Originally posted by NaughtyP

Players that don't need any significant advantage to mop the floor with the rest of the field.

That's all really.

In most cases, this is true: Usually, you're not as good as you think, only the competition is piss poor.

A friend of mine had their FPS clan of six players move to an MMOFPS where they steamrolled the top guilds in the game with hundreds of members. They regularly beat 5:1 even 10:1 odds. In some games, player skill has more effect than in others.

Originally posted by Quirhid

 

Its not the same thing. Sure, financially thriving people are aslo very capable. However, a number of research papers report that "the rich" are significantly more selfish than any other person. Business ethics is a joke to some people, and I'm sure I don't have to tell you examples of this.

I attended a number of math and english competitions (second language) in school. I've played soccer and volleyball for years, martial arts for a few years, attended many, many tournaments, played videogames at a world championship level and you're telling me I don't quite "get it"? What the hell, man?!

Its exactly the same thing. If you cant see any correlation between the selfishness required in obtaining incredible sums of money by stepping over others, and winning in competition because of not only the will the see yourself succeed, but also not wanting to see anyone else have the same success, well, I dont know what to tell you. Theres no difference. And the only thing the people I have described have in common outside of atheltic ability is that very factor, thats it. They all have athletic ability, they're professional athletes. Jordan was on record saying Charles Barkley would never win a championship. They faced each other in the finals once, and Barkley was a close friend of his and also a top 50 player of all time. Why would Jordan say this? Barkley doesnt have it, and Jordan knew it, only those with this trait I suppose can really sense it in others.

No, you dont get it. You said you dont care about winning. Thats fine, if thats how you feel. But no, you dont get what Im talking about.

Originally posted by Meridion
attemping to give f*** about mad skillz...
error: Life present.
sorry, unable to proceed, no f***s were given...

You gave enough of a f--k to make an attempt at being witty on an internet forum dedicated to MMORPGs.

This life you speak of, evidently its on hold?

As predictable as it is, its still a little baffling to see posters who are intent on devolving every discussion into yet another opportunity to show off their l33t rhetoric of apathy.

Arent there plenty of other threads and dubstep youtube videos where you can tell us that you dont care?

Originally posted by HabitualFrogStomp

You DO have to be an asshole to be any measure of champion.

 

Good post, enjoyed reading this.  But I have to disagree in the main.

The same is said in business - "I didn't get where I am today by being nice..." yada yada. 

The problem is that people BELIEVE they have to be arseholes to succeed.

I think PvP is a combination of gear, skill, experience and - and here's the bloody clincher if you're over 30... a lack of RSI and good reactions!

I've been chewed up and spat out by lesser-experienced/geared players because their reactions are faster, their coordination better and their medicine cabinet full of spot cream.

'Skill' in games is almost always measured by efficiently and endurance. How efficiently you can do something over a period of time is generally what determines your skill level.

However, this also depends on the type of game you are playing. In any game with a ladder, you will find that skil is quantified using the above criteria, weighted against the 'skill lvl' of other players. In the best games though, there is also a creative / ingenuity factor that comes into play, that isn't really quantifyable. I.E. That play in League of Legends that is able to pull a ridiculously idiotic dive, and come out on top. Or the players that are constantly changing the Meta. This requires that a game actually have a meta, though.

Originally posted by Aparition

you kill me = luck

me kill you = skill

LOL... I like that.  I'm going to steal it for use someday.

Originally posted by Axehilt

Originally posted by rojo6934

im not implying that about Chess. That really takes a person's skill to play it well. In Chess you only move pieces mindlessly if you dont know how to play. Very different than mmos that doesnt require people's skills.

Yes, decision-making and execution. I didnt have those words in mind but i do agree with it on my first post. The mmos we have now dont require any decision making or good execution. They just require good gear and button spam. Even TERA.

Given equal gear and classes, if you don't hit the right skills in the right order you lose in MMORPG PVP.  It requires skill, even if the game depth isn't as deep as Chess.

And that's without calling up some of the other non-skill-choice decisions required to do well in PVP.

MMORPG PVP is lousy because it's diluted by non-skill factors, but let's not pretend that dilution is the same as not requiring skill.  MMORPG PVP clearly requires skill, it just requires less than a pure skill-focused game.

Why are we capitalising chess?  Just out of interest.  Did they make an MMO?  (so do not link me if they did, please)

And surely, comparing chess to PvP is like comparing extreme sporting to rambling through the countryside with a map, a compass and an anorak... ?

Originally posted by jocieB 

And surely, comparing chess to PvP is like comparing extreme sporting to rambling through the countryside with a map, a compass and an anorak... ?

We're not comparing chess to PVP.  Chess is PVP.  You do realize the acronym stands for Player vs. Player, right?  PVP isn't something specific to MMORPGs or even videogames.  It's the concept of any player vs. player competition in a game.

Originally posted by Axehilt

Originally posted by jocieB 

And surely, comparing chess to PvP is like comparing extreme sporting to rambling through the countryside with a map, a compass and an anorak... ?

We're not comparing chess to PVP.  Chess is PVP.  You do realize the acronym stands for Player vs. Player, right?  PVP isn't something specific to MMORPGs or even videogames.  It's the concept of any player vs. player competition in a game.

If all PvP is can be broken down to one player trying to outdo another, why compare it to something mentally challenging?  The LAST thing PvP is, is mentally challenging... unless you've forgotten where your keys are.  Compare it instead to, say, swingball.  Or Tiddlywinks.  Or mutual masturbation. 

Thanks for the heads up on the acronym though - if for no other reason, I come here to learn. 

I hope this provides you some amusement, cause that's all it it for me: a game of thought and a way to pass some time. I would advice not to look for anything even remotely scientific and take it with a pinch of salt. As OP, I was writing about extreme cases. Not the annual petanque/texas hold'em event of your pub friends. Habitual zoning happening outside of competitive situations. Now I'm certain not many of the extremely successful people could be diagnozed with anything and neither would the shrinks have the balls to do that. Plus they wouldn't use none of the nasty words I used before, but would perhaps if any use terms like raging problems.

Further, I am wondering about causality. It is possible, that assholes are simply often more competitive and at times more successful, but I would think frequent entering in high level competitions involving extreme decision making, execution skills and harmful stress levels. In normal situations, the brain releases endorphin and people are able to find enjoyment in what they are doing. In habitual and compulsive cases, the desire to win (competitiveness) is so great that no enjoyment is found. If rl situation doesn't compensate, it is very much possible that the situation persists and gets out of hand. Thus they become assholes while displaying the same competitive behavior outside of competitive situations. In worst cases it might lead to symptoms resembling mental disorders, but I guess that's a taboo here:)

Now if you feel offended, I urge you to not take internet forum ramblings seriously, take a deep breath, vent e.g. here a bit and move on. I personally find OP's thread slightly entertaining and the game of thought and reactions to it quite amusing.

Originally posted by phumbaba

I hope this provides you some amusement

More bewilderment, for me ;)  But I kinda got it.  \\o//

I meant \.../

oh i dunno.  how does one do the rock devil symbol thing?  I am so un-rock n' roll it's frightening. 

Originally posted by jocieB 

If all PvP is can be broken down to one player trying to outdo another, why compare it to something mentally challenging?  The LAST thing PvP is, is mentally challenging... unless you've forgotten where your keys are.  Compare it instead to, say, swingball.  Or Tiddlywinks.  Or mutual masturbation. 

Thanks for the heads up on the acronym though - if for no other reason, I come here to learn. 

I'm sorry, are you saying PVP games involve zero thought whatsoever?

Are you saying that you could become #1 ranked in chess, Starcraft 2, or any other major PVP game, without exhibiting a ton of high-level thought?

Skill is decision-making (thought, strategy, tactics) and execution (twitch; basically making your decisions manifest.)  Even the most twitch-focused FPS requires a non trivial amount of decision-making (thinking) at a high level of play.  Perhaps you've never been at a high level of play in a game.  It doesn't seem like you're grasping the basics.

Originally posted by Axehilt

Originally posted by jocieB 

If all PvP is can be broken down to one player trying to outdo another, why compare it to something mentally challenging?  The LAST thing PvP is, is mentally challenging... unless you've forgotten where your keys are.  Compare it instead to, say, swingball.  Or Tiddlywinks.  Or mutual masturbation. 

Thanks for the heads up on the acronym though - if for no other reason, I come here to learn. 

I'm sorry, are you saying PVP games involve zero thought whatsoever?

Only if you're quantifying "not mentally challenging" as "zero thought".  Which of course only a complete fuckwit would do.

Are you saying that you could become #1 ranked in chess, Starcraft 2, or any other major PVP game, without exhibiting a ton of high-level thought?

Nope. 

Skill is decision-making (thought, strategy, tactics) and execution (twitch; basically making your decisions manifest.)  Even the most twitch-focused FPS requires a non trivial amount of decision-making (thinking) at a high level of play.  Perhaps you've never been at a high level of play in a game.  It doesn't seem like you're grasping the basics.

Perhaps I haven't.  I doubt I'll ever be as wonderful as you at anything.  But you know what?  I'm happy for you.

Originally posted by jocieB

Are you saying that you could become #1 ranked in chess, Starcraft 2, or any other major PVP game, without exhibiting a ton of high-level thought?

Nope. 

...it's like pulling teeth.

Okay, so we've established one can't do particularly well in PVP games without high-level thought.

And what other synonyms can you think of which mean "high-level thought"?

(Hint: Mental challenges.)

Originally posted by Axehilt

Originally posted by jocieB

Are you saying that you could become #1 ranked in chess, Starcraft 2, or any other major PVP game, without exhibiting a ton of high-level thought?

Nope. 

...it's like pulling teeth.

Okay, so we've established one can't do particularly well in PVP games without high-level thought.

And what other synonyms can you think of which mean "high-level thought"?

(Hint: Mental challenges.)

He's got to be trolling you, Axehilt. Nobody thinks like that.

Originally posted by Quirhid

Originally posted by Axehilt

Originally posted by jocieB

Are you saying that you could become #1 ranked in chess, Starcraft 2, or any other major PVP game, without exhibiting a ton of high-level thought?

Nope. 

...it's like pulling teeth.

Okay, so we've established one can't do particularly well in PVP games without high-level thought.

And what other synonyms can you think of which mean "high-level thought"?

(Hint: Mental challenges.)

He's got to be trolling you, Axehilt. Nobody thinks like that.

God forbid anyone should hold an opinion a. you disagree with or b. at all.

Planning, Reactivity, and Operation skill. Depending on the games mechanics, these 3 talents are to various degrees the most relevant to success.

Also known as Strategy, Tactics, and "Skill", which is a bit harder to define based on the games controls, but is typically a function of eye hand coordination and imput speed, these three talents allow a player to win by preparing and planning better before the match, alternate their method or approach during engagement based on the changes in battle, or simply exceed at operating the controls.

Pretty much all competitive activity revolves around those features, ones I appreciate have a fair and similar amount of each as determining factors toward success. I don't think games should be designed with so much accuracy and twitch that players with vastly higher eye hand coordination and actions per minute just crush other players even when their out strategiezed and superior tactics are used to address them. This is widely present in shooting games, espeically from the generation I played most in, while I would say games like those were some of the closest mix of all elements, the ability for super accurate players to roll over multiple foes by out shooting everyone while ignoring strategy or tactics just made the gameplay kind of isolated to different skill levels. It's even worse when you can defeat opponents simply on the measure of how much preperation you've done before battling, primarily when this is preperation which allows your character to simply be way more powerful than your foe rather than be a really ingenious method of approching battle. Tactics I feel are the most important and least appreciated talent which should be expounded more in games these days, the action of altering or correcting your approach based on the situation or behavior around you is a widely possesable skill, but is also grossly deep in properly developed into the gameplay mechanics. Flanking, suppressing fire, baiting, kiting, and so forth, these methods which players alternate in actual combat are the single defining feature that ensures your experience varies from engagement to engagement. If the game is all about strategy, the players who plan or prepare the best are simply going to win the match before it begins, attempts to change in battle or fight harder are futile. If the gameplay is all about skill, than players don't have to plan, and can't out wit their foes sufficiently to a better outcome.  But tactics, tactics always breed interesting gameplay, I feel that is the most interesting behavior in real competition.

Anyway, stray on the subject a little, but pretty much all PVP "skill" can be surmised in these 3.

Originally posted by Axehilt

Step 1. Put both combatants into a game about PVP skill.  (By definition this won't be an MMORPG.)

Step 2. Congratulate the victor.

Simple.

Almost, I  like the premise.

Originally posted by BahamutKaiser

Planning, Reactivity, and Operation skill. Depending on the games mechanics, these 3 talents are to various degrees the most relevant to success.

Also known as Strategy, Tactics, and "Skill", which is a bit harder to define based on the games controls, but is typically a function of eye hand coordination and imput speed, these three talents allow a player to win by preparing and planning better before the match, alternate their method or approach during engagement based on the changes in battle, or simply exceed at operating the controls.

Pretty much all competitive activity revolves around those features, ones I appreciate have a fair and similar amount of each as determining factors toward success. I don't think games should be designed with so much accuracy and twitch that players with vastly higher eye hand coordination and actions per minute just crush other players even when their out strategiezed and superior tactics are used to address them. This is widely present in shooting games, espeically from the generation I played most in, while I would say games like those were some of the closest mix of all elements, the ability for super accurate players to roll over multiple foes by out shooting everyone while ignoring strategy or tactics just made the gameplay kind of isolated to different skill levels. It's even worse when you can defeat opponents simply on the measure of how much preperation you've done before battling, primarily when this is preperation which allows your character to simply be way more powerful than your foe rather than be a really ingenious method of approching battle. Tactics I feel are the most important and least appreciated talent which should be expounded more in games these days, the action of altering or correcting your approach based on the situation or behavior around you is a widely possesable skill, but is also grossly deep in properly developed into the gameplay mechanics. Flanking, suppressing fire, baiting, kiting, and so forth, these methods which players alternate in actual combat are the single defining feature that ensures your experience varies from engagement to engagement. If the game is all about strategy, the players who plan or prepare the best are simply going to win the match before it begins, attempts to change in battle or fight harder are futile. If the gameplay is all about skill, than players don't have to plan, and can't out wit their foes sufficiently to a better outcome.  But tactics, tactics always breed interesting gameplay, I feel that is the most interesting behavior in real competition.

Anyway, stray on the subject a little, but pretty much all PVP "skill" can be surmised in these 3.

That may well be the noob-to-PvP-truth - but from the stuff I've seen, it's simply about learning a sequence - and knowing not all enemies will fall to the same sequence.  So change a key or two.  Rocket Science me up!