| I'm talking about the same 'naturally talented' or 'naturally gifted' individuals in sports, musical instruments, etc. Do you think it's possible for every normal person to achieve the same level of skill in any games if given enough time? Could one become the best of the best in one game but horrible at another no matter how much time was put into it? |
 |
| Hand eye coordination, definitely can be classified as natural talent. Having played some games with the same people for a very long time, people definitely plateau. Some people don't have the attention to detail necessary to "take it to the next level". |
| Yes. Games aren't that heavy on physical attributes after all. |
[i]"Yet each man kills the thing he loves, [/i]By each let this be heard, Some do it with a bitter look, Some with a flattering word, The coward does it with a kiss, The brave man with a sword!'' ~Oscar |
| Sure, with almost every other ability in existence? I'm great at strategy games, FPSs, MOBAs and other crap, but I'm utterly shit at Fighting games (I just can't get used to them), I don't know any other genres where I'm shit though. Fighting games for me can be pretty boring too, so that's another reason, I won't put any effort. In general, when I have a goal in mind, no matter what it takes, I get it done, if I do care about it. |
Play League of Legends here! Autocrat said: Hitler was good, objectively. |
Immahnoob said: Sure, with almost every other ability in existence? I'm great at strategy games, FPSs, MOBAs and other crap, but I'm utterly shit at Fighting games (I just can't get used to them), I don't know any other genres where I'm shit though. Fighting games for me can be pretty boring too, so that's another reason, I won't put any effort. In general, when I have a goal in mind, no matter what it takes, I get it done, if I do care about it. Immahnoob said: Sure, with almost every other ability in existence? I'm great at strategy games, FPSs, MOBAs and other crap, but I'm utterly shit at Fighting games (I just can't get used to them), I don't know any other genres where I'm shit though. To be honest finding somebody who plays League of Legends makes me laugh because it's such a stupid game yet I also play it. I can understand the topic's question though. When it comes to music rhythm-based games, I can pick any of them up and already be playing the second hardest difficulty with high grades after getting accustomed to the controls, which usually only takes a few songs. Then a bit of practice (like a day or two) and I'm at the highest difficulty. |
| I always start with the highest difficulty when first playing. |
Play League of Legends here! Autocrat said: Hitler was good, objectively. |
Immahnoob said: I always start with the highest difficulty when first playing. It depends on the game, but you most likely are skilled at it, too. Go around online and you'll see a ton of people struggling with the second difficulty a week after getting the game. |
| I meant every game I start, including new ones. I did this since I was little too, so I guess it must be that that makes me so good at games. |
Play League of Legends here! Autocrat said: Hitler was good, objectively. |
flaxman85 said: I'm talking about the same 'naturally talented' or 'naturally gifted' individuals in sports, musical instruments, etc. Yes. flaxman85 said: Do you think it's possible for every normal person to achieve the same level of skill in any games if given enough time? Yes. flaxman85 said: Could one become the best of the best in one game but horrible at another no matter how much time was put into it? Hmm I'd say yes again, but I'm not too sure on that one. |
| natural talent can be overcome by practice at some point. People with talent just have a head start. even 'talent' could be mistaken for years of practice. My friends think I'm talented at games, but I've been playing them since I was 4 or 5 so it's really more about instinct and reflexes built up over the years at this point. |
 |
Immahnoob said: I always start with the highest difficulty when first playing. How about Single-Player game? For me I start with the easiest just so I can enjoy the story. |
 |
Immahnoob said: I meant every game I start, including new ones. I did this since I was little too, so I guess it must be that that makes me so good at games. Oh, yeah. So you can just find any DDR and play heavy/expert well? |
Immahnoob said: I always start with the highest difficulty when first playing. Same here. |
[i]"Yet each man kills the thing he loves, [/i]By each let this be heard, Some do it with a bitter look, Some with a flattering word, The coward does it with a kiss, The brave man with a sword!'' ~Oscar |
| Yes I find myself a lot quicker than my opponents. On FPS games I usually come high or top on the scoreboard. Ive watched others play and they seem very slow compared |
 |
| Nobody's naturally gifted in anything. Some people will have slight natural advantages, such as intelligence, reflexes and even hand size relative to a controller can come into play, but honestly things that are natural are negligible factors. All other skill comes from practice, effort, intuitiveness and building relative skills in the other areas of your life. |
xEmptiness said: "if we follow what SW is suggesting, nihilism is the conclusion" |
Drakehawk said: Single player games tend to be the only ones that have difficulty settings... So yes, I play at the highest difficulty. Immahnoob said: I always start with the highest difficulty when first playing. How about Single-Player game? For me I start with the easiest just so I can enjoy the story. Arietta_ said: I doubt it, I played those just a few times in my whole life, although I do believe I could fare better than the average user, yes.So you can just find any DDR and play heavy/expert well? Space-Wizard said: Do you always love to contradict yourself and bring in some retarded statements to the table? Nobody's naturally gifted in anything. Some people will have slight natural advantages, such as intelligence, reflexes and even hand size relative to a controller can come into play, but honestly things that are natural are negligible factors. All other skill comes from practice, effort, intuitiveness and building relative skills in the other areas of your life. |
Play League of Legends here! Autocrat said: Hitler was good, objectively. |
Space-Wizard said: All other skill comes from practice, effort, intuitiveness and building relative skills in the other areas of your life. I thought all your systems NPC's were programmed. |
|
| Don't team up on my best friend Space Wizard. Really resonated well with that Ganjalf the Green image. But it's not too wrong to say that talent raises the skill floor, rather than the ceiling. Potential is usually higher in somebody intelligent, experimental and innovative. Talent makes the learning process easier, lowers difficulty, et cetera, but somebody who is terrible at math can get better with enough practice than some pompous guy who never practices but learns easily. |
Spooky_Love said: I thought all your systems NPC's were programmed. My system? What on earth are you talking about I don't own any kind of system, and I don't know about any NPCs, that's like a weird twenty-first century video game term. Just simulated characters. I'm talking about real people, not simulated characters. Simulated characters just have whatever traits they are randomly generated with. |
xEmptiness said: "if we follow what SW is suggesting, nihilism is the conclusion" |
Gator said: flaxman85 said: I'm talking about the same 'naturally talented' or 'naturally gifted' individuals in sports, musical instruments, etc. Yes. flaxman85 said: Do you think it's possible for every normal person to achieve the same level of skill in any games if given enough time? Yes. flaxman85 said: Could one become the best of the best in one game but horrible at another no matter how much time was put into it? Hmm I'd say yes again, but I'm not too sure on that one. Same here,but the last question, maybe i think so. |
| Today they say you're crazy, tomorrow they will say you're a genious. |
Arietta_ said: It doesn't mean he doesn't have an advantage and that it actually matters.Don't team up on my best friend Space Wizard. Really resonated well with that Ganjalf the Green image. But it's not too wrong to say that talent raises the skill floor, rather than the ceiling. Potential is usually higher in somebody intelligent, experimental and innovative. Talent makes the learning process easier, lowers difficulty, et cetera, but somebody who is terrible at math can get better with enough practice than some pompous guy who never practices but learns easily. |
Play League of Legends here! Autocrat said: Hitler was good, objectively. |
| yes |
 |
Immahnoob said: Arietta_ said: It doesn't mean he doesn't have an advantage and that it actually matters.Don't team up on my best friend Space Wizard. Really resonated well with that Ganjalf the Green image. But it's not too wrong to say that talent raises the skill floor, rather than the ceiling. Potential is usually higher in somebody intelligent, experimental and innovative. Talent makes the learning process easier, lowers difficulty, et cetera, but somebody who is terrible at math can get better with enough practice than some pompous guy who never practices but learns easily. Of course it means nothing against having an advantage or not. Some people have inherent advantages while others have better circumstances or more resources to apply toward learning a particular skill. |
| I think naturally gifted will always win out in the end especially if in the creative field. I had a tutor at university who said something once I still remember. They said: "You can teach a creative person to be technically minded but you can't teach the technically minded to be creative" This remained true as during out course the students who were very technical but not very creative made good 3D models but their designs were very standard and rather bland. Whilst the creative students whilst not making as clean 3D models came up with some really interesting designs. My models were shit but I still had good technical students saying to me that they were jealous of my designs. I told them why when they can pretty much build anything whilst I could only do basic stuff, he told me that sure he could build things like wheels, cars and existing things but he couldn't think up some new design to save his life. So I guess that was nice. Its not some standard though there are times when its not like this. So in a round about way what im saying is that people who have a natural nac for things will generally end up always been better than someone who studied hard. Its why the naturally gifted athletes beat the average ones. |
SpooksMar 13, 2015 8:02 AM
|
| Well, certain games do require good timing, good hand-eye coordination, good planning, so why not? But like some of the comments said, games can be mastered by practice. Talent just gives certain people a head-start. Still, you can't help wondering that in certain cases like the Koreans who are infamously good in Starcraft 2, how much of that is talent or how much is painful years of practice that shows in their skills? |
 |
Get humbled. Space-Wizard said: Let's not forget autism. The single greatest natural advantage and the envy of all 'gamers.'All other skill comes from practice, effort, intuitiveness and building relative skills in the other areas of your life. |
| No matter how many times I play, I suck at call of duty & battlefield so.....yh I think talent DOES exist. |
| My Manga List My Anime List Shabada shabadabadaba I am DjG545 aka Dj Fo Fo aka The Mutha Fkn Name I'm Usin Now |
| there is natural talent for anything |
 |
KLKfanboy said: there is natural talent for anything Even loafing around? |
| there sure is. practice + talent ≠ practice + more practice |
| Signature removed. Please follow the signature rules, as defined in the Site & Forum Guidelines. |
Spooky_Love said: "You can teach a creative person to be technically minded but you can't teach the technically minded to be creative" I disagree with this statement. I think that a technically minded person can learn to be creative, but it's not really something that exists within the education system that I'm aware of, because learning to be creative has more to do with philosophy, personal introspection, overcoming cognitive dissonance and exploring new ideas, that's a very difficult thing to make a class for. I certainly believe it's possible, but we're only just climbing out of the dark ages of thought and reason. What people who lack creativity are having trouble with is not attempting to push out the barriers in their mind that keep them in a closed area, where they can of course become very adept at whatever is in that closed area, but are restricted to it's quarters. Learning to push those barriers over basically requires life-changing epiphanies, but is possible for anybody willing to challenge the dissonance in their mind, and for that reason I believe that it is false that someone can't learn to be creative. Natural gifts are a spiritual idea, there's no room for such ideas in science. There is always an explanation, in this case it's people's experiences that provoke them to expand their minds and think outside the box. That is something that can be learned. |
xEmptiness said: "if we follow what SW is suggesting, nihilism is the conclusion" |
| How are genes a spiritual idea? |
Play League of Legends here! Autocrat said: Hitler was good, objectively. |
flaxman85 said: I'm talking about the same 'naturally talented' or 'naturally gifted' individuals in sports, musical instruments, etc. Do you think it's possible for every normal person to achieve the same level of skill in any games if given enough time? Could one become the best of the best in one game but horrible at another no matter how much time was put into it? I think dempenting on the video game some people can trully be better. If you practice like crazy at it you might beat them but if they do the same practice then you are fucked. For example i suck at fighting video games. I always end up hitting all the buttons randomly trying to make my character do cool moves because i just can't get all the sequences etc right. I don't think that any amount of practice will help me beat those that are really good at those games. i just don't have it. |
| Everything is achievable. Sometimes one person has to place more effort in than another, but for this, I think anyone can achieve it. |
 |
| So most of you agree that talent = head start If we give both talent and normal person an eternity to practice, the normal person would still lose in the end? |
|
| "Is there such a thing as a 'Natural Talent' when it comes to videogames?" Yes. It depends on the game, but some people could be genetically predisposed to positive traits helping them in that game (or not even genetically, but they trained a relevant skill outside of the video game)... but it is just a head start. "Do you think it's possible for every normal person to achieve the same level of skill in any games if given enough time?" Yes. Someone without any special predispositions could still learn the ins and outs of the game to give them an advantage, and they could still train reflexes and their strategies and so on. |
 ~ join the MAL suicide pact! ~ ~ ★☭★ ~ ~ embrace nuclear annihilation! ~ |
flaxman85 said: So most of you agree that talent = head start If we give both talent and normal person an eternity to practice, the normal person would still lose in the end? Depends on the learning capabilities of the individuals and in which skills the 'talented person' is actually talented. 'Every relevant skill!' - of course, the normal person will lose if he was not a better learner or did not have incredibly helpful learning experiences. |
~ join the MAL suicide pact! ~ ~ ★☭★ ~ ~ embrace nuclear annihilation! ~ |
| It can be some sort of a natural talent but it's certainly inferior to other talents (music, art, sports, etc.) since it doesn't require serious training or that much time. And to be completely honest I think being good at pushing the right combination of buttons is inferior to being good at playing an instrument or creating a painting that resembles Picasso's works. |
Space-Wizard said: Agreed. Spooky_Love said: "You can teach a creative person to be technically minded but you can't teach the technically minded to be creative" I disagree with this statement. I think that a technically minded person can learn to be creative, but it's not really something that exists within the education system that I'm aware of, because learning to be creative has more to do with philosophy, personal introspection, overcoming cognitive dissonance and exploring new ideas, that's a very difficult thing to make a class for. I certainly believe it's possible, but we're only just climbing out of the dark ages of thought and reason. What people who lack creativity are having trouble with is not attempting to push out the barriers in their mind that keep them in a closed area, where they can of course become very adept at whatever is in that closed area, but are restricted to it's quarters. Learning to push those barriers over basically requires life-changing epiphanies, but is possible for anybody willing to challenge the dissonance in their mind, and for that reason I believe that it is false that someone can't learn to be creative. Natural gifts are a spiritual idea, there's no room for such ideas in science. There is always an explanation, in this case it's people's experiences that provoke them to expand their minds and think outside the box. That is something that can be learned. Immahnoob said: By "natural gift", I think he's referring to the idea that you can only do something well if you have the natural ability to do so, which is a sort of spiritual belief. Put alternatively, the idea that natural ability trumps training. How are genes a spiritual idea? You're right that genes predispose people to be better at some things and worse at others. |
LoneWolf said: @Josh makes me sad to call myself Canadian. |
| Yes, because everyone's brains and reflexes are different. |
| I'm too weird to live but much too rare to die. |
Saki-nyan said: That's because you're comparing arguably the greatest painter of all time with people who are 'good at pressing buttons.'And to be completely honest I think being good at pushing the right combination of buttons is inferior to being good at playing an instrument or creating a painting that resembles Picasso's works. It's hard to understand without a decent appreciation of the medium. Saki-nyan said: It can be some sort of a natural talent but it's certainly inferior to other talents (music, art, sports, etc.) since it doesn't require serious training or that much time. Your blanket statement is noted. I'm just gonna assume this isn't bait I guess, if nothing else for the sake of the more impressionable youngsters reading this thread. It's tough to compare any kind of 'talent' to another. Because there is no direct correlation, or mutual relation between two or more things. You believe that pressing keys on a saxophone can be directly compared to mashing the A button in a Gears of War chainsaw duel. Which is wrong. I've personally grown up playing video games and more than a handful of instruments and I'd be lying if I said practicing one had absolutely no effect on my prowess of the other. More often than not it would be a negative effect, like a give and take sorta thing. But that can be chalked up more or less to just not practicing a certain thing. I.E. creating 'rust.' I mean gaming has only just become a thing recently. People have been painting for fucking millenniums. So not only does the general populace have an easier time identifying fine art but the greatest of the great are admittedly years ahead of their time, not just because of potential but because time has fine tuned the medium. |
Saki-nyan said: It can be some sort of a natural talent but it's certainly inferior to other talents (music, art, sports, etc.) since it doesn't require serious training or that much time. And to be completely honest I think being good at pushing the right combination of buttons is inferior to being good at playing an instrument or creating a painting that resembles Picasso's works. you mean plucking the right combination of strings or painting the right combination of strokes? |
~ join the MAL suicide pact! ~ ~ ★☭★ ~ ~ embrace nuclear annihilation! ~ |
| Fuilipino are good at games. In their Blood? |
 |
| Sports, yeah. But videogames? I don't think so |
| Holy sh*t, that would prolly be the most irrelevant talent ever. |
 |
| I think there is some natural talent involved, yeah. I have friends who would get better than me at certain games even if we clocked in the same amount of play time. And in other games it would be the other way around. Example: Me and my brother played the same games more or less, while growing up. He would usually beat me in FPS games, but I would usually beat him in Strategy games. And at least in the start we played video games to a fairly equal amount of time. |
 |
More topics from this board
» Imgur blocked in UK?dazedcowcow62 - Sep 30 |
18 |
by traed
»»
9 minutes ago |
|
» As a kid ,did you often talk to strangers?VabbingSips - Yesterday |
13 |
by RunariNoctis
»»
11 minutes ago |
|
» Are you associated with any furries?VabbingSips - Sep 30 |
32 |
by 140619983000
»»
21 minutes ago |
|
» Is it me or is Casual Discussion kinda dead lately? ( 1 2 )fleurbleue - Oct 3 |
94 |
by Commit_Crime
»»
52 minutes ago |
|
» Would you honestly really prefer if CD had almost no moderation and ended up toxic and hate-filled?fleurbleue - Oct 4 |
46 |
by Spast1c
»»
56 minutes ago |