what the fuck is this lmao
You what. Man if someone really wants to become someone, gain some specified skills or whatever, he will eventually become very good at it if he will put all of his effort to achieve that.Gigo wrote:
Yeah, Gigo, go to the basketball court and start driving that ball through the hoop, you'll be as good... hell, maybe even better... than MJ some day!" Uhmm, no, I won't be.
I'd argue work ethic is definitely more important than natural talent. People who played for only 2-3 years and reached the top- check how much they played every day, probably 5-6 hours or even more, with over 5000 playcount a month. The thing that defines these 'pro' osu players is that they constantly try to improve. There's no secret other than they played hours on end, day after day, year after year and constantly pushed themselves, looked for new ways to improve, changed their settings, thought about the game in their spare time, read threads, stayed healthy, kept playing and kept playing the game.Railey2 wrote:
There is a reason why people always say "play more", right? For sure you can become a pro if you really follow their advice. Well... no.
You are making a costly mistake. Improvement at osu is not only about work, and people who claim that they made it to the top only as a result of their hard work, are lying.
whether it be due to work ethic, mindset, physical attributes, your bringing up as a child, or any other factors - which are all contributors to 'talent' or 'natural ability' in this game.Wrong - natural talent is born ability to perform certain activity with much easier learning curve than standard group of people. Nothing what you pointed out eg. ethic, mindset etc have nothing to do with natural talent. They affects your ability to improve at activity which you are talented. Solving your problems, eg - proper mindset, strict times of training / working on, determination improves your ability to perform task. Talented person require less strain in work to achieve let's say point A than person not naturaly dedicated to this task but that doesn't mean this one person cannot get to this point. For someone not naturally dedicated to this task it will take longer time and more work to reach point A but it's definitly possible.
taiga did u even read my entire postYes, thats why i didn't speak about rest since i have nothing to add there.
or did u find the first thing u disagreed with and made a post about it
I agree that hard work is essential to become a pro. But talent is just as essential. To reach the very top, you need both, as you can't beat people that have both while having only one yourself.Railey2 wrote:
There is a reason why people always say "play more", right? For sure you can become a pro if you really follow their advice. Well... no.
You are making a costly mistake. Improvement at osu is not only about work, and people who claim that they made it to the top only as a result of their hard work, are lying.
I used to say that. It's not that I wasn't admitting that I was pessimistic, it's that I didn't even realize it at the time. What does 'being realistic' even mean ? Nowadays I am optimistic as fuck, yet I am realistic, not because I think things are impossible, but because I think 'how to do this ?' 'what makes this possible and not this'.Railey2 wrote:
I am pretty good at this game. Exceptionally good, even, at least for my own standards. But I can never make it to the very top. It's not called being pessimistic, or giving up on your dreams, it's called being realistic.
I appreciate your words of encouragement, but really I am wholly content with where I am as a player. At the same time, I am aware of the reality that I will never make it to the very top. That is why I used the word never. It is a fact that I can not humanly make it to the very top, period. Don't see that as an unfounded pessimistic statement that is grounded in my insecurities, see it as a realistic estimate, based on experience and the analysis of players improvement rates.Vayentha wrote:
I used to say that. It's not that I wasn't admitting that I was pessimistic, it's that I didn't even realize it at the time. What does 'being realistic' even mean ? Nowadays I am optimistic as fuck, yet I am realistic, not because I think things are impossible, but because I think 'how to do this ?' 'what makes this possible and not this'.Railey2 wrote:
I am pretty good at this game. Exceptionally good, even, at least for my own standards. But I can never make it to the very top. It's not called being pessimistic, or giving up on your dreams, it's called being realistic.
In my opinion, being realistic means that you question your confidence, while still believing in your confidence. And if you happen to find a mistake in your confidence, you are pessimistic if you think that your confidence was wrong, but you are realistic if you think your confidence had a flaw (yet isn't wrong).
Let's take your phrase. You say that you are exceptionnaly good, which is true since you are judging it from your own standards. Yet, you throw all of it away by saying that you cannot make it to the top. That is, in my opinion, being pessimistic. If you were realistic, you would have said 'I won't make it to the top if I don't commit to it more'.
If the first case, what makes it pessimistic is the word 'never'. Like, you'll never be able to make it to the top. This is pessimistic.
While, what makes it realistic in the second case is the 'if'. It means that you won't (not that you'll never) unless you commit more.
Now, this is total interpretation from my part. I wouldn't be surprised to know that you made this thread purposely to get denied by people. Because your education/life taught you that you cannot do something great if you don't have the talent to. Yet, you don't want to believe this, you want to believe that the lack of talent does not mean that you cannot do it. You want to believe that hardwork can replace talent.
You said that hard work cannot beat both hardwork + talent, even though it can beat talent alone. BUT, you do not consider hardwork and talent as things that can be more or less 'bigger'. You can work very hard for one day, but that will mean much less than if you work without effort for an entire year.
Yep, half a year of hardwork + talent will have higher results than one year of hardwork without talent. But that doesn't mean that half a year of hardwork + talent will have higher results than two years of hardwork alone.
What I mean is that it's not because you have both hardwork and talent that you'll do better than someone with hardwork alone.
Also, thanks for appreciating my honest response earlier, a lot of people would have said 'you are wrong because of whatever' yet you said 'thanks'. I appreciate that, you earned my respect by saying that ! :3
Owh, then I'm wrong :3Railey2 wrote:
Your interpretation is quite off though. I was raised in a very positive and approving household, with lots of support from many sides.
Hum, maybe your experience isn't totally right (yet not wrong either) on this one ! (Just like mine may be.)Railey2 wrote:
It is a fact that I can not humanly make it to the very top, period. Don't see that as an unfounded pessimistic statement that is grounded in my insecurities, see it as a realistic estimate, based on experience and the analysis of players improvement rates.
I gave a definition of talent at the beginning of my post.Endaris wrote:
I think while saying that "talent is essential" we get to the point where you have to ask what talent even is as there are many factors that play into a rapid improvement curve not called "play more". As the talent component might encompass things such as self-assessment, decision making on what to play and what to improve on, frustration tolerance and many other things not directly related to circle clicking it could be replaced by say a coach or gameplay & rankings(nice meme[tm]).
You might notice that these are all skills that are heavily connected to competitiveness which isn't everyone's thing anyway and certainly has nothing to do with circle clicking in particular but I believe that the effect of those is massive regarding the ranking curve of a player.
I think it is important to see hard work as the essential component (as elaborated by shortpotato) and greater talent as the thing that gives you the edge. I think most passionate circle clickers are already talented to play the game in some way because they're able to enjoy the game and show endurance in their progress. Talent always includes the tendency to have an interest in the area you're talented at and I think this is something everyone who plays this game for a long time has.
So even if someone may not have the sufficient talent to get to the very top I think players shouldn't be told that they are untalented. Those untalented never even begin to play this game - my grandma for example to give a really dumb one.
ye trueMuuki wrote:
there really arent enough talented people that play osu for it to be an issue towards reaching top100 with just hard work
Yeah you are right, everybody that is not talented should quitFloob wrote:
rip me im not talented at anything at all might as well just quit
Rip, osu will be left with approx 100 players and peppy will shut down so amazing game. All thanks to OP being a mindless brick.Hiro-Senpai wrote:
Yeah you are right, everybody that is not talented should quitFloob wrote:
rip me im not talented at anything at all might as well just quit
Heck yeah ill quit today bcuz playing this game without talent makes no sense
Rip all the untalented players
Did this thread offend you because you find yourself in the untalented-bracket?LMAO, pls.
That's fine, Taiga. You can play the game for other reasons than making it to the top. Just play for your own personal improvement, play for the music or play for fun. Wanting to quit is a pretty weird reaction to my post anyway. It's not like I was sharing new insights, it's just common sense for the most part.
well, I don't want to sugarcoat the truth, so I'm going to tell you that you should give up on your dream of making the top. I think upstanding people would appreciate honesty as it prevents them from sinking their time into something without chances of success.You are a fuckin idiot.
and as I said before, talent is relative. You are probably more talented than the majority of people who got stuck in the 1kpp range.It may be but as many... MANY respected people all over the world pointed out - you can work out and build up your talent but it require excessive amount of self-discipline, determination and sacrifice. You don't know this...
What do you think? How would someone who is 165cm tall and worked his ass off every day feel when michael jordan came to him and told him that he didn't make it to the NBA because he didn't try hard enough?As someone who is 160cm tall, hearing from MJ words "you didn't made it to NBA because you didn't worked enough" even knowing i was training 12 hours per day, i could increase this to 16 hours per day or more, it could be fuckin motivation to show that I CAN DO THIS BECAUSE I LOVE THIS.
I hate to break it to you but you will never play in the NBA with 160cm, no matter how hard you work.[Taiga] wrote:
What do you think? How would someone who is 165cm tall and worked his ass off every day feel when michael jordan came to him and told him that he didn't make it to the NBA because he didn't try hard enough?As someone who is 160cm tall, hearing from MJ words "you didn't made it to NBA because you didn't worked enough" even knowing i was training 12 hours per day, i could increase this to 16 hours per day or more, it could be fuckin motivation to show that I CAN DO THIS BECAUSE I LOVE THIS.
I strugled in osu at rank ~160-150k with 800pp till r0ck one time told me stright - you don't improve because you don't play more and work. Took me few months to rocketjump my rank but he motivated me to do this, to show that i can actually improve. I done it for myself, ONLY for myself and i know my hard work paid off properly.
please stop saying that I made this thread to console myself. I am not frustrated, I am quite happy with where I am right now.AsyouSaidsir wrote:
Here's my opinion on the matter:
Osu! (standard) is a game where you click circles on a computer screen. You have to press a button at the right time, and move the cursor to the right place.
I believe anyone can do that, saying that someone would never become good at the game because they lack talent is wrong. They can become good, and they can even be a top player if they want, the only thing I feel talent affects is how fast some people are improving, but even that barely matters.
Why?
You have to keep in mind a player's experience with rhythm games (or games in general) before they started playing Osu!, it'll affect how fast they'd improve. Show your grandma (or anyone who didn't grow up playing video games) Osu! and let them play a <1* song and see if she can even pass it, she obviously won't, does that mean your grandma lacks talent? No. You just grew up playing games all your life, yet she didn't. It's called experience.
Honestly, this whole "talent" feels like a bad excuse for you to feel better about yourself being stuck in the 5k range. It's like saying some people can never be a pro at a game like Tetris because they lack the talent for it. Not trying to sound rude or anything.
Okay, I apologize for saying that. I still stand by what I said earlier, though.Railey2 wrote:
please stop saying that I made this thread to console myself. I am not frustrated, I am quite happy with where I am right now.
I made this thread because it was common sense to me, but I didn't see it covered on the forums yet.
That's an effect of growing up and being old, I don't think players like Cookiezi would be able to play Osu! at age 70 either, I said Grandma because that's the most relatable person I could think of. People with health problems won't be able to play Osu! very well (E.g. blind people), that also applies to other games P:Railey2 wrote:
To address your other points, my grandma is quite untalented because her reaction time is reduced by a good 200ms. I wouldn't want to tell her that she can make it to the top with hard work (because she can't, and I'd be lying to her). This is the point of the thread. Don't lie to others, don't lie to yourself. There are many people who don't have the stuff to make it, be it for a lower reaction time, worse spacial memory, or whatever it is that cause people to not improve at osu fast enough to keep up with the insane rate at which the top100 run away from everyone else. And yes I think that this applies most games (even tetris), although that might be a bad example. Tetris doesn't seem to be in the end times like osu is.
Thanks for your honest and neutral reply.
I hate to break it to you but you will never play in the NBA with 160cm, no matter how hard you work.One more time i will prove how wrong you are:
It doesn't work that way. Michael Jordan lied to you. Sure you can get better, but you can't get NBA-good.
Feel you. Motivation helps and reality can hurt sometimes, but it isn't too fair to force what you think is the reality onto someone. My current opinion on this whole post is mixed, I don't know what is an ideal opinion to give, but I'll share what comes to mind.[Taiga] wrote:
I strugled in osu at rank ~160-150k with 800pp till r0ck one time told me stright - you don't improve because you don't play more and work. Took me few months to rocketjump my rank but he motivated me to do this, to show that i can actually improve. I done it for myself, ONLY for myself and i know my hard work paid off properly.
[Taiga] wrote:
I hate to break it to you but you will never play in the NBA with 160cm, no matter how hard you work.One more time i will prove how wrong you are:
It doesn't work that way. Michael Jordan lied to you. Sure you can get better, but you can't get NBA-good.
Muggsy Bogues - Toronto Raptor player, 158cm tall.
kthxbai, make some research before you post another bullshit
MJ didn't lied to me. If there is one person who made it - there is open door to me another one, and another one, and many many more can make it.
From the looks of it, it seems like this post is slowly devolving into a heated battlezone of arguments and points regarding both hard work and talent.Becuase there is a difference between making a discussion about "Does talent matter to get into top100?" etc. and making a salt ocean of tears thread by random failure who stands "You will never make to the top without talent".
I did a little search before on players who were around the 160cm height range and Muggsy Bogues showed up. Does this counters OP's recent points?By logic if there is an exception in a "rule", it make it not true anymore.
I hate to break it to you but you will never play in the NBA with 160cmWhich is a lie.