Why are online players so freaking good?

I find it funny how both of you break out sports analogies when the most physical activity you likely endure in a day is a trip from your couch to the s**tter.

Stick to what you know and go earn your 10th prestige, boys.

Jbul

It's funny to see you make blanket statements like that. 10th prestige? I've never even prestiged once! And as I recall, you prestiged in MW2 AND BLOPS.

And lol at the Boxing analogy, hilarious! Yes, a boxing coach wouldn't let it happen but I can go to the local park and play baseball, football, soccer, hockey or whatever the f*** I want and no one is going to worry about matchmaking. Playing sports and getting your ass kicked is ENTIRELY DIFFERENT than actually getting your ass kicked. The people in this thread are playing video games FFS. Worse that could happen if they lose is that they rage quit. Hilariously bad analogy that boxing one.

Let's face it. I am better at online shooters than 90% of the people out there. Give me some f***ing credit and move the f*** on. Dont get upset and start insulting me calling me couch potato just because I actually learned to be good at games. It's as stupid and juvenile as getting upset people who've mastered Ninja Gaiden or Bayonetta on the hardest difficulty. Forgive me for trying to be good at something I spend hundreds of hours on every year. Maybe people are ok with being mediocre at everything, and that's fine with me, but i like to push myself at everything I do. Be it work, sports or freaking video games.

Well, I'm just going to add something in here. Why is it that playing video games a lot equates with not having a life? I could say the same about you and your sports. Anyways, if you don't want to get your ass handed to you by people who are far better, don't play. For some reason Counter Strike just doesn't click for me and I get dominated. So do I go and start whining about people being too good? No, I play something else or play with people that are at my skill level. I could practice and get better but I don't like the game enough to bother. Now, as for that boxing analogy. Of course if you faced a far superior opponent you'd get your posterior handed to you. Thanks for stating the obvious. That's why you pit yourself against easier opponents first and build up your skill that way. It's not everyone else's job to lower themselves to your level because you suck, it's your job to practice and get better. If you're to lazy to do that then go find something else to do.Vangaurdius

Counterstrike is over 10 years old. If you're not good at it now then there's probably no point to even trying. MVC2 was similar.

[QUOTE="Vangaurdius"]Well, I'm just going to add something in here. Why is it that playing video games a lot equates with not having a life? I could say the same about you and your sports. Anyways, if you don't want to get your ass handed to you by people who are far better, don't play. For some reason Counter Strike just doesn't click for me and I get dominated. So do I go and start whining about people being too good? No, I play something else or play with people that are at my skill level. I could practice and get better but I don't like the game enough to bother. Now, as for that boxing analogy. Of course if you faced a far superior opponent you'd get your posterior handed to you. Thanks for stating the obvious. That's why you pit yourself against easier opponents first and build up your skill that way. It's not everyone else's job to lower themselves to your level because you suck, it's your job to practice and get better. If you're to lazy to do that then go find something else to do.anthonycg

Counterstrike is over 10 years old. If you're not good at it now then there's probably no point to even trying. MVC2 was similar.

I find it funny how both of you break out sports analogies when the most physical activity you likely endure in a day is a trip from your couch to the s**tter.

I can say as someone who's been an athlete my entire life that if you put a newbie in the ring with me (I've been boxing for 10 years), I'm going to break his jaw. That's why the boxing coach won't let it happen - he wouldn't have any fun, he wouldn't learn anything, and he'd never box again.

Stick to what you know and go earn your 10th prestige, boys.

Jbul

Well, I box once a week with a couple friends for an hour and always win. Granted, all my friends are morbidly obese, and I'm merely chubby, but still, I'm the best of them. If you beat me at boxing you are a loser who has no life.

[QUOTE="Jbul"]

I find it funny how both of you break out sports analogies when the most physical activity you likely endure in a day is a trip from your couch to the s**tter.

I can say as someone who's been an athlete my entire life that if you put a newbie in the ring with me (I've been boxing for 10 years), I'm going to break his jaw. That's why the boxing coach won't let it happen - he wouldn't have any fun, he wouldn't learn anything, and he'd never box again.

Stick to what you know and go earn your 10th prestige, boys.

CarnageHeart

Well, I box once a week with a couple friends for an hour and always win. Granted, all my friends are morbidly obese, and I'm merely chubby, but still, I'm the best of them. If you beat me at boxing you are a loser who has no life.

Posting this again because of relevance

It's funny to see you make blanket statements like that. 10th prestige? I've never even prestiged once! And as I recall, you prestiged in MW2 AND BLOPS.

And lol at the Boxing analogy, hilarious! Yes, a boxing coach wouldn't let it happen but I can go to the local park and play baseball, football, soccer, hockey or whatever the f*** I want and no one is going to worry about matchmaking. Playing sports and getting your ass kicked is ENTIRELY DIFFERENT than actually getting your ass kicked. The people in this thread are playing video games FFS. Worse that could happen if they lose is that they rage quit. Hilariously bad analogy that boxing one.

Let's face it. I am better at online shooters than 90% of the people out there. Give me some f***ing credit and move the f*** on. Dont get upset and start insulting me calling me couch potato just because I actually learned to be good at games. It's as stupid and juvenile as getting upset people who've mastered Ninja Gaiden or Bayonetta on the hardest difficulty. Forgive me for trying to be good at something I spend hundreds of hours on every year. Maybe people are ok with being mediocre at everything, and that's fine with me, but i like to push myself at everything I do. Be it work, sports or freaking video games.

S0lidSnake

Blanket statements? How about this?

peopke run around like headless chickens or camp like p****ies. THere is no middle ground with these idiots. People are not cautious and don't learn to follow the objectives.

S0lidSnake

Bad analogies?

This is the oldest excuse in the books, if you suck at life, blame someone successful.S0lidSnake

And no, bad matchmaking systems and douchebag pissing contests are what online competitive gaming is about.

Insofar as the sports analogies, you made one first. And sorry, baseball isn't a real sport. :P

[QUOTE="Jbul"]

I find it funny how both of you break out sports analogies when the most physical activity you likely endure in a day is a trip from your couch to the s**tter.

I can say as someone who's been an athlete my entire life that if you put a newbie in the ring with me (I've been boxing for 10 years), I'm going to break his jaw. That's why the boxing coach won't let it happen - he wouldn't have any fun, he wouldn't learn anything, and he'd never box again.

Stick to what you know and go earn your 10th prestige, boys.

CarnageHeart

Well, I box once a week with a couple friends for an hour and always win. Granted, all my friends are morbidly obese, and I'm merely chubby, but still, I'm the best of them. If you beat me at boxing you are a loser who has no life.

Pointless because real sports require physical and mental discipline to accomplish, whereas your online triumphs are hollow victories against adolescents with a frontal lobe full of THC and a Boones Farm in their laps. Must feel amazing! I'm really jealous.

[QUOTE="CarnageHeart"]

[QUOTE="Jbul"]

I find it funny how both of you break out sports analogies when the most physical activity you likely endure in a day is a trip from your couch to the s**tter.

I can say as someone who's been an athlete my entire life that if you put a newbie in the ring with me (I've been boxing for 10 years), I'm going to break his jaw. That's why the boxing coach won't let it happen - he wouldn't have any fun, he wouldn't learn anything, and he'd never box again.

Stick to what you know and go earn your 10th prestige, boys.

Jbul

Well, I box once a week with a couple friends for an hour and always win. Granted, all my friends are morbidly obese, and I'm merely chubby, but still, I'm the best of them. If you beat me at boxing you are a loser who has no life.

Pointless because real sports require physical and mental discipline to accomplish, whereas your online triumphs are hollow victories against adolescents with a frontal lobe full of THC and a Boones Farm in their laps. Must feel amazing! I'm really jealous.

What are you talking about? I'm talking about boxing. Sure, most of the guys who box are brain damaged and use steroids and the judging is crooked as hell and its now slightly more relevant to most Americans than badmington, but still, its a sport (as is water polo).

Blanket statements? How about this?

[QUOTE="S0lidSnake"]

peopke run around like headless chickens or camp like p****ies. THere is no middle ground with these idiots. People are not cautious and don't learn to follow the objectives.

Jbul

Bad analogies?

This is the oldest excuse in the books, if you suck at life, blame someone successful.S0lidSnake

And no, bad matchmaking systems and douchebag pissing contests are what online competitive gaming is about.

Insofar as the sports analogies, you made one first. And sorry, baseball isn't a real sport. :P

How is that a blanket statement? You stick wiht your Xbox Live games and that's fine with me, but you haven't gotten a chance to play actual team based mp like Warhawk, MAG, SOCOM and KZ. Year after year, release after release, i see an influx of CoD fans in these team based multiplayer and go solo. I dont question your account of 12 year old racist douchebags ruining your mp experience, but then again you've probably only played Halo and CoD, both notorious for attracting the scum of the earth.

You'd be surprised at how mature the PSN crowd can be, both when it comes to being civil and playing the game the right way, i.e., sticking with your team. If the OP here learned to stick with his teammates, he'd automatically get better at games.

Regardless, we are going around in circles at this point. Carnage's boxing post was hilarious and captured exactly what i was trying to say, so i will stop here.

And I'm pretty damn good at Uncharted, just ask AzelKosmos.

S0lidSnake

I also agree with Solid. I hadn't played COD before Black Ops yet within few hours I could top 3 in it with almost base gear once I learned the maps and got comfy with the controls. A lot of it is learning about the game then playing smart. I still get torn down by some people because as Solid said they are just naturally better than me, have quicker reactions etc. Time in the game can help but at the end of the day people have natural levels of skill and proficiency at games. I know where my strengths are and I'm pretty good at third person and first person shooters even without playing them before but despite playing a lot of racing games and fighters I get beaten pretty solidly no matter how much I play them, I simply don't gel with them. Not everyone can be good at everything you know? Just cause someone is better though doesn't mean they have no life, that's just a childish comment imo.

@JBUL

Get out, you're embarrassing yourself.

@JBUL

Get out, you're embarrassing yourself.

DarthJohnova

Oh please. You'd have to lead a pretty empty existence to base your self-worth on winning internet arguments, pal. Sorry if that's your pride and joy, but I'm here to have fun. I argue silly and poke fun, I have no interest in being "the guy who wins da INTERNETZ". These guys are all friends of mine with whom we've gone back and forth on various topics for years, and I get a kick out of just busting each others balls.

Stop taking Gamespot so seriously, that's pretty sad.

Anyway, about the topic, I think it all comes down to this -- play what you want, when you want. I don't give a s*** if people who play online are good (and they are), because I don't want to invest the time I'd have to in order to compete with them, I'd rather spend my time doing other things (either "real life", or playing a larger variety of games). I personally am too old and impatient to be a competitive online gamer -- I just don't care enough about being the best at videogames anymore.

But something that hasn't been brought up, which I feel is a valid topic, is the matchmaking. Why aren't there more casual options in more games? I know Gears 3 had a "Casual Player" playlist, which I thought was cool.

There's also a lot of overlap between games.

People have been playing shooters since Doom and Quake; these people really don't have to sink their lives away to beat you at a modern FPS. Same goes for any other long established genre. 20+ years of consistent mechanics to build from in most cases, combined with the fact that said mechanics have been growing increasingly watered down and casual in order to appeal to the sort of bad players who make threads like this one.

And if you want a laugh, take a look at the average gamer score of all the people in this thread who "don't have as much time" as these pathetic, morbidly obese gamers. Don't have the time to get good at anything, but you all have the time to get however many absurd time sink achievements.

[QUOTE="DarthJohnova"]

@JBUL

Get out, you're embarrassing yourself.

Jbul

Oh please. You'd have to lead a pretty empty existence to base your self-worth on winning internet arguments, pal. Sorry if that's your pride and joy, but I'm here to have fun. I argue silly and poke fun, I have no interest in being "the guy who wins da INTERNETZ". These guys are all friends of mine with whom we've gone back and forth on various topics for years, and I get a kick out of just busting each others balls.

Stop taking Gamespot so seriously, that's pretty sad.

They played the hell out of the game, that's why, lol.

You are most likely to end up playing against the people who play online the most often.

People who play online the most often are more likely to be really good.

Some people who aren't very good get discouraged and don't play online very often.

EDIT: But, yeah. I can totally relate, TC.

Because thats all they do.

Anyway, about the topic, I think it all comes down to this -- play what you want, when you want. I don't give a s*** if people who play online are good (and they are), because I don't want to invest the time I'd have to in order to compete with them, I'd rather spend my time doing other things (either "real life", or playing a larger variety of games). I personally am too old and impatient to be a competitive online gamer -- I just don't care enough about being the best at videogames anymore.

But something that hasn't been brought up, which I feel is a valid topic, is the matchmaking. Why aren't there more casual options in more games? I know Gears 3 had a "Casual Player" playlist, which I thought was cool.

Jbul

Being an asset to one's team doesn't mean being the best (99.9% of players never come anywhere close to being the best). Most online games have players of wildly varying skill levels but not all roles require the same skill level so everybody can help the team win.

Such things vary from game to game, but in Warhawk, playing defense in CTF was easier than playing offense. So I learned the ropes by playing defense and then moved on to offense.

From my perspective, new players and veterans playing in the same games is good so long as the veterans are all on one side (Warhawk's dedicated servers always balanced out teams).

Not to sound offensive, but most of those Online players are really good because they spend waaaaaaaay too much time playing Online Multiplayer.

To be on the same level as they are, you'd physically need to spend hours upon hours upon hours practicing in online matches. And most of those players are single, have part time jobs, younger, high school, middle school students and live at home with their parents.

I'm 34, I don't game too often on PSN and I don't have Gold I'm on XBL Silver. I don't know anybody at my age who's even remotely that good or proficient.

KingsofQueens

[QUOTE="Jbul"]

Anyway, about the topic, I think it all comes down to this -- play what you want, when you want. I don't give a s*** if people who play online are good (and they are), because I don't want to invest the time I'd have to in order to compete with them, I'd rather spend my time doing other things (either "real life", or playing a larger variety of games). I personally am too old and impatient to be a competitive online gamer -- I just don't care enough about being the best at videogames anymore.

But something that hasn't been brought up, which I feel is a valid topic, is the matchmaking. Why aren't there more casual options in more games? I know Gears 3 had a "Casual Player" playlist, which I thought was cool.

CarnageHeart

Being an asset to one's team doesn't mean being the best (99.9% of players never come anywhere close to being the best). Most online games have players of wildly varying skill levels but not all roles require the same skill level so everybody can help the team win.

Such things vary from game to game, but in Warhawk, playing defense in CTF was easier than playing offense. So I learned the ropes by playing defense and then moved on to offense.

From my perspective, new players and veterans playing in the same games is good so long as the veterans are all on one side (Warhawk's dedicated servers always balanced out teams).

Exactly. Playing support in most of these team based shooters will net you more points than being a one man army. I've been playing Team Fortress 2 lately, and anytime I play a Heavy, I manage to find a Medic who will stay with me keeping my health my up turning me into a killing machine. And guess what, he'd have just as many points as I did without firing a single bullet.

In MAG, everyone could carry a a repair tool and a revive gun. Reviving teammates gave you twice as many points as a kill, same with repairs. I, along with others, almost never had the best KDR, but almost always made the top 3 in my platoon of 32 players.

I'll agree that it can be really frustrating getting your ass kicked by someone really good in CoD or Uncharted, but you can always quit out and find another match. I've had my ass kicked by a party of five in Uncharted, but i know better than to simply change servers instead of rage quitting, and blaming them of having no life.

[QUOTE="Jbul"]

Anyway, about the topic, I think it all comes down to this -- play what you want, when you want. I don't give a s*** if people who play online are good (and they are), because I don't want to invest the time I'd have to in order to compete with them, I'd rather spend my time doing other things (either "real life", or playing a larger variety of games). I personally am too old and impatient to be a competitive online gamer -- I just don't care enough about being the best at videogames anymore.

But something that hasn't been brought up, which I feel is a valid topic, is the matchmaking. Why aren't there more casual options in more games? I know Gears 3 had a "Casual Player" playlist, which I thought was cool.

CarnageHeart

Being an asset to one's team doesn't mean being the best (99.9% of players never come anywhere close to being the best). Most online games have players of wildly varying skill levels but not all roles require the same skill level so everybody can help the team win.

Such things vary from game to game, but in Warhawk, playing defense in CTF was easier than playing offense. So I learned the ropes by playing defense and then moved on to offense.

From my perspective, new players and veterans playing in the same games is good so long as the veterans are all on one side (Warhawk's dedicated servers always balanced out teams).

[QUOTE="CarnageHeart"]

[QUOTE="Jbul"]

Anyway, about the topic, I think it all comes down to this -- play what you want, when you want. I don't give a s*** if people who play online are good (and they are), because I don't want to invest the time I'd have to in order to compete with them, I'd rather spend my time doing other things (either "real life", or playing a larger variety of games). I personally am too old and impatient to be a competitive online gamer -- I just don't care enough about being the best at videogames anymore.

But something that hasn't been brought up, which I feel is a valid topic, is the matchmaking. Why aren't there more casual options in more games? I know Gears 3 had a "Casual Player" playlist, which I thought was cool.

S0lidSnake

Being an asset to one's team doesn't mean being the best (99.9% of players never come anywhere close to being the best). Most online games have players of wildly varying skill levels but not all roles require the same skill level so everybody can help the team win.

Such things vary from game to game, but in Warhawk, playing defense in CTF was easier than playing offense. So I learned the ropes by playing defense and then moved on to offense.

From my perspective, new players and veterans playing in the same games is good so long as the veterans are all on one side (Warhawk's dedicated servers always balanced out teams).

Exactly. Playing support in most of these team based shooters will net you more points than being a one man army. I've been playing Team Fortress 2 lately, and anytime I play a Heavy, I manage to find a Medic who will stay with me keeping my health my up turning me into a killing machine. And guess what, he'd have just as many points as I did without firing a single bullet.

In MAG, everyone could carry a a repair tool and a revive gun. Reviving teammates gave you twice as many points as a kill, same with repairs. I, along with others, almost never had the best KDR, but almost always made the top 3 in my platoon of 32 players.

I'll agree that it can be really frustrating getting your ass kicked by someone really good in CoD or Uncharted, but you can always quit out and find another match. I've had my ass kicked by a party of five in Uncharted, but i know better than to simply change servers instead of rage quitting, and blaming them of having no life.

A little off topic, but Rragnar is better than all of us at Battlefield. That kid is a beast. :lol:

Jbul

ragnaar is indeed a god in Battlefield. He was even better in Uncharted... i had to resort to teamkilling him to make it a level playing field. :lol: (True story, we teamkilled each other on purpose a lot in U2)

I'm not so sure that being good involves playing for hours on end and having no life. I can turn on any MW, Gears, or Battlefield and be towards to the top of the leaderboard. I think video games are like everything else. Some people are just better than others at certain things. Also, for the trolls, I rarely play more than an hour a day unless I have absolutely nothing to do. Most weeks I play three or four times for about an hour each time and I'm still very competetive.

There's also a lot of overlap between games.

People have been playing shooters since Doom and Quake; these people really don't have to sink their lives away to beat you at a modern FPS. Same goes for any other long established genre. 20+ years of consistent mechanics to build from in most cases, combined with the fact that said mechanics have been growing increasingly watered down and casual in order to appeal to the sort of bad players who make threads like this one.

And if you want a laugh, take a look at the average gamer score of all the people in this thread who "don't have as much time" as these pathetic, morbidly obese gamers. Don't have the time to get good at anything, but you all have the time to get however many absurd time sink achievements.

syztem

Doom, counterstrike, and quake players are always complaining about how dumbed down FPSs are today. Makes sense to me.

I was never good at Galaga and complained about how crazy hard it was. Then I saw this: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sQZuidKexBQ&feature=related

Games are just easy now.