|
Stop derailing this thread, get back on topic. |
On November 26 2012 10:51 NoobSkills wrote:Show nested quote +On November 26 2012 10:42 DonKey_ wrote:On November 26 2012 10:31 NoobSkills wrote:On November 26 2012 10:17 DonKey_ wrote:On November 26 2012 09:52 zefreak wrote:
Skill ceilings are very real and you guys are performing some mental gymnastics in order to write them off.
It's true that it's unlikely a 'perfect game' will be played in any game of sufficient complexity. However, your argument that because there is less to do it allows you to focus on perfecting the few things you can do, while true, IS a lower skill ceiling. Skills are all about mastering small tasks in such a way that they become second nature, allowing you to focus on the next set of higher order tasks. The more layers of these tasks there are, the more areas you have to differentiate yourself from others. If BW had SC2 macro, the skill ceiling WOULD be lowered. That doesn't mean there wouldn't be things to focus on and perfect. It certainly would take less time to reach the level of perfection that we got towards the end of BW, though.
I'm not saying that LoL has an insufficient skill ceiling to be a competitive game, because I think it does. But the idea of scrapping the whole notion of a skill ceiling when discussing games is wrongheaded. Wrong-headed? What are you talking about? If skill-ceiling for an "e-sports" game will not ever be proved, then there is no reason to be discussing it. What does it bring to the table? The term itself is being used incorrectly in practically 85% of the posts that contain it. edit: I for damn sure am not arguing that as a concept skill ceiling does not exist. The thing is you have ZERO way to measure it and ZERO way to reach it. Skill ceiling is being used to somehow justify that someones game is objectively better because maybe just maybe 1000 years down the line when we have scientifically altered ourselves to exceed our current capabilities as humans we will run in to a situation where the game is "figured out". It's a useless stat not worth talking about that is being used as a scapegoat argument so elitists can say their more complex game is better to play than others. I like this post and it made me remember something. I watched someone play 2 HON characters at one time for a full game using 2 keyboards, but sharing control (he won all 3 games doing this). In SC2 nobody could do shit playing 2 games at one time unless chessing in both games. That is decent evidence that one game does require you to do more with your time than the other and that the skill ceiling is higher. You could argue all you wanted for days that LoL is harder, but I'm pretty sure someone could also play 2 characters on LoL and win at a high raiting. Now, using skill ceiling to put down another game is shitty because there is talent in all games. Even speed runners are doing something better than the rest when they hold world records. There is a difference of level of skill from the bottom to the top which makes all game's professional levels awesome to watch, or else Esports wouldn't be around. But I will get off of this topic for now I guess because I'm and "elitist" who is trying to "justify my game is better."  On November 26 2012 10:23 SupLilSon wrote:On November 26 2012 09:36 The Final Boss wrote:On November 26 2012 08:15 SupLilSon wrote:On November 26 2012 07:49 The Final Boss wrote:On November 26 2012 07:46 DonKey_ wrote:On November 26 2012 07:29 D4V3Z02 wrote:On November 26 2012 06:51 SupLilSon wrote:
[quote]
Riot took DOTA, flattened out the learning curve and gave us LoL. I'm sorry but to those who play DOTA or somewhat follow the pro scene, LoL clearly comes off as a game which is easy to play. No one is being an imbecile, RIOT wanted their game to be "easier".. Yeh even LoL Pros said that its skill ceilling isnt that high. You do realize when you use the term skill ceiling in relation to what you have quoted you is 100% incorrect in it's definition. What you are looking for is skill floor as that has to do with making it easier to enter the game. Skill ceiling on the other hand, which btw has gotten sooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooo misused on this forum in regards with the LoL/Dota comparison. It's not appropriate to really talk about skill ceiling with games like LoL/Dota,it would fit more with something akin to Chess, Checkers, or Tic-tac-toe. The bottom line here is NO ONE has ever hit a skill ceiling in "e-sports" titles, they have only ever approached them. This is what I'm trying to say in a more concise manner; stop using the term skill ceiling because it's practically meaningless. I don't think you fully understood what you were responding to. Noobskills was simply saying that because DOTA/LOL are team games, a single player's mechanics are going to have an overall lower direct impact on the games outcome compared to a 1v1 scenario like SC. Teamwork is not a skill, there is no mechanical component to team work that can be quantified. And while I agree that people throw around the term skill ceiling a bit too casually, it has not always misused in this thread. Yea, the skill ceiling is only theoretical but that does not mean it is not meaningful. There are numerous reasons to hypothesize that LoL's overall skill ceiling is much lower than DOTA... removal of denies, fog spots in LoL vs trees in DOTA, night/day mechanic in DOTA, item and hero differentiation, etc. Sure, it's the internet, people can always say "nuh uh" and deny but if you follow a logical thought process, LoL has a lower skill ceiling than DOTA. Edit: And the part about Destiny being decent at SC2 and terrible at LoL is contradictory to the rest of your post. You yourself assert that the 2 games require different skill sets... so you can't really correlate Destiny's transition to anything outside of his ability to learn new skills. European Football is more demanding motor mechanically and motor skill-wise than American Football, I don't think anyone would disagree. Yet it would be silly to think that Messi could join the NFL and have any impact whatsoever... or almost any other Football player for that matter. Why? The majority of their skills have no basis in the much simpler game of American Football... Such is the relationship between DOTA/LoL First off your comparison of European and American football is HILARIOUS, you clearly have no idea of how difficult American football is, how trying it is on the human body, and how deep the strategy of the game goes. I'm not going to rip on soccer because it's a sport that I played in high school and enjoy to play and watch, but calling American football a "much simpler game" is an incredibly stupid thing to say. If you're going to post, try not to take uninformed shots at something you have absolutely no idea about, it makes you look retarded. Secondly, I'm not trying to say that LoL is somehow harder or more difficult to play, I do not believe that. However, it requires different skills and to talk about the "skill ceiling" of it or any other game like StarCraft is ridiculous. As you have said, League requires a different set of skills, because it is not just based around a single person. Your comparison of European and American football is so blatantly retarded that I'm going to leave it behind, and here's a better comparison using sports: it would be like taking a UFC fighter or boxer and expecting them to transition perfectly into American football or rugby. In theory they might have the physical body to do so, but they don't have the correct experience of working in a team setting and the specifics of those sports to transition perfectly. In a complete oversimplification of the sport, two boxers just have to try to knock each other out, going after each others bodies is their victory condition; in football a lineman has to block for the ball carrier. Similarly, in StarCraft I'm just trying to beat my single opponent to death and he's trying to beat me to death; but in League I might be trying to keep an Olaf from getting to my AD Carry, while that Olaf's goal is to murder my ADC. In each, different people have different goals, in StarCraft/boxing you share a similar goal and in League the individual members of each team have different goals. And the comparison of DotA and LoL is a great example as far as why skill ceilings bare so little meaning. There are more things you have to do in DotA than there are in LoL. However, because there are less things to do in LoL, that means that there is more room to focus on and practice the nuances of League of Legends, which is fine because no matter how good you get at last hitting in League, you will never hit the ceiling, because you can improve upon other things in lane. It makes no sense to talk about skill ceilings in a game like StarCraft 2 or League because they are never going to be reached. TL;DR don't talk about games--whether it's LoL or football--that you don't know anything about, skill ceilings are borderline meaningless, stop bashing League of Legends as some "no-skill- game," and I'm done posting in this thread, thank you very much and have a nice night. ...? You don't have to resort to calling people retarded because you get frustrated... European Football is more demanding in areas of technical skill and motor skill than American Football, that's a fact, not a question. But I'm not going to get into that because it'd lead down a completely unrelated tangent on neuromuscular physiology and the workings of fine motor skills vs. gross motor skills. He is just one of those diehards who wants to defend LoL even when it doesn't need defending. Nobody even said it was a bad game, just that it required less skill to master. I wouldn't pay him too much attention. Let me get this straight "I watched someone play 2 HON characters at one time for a full game using 2 keyboards, but sharing control (he won all 3 games doing this). In SC2 nobody could do shit playing 2 games at one time unless chessing in both games." you are using this as evidence that there could be a metric for skill ceiling? Aside from the fact that you don't cite this and it is an anecdote, how does that have any relevant information that a metric could exist for skill ceiling. I did not call you an elitist, unless you are identifying yourself as one who fits that criteria of arguing a more complex game is a better one. Your entire post is just a series of assumptions without evidence. I'm saying it could be used as evidence, not as numerical evidence that dictates exactly how much you are able to do in one game vs another one. If one can play 2 games at one time in one game and not in another, doesn't that mean at least in some sense that you have more to do in the game that you couldn't play 2 of does it not? And doing more, isn't that a measurement in some fashion? There is no tangible way to numerically measure doing more though. Can' it be proven? No. Does it make sense? Yes. The same way that LoL seemingly takes more skill than COD.
This is still all subjective though, because there is not a metric that is applied.
More importantly though how is it relevant to anyone?
|
On November 26 2012 10:46 DonKey_ wrote:Show nested quote +On November 26 2012 10:38 zefreak wrote:On November 26 2012 10:17 DonKey_ wrote:On November 26 2012 09:52 zefreak wrote:
Skill ceilings are very real and you guys are performing some mental gymnastics in order to write them off.
It's true that it's unlikely a 'perfect game' will be played in any game of sufficient complexity. However, your argument that because there is less to do it allows you to focus on perfecting the few things you can do, while true, IS a lower skill ceiling. Skills are all about mastering small tasks in such a way that they become second nature, allowing you to focus on the next set of higher order tasks. The more layers of these tasks there are, the more areas you have to differentiate yourself from others. If BW had SC2 macro, the skill ceiling WOULD be lowered. That doesn't mean there wouldn't be things to focus on and perfect. It certainly would take less time to reach the level of perfection that we got towards the end of BW, though.
I'm not saying that LoL has an insufficient skill ceiling to be a competitive game, because I think it does. But the idea of scrapping the whole notion of a skill ceiling when discussing games is wrongheaded. Wrong-headed? What are you talking about? If skill-ceiling for an "e-sports" game will not ever be proved, then there is no reason to be discussing it. What does it bring to the table? The term itself is being used incorrectly in practically 85% of the posts that contain it. edit: I for damn sure am not arguing that as a concept skill ceiling does not exist. The thing is you have ZERO way to measure it and ZERO way to reach it. With regard to all the games classified as "e-sports". Skill ceiling is being used to somehow justify that someones game is objectively better because maybe just maybe 1000 years down the line when we have scientifically altered ourselves to exceed our current capabilities as humans we will run in to a situation where the game is "figured out". It's a useless stat not worth talking about that is being used as a scapegoat argument so elitists can say their more complex game is better to play than others. This is really what frustrates me the most. It's not something that is supposed to be 'measured'. This doesn't make it useless. You can make comparative, qualitative judgements. This is common in fields like economics where ordinal numbers are often required. And while a ceiling will never be 'reached' in the sense on playing a perfect game, it still matters. Instead of thinking in terms of a ceiling, think in terms of 'depth'. A simple game will still have room for human error, and so it's 'skill ceiling' will never be absolutely reached. But a more complex game, while also not reaching its skill ceiling, will allow for error and variation among many more domains. Rock Paper Scissors cannot be perfectly played by humans because we are not equipped to deal with perfectly randomized mixed strategies. This doesn't mean you can say "Rock Paper Scissors can never be perfected so its just as competitive as Chess or Go, the skill ceiling will never be reached either way" Just an extreme example, not actually trying to compare LoL to rock paper scissors. I don't see the relevance of this, is this something many people find important in a game? You can always make a game one order of degree more difficult by adding another set of procedures to it, sure. How does that make it better as a game though and how does skill ceiling have any relevance at all? There is no "strategy" to playing a single game of Rock, Paper, Scissors, you just make a decision. Skill is not a factor in that.
Yes there is a strategy for Rock Paper Scissors, although I see you are covering your ass by saying 'a single game'. Anyways, assuming you aren't being disingenuous and trying to "catch" me with a technicality, the optimal play is a mixed strategy of rock 1/3rd of the time, paper 1/3rd and scissors 1/3rd. Good luck trying to do that in a truely random way over a large sample size. Skill ceiling - out of reach of human participants, still not as hard as Chess or Go.
|
On November 26 2012 10:51 SupLilSon wrote:Show nested quote +On November 26 2012 10:48 Whatson wrote:On November 26 2012 10:39 SupLilSon wrote:On November 26 2012 10:29 Whatson wrote:On November 26 2012 10:23 SupLilSon wrote:On November 26 2012 09:36 The Final Boss wrote:On November 26 2012 08:15 SupLilSon wrote:On November 26 2012 07:49 The Final Boss wrote:On November 26 2012 07:46 DonKey_ wrote:On November 26 2012 07:29 D4V3Z02 wrote:
[quote]
Yeh even LoL Pros said that its skill ceilling isnt that high.
You do realize when you use the term skill ceiling in relation to what you have quoted you is 100% incorrect in it's definition. What you are looking for is skill floor as that has to do with making it easier to enter the game. Skill ceiling on the other hand, which btw has gotten sooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooo misused on this forum in regards with the LoL/Dota comparison. It's not appropriate to really talk about skill ceiling with games like LoL/Dota,it would fit more with something akin to Chess, Checkers, or Tic-tac-toe. The bottom line here is NO ONE has ever hit a skill ceiling in "e-sports" titles, they have only ever approached them. This is what I'm trying to say in a more concise manner; stop using the term skill ceiling because it's practically meaningless. I don't think you fully understood what you were responding to. Noobskills was simply saying that because DOTA/LOL are team games, a single player's mechanics are going to have an overall lower direct impact on the games outcome compared to a 1v1 scenario like SC. Teamwork is not a skill, there is no mechanical component to team work that can be quantified. And while I agree that people throw around the term skill ceiling a bit too casually, it has not always misused in this thread. Yea, the skill ceiling is only theoretical but that does not mean it is not meaningful. There are numerous reasons to hypothesize that LoL's overall skill ceiling is much lower than DOTA... removal of denies, fog spots in LoL vs trees in DOTA, night/day mechanic in DOTA, item and hero differentiation, etc. Sure, it's the internet, people can always say "nuh uh" and deny but if you follow a logical thought process, LoL has a lower skill ceiling than DOTA. Edit: And the part about Destiny being decent at SC2 and terrible at LoL is contradictory to the rest of your post. You yourself assert that the 2 games require different skill sets... so you can't really correlate Destiny's transition to anything outside of his ability to learn new skills. European Football is more demanding motor mechanically and motor skill-wise than American Football, I don't think anyone would disagree. Yet it would be silly to think that Messi could join the NFL and have any impact whatsoever... or almost any other Football player for that matter. Why? The majority of their skills have no basis in the much simpler game of American Football... Such is the relationship between DOTA/LoL First off your comparison of European and American football is HILARIOUS, you clearly have no idea of how difficult American football is, how trying it is on the human body, and how deep the strategy of the game goes. I'm not going to rip on soccer because it's a sport that I played in high school and enjoy to play and watch, but calling American football a "much simpler game" is an incredibly stupid thing to say. If you're going to post, try not to take uninformed shots at something you have absolutely no idea about, it makes you look retarded. Secondly, I'm not trying to say that LoL is somehow harder or more difficult to play, I do not believe that. However, it requires different skills and to talk about the "skill ceiling" of it or any other game like StarCraft is ridiculous. As you have said, League requires a different set of skills, because it is not just based around a single person. Your comparison of European and American football is so blatantly retarded that I'm going to leave it behind, and here's a better comparison using sports: it would be like taking a UFC fighter or boxer and expecting them to transition perfectly into American football or rugby. In theory they might have the physical body to do so, but they don't have the correct experience of working in a team setting and the specifics of those sports to transition perfectly. In a complete oversimplification of the sport, two boxers just have to try to knock each other out, going after each others bodies is their victory condition; in football a lineman has to block for the ball carrier. Similarly, in StarCraft I'm just trying to beat my single opponent to death and he's trying to beat me to death; but in League I might be trying to keep an Olaf from getting to my AD Carry, while that Olaf's goal is to murder my ADC. In each, different people have different goals, in StarCraft/boxing you share a similar goal and in League the individual members of each team have different goals. And the comparison of DotA and LoL is a great example as far as why skill ceilings bare so little meaning. There are more things you have to do in DotA than there are in LoL. However, because there are less things to do in LoL, that means that there is more room to focus on and practice the nuances of League of Legends, which is fine because no matter how good you get at last hitting in League, you will never hit the ceiling, because you can improve upon other things in lane. It makes no sense to talk about skill ceilings in a game like StarCraft 2 or League because they are never going to be reached. TL;DR don't talk about games--whether it's LoL or football--that you don't know anything about, skill ceilings are borderline meaningless, stop bashing League of Legends as some "no-skill- game," and I'm done posting in this thread, thank you very much and have a nice night. ...? You don't have to resort to calling people retarded because you get frustrated... European Football is more demanding in areas of technical skill and motor skill than American Football, that's a fact, not a question. But I'm not going to get into that because it'd lead down a completely unrelated tangent on neuromuscular physiology and the workings of fine motor skills vs. gross motor skills. As somebody who has played both in high school, you couldn't be more wrong. They require different functions and rely on different skill sets, but to say that soccer requires more skill than american football is just wrong. /tangent. Aside from the quarterback position, the general skills involved in American Football are running, catching and jumping. These are all skills that any developmentally normal human being should be able to perform. The simple act of dribbling in European Football requires more technical skill than any movement in American Football. I really don't think I'm wrong. Except that not every developmentally normal human being can play football at a high level, the same way that a developmentally normal human being cannot play soccer at a high level. I wonder why. Very well, I see that I cannot possibly hope to change your opinion. Keep on believing that then. /tangent. lol... it's science, not really an opinion. High level american football revolves heavily around limiting factors such as an individual's sheer muscle mass, body weight and size (height, width) but that is independent of motor skill, which is what I'm talking about. But w/e this is ridiculously off topic. GL inori maybe you will change my view on LoL
Why do you keep on replying, it's obvious that he's made his point and wishes the tangent to end. You're just derailing this thread.
|
|
|
On November 26 2012 10:54 DonKey_ wrote:Show nested quote +On November 26 2012 10:51 NoobSkills wrote:On November 26 2012 10:42 DonKey_ wrote:On November 26 2012 10:31 NoobSkills wrote:On November 26 2012 10:17 DonKey_ wrote:On November 26 2012 09:52 zefreak wrote:
Skill ceilings are very real and you guys are performing some mental gymnastics in order to write them off.
It's true that it's unlikely a 'perfect game' will be played in any game of sufficient complexity. However, your argument that because there is less to do it allows you to focus on perfecting the few things you can do, while true, IS a lower skill ceiling. Skills are all about mastering small tasks in such a way that they become second nature, allowing you to focus on the next set of higher order tasks. The more layers of these tasks there are, the more areas you have to differentiate yourself from others. If BW had SC2 macro, the skill ceiling WOULD be lowered. That doesn't mean there wouldn't be things to focus on and perfect. It certainly would take less time to reach the level of perfection that we got towards the end of BW, though.
I'm not saying that LoL has an insufficient skill ceiling to be a competitive game, because I think it does. But the idea of scrapping the whole notion of a skill ceiling when discussing games is wrongheaded. Wrong-headed? What are you talking about? If skill-ceiling for an "e-sports" game will not ever be proved, then there is no reason to be discussing it. What does it bring to the table? The term itself is being used incorrectly in practically 85% of the posts that contain it. edit: I for damn sure am not arguing that as a concept skill ceiling does not exist. The thing is you have ZERO way to measure it and ZERO way to reach it. Skill ceiling is being used to somehow justify that someones game is objectively better because maybe just maybe 1000 years down the line when we have scientifically altered ourselves to exceed our current capabilities as humans we will run in to a situation where the game is "figured out". It's a useless stat not worth talking about that is being used as a scapegoat argument so elitists can say their more complex game is better to play than others. I like this post and it made me remember something. I watched someone play 2 HON characters at one time for a full game using 2 keyboards, but sharing control (he won all 3 games doing this). In SC2 nobody could do shit playing 2 games at one time unless chessing in both games. That is decent evidence that one game does require you to do more with your time than the other and that the skill ceiling is higher. You could argue all you wanted for days that LoL is harder, but I'm pretty sure someone could also play 2 characters on LoL and win at a high raiting. Now, using skill ceiling to put down another game is shitty because there is talent in all games. Even speed runners are doing something better than the rest when they hold world records. There is a difference of level of skill from the bottom to the top which makes all game's professional levels awesome to watch, or else Esports wouldn't be around. But I will get off of this topic for now I guess because I'm and "elitist" who is trying to "justify my game is better." On November 26 2012 10:23 SupLilSon wrote:On November 26 2012 09:36 The Final Boss wrote:On November 26 2012 08:15 SupLilSon wrote:On November 26 2012 07:49 The Final Boss wrote:On November 26 2012 07:46 DonKey_ wrote:On November 26 2012 07:29 D4V3Z02 wrote:
[quote]
Yeh even LoL Pros said that its skill ceilling isnt that high.
You do realize when you use the term skill ceiling in relation to what you have quoted you is 100% incorrect in it's definition. What you are looking for is skill floor as that has to do with making it easier to enter the game. Skill ceiling on the other hand, which btw has gotten sooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooo misused on this forum in regards with the LoL/Dota comparison. It's not appropriate to really talk about skill ceiling with games like LoL/Dota,it would fit more with something akin to Chess, Checkers, or Tic-tac-toe. The bottom line here is NO ONE has ever hit a skill ceiling in "e-sports" titles, they have only ever approached them. This is what I'm trying to say in a more concise manner; stop using the term skill ceiling because it's practically meaningless. I don't think you fully understood what you were responding to. Noobskills was simply saying that because DOTA/LOL are team games, a single player's mechanics are going to have an overall lower direct impact on the games outcome compared to a 1v1 scenario like SC. Teamwork is not a skill, there is no mechanical component to team work that can be quantified. And while I agree that people throw around the term skill ceiling a bit too casually, it has not always misused in this thread. Yea, the skill ceiling is only theoretical but that does not mean it is not meaningful. There are numerous reasons to hypothesize that LoL's overall skill ceiling is much lower than DOTA... removal of denies, fog spots in LoL vs trees in DOTA, night/day mechanic in DOTA, item and hero differentiation, etc. Sure, it's the internet, people can always say "nuh uh" and deny but if you follow a logical thought process, LoL has a lower skill ceiling than DOTA. Edit: And the part about Destiny being decent at SC2 and terrible at LoL is contradictory to the rest of your post. You yourself assert that the 2 games require different skill sets... so you can't really correlate Destiny's transition to anything outside of his ability to learn new skills. European Football is more demanding motor mechanically and motor skill-wise than American Football, I don't think anyone would disagree. Yet it would be silly to think that Messi could join the NFL and have any impact whatsoever... or almost any other Football player for that matter. Why? The majority of their skills have no basis in the much simpler game of American Football... Such is the relationship between DOTA/LoL First off your comparison of European and American football is HILARIOUS, you clearly have no idea of how difficult American football is, how trying it is on the human body, and how deep the strategy of the game goes. I'm not going to rip on soccer because it's a sport that I played in high school and enjoy to play and watch, but calling American football a "much simpler game" is an incredibly stupid thing to say. If you're going to post, try not to take uninformed shots at something you have absolutely no idea about, it makes you look retarded. Secondly, I'm not trying to say that LoL is somehow harder or more difficult to play, I do not believe that. However, it requires different skills and to talk about the "skill ceiling" of it or any other game like StarCraft is ridiculous. As you have said, League requires a different set of skills, because it is not just based around a single person. Your comparison of European and American football is so blatantly retarded that I'm going to leave it behind, and here's a better comparison using sports: it would be like taking a UFC fighter or boxer and expecting them to transition perfectly into American football or rugby. In theory they might have the physical body to do so, but they don't have the correct experience of working in a team setting and the specifics of those sports to transition perfectly. In a complete oversimplification of the sport, two boxers just have to try to knock each other out, going after each others bodies is their victory condition; in football a lineman has to block for the ball carrier. Similarly, in StarCraft I'm just trying to beat my single opponent to death and he's trying to beat me to death; but in League I might be trying to keep an Olaf from getting to my AD Carry, while that Olaf's goal is to murder my ADC. In each, different people have different goals, in StarCraft/boxing you share a similar goal and in League the individual members of each team have different goals. And the comparison of DotA and LoL is a great example as far as why skill ceilings bare so little meaning. There are more things you have to do in DotA than there are in LoL. However, because there are less things to do in LoL, that means that there is more room to focus on and practice the nuances of League of Legends, which is fine because no matter how good you get at last hitting in League, you will never hit the ceiling, because you can improve upon other things in lane. It makes no sense to talk about skill ceilings in a game like StarCraft 2 or League because they are never going to be reached. TL;DR don't talk about games--whether it's LoL or football--that you don't know anything about, skill ceilings are borderline meaningless, stop bashing League of Legends as some "no-skill- game," and I'm done posting in this thread, thank you very much and have a nice night. ...? You don't have to resort to calling people retarded because you get frustrated... European Football is more demanding in areas of technical skill and motor skill than American Football, that's a fact, not a question. But I'm not going to get into that because it'd lead down a completely unrelated tangent on neuromuscular physiology and the workings of fine motor skills vs. gross motor skills. He is just one of those diehards who wants to defend LoL even when it doesn't need defending. Nobody even said it was a bad game, just that it required less skill to master. I wouldn't pay him too much attention. Let me get this straight "I watched someone play 2 HON characters at one time for a full game using 2 keyboards, but sharing control (he won all 3 games doing this). In SC2 nobody could do shit playing 2 games at one time unless chessing in both games." you are using this as evidence that there could be a metric for skill ceiling? Aside from the fact that you don't cite this and it is an anecdote, how does that have any relevant information that a metric could exist for skill ceiling. I did not call you an elitist, unless you are identifying yourself as one who fits that criteria of arguing a more complex game is a better one. Your entire post is just a series of assumptions without evidence. I'm saying it could be used as evidence, not as numerical evidence that dictates exactly how much you are able to do in one game vs another one. If one can play 2 games at one time in one game and not in another, doesn't that mean at least in some sense that you have more to do in the game that you couldn't play 2 of does it not? And doing more, isn't that a measurement in some fashion? There is no tangible way to numerically measure doing more though. Can' it be proven? No. Does it make sense? Yes. The same way that LoL seemingly takes more skill than COD. This is still all subjective though, because there is not a metric that is applied. More importantly though how is it relevant to anyone?
If you can't see that it is somewhat a way to view that something requires less skill that is fine. I'm not really here to convince anyone of that. I think anyone who had no vested interest in either game would probably agree though.
How is it relevant to an argument about skill ceilings? Depends if someone is willing to accept it is evidence and not fact.
|
On November 26 2012 10:54 zefreak wrote:Show nested quote +On November 26 2012 10:46 DonKey_ wrote:On November 26 2012 10:38 zefreak wrote:On November 26 2012 10:17 DonKey_ wrote:On November 26 2012 09:52 zefreak wrote:
Skill ceilings are very real and you guys are performing some mental gymnastics in order to write them off.
It's true that it's unlikely a 'perfect game' will be played in any game of sufficient complexity. However, your argument that because there is less to do it allows you to focus on perfecting the few things you can do, while true, IS a lower skill ceiling. Skills are all about mastering small tasks in such a way that they become second nature, allowing you to focus on the next set of higher order tasks. The more layers of these tasks there are, the more areas you have to differentiate yourself from others. If BW had SC2 macro, the skill ceiling WOULD be lowered. That doesn't mean there wouldn't be things to focus on and perfect. It certainly would take less time to reach the level of perfection that we got towards the end of BW, though.
I'm not saying that LoL has an insufficient skill ceiling to be a competitive game, because I think it does. But the idea of scrapping the whole notion of a skill ceiling when discussing games is wrongheaded. Wrong-headed? What are you talking about? If skill-ceiling for an "e-sports" game will not ever be proved, then there is no reason to be discussing it. What does it bring to the table? The term itself is being used incorrectly in practically 85% of the posts that contain it. edit: I for damn sure am not arguing that as a concept skill ceiling does not exist. The thing is you have ZERO way to measure it and ZERO way to reach it. With regard to all the games classified as "e-sports". Skill ceiling is being used to somehow justify that someones game is objectively better because maybe just maybe 1000 years down the line when we have scientifically altered ourselves to exceed our current capabilities as humans we will run in to a situation where the game is "figured out". It's a useless stat not worth talking about that is being used as a scapegoat argument so elitists can say their more complex game is better to play than others. This is really what frustrates me the most. It's not something that is supposed to be 'measured'. This doesn't make it useless. You can make comparative, qualitative judgements. This is common in fields like economics where ordinal numbers are often required. And while a ceiling will never be 'reached' in the sense on playing a perfect game, it still matters. Instead of thinking in terms of a ceiling, think in terms of 'depth'. A simple game will still have room for human error, and so it's 'skill ceiling' will never be absolutely reached. But a more complex game, while also not reaching its skill ceiling, will allow for error and variation among many more domains. Rock Paper Scissors cannot be perfectly played by humans because we are not equipped to deal with perfectly randomized mixed strategies. This doesn't mean you can say "Rock Paper Scissors can never be perfected so its just as competitive as Chess or Go, the skill ceiling will never be reached either way" Just an extreme example, not actually trying to compare LoL to rock paper scissors. I don't see the relevance of this, is this something many people find important in a game? You can always make a game one order of degree more difficult by adding another set of procedures to it, sure. How does that make it better as a game though and how does skill ceiling have any relevance at all? There is no "strategy" to playing a single game of Rock, Paper, Scissors, you just make a decision. Skill is not a factor in that. Yes there is a strategy for Rock Paper Scissors, although I see you are covering your ass by saying 'a single game'. Anyways, assuming you aren't being disingenuous and trying to "catch" me with a technicality, the optimal play is a mixed strategy of rock 1/3rd of the time, paper 1/3rd and scissors 1/3rd. Good luck trying to do that in a truely random way over a large sample size. Skill ceiling - out of reach of human participants, still not as hard as Chess or Go.
Sure "I covered my ass", were we talking about playing games in a series? I could see what you were trying to with your other post, but the example you give is not comparable to "e-sports" titles, because they contain an unquantifiable amount of greater complexities already.
Let's say however I did have metric scale for skill ceiling achievable. Chess would be a 100, LoL would be a 1,000,000 and 1,100,000 would be Dota2. How for most people who cannot even get that 100 skill ceiling would differences in the hundreds of thousands even matter. Skill ceiling is something that just shouldn't be cared about by us players who cannot reach it.
On November 26 2012 11:06 NoobSkills wrote:Show nested quote +On November 26 2012 10:54 DonKey_ wrote:On November 26 2012 10:51 NoobSkills wrote:On November 26 2012 10:42 DonKey_ wrote:On November 26 2012 10:31 NoobSkills wrote:On November 26 2012 10:17 DonKey_ wrote:On November 26 2012 09:52 zefreak wrote:
Skill ceilings are very real and you guys are performing some mental gymnastics in order to write them off.
It's true that it's unlikely a 'perfect game' will be played in any game of sufficient complexity. However, your argument that because there is less to do it allows you to focus on perfecting the few things you can do, while true, IS a lower skill ceiling. Skills are all about mastering small tasks in such a way that they become second nature, allowing you to focus on the next set of higher order tasks. The more layers of these tasks there are, the more areas you have to differentiate yourself from others. If BW had SC2 macro, the skill ceiling WOULD be lowered. That doesn't mean there wouldn't be things to focus on and perfect. It certainly would take less time to reach the level of perfection that we got towards the end of BW, though.
I'm not saying that LoL has an insufficient skill ceiling to be a competitive game, because I think it does. But the idea of scrapping the whole notion of a skill ceiling when discussing games is wrongheaded. Wrong-headed? What are you talking about? If skill-ceiling for an "e-sports" game will not ever be proved, then there is no reason to be discussing it. What does it bring to the table? The term itself is being used incorrectly in practically 85% of the posts that contain it. edit: I for damn sure am not arguing that as a concept skill ceiling does not exist. The thing is you have ZERO way to measure it and ZERO way to reach it. Skill ceiling is being used to somehow justify that someones game is objectively better because maybe just maybe 1000 years down the line when we have scientifically altered ourselves to exceed our current capabilities as humans we will run in to a situation where the game is "figured out". It's a useless stat not worth talking about that is being used as a scapegoat argument so elitists can say their more complex game is better to play than others. I like this post and it made me remember something. I watched someone play 2 HON characters at one time for a full game using 2 keyboards, but sharing control (he won all 3 games doing this). In SC2 nobody could do shit playing 2 games at one time unless chessing in both games. That is decent evidence that one game does require you to do more with your time than the other and that the skill ceiling is higher. You could argue all you wanted for days that LoL is harder, but I'm pretty sure someone could also play 2 characters on LoL and win at a high raiting. Now, using skill ceiling to put down another game is shitty because there is talent in all games. Even speed runners are doing something better than the rest when they hold world records. There is a difference of level of skill from the bottom to the top which makes all game's professional levels awesome to watch, or else Esports wouldn't be around. But I will get off of this topic for now I guess because I'm and "elitist" who is trying to "justify my game is better." On November 26 2012 10:23 SupLilSon wrote:On November 26 2012 09:36 The Final Boss wrote:On November 26 2012 08:15 SupLilSon wrote:On November 26 2012 07:49 The Final Boss wrote:On November 26 2012 07:46 DonKey_ wrote:
[quote]You do realize when you use the term skill ceiling in relation to what you have quoted you is 100% incorrect in it's definition. What you are looking for is skill floor as that has to do with making it easier to enter the game.
Skill ceiling on the other hand, which btw has gotten sooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooo misused on this forum in regards with the LoL/Dota comparison. It's not appropriate to really talk about skill ceiling with games like LoL/Dota,it would fit more with something akin to Chess, Checkers, or Tic-tac-toe.
The bottom line here is NO ONE has ever hit a skill ceiling in "e-sports" titles, they have only ever approached them. This is what I'm trying to say in a more concise manner; stop using the term skill ceiling because it's practically meaningless. I don't think you fully understood what you were responding to. Noobskills was simply saying that because DOTA/LOL are team games, a single player's mechanics are going to have an overall lower direct impact on the games outcome compared to a 1v1 scenario like SC. Teamwork is not a skill, there is no mechanical component to team work that can be quantified. And while I agree that people throw around the term skill ceiling a bit too casually, it has not always misused in this thread. Yea, the skill ceiling is only theoretical but that does not mean it is not meaningful. There are numerous reasons to hypothesize that LoL's overall skill ceiling is much lower than DOTA... removal of denies, fog spots in LoL vs trees in DOTA, night/day mechanic in DOTA, item and hero differentiation, etc. Sure, it's the internet, people can always say "nuh uh" and deny but if you follow a logical thought process, LoL has a lower skill ceiling than DOTA. Edit: And the part about Destiny being decent at SC2 and terrible at LoL is contradictory to the rest of your post. You yourself assert that the 2 games require different skill sets... so you can't really correlate Destiny's transition to anything outside of his ability to learn new skills. European Football is more demanding motor mechanically and motor skill-wise than American Football, I don't think anyone would disagree. Yet it would be silly to think that Messi could join the NFL and have any impact whatsoever... or almost any other Football player for that matter. Why? The majority of their skills have no basis in the much simpler game of American Football... Such is the relationship between DOTA/LoL First off your comparison of European and American football is HILARIOUS, you clearly have no idea of how difficult American football is, how trying it is on the human body, and how deep the strategy of the game goes. I'm not going to rip on soccer because it's a sport that I played in high school and enjoy to play and watch, but calling American football a "much simpler game" is an incredibly stupid thing to say. If you're going to post, try not to take uninformed shots at something you have absolutely no idea about, it makes you look retarded. Secondly, I'm not trying to say that LoL is somehow harder or more difficult to play, I do not believe that. However, it requires different skills and to talk about the "skill ceiling" of it or any other game like StarCraft is ridiculous. As you have said, League requires a different set of skills, because it is not just based around a single person. Your comparison of European and American football is so blatantly retarded that I'm going to leave it behind, and here's a better comparison using sports: it would be like taking a UFC fighter or boxer and expecting them to transition perfectly into American football or rugby. In theory they might have the physical body to do so, but they don't have the correct experience of working in a team setting and the specifics of those sports to transition perfectly. In a complete oversimplification of the sport, two boxers just have to try to knock each other out, going after each others bodies is their victory condition; in football a lineman has to block for the ball carrier. Similarly, in StarCraft I'm just trying to beat my single opponent to death and he's trying to beat me to death; but in League I might be trying to keep an Olaf from getting to my AD Carry, while that Olaf's goal is to murder my ADC. In each, different people have different goals, in StarCraft/boxing you share a similar goal and in League the individual members of each team have different goals. And the comparison of DotA and LoL is a great example as far as why skill ceilings bare so little meaning. There are more things you have to do in DotA than there are in LoL. However, because there are less things to do in LoL, that means that there is more room to focus on and practice the nuances of League of Legends, which is fine because no matter how good you get at last hitting in League, you will never hit the ceiling, because you can improve upon other things in lane. It makes no sense to talk about skill ceilings in a game like StarCraft 2 or League because they are never going to be reached. TL;DR don't talk about games--whether it's LoL or football--that you don't know anything about, skill ceilings are borderline meaningless, stop bashing League of Legends as some "no-skill- game," and I'm done posting in this thread, thank you very much and have a nice night. ...? You don't have to resort to calling people retarded because you get frustrated... European Football is more demanding in areas of technical skill and motor skill than American Football, that's a fact, not a question. But I'm not going to get into that because it'd lead down a completely unrelated tangent on neuromuscular physiology and the workings of fine motor skills vs. gross motor skills. He is just one of those diehards who wants to defend LoL even when it doesn't need defending. Nobody even said it was a bad game, just that it required less skill to master. I wouldn't pay him too much attention. Let me get this straight "I watched someone play 2 HON characters at one time for a full game using 2 keyboards, but sharing control (he won all 3 games doing this). In SC2 nobody could do shit playing 2 games at one time unless chessing in both games." you are using this as evidence that there could be a metric for skill ceiling? Aside from the fact that you don't cite this and it is an anecdote, how does that have any relevant information that a metric could exist for skill ceiling. I did not call you an elitist, unless you are identifying yourself as one who fits that criteria of arguing a more complex game is a better one. Your entire post is just a series of assumptions without evidence. I'm saying it could be used as evidence, not as numerical evidence that dictates exactly how much you are able to do in one game vs another one. If one can play 2 games at one time in one game and not in another, doesn't that mean at least in some sense that you have more to do in the game that you couldn't play 2 of does it not? And doing more, isn't that a measurement in some fashion? There is no tangible way to numerically measure doing more though. Can' it be proven? No. Does it make sense? Yes. The same way that LoL seemingly takes more skill than COD. This is still all subjective though, because there is not a metric that is applied. More importantly though how is it relevant to anyone? If you can't see that it is somewhat a way to view that something requires less skill that is fine. I'm not really here to convince anyone of that. I think anyone who had no vested interest in either game would probably agree though. How is it relevant to an argument about skill ceilings? Depends if someone is willing to accept it is evidence and not fact.
What I'm asking is if you think that a higher skill ceiling game some how affects us who play, but cannot even reach it?
We are talking about things so unfathomably far from obtaining we cannot even imagine it.
|
Inori is a character in King of Fighters...
That's literally all the connection that I can make this bit of news. Goodbye .. guy.
|
I said I was done posting, but I guess I lied. I know that I am right, I know that DonKey_ is the only other sensible person here, and what I certainly know is that LoL is growing faster than any other game right now and it's going to go way farther than StarCraft 2 (which is becoming more and more stagnant) and DotA 2. You guys can keep your snobby elitist crap, I used to love watching StarCraft 2 and the community was great but it's really too bad that TL has become a bastion of bashing a game that is undoubtedly going to be more successful. It doesn't take "less skill," but rather different skills, and talking about a "perfect" game or skill ceilings serves no use. That's all, gg.
|
On November 26 2012 11:07 DonKey_ wrote:Show nested quote +On November 26 2012 10:54 zefreak wrote:On November 26 2012 10:46 DonKey_ wrote:On November 26 2012 10:38 zefreak wrote:On November 26 2012 10:17 DonKey_ wrote:On November 26 2012 09:52 zefreak wrote:
Skill ceilings are very real and you guys are performing some mental gymnastics in order to write them off.
It's true that it's unlikely a 'perfect game' will be played in any game of sufficient complexity. However, your argument that because there is less to do it allows you to focus on perfecting the few things you can do, while true, IS a lower skill ceiling. Skills are all about mastering small tasks in such a way that they become second nature, allowing you to focus on the next set of higher order tasks. The more layers of these tasks there are, the more areas you have to differentiate yourself from others. If BW had SC2 macro, the skill ceiling WOULD be lowered. That doesn't mean there wouldn't be things to focus on and perfect. It certainly would take less time to reach the level of perfection that we got towards the end of BW, though.
I'm not saying that LoL has an insufficient skill ceiling to be a competitive game, because I think it does. But the idea of scrapping the whole notion of a skill ceiling when discussing games is wrongheaded. Wrong-headed? What are you talking about? If skill-ceiling for an "e-sports" game will not ever be proved, then there is no reason to be discussing it. What does it bring to the table? The term itself is being used incorrectly in practically 85% of the posts that contain it. edit: I for damn sure am not arguing that as a concept skill ceiling does not exist. The thing is you have ZERO way to measure it and ZERO way to reach it. With regard to all the games classified as "e-sports". Skill ceiling is being used to somehow justify that someones game is objectively better because maybe just maybe 1000 years down the line when we have scientifically altered ourselves to exceed our current capabilities as humans we will run in to a situation where the game is "figured out". It's a useless stat not worth talking about that is being used as a scapegoat argument so elitists can say their more complex game is better to play than others. This is really what frustrates me the most. It's not something that is supposed to be 'measured'. This doesn't make it useless. You can make comparative, qualitative judgements. This is common in fields like economics where ordinal numbers are often required. And while a ceiling will never be 'reached' in the sense on playing a perfect game, it still matters. Instead of thinking in terms of a ceiling, think in terms of 'depth'. A simple game will still have room for human error, and so it's 'skill ceiling' will never be absolutely reached. But a more complex game, while also not reaching its skill ceiling, will allow for error and variation among many more domains. Rock Paper Scissors cannot be perfectly played by humans because we are not equipped to deal with perfectly randomized mixed strategies. This doesn't mean you can say "Rock Paper Scissors can never be perfected so its just as competitive as Chess or Go, the skill ceiling will never be reached either way" Just an extreme example, not actually trying to compare LoL to rock paper scissors. I don't see the relevance of this, is this something many people find important in a game? You can always make a game one order of degree more difficult by adding another set of procedures to it, sure. How does that make it better as a game though and how does skill ceiling have any relevance at all? There is no "strategy" to playing a single game of Rock, Paper, Scissors, you just make a decision. Skill is not a factor in that. Yes there is a strategy for Rock Paper Scissors, although I see you are covering your ass by saying 'a single game'. Anyways, assuming you aren't being disingenuous and trying to "catch" me with a technicality, the optimal play is a mixed strategy of rock 1/3rd of the time, paper 1/3rd and scissors 1/3rd. Good luck trying to do that in a truely random way over a large sample size. Skill ceiling - out of reach of human participants, still not as hard as Chess or Go. Sure "I covered my ass", were we talking about playing games in a series? I could see what you were trying to with your other post, but the example you give is not comparable to "e-sports" titles, because they contain an unquantifiable amount of greater complexities already. Let's say however I did have metric scale for skill ceiling achievable. Chess would be a 100, LoL would be a 1,000,000 and 1,100,000 would be Dota2. How for most people who cannot even get that 100 skill ceiling would differences in the hundreds of thousands even matter. Skill ceiling is something that just shouldn't be cared about by us players who cannot reach it. Show nested quote +On November 26 2012 11:06 NoobSkills wrote:On November 26 2012 10:54 DonKey_ wrote:On November 26 2012 10:51 NoobSkills wrote:On November 26 2012 10:42 DonKey_ wrote:On November 26 2012 10:31 NoobSkills wrote:On November 26 2012 10:17 DonKey_ wrote:On November 26 2012 09:52 zefreak wrote:
Skill ceilings are very real and you guys are performing some mental gymnastics in order to write them off.
It's true that it's unlikely a 'perfect game' will be played in any game of sufficient complexity. However, your argument that because there is less to do it allows you to focus on perfecting the few things you can do, while true, IS a lower skill ceiling. Skills are all about mastering small tasks in such a way that they become second nature, allowing you to focus on the next set of higher order tasks. The more layers of these tasks there are, the more areas you have to differentiate yourself from others. If BW had SC2 macro, the skill ceiling WOULD be lowered. That doesn't mean there wouldn't be things to focus on and perfect. It certainly would take less time to reach the level of perfection that we got towards the end of BW, though.
I'm not saying that LoL has an insufficient skill ceiling to be a competitive game, because I think it does. But the idea of scrapping the whole notion of a skill ceiling when discussing games is wrongheaded. Wrong-headed? What are you talking about? If skill-ceiling for an "e-sports" game will not ever be proved, then there is no reason to be discussing it. What does it bring to the table? The term itself is being used incorrectly in practically 85% of the posts that contain it. edit: I for damn sure am not arguing that as a concept skill ceiling does not exist. The thing is you have ZERO way to measure it and ZERO way to reach it. Skill ceiling is being used to somehow justify that someones game is objectively better because maybe just maybe 1000 years down the line when we have scientifically altered ourselves to exceed our current capabilities as humans we will run in to a situation where the game is "figured out". It's a useless stat not worth talking about that is being used as a scapegoat argument so elitists can say their more complex game is better to play than others. I like this post and it made me remember something. I watched someone play 2 HON characters at one time for a full game using 2 keyboards, but sharing control (he won all 3 games doing this). In SC2 nobody could do shit playing 2 games at one time unless chessing in both games. That is decent evidence that one game does require you to do more with your time than the other and that the skill ceiling is higher. You could argue all you wanted for days that LoL is harder, but I'm pretty sure someone could also play 2 characters on LoL and win at a high raiting. Now, using skill ceiling to put down another game is shitty because there is talent in all games. Even speed runners are doing something better than the rest when they hold world records. There is a difference of level of skill from the bottom to the top which makes all game's professional levels awesome to watch, or else Esports wouldn't be around. But I will get off of this topic for now I guess because I'm and "elitist" who is trying to "justify my game is better." On November 26 2012 10:23 SupLilSon wrote:On November 26 2012 09:36 The Final Boss wrote:On November 26 2012 08:15 SupLilSon wrote:On November 26 2012 07:49 The Final Boss wrote:
[quote]
This is what I'm trying to say in a more concise manner; stop using the term skill ceiling because it's practically meaningless. I don't think you fully understood what you were responding to. Noobskills was simply saying that because DOTA/LOL are team games, a single player's mechanics are going to have an overall lower direct impact on the games outcome compared to a 1v1 scenario like SC. Teamwork is not a skill, there is no mechanical component to team work that can be quantified. And while I agree that people throw around the term skill ceiling a bit too casually, it has not always misused in this thread. Yea, the skill ceiling is only theoretical but that does not mean it is not meaningful. There are numerous reasons to hypothesize that LoL's overall skill ceiling is much lower than DOTA... removal of denies, fog spots in LoL vs trees in DOTA, night/day mechanic in DOTA, item and hero differentiation, etc. Sure, it's the internet, people can always say "nuh uh" and deny but if you follow a logical thought process, LoL has a lower skill ceiling than DOTA. Edit: And the part about Destiny being decent at SC2 and terrible at LoL is contradictory to the rest of your post. You yourself assert that the 2 games require different skill sets... so you can't really correlate Destiny's transition to anything outside of his ability to learn new skills. European Football is more demanding motor mechanically and motor skill-wise than American Football, I don't think anyone would disagree. Yet it would be silly to think that Messi could join the NFL and have any impact whatsoever... or almost any other Football player for that matter. Why? The majority of their skills have no basis in the much simpler game of American Football... Such is the relationship between DOTA/LoL First off your comparison of European and American football is HILARIOUS, you clearly have no idea of how difficult American football is, how trying it is on the human body, and how deep the strategy of the game goes. I'm not going to rip on soccer because it's a sport that I played in high school and enjoy to play and watch, but calling American football a "much simpler game" is an incredibly stupid thing to say. If you're going to post, try not to take uninformed shots at something you have absolutely no idea about, it makes you look retarded. Secondly, I'm not trying to say that LoL is somehow harder or more difficult to play, I do not believe that. However, it requires different skills and to talk about the "skill ceiling" of it or any other game like StarCraft is ridiculous. As you have said, League requires a different set of skills, because it is not just based around a single person. Your comparison of European and American football is so blatantly retarded that I'm going to leave it behind, and here's a better comparison using sports: it would be like taking a UFC fighter or boxer and expecting them to transition perfectly into American football or rugby. In theory they might have the physical body to do so, but they don't have the correct experience of working in a team setting and the specifics of those sports to transition perfectly. In a complete oversimplification of the sport, two boxers just have to try to knock each other out, going after each others bodies is their victory condition; in football a lineman has to block for the ball carrier. Similarly, in StarCraft I'm just trying to beat my single opponent to death and he's trying to beat me to death; but in League I might be trying to keep an Olaf from getting to my AD Carry, while that Olaf's goal is to murder my ADC. In each, different people have different goals, in StarCraft/boxing you share a similar goal and in League the individual members of each team have different goals. And the comparison of DotA and LoL is a great example as far as why skill ceilings bare so little meaning. There are more things you have to do in DotA than there are in LoL. However, because there are less things to do in LoL, that means that there is more room to focus on and practice the nuances of League of Legends, which is fine because no matter how good you get at last hitting in League, you will never hit the ceiling, because you can improve upon other things in lane. It makes no sense to talk about skill ceilings in a game like StarCraft 2 or League because they are never going to be reached. TL;DR don't talk about games--whether it's LoL or football--that you don't know anything about, skill ceilings are borderline meaningless, stop bashing League of Legends as some "no-skill- game," and I'm done posting in this thread, thank you very much and have a nice night. ...? You don't have to resort to calling people retarded because you get frustrated... European Football is more demanding in areas of technical skill and motor skill than American Football, that's a fact, not a question. But I'm not going to get into that because it'd lead down a completely unrelated tangent on neuromuscular physiology and the workings of fine motor skills vs. gross motor skills. He is just one of those diehards who wants to defend LoL even when it doesn't need defending. Nobody even said it was a bad game, just that it required less skill to master. I wouldn't pay him too much attention. Let me get this straight "I watched someone play 2 HON characters at one time for a full game using 2 keyboards, but sharing control (he won all 3 games doing this). In SC2 nobody could do shit playing 2 games at one time unless chessing in both games." you are using this as evidence that there could be a metric for skill ceiling? Aside from the fact that you don't cite this and it is an anecdote, how does that have any relevant information that a metric could exist for skill ceiling. I did not call you an elitist, unless you are identifying yourself as one who fits that criteria of arguing a more complex game is a better one. Your entire post is just a series of assumptions without evidence. I'm saying it could be used as evidence, not as numerical evidence that dictates exactly how much you are able to do in one game vs another one. If one can play 2 games at one time in one game and not in another, doesn't that mean at least in some sense that you have more to do in the game that you couldn't play 2 of does it not? And doing more, isn't that a measurement in some fashion? There is no tangible way to numerically measure doing more though. Can' it be proven? No. Does it make sense? Yes. The same way that LoL seemingly takes more skill than COD. This is still all subjective though, because there is not a metric that is applied. More importantly though how is it relevant to anyone? If you can't see that it is somewhat a way to view that something requires less skill that is fine. I'm not really here to convince anyone of that. I think anyone who had no vested interest in either game would probably agree though. How is it relevant to an argument about skill ceilings? Depends if someone is willing to accept it is evidence and not fact. What I'm asking is if you think that a higher skill ceiling game some how affects us who play, but cannot even reach it? We are talking about things so unfathomably far from obtaining we cannot even imagine it.
Meh, the skill ceiling on the whole could never be reached anyway. It actually isn't even relevant to what people like. I personally don't give a shit about it, but i was relevant to the first guy who responded. I think people should just like what they like and enjoy it. I did like SC2 more when it was more aggressive, now I prefer MOBA because there is real action all the time even when just CSing
|
On November 26 2012 11:24 The Final Boss wrote:
I said I was done posting, but I guess I lied. I know that I am right, I know that DonKey_ is the only other sensible person here, and what I certainly know is that LoL is growing faster than any other game right now and it's going to go way farther than StarCraft 2 (which is becoming more and more stagnant) and DotA 2. You guys can keep your snobby elitist crap, I used to love watching StarCraft 2 and the community was great but it's really too bad that TL has become a bastion of bashing a game that is undoubtedly going to be more successful. It doesn't take "less skill," but rather different skills, and talking about a "perfect" game or skill ceilings serves no use. That's all, gg.
Things I learned from this post:
you are overconfident, you rely on a non sequitur (LoL's popularity) to make your point, you take things much too seriously and you apparently haven't been reading the last few posts because one thing we are NOT doing is bashing LoL.
Thanks for your valuable input
|
On November 26 2012 11:24 The Final Boss wrote:
I said I was done posting, but I guess I lied. I know that I am right, I know that DonKey_ is the only other sensible person here, and what I certainly know is that LoL is growing faster than any other game right now and it's going to go way farther than StarCraft 2 (which is becoming more and more stagnant) and DotA 2. You guys can keep your snobby elitist crap, I used to love watching StarCraft 2 and the community was great but it's really too bad that TL has become a bastion of bashing a game that is undoubtedly going to be more successful. It doesn't take "less skill," but rather different skills, and talking about a "perfect" game or skill ceilings serves no use. That's all, gg.
Things that tell me you're into LoL so much that if I said LoL was not a chesse burger you would say it was in fact a cheese burger.
You we can keep our high tea and SC2 matches... lol elitist
Community was trash in beta.
You used to love to watch it, but somehow the community made the games less appealing to you lol.
It does take far less skill. Arguing about a game that takes less skill does in fact serve no use.
|
can a mod PLEASE clear up the RETARDED FUCKING CONVERSATION ABOUT LOL. IM SO FUCKING SICK OF THIS SHIT BEING BUMPED By RETARDS
User was warned for this post
|
Northern Ireland25396 Posts
On November 26 2012 11:24 The Final Boss wrote:
I said I was done posting, but I guess I lied. I know that I am right, I know that DonKey_ is the only other sensible person here, and what I certainly know is that LoL is growing faster than any other game right now and it's going to go way farther than StarCraft 2 (which is becoming more and more stagnant) and DotA 2. You guys can keep your snobby elitist crap, I used to love watching StarCraft 2 and the community was great but it's really too bad that TL has become a bastion of bashing a game that is undoubtedly going to be more successful. It doesn't take "less skill," but rather different skills, and talking about a "perfect" game or skill ceilings serves no use. That's all, gg.
You don't have to be a snobby elitist to dislike LoL. A lot of the reaction here is in part to LoL being a seemingly omnipresent point of discussion, even in the SC2 sections. Some people go out of their way to bash the game as a reaction to this, but personally feel each to his own. That said I am fucking, 100% sick of LoL talk in every other thread when we should be talking about SC2 and other games that are you know, actually the point of TL. That or whining 'SC2 is stagnant every game is boring' in a world where just last week we had Grubby's comebacks, Sting living on a knife edge and bloody Gumiho playing some of the most fun to watch Starcraft 2 I've seen in ages.
If you don't like SC2, (not you personally but a general plea to posters) stop making the whole forum have to sit and stew in your disillusion with a game you are not obligated to play. You can be an active TLer on many other areas of this fine site, stop with this pointless, inter-game pissing contest, the 'facts' about either game being harder/easier that are actually subjective interpretations all of that really. Incredibly obnoxious
I mean Inori has a retirement thread for 24 pages and going because LoL is involved, it's a shame perhaps he would have delayed quitting if people paid him any kind of attention when he was actually playing SC2.
|
On November 26 2012 12:22 Wombat_NI wrote:Show nested quote +On November 26 2012 11:24 The Final Boss wrote:
I said I was done posting, but I guess I lied. I know that I am right, I know that DonKey_ is the only other sensible person here, and what I certainly know is that LoL is growing faster than any other game right now and it's going to go way farther than StarCraft 2 (which is becoming more and more stagnant) and DotA 2. You guys can keep your snobby elitist crap, I used to love watching StarCraft 2 and the community was great but it's really too bad that TL has become a bastion of bashing a game that is undoubtedly going to be more successful. It doesn't take "less skill," but rather different skills, and talking about a "perfect" game or skill ceilings serves no use. That's all, gg. You don't have to be a snobby elitist to dislike LoL. A lot of the reaction here is in part to LoL being a seemingly omnipresent point of discussion, even in the SC2 sections. Some people go out of their way to bash the game as a reaction to this, but personally feel each to his own. That said I am fucking, 100% sick of LoL talk in every other thread when we should be talking about SC2 and other games that are you know, actually the point of TL. That or whining 'SC2 is stagnant every game is boring' in a world where just last week we had Grubby's comebacks, Sting living on a knife edge and bloody Gumiho playing some of the most fun to watch Starcraft 2 I've seen in ages. If you don't like SC2, (not you personally but a general plea to posters) stop making the whole forum have to sit and stew in your disillusion with a game you are not obligated to play. You can be an active TLer on many other areas of this fine site, stop with this pointless, inter-game pissing contest, the 'facts' about either game being harder/easier that are actually subjective interpretations all of that really. Incredibly obnoxious I mean Inori has a retirement thread for 24 pages and going because LoL is involved, it's a shame perhaps he would have delayed quitting if people paid him any kind of attention when he was actually playing SC2.
This is the best post in the thread, and I feel kind of stupid for joining the LoL discussion after reading it. Good on you, sir.
|
On November 23 2012 18:58 MrMercuG wrote:Show nested quote +On November 23 2012 18:24 blade55555 wrote:On November 23 2012 18:20 JonIrenicus wrote:
He did the best choice. . He would be a fool not to go full time on lol.
Sc2 is fucked up, and LoL is constantly growing.
This is the why no one can criticize also Destiny for the choice he made. Well duh, when you have no results in over a year yeah you should switch games. It's why destiny switched, he hasn't had any good results in sc2 like ever (I am not counting show matches/online tournaments), every pro/semi pro that has retired has not had results in a year +. Still hilarious how people say this means sc2 is dying because pros who don't have results in a year retire lol. Good luck to inori! To be fair CoCa and Puzzle were quite good at this game, lol.
Really? I thought puzzle was such a talented SC2 player, Slayers ruine him . Hope he's doing well in LOL
Anyway, do you know what team Puzzle joined in LOL league?
|
Not meaning to be incendiary.. but fuck LoL. Stop stealing actually talented progamers and making them compete in your farce of an e-sport. With all due respect...
|
What the fuck is this thread still open for? It stopped being about Inori or retirement about 20 pages ago...
+ Show Spoiler +On November 26 2012 12:22 Wombat_NI wrote:Show nested quote +On November 26 2012 11:24 The Final Boss wrote:
I said I was done posting, but I guess I lied. I know that I am right, I know that DonKey_ is the only other sensible person here, and what I certainly know is that LoL is growing faster than any other game right now and it's going to go way farther than StarCraft 2 (which is becoming more and more stagnant) and DotA 2. You guys can keep your snobby elitist crap, I used to love watching StarCraft 2 and the community was great but it's really too bad that TL has become a bastion of bashing a game that is undoubtedly going to be more successful. It doesn't take "less skill," but rather different skills, and talking about a "perfect" game or skill ceilings serves no use. That's all, gg. You don't have to be a snobby elitist to dislike LoL. A lot of the reaction here is in part to LoL being a seemingly omnipresent point of discussion, even in the SC2 sections. Some people go out of their way to bash the game as a reaction to this, but personally feel each to his own. That said I am fucking, 100% sick of LoL talk in every other thread when we should be talking about SC2 and other games that are you know, actually the point of TL. That or whining 'SC2 is stagnant every game is boring' in a world where just last week we had Grubby's comebacks, Sting living on a knife edge and bloody Gumiho playing some of the most fun to watch Starcraft 2 I've seen in ages. If you don't like SC2, (not you personally but a general plea to posters) stop making the whole forum have to sit and stew in your disillusion with a game you are not obligated to play. You can be an active TLer on many other areas of this fine site, stop with this pointless, inter-game pissing contest, the 'facts' about either game being harder/easier that are actually subjective interpretations all of that really. Incredibly obnoxious I mean Inori has a retirement thread for 24 pages and going because LoL is involved, it's a shame perhaps he would have delayed quitting if people paid him any kind of attention when he was actually playing SC2.
Hit the nail on the head Wombat..
|
Even if the game isnt harder there are ways in which it is harder for an individual talent to break out. You can't just get good alone in your basement and show up and win a tournament. You need to find yourself 5 other individuals who are as dedicated and talented as you are. The current top NA/EU teams are very selective and reluctant to accept newcomers.
|
On November 26 2012 12:22 Wombat_NI wrote:Show nested quote +On November 26 2012 11:24 The Final Boss wrote:
I said I was done posting, but I guess I lied. I know that I am right, I know that DonKey_ is the only other sensible person here, and what I certainly know is that LoL is growing faster than any other game right now and it's going to go way farther than StarCraft 2 (which is becoming more and more stagnant) and DotA 2. You guys can keep your snobby elitist crap, I used to love watching StarCraft 2 and the community was great but it's really too bad that TL has become a bastion of bashing a game that is undoubtedly going to be more successful. It doesn't take "less skill," but rather different skills, and talking about a "perfect" game or skill ceilings serves no use. That's all, gg. You don't have to be a snobby elitist to dislike LoL. A lot of the reaction here is in part to LoL being a seemingly omnipresent point of discussion, even in the SC2 sections. Some people go out of their way to bash the game as a reaction to this, but personally feel each to his own. That said I am fucking, 100% sick of LoL talk in every other thread when we should be talking about SC2 and other games that are you know, actually the point of TL.
This is 100% of the reason why forums add new sections. If TL insists on putting its eggs in the DotA2 basket then LoL will continue to be discussed in random places. Period.
|
I always enjoyed Inori's play back in the day my most memorable game was him vs Haypro from the TL Map making contest 
Best of luck in whatever you do inori
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
