I think you are confusing talent with internal drive. No, I'm not talking about the shitty external drive where you tell yourself you want to be the best. I'm talking about the subconscious drive to succeed. If you don't have that internal drive it doesn't matter how much you think you want to be the best, you simply won't improve the way people who have it do. These people aren't talented, they just really, truly took improving seriously.B1rd wrote:
this isn't true. talent exists.
forum
Anyone feel like they got the short end of the stick?
posted
Total Posts
128
NixXSkate wrote:
I feel your pain, streams are evil.
There is still talent to a degree. Some motor skills are involved after all, and some people just naturally have more control over it than others. Though someone without any talent that puts in hard work and effort can still exceed someone with talent that doesn't bother to improve upon it.
Like, I know people who haven't played any rhythm games before and only play osu! casually. Yet they can stream over 200bpm no problem and have sight reading and aim on par with me. While I've spent twice as much time trying to work on my skills and improve as hard as I can. But I can still onlystream mash 160bpm at most and he's been keeping up with me on all other skills with hardly any effort. If he actually put in as much time and effort as I have, he could at least double or triple his current pp.
Not saying that I play 24/7 every day or something (especially considering my play count), but I at least put in a few to several hours each day, taking a day off after two or three days to rest up, depending on the hours I've put in. Point is, talent is a thing. I'm not the most efficient with my training in comparison to others, but someone who puts in only half the effort I do, like a couple of my friends, still manages to be better.
Like, I know people who haven't played any rhythm games before and only play osu! casually. Yet they can stream over 200bpm no problem and have sight reading and aim on par with me. While I've spent twice as much time trying to work on my skills and improve as hard as I can. But I can still only
Not saying that I play 24/7 every day or something (especially considering my play count), but I at least put in a few to several hours each day, taking a day off after two or three days to rest up, depending on the hours I've put in. Point is, talent is a thing. I'm not the most efficient with my training in comparison to others, but someone who puts in only half the effort I do, like a couple of my friends, still manages to be better.
NixXSkate wrote:
I feel your pain, streams are evil.
Streams > flailing my cursor across the screen
Sounds like you are trying to stream 200bpm and they are just playing the rhythm (aka, you are thinking too hard about it). Ear training is a thing and doesn't require rhythm games. Being in good physical shape also helps. Neither of these two requires playing osu! and neither of them is "talent".SlasherZX wrote:
Like, I know people who haven't played any rhythm games before and only play osu! casually. Yet they can stream over 200bpm no problem and have sight reading and aim on par with me. While I've spent twice as much time trying to work on my skills and improve as hard as I can. But I can still onlystreammash 160bpm at most and he's been keeping up with me on all other skills with hardly any effort. If he actually put in as much time and effort as I have, he could at least double or triple his current pp.
I am in good physical shape and rather physically active. Not sure what that has to do with anything though. Considering I have an obese friend who still streams faster and more consistently.chainpullz wrote:
Sounds like you are trying to stream 200bpm and they are just playing the rhythm (aka, you are thinking too hard about it). Ear training is a thing and doesn't require rhythm games. Being in good physical shape also helps. Neither of these two requires playing osu! and neither of them is "talent".SlasherZX wrote:
Like, I know people who haven't played any rhythm games before and only play osu! casually. Yet they can stream over 200bpm no problem and have sight reading and aim on par with me. While I've spent twice as much time trying to work on my skills and improve as hard as I can. But I can still onlystreammash 160bpm at most and he's been keeping up with me on all other skills with hardly any effort. If he actually put in as much time and effort as I have, he could at least double or triple his current pp.
Also, I do listen to the rhythm. But my fingers can't move faster than 160bpm regardless (which I can admit motor skills aren't really a "talent", so a mistake on my part. But still genetics can still play a role in a person's motor capabilities). Music can't suddenly make your fingers move faster though. All listening to the music and rhythm can do is help with accuracy. Which that in itself can at least be considered a talent, as some are more musically inclined than others.
You would be surprised the exertion your body can perform for brief periods of time. Most "200bpm streams" only last a second or two. I can burst streams well above the bpm I can consistently stream with OD10. If you have a good ear and your muscles are in good sync with the beat streams will just happen. There are 200bpm streams I can play on HR simply because they fit so well even though I can only stream ~180bpm. If you have to actually think about streams you've already done something wrong: thinking. Everything should be automatic.SlasherZX wrote:
Music can't suddenly make your fingers move faster though. All listening to the music and rhythm can do is help with accuracy. Which that in itself can at least be considered a talent, as some are more musically inclined than others.
Hmmm I dunno. Talent might help, maybe, just maybe.
So I have till end of november, my 6th month, to get to your 5k pp? ezpzhddt (goddam you were fast!)GoldenWolf wrote:
Ya it took me 6 months
goml
Yeah it took me 6 months to get my 5k pp in ppv2
What I didn't say though is I haven't started at 0 :^)
What I didn't say though is I haven't started at 0 :^)
Lol, I play this game so that I don't have to think about anything in the first place. So I'm doing nothing wrong. My streaming is rather consistent too, until I reach a bpm above my limits. Like for a longer 180bpm stream I can hit the first 5 notes fine, then 5 after that are 100's and 5 more after that are 50's. And then it's gg from there if there's anymore than 15 notes in the stream. Which is not too uncommon to see longer streams in higher difficulty songs.chainpullz wrote:
You would be surprised the exertion your body can perform for brief periods of time. Most "200bpm streams" only last a second or two. I can burst streams well above the bpm I can consistently stream with OD10. If you have a good ear and your muscles are in good sync with the beat streams will just happen. There are 200bpm streams I can play on HR simply because they fit so well even though I can only stream ~180bpm. If you have to actually think about streams you've already done something wrong: thinking. Everything should be automatic.
People who try to argue that talent doesn't exist need to think a bit harder before arguing.
This argument is going no where, someone HAS to get the short end of the stick and someone HAS to be better than the restNarrill wrote:
People who try to argue that talent doesn't exist need to think a bit harder before arguing.
The other factors are, mentioned previously
Your physical conditions, hyper/healthy/tired/sick
Your effort
Your weapons
Motivation
and other disturbances (Phone calls, your mum and etc)
The people arguing for talent being a thing aren't even arguing against other factors being a thing. There are plenty of factors that we all know come into play obviously. But some level of talent is still definitely an existing thing and cannot be disproved. Saying there's no talent involved is like saying left-handed people can use their right hand to perform tasks just as well as with their left. Is it possible? Yes. But they have to work harder in learning to do so than those born right-handed. It's the same principle.
Focus on acc. Acc gives a lot of pp these days, go over your best scores and get over 99% on them.
I feel the same way, getting a new keyboard has helped me become 20% faster, but im still slower than avarage for my rank.
I feel the same way, getting a new keyboard has helped me become 20% faster, but im still slower than avarage for my rank.
It's this quote that I was primarily responding to. There isn't any genetic coding for pulling things off high shelves or being attractive either.pied wrote:
Last time I checked, there wasn't any genetic coding for circle clicking performance. Or any other activity related to skill
I just find it funny that kids who play computer games for a couple years (a casual activity for most) argue with human history itself to say that talent doesn't exist.
5deep7meRaneFire wrote:
I just find it funny that kids who play computer games for a couple years (a casual activity for most) argue with human history itself to say that talent doesn't exist.
I don't think you really understood what I was saying. If there's no genetic coding for being attractive, then where do our traits such as blond hair, green eyes, cleft chin, etc come from? There isn't a segment of your DNA that's labeled "attractive" "unattractive" or "average", it just so happens that certain traits are favored more over other ones. Also attractiveness is relative.Narrill wrote:
It's this quote that I was primarily responding to. There isn't any genetic coding for pulling things off high shelves or being attractive either.pied wrote:
Last time I checked, there wasn't any genetic coding for circle clicking performance. Or any other activity related to skill
Someone earlier in the thread said something along the lines of that talent doesn't exist directly for osu! or other activities, but there are advantages from person to person with motor skills. This is correct. Some people do have advantages over others, and naturally excel slightly better than others. This doesn't take away from the fact that the "disadvantaged" person can't get better than someone who excels without trying. Naturally excelling at something doesn't take you very far. You might start off fast because your a quick learner, but it's impossible to become great without putting in hard work. Another way to look at it, is if everyone played the exact amount of time, doing the exact same thing, and had the exact same concentration, skill levels would still fluctuate. But only marginally. Hard work is what distinguishes the good from the best, and if you can accept that, it opens up a whole world of opportunity to you.
Also, elaborate on this "human history" please.RaneFire wrote:
I just find it funny that kids who play computer games for a couple years (a casual activity for most) argue with human history itself to say that talent doesn't exist.
Age is another factor, younger people have softer brains and learn quicker. if some 6-7 year old could actually muster up the attention span required to get good at osu! he would be a force to be reckoned with, easily the next cookiezi before his tenth birthday.
come to think of it wasnt rrtyui like 11 when he started?
come to think of it wasnt rrtyui like 11 when he started?
I don't know why you assumed that we would think of talent as an "instantly good at something" trait. It's not. We know that. There are factors in our genome, which are random at best, that help us with certain activities. That's what we refer to as talent. It all takes hard work, and from what you are saying, your line of thinking is no different from ours. You just made assumptions of what people thought about it.pied wrote:
I don't think you really understood what I was saying. If there's no genetic coding for being attractive, then where do our traits such as blond hair, green eyes, cleft chin, etc come from? There isn't a segment of your DNA that's labeled "attractive" "unattractive" or "average", it just so happens that certain traits are favored more over other ones. Also attractiveness is relative.
Someone earlier in the thread said something along the lines of that talent doesn't exist directly for osu! or other activities, but there are advantages from person to person with motor skills. This is correct. Some people do have advantages over others, and naturally excel slightly better than others. This doesn't take away from the fact that the "disadvantaged" person can't get better than someone who excels without trying. Naturally excelling at something doesn't take you very far. You might start off fast because your a quick learner, but it's impossible to become great without putting in hard work. Another way to look at it, is if everyone played the exact amount of time, doing the exact same thing, and had the exact same concentration, skill levels would still fluctuate. But only marginally. Hard work is what distinguishes the good from the best, and if you can accept that, it opens up a whole world of opportunity to you.Also, elaborate on this "human history" please.RaneFire wrote:
I just find it funny that kids who play computer games for a couple years (a casual activity for most) argue with human history itself to say that talent doesn't exist.
There's plenty of human history if you're prepared to look, from musicians to artists, to war strategists. Talent comes in many forms. All talent must be nurtured and requires effort on the individual's part. When talent is nurtured at a young age and this person has worked at it for their entire life up to that point, setting themselves apart from everyone, that person can truly be considered talented. Talent requires hard work. Hard work does not require talent.
I didn't assume that. Is your idea of talent that there is some skill plateau that isn't possible or extremely difficult to cross unless you have excessive talent? If your saying talent is the same thing as skill potential, then your wrong.RaneFire wrote:
I don't know why you assumed that we would think of talent as an "instantly good at something" trait. It's not. We know that. There are factors in our genome, which are random at best, that help us with certain activities. That's what we refer to as talent. It all takes hard work, and from what you are saying, your line of thinking is no different from ours. You just made assumptions of what people thought about it.
There's plenty of human history if you're prepared to look, from musicians to artists, to war strategists. Talent comes in many forms. All talent must be nurtured and requires effort on the individual's part. When talent is nurtured at a young age and this person works at it for their entire life, setting themselves apart from everyone, the person can truly be considered talented. Talent requires hard work. Hard work does not require talent.
Not quite. It's rather how fast you learn, but that's not quite it as well. It is only like having a head-start, but that head-start is not limited to the beginning of your development, it can occur at any point. It's an attribute that you have, that other people don't, which helps you in a similar manner, but doesn't necessarily determine that others can't do the same. Skill is not linear. That's why I edited my post to say "up to", albeit hours later. There is no limit to your potential. The best of the best keep getting better, as does everyone else.pied wrote:
I didn't assume that. Is your idea of talent that there is some skill plateau that isn't possible or extremely difficult to cross unless you have excessive talent? If your saying talent is the same thing as skill potential, then your wrong.
Well, I guess were at somewhat of an agreement then. But the point of the thread was that people think they're stuck at the skill level they're at and can't improve anymore because they aren't talented...or whatever that means anymore.RaneFire wrote:
Not quite. It's rather how fast you learn, but that's not quite it as well. It is only like having a head-start, but that head-start is not limited to the beginning of your development, it can occur at any point. It's an attribute that you have, that other people don't, which helps you in a similar manner, but doesn't necessarily determine that others can't do the same. Skill is not linear. That's why I edited my post to say "up to", albeit hours later. There is no limit to your potential. The best of the best keep getting better, as does everyone else.pied wrote:
I didn't assume that. Is your idea of talent that there is some skill plateau that isn't possible or extremely difficult to cross unless you have excessive talent? If your saying talent is the same thing as skill potential, then your wrong.
It means they're too lazy to put more effort into getting better
Don't know if I should judge my aim because I know I aim good. I simply feel it, I just press the damn key late. Tried practicing with CS7 (editing maps) and I can see a little improvement, but I still press keys too late, or it's just my aim. Because I just tap in the rhythm of the song and move my mouse, if I'm too late to hit the circle, normally I would miss but lately i feel like I aimed well it's just that i press late... Well. play mor git gut
You didn't say it in a way that facilitated proper understanding, so that isn't my fault.pied wrote:
I don't think you really understood what I was saying.
As for your explanation, a less-talented player will never surpass a talented player who puts in the same amount of work, plain and simple. That's all there is to it.
There is no such thing as drawing the short end of the stick. What you're experiencing is called "having low self-esteem and not knowing how to practice".
May you suggest better ways to practice? I've been stuck practicing the 3.5-4.5 star range without any success for the past 8 months.Tess wrote:
There is no such thing as drawing the short end of the stick. What you're experiencing is called "having low self-esteem and not knowing how to practice".
I can't disagree about the low self-esteem, but I think there is such a thing as drawing the short end of the stick...
Let me rephrase - physically, you only draw the short end of the stick if you have some sort of permanent handicap like missing an arm or a permanently damaged muscle or joint or something. Not being as good as others =/= drawing the short end of the stick.
Mentally, nearly everyone draws the "short end end of the stick", meaning that, seeing as everybody's in the same boat (albeit a raggedy one) there is no such thing. Hardly anyone knows how to properly practice because most of these players lack both discipline and patience, as well as knowledge on how to practice in general.
I don't really like sharing my practice methods because I've worked hard to figure things out and I don't want others to get the same things without any effort at all. But I will tell you this; take a look at other players and the things they struggle with, and then compare them to players of different skill levels with the same kinds of struggles. What are their differences? What are their similarities? Then take a look at the top 50 players. Look at their highscores - how did they get there? Do they share anything about their playstyle or history? Spectate them and look at how they get their scores, then compare that to how you play yourself and ask yourself what you can do to achieve good scores more consistently.
The more you focus on improvement, the more you'll improve. The more you think about how you suck, ~~~ ~~~~ ~~~~ ~~~~~
Mentally, nearly everyone draws the "short end end of the stick", meaning that, seeing as everybody's in the same boat (albeit a raggedy one) there is no such thing. Hardly anyone knows how to properly practice because most of these players lack both discipline and patience, as well as knowledge on how to practice in general.
I don't really like sharing my practice methods because I've worked hard to figure things out and I don't want others to get the same things without any effort at all. But I will tell you this; take a look at other players and the things they struggle with, and then compare them to players of different skill levels with the same kinds of struggles. What are their differences? What are their similarities? Then take a look at the top 50 players. Look at their highscores - how did they get there? Do they share anything about their playstyle or history? Spectate them and look at how they get their scores, then compare that to how you play yourself and ask yourself what you can do to achieve good scores more consistently.
The more you focus on improvement, the more you'll improve. The more you think about how you suck, ~~~ ~~~~ ~~~~ ~~~~~
Patently false.Tess wrote:
Mentally, nearly everyone draws the "short end end of the stick", meaning that, seeing as everybody's in the same boat (albeit a raggedy one) there is no such thing.
Good, you're capable of disagreeing. Now try adding some arguments or explanations. It makes you look less dense.
No you. The assertion that everyone is "mentally... in the same boat" flies in the face of both genetics and developmental theory.
Wait are the people saying that talent doesn't exist for this really thinking that no one can start of being better than someone else and that everyone starts of at the exact same level? Cos I started out so terrible at the game, at rank 2.6 million lol. From day 1, my friends that also just started achieved rank 200k and they consistently doubled my scores in every song in multiplayer. I think that's called natural talent.
Sure, you can improve and overcome that natural talent, as I have done, but people start off better than other people, and that advantage is called talent.
Sure, you can improve and overcome that natural talent, as I have done, but people start off better than other people, and that advantage is called talent.
You can learn a lot when you are starting, very quickly, but it does slow down. The people who do this may seem more talented than you, but they just try harder than you. Their focus is to "get good asap" and they soon burn out, stop playing, and leave you with the idea that they had the potential to be better than you, when in fact they just tried so ridiculously hard at first, you can't even imagine, and they finally realised just how much farther they still had to go... and subsequently quit or just stop playing as much. Too much effort can actually be confidence shattering. The difference between them and the people who do actually improve insanely fast, is the strength of their confidence to get good. The talent I refer to is largely a side-component that only forms part of your entire skillset, not something that determines everything you will ever do in the game.cheezstik wrote:
From day 1, my friends that also just started achieved rank 200k and they consistently doubled my scores in every song in multiplayer. I think that's called natural talent.
There's also precedent from other games. Generally if you're good at games (friends better than you), you're good at new ones too, or at least know what to expect and how to improve best. I've seen it personally. Some people just know exactly how to figure out what they need to do, and come to realisations a lot sooner. I wouldn't call this talent, as much as it is "conditioning". It's your ability to teach yourself, and if you know anything about that, you know that it can't be taught to you, otherwise your thought process has a dependancy. You have to find it and initiate it yourself.
Well, talent is literally defined as "Natural aptitude or skill", so I think it can apply in this situation. The skill in this game does not come 100% from learning and knowledge, a lot of it has to do with things like coordination and speed, which some people are just naturally and genetically better at.RaneFire wrote:
You can learn a lot when you are starting, very quickly, but it does slow down. The people who do this may seem more talented than you, but they just try harder than you. Their focus is to "get good asap" and they soon burn out, stop playing, and leave you with the idea that they had the potential to be better than you, when in fact they just tried so ridiculously hard at first, you can't even imagine, and they finally realised just how much farther they still had to go... and subsequently quit or just stop playing as much. Too much effort can actually be confidence shattering. The difference between them and the people who do actually improve insanely fast, is the strength of their confidence to get good. The talent I refer to is largely a side-component that only forms part of your entire skillset, not something that determines everything you will ever do in the game.cheezstik wrote:
From day 1, my friends that also just started achieved rank 200k and they consistently doubled my scores in every song in multiplayer. I think that's called natural talent.
There's also precedent from other games. Generally if you're good at games (friends better than you), you're good at new ones too, or at least know what to expect and how to improve best. I've seen it personally. Some people just know exactly how to figure out what they need to do, and come to realisations a lot sooner. I wouldn't call this talent, as much as it is "conditioning". It's your ability to teach yourself, and if you know anything about that, you know that it can't be taught to you. You have to find it yourself.
I mean, I'm not complaining, I'm happy with where I am for my playcount, I'm just acknowledging that I might have had to put in more or less effort to get here compared to someone else with more or less talent.
Talent is the luck of having neural connections formed before learning a skill that make it easier to learn said skill. The way people look at talent is just false, because talent itself can be taught. Sure, genetics might help you with physical things, but globally speaking, anyone can become #1 if they aren't physically or mentally handicapped, and have the mindset required to get there. Hence why I said that most people are mentally in the same boat.
Which leads me to Narill - just as I'd said in my previous post, you are being dense. I was referring to one specific mental aspect, I never said that everyone had exactly the same brain with the same skills. I meant that almost everybody has an incorrect mindset to progressing quickly and efficiently. People are too caught up on things that won't help them progress at all, which is really why pretty much anybody with a >5K rank can't really do all that much. I mean, I'm rank 2.6K and I can't pass maps that the current #1 nearly SSes. Do you know what this means? A player who is in the top 0.05th percentile of the game isn't half as good as the #1. That gap isn't natural. At my skill level, if other people actually knew how to practice, I should be in the 10, or even 20Ks. Of course people will keep improving, but if you seriously think that this is the best they can do, then you are quite ignorant and dense.
Which leads me to Narill - just as I'd said in my previous post, you are being dense. I was referring to one specific mental aspect, I never said that everyone had exactly the same brain with the same skills. I meant that almost everybody has an incorrect mindset to progressing quickly and efficiently. People are too caught up on things that won't help them progress at all, which is really why pretty much anybody with a >5K rank can't really do all that much. I mean, I'm rank 2.6K and I can't pass maps that the current #1 nearly SSes. Do you know what this means? A player who is in the top 0.05th percentile of the game isn't half as good as the #1. That gap isn't natural. At my skill level, if other people actually knew how to practice, I should be in the 10, or even 20Ks. Of course people will keep improving, but if you seriously think that this is the best they can do, then you are quite ignorant and dense.
Careful, if you keep shoving words into my mouth like that you'll break my jaw.
It's quite a cowardly tactic to make a baseless statement, refuse to elaborate on it, and then dismiss the implications your statement carries with it. I guess winning an argument matters more to you than finding the truth.
I never cared for PP. I just play for the awesome song. But then, I always realize that my skill level is always the same. It makes me wonder if I would improve...
Maybe I'm just pushing your buttons until you reevaluate your argument and realize how off-base it is.Tess wrote:
It's quite a cowardly tactic to make a baseless statement, refuse to elaborate on it, and then dismiss the implications your statement carries with it. I guess winning an argument matters more to you than finding the truth.