This is just a thought. But I have a hard time not looking down on people who play mindless games like Candy Crush and such... does that make me a bad person? I just seems like you have to be kind of smart to play Civ V well... I think a lot of the kids I teach would just be bored playing... they just wouldn't get it. Maybe I don't give people enough credit.
Are people who play civ smart, or am I an elitist?
- Thread starter Zaimejs
- Start date
forcedalt
Warlord
I don't think it means anyone is smarter. I think of it like a certain personality will be more inclined toward this type of thing.
redwings1340
Emperor
I'm sure quite a few people here have played both Candy Crush and Civ, but there's probably a certain mindset to like strategy games that is required to really appreciate civ.
I would hesitate to use the word smarter without any real evidence though.
I would hesitate to use the word smarter without any real evidence though.
El Caballerion
King
Well... you're asking us, and I certainly ain't no dummy. 
ScantilyCladLad
Chieftain
- Joined
- Sep 19, 2008
- Messages
- 59
yeah i dont think it requires being smart to be good at civ.
It requires knowledge, and it requires application of that knowledge, but you can be a good player by following cookie cutter strategies or schemas developed from playing over time
Really depends on your definition of smart i guess, which wont be solved in this thread
It requires knowledge, and it requires application of that knowledge, but you can be a good player by following cookie cutter strategies or schemas developed from playing over time
Really depends on your definition of smart i guess, which wont be solved in this thread
Kallowe
Chieftain
No, you're correct we CIV players are simply superior in every way to those plebes.
Osama Bin Davis
Warlord
I have to say that the average civ player isn't that smart. To be highly skilled at the game is all to do with gaming mechanics not well rounded gameplay with the need to think on your feet.
Certain type of personalities are attracted to civ. Generally 3 different types (especially on this site) creationists that like big picture thinking so love the grand scale of the game, mechanics that like to break down processes, strategies etc to gain a slight edge and lord type people that like to rule and manage numbers.
Unfortunately with each iteration it is becoming more and more focused on the mechanic type person and its taking away from the fun of the game.
Certain type of personalities are attracted to civ. Generally 3 different types (especially on this site) creationists that like big picture thinking so love the grand scale of the game, mechanics that like to break down processes, strategies etc to gain a slight edge and lord type people that like to rule and manage numbers.
Unfortunately with each iteration it is becoming more and more focused on the mechanic type person and its taking away from the fun of the game.
Somehow, I sort of agree with OP.
I personnaly just can't play any phone games. They are usually so shallow compared to most pC games. There is nothing wrong about playing a "casual" game, but it's just not my cup of tea.
I prefer the burden of having a computer & a bit of time upon upon transportable minigames.
And to add water to the mill (sorry if this expressions doesn't exist in English
), I would assume that if you add a poll on what type of job the average civfnatic player is doing, you will get a hight rate of high paid/high quality jobs compared to any popular phone game.
I don't know if that answer your question, but I do think their is indeed a correlation with education somehow.
my 2cc
4N4
I personnaly just can't play any phone games. They are usually so shallow compared to most pC games. There is nothing wrong about playing a "casual" game, but it's just not my cup of tea.
I prefer the burden of having a computer & a bit of time upon upon transportable minigames.
And to add water to the mill (sorry if this expressions doesn't exist in English
), I would assume that if you add a poll on what type of job the average civfnatic player is doing, you will get a hight rate of high paid/high quality jobs compared to any popular phone game.I don't know if that answer your question, but I do think their is indeed a correlation with education somehow.
my 2cc
4N4
I suspect people who are good at civ are people who enjoy civ.
And I suspect people who enjoy civ are more likely the same sorts of people who enjoy board games, analysing strategy and like history. Probably only a small proportion of the fanbase fit all three of these, but I think its likely to be a higher percentage than in the general population.
Also, it being a computer game, the average fan is more likely to be a male between the age of 15 and 40. Again, a population trend rather than a description of all computer gamers.
As for "smart", I think thats a hard thing to assess, as its such a nebulous term. Are we talking liquid or crystallised intelligence? Education or wisdom? Scientific literacy or emotional self awareness?
Also, of course, a survey civfanatics is not going to answer the broader question, as there's a heavy selection bias in the population here.
And I suspect people who enjoy civ are more likely the same sorts of people who enjoy board games, analysing strategy and like history. Probably only a small proportion of the fanbase fit all three of these, but I think its likely to be a higher percentage than in the general population.
Also, it being a computer game, the average fan is more likely to be a male between the age of 15 and 40. Again, a population trend rather than a description of all computer gamers.
As for "smart", I think thats a hard thing to assess, as its such a nebulous term. Are we talking liquid or crystallised intelligence? Education or wisdom? Scientific literacy or emotional self awareness?
Also, of course, a survey civfanatics is not going to answer the broader question, as there's a heavy selection bias in the population here.
(I find my earlier comment rather harsh and brash, so allow me try again.)
Search as you will, every statistics or metric of the Civ playing base, you'll not find a single one where majority of the players play at the highest level. Civ is a difficult game, and vast majority of us play at a level far below Diety. That's just the nature of Civ - it's a very hard franchise.
I'm not trying to say that your playing level somehow equates to intelligence, but the opposite. Yet suppose the null hypothesis from the topic is true, then what does that fact, that there're very few "tommynt" level savant players among us say about rest of us?
It may very well be that the top level, most competitive players among us exude certain brilliance that we call "smartness," would they shone with other games? I would say so. In the past I was quite active in the StarCraft scene, and tommynt reminds me of those sort of natural talents that elsewhere can earn a living playing video games. His talents could easily shone in StarCraft or chess or scrabble instead. He just so happen to be playing Civ, and sometimes hand down a bit of tips and tricks to us mere mortals.
So what does that leave the rest of us, if we do not (1) play competitively nor (2) exhibit any natural abilities? Are we playing civ smartly? Are there any evidence of our "smartness" for wasting time in this game versus that?
I find it hard to believe that's the case, that somehow by picking up Civ5 instead of Black Ops 2 at Game Stop I suddenly elevates my station. Surely, I won't be putting "Play BnW on Immortal" on my college app.
It's silly, to think playing a game somehow make you or I or anyone inherently better. People play game to lull away time. We play Civ5 because we find it fun. That's all there's to it.
Search as you will, every statistics or metric of the Civ playing base, you'll not find a single one where majority of the players play at the highest level. Civ is a difficult game, and vast majority of us play at a level far below Diety. That's just the nature of Civ - it's a very hard franchise.
I'm not trying to say that your playing level somehow equates to intelligence, but the opposite. Yet suppose the null hypothesis from the topic is true, then what does that fact, that there're very few "tommynt" level savant players among us say about rest of us?
It may very well be that the top level, most competitive players among us exude certain brilliance that we call "smartness," would they shone with other games? I would say so. In the past I was quite active in the StarCraft scene, and tommynt reminds me of those sort of natural talents that elsewhere can earn a living playing video games. His talents could easily shone in StarCraft or chess or scrabble instead. He just so happen to be playing Civ, and sometimes hand down a bit of tips and tricks to us mere mortals.
So what does that leave the rest of us, if we do not (1) play competitively nor (2) exhibit any natural abilities? Are we playing civ smartly? Are there any evidence of our "smartness" for wasting time in this game versus that?
I find it hard to believe that's the case, that somehow by picking up Civ5 instead of Black Ops 2 at Game Stop I suddenly elevates my station. Surely, I won't be putting "Play BnW on Immortal" on my college app.
It's silly, to think playing a game somehow make you or I or anyone inherently better. People play game to lull away time. We play Civ5 because we find it fun. That's all there's to it.
Doktor Vic Tim
King
I enjoy civ but I'm not good at it
And if you want to witness some elitist people in terms of games, just take a look at the fighting game community. Whew!
Though as previously said, asking such a question in a civilization related forum is going to give you expected answers. At least from what I know, civ doesn't try to copyright basic words like candy and saga.
Ninakoru
A deity on Emperor
Hahaha
It's more about some people like us prefer to "think" on their free times, others like to disconnect their brain and play easy mindless games, but i think it has nothing to do with being smart.
Memoryjar
Emperor
I partially agree. I grow with civ I and Tetris. And I think, Civ is more complete than Tetris/Candy Crush (and in a way Starcraft).
Civ series needs time and focus. Many parameters to control to resolve this complex puzzle. In Tetris-like, when I realize it's just a question of time and accuracy, I feel bored with them.
By the way, to OP, I use to think people who play video-games (GTA, Quake-like, RTS, Daggerfall-like, Minecraft...) are smart.
I think there's likely a very poor correlation between game difficulty/complexity and player intelligence. A professor might want to play Candy Crush because they'd like some mind-numbing down time, and an average teenager might play Civ because they have no other outlets through which they are mentally stimulated. Sid Meier in his 2010 GDC keynote address labelled civ-players 'egomaniacs', and I think that's more likely accurate than any reflections on the academic superiority of civ-players as a whole. Of course, egomaniacs are by no means necessarily unintelligent, but there's probably a general tendency to overestimate one's own faculties, at the expense of those whose preferences are different.
LoneRebel
Emperor
And to add water to the mill (sorry if this expressions doesn't exist in English
Oh, really? I wouldn't be so sure.
Paszczak
Warlord
- Joined
- Dec 23, 2013
- Messages
- 112
Fixed.
Similar threads
