Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Are there any intelligent bad players?

Collapse
X

Are there any intelligent bad players?

Collapse
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

    #46
    YOU just said $1000 dollar rig was required, Joker. Chronic liars, the lot of you. You have 15 ways to explain why this game is pay to win, and then turn around and chastise people for suggesting the game is pay to win, and it's an ever moving benchmark. There are no arrows of facts that can pierce the try hard ideology. To them, the game is fair (for everyone but them often). So if you're failing it's because you're not trying hard enough. Oh you are trying hard enough, then you're not trying in the right way. Oh you are trying in the right way? Then you need to upgrade your system. Oh you can't afford that upgrade? Well I never said you had to upgrade your system anyway. GTFO of here trying to make me feel like the liar and manipulator. I may have learned persuasive techniques, but I remain firmly committed to consistency and facts. Before I learned these techniques I actually let you abusive gaslighters get to me. I would ruotinely question whether I was crazy Meanwhile the abuser just keeps doing these things with no remorse. You jokers routinely just lie and manipulate to get your way, and try to make others feel bad for trying to stop you.

    Comment


    • KH Samurai YT commented
      Editing a comment
      I mean look at my posts vs his and youll see who's griefing and manipulating, I do apologize for the wrongful assumption on you being an admin, you were not very clear that you were talking about a different forum and I jumped to a conclusion.
      Last edited by KH Samurai YT; 05-17-2019, 04:00 AM.

    • SLxTnT commented
      Editing a comment
      I really don't know how much clearer I have to be.

      To play at 144 FPS at 1080p on this game, you do NOT need $1k. This game isn't graphically intensive, a cheaper GPU will work perfectly fine.
      To play at 144 FPS at 1080p on OTHER GAMES, you DO want to spend upwards of $1k. Other games can be graphically intensive, it would be better to spend the extra money to get a better GPU to save money in the future.

      "It's not hard to get 60 FPS in this game. Definitely doesn't require $1k, unless you're building a complete system geared towards 144 FPS at 1080p in other more graphically intensive games. "
      "want to play 144 FPS 1080p in other games, you'll need upwards of $1k."
      I don't think you're reading. You saw $1k and instantly assumed it meant that was how much you had to spend.

      Also not sure how telling someone you can get a cheaper gaming rig, and that you don't need 144 FPS to be good at this game is me saying he's bad? Why are you trying to twist my words into something different? Most of what you're accusing us of doing can be directly applied to yourself. With that mindset, you'll never get better at this game. You'll never find fault in yourself, so you'll never try to better yourself. Instead you'll blame it on something else.

    • WhatYa commented
      Editing a comment
      You said, "With a quick search on laptops .You can get a 144Hz panel, gtx 1050ti (will play fortnite fine), 500GB NVMe, and 16GB of RAM for $900. That's on a laptop.
      If you wanted to go with a desktop, a Radeon 580 (<$200 used) + Ryzen 2nd gen CPU will be pretty low cost. Waiting for gen 3 may drop the prices even more. A quick search on monitors show 144Hz monitors less than $200." In response to "So, we need 1000$+ station and 500$ display just to not suck at the game? Seriously, man, it's just a game. Most of players doesn't came here to compete at top level. They just want to have fun. Why they have to spend money for upgrade for compensating hlarious game mechanics? Why console players should change their consoles for PC?"

      So instead of just admitting you were wrong, y'all try to have me banned because you're losing the argument. GG on that.

    #47
    This topic was originally about whether or not skill = intelligence. I wasn't the one who brought up bugs, you were, but yes, bug should be fixed regardless of opinions. That's not how life works though, a bunch of nobodies complaining about something anonymously isn't how things get done quickly, someone bigger and more influential needs to make it publicly known.

    As far as game balancing goes though, the casual crowd should be ignored.

    You haven't been consistent at all, by the way. I still don't know how that AI nonsense relates to FN or the topic.

    Comment


      #48
      I've explained it multiple times, and it was just an analogy. If it is not a good analogy for you then so be it. I'll drop it then. But, because despite knowing I'm dealing with liars and gaslighters here, I want to give you the benefit of the doubt, I'll explain it one last time. If you still don't get it, drop it. It's just an analogy.

      The AI was able to beat the sweats not by trying to outdo the sweats or do what the sweats would consider the optimum play. It didn't do what you are suggesting, focus on the elites. It dropped that whole premise in order to free itself up to take the kinds of moves only a braindead noob (From our perspective) would take. It became so successful expressly by not doing what the sweats do, by not being a human who feels compelled to follow the crowd into subservience to the elites.

      You are literally saying 99% of the playerbase should be ignored in their feedback about the game. Holy **** it's a good thing you don't own a business. No better way to alienate potential customers than by letting them know you don't care about their opinions. Meanwhile you want me to feel bad for not falling for your manipulative ******** while expressly admitting that my opinion does not matter to you at all, that I should be ignored. Gross.

      The problem is that you think it's a good thing that we have to wait for some streamer to complain to get fixes. That's the exact problem I've been trying to point out to you. If we didn't have to wait for that, we would get bug fixes a lot faster.

      You both have utterly dropped the ball on this one and it's probably best you just admit defeat.

      Comment


      • KH Samurai YT commented
        Editing a comment
        you want me to pull the private messages where you yourself admit your lying and manipulating with these posts.

      • WhatYa commented
        Editing a comment
        Yes. Yes I do. Please do. Post it all. And everyone will see me explaining to you that I use proper persuasive debate tactics while never giving up on the Truth, and you ignoring that and calling me a liar because ALL that you know is persuasion. You wouldn't know the Truth outside of "whatever I find valuable."

      #49
      Oh boy, where to start. So you think an AI, which emulates perfect mechanical skills, by the way, because it reads and responds to player inputs with 0 delay, beating out a group of humans with an unexpected strategy is some sort of evidence that going against the norm is a good thing? No, it just shows that you can program bs AI that make no mistakes. The strat doesn't matter when they have perfect mechanics to back it up.

      Come on, we've already been over over what a tryhard and casual are in one of your previous topics. When I say casual, I'm talking about the people who have no deep understanding of stats and mechanics. As far as I'm concerned, these people should have no say in how a game is balanced. Hell, we just had it tested and look at what it brought back, one of the most obnoxiously broken guns the game's ever seen. If that's your idea of good feedback, yeah, you can get out.

      you think it's a good thing that we have to wait for some streamer to complain to get fixes
      Don't put words in my mouth. I'm saying nothing gets done unless someone with influence brings it to light. That's not a good thing, but it is the reality.

      Dropping the ball indeed.

      Comment


        #50

        I'm not going to read the entire thread but I've got an idea of the conversation that has taken place.

        Intelligent players and low intelligent players will view the game as broken or themselves broken depends on their view and what they choose to blame. Intelligent bad players yes, unintelligent good players yes but only at certain levels which is another form is dualism. If the game is the standard for measurement then many will not measure up, if measurement standard is the other the player many will not measure up. The standard is you not the game or the other players, the "You" is the correlation on "why" many players can't achieve their in-game goals.
        Last edited by Bama_Joe; 05-16-2019, 07:56 PM.

        Comment


        • WhatYa commented
          Editing a comment
          I agree. People will blame themselves first, or blame the system first, depending on their deeper ideological convictions. Healthy people will tend towards blaming the system. Toxic try hards will tend towards blaming the individual. Not all healthy people are bad, not all try hards are good. But the try hards ARE loud and persuasive and they drive a narrative that makes it hard for healthy people to even be heard. So systemic errors get overlooked because everybody, even the healthy people, are over-focusing on themselves.

        #51
        I did not read all the effing BOOKS in this thread but im gonna just say this. Being good at fortnite is not a measure of your quality as a human being. This is the problem with the try hards is that is what they believe. Their efforts could be so much more valuable if they would channel their efforts into something more constructive like their educations and careers and let us normal people enjoy this STUPID EFFING VIDEO GAME!

        Comment


        • WhatYa commented
          Editing a comment
          100% agree. Well said.

        #52
        Originally posted by u5erx View Post
        I did not read all the effing BOOKS in this thread but im gonna just say this. Being good at fortnite is not a measure of your quality as a human being. This is the problem with the try hards is that is what they believe. Their efforts could be so much more valuable if they would channel their efforts into something more constructive like their educations and careers and let us normal people enjoy this STUPID EFFING VIDEO GAME!
        I hope no one in the thread said that I've put over 60 hours in 4 days not playing fortnite but with my actual job, and I'll probably finish the Wicks bounty tonight.

        If anyone equals their self-worth or self-confidence to this game there's a much bigger problem.

        Comment


          #53
          I dont think anyone said that specifically but thats what i translated out of it. And you see it with how hard people push themselves in this game, nobody is just playing. Everybody wants to be THE ABSOLUTE BEST. Rock meet hard place.

          Comment


            #54
            Originally posted by WhatYa View Post
            I often get this general feeling from the try hard crowd that skill at their game (this game, for example) is equal to intelligence. For instance watching the qualifiers, one of the announcers said "that's the common thing that unites these players at the top level, they're good at math." This is indicative of a general sense among some folks that good players deserve to have their opinions more weighted, or that bad players opinions don't matter as much as the good. Some people who espouse this belief aren't even good players, and yet nevertheless feel like they deserve less of a voice because of this.

            Someone please walk me through the logic of this, because the last I checked "I'm right because I have a particular talent" is an appeal to authority, and therefore not a logical argument. It wouldn't even matter if you were a physicist discussing physics, still that would be a bad argument. I have to think this can't be the logic you're using because it's so obviously wrong, I would think you would have to be willingly lying to see it as legitimate.

            Maybe instead you mean something like "someone who has done no research on a topic (for instance playing the game) should not have their words taken at face value." And this would be a legit argument under very particular circumstances. Probably far more particular circumstances than you are thinking. "Balance" without context to "what kind of balance" means nothing. If we were to balance it for 1v1's, that would be different than balancing it for the most high end solo matches. This applies to balance differences between competitive modes, and pubs. But even deeper than that is the question of defining balance to begin with.

            If you think skill = intelligence, and intelligence = correctness (itself a questionable assumption) you are very likely to think balance means something along the lines of "weighted towards what the most skillful players want." This would not seem irrational if you are making these assumptions, but I assure you it is. The assumptions themselves are completely off base. There is no correlation between "skill at fortnite" and "math skill" nor between "gaming" and math, or literally anything other than "math skill." Nor is there any correlation between "Fortnite skill" and intelligence, outside of "intelligently playing Fortnite." This is not how good thinking works.

            If you examine these assumptions critically you may just discover why you find it so hard to believe that most players are not on board with you about the direction of the game. You want the game to be fun in the sense that the good players are having a good time. And you disregard, at least to a large extent, the bad players concurrently having less of a good time. You may have an argument that this is how a competitive mode should work, tho I have my doubts on that as well (it's wrong). But this would not apply to any casual game. We play games to have fun... it's kind of part of the definition of a game. Bad players want to have fun too.

            And I know you may not care, and might even be disgusted by that, but it remains a fact. This isn't there job, it's a game. You are left with a choice, you can either drive them out of the game by balancing towards the skilled players, or you can balance the game around even the worst player having fun. This is an ideological choice you will have to make based on your assumptions of value and worth and hierarchy. I will always remain resolutely on the side of the most disadvantaged people, but I understand not everyone thinks that way. But if I owned a capitalist enterprise I know which one of those answers will succeed on the market, and which one will fail. Hardcore games are niche, casual games have more of a chance to blow up. The money is in casual gaming.

            I am a bad player, thank you for coming to my TED Talk.
            This is sort of an obvious answer, but yes--there is a link between IQ and skill at FPS games. The simple answer is that the smarter you are the faster your reflexes and processing time will be. Reflexes operate in the first of the two sub-consciences. In other words, the part of your brain that assesses threats in real time. The highest IQ people can do risk assessment the fastest, and thus are better at video games.

            Comment


            • WhatYa commented
              Editing a comment
              Evidence, plz.

            • KH Samurai YT commented
              Editing a comment
              yes please I would like to see the case studies on this as well.

            #55
            *raises hand*
            They've released two item shop skins that were essentially Battle Pass skins. (Rustlord, and Wick). No matter what reason YOU can come up with: It's just plain ignorant not to recognize a blatant cash grab. The unvaulting event was a very clever way of setting up a shield for criticism. "We didn't make that decision, YOU did." If that's not a sign that they knew things were about to go South, I'd have to ask how old you are honestly.

            They don't care about loyalty. The game is broken. They don't care.

            People I know who don't play the game have heard about the complaints, and ask me "Did they really remove the shotgun?" before laughing when I explain the seperate mechanics of the only two shotguns in the game.

            The way I see it, if someone doesn't like getting peppered, then one pumped- I'm gonna sit back, in Team Rumble with a sniper and spawn kill kids until they themselves start sending feedback to Epic, seeing as my daily letters are just getting more vitriolic and less about the game.

            #summeroftoxicity brought to you by Epic.

            "Players are getting too agressive."
            WICK'S BOUNTY - Kill as many as you can for points.
            -_-
            Last edited by NotoriousMrTUMZ; 05-16-2019, 09:39 PM.

            Comment


              #56
              Originally posted by Dark_Prophit View Post

              This is sort of an obvious answer, but yes--there is a link between IQ and skill at FPS games. The simple answer is that the smarter you are the faster your reflexes and processing time will be. Reflexes operate in the first of the two sub-consciences. In other words, the part of your brain that assesses threats in real time. The highest IQ people can do risk assessment the fastest, and thus are better at video games.

              That's an ice cube comment and it will slip or melt away, guaranteed. People can't seem to separate video games and real procedures or want to blind the two together. Example;

              I view myself good at video games, management, and manual labor (many years ago) while I'm not the best with math my traits and body favor physical work over mental work I enjoy the mental work more, that alone helped my success.

              My body six feet eight inches 265 lbs (last I checked) is built to be the animal but my brain isn't, it must be a reason or simple logic why I don't favor the advantage.

              Comment


                #57
                Originally posted by Dark_Prophit View Post

                This is sort of an obvious answer, but yes--there is a link between IQ and skill at FPS games. The simple answer is that the smarter you are the faster your reflexes and processing time will be. Reflexes operate in the first of the two sub-consciences. In other words, the part of your brain that assesses threats in real time. The highest IQ people can do risk assessment the fastest, and thus are better at video games.
                The last time I took an IQ test I scored a 138... my reflexes are shoddy. Please explain to me why my reflexes are so shoddy!

                Comment


                • WhatYa commented
                  Editing a comment
                  lol. Oh they'll explain it, I'm sure. They will explain it in a very persuasively minded manner with no regard for evidence or facts or nuance. It's an ideological commitment, a myth, not a scientific statement.

                • KH Samurai YT commented
                  Editing a comment
                  im ignoring whatya's comment here more of the same drivel he spews, but I do not agree with a statement game skill relates to intelligence. you may find risk assessment as highly intellectual trait, I find it actually being in tune with your survival instincts more which as we know every animal knows how to survive its ingrained in our dna

                #58
                Originally posted by Dark_Prophit View Post

                This is sort of an obvious answer, but yes--there is a link between IQ and skill at FPS games. The simple answer is that the smarter you are the faster your reflexes and processing time will be. Reflexes operate in the first of the two sub-consciences. In other words, the part of your brain that assesses threats in real time. The highest IQ people can do risk assessment the fastest, and thus are better at video games.
                That's like saying boxers are smart people..

                Comment


                • WhatYa commented
                  Editing a comment
                  I literally lol'ed. I mean, I am a boxer and a generally smart person, but I know some great boxers that are dumb as rocks. Like, have you ever watched George Foreman talk? Love the guy, but I would never consider him an intellectual.

                  Jim Lampley is not a fighter, but his fight iq is off the charts. Joe Rogan has roughly the same fight iq and is a fighter, but not a great one or anything. The two factors are entirely unrelated to each other.

                #59
                We're really making some headway.................

                Comment


                  #60
                  Think more long term, and focus less on any one individual. People can agree on all the facts, and still consider each other enemies. What we agree on are stories, not facts. "Making headway" is overcoming the VERY LOUD narrative that the Try Hards force on The Community.

                  Comment


                  • WhatYa commented
                    Editing a comment
                    Everyone is forcing their narrative. Literally everyone. Some are good at, some are bad. Some have all the facts and are exceedingly bad because they fail to understand that people don't build communities on facts, they build them on stories. The facts are losing in the world right now. We head ever closer to ecological disaster and nothing is being done about it because the facts are losing.

                    Slx, everybody knows try hard doesn't mean games played, nor does casual mean lack thereof. That's just the convenient fall back try hards make to try to get people to ignore and/or fall for their toxic behavior. Some try hards are bad, some bots are good. Some try hards play 1 or 2 games a day, some bots play for hours. Everybody knows, intuitively, that these are not what is meant by the terms. Everyone, that is, except try hards, conveniently. If they fail to recognize the term they can claim plausible deniability.

                  • SLxTnT commented
                    Editing a comment
                    You want to go with that? Then I'm mainly a casual player. I'll "try hard" in Arena, but in casuals I'll literally jump into 3 squads fighting. My goal is to have fun, not win. Just because I'm skilled at the game doesn't automatically make me a try hard.

                    Do you want to define what "try hard" means? You failed to do that. Even though many people on here talk about "sweaty try hards playing 8+ hours a day," I'll go with "someone who's trying their hardest to win."

                  • WhatYa commented
                    Editing a comment
                    I think you're just not getting the term, and I think this is on purpose because you've subconsciously biased yourself against it. Try hards are ultra competitive to the exclusion of fun/silliness. They identify w the elites, want the game catered to the elites, and want anyone who is not elite to feel bad about it. They think it's more fun to trap kill a bot then to create a baller monster and dance w the opponent. In fact, to the try hardiest, that would be akin to a mortal sin, an affront to the gods. I personally have explained this 1000s of times, and everyone gets it, except, conveniently, the try hards. Plausible deniability.
                Working...
                X