Being an expert is certainly not "just pattern matching" for physical sports, music, real-time video games, and many, many other things. Not only does one need to see the pattern, but they must be able to physically make their body do what they recognize needs to be done. Beyond "just pattern matching", if there's any chance of failure, what separates experts from amateurs is consistency of execution.
I would say there's quite a bit of pattern matching in video games, especially real-time ones like competitive FPSs.
You see a player round a corner and know that they are likely to end up at point A, B, or C within times X, Y, or Z.
You hear a specific gun being used to your left, it is likely being fired from areas D, E, or F because those have good sightlines to where you are.
For both circumstances you know that of the Q number of weapons you have R will be the best option for the range that you will likely encounter the enemy at and grenade S will also help. Weapons T and U will leave you undermatched. You switch to Q, reload it in an area that you know is relatively safe. As your approach the target you know that enabling powerup V will help you get the upper hand.
I didn't say there wasn't pattern matching in video games, I said that pattern matching is only part of being an expert.
To use your FPS example, knowing all of those things still doesn't matter if you miss every shot.
Another example -- 99% of the best Olympic athletes at the 2012 Olympics were less than 40 years old.[1] I don't think that people over 40 are worse at pattern matching, I think being an expert at something requires more than just pattern matching. Depending on the activity, physical strength, eyesight, reaction time, and so many other things matter too.
