Originally posted by VengeSunsoar When I have said time is not the most important. You have repeatedly said no.
In truth what you said is that time doesn't matter. I've said it does matter.
Again, show me where I said that time is the most important factor. And by the way, I'm sure you'll take me saying this as an opportunity to slip away from answering the previous question but I'm gonna say it anyway, time probably is the most important factor because nothing else matters without time. You will literally learn ZERO without time.
Let me repeat.
The truck driver drives for 8-15 hours per day. The race car driver drivers for 5-8 hours per day.
The truck driver is driving more. The race car driver is better.
That the truck driver is spending more time does not matter. The race car driving is using the time better.
The time will pass anyway.
What you do during that time is what matters, not the time itself.
And once again, when I have said time is not the most important aspect you have you have repeatedly said no.
No what that means is NOT that time doesn't matter, it's that time didn't matter enough to overcome the more efficient practice from the race car driver. That's what it means. It does NOT mean that time doesn't matter, which you've repeated many times.
Furthermore, you don't know if the gap between the trucker driver's time and the race car driver's time is the same as the gap between the truck driver's cognitive faculties and the race car driver's cognitive faculties.
I was going to write a few paragraphs explaining why older MMOs only seemed more difficult due to obtuse mechanics & people's own inexperience with the genre at the time, then I realized it would be a waste of time. Therefore I'll just sum up my view on the issue by saying no, they most certainly were not intentionally more difficult by design. Saying otherwise is in fact patently false.
You people are looking for an experience which can't be had again; that feeling of wonder when you were new to the genre. It's best you move on to other things, because no matter what a developer does, it will never satisfy you, especially since you're letting nostalgia shape faded old memories into something far grander than the actual reality you experienced.
I've said all I wanted to say on the matter. I bid you good day.
Goodbye I guess?
In case you end up sticking around, it's not simply nostalgia. I'm currently playing Darkfall Unholy Wars which does fulfill, at least partialaly, that itch that I've had for oldschool games.
Originally posted by VengeSunsoar When I have said time is not the most important. You have repeatedly said no.
In truth what you said is that time doesn't matter. I've said it does matter.
Again, show me where I said that time is the most important factor. And by the way, I'm sure you'll take me saying this as an opportunity to slip away from answering the previous question but I'm gonna say it anyway, time probably is the most important factor because nothing else matters without time. You will literally learn ZERO without time.
Let me repeat.
The truck driver drives for 8-15 hours per day. The race car driver drivers for 5-8 hours per day.
The truck driver is driving more. The race car driver is better.
That the truck driver is spending more time does not matter. The race car driving is using the time better.
The time will pass anyway.
What you do during that time is what matters, not the time itself.
And once again, when I have said time is not the most important aspect you have you have repeatedly said no.
No what that means is NOT that time doesn't matter, it's that time didn't matter enough to overcome the more efficient practice from the race car driver. That's what it means. It does NOT mean that time doesn't matter, which you've repeated many times.
Furthermore, you don't know if the gap between the trucker driver's time and the race car driver's time is the same as the gap between the truck driver's cognitive faculties and the race car driver's cognitive faculties.
What it means is that the even though the truck driver was spending more time, it did not matter because the race car driver was using it better.
Time is not the most important factor, it will pass regardless what you do.
You yourself said in the above paragraph, "time is the most important factor" yet here, the race driver was spending less time but using it better. Therefore time is not the most important factor, what you do with that time is.
Just because you don't like it doesn't mean it is bad.
Originally posted by VengeSunsoar When I have said time is not the most important. You have repeatedly said no.
In truth what you said is that time doesn't matter. I've said it does matter.
Again, show me where I said that time is the most important factor. And by the way, I'm sure you'll take me saying this as an opportunity to slip away from answering the previous question but I'm gonna say it anyway, time probably is the most important factor because nothing else matters without time. You will literally learn ZERO without time.
Let me repeat.
The truck driver drives for 8-15 hours per day. The race car driver drivers for 5-8 hours per day.
The truck driver is driving more. The race car driver is better.
That the truck driver is spending more time does not matter. The race car driving is using the time better.
The time will pass anyway.
What you do during that time is what matters, not the time itself.
And once again, when I have said time is not the most important aspect you have you have repeatedly said no.
No what that means is NOT that time doesn't matter, it's that time didn't matter enough to overcome the more efficient practice from the race car driver. That's what it means. It does NOT mean that time doesn't matter, which you've repeated many times.
Furthermore, you don't know if the gap between the trucker driver's time and the race car driver's time is the same as the gap between the truck driver's cognitive faculties and the race car driver's cognitive faculties.
What it means is that the even though the truck driver was spending more time, it did not matter because the race car driver was using it better.
Time is not the most important factor, it will pass regardless what you do.
You yourself said in the above paragraph, "time is the most important factor" yet here, the race driver was spending less time but using it better. Therefore time is not the most important factor, what you do with that time is.
Furthermore, you don't know if the gap between the trucker driver's time and the race car driver's time is the same as the gap between the truck driver's cognitive faculties and the race car driver's cognitive faculties.
I'll just repeat that because you didn't respond to it.
But prior to me taking you on for the sake of argument, when had I said that time is the most important factor? I most certainly did not. What you DID say however is that time does not matter. That is absolutely, 100%, very very very very very wrong. Time absolutely does matter. That's why I'm completely correct when I say that holding all things constant, the player who plays games more will tend to be more skilled. That was my original statement, and NOTHING you've said contradicts that.
Originally posted by VengeSunsoar When I have said time is not the most important. You have repeatedly said no.
In truth what you said is that time doesn't matter. I've said it does matter.
Again, show me where I said that time is the most important factor. And by the way, I'm sure you'll take me saying this as an opportunity to slip away from answering the previous question but I'm gonna say it anyway, time probably is the most important factor because nothing else matters without time. You will literally learn ZERO without time.
Let me repeat.
The truck driver drives for 8-15 hours per day. The race car driver drivers for 5-8 hours per day.
The truck driver is driving more. The race car driver is better.
That the truck driver is spending more time does not matter. The race car driving is using the time better.
The time will pass anyway.
What you do during that time is what matters, not the time itself.
And once again, when I have said time is not the most important aspect you have you have repeatedly said no.
No what that means is NOT that time doesn't matter, it's that time didn't matter enough to overcome the more efficient practice from the race car driver. That's what it means. It does NOT mean that time doesn't matter, which you've repeated many times.
Furthermore, you don't know if the gap between the trucker driver's time and the race car driver's time is the same as the gap between the truck driver's cognitive faculties and the race car driver's cognitive faculties.
What it means is that the even though the truck driver was spending more time, it did not matter because the race car driver was using it better.
Time is not the most important factor, it will pass regardless what you do.
You yourself said in the above paragraph, "time is the most important factor" yet here, the race driver was spending less time but using it better. Therefore time is not the most important factor, what you do with that time is.
Furthermore, you don't know if the gap between the trucker driver's time and the race car driver's time is the same as the gap between the truck driver's cognitive faculties and the race car driver's cognitive faculties.
I'll just repeat that because you didn't respond to it.
But prior to me taking you on for the sake of argument, when had I said that time is the most important factor? I most certainly did not. What you DID say however is that time does not matter. That is absolutely, 100%, very very very very very wrong. Time absolutely does matter. That's why I'm completely correct when I say that holding all things constant, the player who plays games more will tend to be more skilled. That was my original statement, and NOTHING you've said contradicts that.
There is no reason to respond to that. We don't know what their cognitive abilities are, it will make a big difference, likely the biggest difference.
However you said all other things being equal, so that's what I was going with.
Post 175
I can't seem to paste on here,
"time is probably the most important factor because nothing else matters without time"
I say time is the least important. It will pass anyway. What you do with that time is the most important, and in practice that is about cognition.
Just because you don't like it doesn't mean it is bad.
Originally posted by VengeSunsoar When I have said time is not the most important. You have repeatedly said no.
In truth what you said is that time doesn't matter. I've said it does matter.
Again, show me where I said that time is the most important factor. And by the way, I'm sure you'll take me saying this as an opportunity to slip away from answering the previous question but I'm gonna say it anyway, time probably is the most important factor because nothing else matters without time. You will literally learn ZERO without time.
Let me repeat.
The truck driver drives for 8-15 hours per day. The race car driver drivers for 5-8 hours per day.
The truck driver is driving more. The race car driver is better.
That the truck driver is spending more time does not matter. The race car driving is using the time better.
The time will pass anyway.
What you do during that time is what matters, not the time itself.
And once again, when I have said time is not the most important aspect you have you have repeatedly said no.
No what that means is NOT that time doesn't matter, it's that time didn't matter enough to overcome the more efficient practice from the race car driver. That's what it means. It does NOT mean that time doesn't matter, which you've repeated many times.
Furthermore, you don't know if the gap between the trucker driver's time and the race car driver's time is the same as the gap between the truck driver's cognitive faculties and the race car driver's cognitive faculties.
What it means is that the even though the truck driver was spending more time, it did not matter because the race car driver was using it better.
Time is not the most important factor, it will pass regardless what you do.
You yourself said in the above paragraph, "time is the most important factor" yet here, the race driver was spending less time but using it better. Therefore time is not the most important factor, what you do with that time is.
Furthermore, you don't know if the gap between the trucker driver's time and the race car driver's time is the same as the gap between the truck driver's cognitive faculties and the race car driver's cognitive faculties.
I'll just repeat that because you didn't respond to it.
But prior to me taking you on for the sake of argument, when had I said that time is the most important factor? I most certainly did not. What you DID say however is that time does not matter. That is absolutely, 100%, very very very very very wrong. Time absolutely does matter. That's why I'm completely correct when I say that holding all things constant, the player who plays games more will tend to be more skilled. That was my original statement, and NOTHING you've said contradicts that.
There is no reason to reason to respond to that. We don't know what their cognitive abilities are, it will make a big difference, likely the biggest difference.
However you said all other things being equal, so that's what I was going with.
There is a reason to respond to it, maybe you just don't understand it. I'll explain again.
The truck driver example does NOT show that time is less important than cognitive ability or whatever you're claiming is the most important thing. Why does it not show that? Because you don't know how much more time the truck driver spent compared to how much more cognitive ability the race car driver has. What if the race car driver is practicing WAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAY more efficiently, or is thinking about it WAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAY more, but the trucker driver only drover for an extra hour or so. You would say "see! Time doesn't matter as much as efficient practice!" But in reality you don't know that, because you have to somehow compare the gap in time to the gap in cognitive abilities.
Post 175
I can't seem to paste on here,
"time is probably the most important factor because nothing else matters without time"
I say time is the least important. It will pass anyway. What you do with that time is the most important, and in practice that is about cognition.
No you claimed I said "time is the most important factor" BEFORE I said that. The only reason I said that is because you were claiming I had already said that. That is separate to the argument we've been having because before that I had NEVER said that time was the most important factor. I deliberately asked you to find a quote where I said that BEFORE that post. That's why I asked that. You're being willfully ignorant about this.
Originally posted by VengeSunsoar When I have said time is not the most important. You have repeatedly said no.
In truth what you said is that time doesn't matter. I've said it does matter.
Again, show me where I said that time is the most important factor. And by the way, I'm sure you'll take me saying this as an opportunity to slip away from answering the previous question but I'm gonna say it anyway, time probably is the most important factor because nothing else matters without time. You will literally learn ZERO without time.
Let me repeat.
The truck driver drives for 8-15 hours per day. The race car driver drivers for 5-8 hours per day.
The truck driver is driving more. The race car driver is better.
That the truck driver is spending more time does not matter. The race car driving is using the time better.
The time will pass anyway.
What you do during that time is what matters, not the time itself.
And once again, when I have said time is not the most important aspect you have you have repeatedly said no.
No what that means is NOT that time doesn't matter, it's that time didn't matter enough to overcome the more efficient practice from the race car driver. That's what it means. It does NOT mean that time doesn't matter, which you've repeated many times.
Furthermore, you don't know if the gap between the trucker driver's time and the race car driver's time is the same as the gap between the truck driver's cognitive faculties and the race car driver's cognitive faculties.
What it means is that the even though the truck driver was spending more time, it did not matter because the race car driver was using it better.
Time is not the most important factor, it will pass regardless what you do.
You yourself said in the above paragraph, "time is the most important factor" yet here, the race driver was spending less time but using it better. Therefore time is not the most important factor, what you do with that time is.
Furthermore, you don't know if the gap between the trucker driver's time and the race car driver's time is the same as the gap between the truck driver's cognitive faculties and the race car driver's cognitive faculties.
I'll just repeat that because you didn't respond to it.
But prior to me taking you on for the sake of argument, when had I said that time is the most important factor? I most certainly did not. What you DID say however is that time does not matter. That is absolutely, 100%, very very very very very wrong. Time absolutely does matter. That's why I'm completely correct when I say that holding all things constant, the player who plays games more will tend to be more skilled. That was my original statement, and NOTHING you've said contradicts that.
There is no reason to reason to respond to that. We don't know what their cognitive abilities are, it will make a big difference, likely the biggest difference.
However you said all other things being equal, so that's what I was going with.
There is a reason to respond to it, maybe you just don't understand it. I'll explain again.
The truck driver example does NOT show that time is less important than cognitive ability or whatever you're claiming is the most important thing. Why does it not show that? Because you don't know how much more time the truck driver spent compared to how much more cognitive ability the race car driver has. What if the race car driver is practicing WAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAY more efficiently, or is thinking about it WAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAY more, but the trucker driver only drover for an extra hour or so. You would say "see! Time doesn't matter as much as efficient practice!" But in reality you don't know that, because you have to somehow compare the gap in time to the gap in cognitive abilities.
Post 175
I can't seem to paste on here,
"time is probably the most important factor because nothing else matters without time"
I say time is the least important. It will pass anyway. What you do with that time is the most important, and in practice that is about cognition.
No you claimed I said "time is the most important factor" BEFORE I said that. The only reason I said that is because you were claiming I had already said that. That is separate to the argument we've been having because before that I had NEVER said that time was the most important factor. I deliberately asked you to find a quote where I said that BEFORE that post. That's why I asked that. You're being willfully ignorant about this.
No. I said in the paragraph above, post 175 was above when I said that. That was the paragraph I was referring to.
I would say you are being deliberately obstinate, as well as willfully ignorant about this.
Look here are some things for you to read, all agree that time is not the most important factor. It is deliberate practice, cognition. One musician says if your doing if your doing it more than 4 hours a day, your not doing it right, another says practice with your fingers you'll need all day, practice with your mind you will do as much in 1 1/2 hours.
Either way I'm tired of debating this. As usual, there is nothing learned, nothing decided, we just go round and round the mulberry bush, making this debate completely pointless, so good luck.
Originally posted by VengeSunsoar When I have said time is not the most important. You have repeatedly said no.
In truth what you said is that time doesn't matter. I've said it does matter.
Again, show me where I said that time is the most important factor. And by the way, I'm sure you'll take me saying this as an opportunity to slip away from answering the previous question but I'm gonna say it anyway, time probably is the most important factor because nothing else matters without time. You will literally learn ZERO without time.
Let me repeat.
The truck driver drives for 8-15 hours per day. The race car driver drivers for 5-8 hours per day.
The truck driver is driving more. The race car driver is better.
That the truck driver is spending more time does not matter. The race car driving is using the time better.
The time will pass anyway.
What you do during that time is what matters, not the time itself.
And once again, when I have said time is not the most important aspect you have you have repeatedly said no.
No what that means is NOT that time doesn't matter, it's that time didn't matter enough to overcome the more efficient practice from the race car driver. That's what it means. It does NOT mean that time doesn't matter, which you've repeated many times.
Furthermore, you don't know if the gap between the trucker driver's time and the race car driver's time is the same as the gap between the truck driver's cognitive faculties and the race car driver's cognitive faculties.
What it means is that the even though the truck driver was spending more time, it did not matter because the race car driver was using it better.
Time is not the most important factor, it will pass regardless what you do.
You yourself said in the above paragraph, "time is the most important factor" yet here, the race driver was spending less time but using it better. Therefore time is not the most important factor, what you do with that time is.
Furthermore, you don't know if the gap between the trucker driver's time and the race car driver's time is the same as the gap between the truck driver's cognitive faculties and the race car driver's cognitive faculties.
I'll just repeat that because you didn't respond to it.
But prior to me taking you on for the sake of argument, when had I said that time is the most important factor? I most certainly did not. What you DID say however is that time does not matter. That is absolutely, 100%, very very very very very wrong. Time absolutely does matter. That's why I'm completely correct when I say that holding all things constant, the player who plays games more will tend to be more skilled. That was my original statement, and NOTHING you've said contradicts that.
There is no reason to reason to respond to that. We don't know what their cognitive abilities are, it will make a big difference, likely the biggest difference.
However you said all other things being equal, so that's what I was going with.
There is a reason to respond to it, maybe you just don't understand it. I'll explain again.
The truck driver example does NOT show that time is less important than cognitive ability or whatever you're claiming is the most important thing. Why does it not show that? Because you don't know how much more time the truck driver spent compared to how much more cognitive ability the race car driver has. What if the race car driver is practicing WAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAY more efficiently, or is thinking about it WAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAY more, but the trucker driver only drover for an extra hour or so. You would say "see! Time doesn't matter as much as efficient practice!" But in reality you don't know that, because you have to somehow compare the gap in time to the gap in cognitive abilities.
Post 175
I can't seem to paste on here,
"time is probably the most important factor because nothing else matters without time"
I say time is the least important. It will pass anyway. What you do with that time is the most important, and in practice that is about cognition.
No you claimed I said "time is the most important factor" BEFORE I said that. The only reason I said that is because you were claiming I had already said that. That is separate to the argument we've been having because before that I had NEVER said that time was the most important factor. I deliberately asked you to find a quote where I said that BEFORE that post. That's why I asked that. You're being willfully ignorant about this.
No. I said in the paragraph above, post 175 was above when I said that. That was the paragraph I was referring to.
YOU CLAIMED I SAID THAT BEFORE POST 175! I've said this three times now. And this isn't semantics. You started this discussion by disagreeing with my initial claim. My initial claim was NOT that time is the most important factor. My initial claim was that holding all things constant, time matters. As in hardcore players are probably more skilled than casual players because they play more. Why did you disagree with that?
I would say you are being deliberately obstinate, as well as willfully ignorant about this.
Look here are some things for you to read, all agree that time is not the most important factor. It is deliberate practice, cognition. One musician says if your doing if your doing it more than 4 hours a day, your not doing it right, another says practice with your fingers you'll need all day, practice with your mind you will do as much in 1 1/2 hours.
Either way I'm tired of debating this. As usual, there is nothing learned, nothing decided, we just go round and round the mulberry bush, making this debate completely pointless, so good luck.
Please provide quotes from those studies that back up your claim. Don't make me do your work for you. The snippets you included don't say that time is a less important factor than anything else. As I've shown, time is the most important factor because without time, nothing else matters. It may be tied with something else for most important, but it is no less important than anything else.
This is the longest semantics troll in history! +1 to both of you! rofl
Sorry but I'm not wrong. You say it's semantics, but in fact it's just that Venge is fundamentally misinformed about factor analysis. It's not semantics.
This is the longest semantics troll in history! +1 to both of you! rofl
Sorry but I'm not wrong. You say it's semantics, but in fact it's just that Venge is fundamentally misinformed about factor analysis. It's not semantics.
Either way, the page after page of it got me a good laugh, that's all that matters =P lol
MMO's ARE too easy and have been for awhile; hence I don't play them. I play MOBA's and single player games that are intended to be challenging (like Dark Souls)...as far as I can tell most people are doing that these days (especially with the MOBA part).
Originally posted by seacow1g MMO's ARE too easy and have been for awhile; hence I don't play them. I play MOBA's and single player games that are intended to be challenging (like Dark Souls)...as far as I can tell most people are doing that these days (especially with the MOBA part).
I plowed through Dark Souls 2 in the few days after release. I loved it. Those games are amazing.
Originally posted by seacow1g MMO's ARE too easy and have been for awhile; hence I don't play them. I play MOBA's and single player games that are intended to be challenging (like Dark Souls)...as far as I can tell most people are doing that these days (especially with the MOBA part).
I plowed through Dark Souls 2 in the few days after release. I loved it. Those games are amazing.
Indeed! Unfortunately they are few and far between. Thankfully they make them pretty massive to keep us busy for a while.
This thread seems to be derailing at one critical point constantly:
I don't think the OP is talking about the time invested in a game.
I stopped playing mmos avidly sometime during burning crusade. That is perspective of where I stand.
I put a lot of hours into raiding. And while i don't regret it ( It was a hobby like any other that I would spend some evenings and weekends of my life playing). I do feel we as gamers were being milked for every hour we played. Difficulty was based on stacking up your potions, making every opportunity to prepare for that eventful raid.. etc.... It was a hell of a time sink, and that wasn't needed.. or even fun.
No.... the OP is talking about something different:
Skill, Ability, Challenge and the idea that heaven forbid we actually are REWARDED for our efforts.
And that is something that is perfectly feasible within the context of a game that doesn't force you to dedicate your life to it.
This thread seems to be derailing at one critical point constantly:
I don't think the OP is talking about the time invested in a game.
I stopped playing mmos avidly sometime during burning crusade. That is perspective of where I stand.
I put a lot of hours into raiding. And while i don't regret it ( It was a hobby like any other that I would spend some evenings and weekends of my life playing). I do feel we as gamers were being milked for every hour we played. Difficulty was based on stacking up your potions, making every opportunity to prepare for that eventful raid.. etc.... It was a hell of a time sink, and that wasn't needed.. or even fun.
No.... the OP is talking about something different:
Skill, Ability, Challenge and the idea that heaven forbid we actually are REWARDED for our efforts.
And that is something that is perfectly feasible within the context of a game that doesn't force you to dedicate your life to it.
Originally posted by VengeSunsoar When I have said time is not the most important. You have repeatedly said no.
In truth what you said is that time doesn't matter. I've said it does matter.
Again, show me where I said that time is the most important factor. And by the way, I'm sure you'll take me saying this as an opportunity to slip away from answering the previous question but I'm gonna say it anyway, time probably is the most important factor because nothing else matters without time. You will literally learn ZERO without time.
Is the following bit of math a true statement?
3x + t < 4x + t
If you think so then take the next step with the math to prove it.
3x + t - t < 4x + t - t
3x < 4x
3x/x < 4x/x
3 < 4
Remove the factor that is going to be the same on both sides of the equation to see what really matters. "t" is time by the way. Let "x" be the cognitive reaction time for humans.
Yes, in general more time equals better skill relative to a single person, but when comparing more than one person, the level of effort, desire to learn and built in priming to learn whatever is being learned take precedence. It is just far more likely that the amount of time spent will be comparable or negligible than it will be that two people have the same desire to play, learn the game and will have the same amount of priming to learn a game's mechanics.
None of the above matters though. We're not talking about rocket science here, or even driving a car at a moderately fast speed. There are stories, on the internet, of eight year olds playing MMORPGs as far back as UO. These games aren't that hard and they never have been. The biggest barrier to advancement and success has been the amount of time a person is willing to put into the games, doing the same thing over and over again to get bigger numbers. It's not about skill or cognitive abilities and it never has been. A sixth grade education is enough to excel at all of them, except maybe TSW, but then you'd only need like an 8th grade education. It's about a willingness to ignore everything else because it takes so much time to complete the arbitrary tasks, convincing yourself after awhile that you couldn't possibly sink all this effort into something that wasn't worthwhile, so this must be an awesome thing you are doing. Much like posting on these forums.
I can not remember winning or losing a single debate on the internet.
Originally posted by VengeSunsoar When I have said time is not the most important. You have repeatedly said no.
In truth what you said is that time doesn't matter. I've said it does matter.
Again, show me where I said that time is the most important factor. And by the way, I'm sure you'll take me saying this as an opportunity to slip away from answering the previous question but I'm gonna say it anyway, time probably is the most important factor because nothing else matters without time. You will literally learn ZERO without time.
Is the following bit of math a true statement?
3x + t < 4x + t
If you think so then take the next step with the math to prove it.
3x + t - t < 4x + t - t
3x < 4x
3x/x < 4x/x
3 < 4
Remove the factor that is going to be the same on both sides of the equation to see what really matters. "t" is time by the way. Let "x" be the cognitive reaction time for humans.
Yes, in general more time equals better skill relative to a single person, but when comparing more than one person, the level of effort, desire to learn and built in priming to learn whatever is being learned take precedence. It is just far more likely that the amount of time spent will be comparable or negligible than it will be that two people have the same desire to play, learn the game and will have the same amount of priming to learn a game's mechanics.
None of the above matters though. We're not talking about rocket science here, or even driving a car at a moderately fast speed. There are stories, on the internet, of eight year olds playing MMORPGs as far back as UO. These games aren't that hard and they never have been. The biggest barrier to advancement and success has been the amount of time a person is willing to put into the games, doing the same thing over and over again to get bigger numbers. It's not about skill or cognitive abilities and it never has been. A sixth grade education is enough to excel at all of them, except maybe TSW, but then you'd only need like an 8th grade education. It's about a willingness to ignore everything else because it takes so much time to complete the arbitrary tasks, convincing yourself after awhile that you couldn't possibly sink all this effort into something that wasn't worthwhile, so this must be an awesome thing you are doing. Much like posting on these forums.
Indeed. I've seen players in LoL who required 3 years to be on top. Then there are players who can achieve that in 3 months. Then again, some of that skill carries over from the previous games you've played. People who played DotA surely have an advantage over people who haven't played MOBAs before.
But the games we play, they are never entirely new. If you, Holophonist, feel that games today are easy, consider that you've had 10 or more years of practice playing these games. And apart from few exceptions, they all have pretty much identical gameplay with a gimmick here and a gimmick there.
For a "generic MMORPG", it is no doubt a challenge to design content that is both, not too challenging to entirely new players, but not too easy for the veterans either. So if you really, really want to challenge yourself. Try playing new games with completely different gameplay.
See War Thunder's historical battles (mode) for example: It is sure to take a while before you master the art of air combat. It is in completely different head space than what you are used to from MMORPGs.
If you keep looking, you are bound to find something that you find challenging. But from MMORPGs, I don't think we see too much challenge until some dev tries and succeeds with action combat again.
I skate to where the puck is going to be, not where it has been-Wayne Gretzky
Most MMO's I have tried had a hard mode and most had a stupid, hard mode. It was just easier to ignore those option in the race to end game, then on to complaints of lack of end game.
I don't really understand this logic. Old games were more like a chess match. You had to learn to make the right move at the right time. To an extent it was reflexes, but not like an action game where you dodge.
Action games are generally reactionary. That usually doesn't require much in the way of thought, but only in the way of being a being able to react quickly. Pretty much anyone can play a sport and rely on their reflexes. Some will have faster reflexes and others will not. That isn't exactly skill as much your body naturally reacting. Like playing chess though you can improve your abilities at said sport by practicing.
In old MMOs "EQ/D&D style" you had the healer, DPS, tank, and CC. This was generally the optimal formation found by players playing the game. I don't believe it was ever intended that there was an optimal setup. In D&D you generally didn't heal until after a battle was over.
A lot of people have posted a lot of different things about how this doesn't make the game challenging just annoying or time consuming. There are lot of things I've mentioned that made it difficult. People can continue to right them off because they feel it's a waste of their time to spend on a X hours on X game. The truth is those games weren't easy. Sure you could do it with enough time, but that is the case in most things in life. The fact that it require time and a lot of study to complete certain things means it was more challenging then today's games. Generally you can jump in and get to max level fairly quickly without ever conversing with one person in the game. If a six year old could complete things in EQ then a 1 year old must be able to easily get from 1 to max level in modern MMOs without any difficulty. Personally I think the difficulty was created by a mix of having to socially interact with and depend on other people in game, having to accept others differences, having to have a large measure of patience, and having to be creative to succeed.
I'm sure everything is just a waste of time to people. They could be spending it earning more money, talking to their friends all day, doing some hobby, playing a sport, spending time with their family, or whatever makes them happy. The thing is people tend to belittle other things because they feel they aren't important to them. If someone spends X amount of time on a game then they are wasting all their time because X game is so simple a 6 year old could play it. Perhaps to some people the social interaction and the creative things that happened in game was worth the time spent. Some people perhaps actually had a really good time and that's why they complain to see such a thing come about again even though it's futile in this day and age where everyone seems to only spend a little time on everything and no one has much free time to spend on anything in general. This age of social networking where people are only willing to talk to their friends/family in most cases and aren't willing to interact with people outside of their social group of trusted friends.
Originally posted by VengeSunsoar When I have said time is not the most important. You have repeatedly said no.
In truth what you said is that time doesn't matter. I've said it does matter.
Again, show me where I said that time is the most important factor. And by the way, I'm sure you'll take me saying this as an opportunity to slip away from answering the previous question but I'm gonna say it anyway, time probably is the most important factor because nothing else matters without time. You will literally learn ZERO without time.
Is the following bit of math a true statement?
3x + t < 4x + t
If you think so then take the next step with the math to prove it.
3x + t - t < 4x + t - t
3x < 4x
3x/x < 4x/x
3 < 4
Remove the factor that is going to be the same on both sides of the equation to see what really matters. "t" is time by the way. Let "x" be the cognitive reaction time for humans.
This equation, just like Venge's examples, isn't measuring time. You're assuming the same level of time for each person, but differing levels of cognitive reaction time. How about this?
x + 3t < x +4t
Now all of a sudden it looks like time is "what really matters."
Yes, in general more time equals better skill relative to a single person, but when comparing more than one person, the level of effort, desire to learn and built in priming to learn whatever is being learned take precedence. It is just far more likely that the amount of time spent will be comparable or negligible than it will be that two people have the same desire to play, learn the game and will have the same amount of priming to learn a game's mechanics.
None of the above matters though. We're not talking about rocket science here, or even driving a car at a moderately fast speed. There are stories, on the internet, of eight year olds playing MMORPGs as far back as UO. These games aren't that hard and they never have been. The biggest barrier to advancement and success has been the amount of time a person is willing to put into the games, doing the same thing over and over again to get bigger numbers. It's not about skill or cognitive abilities and it never has been. A sixth grade education is enough to excel at all of them, except maybe TSW, but then you'd only need like an 8th grade education. It's about a willingness to ignore everything else because it takes so much time to complete the arbitrary tasks, convincing yourself after awhile that you couldn't possibly sink all this effort into something that wasn't worthwhile, so this must be an awesome thing you are doing. Much like posting on these forums.
To be honest I'm not sure how any of this contradicts what I said. It doesn't matter if things like level of effort take precedence because we don't know how much effort each person is putting into the game. That's why I've said so many times that holding all things constant, games made for hardcore gamers will tend to be harder than games made for casual players. If we somehow knew how much effort each person was putting into learning the game, we could come to a different conclusion about casual games vs hardcore games.
Not only that, just because MMORPGs in general don't take much skill, doesn't make my statement any less true. Some MMORPGs take more skill than others, and they tend to be the hardcore ones. The more casual MMORPGs will tend to be the easier ones.
Originally posted by VengeSunsoar When I have said time is not the most important. You have repeatedly said no.
In truth what you said is that time doesn't matter. I've said it does matter.
Again, show me where I said that time is the most important factor. And by the way, I'm sure you'll take me saying this as an opportunity to slip away from answering the previous question but I'm gonna say it anyway, time probably is the most important factor because nothing else matters without time. You will literally learn ZERO without time.
Is the following bit of math a true statement?
3x + t < 4x + t
If you think so then take the next step with the math to prove it.
3x + t - t < 4x + t - t
3x < 4x
3x/x < 4x/x
3 < 4
Remove the factor that is going to be the same on both sides of the equation to see what really matters. "t" is time by the way. Let "x" be the cognitive reaction time for humans.
Yes, in general more time equals better skill relative to a single person, but when comparing more than one person, the level of effort, desire to learn and built in priming to learn whatever is being learned take precedence. It is just far more likely that the amount of time spent will be comparable or negligible than it will be that two people have the same desire to play, learn the game and will have the same amount of priming to learn a game's mechanics.
None of the above matters though. We're not talking about rocket science here, or even driving a car at a moderately fast speed. There are stories, on the internet, of eight year olds playing MMORPGs as far back as UO. These games aren't that hard and they never have been. The biggest barrier to advancement and success has been the amount of time a person is willing to put into the games, doing the same thing over and over again to get bigger numbers. It's not about skill or cognitive abilities and it never has been. A sixth grade education is enough to excel at all of them, except maybe TSW, but then you'd only need like an 8th grade education. It's about a willingness to ignore everything else because it takes so much time to complete the arbitrary tasks, convincing yourself after awhile that you couldn't possibly sink all this effort into something that wasn't worthwhile, so this must be an awesome thing you are doing. Much like posting on these forums.
Indeed. I've seen players in LoL who required 3 years to be on top. Then there are players who can achieve that in 3 months. Then again, some of that skill carries over from the previous games you've played. People who played DotA surely have an advantage over people who haven't played MOBAs before.
But the games we play, they are never entirely new. If you, Holophonist, feel that games today are easy, consider that you've had 10 or more years of practice playing these games. And apart from few exceptions, they all have pretty much identical gameplay with a gimmick here and a gimmick there.
For a "generic MMORPG", it is no doubt a challenge to design content that is both, not too challenging to entirely new players, but not too easy for the veterans either. So if you really, really want to challenge yourself. Try playing new games with completely different gameplay.
See War Thunder's historical battles (mode) for example: It is sure to take a while before you master the art of air combat. It is in completely different head space than what you are used to from MMORPGs.
If you keep looking, you are bound to find something that you find challenging. But from MMORPGs, I don't think we see too much challenge until some dev tries and succeeds with action combat again.
The problem with your first paragraph is we have no information about how naturally skilled casual players are compared to hardcore players. So that's why we have to assume they're same. Assuming they're the same, the group that plays more will probably be better. And by the way, assuming they're the same is a generous concession on my part; it wouldn't be hard to make the case that hardcore players focus more, think about the game more while not playing, etc.
When it comes to MMO's I don't particularly care how mechanically easy they are, though I do prefer fps style aiming as it's far more engaging. I'm just making a statement that I believe to be true: Casual games will tend to be easier than hardcore games.
I just wish a game could find a happy balance. I don't want to get everything (or most stuff) in a weekend. But then again, I don't want to grind for a year to be competitive. It seems its one extreme to the other. Theme park MMOs have realized, if they hype the game enough, use a familiar and popular title name, that they can sucker enough people to pay 50 bucks out of the gate.
Indie games (developers disgusted with the theme park model) go full boar the other direction, full loot, outrageous repetitive grinding, and pathetic populations.
I wish there was a middle ground game, something that is fun to play, but takes some investment to be competitive, but not too much.
The most disturbing part of the online games now, the AAA ones, is that you can solo the whole game, without a guild. That really removes the entire spirit of an MMO.
What happen to mmo's now? I remember when a mmo where a challenge. One play style, players adapting to the content, true team play, real player communities, Countless hours of dying and few players ever reaching really top level/gear because of hard work. But now, reaching top level can be done in a weekend, content is adjusted for the player so they can get through it, everything can be solo'ed in a weekend.
What makes anyone think the next two big mmo's coming out will be anything different? I mean, it more of the same. Will there be anything different? I mean really. The last 2 AAA mmo's I played, reaching top level was easy, I rarely died, leveling was a joke, getting high-end gear was not that difficult. I did most of that with a month's time. After, 3 months, I had no interest in continuing to play. Does anyone really thing the AAA games Wildstar online or Elder scrolls online will last that long?
I've played some of the best AAA mmo's out there, daoc, wow, rift, gw2, ac and with each new mmo the games gets easier. I'm here to bash but I can't see next two mmos as something that will change anything. Does anyone really seeing themselves play ESO or Wildstar for 6 months or longer?
Maybe it not just mmo's but video games in general. I watched this youtube post by Review Tech USA some up everything I felt.
Haha and at the same time people are voting for skill reduction and such minimalist approaches to gaming like we now see in ESO.
"But MMOs are too easy, really" - yeah well go figure if you on the other hand Want it to be so easy (not speaking of you OP in particular, more the vast majority of gamers out there)
Comments
No what that means is NOT that time doesn't matter, it's that time didn't matter enough to overcome the more efficient practice from the race car driver. That's what it means. It does NOT mean that time doesn't matter, which you've repeated many times.
Furthermore, you don't know if the gap between the trucker driver's time and the race car driver's time is the same as the gap between the truck driver's cognitive faculties and the race car driver's cognitive faculties.
Goodbye I guess?
In case you end up sticking around, it's not simply nostalgia. I'm currently playing Darkfall Unholy Wars which does fulfill, at least partialaly, that itch that I've had for oldschool games.
What it means is that the even though the truck driver was spending more time, it did not matter because the race car driver was using it better.
Time is not the most important factor, it will pass regardless what you do.
You yourself said in the above paragraph, "time is the most important factor" yet here, the race driver was spending less time but using it better. Therefore time is not the most important factor, what you do with that time is.
Furthermore, you don't know if the gap between the trucker driver's time and the race car driver's time is the same as the gap between the truck driver's cognitive faculties and the race car driver's cognitive faculties.
I'll just repeat that because you didn't respond to it.
But prior to me taking you on for the sake of argument, when had I said that time is the most important factor? I most certainly did not. What you DID say however is that time does not matter. That is absolutely, 100%, very very very very very wrong. Time absolutely does matter. That's why I'm completely correct when I say that holding all things constant, the player who plays games more will tend to be more skilled. That was my original statement, and NOTHING you've said contradicts that.
There is no reason to respond to that. We don't know what their cognitive abilities are, it will make a big difference, likely the biggest difference.
However you said all other things being equal, so that's what I was going with.
Post 175
I can't seem to paste on here,
"time is probably the most important factor because nothing else matters without time"
I say time is the least important. It will pass anyway. What you do with that time is the most important, and in practice that is about cognition.
There is a reason to respond to it, maybe you just don't understand it. I'll explain again.
The truck driver example does NOT show that time is less important than cognitive ability or whatever you're claiming is the most important thing. Why does it not show that? Because you don't know how much more time the truck driver spent compared to how much more cognitive ability the race car driver has. What if the race car driver is practicing WAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAY more efficiently, or is thinking about it WAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAY more, but the trucker driver only drover for an extra hour or so. You would say "see! Time doesn't matter as much as efficient practice!" But in reality you don't know that, because you have to somehow compare the gap in time to the gap in cognitive abilities.
No you claimed I said "time is the most important factor" BEFORE I said that. The only reason I said that is because you were claiming I had already said that. That is separate to the argument we've been having because before that I had NEVER said that time was the most important factor. I deliberately asked you to find a quote where I said that BEFORE that post. That's why I asked that. You're being willfully ignorant about this.
No. I said in the paragraph above, post 175 was above when I said that. That was the paragraph I was referring to.
I would say you are being deliberately obstinate, as well as willfully ignorant about this.
Look here are some things for you to read, all agree that time is not the most important factor. It is deliberate practice, cognition. One musician says if your doing if your doing it more than 4 hours a day, your not doing it right, another says practice with your fingers you'll need all day, practice with your mind you will do as much in 1 1/2 hours.
Either way I'm tired of debating this. As usual, there is nothing learned, nothing decided, we just go round and round the mulberry bush, making this debate completely pointless, so good luck.
http://graphics8.nytimes.com/images/blogs/freakonomics/pdf/DeliberatePractice(PsychologicalReview).pdf
The role of deliberate practice
https://www.apa.org/education/k12/practice-acquisition.aspx
rote repetition, simply repeating a task, will not automatically improve performance
http://www.bulletproofmusician.com/how-many-hours-a-day-should-you-practice/
deliberate practice
http://www.athletics-training.com/articles/sports-psychology.html
control and mindset changes
http://jamesclear.com/deliberate-practice
a look at how the best performers practiced
http://aubreydaniels.com/pmezine/expert-performance-apologies-dr-ericsson-it-not-10000-hours-deliberate-practice
The behaviour that you want to occur again… repetition alone, outside of a deliberate plan by which consequences are applied is not enough
http://ideas.time.com/2012/01/25/the-myth-of-practice-makes-perfect/
deliberate practice
HOLY CRAP!!!!
This is the longest semantics troll in history! +1 to both of you! rofl
YOU CLAIMED I SAID THAT BEFORE POST 175! I've said this three times now. And this isn't semantics. You started this discussion by disagreeing with my initial claim. My initial claim was NOT that time is the most important factor. My initial claim was that holding all things constant, time matters. As in hardcore players are probably more skilled than casual players because they play more. Why did you disagree with that?
Please provide quotes from those studies that back up your claim. Don't make me do your work for you. The snippets you included don't say that time is a less important factor than anything else. As I've shown, time is the most important factor because without time, nothing else matters. It may be tied with something else for most important, but it is no less important than anything else.
Sorry but I'm not wrong. You say it's semantics, but in fact it's just that Venge is fundamentally misinformed about factor analysis. It's not semantics.
Either way, the page after page of it got me a good laugh, that's all that matters =P lol
I plowed through Dark Souls 2 in the few days after release. I loved it. Those games are amazing.
Indeed! Unfortunately they are few and far between. Thankfully they make them pretty massive to keep us busy for a while.
This thread seems to be derailing at one critical point constantly:
I don't think the OP is talking about the time invested in a game.
I stopped playing mmos avidly sometime during burning crusade. That is perspective of where I stand.
I put a lot of hours into raiding. And while i don't regret it ( It was a hobby like any other that I would spend some evenings and weekends of my life playing). I do feel we as gamers were being milked for every hour we played. Difficulty was based on stacking up your potions, making every opportunity to prepare for that eventful raid.. etc.... It was a hell of a time sink, and that wasn't needed.. or even fun.
No.... the OP is talking about something different:
Skill, Ability, Challenge and the idea that heaven forbid we actually are REWARDED for our efforts.
And that is something that is perfectly feasible within the context of a game that doesn't force you to dedicate your life to it.
thank you
Read my blog http://sanmonocobra.blogspot.com/
MMORPG is about a building a community which will challenge the virtual environment, so i would say they have become harder
or out of their rails... you can thank WoW later for that .
Is the following bit of math a true statement?
3x + t < 4x + t
If you think so then take the next step with the math to prove it.
3x + t - t < 4x + t - t
3x < 4x
3x/x < 4x/x
3 < 4
Remove the factor that is going to be the same on both sides of the equation to see what really matters. "t" is time by the way. Let "x" be the cognitive reaction time for humans.
Yes, in general more time equals better skill relative to a single person, but when comparing more than one person, the level of effort, desire to learn and built in priming to learn whatever is being learned take precedence. It is just far more likely that the amount of time spent will be comparable or negligible than it will be that two people have the same desire to play, learn the game and will have the same amount of priming to learn a game's mechanics.
None of the above matters though. We're not talking about rocket science here, or even driving a car at a moderately fast speed. There are stories, on the internet, of eight year olds playing MMORPGs as far back as UO. These games aren't that hard and they never have been. The biggest barrier to advancement and success has been the amount of time a person is willing to put into the games, doing the same thing over and over again to get bigger numbers. It's not about skill or cognitive abilities and it never has been. A sixth grade education is enough to excel at all of them, except maybe TSW, but then you'd only need like an 8th grade education. It's about a willingness to ignore everything else because it takes so much time to complete the arbitrary tasks, convincing yourself after awhile that you couldn't possibly sink all this effort into something that wasn't worthwhile, so this must be an awesome thing you are doing. Much like posting on these forums.
I can not remember winning or losing a single debate on the internet.
Indeed. I've seen players in LoL who required 3 years to be on top. Then there are players who can achieve that in 3 months. Then again, some of that skill carries over from the previous games you've played. People who played DotA surely have an advantage over people who haven't played MOBAs before.
But the games we play, they are never entirely new. If you, Holophonist, feel that games today are easy, consider that you've had 10 or more years of practice playing these games. And apart from few exceptions, they all have pretty much identical gameplay with a gimmick here and a gimmick there.
For a "generic MMORPG", it is no doubt a challenge to design content that is both, not too challenging to entirely new players, but not too easy for the veterans either. So if you really, really want to challenge yourself. Try playing new games with completely different gameplay.
See War Thunder's historical battles (mode) for example: It is sure to take a while before you master the art of air combat. It is in completely different head space than what you are used to from MMORPGs.
If you keep looking, you are bound to find something that you find challenging. But from MMORPGs, I don't think we see too much challenge until some dev tries and succeeds with action combat again.
I skate to where the puck is going to be, not where it has been -Wayne Gretzky
I don't really understand this logic. Old games were more like a chess match. You had to learn to make the right move at the right time. To an extent it was reflexes, but not like an action game where you dodge.
Action games are generally reactionary. That usually doesn't require much in the way of thought, but only in the way of being a being able to react quickly. Pretty much anyone can play a sport and rely on their reflexes. Some will have faster reflexes and others will not. That isn't exactly skill as much your body naturally reacting. Like playing chess though you can improve your abilities at said sport by practicing.
In old MMOs "EQ/D&D style" you had the healer, DPS, tank, and CC. This was generally the optimal formation found by players playing the game. I don't believe it was ever intended that there was an optimal setup. In D&D you generally didn't heal until after a battle was over.
A lot of people have posted a lot of different things about how this doesn't make the game challenging just annoying or time consuming. There are lot of things I've mentioned that made it difficult. People can continue to right them off because they feel it's a waste of their time to spend on a X hours on X game. The truth is those games weren't easy. Sure you could do it with enough time, but that is the case in most things in life. The fact that it require time and a lot of study to complete certain things means it was more challenging then today's games. Generally you can jump in and get to max level fairly quickly without ever conversing with one person in the game. If a six year old could complete things in EQ then a 1 year old must be able to easily get from 1 to max level in modern MMOs without any difficulty. Personally I think the difficulty was created by a mix of having to socially interact with and depend on other people in game, having to accept others differences, having to have a large measure of patience, and having to be creative to succeed.
I'm sure everything is just a waste of time to people. They could be spending it earning more money, talking to their friends all day, doing some hobby, playing a sport, spending time with their family, or whatever makes them happy. The thing is people tend to belittle other things because they feel they aren't important to them. If someone spends X amount of time on a game then they are wasting all their time because X game is so simple a 6 year old could play it. Perhaps to some people the social interaction and the creative things that happened in game was worth the time spent. Some people perhaps actually had a really good time and that's why they complain to see such a thing come about again even though it's futile in this day and age where everyone seems to only spend a little time on everything and no one has much free time to spend on anything in general. This age of social networking where people are only willing to talk to their friends/family in most cases and aren't willing to interact with people outside of their social group of trusted friends.
This equation, just like Venge's examples, isn't measuring time. You're assuming the same level of time for each person, but differing levels of cognitive reaction time. How about this?
x + 3t < x +4t
Now all of a sudden it looks like time is "what really matters."
To be honest I'm not sure how any of this contradicts what I said. It doesn't matter if things like level of effort take precedence because we don't know how much effort each person is putting into the game. That's why I've said so many times that holding all things constant, games made for hardcore gamers will tend to be harder than games made for casual players. If we somehow knew how much effort each person was putting into learning the game, we could come to a different conclusion about casual games vs hardcore games.
Not only that, just because MMORPGs in general don't take much skill, doesn't make my statement any less true. Some MMORPGs take more skill than others, and they tend to be the hardcore ones. The more casual MMORPGs will tend to be the easier ones.
The problem with your first paragraph is we have no information about how naturally skilled casual players are compared to hardcore players. So that's why we have to assume they're same. Assuming they're the same, the group that plays more will probably be better. And by the way, assuming they're the same is a generous concession on my part; it wouldn't be hard to make the case that hardcore players focus more, think about the game more while not playing, etc.
When it comes to MMO's I don't particularly care how mechanically easy they are, though I do prefer fps style aiming as it's far more engaging. I'm just making a statement that I believe to be true: Casual games will tend to be easier than hardcore games.
I just wish a game could find a happy balance. I don't want to get everything (or most stuff) in a weekend. But then again, I don't want to grind for a year to be competitive. It seems its one extreme to the other. Theme park MMOs have realized, if they hype the game enough, use a familiar and popular title name, that they can sucker enough people to pay 50 bucks out of the gate.
Indie games (developers disgusted with the theme park model) go full boar the other direction, full loot, outrageous repetitive grinding, and pathetic populations.
I wish there was a middle ground game, something that is fun to play, but takes some investment to be competitive, but not too much.
The most disturbing part of the online games now, the AAA ones, is that you can solo the whole game, without a guild. That really removes the entire spirit of an MMO.
Haha and at the same time people are voting for skill reduction and such minimalist approaches to gaming like we now see in ESO.
"But MMOs are too easy, really" - yeah well go figure if you on the other hand Want it to be so easy (not speaking of you OP in particular, more the vast majority of gamers out there)