Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in
Your question
Closed

Researchers Investigating Why People Win or Lose at Games

Tags:
Last response: in News comments
Share
January 27, 2013 9:23:50 AM

Well that's all very... dumb.
Score
20
January 27, 2013 9:48:52 AM

The person who lose is a noob! end of research! :D 
Score
27
Related resources
January 27, 2013 9:54:10 AM

noobs loose, pros win, how obvious!
Score
3
January 27, 2013 10:03:30 AM

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.
Score
20
January 27, 2013 10:12:43 AM

if they just focused their research on why people win or lose at the stock market, that will be more rewarding
Score
14
January 27, 2013 10:58:25 AM

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

>_>
Score
13
January 27, 2013 11:00:46 AM

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.
Score
11
January 27, 2013 11:28:15 AM

Make more mistake than the opponent then you loose.
Score
2
January 27, 2013 11:50:14 AM

Great.. in the not too distant future:
Can't win at the game you are playing? We've got a pill for that!
Score
14
January 27, 2013 11:52:18 AM

our education system is seriously failing here. three people already misspelled "lose" as "loose." it hurts my brain.
Score
24
January 27, 2013 11:58:50 AM

All your bases are belong to us.

gg
Score
3
January 27, 2013 12:10:05 PM

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.
Score
0
January 27, 2013 12:12:32 PM

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*
Score
0
January 27, 2013 12:17:28 PM

Didn't know it took a genius to figure this out. :p 
Score
6
January 27, 2013 12:40:36 PM

That's easy
If they loose against me is beacuse they are noobs
If they win against me is beacuse they are cheaters-hackers
Score
0
January 27, 2013 12:59:25 PM

the word is "lose." for the love of everything, "lose." it is in the damn title of the article ffs.
Score
12
January 27, 2013 1:13:23 PM

Usually it's "The more you play, the better you are at a game"
Score
5
January 27, 2013 1:56:53 PM

Quote:
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.
Score
-4
January 27, 2013 2:34:23 PM

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...
Score
13
January 27, 2013 2:41:25 PM

orionite... 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.


A lot would have to be who is doing the funding. If this is on a tax payer's dime=very dumb.
Score
1
January 27, 2013 2:51:49 PM

bustaprits 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.


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
Score
3
January 27, 2013 3:37:09 PM

^ Blame Pac-Man.
Score
3
January 27, 2013 3:45:50 PM

I blame my teammates heh.
Score
3
January 27, 2013 3:59:32 PM

I win: What a noob!
I lose: What a cheater!
Score
7
January 27, 2013 6:49:52 PM

So...what is the point of this? Gaming, for nearly everyone, is for entertainment... Whether we win or lose may irritate us, but there are zero consequences to those actions.. Winning or losing in a real world market has real world consequences.. The two should not be related.

Score
0
January 27, 2013 8:28:42 PM

Give the soft sciences a break. Game theory is the only thing they have to make it sound like they are a real science. There are obvious problems with it but at the core it still quasi describes how the world should work. My buying isn't very rational :(  I buy companies I like and sell companies I don't like.
Score
0
January 27, 2013 8:53:23 PM

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

C'mon, loosen up a little bit!
Score
3
January 27, 2013 10:42:45 PM

An experts wins one, a noob whines on.

Even more so if the game involves dice (as they are obviously fixed)
Score
0
January 28, 2013 12:36:25 AM

vittau said:
C'mon, loosen up a little bit!


I see what you did there. +1 for you.
Score
1
January 28, 2013 1:07:38 AM

"....perfect knowledge of what [we] are doing and of what [our] opponents are doing...."

It makes me remember the old saying (from book "art of war")

Do not know yourself and your opponent (strength & weakness) = 0% chance to win
know yourself but do not know your opponent = 50% chance to win
know yourself and know your opponent = 100% chance to win

something like that.......

Score
2
January 28, 2013 1:20:26 AM

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

There already are pills for exactly that, they just go by the trade names of Adderall and Ritalin and get prescribed for nearly anything
Score
0
January 28, 2013 1:14:26 PM

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


Clearly, more research into why some people win games but continue to be completely inept at everyday tasks is also valuable...
Score
0
January 29, 2013 7:07:52 AM

The stock market is just legalised gambling. We already have research that people playing the market do no better than chance. Comparing it to a game where learned skill matters is silly. Also games are supposed to be winnable these days. It's a completely different scenario.
Score
0
!