Starcraft 2 Science: Skillcraft Results - Page 6

On March 07 2013 17:45 Mongolbonjwa wrote:
One thing I have always been thinking, is that people often talk about multitasking in starcraft. But actually there is no real multitasking in starcraft, it is not even possible. All actions are in sequences, they do not happen simultaneously. What people think is multitasking, is actually just switching fast between different actions.

In contrary, there is real multitasking in fighter pilot training and actually flying the jet plane, and it is far more difficult than starcrafts "multitasking" which is not even real multitasking. So if you wanna study multitasking, fighter pilots and their training programs are something that should be checked. Even the qualifiers for pilot training programs are very difficult. Flying jets also requires great deal of emergency management skills, which again is far more demanding than playing starcraft. Specially when considered that fighter pilots need to learn to deal with high G-forces and they have to study lots of theory of physics of flying and how the jet itself works, learning to fly jet planes is harder than starcraft.

On April 04 2013 12:35 reo_b wrote:


Well, you've sucked me in, had to register an account.

You keep putting this study down in multiple posts with baseless and extraneous criticisms. Can I ask, what are your qualifications?

Humans are inherently incapable of "high level" multi-tasking. We're similar to a single core processor, rapidly switching between different tasks. Our "sensors" - feel, sight, hearing, etc. - provide "interrupts" (in the computer science sense) that signal our brains' higher-level areas to refocus on a new task. Much like a computer switching tasks, this mental task switching incurs overhead (thus it is more efficient for humans to finish single tasks to completion than it is to hop between several tasks).

Flying a jet is no more "multi-tasking" than Starcraft is. In fact, there is much less task-switching in flying a plane. When you're in an emergency situation piloting a plane, your entire attention is on the single situation at hand. You are flying the plane, based on input from a number of your senses. To add an extra layer of "multi-tasking" to flying a plane, you could add random math problems (on top of an emergency situation) that need to be solved on an interval to prevent the controls from locking out. This would be kind of like attending to worker macro during an intense battle.

Before you ask: Yes, I fly planes. Yes, I play Starcraft.

On April 04 2013 12:35 reo_b wrote:


Well, you've sucked me in, had to register an account.

You keep putting this study down in multiple posts with baseless and extraneous criticisms. Can I ask, what are your qualifications?

Humans are inherently incapable of "high level" multi-tasking. We're similar to a single core processor, rapidly switching between different tasks. Our "sensors" - feel, sight, hearing, etc. - provide "interrupts" (in the computer science sense) that signal our brains' higher-level areas to refocus on a new task. Much like a computer switching tasks, this mental task switching incurs overhead (thus it is more efficient for humans to finish single tasks to completion than it is to hop between several tasks).

Flying a jet is no more "multi-tasking" than Starcraft is. In fact, there is much less task-switching in flying a plane. When you're in an emergency situation piloting a plane, your entire attention is on the single situation at hand. You are flying the plane, based on input from a number of your senses. To add an extra layer of "multi-tasking" to flying a plane, you could add random math problems (on top of an emergency situation) that need to be solved on an interval to prevent the controls from locking out. This would be kind of like attending to worker macro during an intense battle.

Before you ask: Yes, I fly planes. Yes, I play Starcraft.

On May 18 2013 02:44 dsjoerg wrote:
Has the paper been accepted / published yet? Inquiring minds must know!

On May 19 2013 04:22 Evangelist wrote:
What's interesting about Starcraft 2 is that it is one of the few real time played games which has its statistical record keeping hard coded/built into the game rules rather than externally recorded. This makes it a prime candidate for an analysis of stress. As an example, the predisposition to certain personality types to "panic" in game through rapid action movement, a suddenly drop in useful APM upon an engagement and so on.

I look forward to seeing the results of this.

On April 13 2013 03:07 m0ck wrote:
I wonder if you'll be doing more research with a focus on the highest echelon of players in the future? From my perspective, the differences between players from the masters level and up are very interesting. Have you considered attempting to compare the interactive data from the replays with more direct perceptual data? I'm thinking something akin to eye-tracking. As far as I can tell, the data from a replay will not easily allow you to measure a players awareness of the mini-map, for instance.

On May 19 2013 04:22 Evangelist wrote:
What's interesting about Starcraft 2 is that it is one of the few real time played games which has its statistical record keeping hard coded/built into the game rules rather than externally recorded. This makes it a prime candidate for an analysis of stress. As an example, the predisposition to certain personality types to "panic" in game through rapid action movement, a suddenly drop in useful APM upon an engagement and so on.

I look forward to seeing the results of this.

On April 04 2013 12:35 reo_b wrote:


Well, you've sucked me in, had to register an account.

You keep putting this study down in multiple posts with baseless and extraneous criticisms. Can I ask, what are your qualifications?

Humans are inherently incapable of "high level" multi-tasking. We're similar to a single core processor, rapidly switching between different tasks. Our "sensors" - feel, sight, hearing, etc. - provide "interrupts" (in the computer science sense) that signal our brains' higher-level areas to refocus on a new task. Much like a computer switching tasks, this mental task switching incurs overhead (thus it is more efficient for humans to finish single tasks to completion than it is to hop between several tasks).

Flying a jet is no more "multi-tasking" than Starcraft is. In fact, there is much less task-switching in flying a plane. When you're in an emergency situation piloting a plane, your entire attention is on the single situation at hand. You are flying the plane, based on input from a number of your senses. To add an extra layer of "multi-tasking" to flying a plane, you could add random math problems (on top of an emergency situation) that need to be solved on an interval to prevent the controls from locking out. This would be kind of like attending to worker macro during an intense battle.

Before you ask: Yes, I fly planes. Yes, I play Starcraft.

On May 22 2013 04:24 CrushDog5 wrote:


We were asked to do some revisions to the manuscript, which we did, and just sent it in today.

We're hoping the editor just accepts it as is without sending it back out to reviewers. If that happens, it will be maybe 3 weeks till it's available online. We submitted to an open access journal, so everyone can just download the paper without needing to be affiliated to a university or pay anything.

If they send it out to reviewers again add 3 weeks.

If the editor goes insane and rejects this revision add 6 months. I don't think that will happen though.