213374U

No, it's not great. In fact, it's quite common. Sure, I guess it can be argued it's a matter of taste. But what can't be argued it's that the writing is scarce, compared to other FPSs. But that was not my point. It's still another generic FPS, whose only distinctive trait is that it bears the name "Half-Life". No advancements in gameplay conception whatsoever, no advancements in plot/character interaction, no advancements. Now the question is, they didn't want to, or they couldn't do better?

Shh. It's a secret.

You are proving my point. Six years of development and who knows how much money spent and all they could do is... HL2. It's not revolutionary in any sense (except if you consider the physics engine revolutionary), and it is a good example of mediocre writing. With so much they did so little, and I'm not saying they could have done much more. You can't have it all. Not in a FPS, not in a RPG.

Palpatine is... "

I'm not talking about kids. I'm talking about young infants, that for instance, learn to read or do basic mathematic operations on their own. For those kids, the rationalizations you propose don't apply. There is also the ability to grasp concepts quickly, that regardless of training and mental gymnastics, is different from person to person. Sure, as I said, training can do wonders, and probably the apparent difference will decrease. That's why hard-working students with average intelligence do better than "real smart" students that don't dedicate enough time to their studies. Also, creativity when approaching new problems and situations can't be trained. And it's undeniable that some people are better than others at that. Adaptability can't be taught. For that matter, neither can abstract thought capacity, musical talent, etc. Okay. But the opposite is true, as well. Not every old concept is necessarily wrong just because it's old. It is convenient because it's true. There is no such thing as equality. It's all a fallacy invented by people who were tired of other people using feeble, random arguments to support their whimsy power. It served a purpose back then, and I guess that, to some degree, it does today. But it's still a fallacy nonetheless. Nature isn't fair, as "fairness" is a human notion, and a rather random one at that.

I'd like to think that what you want is feasible, but it's not. Developers don't have an unlimited supply of money and time to create the ultimate game for which their names will be written in the annals of history. It's just another business. Sure, they want to create the best possible games so you will consider buying their products in the future, but they have deadlines to meet and budgets to limit them. And from a certain point on, adding extra features and polish is no longer cost-effective. Take HL2, for instance... "

Exactly. The difference in intelligence is evident in children, the more, the younger they are. At those levels, expertise is non-existant and self-confidence is irrelevant. I agree that you can train for most IQ tests, and at that point those two factors are decisive, but that just proves that IQ tests aren't really a measure of a person's intelligence.

I am deeply offended by the inclusion of the bastardized sequel known as Invisible War together with the original. And no, Topaz Quasar has the Poll Master title... for eternity. Sorry.

Didn't AI stand for Artificial Idiocy? Anyway, I don't think the AIs' opinion of you depend on your warmongering tendencies, but rather on your willingness to keep your word. Breaking treaties will ensure that not even the sworn enemy of those you betrayed will want to deal with you, and that includes commercial agreements. Using nukes hurts your image, too, to an absurd degree. Also, the commercial algorythms are not very good. If an AI knows they have something you want badly, or the level of your civilizations is very different, they will reject a fair trade only to piss you off (nobody would trade nuclear fission for wine).

After going once more through the excellent experience that is Deus Ex, I rented Invisible War, and brought myself to beat it. All I have to say is... that is not Deus Ex. I'll probably be renting Metal Gear Solid 3 tomorrow. Yup. My last JC Denton was a Cloak+Dragon's Tooth combo murderer, so I had no problem hitting the "moving thingies". And, at any rate, it's a matter of planning. Choose a type of weaponry at the beginning of the game, and spend all of your skill points on the proper skill. When you reach mastery, there's no way in hell you can miss with that weapon. However, its RPG elements are restricted to skill and augmentation management, and the ability to choose an ending. Otherwise, the plot is mostly linear.

Heh. Looks like you got a lot of points for coop/flag grabbing. And I mean A LOT. I haven't had a chance to play the full game yet (yes, game stores SUCK where I live), but the only times I was able to get such scores was when I got lucky on my bombing runs with the Su-34 (sometimes I missed and accidentally tk'ed half my team and got kickbanned). Perhaps when I get the game and a decent Fastpath connection we'll meet in the battlefield...

Most likely, you can't. Probably that person has (or can hire) bodyguards to turn your bones into jelly, in the rare event they couldn't deal with you themselves. Which means you can't "beat up" anyone. And that statement certifies your stupidity much better than any silly test would. Thanks for making official something that everyone already knew. As for Eldar's post: "God gives talent; work transforms talent into genius." - Anna Pavlova

Well, that was an interesting read.

"My fellow libertarians, we can no longer tolerate the oppression of the supernatural! It is time we take action against those filthy capitalist ghosts that threaten to turn our children into cheap TV show fodder! ...And, at any rate, we can conclude that America sucks! Who is with me?!" Well now. That explains why the most supernatural thing that's ever happened to me is my keychain repeatedly going missing for no apparent reason.

Yeah, that's what I thought, too.

At any rate... what's to prevent me from taking the test over and over again until I finally get a perfect score?

Don't do it, Gluupor!

Those are all good points as to why the d20 scale isn't well suited to measure the real world. You would think that is just common sense, but apparently, it's not so. I mean, this thread was started just for fun, and here are you guys making statistical analyses. At any rate, I think I read somewhere that the average IQ wasn't 100, but more like 85-90, which kinda conflicts with the test threshold. Oh yeah mkreku, it looks like you went to considerable lengths to associate d20 stats with IQ results, but you forgot to take into consideration attribute modifiers gained at level up. Which means that, at the end of their career, a gifted child could be at 22 INT. Which is yet another absurd, since intelligence decreases with age.

What you want is Battlefront 2. Yeah. Like the Sky... er... thingy on Onderon.

No, he wasn't. It's a blatant CGI sequence. I'd like to see you try and perform a lightsaber fight choreography, and then perhaps you'd have a higher opinion of a 60+ year old man doing the same stuff. That kind of tricks are really lame and result in pretty awful sequences. Well, I think that Palps was pretending, and probably he was not trying to kill Mace. Which isn't necessarily the same as hold back.

Commissar wins the thread.

That's probably the one of the most ludicrous comments I've ever read in these boards.

I really don't see why you are so interested in people proving their supposedly superior intellects to you. Most likely they can't, but we already know that. We already know that lots of people live in a perpetual state of self-delusion. So, again, why do you care? Do you feel like you have something to prove?