Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Gamers deemed too fast for real-life race

uk.eurosport.yahoo.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

11–20 of 36 posts

Re: Gamers deemed too fast for real-life race

#11

Post by dddrh »

stcredzero wrote: post #9
gilrain wrote: post #5

The type of games these players play, how seriously they take them, and the advanced setups they use mean a more honest headline might be: "The best amateur racers with countless hours of simulator time are sometimes better than professional racers."

I wonder how much of that could be due to being less sensitive to danger than they should be. If most of the conditioning was in a context where there were never any severe consequences for failure, you'd expect trainees that were considerably more aggressive than those conditioned in contexts where consequences could include death.

That always stood out to me in Ender's Game. Especially when Ender had to learn the lesson to not be so flippant with the units under his command.

Re: Gamers deemed too fast for real-life race

#14

Post by mkilling »

stcredzero wrote: post #9
gilrain wrote: post #5

The type of games these players play, how seriously they take them, and the advanced setups they use mean a more honest headline might be: "The best amateur racers with countless hours of simulator time are sometimes better than professional racers."

I wonder how much of that could be due to being less sensitive to danger than they should be. If most of the conditioning was in a context where there were never any severe consequences for failure, you'd expect trainees that were considerably more aggressive than those conditioned in contexts where consequences could include death.

That doesn't translate. I spent considerable time playing racing simulations, and still my first time on a real track was an intimidating experience.

Re: Gamers deemed too fast for real-life race

#15

Post by dylangs1030 »

This is cool, but shouldn't be all that surprising. The article doesn't go into any metrics used to test beginner racing candidates.

It's essentially like pairing astronauts who have done extensive virtual testing with people who have limited field experience. You expect the former group to outdo the latter, but obviously they will underperform against those who have done extensive field work in space.

And so on. Many programs use virtual testing as a precursor to field work. So I'm not surprised that expert gamers who have probably clocked in near 10,000 hours of virtual racing can beat comparatively greenhorn racers who know how to drive a car but don't have much actual racing experience.

Re: Gamers deemed too fast for real-life race

#16

Post by stcredzero »

mkilling wrote: post #14
stcredzero wrote: post #9

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I wonder how much of that could be due to being less sensitive to danger than they should be. If most of the conditioning was in a context where there were never any severe consequences for failure, you'd expect trainees that were considerably more aggressive than those conditioned in contexts where consequences could include death.

That doesn't translate. I spent considerable time playing racing simulations, and still my first time on a real track was an intimidating experience.

One personal anecdote may well be true and valuable, but it still isn't usable data.

Re: Gamers deemed too fast for real-life race

#17

Post by pekk »

mkilling wrote: post #14
stcredzero wrote: post #9

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I wonder how much of that could be due to being less sensitive to danger than they should be. If most of the conditioning was in a context where there were never any severe consequences for failure, you'd expect trainees that were considerably more aggressive than those conditioned in contexts where consequences could include death.

That doesn't translate. I spent considerable time playing racing simulations, and still my first time on a real track was an intimidating experience.

The issue isn't how you felt, it is what kind of behavior you learned in the simulation context which would transfer to what you did on the real track. Doubtless your intimidation affected your behavior, but if a simulation can improve real performance then it is unlikely that a little intimidation completely erases all the tendencies learned in the simulation. It can't be assumed that things which improve performance will transfer, but things which could be dangerous won't transfer.

Re: Gamers deemed too fast for real-life race

#19

Post by jamesaguilar »

stcredzero wrote: post #9
gilrain wrote: post #5

The type of games these players play, how seriously they take them, and the advanced setups they use mean a more honest headline might be: "The best amateur racers with countless hours of simulator time are sometimes better than professional racers."

I wonder how much of that could be due to being less sensitive to danger than they should be. If most of the conditioning was in a context where there were never any severe consequences for failure, you'd expect trainees that were considerably more aggressive than those conditioned in contexts where consequences could include death.

Possible, but I'm guessing that the massive amount of simulator time, muscle memory, and practice are probably closer to the true explanation.

Re: Gamers deemed too fast for real-life race

#20

Post by jamesaguilar »

stcredzero wrote: post #16
mkilling wrote: post #14

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That doesn't translate. I spent considerable time playing racing simulations, and still my first time on a real track was an intimidating experience.

One personal anecdote may well be true and valuable, but it still isn't usable data.

Normally this rejoinder is used by people who have provided data and received an anecdote in response. However, you haven't even provided an anecdote . . .
Post reply on HN