This is a split board - You can return to the Split List for other boards.

As you grow older, you'll play less games

#161molotov ckoctailPosted 1/29/2013 8:08:46 AM
Banana_Mana posted...
To be a gamer you don't need to play every single day.

Play when you want, what you want. You also don't need to update the internet with your personal game-playing time availability / passion.

We don't care.

Anyway, I play more now (as an almost 30 something) than I did when I was in my early 20s / late teens.

Sure I go out less, and am less impulsive with spending money, but I don't game less. Not going out as much = more time to play!


right.
---
You offend, yet you say not to be so defensive. This is Indigenous land. YOU get out!
#162Banana_ManaPosted 1/29/2013 8:09:43 AM
molotov ckoctail posted...
Banana_Mana posted...
To be a gamer you don't need to play every single day.

Play when you want, what you want. You also don't need to update the internet with your personal game-playing time availability / passion.

We don't care.

Anyway, I play more now (as an almost 30 something) than I did when I was in my early 20s / late teens.

Sure I go out less, and am less impulsive with spending money, but I don't game less. Not going out as much = more time to play!


right.


:P

I knew it!

There's always one.
---
An Englishman, an Irishman and a Scotsman walk into a bar. The barman looks at them and says: "Is this some kind of a joke?
#163DyingPancakePosted 1/29/2013 8:24:50 AM
The pretentiousness in this topic is ridiculous

Plenty of examples to go around, but I can't belive that people are saying the reason they can't enjoy games is because they have such a high IQ.
---
Under a cold October sky, I wait
Number of deer shot this year: 2
#164WinternovaPosted 1/29/2013 8:26:18 AM
DyingPancake posted...
The pretentiousness in this topic is ridiculous

Plenty of examples to go around, but I can't belive that people are saying the reason they can't enjoy games is because they have such a high IQ.


Based on my performance on a standardized test, I could easily join Mensa if I wanted to. That being said...I really enjoy games. :-)
---
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pMKUUUvjjzo
Fan of: Steelers(6-time Champions), Red Wings(11-time Champions)
#165MerydiaPosted 1/29/2013 1:16:03 PM(edited)
ILikesCheese posted...
What are you, the Alt account? :D

No, many people responded to that post, albeit negatively, myself included.

First off, the post you quote is obviously by someone under the age of 18, as their timeline is WAY off. Secondly, saying IQ has anything to do with the equation is, in a word, really stupid. I have a 140+ IQ (or at least I did back in college), a Masters in Business, a very nice paying job that comes easy to me and I can waste a lot of time at, a wife, awesome house, no fricking kids, basically the good life.

There was a period in the mid-80s where video games stagnated and the teenage me lost interest. Games back then didn't really have a good multiplayer component and zero online obviously, and I was more interested in "outside the house" social pursuits This happened to me again in the 90s at another stage of my life. Now however, I find many diverse games both fun and worth my time, especially since now they are not such a solo activity.

Each new gaming generation brings with it much more technological advancement than just "better graphics". At some point, you will almost always be pulled back in to the hobby.

Nope, I'm not the alt account, and I already stated I personally wouldn't have chosen the term IQ. It has too much stigma.

All I went on to say is that I personally think intelligence may deter someone from enjoying a game (because of their ability to perceive elements they find stale), but not that it's universal, and not that a lack of outstanding intelligence would prevent this issue for anyone. I'm not in disagreement with anyone (except for anyone who says intelligence has no possible impact on perception of recycled/stale/rehashed/whatever gaming elements).

Most of the commentary on this topic has really not been all that acidic or pretentious. I think some of you should read what people say more carefully, and try not to subscribe to buzz words.

Edit: I wanted to say that I think only two people responded to that person's post (before my first), and that both comments were about what people were playing 20 years ago rather than a response to the crux of his/her statement. I expected people to have a more adverse reaction to the word IQ -- which they did, but only after I quoted him/her. I was earnestly surprised at the lack of focus on that word.
---
"You can use logic to justify almost anything. That's its power, and its flaw." -Kathryn Janeway
#166LargeLongSwordPosted 1/29/2013 5:27:18 PM(edited)
It's true, games took longer for me to beat than say 4-5 years ago because most of my time now are spent on babes and my Sword. I still play an hour or 2 when I am tired though.
---
Now Playing:
Mass Erect 3, AssCreed III, XXXCOM
#167FlameDragnPosted 1/29/2013 5:28:17 PM
Merydia posted...
ILikesCheese posted...
What are you, the Alt account? :D

No, many people responded to that post, albeit negatively, myself included.

First off, the post you quote is obviously by someone under the age of 18, as their timeline is WAY off. Secondly, saying IQ has anything to do with the equation is, in a word, really stupid. I have a 140+ IQ (or at least I did back in college), a Masters in Business, a very nice paying job that comes easy to me and I can waste a lot of time at, a wife, awesome house, no fricking kids, basically the good life.

There was a period in the mid-80s where video games stagnated and the teenage me lost interest. Games back then didn't really have a good multiplayer component and zero online obviously, and I was more interested in "outside the house" social pursuits This happened to me again in the 90s at another stage of my life. Now however, I find many diverse games both fun and worth my time, especially since now they are not such a solo activity.

Each new gaming generation brings with it much more technological advancement than just "better graphics". At some point, you will almost always be pulled back in to the hobby.

Nope, I'm not the alt account, and I already stated I personally wouldn't have chosen the term IQ. It has too much stigma.

All I went on to say is that I personally think intelligence may deter someone from enjoying a game (because of their ability to perceive elements they find stale), but not that it's universal, and not that a lack of outstanding intelligence would prevent this issue for anyone. I'm not in disagreement with anyone (except for anyone who says intelligence has no possible impact on perception of recycled/stale/rehashed/whatever gaming elements).

Most of the commentary on this topic has really not been all that acidic or pretentious. I think some of you should read what people say more carefully, and try not to subscribe to buzz words.

Edit: I wanted to say that I think only two people responded to that person's post (before my first), and that both comments were about what people were playing 20 years ago rather than a response to the crux of his/her statement. I expected people to have a more adverse reaction to the word IQ -- which they did, but only after I quoted him/her. I was earnestly surprised at the lack of focus on that word.



I am enough of an artist to draw freely upon my imagination. Imagination is more important than knowledge. Knowledge is limited. Imagination encircles the world.

Einstein

A man with a genius IQ, yet was able to enjoy the absurd and the things that are around us all the time, yet appreciate the difference in each incarnation of the regular.

Sorry pal. You still come across as a d*****. And you're talking to someone with an above average IQ. It doesn't mean squat. IQ is nothing but potential. Intelligence has nothing to do with it either. You could be dumb as a box of rocks with regards to one area, yet be very knowledgeable of brain surgery. Neither is necessarily exclusive of the other.
#168MerydiaPosted 1/29/2013 8:10:11 PM
FlameDragn posted...
I am enough of an artist to draw freely upon my imagination. Imagination is more important than knowledge. Knowledge is limited. Imagination encircles the world.

Einstein

A man with a genius IQ, yet was able to enjoy the absurd and the things that are around us all the time, yet appreciate the difference in each incarnation of the regular.

Sorry pal. You still come across as a d*****. And you're talking to someone with an above average IQ. It doesn't mean squat. IQ is nothing but potential. Intelligence has nothing to do with it either. You could be dumb as a box of rocks with regards to one area, yet be very knowledgeable of brain surgery. Neither is necessarily exclusive of the other.


I said it before multiple times: I don't care to utilize IQ as an arguing cornerstone because the concept is far too stigmatized and (as this thread has proven) sensitive. I only made statements regarding general intelligence. I have yet to use my IQ as a point of argumentation, but you just did. I'm only coming off inappropriately to people who view intelligence as a point of pride rather than observation or relativity.

I'm merely arguing that intelligence can be a precursor to getting bored with games easily. I obviously view it as a stepping stone to an outcome and not a rule. I'm not the one arguing outside the gray here, and the fact that you cannot seem to grasp this baffles me. I never, ever argued exclusion.

Additionally, IQ stands for intelligence quotient, or the rate at which one can learn relative to others. Learning is the enabler to knowledge. What on Earth are you arguing?

Oh, and you took Einstein's quote severely out of context for this discussion. He is clearly not saying that imagination allows you to ignore knowledge, simply that it is a greater tool to meet your ends. It also likely implies that one's imagination is an accent or exponent to their utilization of knowledge, rather than a method to suppress knowledge for one's own entertainment (as you have essentially been arguing).

I admittedly am growing tired of you throwing red herrings and ad hominems at me. It isn't going anywhere. It is clear that you are on a hunt for something, but I am not the target that belongs in your sights. Sorry.
---
"You can use logic to justify almost anything. That's its power, and its flaw." -Kathryn Janeway
#169FlameDragnPosted 1/29/2013 8:18:47 PM
Merydia posted...
FlameDragn posted...
I am enough of an artist to draw freely upon my imagination. Imagination is more important than knowledge. Knowledge is limited. Imagination encircles the world.

Einstein

A man with a genius IQ, yet was able to enjoy the absurd and the things that are around us all the time, yet appreciate the difference in each incarnation of the regular.

Sorry pal. You still come across as a d*****. And you're talking to someone with an above average IQ. It doesn't mean squat. IQ is nothing but potential. Intelligence has nothing to do with it either. You could be dumb as a box of rocks with regards to one area, yet be very knowledgeable of brain surgery. Neither is necessarily exclusive of the other.


I said it before multiple times: I don't care to utilize IQ as an arguing cornerstone because the concept is far too stigmatized and (as this thread has proven) sensitive. I only made statements regarding general intelligence. I have yet to use my IQ as a point of argumentation, but you just did. I'm only coming off inappropriately to people who view intelligence as a point of pride rather than observation or relativity.

I'm merely arguing that intelligence can be a precursor to getting bored with games easily. I obviously view it as a stepping stone to an outcome and not a rule. I'm not the one arguing outside the gray here, and the fact that you cannot seem to grasp this baffles me. I never, ever argued exclusion.

Additionally, IQ stands for intelligence quotient, or the rate at which one can learn relative to others. Learning is the enabler to knowledge. What on Earth are you arguing?

Oh, and you took Einstein's quote severely out of context for this discussion. He is clearly not saying that imagination allows you to ignore knowledge, simply that it is a greater tool to meet your ends. It also likely implies that one's imagination is an accent or exponent to their utilization of knowledge, rather than a method to suppress knowledge for one's own entertainment (as you have essentially been arguing).

I admittedly am growing tired of you throwing red herrings and ad hominems at me. It isn't going anywhere. It is clear that you are on a hunt for something, but I am not the target that belongs in your sights. Sorry.


You my good sir or madam have proved my point. Thank you
#170MerydiaPosted 1/29/2013 8:29:45 PM
FlameDragn posted...
You my good sir or madam have proved my point. Thank you

Sure thing.
---
"You can use logic to justify almost anything. That's its power, and its flaw." -Kathryn Janeway