|
| Thread: What is a gamer? |  This thread is pages long: 1 2 3 · «PREV / NEXT» |
|
DagothGares
Responsible
Undefeatable Hero
No gods or kings
|
posted October 31, 2014 01:17 AM |
|
|
They disgust me, because I enjoy playing against humans (and I am BAD at chess). They're so smug and so superior in every move they make against me. It's impenetrable. I never felt so out of my league as when I went up against a computer.
After five moves I always see how completely out of my depth I am. They always see exactly what I plan to do and I can't execute a winning strategy. they also always trade better than me.
EDIT: but Stevie, you can't beat a computer. No one can. At least, not a good one.
____________
If you have any more questions, go to Dagoth Cares.
|
|
Stevie
Responsible
Undefeatable Hero
|
|
posted October 31, 2014 01:25 AM |
|
Edited by Stevie at 01:27, 31 Oct 2014.
|
|
Sure you can. Study it's pattern. If that's not enough, study it's code. The only way you can't beat a computer is if it's preset to be undefeatable. Given enough time and work, it's still possible to beat a computer, because unlike a computer we can improve, study and crack down behavior and establish patterns. It may be hard to crack down the one way out of a zillion to beat a chess computer, but it's still in the realm of possibility. I assure you, I've played a ton of Chessmaster 9000 with my dad and we could recognize patterns (my dad's a mathematician).
|
|
DagothGares
Responsible
Undefeatable Hero
No gods or kings
|
|
posted October 31, 2014 01:26 AM |
|
|
The greatest chess players in the world can't beat a computer, man! They are not scripted, they just figured out the best way to win, all the variations, everything.
____________
If you have any more questions, go to Dagoth Cares.
|
|
OhforfSake
Promising
Legendary Hero
Initiate
|
|
posted October 31, 2014 01:33 AM |
|
|
@Dagoth
If you want a computer I'd guess you can defeat, you could try the battle chess one I linked to. It's very easy, in my opinion. Btw. I think the main problem for most new players aren't that the opponent knows exactly what you want to do, not computers either, it's more that.. sorry to be blunt.. many new players idea of how to process is rather bad. E.g. I used to play against a friend and I'd often choose inferior moves to make the game interesting, the problem was he'd often only focus on one piece or a very narrow and specific path, while not contemplating his weaknesses.. when you're losing 5 moves in, it's not because the computer is doing anything extraordinary, it's more that you're not familiar with openings and even the worst computers usually knows openings, because they're so easy to implement. For a computer the opening is the best part, there's no danger as long as you remember the moves you've to play and that's something that doesn't require a lot to program.
Stevie said:
OhforfSake said:
Stevie said:
Artificial intelligence doesn't provide the kind of competitiveness that'd make me consider someone a gamer.
Try to beat a chess computer then. 
Try reading my quote again, see if it still makes sense. Chess computers don't think, they don't improve or change approaches, they just execute a pattern. Crack that pattern down, you're no more of a gamer than beating the AI of any other game.
I triple quoted to get the original quote with, but I'm not sure I follow your point then. It doesn't really help to know the pattern of a strong chess computer, the best players in the world usually know how they work, but it doesn't help, because the computer can do stuff the human brain can't do nearly as well. 17 years ago it was a contest, today freely available chess engines are regarded to be ~400 points ahead of the best players in the world.
Edit:
@Dagoth
There are some 10^50 combinations in chess, not even a computer that runs for all eternity have enough time to go through that.
Chess tablebases are positions with less material where all combinations have been went through, e.g. 6 pieces are freely available online: http://www.k4it.de/index.php?lang=en&topic=egtb
____________
Living time backwards
|
|
Stevie
Responsible
Undefeatable Hero
|
|
posted October 31, 2014 01:44 AM |
|
Edited by Stevie at 01:46, 31 Oct 2014.
|
Larry Christiansen vs. Chessmaster 9000 - First game won, second and third lost, 4th game draw. From Wikipedia. Link
Just that one win makes it beatable.
Anyway, too much chess talk that in essence is so remote that I'd say has no relevance in our conversation about what is a gamer.
|
|
OhforfSake
Promising
Legendary Hero
Initiate
|
|
posted October 31, 2014 01:52 AM |
|
|
Stevie said:
Sure you can. Study it's pattern. If that's not enough, study it's code. The only way you can't beat a computer is if it's preset to be undefeatable. Given enough time and work, it's still possible to beat a computer, because unlike a computer we can improve, study and crack down behavior and establish patterns. It may be hard to crack down the one way out of a zillion to beat a chess computer, but it's still in the realm of possibility. I assure you, I've played a ton of Chessmaster 9000 with my dad and we could recognize patterns (my dad's a mathematician).
Of course it's possible to defeat, I'm not saying that it's undefeatable, I'm saying that even if most people used years to study a specfic engine, they'd still struggle to defeat it.
There's no "one way out of a zillion", good engines do not repeat mistakes, if I go through a game with the computer it gives me a lot of suggestions and sometimes I see some move that might be interesting, but isn't being pondered by the computer. 999 times my suggestion turns out to be inferior, heck it turns out be disastrous 900 of those times, but 1 of those 1000 times, the computer likes this move. Now it'll keep on suggesting this move instead. If I play through a game with this move and down the horizon there are trouble, it'll re-evaluate, etc.
Yes all computers do follow patterns, random play usually doesn't go very well, there are of course some moves that are obviously better than others, but it doesn't mean you can beat them, it means that you can survive the.. opening! The very first thing which one needs to know about when playing chess. The best player in the world usually don't start to get an advantage before the late end-game. When I let the super engine play a commercial Lego Chess program, it first started to get an advantage at the end-game. In other words, if you know what you're doing, you can often survive pretty well for quite a while in chess, but the main problem is that you're still at a -1.5 disadvantage and it's only a matter of time before you've lost, it's just not very obvious yet for the player.
Btw. Chessmaster 9000 is rated at ~2700, the best player in the world is around 2850, but in general just below 2800. Houdini 1.5a is a free program rated around 3300, iIRC. Therefore Houdini would be expected to win 95% of its games against the best player in the world and the best player in the world would be expected to win 70% of his games against Chessmaster 9000, and Chessmaster 9000 is better than the majority of players in the world according to its rating.
Edit:
Stevie said:
alk that in essence is so remote that I'd say has no relevance in our conversation about what is a gamer.
Sorry about that, it was just to demonstrate that there exist computer opponents that are stronger than the best players in some games, without the game has been solved, such as,say, connect four.
____________
Living time backwards
|
|
Stevie
Responsible
Undefeatable Hero
|
|
posted October 31, 2014 02:27 AM |
|
|
|
But these are very one-directional games that were just buffed up on that aspect. I don't see how they bear any weight in our conversation about gamers. It's pretty clear that in today's gaming the predominant form of competitive play is PvP and co-op. All major MMOs, MOBAs, FPSs and RTSs are heavily based on that.
|
|
OhforfSake
Promising
Legendary Hero
Initiate
|
|
posted October 31, 2014 02:40 AM |
|
|
Well sure, it was just to show it can be challenging to play an AI. There were tries to make an AI that could play computer games, btw. which either produced a pretty awful player or a player who did everything perfectly depending on the data available for the program.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YGJHR9Ovszs
Btw. there are also stuff like speed running with ladders / leader boards, but I guess that goes under pvp.
____________
Living time backwards
|
|
Shares
Supreme Hero
I am. Thusly I am.
|
|
posted October 31, 2014 07:30 PM |
|
|
Stevie said:
I dunno man, that's how I feel about it. You can't be a gamer if you play PvE. You're a gamer if you're somehow engaged in competitive play. If you're not, you're just... a casual, lol. Take my father for example. I think he has triple my WoW hours, and I can't say he's a gamer. He just explores, kills all he can kill by himself, makes professions, completes all the quests, and just soloes the entire game. That's all he does, no party, no raids, no guilds, no arenas, no duels, no battlegrounds, no nothing!
Let's take a more.. difficult example let's say, StarCraft 2. If you're enjoying the campaigns and pve maps, to me you're just a casual player, no matter how good you are or how long you've played. But if you're engaged into competitive play, like 1v1 and such, then yea, to me you're a gamer.
Just how I view it. Player vs. Environment = casual; Player vs. Player = gamer.
I think I figured it out, but let me present an example as a basis of discussion. I enjoy playing single player games a lot. More so than I do playing multiplayer games for the most part and certainly more than I generally enjoy playing competitively (though there are exceptions). And I've been playing like this for a long time now, playing through oodles of roleplaying games, I'm currently playing through Tie Fighter (which has gotten really difficult now) and so on, but also... less approachable stuff, like various extremely complex rogue likes. I've played DotA, War/Starcraft and various shooters, but for the most part I prefer playing against bots.
But that's just electronic games. I play Magic, TTRPGs, board games and so on as well, and I've put a lot of effort into discussing and analysing these games. Figuring them out to their very cores. Both for physical and electronic games. I read statistics, write about games, I've studied game theory (and I know that's not necessarily related to games) and that's the reason I'm here and we're having this conversation. It's one of my main interests and understanding games is probably what I spend the most effort on out of all my hobbies.
Mostly when I play with others, that's the casual experience to me. It's something I do because I already know how to do it, because I enjoy it and because it sometimes lets me spend time with friends.
One of my brothers, however, don't really play many games. He enjoyed Heroes, back in the day, and now he mostly plays FIFA with friends. It's something he does with certain friends to just have a good time with pals. This means that he qualifies more for being a gamer, whereas I seem more like a casual. Would you find that accurate.
Stevie said:
Try reading my quote again, see if it still makes sense. Chess computers don't think, they don't improve or change approaches, they just execute a pattern. Crack that pattern down, you're no more of a gamer than beating the AI of any other game.
Computers can learn, adjust to your specific tendencies and styles, they can learn from you and steal your moves if they're better and so on... And here we'd get into the discussion about how human intelligence works in comparison to other intelligences, and in particular whether there's something inherently special about the human intelligence.
|
|
OhforfSake
Promising
Legendary Hero
Initiate
|
|
posted October 31, 2014 07:44 PM |
|
|
Shares said:
Computers can learn, adjust to your specific tendencies and styles, they can learn from you and steal your moves if they're better and so on... And here we'd get into the discussion about how human intelligence works in comparison to other intelligences, and in particular whether there's something inherently special about the human intelligence.
There was this game between two very strong grandmasters of chess, where one player had a very nice winning sacrifice. I gave the position to the computer and it saw the sacrifice at once, so I wondered where did the loser go wrong? Everything looked so ordinary. I went some moves back until the computer said it was even, but the more time I gave it, the more inclined it was towards the side who also won, simply because of that non-obvious sacrifice.. I even went pretty long way back and let the computer play itself and the winning side between the two humans ended up winning again via that same sacrifice, though this time in a much more complicated manner.
|
|
Shares
Supreme Hero
I am. Thusly I am.
|
|
posted October 31, 2014 07:52 PM |
|
|
OhforfSake said:
There was this game between two very strong grandmasters of chess, where one player had a very nice winning sacrifice. I gave the position to the computer and it saw the sacrifice at once, so I wondered where did the loser go wrong? Everything looked so ordinary. I went some moves back until the computer said it was even, but the more time I gave it, the more inclined it was towards the side who also won, simply because of that non-obvious sacrifice.. I even went pretty long way back and let the computer play itself and the winning side between the two humans ended up winning again via that same sacrifice, though this time in a much more complicated manner.
One day chess will be solved and we'll know for sure or if it was actually a mistake.
|
|
artu
Promising
Undefeatable Hero
My BS sensor is tingling again
|
|
posted October 31, 2014 08:05 PM |
|
Edited by artu at 20:12, 31 Oct 2014.
|
A gamer is someone who invests a lot of time in playing computer games. Anything more specific than that, you people will be talking about sub-categories. While it is true gaming usually results in groups sharing a common terminology which can be referred to as cultural, I think, there isn't just one gamer culture or lingo. There are many genres and the technology and devices in this field changes so rapidly, it is very likely that a group of gamers from ten years ago wont be able to understand the contemporary ones.
Think of cinephiles, there are horror fans, film noir collectors, sci-fi and fantasy nerds, festival followers who are into world cinema etc etc... All these people's interests show very different patterns but they are still all cinephiles. The term gamer is not much different. Checking out Urban Dictionary, there are more than 40 definitions, some tongue-in-cheek. Yet, when we take an average, the one thing they all agree on is, a gamer is someone who invests a significantly serious amount of time and energy into computer gaming.
Btw, I'm not so sure if real life games like chess or solitaire can be considered as computer games. Yes, they are playable in the/against the computer also but they are not "computer games" in the real sense. If a group of Bridge enthusiasts, who happen to play a weekly tournament decide to go on-line and play over the internet just to avoid traveling through traffic, do they suddenly become gamers?
|
|
Salamandre
Admirable
Omnipresent Hero
Wog refugee
|
|
posted October 31, 2014 08:24 PM |
|
|
I am not sure term "invest" is correct. Very few people literally invest in gaming (and live from), all others just waste their time.
____________
Era II mods and utilities
|
|
artu
Promising
Undefeatable Hero
My BS sensor is tingling again
|
|
posted October 31, 2014 08:30 PM |
|
|
I say "invest time" rather than "spend time" because it indicates a deliberate choice as opposed to "what shall I do tonight, well, I guess playing Diablo will do."
People who invest money or who invest their time to earn money from gaming are professionals of the sector rather than casual gamers. Of course, they are usually also gamers. But that would be like the difference between a director (who will most likely be a cinephile himself) and a regular cinephile, if I carry on with the same analogy.
|
|
Shares
Supreme Hero
I am. Thusly I am.
|
|
posted October 31, 2014 08:50 PM |
|
Edited by Shares at 20:50, 31 Oct 2014.
|
artu said:
A gamer is someone who invests a lot of time in playing computer games. Anything more specific than that, you people will be talking about sub-categories. While it is true gaming usually results in groups sharing a common terminology which can be referred to as cultural, I think, there isn't just one gamer culture or lingo. There are many genres and the technology and devices in this field changes so rapidly, it is very likely that a group of gamers from ten years ago wont be able to understand the contemporary ones.
Think of cinephiles, there are horror fans, film noir collectors, sci-fi and fantasy nerds, festival followers who are into world cinema etc etc... All these people's interests show very different patterns but they are still all cinephiles. The term gamer is not much different. Checking out Urban Dictionary, there are more than 40 definitions, some tongue-in-cheek. Yet, when we take an average, the one thing they all agree on is, a gamer is someone who invests a significantly serious amount of time and energy into computer gaming.
Btw, I'm not so sure if real life games like chess or solitaire can be considered as computer games. Yes, they are playable in the/against the computer also but they are not "computer games" in the real sense. If a group of Bridge enthusiasts, who happen to play a weekly tournament decide to go on-line and play over the internet just to avoid traveling through traffic, do they suddenly become gamers?
But do you call someone that happens to spend a lot of time in front of the TV a cinephile? Do you call someone that reads a lot about different films, directors, actors, producers and go to film festivals a cinephile, despite them quite possibly only spending an hour or two watching videos most weeks?
|
|
artu
Promising
Undefeatable Hero
My BS sensor is tingling again
|
|
posted October 31, 2014 08:59 PM |
|
Edited by artu at 21:01, 31 Oct 2014.
|
TV isn't cinema. And if someone "reads a lot about different films, directors, actors, producers and go to film festivals," it's very unlikely he watches only a few movies a week. People tend to become knowledgeable about their hobbies because they are directly investing time in them. Gaming is such a hobby, nothing more. There's no need to pretend it's something above that. You can be part of a gaming community but the same goes for stamp collectors with their clubs. Gaming does not unite people on an ideological or ethical paradigm, it's not a sub-culture with a manifesto or a life-style. It's only people who enjoy the same thing and who are sometimes doing it together.
____________
Are you pretty? This is my occasion. - Ghost
|
|
AlexSpl
Responsible
Supreme Hero
|
|
posted October 31, 2014 09:08 PM |
|
|
|
Escapism – the tendency to seek distraction and relief from unpleasant realities, especially by seeking entertainment or engaging in fantasy.
|
|
OhforfSake
Promising
Legendary Hero
Initiate
|
|
posted October 31, 2014 09:09 PM |
|
|
Shares said:
OhforfSake said:
There was this game between two very strong grandmasters of chess, where one player had a very nice winning sacrifice. I gave the position to the computer and it saw the sacrifice at once, so I wondered where did the loser go wrong? Everything looked so ordinary. I went some moves back until the computer said it was even, but the more time I gave it, the more inclined it was towards the side who also won, simply because of that non-obvious sacrifice.. I even went pretty long way back and let the computer play itself and the winning side between the two humans ended up winning again via that same sacrifice, though this time in a much more complicated manner.
One day chess will be solved and we'll know for sure or if it was actually a mistake.
I've tried some of the programs with a solved version of connect 4, it's pretty cool to see whenever it's a forced win/loss, etc. 
Unlike connect 3/tic-tac-toe/nods and crosses, connect 4 isn't trivially solved for a human.
|
|
Salamandre
Admirable
Omnipresent Hero
Wog refugee
|
|
posted October 31, 2014 09:27 PM |
|
|
AlexSpl said:
Escapism – the tendency to seek distraction and relief from unpleasant realities, especially by seeking entertainment or engaging in fantasy.
Not everyone is russian here, so doesn't apply.
____________
Era II mods and utilities
|
|
AlexSpl
Responsible
Supreme Hero
|
|
posted October 31, 2014 09:35 PM |
|
|
|
I'm not Russian, though Russian is my native tongue. Nevertheless, I don't see any connection between escapism and Russians.
|
| |
|
|
