Discussion in 'Civ4 - Strategy & Tips' started by Mike Hussey, Jan 9, 2008.
I'm sure there are many great players, but I'm not so sure there's much point to it.
No point in playing well, this thread or both?
It seems like idolizing people for their game addiction is just silly and pointless. It's sort of like idolization of an alcoholic for how many drinks they can down before passing out. If you're going all out to be really good at something, make it something worth while. It might sound like heresy here, but from other people's perspective... How many women would be impressed if you told them you have 100 HoF deity games posted?
For the record my woman who I have been married to for 20+ years was damned impressed that I has wasted so much time playing CIV that someone actually made a YouTube tribute to me losing an RPC!
For me I see this as a hobby replacing Television. I am at emperor now but if I micromanaged more perhaps Diety would be attainable, which I could care less about.
Oh, and I do not idoloize the drunk who passed from too many drinks, I idolize the one still standing
Worth while? As in making more money or something like that? From your first post in this thread i thought you were joking. But you actually believe the results from that "research" you posted there are applicable to everyone who plays a video game on a decent level. Although i play a lot of Civ i don't fit the bill. I have a GF, don't have the urgent need to impress other women, and do quite a lot of other things including sport. Others here whom i know a bit better don't fit the results either. I actually have doubts about the research you linked to , seems to me the researchers might have been working towards a desired result here.
Strange btw to hear all this from someone who's written > 3200 posts here.Were these posts all worthwhile?
Indeed, the vast majority of my posts here came while keeping a consistent workout schedule, working 20 hours a week, and going through a full time graduate program. Actually, most of the top players have life balance if I understand it correctly. There aren't many shoe polishers in civ.
Just like madscientist, this completely replaces more typical uses of free/hobby time for me. Because of civ and other games, I watch virtually no television or go out drinking/etc. It does not, however, take over necessities (even if I can be lazy sometimes).
It is sort of half-joking as I play some CIV IV. I didn't realize that I had that many posts. I think most of that is in Off-Topic and SGOTMs threads.
I still think it's silly to try to make idols out of game addicts.
Anyway, to each his or her own...
I always wonder why people consider being skilled in a computer game being of less significance than being skilled in, say, a sport, or an "accepted by society" game such as chess (assumed a big enough player base and skill variance for the particular game to matter).
If a person strives to be good at something (such as playing a certain game or playing an instrument etc.), of course he "idolizes" (a strong word, but gets the point across) the people that ARE very good at it. That's just human nature. No one's "trying to make idols".
It's also quite funny that when this question arises, each side in the argument generally hurries to defend their prowess in life, even though has nothing to do with the conversation subject. Being addicted or having a life or working out has no impact on the fact of their skills in a certain game or the helpfulness of their advice in a forum such as this, which is what makes a player "great".
You can earn a living at sports if you're good enough. No matter how good you are a playing CIV you won't make money at it. Chess is more profitable but it's not like the top chess players are in the same league as the top sports stars.
Some wannabes do make idols of people they want to be like. Certainly, it does take some measure of intelligence to get good at CIV. If you're admiring someone for that aspect then there's nothing to worry about. If you admire someone just because they spend the majority of their free time on a game (with little or no reward) then you might have a problem.
Yeah, one has little to do with the other. There are all types of people who play CIV. It's not like you can't be successful in life if you do or don't play CIV or some other game. Some games can increase your mental abilities but there are a lot of ways to do that besides games.
You raise some interesting points in your post.I'm a good chess player and i notice in RL that people are impressed by this to the point that they want to play against me, ask me advice which club to join etc.... Less so with programming skills, it's often seen in my country as a job you do when you failed to get something else. True this often happens, i chose it myself after my physics studies, no future for me there. I have found out over the years that writing really good programs is one of the hardest things to achieve, imo harder than playing a decent game of chess or civ. But there seems to be some consensus that if you know too much about comps you must be a nerd, in bad health etc... That's why i stated Murky's research article probably worked towards a desired result confirming this consensus.
As far as i can see also in RL the consensus is wrong and insulting, it is for this reason that i claimed most skilled computer users also do other things in life.But you're quite right,of course it shouldn't matter in a civ forum, especially not in the ST&T department.
Just winning a good game is it's own reward. You seem to think that reward only comes in the way of earning more money, i don't think that way.
I think you got the causality tangled up there. People don't respect those things more because you can earn money by doing them. You can earn money by doing them because people respect those things more. There's also plenty of minor sports that you have no hope of earning money doing, but I guarantee they will still get you more respect than playing computer games. This partly stems from the fact that doing sports is considered healthy, and using a computer unhealthy; though top sports can be considered a big health hazard.
Earning money certainly isn't a prerequisite or a reason for being idolized and respected; thousands of rock bands have millions of fans while earning very little cash for it. On the other I can't imagine many people idolizing the best computer programmers even though they can make a very respectable salary.
You make it sound like it's the most pitiful thing in the world to idolize someone, even though I bet most people have those idols in one form or another.
I also think no one admires a player for spending all their time on a game. They might admire that dedication, as the willpower to stick doing to something. If a dude rides a bicycle around the world or swims across the English canal, he's bound to get some degree of respect from some people even though he was totally wasting his time from a pragmatic viewpoint. Once again, I don't think that's too weird or pitiful. Then again if the player continues to suck at the game despite his dedication, he won't get much respect at all.
I guess this strayed some ways off topic, but to identify great Civ players I guess it's good to consider what being "great" means
Other people admire runners, like Usain Bolt.
Well not to say I do not respect runners but for me personally, it is far more fascinating to see someone doing something which I could also try and not find boring.
I like to imitate until I am good enough to be creative in the game myself, so I enjoy game writeups of the brighter and/or more determined Civ players The great ones! They are great for different reasons, most of them I guess are very distinct. Snide, ironic, precise, funny, helpful - because they like the game so much and play it so well -in the forum public-, they inspire. Wow, sounds fishy, still it is more appealing to me than the all star team of American Football. Others will think otherwise
To each their own, I guess. I am also a big chess fan and a very good player myself, though nowhere near the top players. But I am a big fan of the big ones there as well, for the same reason. Also, in Civ as in chess, there can be beauty about a well done game, or so I feel about it.
So I believe it is worthwhile to do a little idolizing sometimes.
I do not really care about people believing in those stereotypes, life is too short to rely on other people's opinions in such unimportant matters! I do know enough people which really fit those stereotypes, I myself I believe I do not fit into any stereotype, but even if I would, so what? I'd be fine with it, I could not care less as long as I'm happy.
And I'd say from my experience, most people posting on these forums quite much wouldn't fit into any stereotype either. Or so I guess.
Edit: On topic, atm I really think TMIT is great, because he plays well and also does so much for the community, I absolutely love writeups like that industrious series of obsolete and in the helpful department I recall DaveMcW who really answers anybody with a short and precise remark, as well as cabert who is here like since forever and really shines in that department as well. Basically, there are too many to mention, so don't be disappointed if you're not in my shameless praise!
Edit2: So for me, a great civ player would be someone who plays extremely well and also helps other players to get better, either by showing why he plays this or that at a certain point, or just in the form of helpful articles and tips.
Dirk 1302, future hermit, aelf, sis(whatever the rest of his name is), Dave. There are others, but I'm danged tired.
So this is what life will be like for me 18 years from now.
It depends on you. The correlation to fat-depressed guys to being the result of gaming isn't well established. It could be that those guys just find gaming to be a good escape from their otherwise miserable lives.
True, correlation does not equal causality. The causal relationship between correlated factors is often difficult to establish, or surprising.
Too bad the media/newspapers aren't aware of that and spam garbage results...ranging from "medical discoveries" to "gaming" to "roadside safety" and "sleeping habits". Fun times. Example: strokes are correlated with visiting chiropractors. Does that mean visiting one increases your chances of strokes? Of course not, ultimately it was found that people who should have been seeking medical care for strokes were visiting the chiropractor instead, but don't tell that to the first story reporting the matter....
That Bleys guy had Emperor SMOKED like a fine salmon!
Lol. First rule of Statistics Class: Correlation =/= Relationship
In statistics correlation is a value between 1 and -1 used to determine the strength and direction of a scatterplot.
A Relationship suggests that two variables are connected to one another, though one is not capable of determining cause of said relationship without a controlled experiment (Not a Study, which usually doesn't definitively prove anything).
Yes! Thank you AP Stats!
I like to know who is good in any thing I'm interested, not to idolize him/her,
but to learn with.
lol. you guys must not be from the midwest.
we don't care if your president of the universe- not impressed.
Separate names with a comma.