Skill: Intelligence or Luck?

[Ashleyxoxo]

Admit it: you just can't keep up with the young kids. Is it because they're smarter, more progressive than you? Or is it because they have more free time and win at the game of chance?

P.S. Don't cop out with "it's a little bit of both." That is obvious, but which matters more?

[XDurionX]

Skill in video games is mostly about practising your muscle memory. I'm 41 and i cannot compete with 20 year olds in action games. Strategy games are a whole different beast, though. I think the older you get the less you care about video games since there are more pressing challenges in adult life.

[Nachtigal]

Determination.

[Nutri]

Don't forget to factor in that reaction time decreases the older you get.

[Ivarr]

Kids have a higher degree of neuroplasticity making the acquiring of new skills trivial. However, what they lack is the long term perspective that lets them relate hard work to future achievements which pushes them into the direction of getting incredibly good at video games, sports or instruments but not necessarily better at academic pursuits.

So ideally you want the best of both worlds. You want the curiosity of a kid and the appreciation of long term rewards to stick to complex tasks.

[Mysterymask]

Really depends...Fighting games is usually 30% character and 70% skill...but some random things pop up every so often...

Guilty gear has Faust's What's This? Move...where he just throws a random item. Sometimes it's a heal, sometimes it's a trumpet, sometimes it throws meteors. Have I won games cause I got a lucky meteor? Yes but the random is in a way that the opponent has react to the item no matter what. So my opponent died to the meteor yes but that was because they didn't respect my random bullshit move but on the other hand it could of been the heal that they could of picked up so yes luck plays a factor.

Wow to use as an example does have a higher luck component. Luck on drops, luck on procs, luck on crits, luck that your opponent lags out. All of this can be controlled and properly utilizing it is a skill but would be stupid to not admit luck plays a factor

[Ryzeth]

The question is kind of... Stupid.

If something is skill-based, then there isn't any luck involved. Ergo, intelligence is the answer. Everything "skill based" is a mixture of intelligence/knowledge and coordination/ability.

If any outcome is predicated upon luck, then it is inherently not skill that achieves said outcome.

Kids have a higher degree of neuroplasticity making the acquiring of new skills trivial. However, what they lack is the long term perspective that lets them relate hard work to future achievements which pushes them into the direction of getting incredibly good at video games, sports or instruments but not necessarily better at academic pursuits.

So ideally you want the best of both worlds. You want the curiosity of a kid and the appreciation of long term rewards to stick to complex tasks.

The 60s called, it wants its mentality back. This is like a peak boomer comment.

[Ashleyxoxo]

Kids have a higher degree of neuroplasticity making the acquiring of new skills trivial. However, what they lack is the long term perspective that lets them relate hard work to future achievements which pushes them into the direction of getting incredibly good at video games, sports or instruments but not necessarily better at academic pursuits.

So ideally you want the best of both worlds. You want the curiosity of a kid and the appreciation of long term rewards to stick to complex tasks.

This is all wrong. Getting good at video games increases problem solving skills among other things that help you in academia. Secondly, if they're smart enough they can make a living with gaming, so it's not always the opposite of a practical trajectory.

[LordVargK]

Neither? Practice is the only logical answer. Intelligence only determines how much you have to practice. And that also is only true for games where you have to apply logic. Reaction based games don't ask much intelligence of the player.

[Ashleyxoxo]

Reaction based games don't ask much intelligence of the player.

You've clearly never played Counter-Strike.

[Hellobolis]

intelligence is like playing it safe, reliable but sometimes boring.

luck comes with great highs and deep lows.

depends on my mood and the specific game which one i'll go for.

[shise]

Skills in wow were always about time and dedication. Now, this is obviously a generalization, I know that individual persons can go differently but...

I used to be a god mode healer when all I did was think about wow, play wow, research wow inside out. I also wanted to do it so badly. Perefect storm.. I swear I didn´t meet a healer through BC and WotLK who would rival me in healing done/no overhealing/ active play/ saving people´s butts/ knowing the fights down to the detail . Only a resto druid came close And I was playing on the realm top guilds so the standard was rather high back then.

Today? there is no way on Earth that I could get even close to such level lol. First of all, I do not care. Second, I don´t have 1/10th of the time for it.

[Hellobolis]

This is all wrong. Getting good at video games increases problem solving skills among other things that help you in academia. Secondly, if they're smart enough they can make a living with gaming, so it's not always the opposite of a practical trajectory.

like the opposite. luck is how you make money with gaming, smarts don't matter if the holy algorithm doesn't notice you. unless you are talking making money as in a "real" job, but even there the jobs that "being good at games" is a hiring bonus are very sparse.

[potis]

Age has nothing to do with skill, you mustnt have been around multiple gamers to say these things.

Some people are simply better, whether its because of intelligence or whatever the cause is, reaction time and processing of information is more important.

Muscle memory can help the weaker players get better, but never at the level of some others.

Net cafe culture in Greece has allowed me to see generations growing up with particular games, and you can tell, if it was just the young age, then all of those kids should have been good as they grew up.

How come a full school of then 13-15 year olds, now 23-25, only one of them had ever reached a high rank in LoL as they were playing, and the rest were hovering in the trenches of shitness at the game?

Do note, all these dudes now have thousands of hours in the game, yet most are stuck in the low-mid ranks, a couple at the higher ranks, and only one at the top ranks, people playing LoL know the ranks, i dont have to explain what a "Challenger" is.

Yes the LoL Challenger is decent at most games, but not someone you would call "Good", and the lower rank friends of his, are not decent in any way shape or form.

[Gorsameth]

Admit it: you just can't keep up with the young kids. Is it because they're smarter, more progressive than you? Or is it because they have more free time and win at the game of chance?

P.S. Don't cop out with "it's a little bit of both." That is obvious, but which matters more?

Funny how the actual answer is not in there.

Age.

They are not smarter, your older.

You learn slower, your reaction speeds are slower.

[bluesock]

like the opposite. luck is how you make money with gaming, smarts don't matter if the holy algorithm doesn't notice you. unless you are talking making money as in a "real" job, but even there the jobs that "being good at games" is a hiring bonus are very sparse.

The "holy algorithm" is completely irrelevant if you're too stupid to capitalize on it. At best it will net you a viral video once and then you get back to your sub 5k views. Just look at how many youtube channels have 1m+ subs but barely break 5-10k views per video.

And on the other side is people that know how to manipulate the "holy algorithm", as you call it, to their advantage. Mr Beast literally spent years watching and analizing popular youtubers and following trends, keeping watch on what and why became viral and popular and used that to his advantage to climb to the top. If you think people like the Doc got to there place they're at based on nothing but "luck" you're genuinely delusional.

[Ashleyxoxo]

You learn slower

Therefore are less intelligent. Duh.

[Nutri]

By the reactions the OP makes in this thread, it's safe to say this will go nowhere.
Might as well lock right now.

[kranur]

Skill by it's definition has nothing to do with luck and not fully on intelligence either. Luck is luck .. any dumb idiot can have it, skill not so much.

Skill comes from natural talent, in the case of video games it's about reaction times, attention span and adaptability to new situations. On top of it add a lot of practicr that is needed to memorize everything that can happen, so that you can instantly react.

It also depends on games .. I've seen people that were rather dumb but excellent counter strike players with unbelievable aim .. that is purely natural talent.

[Airlick]

You've clearly never played Counter-Strike.

Any shooter is 70% mechanical skills (which comes from both practice and good gaming setup), 20% experience and then maybe 10% is intelligence. Even if you're dumb you can hit high ratings given good enough mechanics and enough experience, but good luck being intelligent and hitting high ratings without good mechanics. It only changes at top ratings, where everyone has pretty much hit the mechanical skill and experience ceilings and intelligence (and also luck) is what lets them end on top of others.