What Genre takes the most "skill"?
- Thread starter Durxom
- Start date
Recommended Videos
Rts id have to say because in Fps when ypu raise the difficulty you just die faster the enemy doesnt play better and for anyone who disagrees play MEN OF WAR and tell me it Fps's require more skill. Also Rpgs arent hard just grind and level up if a part is hard.
Different genres require too many different skill sets to say which one is superior to the other. I'd say it would be a better argument of what is more 'competitive'.
In terms of skilled, hungry, and competitive players, nothing compares to Starcraft. It's just too huge, has really good sponsorship, and is a very deep and challenging game with strategy that have been honed for 10 or more years. You need reactions, planing, understanding your opponent and how to be deceptive. People call Starcraft the sport of South Korea for a reason.
2nd would be fps's. Its a combination of Team coordination, map memorization, and crazy reactions to be a competitive player. I know things like Quake have 1v1 fps things, but I have a personal preference toward the team based ones. It seems to make more sense for the genre.
3rd would be my pet genre, the fighting game genre. So many unique characters, strategies, and unique skill sets like footies, yomi, zoning, frame traps, and understanding some really weird game mechanics. Stuff like fuzzy guards, chicken blocking, wave dashing, unfly, roll canceling and other really weird shit that you have to deal with just to be competitive. And its the one genre where I feel that is the easiest to understand as a spectator. Who ever is getting the shit kicked out of him is losing.
Though i like fighters the most, I know they aren't the biggest fish in the ocean , but I feel the are the most unique out of the other competitive genres.
In terms of skilled, hungry, and competitive players, nothing compares to Starcraft. It's just too huge, has really good sponsorship, and is a very deep and challenging game with strategy that have been honed for 10 or more years. You need reactions, planing, understanding your opponent and how to be deceptive. People call Starcraft the sport of South Korea for a reason.
2nd would be fps's. Its a combination of Team coordination, map memorization, and crazy reactions to be a competitive player. I know things like Quake have 1v1 fps things, but I have a personal preference toward the team based ones. It seems to make more sense for the genre.
3rd would be my pet genre, the fighting game genre. So many unique characters, strategies, and unique skill sets like footies, yomi, zoning, frame traps, and understanding some really weird game mechanics. Stuff like fuzzy guards, chicken blocking, wave dashing, unfly, roll canceling and other really weird shit that you have to deal with just to be competitive. And its the one genre where I feel that is the easiest to understand as a spectator. Who ever is getting the shit kicked out of him is losing.
Though i like fighters the most, I know they aren't the biggest fish in the ocean , but I feel the are the most unique out of the other competitive genres.
Hardcore platformers N/N+/Meatboy/Splosion Man.
At first there nice and easy then BOOM! they get crazy hard and you need amazing reflexes and great timing. Also a lot of willpower to keep going and not to become insane.
At first there nice and easy then BOOM! they get crazy hard and you need amazing reflexes and great timing. Also a lot of willpower to keep going and not to become insane.
I think it would be a mistake to debate which genre requires the most skill, since even within genre, there is a wide spectrum of what kind of skills they demand from the player. Add to the fact that you can't really quantifiably compare the importance of say, reaction rate vs. say, opponent valuation except in the context of a particular game, such a debate would be moot at best.
Having said that, I do believe that competitive games, be it a fighter or RTS or turn based will generally require far more skill than any single player, since competitive games by their very nature continues to raise the competition bar by having it's strategies evolve continuously.
In addition, while raw skills like build orders, reaction speed and such might apply to specific genres, certain skills can be applied to ALL competitive games, and that skill is valuation and yomi. (to use Sirlin's terms)
valuation is the ability to quickly judge the landscape of play and making the right decision based on imperfect information, while Yomi is a component of valuation where you must figure out what your opponent is doing to properly respond to them.
Any competitive game that doesn't require either of these are generally incredibly shallow and probably will only require as much as skill as it takes to go to gamefaqs.com. (Since it means the game is solved and that all that's left to practice is the optimal strategy being laid out)
Having said that, I do believe that competitive games, be it a fighter or RTS or turn based will generally require far more skill than any single player, since competitive games by their very nature continues to raise the competition bar by having it's strategies evolve continuously.
In addition, while raw skills like build orders, reaction speed and such might apply to specific genres, certain skills can be applied to ALL competitive games, and that skill is valuation and yomi. (to use Sirlin's terms)
valuation is the ability to quickly judge the landscape of play and making the right decision based on imperfect information, while Yomi is a component of valuation where you must figure out what your opponent is doing to properly respond to them.
Any competitive game that doesn't require either of these are generally incredibly shallow and probably will only require as much as skill as it takes to go to gamefaqs.com. (Since it means the game is solved and that all that's left to practice is the optimal strategy being laid out)
i would say fighting games and RTS's take the most skill, both are very different though so its hard to say which, if either, takes more skill. Depends on what kind of person you are really. You need really good reflexes and reaction times for both, although in different ways, in fighters its more about execution and learning to recognise when to do certain things, in RTS's its more about recognising what your opponent is doing and changing your gameplan accordingly.
and yet both of these will probably pale in comparison to chess when it comes to reading your opponent and trying to see into the future.Pink_Pirate said:
the same can be said of Go or Mahjong.
I agree with most of the people here, RTS's. You need complete Knowledge of the units, a lot of Intelligence to think up good strategies, and both Speed and Skill to actually play competitively.
Time for a venture into the obscure/not usually covered:
City builders: Patience is the #1 skill. Building too much too fast is a recipe for running out of money before your city can sustain itself---this is practically a universal rule of the genre to the point where I think developers always keep it in mind. This goes ditto for trading simulators (too many ships, not enough cash to buy goods to sell for profit usually undoes the rookie trader).
Grand Strategy Games (i.e. the Europa Universalis series and its derivatives): Being overaggressive in the earlygame. Yes, it's quite possible to make steamrollers happen and get world conquest victories, but trying to do it early in the game unless you've got a really favorable starting position that can support a large army is a recipe for disaster. This also goes on some level in most Total War games.
City builders: Patience is the #1 skill. Building too much too fast is a recipe for running out of money before your city can sustain itself---this is practically a universal rule of the genre to the point where I think developers always keep it in mind. This goes ditto for trading simulators (too many ships, not enough cash to buy goods to sell for profit usually undoes the rookie trader).
Grand Strategy Games (i.e. the Europa Universalis series and its derivatives): Being overaggressive in the earlygame. Yes, it's quite possible to make steamrollers happen and get world conquest victories, but trying to do it early in the game unless you've got a really favorable starting position that can support a large army is a recipe for disaster. This also goes on some level in most Total War games.
I would go with RTS's needing the most skill to play,due to the fact that you need micro/macro management capabilities to succeed(This includes City Builders as well).
Adventure games come at a second.They require some skill and "brain matter" to solve difficult puzzles.
FPS's just require fast reflexes and keen eyesight.
RPG's requires patience along with skill.
Adventure games come at a second.They require some skill and "brain matter" to solve difficult puzzles.
FPS's just require fast reflexes and keen eyesight.
RPG's requires patience along with skill.
No, it happens more often than you would think. Amateurs beating good players doesn't happen [i/]that[/i] often, but far more often than in the other genres.StriderShinryu said:
I think you need to consider what sort of level of play you're talking about then. An honestly good fighting game player won't lose more than a round here or there against a masher, and matches consist of more than single rounds. If you do lose more than that (especially if the fighting game doesn't support mashing) then you're not really a good player no matter what you say. A pro player, of course, will pretty much never lose against a masher.MrDeckard said:
I could say that in an RTS a "good" player could be beaten a noticeable percentage of the time by an early match zerg style rush performed by an "amateur" player too. What does that say about the skill required by the game? Not a heck of a lot. What does it say about the skill level of the players? Quite a bit.
