceiling but maybe the ceiling for the rate of improvement. I think the fact that your rank isn't changing is a bad indication of how much you are improving. getting out of Platinum for me was more of a matter of re-choosing new builds that were safe agaisnt cloaked banshees for terrans cause i would go 3 gate aggro expo and would die to one cloacked banshee. For PvP it was not relying on Dt base race, and pvz IDR. | ||
|
zefreak
United States2731 Posts
On March 11 2012 11:32 Lysenko wrote: But there are many types of learning, many types of cognitive skills, and genetics absolutely play a role in at which ones a person is stronger. Video games depend a lot on reaction time, which varies quite a bit among all kinds of people with all kinds of other mental skills. I had an SAT (college admission test, for those not in the U.S.) score that was 20 points away from perfect at age 14, but I've played about 3500 ladder games of Starcraft 2 (as Zerg) and I'm still hovering around high gold, low plat. I can tell you exactly what my issues are -- they're ultimately a matter of imprecise control and slow reaction time when I *can't* rely on muscle memory for success. At no point in my life have I been that great at tests of reaction time or manual dexterity. Meanwhile, my half brother, who shares a quarter of my genes, and with whom I did not grow up, is at this point very likely to match my performance on the SAT. These things are influenced by genetics, as well as environment, including practice. Very focused practice might help on the purely mechanical front, but it's hard to spend the time doing something that's tedious when there are other things going on. I see what you are saying, but normal genetic variation changes the rate of progress, not the 'ceiling'. Unless you have a serious learning disability I can't imagine someone approaching the point where you can't improve. The return on investment might be very low for some types of people, however. | ||
|
Lysenko
Iceland2128 Posts
On March 11 2012 11:48 zefreak wrote: I see what you are saying, but normal genetic variation changes the rate of progress, not the 'ceiling'. Unless you have a serious learning disability I can't imagine someone approaching the point where you can't improve. The return on investment might be very low for some types of people, however. I'd argue that nobody really knows what the "ceiling" is on any particular skill for a particular person, and it's impossible to say to what extent genetic variation affects that without extensive research, and maybe not even then. | ||
| ||
