Researchers Investigating Why People Win or Lose at Games

[Guest]

Researchers have spent some time to find out more on the causes of why someone may win a game and someone else loses.

Researchers Investigating Why People Win or Lose at Games : Read more

 

[MatildaPersson]

Well that's all very... dumb.

 

[bluegold316]

The person who lose is a noob! end of research!

 

[tlg]

noobs loose, pros win, how obvious!

 

[bustapr]

its not appropriate to compare reactions in the stock market to reactions in games. in stocks you are more cautious since theres a real world loss and you dont have a real opponent trying to beat you. In games you take much more chances since theres no consequences in real life and theres always an opponent trying to beat you within minutes or seconds.

theres no real way to tell why you lose or win a game since its impossible to predict another persons mood, personalities, and risks, regardless of the skill level. this researcher is going to waste time and money only to come to the conclusion that you cant tell why a person wins or loses games.

 

[cookoy]

if they just focused their research on why people win or lose at the stock market, that will be more rewarding

 

[memadmax]

Well....
Someone had to justify their tax funded research grant SOMEHOW!

>_>

 

[blubbey]

People win because they understand what they're doing. People lose because they don't. E.g. Ninja Gaiden (and NG Black). That game was supposedly one of the more difficult games of its generation (gen 6 - Xbox/PS2/GC/DC). People were bad at the game because from what I've seen they didn't understand the mechanics of the opponents, the mechanics of your character or the environment (as a general rule) for example not blocking, button mashing instead of knowing which moves to use and when, not knowing opponents moves and how to counter them. Know how to do that then you can beat it. That goes for pretty much everything. If you know what to do then you can win. Obviously the more complex it is the harder it is to understand and the more difficult it is to win.

 

[digiex]

Make more mistake than the opponent then you loose.

 

[techcurious]

Great.. in the not too distant future:
Can't win at the game you are playing? We've got a pill for that!

 

[neon neophyte]

our education system is seriously failing here. three people already misspelled "lose" as "loose." it hurts my brain.

 

[Haserath]

All your bases are belong to us.

gg

 

[manofchalk]

And once we come up with these more accurate and efficient models of how the stock market will react, suddenly everyone has that capability. The relative difficulty of the stock market wont change.

 

[neon neophyte]

once we have models predicting how the stock market reacts, we'll need models that predict how the stock market will react to our predictions. then we'll need a model for how the stock market will react to the predictions of how the stock market will react to our predictions *head explodes*

 

[excella1221]

Didn't know it took a genius to figure this out.

 

[Dangi]

That's easy
If they loose against me is beacuse they are noobs
If they win against me is beacuse they are cheaters-hackers

 

[neon neophyte]

the word is "lose." for the love of everything, "lose." it is in the damn title of the article ffs.

 

[Shin-san]

Usually it's "The more you play, the better you are at a game"

 

[orionite]

Well that's all very... dumb.

... and most other posters here. Of course you are absolutely right. Game theory? What a load of bull. No idea why nobel prizes are handed out for something as dumb as this, especially as they have no relation to real life... You people sure make it easy to be an elitist prick.

 

[Kami3k]

A better study, and far more useful, would be to go into detail on why people don't know the difference between loose and lose...

 

[kitekrazy1963]

[citation][nom]orionite[/nom]... and most other posters here. Of course you are absolutely right. Game theory? What a load of bull. No idea why nobel prizes are handed out for something as dumb as this, especially as they have no relation to real life... You people sure make it easy to be an elitist prick.[/citation]

A lot would have to be who is doing the funding. If this is on a tax payer's dime=very dumb.

 

[unksol]

[citation][nom]bustapr[/nom]its not appropriate to compare reactions in the stock market to reactions in games. in stocks you are more cautious since theres a real world loss and you dont have a real opponent trying to beat you. [/citation]

I think you meant "in the stock market you are SUPPOSED to be more cautious since there's a real world loss". That's SUPPOSED TO affect YOU.

Game theory is a real area of research. And it has nothing to do with idiots playing COD and tea bagging each other. Believe me, it is NOT about YOUR video games

 

[excella1221]

^ Blame Pac-Man.

 

[LemonMeringueTy]

I blame my teammates heh.

 

[bisso]

I win: What a noob!
I lose: What a cheater!