205 replies to this topic

[Utttand4]

I don't see how you could prove this. Since a game becomes increasingly more demanding as the other team (or person) becomes better. You could even argue that a team based game is more mentally demanding (for the sake of argument lets say in this case 3v3's in sc2) because not only are you trying to co ordinate an attack against your opponent, you're trying to command and maneuver a large number of units. A 1v1 player has to do this, yes, but they aren't also trying to align there attacks with there team mates, and predict and out play multiple opponents. (instead of just one.)

That is actually a very bad example to use. Team matches in SC2 are crap compared to 1v1.

Once again i believe that a 1v1 and a 3v3 are different, and have no achievable "skill ceiling"

I knew i shouldnt have used that word.

It doesn't confuse me, i just believe now that you're miss using the phrase.

You're starting to lose me, because you're implying that there isn't always a way to improve on those skills, or you're implying that at a certain lvl improvement in those skills wont give you that much of an edge.

Ive actually had this discussion before, years ago in fact, on this very same forum. I dont think anyone back then disputed the term "skill ceiling".

I'll agree with you that it is far easier for a new player to pick up CoD and play it. The controls are smooth, it can be a slower game at times, and aiming is simple.
However, just because something is easy to start, doesn't mean that it's easy to master. The largest complain i see you making valid here is that perhaps it's complex in an unusual way compared to other fps games.

What.

The two sentences here doesn't fit together. Certain games having steep barriers for new players to over come doesn't disprove that a game is only as difficult as the other team can make it.

I didnt disprove it, like i said, it was partially correct. (keyword: partially)

As a matter of fact, it supports that statement. Saying that the team is through the basic mechanics of the game while the other team is not would inevitably lead to the better team winning. Making the game very difficult for one team, and easy for another.

At high levels of game play where both teams, or individual players, have a higher level of skill in basic mechanics than other players, it would indeed become more demanding in the mental aspect than the "physical" but that doesn't really help your argument. Because if a "pro" can now handle all basic functions "micros/macros/strafejumps/dodgejumps/aim/mapcontrols/pulls" without actually needing to think about it, then the game isn't really about your (physical) ability to play. It would be about who is smarter. If this is the case (which i don't fully agree with) then what you're implying is that a game of CoD would determine purely who is a tactically smarter person.

huh?

You're (knowingly or not) implying this while simultaneously saying that the "physical" (for lack of a better word) aspect of the game the game is not only unimportant, through the logic that "pros" have hit this "skill ceiling", edit1: (but that i can actually be achieved). Which at the current mastery of gaming today, is so far out of sight that it's imaginary.

Im afraid you've lost me.

I'd consider giving some thought to comparing tic-tac-toe, and chess.While tic-tac-toe is one of the few games that clearly has an achievable skill cap, it's allot more questionable what that lvl is in chess. Is there currently an achieve able "skill ceiling" in chess?

Now im confident you really dont understand the term.

[spiri7ussancti]

Now im confident you really dont understand the term.

Looks like me and you are on the same page then finally.

Skill ceiling refers to the depth or complexity of a, game, class, style, race, character, or weapon.

[Utttand4]

Im trying to be polite here, but you remind me of a chat bot that randomly throws together gaming-related words to form sentences that are barely coherent.

[spiri7ussancti]

Im trying to be polite here, but you remind me of a chat bot that randomly throws together gaming-related words to form sentences that are barely coherent.

If you were trying to be polite you would have never posted that.

But i can see what you mean, i think the reason it's so hard to articulate my thoughts is because i'm constantly interconnecting subjects in my mind and it's hard to stay solidly on one subject.

[CakeCom]

^This entire discussion made me laugh.

Okay think about it like this Spiri7.

Team Fortress 2 Competitive: You are a scout. You must learn how a scout moves, what his limitations are, the perfect ways to box people in with your fellow scout (usually a 5v5 / 4v4 team will have 2 scouts I believe) and what enemies you would want to take head on (it's kind of rare to see a 1v1 in competitive TF2 but I've seen it in a game or two) if you catch them out of place.

Starcraft 2 Competitive: You are a zerg. You have to learn how to perfectly macro your larva count (use the queen properly), what to spend larva on (drones vs army), what strategies to use against your opponent (There's more then a dozen for zerg I believe, but you'd normally just stick to 3 or 4... I dunno Im pretty bad at the game myself so someone correct me if you want) and you have to learn to micro your units to keep them alive so they can restore health, keep your army at the most efficient numbers at all times while still doing effective amounts of damage.

Call of Duty Competitive: You must learn the map designs (from firsthand experience I find it takes maybe 2 playthroughs of a map to master it if you have common sense, no joke), your weapon choice (most competitive players seem to use one of like 3 different weapons, mostly with the same attatchments so really you can pull up a YouTube video and cut those 2 lessons off your list right there) and how to pick people off without being seen. That's pretty much it. There's also learning the simple control scheme and how to abuse the crosshairs but really it all just comes down to knowing the maps and shooting people. Unlike games like TF2 where you must learn to dodge your opponents, defend teammates, capture specific points and certain times or games like Starcraft where you must use specific units on specific enemies, master your macro + micro.

Basically what I'm saying is, the learning curve between CoD casual play and CoD competitive play is almost nothing. Unlike other games where you need to take the time to learn that competitive play is totally different from casual play (except Starcraft where it seems like casual play can be just as much of a cunt as competitive play to learn *)

[spiri7ussancti]

(I said something mean. I'm trying to improve upon my reactions to people not understanding what I'm saying. So this is the improved post.)

I don't feel as if you've actually read what i posted above. I'm requesting that if you want to continue this discussion with me cakecom, that you please go re read my posts. If you feel that any of it's inaccurate then please bring it up.

I'd love it if we could continue a conversation trying to define what skill is, and if there is actually a skill ceiling. In stead of insulting each others games in a similar fashion to the fan boys that we both claim hate.

Please, and thank you in advanced.

SPIRI7US SANCTI

Edited by spiri7ussancti, 14 August 2011 - 09:01 PM.