Sounds like the OP got 0wned and got butthurt about it.
truth.
"defense mechanism"
....is what that extremely incoherent original post is all about. its about the worst opener post i've seen on this site, and that's really saying something
...snip....
Everyone else here (well, besides Banquetto and one other who are obviously a childish trolls spewing 1-line insults in fail attempts to be witty) seems to clearly understand the topic being discussed and many here actually follow my logic, however complex it may seem to you.
Typically incoherent posts don't get replied to because no one understands them. This thread has thousands of views and quite a lot of posts and attention. This would not be so if people did not understand the OP.
you thinks posts need to be coherent in order to get responses? lol
also, an at least large portion (if not the majority) of people here are arguing AGAINST you, and yet your defense mechanism has you claiming that its just me and one other guy. lol say what you want to make yourself feel good. thats the whole issue here. its why you refuse to acknowledge skills. 8) you're so sore about losing in games, that you have to try to explain it away to save your ego.
First, I'd drop the whole "your defense mechanism" thing as you're not a psychologist. I actually have a degree in the field of psychology, and find it quite humorous when young kids or young adults pretend to know what a defense mechanism is.
Second, I am not claiming you and TWO other people are against me. I am fully aware of those against me and for me. You and two other people are TROLLING me. Huge difference.
I would stop the act for a second if I were you, and realize that you are not against me. Neither is the person you quoted. People who are against others disagree with reason, logic, and communication. All you and this other guy have done is throw in a troll line to insult me in a very childish and attention-seeking manner.
Third, consider yourself now placed on ignore. Your first post was an insult without any argument. Your second post was an arrogant laugh, with statements so illogical and irrational, that I can only assume you are either trolling me or have some kind of delusion when reading my posts.
It's simply amazing that I, someone who top charts quickly in competitive gaming in all genres and typically wins or loses with a very high score, somehow "is so sore about losing in games" that I have to "try to explain it away to save my ego" using "my defense mechanism" (as if there is only one?) lol.
Actually on second thought, your posts are so funny to laugh at, I actually think I'll keep you off ignore and continue to respond to your posts
So where'd you get your degree in psychology? I got mine from Southern Nazarene University. I actually look foward to your reply, as this is beginning to get fun thanks to my forum Player Skill!
I have to agree with this, At both the very entry levels and again at the very top levels in almost any MMO, It's more about skill than anything else since going into the fights, all things are pretty equal.
Originally posted by GeeTeeEffOh
I really don't see this as an "OR" statement. It's "AND" all the way.
Forgot to take your pills?
Anyways, as you correctly point out, you have it, people like you have successfully cryed for years until everything that would disrupt your gaming experience was removed, loosing a part of the players and making the games a joke complexity-wise in the process.
Good job!
So what do you still have a effing problem with? Still not satisfied? Not skilled enough to be able to be "top-level gamer"? Do we remove levels, gear and talents next?
Flame on!
Maybe if you pulled your head out of your nerd rage for a minute, you might not go on with senesless ramblings, and be able to form something coherant.
It's not my fault you failed at games like WoW (lol) and feel the need to burn after anyone who has accepted those progression models.
Sorry, I don't mind progression, I don't mind being able to say that I worked with 19 other people to compelte something and walk out with something to show for it.
It shows the ability to work well with others. And based on your post, I can see clearly why you have failed at that.
Or was it more likely that in your fit of nerd rage you started jumping to senseless conclusions.
Sounds like the OP got 0wned and got butthurt about it.
truth.
"defense mechanism"
....is what that extremely incoherent original post is all about. its about the worst opener post i've seen on this site, and that's really saying something
...snip....
Everyone else here (well, besides Banquetto and one other who are obviously a childish trolls spewing 1-line insults in fail attempts to be witty) seems to clearly understand the topic being discussed and many here actually follow my logic, however complex it may seem to you.
Typically incoherent posts don't get replied to because no one understands them. This thread has thousands of views and quite a lot of posts and attention. This would not be so if people did not understand the OP.
you thinks posts need to be coherent in order to get responses? lol
also, an at least large portion (if not the majority) of people here are arguing AGAINST you, and yet your defense mechanism has you claiming that its just me and one other guy. lol say what you want to make yourself feel good. thats the whole issue here. its why you refuse to acknowledge skills. 8) you're so sore about losing in games, that you have to try to explain it away to save your ego.
Oh closer inspection, I see you are a 42 year old from TN and not a young kid or young adult fresh out of a Psych 101 course.
I actually now realize that you are probably not trolling me and actually believe what you are saying, leaving me only to believe you might have a few issues that I should not take advantage of by talking to you while laughing at your posts due to the irrational trolling and asinine assumptions within.
My apologies, I actually feel bad laughing at someone who may have a real disability or projection issues, and that isn't something I want to partake in. Sorry, I will do you a favor and place you on ignore so that I will not take advantage of you. I was really looking forward to your reply though but treating others who have issues with respect is more important to me (based on my career field) than the potential fun and hilarity that could ensue by allowing myself to be an easy target for them to respond to.
the fact you put me on (or were about to) an ignore list in the first place pretty much proves the defense mechanism theory to hold water. a lot of people have aggravated me on this forum, but i haven't for a second considered blocking them out so that i didn't have to see their dissention.
pardon me for not wanting to spend 10+ minutes writing you a novel, when a few sentences gets the idea across. the heart of the matter here is really very simple. its your defense mechanism thats requiring you to build up these monumental posts in order to try avoid the simple truth.
you can't explain it away. no matter how many pages you write.
and your psych degree means next to nothing (if even true). it means you went to school and ticked off the boxes. that's about it. my father had one (just one example of several people i know) and he has major psychological problems.
Sounds like the OP got 0wned and got butthurt about it.
truth.
"defense mechanism"
....is what that extremely incoherent original post is all about. its about the worst opener post i've seen on this site, and that's really saying something
...snip....
Everyone else here (well, besides Banquetto and one other who are obviously a childish trolls spewing 1-line insults in fail attempts to be witty) seems to clearly understand the topic being discussed and many here actually follow my logic, however complex it may seem to you.
Typically incoherent posts don't get replied to because no one understands them. This thread has thousands of views and quite a lot of posts and attention. This would not be so if people did not understand the OP.
you thinks posts need to be coherent in order to get responses? lol
also, an at least large portion (if not the majority) of people here are arguing AGAINST you, and yet your defense mechanism has you claiming that its just me and one other guy. lol say what you want to make yourself feel good. thats the whole issue here. its why you refuse to acknowledge skills. 8) you're so sore about losing in games, that you have to try to explain it away to save your ego.
Did it ever occur to you the possibility that the reason someone finds "Pro Play" to be a joke is because they are skilled at games as well and understand what makes a player "Pro"?
When I began looking into "Pro Players" and what made them Pro, I was actually heart brokenly disappointed. I discovered that it wasn't about "Player Skill" or what I felt made me or other people great players. No...it was about min/max exploitation of game mechanics through Long Term Study, creating strategies based off of balance in the game. Disappointing but it was all about "Gaming the System".
I always dreamed it was about fast, accurate twitch reflex aiming and instinctual tactics requiring mental reflexes. Instead, it's mostly about developing specific strategies, constant memory management of game mechanics, and exploiting balance.
Pro Players of QUAKE do not excel at being the fastest headshotter in the universe or the quickest thinking tactician. They excel at map control, memory management, game knowledge, and exploitation of other's mistakes of memory management and game knowledge. Listen to the videos and hear them as they count down their mental timers and explain why they lost was entirely because of a single deny of a crucial map choke point, power-up, etc. The last one I watched literally said, "Whenever he got that power-up, it didnt matter what I did, he won." because the power-up made his armor high enough to where they could shoot at each other and it was 100% guaranteed that he'd lose bc the character, not the player, was significantly better. It's all simple mathematics and exploitation of mathematics.
In fact it was quite sad for me to see that a lot of Pro Players spam bullet streams the milli-second they turn a corner because they assume, based on experience and knowledge, the player will be there. When they do it so predictably that they often fire at nothing because they werent there, I realize that it isnt about quick reflexes, it's about predicting the enemy based on consistent strategies based entirely on specific min/max features (like contrlolling a power-up or denying extra bonuses) based on experience playing the specific game.
This disappointment over what made "Pro" players Pro, is also what made me realize why I was so good at games when I play them. It's not even that I naturally exploit the metagame and quickly go online to learn the strategies that min/max exploit the mathematics of the game to give me an advantage. I already knew I did that.
What I realized is that the reason I got so many kills or do so well in games is because I know how to form superior strategies and focus on map control over anything else. Map Control is far far greater than accuracy, headshots, etc. I'm actually not much of a headshot person unless I'm sniping.
By Map Control, I include even those moments when you simply step backwards to increase the range between you and the enemy, predicting which door they will enter through (or putting the cursor between the two) and knowing that based on that range alone, you will win the skirmish even if they are better players than you, because the game advantage and physics / mathematics are in your favor significantly.
Controlling your opponent is more important than aiming at them. Coincidentally, this made me an even better player now that I know to focus on these strategies as opposed to trying to improve my aim or reflexes. Quite the opposite of your proposed "sore loser" version of myself who sucks at video games and uses defend mechanisms to protect my fragile ego and apparent...low self esteem? Trolololool...
Did it ever occur to you the possibility that the reason someone finds "Pro Play" to be a joke is because they are skilled at games as well and understand what makes a player "Pro"?
When I began looking into "Pro Players" and what made them Pro, I was actually heart brokenly disappointed. I discovered that it wasn't about "Player Skill" or what I felt made me or other people great players. No...it was about min/max exploitation of game mechanics through Long Term Study, creating strategies based off of balance in the game. Disappointing but it was all about "Gaming the System".
I always dreamed it was about fast, accurate twitch reflex aiming and instinctual tactics requiring mental reflexes. Instead, it's mostly about developing specific strategies, constant memory management of game mechanics, and exploiting balance.
Pro Players of QUAKE do not excel at being the fastest headshotter in the universe or the quickest thinking tactician. They excel at map control, memory management, game knowledge, and exploitation of other's mistakes of memory management and game knowledge. Listen to the videos and hear them as they count down their mental timers and explain why they lost was entirely because of a single deny of a crucial map choke point, power-up, etc. The last one I watched literally said, "Whenever he got that power-up, it didnt matter what I did, he won." because the power-up made his armor high enough to where they could shoot at each other and it was 100% guaranteed that he'd lose bc the character, not the player, was significantly better. It's all simple mathematics and exploitation of mathematics.
In fact it was quite sad for me to see that a lot of Pro Players spam bullet streams the milli-second they turn a corner because they assume, based on experience and knowledge, the player will be there. When they do it so predictably that they often fire at nothing because they werent there, I realize that it isnt about quick reflexes, it's about predicting the enemy based on consistent strategies based entirely on specific min/max features (like contrlolling a power-up or denying extra bonuses) based on experience playing the specific game.
i'll give you credit that this post/tangent is pretty coherent. and if thats all you said in this thread i'd be largely agreeing with you.
while i think you downplay skills too much, there's definitely an element of truth to the fact that "gaming the system" (i don't think thats the best way to put it, since there's really no other way to play a game, other than by its own rules and mechanics) can be alot more important than spur-of-the-moment skills/strategies (assuming they aren't BAD).
i think FPS tournaments should be held on a series of randomly generated maps because of this. as an example in quake 2, on custom/player-made maps, i can often mop the floor with people who mop the floor with me, when we play on standard maps (that people have been playing for 15 years). i refuse to play those same maps over and over ad nauseum, because i play for fun, and don't really care where i stand on a leaderboard. but they have particular maps down to a science. but when they have to think on their feet, many of them can't really do it. they are map specialists, taking advantage of sheer experience/knowledge for specific maps.
the fact you put me on (or were about to) an ignore list in the first place pretty much proves the defense mechanism theory to hold water. a lot of people have aggravated me on this forum, but i haven't for a second considered blocking them out so that i didn't have to see their dissention.
pardon me for not wanting to spend 10+ minutes writing you a novel, when a few sentences gets the idea across. the heart of the matter here is really very simple. its your defense mechanism thats requiring you to build up these monumental posts in order to try avoid the simple truth.
you can't explain it away. no matter how many pages you write.
and your psych degree means next to nothing (if even true). it means you went to school and ticked off the boxes. that's about it. my father had one (just one example of several people i know) and he has major psychological problems.
I don't think you understand why I am placing you on ignore...
I am doing so to protect you and do the right thing. Keeping you off ignore will only encourage you to reply more often to me. Each reply you make is exttremely enjoyable to me. They are filled with irrational assumptions, pointless trolling, and possible (hilarious) projection.
A few sentences can get an idea across. Unfortunately, you are getting no idea across by childishly insulting others. Saying "Trololol this guy is incoherent and so dumb!" is not an argument. I am sorry if you think it resembles any form of intellectual discourse.
Brushing off my psychology degree while proving you are uneducated on what you are name-dropping (Defense Mechanism, Ego, Psychological Problems, etc.) only goes to encourage me to ignore you for your own protection before I start sharing your posts with my friends for additional laughter.
I would beg to differ that my degree means "next to nothing" as it educated me to NOT do exactly what you're doing. Labeling people irrationally with disorders without clear evidence. It, along with my career experience, have taught me to identify people with potential disorders or problems with denial, projection, arrogance, etc.
My final words to you are this: I never once denied or even discussed that I do or don't have "major psychological problems". The reason I stated my degree (and the lack of yours) had nothing to do with proving my own sanity or your delusions. For those of us who base our view entirely in reality, it is quite obvious that the reason I stated my degree (and the lack of yours) is excluslively based on your name-dropping of commonly used phrases of (not even) pop-psychology. Something less educated than what you might find in a teeny bopper magazine's psych stereotypes.
I believe the term "name-dropping" is correct, as it is quite clear you do not know what you are talking about. Not just because of the clear lack of education in psychology, but the simple fact you use pop-terms in a way that educated people (in the field of psychology) find off.
I have, however, had experience with people similar in action before. Those who often, without any real evidence, void of logical conclusions to the assertion, claim others are [insert pop terms] while displaying a clear lack of understanding of said terms (and why a real psychologist would never say it like that, or use those terms, can be symptoms of one of many psychological issues, problems, or even a disorder. Especially when consistent through the person's communication, when they aren't even using pop terms. You work long enough with people who have disorders and mental defects and you can begin to readily identify the POSSIBILITY.
My final paragraph being: Note that us professionals only talk about "possibilities" and do not actually label people with ultimate certainty with a 100% accurate diagnosis with limited information. Quite the opposite of what you just did--- labeling me with specific terms, specific conditions, in a very specific way, with 100% confidence while provided with very little information about me. Us professionals are fully ready to tell ourselves the person we are identifying as POSSIBLY mental is in fact entirely plausible to be a perfectly healthy person-- just an odd one, or more realistically: an obvious troll trolling to troll.
If you practice you will get good, for the most part, although some people will never get any better than a certain level. I don't think's a comment on their intelligence or value as a person, it's just that some people have talents that lie else where.
There are some people who put in ALOT of time in mmos and it makes the majority of us look rather average. Then there are the people that cheat. Lot of people cheat, they have no compunction about it. So the typical player is far removed from the so called 'elite' player by prior experience, social contacts, long hours practicing and occasionally exploits and cheats.
Mmos are not really a ruler to measure one's worth or anything. It's just a pass time.
the fact you put me on (or were about to) an ignore list in the first place pretty much proves the defense mechanism theory to hold water. a lot of people have aggravated me on this forum, but i haven't for a second considered blocking them out so that i didn't have to see their dissention.
pardon me for not wanting to spend 10+ minutes writing you a novel, when a few sentences gets the idea across. the heart of the matter here is really very simple. its your defense mechanism thats requiring you to build up these monumental posts in order to try avoid the simple truth.
you can't explain it away. no matter how many pages you write.
and your psych degree means next to nothing (if even true). it means you went to school and ticked off the boxes. that's about it. my father had one (just one example of several people i know) and he has major psychological problems.
...snip...
Brushing off my psychology degree while proving you are uneducated on what you are name-dropping (Defense Mechanism, Ego, Psychological Problems, etc.) only goes to encourage me to ignore you for your own protection before I start sharing your posts with my friends for additional laughter.
...snip....
Us professionals are fully ready to tell ourselves the person we are identifying as POSSIBLY mental is in fact entirely plausible to be a perfectly healthy person-- just an odd one, or more realistically: an obvious troll trolling to troll.
the simple single word EGO is "name dropping"? 8)
this whole exchange is pretty ironic as these huge posts of yours are pretty amusing with all the mental gyrations involved.
and the fact that your title to this thread seems pretty trollerific.
and your last statement there seems to really go against the spirit of most of your posts on this thread.
Humans play games for skillful competition. To prove out and hone skills. The brain is rewarded with pleasure during the process of learning, and this trait of our biology is an evolutionary advantage (which is why some animals also play.)
Game depth is a measure of how much learning a game offers, and by extension how much pleasure a game is capable of providing.
Most people understand Time Investment to be a game mechanic devoid of depth. No skill is exhibited, nothing can be learned. It's shallow.
It seems like players with the weakest concept of skill are the ones who have the hardest time understanding this. Instead of understanding that skill is composed of decision-making (strategy/tactics) and execution (twitch), they assume the word only refers to twitch skill.
This is why, IMO, the term "twitch game" gets abused and inserted into straw man arguments(see OP) ad nauseum. Even the most twitch based games require considerable, but speedy decision making to be effective.
One earlier poster posted a Street Fighter match as an example. It would be hard to argue against that being considered one of the most extreme examples of twitch gaming there is. But yet, so much of being successful in it is about decision making. Watch the video and you'll see it.
I, myself can execute moves faster than my avatar can deliver them, so there's no doubt that on a pro level, this is also the case for probably anyone considered a pro. What this means, IMO, is that even in a game like SF3, your winning or losing STILL hinges largely on decision making; it's just that the process occurs so quickly that it doesn't seem like thought.
Whether you're at liberty to take .02 seconds to make a decision or an hour, it still requires thought to win consistently.
It's weird that people assume this, given that those same people tend to understand that Chess requires skill (it lacks an execution component, and is entirely about decision-making.)
Granted pattern recognition/learning/mastery isn't the only reason players play games, but even in the other reasons players play (socializing or expressing themselves) there's often an element of learning. For example, players who've run guilds discover that there's some overlap between that skill set and real-life managerial skills. And I don't think you can have a social exchange with another person which isn't some form of learning.
Mostly to OP: I personally only have issues with artificial advancement in PvP. Cases where PvP occurs between players where some players have 100 HP but others have 200HP because they're higher level or have some form of Pay or Grind 2 win gear. To me, this is not enjoyable PvP as a winner or a loser.
A system where you build your character from the same "point pool" as another player that grants certain skills/abilities/stats depending on how you set them up is perfectly fine, if not quite possibly the potential system for the greatest PvP ever. I'm all for a system where setting up your character to perfectly compliment your playstyle gives you an edge against someone who can't/doesn't.
Such PvP can be deep, and doesn't require artificial advancement bonuses to be so.
I agree entirely that great PvP is balanced PvP.
I actually have the most fun in balanced PvP. Why? I'd love to share...
1) If you win, you know it's bc you have "Player Skill" (yes, that non-existent self-defined quality)
2) Challenge. Typically skilled players (with "Player Skill") are also skilled at min/maxing, playing OP classes/skills, exploiting OP game mechanics, etc. This MULTIPLIES with good players. A good player isn't just good, they're great. A balanced game where a player cannot use level 50 bandages at level 10 or pop a +500 Agility potion at level 1 granting them 1000% crit chance, is a game with CHALLENGE. When a player is limited the most to be UNABLE to min/max (balance helps to lessen the ability to exploit game balance) it provides the most challenge to that player.
3) Teamwork becomes more important, more rewarded. Why? #4...
4) Even Bad Players are rewarded for balanced PvP.
People would most often argue that when you allow for players to win based on level or gear, it is unfair because Player Skill doesn't matter. I am stating that this is entirely false.
Here is their argument:
BAD PLAYER has 2000 HP
SKILLED PLAYER has 1000 HP
Despite SKILLED PLAYER's superior "player skill" he loses bc of EZ-mode gear grind QQ.
Here is MY argument: This is reality.
BAD PLAYER is bad, so he only has 200 HP.
SKILLED PLAYER is skilled, so he has 2000 HP.
SKILLED PLAYER would win in an even matchup, but not only is he a better player but he understands the metagame better, knows how to win, and knows the benefits of potions, items, gear, and levels.
PvP games which do not provide pure balance actually "Snowball".
Bad players are bad a using their skills, perhaps because many use their mouse to click their abilities in PvP. These same players also have bad gear, no real understanding of compettive play, etc.
Good players are skilled in the first place, but also understand how to get the best Crit %, maximize their HP, and they know that Intellect is superior to Spirit no matter what the game tells you. They know the real math, they know how to win, and so these advantages "Snowball". First starts the superior skill from years of competitive gaming. This rolls up with better gear, talent spec, ability understanding, metagame exploit, and soon their snowball is an avalanche compared to the bad player.
So I believe firmly that balanced PvP (equal HP, equal level or no levels) is perfect bc it BENEFITS both the skilled player AND the bad player.
Humans play games for skillful competition. To prove out and hone skills. The brain is rewarded with pleasure during the process of learning, and this trait of our biology is an evolutionary advantage (which is why some animals also play.)
Game depth is a measure of how much learning a game offers, and by extension how much pleasure a game is capable of providing.
Most people understand Time Investment to be a game mechanic devoid of depth. No skill is exhibited, nothing can be learned. It's shallow.
It seems like players with the weakest concept of skill are the ones who have the hardest time understanding this. Instead of understanding that skill is composed of decision-making (strategy/tactics) and execution (twitch), they assume the word only refers to twitch skill.
This is why, IMO, the term "twitch game" gets abused and inserted into straw man arguments(see OP) ad nauseum. Even the most twitch based games require considerable, but speedy decision making to be effective.
One earlier poster posted a Street Fighter match as an example. It would be hard to argue against that being considered one of the most extreme examples of twitch gaming there is. But yet, so much of being successful in it is about decision making. Watch the video and you'll see it.
I, myself can execute moves faster than my avatar can deliver them, so there's no doubt that on a pro level, this is also the case for probably anyone considered a pro. What this means, IMO, is that even in a game like SF3, your winning or losing STILL hinges largely on decision making; it's just that the process occurs so quickly that it doesn't seem like thought.
Whether you're at liberty to take .02 seconds to make a decision or an hour, it still requires thought to win consistently.
It's weird that people assume this, given that those same people tend to understand that Chess requires skill (it lacks an execution component, and is entirely about decision-making.)
Granted pattern recognition/learning/mastery isn't the only reason players play games, but even in the other reasons players play (socializing or expressing themselves) there's often an element of learning. For example, players who've run guilds discover that there's some overlap between that skill set and real-life managerial skills. And I don't think you can have a social exchange with another person which isn't some form of learning.
Mostly to OP: I personally only have issues with artificial advancement in PvP. Cases where PvP occurs between players where some players have 100 HP but others have 200HP because they're higher level or have some form of Pay or Grind 2 win gear. To me, this is not enjoyable PvP as a winner or a loser.
A system where you build your character from the same "point pool" as another player that grants certain skills/abilities/stats depending on how you set them up is perfectly fine, if not quite possibly the potential system for the greatest PvP ever. I'm all for a system where setting up your character to perfectly compliment your playstyle gives you an edge against someone who can't/doesn't.
Such PvP can be deep, and doesn't require artificial advancement bonuses to be so.
3) Teamwork becomes more important, more rewarded. Why? #4...
4) Even Bad Players are rewarded for balanced PvP.
It's POSSIBLE for their team to win, I agree. A good game involves enough room for even good players to error, and so the other team CAN win. But skill(of every kind) still matters.
People would most often argue that when you allow for players to win based on level or gear, it is unfair because Player Skill doesn't matter. I am stating that this is entirely false.
Here is their (MY) argument:
BAD PLAYER has 2000 HP due to being higher level and/or repetitive gear grind
SKILLED PLAYER has 1000 HP due to still being lower level and/or less time spent grinding for gear
Despite SKILLED PLAYER's superior "player skill" he loses bc he doesn't spend countless hours playing repetitive PVE raids.
Here is MY argument: This is reality.
BAD PLAYER is bad, so he only has 200 HP.
SKILLED PLAYER is skilled, so he has 2000 HP.
SKILLED PLAYER would win in an even matchup, but not only is he a better player but he understands the metagame better, knows how to win, and knows the benefits of potions, items, gear, and levels.
Sometimes that's the case, but quite often it's not.
PvP games which do not provide pure balance actually "Snowball".
Agree. I think.
Bad players are bad a using their skills, perhaps because many use their mouse to click their abilities in PvP. These same players also have bad gear, no real understanding of compettive play, etc.
Yep. And in most MMO's, they can still just grind their way to the top despite their lack of competence, to then prey on players who may/may not be better than them in total confidence that their higher level will compensate for their lack of skill.
Good players are skilled in the first place, but also understand how to get the best Crit %, maximize their HP, and they know that Intellect is superior to Spirit no matter what the game tells you. They know the real math, they know how to win, and so these advantages "Snowball". First starts the superior skill from years of competitive gaming. This rolls up with better gear, talent spec, ability understanding, metagame exploit, and soon their snowball is an avalanche compared to the bad player.
I agree with that for the most part, but would add that this snowball is enlarged exponentially by artificial advancement bonuses.
So I believe firmly that balanced PvP (equal HP, equal level or no levels) is perfect bc it BENEFITS both the skilled player AND the bad player.
IMO, you don't even need equal HP to be equally matched outside of skill(maybe you just said that to simplify the argument?). You just need a well balanced system of give/take, mins/maxes, skills, etc for a player to choose from where a player can build a strong(or weak) character based on, say, crowd control, and another can build a particular kind of DPS, etc., and that their ability to build and then USE that skillset becomes a factor in the fight, as well as the opposing player's ability to counteract it.
Though I don't quite understand the OP's sense of humor when it comes to players being able to think outside the box, or in the box in the case of moto box. It's not that their brain works differently than anyone else's, it's that their brain is working more than anyone else's. Watching CT ladder defuse a bomb from under a building, watching a dragoon solo play in brood wars, watching players parry at no hp in SF3-3s, just simply watching absoute cleverness in a dire situation calls for a pants statue any time.
You know what kills the pants statue, watching blizzard remove 2's from competitive brackets, and subsequently watching beast cleave take flight. Probably the lowest moment in WoW's history.
So what would you rather see, someone who takes no damage and one shots everyone, or someone who can quarterknock a Word of Healing.
So what would you rather see, someone who takes no damage and one shots everyone, or someone who can quarterknock a Word of Healing.
Oh the hate I feel when I see rangers and mesmers...
On the other hand you can look at from the mesmer's perspective, that you're object of satisfaction that is result of one of the most sudden boners in that mesmers life time.
I'm guessing you may have me on ignore since you haven't responded to any of my posts, but I'll go ahead and reply again anyway in the offchance you don't.
Most professional level players tend to play with other professionals. If you are going into a match where someone is smurfing or there is no competitive ranking system in the game and having you (or another player) dominating 60:2, then at this point the match probably isn't helping you improve your game and probably isn't fun for either party involved. I personally wouldn't kick a player who is dominating that much because I want to try to learn anyway I can from them, but if you just want to play casually it's understandable you'd want to vote kick that person. There is nothing wrong with that. If there is any form of matchmaking then yes, they shouldn't be smurfing or joining random games to beat people that badly.
Occasionally when doing player matches (unranked) for fun in fighting games I'll encounter someone who is much lower skill level than me and repeatly beat them (often doing things like random select or picking "joke" characters). I figured they want to play against a player with more skill than them simply for the same reasons I do where they maybe want to learn and try to understand the game better to play at that higher skill. I figured that if they really don't want to play me they'd just leave the game or kick me out of the lobby. I never trash talk or do anything unsportsmanlike. I do get annoyed when I get matched with a horrible teammate in League of Legends, but I make sure never to type my frustration out in all-chat and keep my frustration in a private conversation between people I've duo-queued with on TS. I've seen people (including friends I duo with) doing some pretty unsportsmanlike raging at teammates though, so I can understand why you might be frustrated with so called "pro" players. Generally though due to ranking systems, the teammates I'm matched with are near my skill level so the games are generally pleasant unless I duo queue with a friend of much lower ELO than me.
I don't understand why anyone would smurf either, to be honest. I don't intentionally go out and seek players who are new or bad at a game and try to stomp them in any games. I've been in situations where I can do that in some games, and if I'm winning too much I simply go find a more competitive match.
I really don't understand why you think professional play is all about "min-maxing" and "exploiting". Most exploits are well known about the professional crowd and banned from use in professional play. In professional play in most non-gear based games (every "Esports type" game except WoW) you'll see a wider variety of champions, characters, guns, strategies, etc. played than at a typical mid or low level game. For example in a League of Legends tournament you'll often see champs that are considered "low tier" picked and the players having good success with them. In a typical ranked game at my ELO I rarely see these champions picked. For all the people who bash LoL for it's lack of balance it really is a well tuned game in that only two champs that I know of (Twitch and Evelynn) never see the light of day in tournament play. Same goes with Fighting games. While you'll see higher tier characters picked more often in tournaments, you'll see a lot more lower tier characters than you would playing online at a much lower level of play typically.
For most (if not all professional) players they play games professionally for the same reasons you play games. To have fun. If you make money while doing what you love then more power to you.
1. Balance ( can never be had just an excuse to nerf things to make whiners happy for a month or to change design course)
This is true. However, there's a difference between trying to balance a game knowing you'll never completely succeed, and utilizing a game mechanic that deliberately imbalances it(aka progressive advancement). There will always be people claiming imbalance, whether it be from game mechanics, scripting, latency, you name it. But there are those of us that find no value in MMO PvP simply because there's (particularly strong) artificial advancement bonuses("You're next level. Here, have some more HP and an increase to all your stats").
SKILLED PLAYER would win in an even matchup, but not only is he a better player but he understands the metagame better, knows how to win, and knows the benefits of potions, items, gear, and levels.
First off, what you are referring to (character builds, min-maxxing, etc.) is not skill. It might be considered strategy if there's enough room for choice.
However, mostly this comes down to being able to tell which numbers are bigger than another, which obviously does not take skill or strategy. There are exceptions to this, such as GW, but that's a game that was built to provide a fairly level playing field.
On the other hand you can look at from the mesmer's perspective, that you're object of satisfaction that is result of one of the most sudden boners in that mesmers life time.
There's always a silver lining.
Oh of course, I myself enjoy playing a mesmer, had tons of fun with one. That was my attempt at wry humor.
Everything creates huge amounts of negativity on the internet, that's what the internet is for: Negativity, porn and lolcats.
Comments
First, I'd drop the whole "your defense mechanism" thing as you're not a psychologist. I actually have a degree in the field of psychology, and find it quite humorous when young kids or young adults pretend to know what a defense mechanism is.
Second, I am not claiming you and TWO other people are against me. I am fully aware of those against me and for me. You and two other people are TROLLING me. Huge difference.
I would stop the act for a second if I were you, and realize that you are not against me. Neither is the person you quoted. People who are against others disagree with reason, logic, and communication. All you and this other guy have done is throw in a troll line to insult me in a very childish and attention-seeking manner.
Third, consider yourself now placed on ignore. Your first post was an insult without any argument. Your second post was an arrogant laugh, with statements so illogical and irrational, that I can only assume you are either trolling me or have some kind of delusion when reading my posts.
It's simply amazing that I, someone who top charts quickly in competitive gaming in all genres and typically wins or loses with a very high score, somehow "is so sore about losing in games" that I have to "try to explain it away to save my ego" using "my defense mechanism" (as if there is only one?) lol.
Actually on second thought, your posts are so funny to laugh at, I actually think I'll keep you off ignore and continue to respond to your posts
So where'd you get your degree in psychology? I got mine from Southern Nazarene University. I actually look foward to your reply, as this is beginning to get fun thanks to my forum Player Skill!
Maybe if you pulled your head out of your nerd rage for a minute, you might not go on with senesless ramblings, and be able to form something coherant.
It's not my fault you failed at games like WoW (lol) and feel the need to burn after anyone who has accepted those progression models.
Sorry, I don't mind progression, I don't mind being able to say that I worked with 19 other people to compelte something and walk out with something to show for it.
It shows the ability to work well with others. And based on your post, I can see clearly why you have failed at that.
Or was it more likely that in your fit of nerd rage you started jumping to senseless conclusions.
Well, either way, it's still a fail.
Oh closer inspection, I see you are a 42 year old from TN and not a young kid or young adult fresh out of a Psych 101 course.
I actually now realize that you are probably not trolling me and actually believe what you are saying, leaving me only to believe you might have a few issues that I should not take advantage of by talking to you while laughing at your posts due to the irrational trolling and asinine assumptions within.
My apologies, I actually feel bad laughing at someone who may have a real disability or projection issues, and that isn't something I want to partake in. Sorry, I will do you a favor and place you on ignore so that I will not take advantage of you. I was really looking forward to your reply though
but treating others who have issues with respect is more important to me (based on my career field) than the potential fun and hilarity that could ensue by allowing myself to be an easy target for them to respond to.
the fact you put me on (or were about to) an ignore list in the first place pretty much proves the defense mechanism theory to hold water. a lot of people have aggravated me on this forum, but i haven't for a second considered blocking them out so that i didn't have to see their dissention.
pardon me for not wanting to spend 10+ minutes writing you a novel, when a few sentences gets the idea across. the heart of the matter here is really very simple. its your defense mechanism thats requiring you to build up these monumental posts in order to try avoid the simple truth.
you can't explain it away. no matter how many pages you write.
and your psych degree means next to nothing (if even true). it means you went to school and ticked off the boxes. that's about it. my father had one (just one example of several people i know) and he has major psychological problems.
---------------------------
Corpus Callosum
---------------------------
ends up putting me on an ignore list after diagnosing me as mentally ill. 8)
---------------------------
Corpus Callosum
---------------------------
Did it ever occur to you the possibility that the reason someone finds "Pro Play" to be a joke is because they are skilled at games as well and understand what makes a player "Pro"?
When I began looking into "Pro Players" and what made them Pro, I was actually heart brokenly disappointed. I discovered that it wasn't about "Player Skill" or what I felt made me or other people great players. No...it was about min/max exploitation of game mechanics through Long Term Study, creating strategies based off of balance in the game. Disappointing but it was all about "Gaming the System".
I always dreamed it was about fast, accurate twitch reflex aiming and instinctual tactics requiring mental reflexes. Instead, it's mostly about developing specific strategies, constant memory management of game mechanics, and exploiting balance.
Pro Players of QUAKE do not excel at being the fastest headshotter in the universe or the quickest thinking tactician. They excel at map control, memory management, game knowledge, and exploitation of other's mistakes of memory management and game knowledge. Listen to the videos and hear them as they count down their mental timers and explain why they lost was entirely because of a single deny of a crucial map choke point, power-up, etc. The last one I watched literally said, "Whenever he got that power-up, it didnt matter what I did, he won." because the power-up made his armor high enough to where they could shoot at each other and it was 100% guaranteed that he'd lose bc the character, not the player, was significantly better. It's all simple mathematics and exploitation of mathematics.
In fact it was quite sad for me to see that a lot of Pro Players spam bullet streams the milli-second they turn a corner because they assume, based on experience and knowledge, the player will be there. When they do it so predictably that they often fire at nothing because they werent there, I realize that it isnt about quick reflexes, it's about predicting the enemy based on consistent strategies based entirely on specific min/max features (like contrlolling a power-up or denying extra bonuses) based on experience playing the specific game.
This disappointment over what made "Pro" players Pro, is also what made me realize why I was so good at games when I play them. It's not even that I naturally exploit the metagame and quickly go online to learn the strategies that min/max exploit the mathematics of the game to give me an advantage. I already knew I did that.
What I realized is that the reason I got so many kills or do so well in games is because I know how to form superior strategies and focus on map control over anything else. Map Control is far far greater than accuracy, headshots, etc. I'm actually not much of a headshot person unless I'm sniping.
By Map Control, I include even those moments when you simply step backwards to increase the range between you and the enemy, predicting which door they will enter through (or putting the cursor between the two) and knowing that based on that range alone, you will win the skirmish even if they are better players than you, because the game advantage and physics / mathematics are in your favor significantly.
Controlling your opponent is more important than aiming at them. Coincidentally, this made me an even better player now that I know to focus on these strategies as opposed to trying to improve my aim or reflexes. Quite the opposite of your proposed "sore loser" version of myself who sucks at video games and uses defend mechanisms to protect my fragile ego and apparent...low self esteem? Trolololool...
Not before responding to you THREE times
i'll give you credit that this post/tangent is pretty coherent. and if thats all you said in this thread i'd be largely agreeing with you.
while i think you downplay skills too much, there's definitely an element of truth to the fact that "gaming the system" (i don't think thats the best way to put it, since there's really no other way to play a game, other than by its own rules and mechanics) can be alot more important than spur-of-the-moment skills/strategies (assuming they aren't BAD).
i think FPS tournaments should be held on a series of randomly generated maps because of this. as an example in quake 2, on custom/player-made maps, i can often mop the floor with people who mop the floor with me, when we play on standard maps (that people have been playing for 15 years). i refuse to play those same maps over and over ad nauseum, because i play for fun, and don't really care where i stand on a leaderboard. but they have particular maps down to a science. but when they have to think on their feet, many of them can't really do it. they are map specialists, taking advantage of sheer experience/knowledge for specific maps.
---------------------------
Corpus Callosum
---------------------------
I don't think you understand why I am placing you on ignore...
I am doing so to protect you and do the right thing. Keeping you off ignore will only encourage you to reply more often to me. Each reply you make is exttremely enjoyable to me. They are filled with irrational assumptions, pointless trolling, and possible (hilarious) projection.
A few sentences can get an idea across. Unfortunately, you are getting no idea across by childishly insulting others. Saying "Trololol this guy is incoherent and so dumb!" is not an argument. I am sorry if you think it resembles any form of intellectual discourse.
Brushing off my psychology degree while proving you are uneducated on what you are name-dropping (Defense Mechanism, Ego, Psychological Problems, etc.) only goes to encourage me to ignore you for your own protection before I start sharing your posts with my friends for additional laughter.
I would beg to differ that my degree means "next to nothing" as it educated me to NOT do exactly what you're doing. Labeling people irrationally with disorders without clear evidence. It, along with my career experience, have taught me to identify people with potential disorders or problems with denial, projection, arrogance, etc.
My final words to you are this: I never once denied or even discussed that I do or don't have "major psychological problems". The reason I stated my degree (and the lack of yours) had nothing to do with proving my own sanity or your delusions. For those of us who base our view entirely in reality, it is quite obvious that the reason I stated my degree (and the lack of yours) is excluslively based on your name-dropping of commonly used phrases of (not even) pop-psychology. Something less educated than what you might find in a teeny bopper magazine's psych stereotypes.
I believe the term "name-dropping" is correct, as it is quite clear you do not know what you are talking about. Not just because of the clear lack of education in psychology, but the simple fact you use pop-terms in a way that educated people (in the field of psychology) find off.
I have, however, had experience with people similar in action before. Those who often, without any real evidence, void of logical conclusions to the assertion, claim others are [insert pop terms] while displaying a clear lack of understanding of said terms (and why a real psychologist would never say it like that, or use those terms, can be symptoms of one of many psychological issues, problems, or even a disorder. Especially when consistent through the person's communication, when they aren't even using pop terms. You work long enough with people who have disorders and mental defects and you can begin to readily identify the POSSIBILITY.
My final paragraph being: Note that us professionals only talk about "possibilities" and do not actually label people with ultimate certainty with a 100% accurate diagnosis with limited information. Quite the opposite of what you just did--- labeling me with specific terms, specific conditions, in a very specific way, with 100% confidence while provided with very little information about me. Us professionals are fully ready to tell ourselves the person we are identifying as POSSIBLY mental is in fact entirely plausible to be a perfectly healthy person-- just an odd one, or more realistically: an obvious troll trolling to troll.
Or you can join a pro league in S Korea and makes big bucks like him:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lim_Yo-Hwan
If you practice you will get good, for the most part, although some people will never get any better than a certain level. I don't think's a comment on their intelligence or value as a person, it's just that some people have talents that lie else where.
There are some people who put in ALOT of time in mmos and it makes the majority of us look rather average. Then there are the people that cheat. Lot of people cheat, they have no compunction about it. So the typical player is far removed from the so called 'elite' player by prior experience, social contacts, long hours practicing and occasionally exploits and cheats.
Mmos are not really a ruler to measure one's worth or anything. It's just a pass time.
Until we define "skill" as it pertains to various games, this argument isn't going anywhere.
PS. I believe the correct phrase is.....WE professionals instead of US professionals.
the simple single word EGO is "name dropping"? 8)
this whole exchange is pretty ironic as these huge posts of yours are pretty amusing with all the mental gyrations involved.
and the fact that your title to this thread seems pretty trollerific.
and your last statement there seems to really go against the spirit of most of your posts on this thread.
---------------------------
Corpus Callosum
---------------------------
I agree entirely that great PvP is balanced PvP.
I actually have the most fun in balanced PvP. Why? I'd love to share...
1) If you win, you know it's bc you have "Player Skill" (yes, that non-existent self-defined quality)
2) Challenge. Typically skilled players (with "Player Skill") are also skilled at min/maxing, playing OP classes/skills, exploiting OP game mechanics, etc. This MULTIPLIES with good players. A good player isn't just good, they're great. A balanced game where a player cannot use level 50 bandages at level 10 or pop a +500 Agility potion at level 1 granting them 1000% crit chance, is a game with CHALLENGE. When a player is limited the most to be UNABLE to min/max (balance helps to lessen the ability to exploit game balance) it provides the most challenge to that player.
3) Teamwork becomes more important, more rewarded. Why? #4...
4) Even Bad Players are rewarded for balanced PvP.
People would most often argue that when you allow for players to win based on level or gear, it is unfair because Player Skill doesn't matter. I am stating that this is entirely false.
Here is their argument:
BAD PLAYER has 2000 HP
SKILLED PLAYER has 1000 HP
Despite SKILLED PLAYER's superior "player skill" he loses bc of EZ-mode gear grind QQ.
Here is MY argument: This is reality.
BAD PLAYER is bad, so he only has 200 HP.
SKILLED PLAYER is skilled, so he has 2000 HP.
SKILLED PLAYER would win in an even matchup, but not only is he a better player but he understands the metagame better, knows how to win, and knows the benefits of potions, items, gear, and levels.
PvP games which do not provide pure balance actually "Snowball".
Bad players are bad a using their skills, perhaps because many use their mouse to click their abilities in PvP. These same players also have bad gear, no real understanding of compettive play, etc.
Good players are skilled in the first place, but also understand how to get the best Crit %, maximize their HP, and they know that Intellect is superior to Spirit no matter what the game tells you. They know the real math, they know how to win, and so these advantages "Snowball". First starts the superior skill from years of competitive gaming. This rolls up with better gear, talent spec, ability understanding, metagame exploit, and soon their snowball is an avalanche compared to the bad player.
So I believe firmly that balanced PvP (equal HP, equal level or no levels) is perfect bc it BENEFITS both the skilled player AND the bad player.
Two words, MOTO BOX!
Though I don't quite understand the OP's sense of humor when it comes to players being able to think outside the box, or in the box in the case of moto box. It's not that their brain works differently than anyone else's, it's that their brain is working more than anyone else's. Watching CT ladder defuse a bomb from under a building, watching a dragoon solo play in brood wars, watching players parry at no hp in SF3-3s, just simply watching absoute cleverness in a dire situation calls for a pants statue any time.
You know what kills the pants statue, watching blizzard remove 2's from competitive brackets, and subsequently watching beast cleave take flight. Probably the lowest moment in WoW's history.
So what would you rather see, someone who takes no damage and one shots everyone, or someone who can quarterknock a Word of Healing.
How is this thread still going? I see so much hate being spewed from both sides, I feel bad just reading this stuff.
Everything creates huge amounts of negativity on the internet, that's what the internet is for: Negativity, porn and lolcats.
Oh the hate I feel when I see rangers and mesmers...
Everything creates huge amounts of negativity on the internet, that's what the internet is for: Negativity, porn and lolcats.
On the other hand you can look at from the mesmer's perspective, that you're object of satisfaction that is result of one of the most sudden boners in that mesmers life time.
There's always a silver lining.
3 illusions exist in the mind of all gamers..
1. Balance ( can never be had just an excuse to nerf things to make whiners happy for a month or to change design course)
2. skill (smashing buttons are not skill . shooting a guy from over a mile with a sniper rifle is skill)
3. Hype ( A person who has the inbilty to see the forest for the trees)
The rest is subjective and open to debate and endless horse beatings that follow.
I'm guessing you may have me on ignore since you haven't responded to any of my posts, but I'll go ahead and reply again anyway in the offchance you don't.
Most professional level players tend to play with other professionals. If you are going into a match where someone is smurfing or there is no competitive ranking system in the game and having you (or another player) dominating 60:2, then at this point the match probably isn't helping you improve your game and probably isn't fun for either party involved. I personally wouldn't kick a player who is dominating that much because I want to try to learn anyway I can from them, but if you just want to play casually it's understandable you'd want to vote kick that person. There is nothing wrong with that. If there is any form of matchmaking then yes, they shouldn't be smurfing or joining random games to beat people that badly.
Occasionally when doing player matches (unranked) for fun in fighting games I'll encounter someone who is much lower skill level than me and repeatly beat them (often doing things like random select or picking "joke" characters). I figured they want to play against a player with more skill than them simply for the same reasons I do where they maybe want to learn and try to understand the game better to play at that higher skill. I figured that if they really don't want to play me they'd just leave the game or kick me out of the lobby. I never trash talk or do anything unsportsmanlike. I do get annoyed when I get matched with a horrible teammate in League of Legends, but I make sure never to type my frustration out in all-chat and keep my frustration in a private conversation between people I've duo-queued with on TS. I've seen people (including friends I duo with) doing some pretty unsportsmanlike raging at teammates though, so I can understand why you might be frustrated with so called "pro" players. Generally though due to ranking systems, the teammates I'm matched with are near my skill level so the games are generally pleasant unless I duo queue with a friend of much lower ELO than me.
I don't understand why anyone would smurf either, to be honest. I don't intentionally go out and seek players who are new or bad at a game and try to stomp them in any games. I've been in situations where I can do that in some games, and if I'm winning too much I simply go find a more competitive match.
I really don't understand why you think professional play is all about "min-maxing" and "exploiting". Most exploits are well known about the professional crowd and banned from use in professional play. In professional play in most non-gear based games (every "Esports type" game except WoW) you'll see a wider variety of champions, characters, guns, strategies, etc. played than at a typical mid or low level game. For example in a League of Legends tournament you'll often see champs that are considered "low tier" picked and the players having good success with them. In a typical ranked game at my ELO I rarely see these champions picked. For all the people who bash LoL for it's lack of balance it really is a well tuned game in that only two champs that I know of (Twitch and Evelynn) never see the light of day in tournament play. Same goes with Fighting games. While you'll see higher tier characters picked more often in tournaments, you'll see a lot more lower tier characters than you would playing online at a much lower level of play typically.
For most (if not all professional) players they play games professionally for the same reasons you play games. To have fun. If you make money while doing what you love then more power to you.
First off, what you are referring to (character builds, min-maxxing, etc.) is not skill. It might be considered strategy if there's enough room for choice.
However, mostly this comes down to being able to tell which numbers are bigger than another, which obviously does not take skill or strategy. There are exceptions to this, such as GW, but that's a game that was built to provide a fairly level playing field.
Oh of course, I myself enjoy playing a mesmer, had tons of fun with one. That was my attempt at wry humor.
Everything creates huge amounts of negativity on the internet, that's what the internet is for: Negativity, porn and lolcats.