|
On February 08 2010 04:56 moopie wrote:Show nested quote +On February 07 2010 22:28 Sad[Panda] wrote:I On February 07 2010 16:10 NSANE.hydra wrote:On February 07 2010 16:00 PiePie wrote:On February 07 2010 15:56 NSANE.hydra wrote:On February 07 2010 15:48 moopie wrote:On February 07 2010 15:36 Holgerius wrote:On February 07 2010 15:34 Itachii wrote:On February 07 2010 15:33 Holgerius wrote: Hyvaa outplayed JD, holy fuck. :O outplay my ass, jd passed his lings and could easily enter main with all of them, hyvva would be forced to move back.but instead jd decidecs to chase his lings -_- Decision making is a part of playing SC you know? Yes, and hyvaa did win, but he didn't "outplay" jd. jd outplayed himself. :/ This. Jaedong's bad decision killed him, not any brilliant play on hyvaa's part. JD can't get outplayed by others, he always outplays himself. When people make bad choices it's not called outplayed /sarcasm. Look what im trying to say is even if Hyvaa didn't do anything stellar, he still made better choices than JD as simple as it is, thus outplayed (not stellar outplayed but outplayed none the less) We just have different definitions of outplayed. Yes, hyvaa deserved the win because he played more solidly than JD, but I don't consider it outplaying unless he was actively outsmarting JD. It's just a matter of opinion on what constitutes "outplaying". There's really no point in arguing anymore, I just would rather this not be called "fanboyism", because I would use the same standard with any other player... You do realize how stupid this sounds Hyvaa played more solid than jaedong but didn't out play him... so according to this logic a player who wins a game using great mechanics and standard gameplay didn't outplay his opponent just because he didn't use anything clever or "Outsmart" his opponent don't get me wrong I love jaedong as much as the next Oz (Jaedong) fanboy but this just sounds so contradicting that its rediculous t.t This comes to a matter of definition (and thus the disagreement), but look at it this way: Some people consider the term 'outplayed' to mean the same (or similar) as 'outsmarted'. In SC, that would happen when a player sees what his opponent is doing and completely counters that build, thus dominating the match. JD vs Kal in MSL semi's was like that, and as a Kal fan it was quite sad to see, but he was outplayed on every level, his builds entirely countered, and was made to look like a noob. Now in this match, both players played pretty standard zvz, and they both commited into an all-or-nothing ling runby. A few seconds later, JD changed his mind (for whatever reason) and turned his lings around, spire went down for him, hyvaa kept his base and the rest is history. Now, was hyvaa outsmarting him? I wouldn't say so, because it wasn't him 'reacting' to JD's build, he sent his lings to attack JD's main, and JD sent his lings to attack hyvaa's main. After that, it was JD himself that made the decision/mistake and lost the game. The reason I don't consider the term 'outplayed' to simply mean 'played better' (which includes not making as many mistakes or as critical) is because that is already stated by who won the match. if player A wins over player B, he played better than him (either by outplaying him, or by player B making a blunder, by luck, etc etc). Simply stating that every match that a player wins he outplayed his opponent is redundant.
Personally I think that this would make more sense if someone said hyvaa had outclassed jaedong because redundant or not jaedong made a mistake and hyvaa played more solidly than jaedong and won either way and outplayed them I just don't understand how someone can say hyvaa played more soldily but didn't outplay him. Outsmart and Outplay are two different words and should stay that way imo otherwise we wouldn't need to use them both...
|
In this scenario, what you're saying is that outplay means "to win without a great advantage in build order." Jaedong blundered in the game. Hyvaa took advantage of that enormous blunder and won. That's just an example of winning. Whenever a person wins without it being mostly luck, they certainly "outplayed" their opponent. But if to outplay is to mean something more, you can't simply take that route. People make mistakes in games all the time, large and small. These give corresponding disadvantages. Simply seeing an error and exploiting it is not enough to warrant the word "outplay." I propose that we take outplay to mean that you actively create opportunities for your opponent to make an error, that you force an error, or that you anticipate what error your opponent will make before he makes it. That way, you are presumably thinking one step ahead of your opponent, not simply responding to his mistakes.
By the way...outsmart and outplay are different words, yes. But outplaying occurs in games, outsmarting occurs everywhere. They could easily be the same in the context of Starcraft.
|
Ecrilon said it perfectly. That's what I've been trying to say, but I'm not exactly that eloquent.
|
On February 08 2010 10:38 Ecrilon wrote: In this scenario, what you're saying is that outplay means "to win without a great advantage in build order." Jaedong blundered in the game. Hyvaa took advantage of that enormous blunder and won. That's just an example of winning. Whenever a person wins without it being mostly luck, they certainly "outplayed" their opponent. But if to outplay is to mean something more, you can't simply take that route. People make mistakes in games all the time, large and small. These give corresponding disadvantages. Simply seeing an error and exploiting it is not enough to warrant the word "outplay." I propose that we take outplay to mean that you actively create opportunities for your opponent to make an error, that you force an error, or that you anticipate what error your opponent will make before he makes it. That way, you are presumably thinking one step ahead of your opponent, not simply responding to his mistakes.
By the way...outsmart and outplay are different words, yes. But outplaying occurs in games, outsmarting occurs everywhere. They could easily be the same in the context of Starcraft.
Well explained this way it makes more sense what your trying to get across I just don't agree with you when you say that seeing a blunder and exploiting it isn't enough to be outplayed but that's all personal opinion thanks for clearing it up a little bit ^^; I just interpretted what they were saying as outsmarting someone is essentially outplaying them
Edit: and yes I know outplayed and outsmarted can go hand in hand or be used simultaneously in starcraft I didn't say anything about that because I figured that was inferred or assumed I just wanted to get the point across that outsmarting and outplaying are 2 different ideals
|
People discussing whether a player got "outplayed" or "outsmarted" or just "defeated". It has to be the case that Jaedong lost a game...
Every freaking time the same stuff...
Anyway, good job estro. A bit surprised that hyvaa managed to take down Jaedong but that's SC. Anything can happen.
|
On February 08 2010 12:32 Lebesgue wrote: People discussing whether a player got "outplayed" or "outsmarted" or just "defeated". It has to be the case that Jaedong lost a game...
Every freaking time the same stuff...
Anyway, good job estro. A bit surprised that hyvaa managed to take down Jaedong but that's ZvZ. Anything can happen.
Fixed that for ya.
Btw... go estro!
|
I have just watched the games, pretty clear that Jeadong got outplayed here, finally a good performance by hyvaa
|
|
|
|