the awkward nature of showing off only your greatest hits, vs just showing everything. i think the latter is more human. the former makes people really sad because they start thinking pro's are just factories of perfect works 24/7 and in reality.. they fail a lot.

old starcraft adage: the pro has lost more games than you've played :blobcatsleepless:

@koakuma@uwu.social some people don't have executive dysfunction

@koakuma@uwu.social if you want to be the best you have to overfit to the problem, yes.

@koakuma@uwu.social or the college grading scale C <- you bothered to read the book B <- you even studied it A <- overfit to test

@koakuma@uwu.social innate talent exists but people give it too much credit. if you throw enough randomly initialized neural networks out there, some of them will be more suited to a given task than others. they're still omnicomputers it's not like you can't teach them to do it anyway. it does take persistence, and its deliberate practice not 'just' practice hours. 1,000 hours of the same task doesn't do much (i would know, i did the thousand cube drawing challenge.)

@koakuma@uwu.social @icedquinn@blob.cat isn't the whole point of the spoons metaphor that you, you know, wake up with a limited amount of em every day and have to learn to manage what you're spending them on

@koakuma@uwu.social @tlapka@ak.kawen.space yeah i'm aware of spoon theory for the most part there is no 'comfortable' way to deal with limitations. studying / penances always suck and the only real advice people came up with throughout time is to just cope with the pain. the other part is narrowing scope down to something manageable. if you're constantly dealing with 'drowning*' tasks you have to outsource or abandon the things that are generating them. the social business books talk about the need to say 'no' to things and be very selective about 'yes.' for low spoon people you probably have to figure out how to abort or outsource more than someone else * started to label some tasks as 'drowning' because you have to do them just to maintain status quo; there is probably a better name. i think i was going to call them 'above-water' once

@koakuma@uwu.social @tlapka@ak.kawen.space for me personally i saw what you had to do to be good at starcraft, saw the pros weren't actually enjoying the game, and noped out. music and synths are more fun (although i still don't play them much these days.)

@neo@shork.comfysnug.space its mostly about memorizing cheeses and hard counters at the bronze level. you don't get to the 'fun' until upper diamond / master level. @tlapka@ak.kawen.space @koakuma@uwu.social

@neo@shork.comfysnug.space @tlapka@ak.kawen.space @koakuma@uwu.social most people don't enjoy getting curbstomped 24/7, and unfortunately that's whats in store for noobs in strategy games

@neo@shork.comfysnug.space @tlapka@ak.kawen.space @koakuma@uwu.social tournament winning game designers agree with what i said, so its w/e

@neo@shork.comfysnug.space > removed fun from the game that's not what he does. sirlin became a world champion in a fighting game and now designs card games that specifically try to omit the dumb execution taxes that filter everyone out of the games. > multiplayer yes statistically most gamers are single player. however, @tlapka@ak.kawen.space @koakuma@uwu.social is talking about managing spoon levels with self improvement which notoriously consumes lots of spoons. i am relating something of personal experience to make a point about deciding if what you have to do to reach a skill level you want is something you're still willing to do.