Do stupid people (linear thinkers) have gaming advantage?

[Addict]

Nice troll thread.

If you get your ass handed to you by the equivilent of "single track record", then you are a) very none-creative b) Linear in your thinking and cant change your tactics c) not that bright.

Dont cofuse the ability to concentrate and be focused as being daft.

[plastkaze]

I don't need a pseudo intellectual to explain anything to me. And as far as counting to 10...I'll get right on that after I figure out what comes after the letter G.

- - - Updated - - -



1, 2, 5.....3 sir!

N ono, I'm pretty sure it went 1, 5, 3, 9...

[Deleted]

Everyone, look at all those high-intellectual CS gamers... lol.

Someone help me find one?

[Aphrel]

Upon playing games, I often notice that the uncreative, non-intuitive, and generally close-to-average in terms of intellect persons tend to be the most consistent in gaming performance. This I say because obviously I am the opposite of all those, and notice that I differ in my gaming approach to the vast majority (hint: stupid) people. What I've noticed is that potential-wise (i.e., my maximum output), I am on a whole other level to them. That is, a given performance in which I and a linear thinker duel, I most likely demolish him. I am able to, due to my intuition and intellect, demolish his performance, and make mine excellent. Yet, as this thinker I happen to be who is able to be abstract, I can be rather inconsistent - and, because I have a natural preference for the non-linear, my gaming performance can drop drastically in case I am not in a state of deep focus.

The non-linear non-intellectual, however, even on his day off, has more consistency, for his performance has always been relying on the same pattern. His low performance happens only if the pattern is shattered by an external force, such as me. It is akin to a car that drives fast straightforwardly: it will continue by mere pushing of the pedal, and do well in that linear task; yet, a mere rock on the road can slow it down, or push it away; and, should no such obstacle be placed by an external force or agent, the car shall continue freely.

The non-intellectual, linear thinker has an advantage over the deep thinker, for even if the talent of the latter is on an incomparably higher level, the linear thinker shall be victorious by merely being awake in the midst of the briefest time of mind fatigue that occurs in the deep thinker.

Neither method or paragon players strikes me as stupid and the players who consistently win the arena ladders is far above average skillwise in wow. So id say your observation doesnt hold up.
In fact, im having a hard time thinking of any type of game where negative cognitive abilities are an advantage.
Sure there are games where persistance and patience is the only thing you need but even in those games there is never a negative impact of being smart when figuring out the optimal path for reward/time.

[Gilgemesh]

I should also add you're confusing intelligence with how people think.
Linear thinkers are just as capable at learning new things as lateral thinkers. The difference is in how they work. Both have pros and cons, and both can have genius level intellect.

[Karaoke]

I don't suck. People are always amazed at how I play. My style is one in a million; I do things in a shadowy fashion, and in higher quality than almost anyone. My problem is lack of consistency, and linear people making use of it.

Look...enough with the 'my style is amazing' crap. Video games are binary when playing against other players. You win or you lose. As an intelligent player, you play to maximize winning.

Your flashy style or whatever you call it to support your losing habits does not maximize winning. You're playing a game, to win, and you're telling us you can't do it.

Does that really make you intelligent? I thought intelligent people knew how to achieve a goal.

[Rukh]

I'm not sure reaction skills are correlated with intelligence. Some of the best hunters I know aren't the brightest people around. I would agree that FPS's demand quick reaction, and awareness of peripheral events, but I'm not convinced that has to do anything with deep reasoning or strategy.

It's generally considered a type of intelligence because it takes certain brain processing to receive a signal, process, interpret what needs to be done, and act on it.

[Queen of Hamsters]

What I'm getting is that he's a one-trick pony with a single strategy that falls apart as soon as someone forces him out of it. I see it quite a bit in Class based shooters.

Exactly.

Even birds are able to adapt and change tactic depending on the situation, and the most intelligent birds are on the level of a 4-year old human.
Being bad at games or good at games = just that, it says nothing about the intelligence of the person.

[Deleted]

Nice troll thread.

If you get your ass handed to you by the equivilent of "single track record", then you are a) very none-creative b) Linear in your thinking and cant change your tactics c) not that bright.

Dont cofuse the ability to concentrate and be focused as being daft.

You don't get it. Linear thinking isn't doing the one and same thing always, it is doing things in a linear fashion... That's it. A linear thinker will almost always stick to certain mechanisms, and he will be consistent at that because if they work, they work. The deep thinker will be less consistent because he will always think in abstract, complex manners, and that can make a performance drop because not all methods are equally viable for winning, and abstract thinking makes the winning formula harder to find.

... So simple.

[Rukh]

N ono, I'm pretty sure it went 1, 5, 3, 9...

No I'm pretty sure you start at 0. 0... 10! There we go.

Or maybe I should start at 10. hmmmm. hmmmmm. Think Siguard, think.

[Deleted]

In fact, im having a hard time thinking of any type of game where negative cognitive abilities are an advantage.

FPS games.

- - - Updated - - -

I should also add you're confusing intelligence with how people think.
Linear thinkers are just as capable at learning new things as lateral thinkers. The difference is in how they work. Both have pros and cons, and both can have genius level intellect.

Sure, but most linear thinkers are average.

[Queen of Hamsters]

You don't get it. Linear thinking isn't doing the one and same thing always, it is doing things in a linear fashion... That's it. A linear thinker will almost always stick to certain mechanisms, and he will be consistent at that because if they work, they work. The deep thinker will be less consistent because he will always think in abstract, complex manners, and that can make a performance drop because not all methods are equally viable for winning, and abstract thinking makes the winning formula harder to find.

... So simple.

If you're intelligent, you can conclude what the winning formula is and adapt to it, and especially so in games aimed at what, 14-year olds?
Tacticians aren't stupid because they stick to the tactic that works WHEN it works.

[plastkaze]

No I'm pretty sure you start at 0. 0... 10! There we go.

Ahhhh, it was that simple. *slaps forehead*

[Random010203]

It's generally considered a type of intelligence because it takes certain brain processing to receive a signal, process, interpret what needs to be done, and act on it.

Absolutely, but that is more instinct, and muscle memory/reflex, not really associated with critical thinking or strategy. I'm not knocking FPS, I got every single achievement on CoD:MW back in the day (I was 18), I just don't think it really demands deep, intellectually reasoning.

[Deleted]

These linear thinkers are so sad. Look at their responses, all the same. You'd think you were talking to the same person, lol.

[Rukh]

Absolutely, but that is more instinct, and muscle memory/reflex, not really associated with critical thinking or strategy. I'm not knocking FPS, I got every single achievement on CoD:MW back in the day (I was 18), I just don't think it really demands deep, intellectually reasoning.

Sure, I'm just saying those are also mental capacities, so there's no reason to discount them. Being able to quickly process sensory signals is a capacity.

[Xyonai]

You don't get it. Linear thinking isn't doing the one and same thing always, it is doing things in a linear fashion... That's it. A linear thinker will almost always stick to certain mechanisms, and he will be consistent at that because if they work, they work. The deep thinker will be less consistent because he will always think in abstract, complex manners, and that can make a performance drop because not all methods are equally viable for winning, and abstract thinking makes the winning formula harder to find.

... So simple.

There's a logic here, but you're equating 'Linear Thinking' with low intelligence and that's where this debate is falling apart.

[plastkaze]

These linear thinkers are so sad. Look at their responses, all the same. You'd think you were talking to the same person, lol.

Considering all your replies are the same, welcome to the mundane world!

[Rukh]

These linear thinkers are so sad. Look at their responses, all the same. You'd think you were talking to the same person, lol.

So you lack the capacity to discern distinctions in phrasing, subject matter, and context. interesting. Tell us more!

[Random010203]

Sure, I'm just saying those are also mental capacities, so there's no reason to discount them. Being able to quickly process sensory signals is a capacity.

Absolutely, and it's a great skill to have as a teen/young adult. I honestly wish my reflexes were better tbh, but we are all made differently I guess.