This is trending on Facebook and while I find it fascinating figuing out the complexity of solving the game, normies are spouting that the game is harder than math problems.
DigitalTrends: "SCIENTISTS PROVE PLAYING ‘SUPER MARIO BROS.’ CAN BE AS HARD AS COMPLEX MATH"
MissOpen: "Study Says Super Mario Bros. Can Be as Hard as Solving Complex Math Problems"
Vocativ: "How Playing Super Mario Bros Can Be Harder Than Calculus"
Gamenesia: "A New Study Says Playing Super Mario Bros. Can be as Hard as Solving Complex Math Problems"
I support the glorification of simple, menial tasks as complex intellectual problems. As an autist it increases my social status and sexual fitness.
Not really comfortable with normal sexual situations, though, so I'm really hoping this promotes some more autism-compatible sexual activities.
Jayden Green
People like getting pat on the back for something they've already accomplished and it's that simple. The fact is that the MIT article is worded to come across as "If you've beaten Super Mario, you're practically a mathematician" rather than comparing the two or simply saying "Super Mario is of comparable difficulty to some complex math, if you've done the former you could probably do the latter". That alone says a lot about the public attitude towards math, the public attitude against learning, and how desperate higher education institutions are for free publicity. What exactly constitutes autism-compatible sex, being embraced by a non-sentient non-threatening electronic body pillow with a synthetic vagina?
Luke Fisher
>normies are spouting that the game is harder than math problems
No, games are harder than CS problems that are typically in NP - which is why you see a flood of CS majors hating on vidya gaem cause their too stupid to play them.
Math problems surpass all the complexity classes in terms of difficulty.
Hudson Morales
And this is in the new just now because MIT made a press release about it? Demaine proved this years ago for fun dammit.
Lots of things can be proven to be NP hard. Fuck I bet doing the dishes and laundry are NP hard problem, but do you see people spouting off about how doing dishes and laundry are 'harder than some math problems'? No you don't.
Fuck, computers can't even do the laundry or dishes, these are really hard problems!
They had to make highly contrived levels to show that Super Mario Bros is in fact Turing complete. The levels are probably really hard to complete, even for a human.
Ryan Price
Kek it's bullshit to make video game faggots think their waste of a life matters
Zachary Murphy
>And this is in the new just now because MIT made a press release about it? Demaine proved this years ago for fun dammit.
That sounds pretty nice. I had intercourse with a woman that sought naive young men like myself as a sexual conquest that asked me to "spit in [her] mouth" during the sexual encounter. It made me very uncomfortable and I did not oblige, which was unfortunately the wrong choice to make in the situation.
I would like a consistent and predictable pattern of sexual conduct that can be performed in any sexual situation such that there is always a solution to the problem. Not to discount that there are intimate complexities to the relationship, but to at least provide a basic performance that can complement a standard sexual display.
any (math) problem that can be solved algorithmically is easy by definition.
"hard" in this context talks about how computational complexity grows in terms of the input size
Ian Thomas
Whatever. As long as puzzle/platformer games don't get marketed as "Brain Games" like that Lumosity bullshit, I don't mind.
Dylan Mitchell
...
Owen Thomas
OP here, I was waiting for someone to post that
Carter Ross
you clearly dont understand what NP means. or you are pretending to be retard. idc
Joshua Turner
I can beat that game in less than half an hour not using shortcuts (otherwise 10min), yet I struggle with Calculus I a lot.
SMB its easy as pie, almost retarded-proof, people that can't beat it its just people that never touched a platformer in their miserable lives and probably don't even have the will to try properly.
Ninja Gaiden is a hard game, Battletoads is a hard game, Ghouls n Goblins is a hard game, Super Mario Bros isn't.
inb4 back to /v/
The thread is about videogame difficulty for normies (you), fucking autist.
Christian Baker
That's not a cycle
Levi Rivera
Obviously it is for you, because you don't do research.
Henry Bell
>Thoughts?
Today's generation of gamers have had their hands held all the way through games that reward them with instant gratification experiences no more effort and though that being able to mash the "X" button fast enough to play the next scene.
All 10,000 or so Mario games are little kid difficulty level in all respects.
>Ninja Gaiden is a hard game, Battletoads is a hard game, Ghouls n Goblins is a hard game
They are moderately difficult and mostly use memorization and reflex than anything else. People find them difficult because of how death is handled. Games that require complex forethought are much more difficult, but those games normally allow you to save or have checkpoints.
Compare a 1-hit 1-kill 0 live bullet hell shump shump to a randomly generated game like Minecraft with infinite lives and saved world. The shump only requires reflexes and memorization to complete but has a harsh death penalty. Minecraft on the other hand (when no in Hardcore mode), is far more complex but there's almost no death penalty. 1 game is completely linear and the other is completely open. Shumps where big games back in the early days. They required you to be perfect. At least Minecraft requires you to be inventive to an extent.
Compare that to today's linear games. All of the mainstream ones have checkpoints, quicksaves, and manual saves. They have game hints and tips everywhere, tutorials built into the game, skill requirements are far less because game characters often times just cinematic their way through stuff or you auto click them through it. Due to the rise in graphics over AI there's still little AI to pit your wit against. Puzzles comes with their own solutions now. All the popular, single player, modern games need is your mother to hold your hand.
So, kids these days think old games are "hard", which is sad really.
Joseph Morgan
Skimmed through you post, got the vibe of >minecraft is good Stopped skimming and posted this reaction to what you have implied
Kayden Ross
A well crafted linear level will always be higher quality than anything a random level generator can put together. There will also almost always be unpredictable elements. In well designed shmups enemies will have attacks that are relative to your character position or even completly random.
In addition randomly generated non-linear games have end points of being 'solved' as well. It's mostly a matter of finding out the best synergy and priority of use for your options. There is always some fundmental part of the core game that remains, the RNG just tinkers with the variables.
All games reach eventually reach a point where the player is familiar with the correct tactics for each situation and all that matters is execution of the tactics. In turn based games players can usually have perfect execution while in action games, the faster the game is, the harder it is to execute a tactic perfectly. When the player fails an execution there is some sort of penalty (health lose, lose of power ups or resources, or having to restart).
So the formula for difficulty is something like this
C=complexity of tactics and input. Ninja gaiden would have a low score while a strategy game would have a high score O=Relative power of the obstacles, including how difficult it is to discern effect tactics vs them. A maze dungeon or shmup would have a high score, a linear dungeon or modern action games would have a low score
S=Speed of the game or how difficult the execution is, including not just game speed but the player's avatar. Also accounts for how forgiving the controls are (ie no air control when jumping is harder than getting full air control).
P=penalty for a failed execution
[(C+O)*S]^P
Juan Wood
thx for vid, enjoyable with coffee in the morning although its 10 pm ;)
Bentley Walker
That was never said. Stop skimming.
I agree for the most part. Though randomly generated games can be really hard, but that depends on a plethora of things. Some games like "Stars!", which is a turn-based, single player/multiplayer 4X game, has everything randomly generated. Being successful in that game takes a lot more mental work than any linear or other randomly generated game that I know of. Only Notrium seems to take the cake from Stars! in difficulty and being procedurally generated.
I highly recommend Stars! to Veeky Forums, if you can find a download for it.
Landon King
>This just in: Humans are better at solving NP problems situationally
Jaxson Harris
tas, doesnt count
Alexander Sullivan
yeah, that's accurate. Normies are really just afraid of calculus.
Carson Hall
only games worth playing from a cognitive aspect are online multiplayer games with rankings
>chess >shooters >RTS >lol /dota >go
anything else is trash/just for fun (cognitively)
Robert Johnson
every game is cognitively simple, all tactics are just >if x then do y the fun is really shutting out everything else and embracing the voluntary enslavement. woah... did I just life?
also bouncing around in quake CA is fun
Zachary Butler
A more helpful comparassion would be to look at games that are similar genres and thus test the player in different ways.
An arcade shmup and a turn based x4 are almost as different as possible. One is minimalism, achieving amazing complexity of bullet and enemy patterns with nothing more than 8 way movement. The other tries to give you the most choices possible.
For a better comparasion look at a linear strategy game like fire emblem vs a randomly generated one. The more difficult fire emblems on their higher difficulty are like super-chess puzzles with multiple variations on the same solution. Each map is custome made so you must perfectly understand how to exploit the map shape, anticipate (or even manipulate) enemy ai and carefully guesstimate the damage output of each move. The penalty is harsh as you have finite units which can be defeated in a single round if positioned poorly.
In contrast a randomly generated strategy game never really gives you a polished map, mathemtically calculated out, it may even give you an unsolvable map. But because it is different every time you don't so much as solve the maps as you do figure out the basic axioms, most reliable tactics and stat relationships and basically try to achieve the highest mean efficiency over hundreds of encounters. Obviously there can be a harsh penalty but only if the RNG is tweaked so that the game will not randomly become unwinnable very often.
There's also strategy such as early rpgs where the tactics are very simple but the basic rules of the games are hidden from the player and they must discover them. The player does not know only rogues can safely open chests, that the trolls are weak to fire, or what the best items to buy are until they discover the rules themself.
Juan Myers
I don't believe comparing the type of games really matters too much. We are comparing old popular games to new popular games and why that affects opinions of difficulty in today's gaming generation.
Most new games using any type of RNG are tweaked to prevent unwinnable situations. The old ones didn't. One example is ancient Solitaire, but this line of thought strays too far from the subject "modern gamers aren't playing hard games and are not getting a well-rounded view of what is actually hard or easy."
Brandon Allen
Is this why im into logic and riddles? Because I played mario and zelda during the years of crucial brain development?
Not sure why people think it's hard. This may be due to the amount of time I spent playing it, but SMB is one of the most intuitive platformers. Any gamer my age can easily speed run through the levels.
>>shooters >>RTS >>lol /dota >>go >worth playing from a cognitive aspect sure thing buddy :^)
Logan Adams
>Kek it's bullshit to make video game faggots think their waste of a life matters
This, I really hate the hours yound men spend on video games, that if they spent 10% of those hours studying any useful skill they find enjoyable they would 10x better off for life.
