@dang — pretty annoying that this user is engagement farming by reposting classics. Not great behavior. https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=31199361
95%-ile isn't that good (2020)
31–40 of 191 posts
Re: 95%-ile isn't that good (2020)
#32This is my sad reality of local multiplayer games like Speedrunners, Duck Game, and Ultimate Chicken Horse. They're super fun, but I'm too good for my friends & family, and too bad for people who take it seriously online.
Re: 95%-ile isn't that good (2020)
#33This is my sad reality of local multiplayer games like Speedrunners, Duck Game, and Ultimate Chicken Horse. They're super fun, but I'm too good for my friends & family, and too bad for people who take it seriously online.
Classic “Kid who owns the only Sega in a friend group” problem. Nobody wants to play Mortal Kombat with them.
If I could stand the BO or the competitive atmosphere I'd consider it.
Re: 95%-ile isn't that good (2020)
#34I would have to agree about 95th percentile being not that difficult. A streamer that I occasionally tune into (Asmongold) says that if you are seeking information outside of the game such as watching streams of the game, that makes you a top 10% player automatically. Most people are passive consumers and participants in their activities and that isn't exclusive to the individual. I am a passive consumer & participan…
Try being in the top 1% of basketball players if you're under 5'9".
Easier said than done.
Re: 95%-ile isn't that good (2020)
#35Earlier quoted context omitted.
People post/repost the classics all the time, why are you tattling this aggressively, lol? It just needs a [2020] tag.
This is spam. I like to come here and want to contribute new ideas to the discourse here. I expect others to do the same.
We're deluding ourselves if we think we're finding new ideas on what amounts to a faded techbro subreddit. Much of the discussion in tech happens in circles until we start talking about concrete code.
Re: 95%-ile isn't that good (2020)
#36This is my sad reality of local multiplayer games like Speedrunners, Duck Game, and Ultimate Chicken Horse. They're super fun, but I'm too good for my friends & family, and too bad for people who take it seriously online.
My friends could always tell when I was essentially just letting them kill me so that the fun could otherwise continue. Wound up playing way less PC games with them than N64/Genesis/Snes.
Re: 95%-ile isn't that good (2020)
#37Earlier quoted context omitted.
People post/repost the classics all the time, why are you tattling this aggressively, lol? It just needs a [2020] tag.
This is spam. I like to come here and want to contribute new ideas to the discourse here. I expect others to do the same.
Re: 95%-ile isn't that good (2020)
#381. People don't want to win or don't care about winning
2. People understand their mistakes but haven't put in enough time to fix them
3. People are untalented
4. People don't understand how to spot their mistakes and fix them
——
There is another very common reason. It is often emotionally difficult to acknowledge that you’re making simple mistakes that could be fixed by a relatively small amount of dedicated practice.
Relatedly, most people have a fear of putting in the actual effort to get better and then still falling short of expectations (their own or others).
It’s emotionally easier to pretend that there are other reasons outside of your control and that dedicated practice wouldn’t make a difference anyways.
In my experience, the solution to this to work on accepting your emotions and developing inner security such that you don’t feel that your self-worth depends on the outcome of these events.
One might even discover that they don’t actually even care that much about achieving a high level of performance in activity X and that the “need” to be good at it is a manifestation of older behavioral patterns and conditioning that don’t necessarily benefit them today :)
Re: 95%-ile isn't that good (2020)
#39> Note that when I say 95%-ile, I mean 95%-ile among people who participate, not all people (for many activities, just doing it at all makes you 99%-ile or above across all people). I'm also not referring to 95%-ile among people who practice regularly. The "one weird trick" is that, for a lot of activities, being something like 10%-ile among people who practice can make you something like 90%-ile or 99%-ile among peo…
Re: 95%-ile isn't that good (2020)
#40Earlier quoted context omitted.
This has been HN for years now. It’s a click farm with canned talking points.
It's kinda sad, this place feels kinda like Slashdot, and not in a good way. :(