traxan: All I know is I can't get my aging ass out of Silver league in SC2 PvP. Once I start pushing to the upper levels of gold I get murdered.
Jim_Callahan: There are a number of cognition-related studies related to long-running games of other types, too, mostly FPSes.
Carolus99: traxan: All I know is I can't get my aging ass out of Silver league in SC2 PvP. Once I start pushing to the upper levels of gold I get murdered.Sounds like you need to go ZvP and rush roaches ;)
SacriliciousBeerSwiller: I'm better at video games than I ever was before. I think alcohol consumption must counteract this.
ReverendJynxed: Fast bad decisions are still bad decisions. Slow and steady.
Peki: ReverendJynxed: Fast bad decisions are still bad decisions. Slow and steady.I've always felt that the best decisions were the ones determined by the fewest if/then statements, and studies (don't ask me for a citation, but I remember reading about it on Fark) have shown that people who make decisions on one or two variables are more satisfied with their choices later, i.e. single-issue voters or people who decide what car to buy based on gas mileage and price alone. The more time you take, the more you agonize, and the more variables you consider, the less happy you are with your choice."Fast" then simply becomes a matter of how quickly you can get through your flow chart, or a reflection of "gut instinct" (like on school exams), not an assumption of an inadequate consideration of the problem. Many people think I make decisions too fast; then they sit and listen for 10 minutes for my reasons, usually end up agreeing with me, while the choice took me less than half a second to go through in my head. *shrug*
sendtodave: Isn't that about the same age that the brain stops maturing (that is, you actually become an adult)?Huh.Adulthood really is a long downhill slope.
Trocadero: But the point is that in Starcraft there is an objective, non-opinion metric to determine success and failure. Buying a car "you're happy with" is about personal feelings. Truthiness, and all that.
Peki: Trocadero: But the point is that in Starcraft there is an objective, non-opinion metric to determine success and failure. Buying a car "you're happy with" is about personal feelings. Truthiness, and all that.Okay, never played SC, but familiar with the idea, so take my next point with a grain of salt:May have an objective, non-opinion metric, but HOW you get there is entirely a decision-making process. Video game, car buying, voting, we're still talking about strategy, essentially.Difference is in SC if you figure out your decision flow-chart sucks, much easier to adapt than to go "Crap, I don't like this car, can I have that one instead?" If anything, that proves my point more. Decision by flow-chart is easier to adapt to a variety of situations, whereas the agonizer would have to learn what damage each unit does and how many hit points each structure has and, and, and. . . and then do it all over again for each situation in which a decision has to be made (learning all the characteristics of the various cars to buy, for instance). The flow-chart does enough research to figure out what's important, picks one or two, and goes from there. Information efficiency, if you will./hmm. . maybe video games make for better decision makers. . .
Peki: Information efficiency, if you will.
Peki: Personally, I think I'm way more observant than the non-gamers around me.
Tryfan: Not surprised. Virtually no one in the top echelon of e-sports over that age. Most are well below it.
worlddan: Peki: Information efficiency, if you will.Honestly, if you are not a psychologist that a remarkable intuitive insight. The competitive advantage of Informational efficiency depends on the richness of the data environment. Some environments are data rich--this is to say that there is a large amount of sensory data and it is often complex. Think of a jungle. In that case informational efficiency is critical to navigating the environment successfully. However, many environments are data poor--think of desert at twilight. In data poor environments perception is at a premium and what you call "agonizing" is the most useful survival strategy.Descended from apes, humans have had to navigate both the jungles and the savannas. Video games are reflective of only the jungle half of that heritage. I tend to agree with the notion that in many modern contexts (such as high speed stock market trading) that informational efficiency is the key to success. But the key takeaway is that there is nothing inherent in that truth. From a survival perspective, what strategy is best in environment dependent. The psychologist Mihaly Csikszentmihalyi has written extensively on this topic.
red5ish: I'm not saying that you, as an individual, are not real observant, I'm saying you notice what you are conditioned to notice.
Links are submitted by members of the Fark community.
When community members submit a link, they also write a custom headline for the story.
Other Farkers comment on the links. This is the number of comments. Click here to read them.
You need to create an account to submit links or post comments.
Click here to submit a link.
Also on Fark
Submit a Link »
Copyright © 1999 - 2017 Fark, Inc | Last updated: Feb 27 2017 05:20:41
Runtime: 0.296 sec (295 ms)