Interview Dragon Age - BioWare's Blue Period

[Silellak]

IQ ratings are overrated. Common sense, character and taste are underrated.

bingo

Really? I mean, I see common sense being an arguable point - more or less everyone in a society tend to agree on what is or isn't "'common sense." It is a tangible quality you can measure based on the value and definitions society has placed upon it.

But "character" and especially "taste" are incredibly subjective. Obviously, you are more than welcome to shit on whoever you want if their tastes don't line up with your own; but to pretend your own taste and opinions are some sort of undeniable fact that you can use as a basis for judging the intelligence of others makes you look like the "stupid" one.

 

[MetalCraze]

Who cares? Not all intelligent people have the same taste in games. Just because a game does or doesn't require intelligence, doesn't prove anything about the overall 'intelligence' of someone who enjoys it.

A genius might very well enjoy watching shitty movies or TV shows, or playing shitty video games. Why? Because they just want to shut off their brain and relax for awhile.

You know so much about geniuses, please tell me more. What else do they enjoy besides overly repetitive games where you just button-mash and run through copy-pasta corridors - like autists do?

Playing 'dumb' video games doesn't prove someone is dumb any more than playing 'smart' games prove someone is smart.

Oblivion fanbase is a direct proof of the opposite. Every guy who enjoys Oblivion so much "he is awesome at it" is a retard, there are no exceptions. I dare you to show me at least one.

But "character" and especially "taste" are incredibly subjective.

Not true. How will you call a guy who thinks that Rothko's diarrhea is an art?

However, a blanket statement of 'no smart people play Halo' is just absurd, overly-elitist drivel.

Did I hurt your feelings there once again?

 

[Silellak]

You know so much about geniuses, please tell me more. What else do they enjoy besides overly repetitive games where you just button-mash and run through copy-pasta corridors - like autists do?

My point was that intelligent people might enjoy a non-intelligent activity in order to "shut their brain off" for awhile. Did that never occur to you?

Playing 'dumb' video games doesn't prove someone is dumb any more than playing 'smart' games prove someone is smart.

Oblivion fanbase is a direct proof of the opposite. Every guy who enjoys Oblivion so much "he is awesome at it" is a retard, there are no exceptions. I dare you to show me at least one.

So you take my general statement referring to all "dumb" games, and make it specific not only to a single game, but also take it a step further and argue that someone who 'enjoys Oblivion so much "he is awesome at it"' can't possibly be intelligent, which wasn't anywhere near my point to begin with. My point was simply that there are many reasons to enjoy a game, and someone might be looking for something entirely different than what you're looking for. You might want something you find "intellectually stimulating", but someone else might want something they can just "switch off" during and enjoy.

That being said, let's put together a hypothetical situation for a moment. Let's say I found a video or message board post of someone saying "I am so awesome at Oblivion! It's a great game!". At that point, how would I prove their intelligence to you? Would I need to hire a PI to dig into their personal lives? Or would it be enough to find them making an equally glowing - if not more so - review of Fallout and Arcanum?

Somehow I don't think anything would be enough; it's clear you've already judged them based on their opinions of Oblivion. Thus making your "dare" not just childish but likely impossible.

Did I hurt your feelings there once again?

I was wondering how long it would take you to cross over into personal attacks. One of these days I hope you manage to have a real debate with someone, where you:

1. Respond to the points other people make, rather than rephrasing them to the points you wish they had made and blasting those arguments instead
2. Manage to disagree with someone without insulting them

 

[Monocause]

On the IQ case, just to derail the thread a little more:

For starters I'd like to notify that my opinion isn't biased, since i fare pretty well at these IQ tests. I've subjected myself to multiple forms of this peculiar torture and always got marks in between of 130-150 in different scales, which is quite good.
That doesn't change that these tests are a load of crock. They don't gauge 'intelligence' as we understand it, they gauge some specific parts of it. Intelligence doesn't evolve linearly and a person can be fe. a brilliant observator and orator, but may have trouble with simplest mathematical procedures, and vice versa. Read up the list of the Mensa members; you'll notice some familiar names for sure. Now, Doda Rabczewska, a local singer girl who's without a doubt a complete idiot got reportedly ~160 IQ in a test and is a legit Mensa member. On the other hand, there's a guy on my year at the uni who's got 79 IQ from one of the popular tests. That, my friends, is the IQ level of an ape. Somehow the guy's not stupid though, he's slow at times, that's true, but his cognitive abilities, memory functionality and commonly understood "intelligence" are not even close to being severely impaired.

The truth is, not one serious person gives a crap about IQ tests except for people with narcissistic disorders, people with inferiority complex who need to build up their self-esteem, idiots, celebrities and sub-par journalists. 'nuff said.

And back on track with the topic: I haven't played Halo, but I've played a couple of other FPS games. There's nothing wrong with liking them, I guess, they're the sort of entertainment that allows you to mindlessly blow off some steam in a virtual environment.
One has to admit that masturbating to Master Chief or making teh awesome youtube videos of the game shows that someone's retarded though.

 

[Silellak]

On the IQ case, just to derail the thread a little more:

For starters I'd like to notify that my opinion isn't biased, since i fare pretty well at these IQ tests. I've subjected myself to multiple forms of this peculiar torture and always got marks in between of 130-150 in different scales, which is quite good.
That doesn't change that these tests are a load of crock. They don't gauge 'intelligence' as we understand it, they gauge some specific parts of it. Intelligence doesn't evolve linearly and a person can be fe. a brilliant observator and orator, but may have trouble with simplest mathematical procedures, and vice versa. Read up the list of the Mensa members; you'll notice some familiar names for sure. Now, Doda Rabczewska, a local singer girl who's without a doubt a complete idiot got reportedly ~160 IQ in a test and is a legit Mensa member. On the other hand, there's a guy on my year at the uni who's got 79 IQ from one of the popular tests. That, my friends, is the IQ level of an ape. Somehow the guy's not stupid though, he's slow at times, that's true, but his cognitive abilities, memory functionality and commonly understood "intelligence" are not even close to being severely impaired.

The truth is, not one serious person gives a crap about IQ tests except for people with narcissistic disorders, people with inferiority complex who need to build up their self-esteem, idiots, celebrities and sub-par journalists. 'nuff said.

And back on track with the topic: I haven't played Halo, but I've played a couple of other FPS games. There's nothing wrong with liking them, I guess, they're the sort of entertainment that allows you to mindlessly blow off some steam in a virtual environment.
One has to admit that masturbating to Master Chief or making teh awesome youtube videos of the game shows that someone's retarded though.

I am certainly not arguing for or against the viability of IQ tests. I've never even bothered to take one.

My point was simply that it is absurd to completely dismiss IQ tests and instead use "What games does this person like?" as a measure of intelligence. Even if IQ tests are a complete crock of shit, that doesn't change the insanity of statements like "everyone who enjoys Halo is stupid."

 

[MetalCraze]

So you take my general statement referring to all "dumb" games, and make it specific not only to a single game

I see you decided to ignore all other text? I even try to write in short sentences but even then it is so hard to read as it appears. What I'm saying is that the taste can be used to determine persons intelligence. I gave you three examples there, not just one.

Let's say I found a video or message board post of someone saying "I am so awesome at Oblivion! It's a great game!". At that point, how would I prove their intelligence to you?

It's easy - if you are making a video talking about how awesome you are at Oblivion - you are retarded.

I was wondering how long it would take you to cross over into personal attacks.

You consider THAT a personal attack? Haha.
Also I never go down to insults unless something that person says looks incredibly retarded to me. I actually prefer to ignore stupid text most of the time which I just did to your last two sentences.

 

[Silellak]

I see you decided to ignore all other text? I even try to write in short sentences but even then it is so hard to read as it appears. What I'm saying is that the taste can be used to determine persons intelligence. I gave you three examples there, not just one.

Yet somehow, you still manage to be wrong. It is ridiculous to judge someone's intelligent based solely on whether or not they like or play a certain game. What's equally as important is the reason they like or play the game.

If someone loves Pong because of its incredible story, or thinks that Pac-Man's greatest strength is the dialog, or that Oblivion is a deep, strategic game with a huge number of tactical options, then you might be justified in calling them an idiot - because it's something that is provably wrong. It's gone beyond being simply a matter of taste.

However, there are plenty of reasons someone might enjoy a "dumb" game that has nothing to do with being "dumb" themselves. That seems to be the concept you are unwilling, or perhaps even unable, to grasp. Is someone stupid if they know Oblivion is a shallow game, but they enjoy it because it doesn't require much thought?

 

[Solaris]

IQ ratings are overrated. Common sense, character and taste are underrated.

bingo

Really? I mean, I see common sense being an arguable point - more or less everyone in a society tend to agree on what is or isn't "'common sense." It is a tangible quality you can measure based on the value and definitions society has placed upon it.

But "character" and especially "taste" are incredibly subjective. Obviously, you are more than welcome to shit on whoever you want if their tastes don't line up with your own; but to pretend your own taste and opinions are some sort of undeniable fact that you can use as a basis for judging the intelligence of others makes you look like the "stupid" one.

Of course 'character' and 'taste' are subjective things, it's what makes the world so interesting, and the basis for art in all its forms. For me it's not a case of judging others intelligence in a clinical fashion. That's the whole point for me, too much emphasis is placed on pure intelligence/logic as the true mark of intelligence. Where really as humans we are better served with a nice mix of of all the above plus common sense and wisdom.

The only 'stupid' ones are those that base intelligence purely on IQ alone.

 

[Silellak]

Of course 'character' and 'taste' are subjective things, it's what makes the world so interesting, and the basis for art in all its forms. For me it's not a case of judging others intelligence in a clinical fashion. That's the whole point for me, too much emphasis is placed on pure intelligence/logic as the true mark of intelligence. Where really as humans we are better served with a nice mix of of all the above plus common sense and wisdom.

The only 'stupid' ones are those that base intelligence purely on IQ alone.

For the most part, I do agree with you, just to the exclusion of "taste" as a primary factor in objectively judging someone's intelligence.

Once you make a primary factor something subjective, then the entire idea of "intelligent" becomes subjective. And maybe it is, or should be - there are very different types of "intelligent", after all.

In general, I find people are far too willing to jump up and call anyone with a different opinion "stupid", rather than trying to figure out why they might believe or act a certain way. I know plenty of people I consider intelligent who enjoy or believe things I consider to be primarily the realm of "stupid people" - the Twilight series, most of the crap on TV, etc. For some reason, plenty of intelligent people enjoy these things - be it an excuse to "switch off" their brains for awhile or a "guilty pleasure" that touches them some way for some reason.

 

[Solaris]

Once you make a primary factor something subjective, then the entire idea of "intelligent" becomes subjective. And maybe it is, or should be - there are very different types of "intelligent", after all.

That is how I see it actually, subjectivity and objectivity are intrinsically linked. So isolating one out as the basis for intelligence is wrong, imo.

 

[Silellak]

Once you make a primary factor something subjective, then the entire idea of "intelligent" becomes subjective. And maybe it is, or should be - there are very different types of "intelligent", after all.

That is how I see it actually, subjectivity and objectivity are intrinsically linked. So isolating one out as the basis for intelligence is wrong, imo.

I can see your point there. I suppose we all have certain subjective areas where we'll quickly label someone as "stupid" for believing or enjoying a particular thing. I try and give people the benefit of the doubt, though. For me, there's a big difference between "They like Twilight because they think it's a fantastic book" vs. "They like Twilight despite the fact, or perhaps even because, it's a terrible book".

I find the people who are quickest to label others "stupid" often aren't the brightest, themselves. So I guess you can call that part of my own subjective test for determining the intelligence of others.

 

[Kron]

I strongly object to the sex, blood and violence themes being seen as mature in themselves; it has to do with the context these are themes are presented in within the game itself.

Nailed it.

 

[Spectacle]

The ridiculously oversized shoulder pads kills the maturity for me. Those things would be a huge hindrance to a real world fighter, and scream "style over substance", which is the opposite of mature.

 

[1eyedking]

Mature, gritty and adult, yet featuring Marylin Manson on one of their trailers? For casual, time-challenged gamers, yet sporting 80+ hours of gameplay?

Are their target consumers so insecure they resort to this kind of double talk?

 

[rpgcodexusername]

halo is provably a crap game, so if you play it you must be an idiot.

 

[Ferrous]

Intelligent people don't play Halo and have nothing good to say about it.

Haha you're an idiot. A persons taste in computer games determines intellect? Subjective questions are not an indicator for a objective level of intelligence.

"What computer games do you like?" falls under the umbrella of a subjective question.

People who claim to have a 'subjective' intelligence can typically be placed in the "mommy says i'm special" category.


Perhaps this is less of an attack on halo players and more of a reflection on your own shortcomings?

 

[Jaime Lannister]

a n00b tries to troll skyway

little does he know that skyway cannot be trolled, he will bitch until the end of time, he will go months without sleep if that's what it takes for him to win an internet battle

 

[Silellak]

a n00b tries to troll skyway

little does he know that skyway cannot be trolled, he will bitch until the end of time, he will go months without sleep if that's what it takes for him to win an internet battle

He who fights with skyway should look to it that he himself does not become a skyway. And when you gaze long into the skyway, the skyway gazes also into you.

 

[MetalCraze]

Yet somehow, you still manage to be wrong. It is ridiculous to judge someone's intelligent based solely on whether or not they like or play a certain game. What's equally as important is the reason they like or play the game.

If someone loves Pong because of its incredible story, or thinks that Pac-Man's greatest strength is the dialog, or that Oblivion is a deep, strategic game with a huge number of tactical options, then you might be justified in calling them an idiot - because it's something that is provably wrong. It's gone beyond being simply a matter of taste.

Are you running out of arguments or something? Because a whole armada of strawmen just passed me by right there. You could've just said something like "how about someone who enjoys Oblivion because he thinks that it has a mature writing and story?" - which is clearly not a mark of intelligence.

Is someone stupid if they know Oblivion is a shallow game, but they enjoy it because it doesn't require much thought?

It is very repetitive too. It doesn't require any thought at all. Yes if a person enjoys a game which treats that person as a moron - there is a reason for that.
There are much better games that don't require much thought, yet for some reason they don't treat you like a dumb teenager.

 

[Black]

Humans don't really SPEAK in complete, punctuation perfect sentences.

The superior ones do.

 

[Shannow]

But "character" and especially "taste" are incredibly subjective. Obviously, you are more than welcome to shit on whoever you want if their tastes don't line up with your own; but to pretend your own taste and opinions are some sort of undeniable fact that you can use as a basis for judging the intelligence of others makes you look like the "stupid" one.

Would you rather have an highly intelligent politician or an honest one? Optimally I'd like an intelligent one with integrety but if I had to chose I'd take the honest one that makes honest mistakes over the one that uses his intelligence to line his pockets and put his friends into high positions.

Taste:
My bones are lined with metal. I'm indestructable. I live in a bunker, anyway. There are subhumans out there and I'm better than them.

or

I have a dream that one day this nation will rise up and live out the true meaning of its creed: "We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal."


Pretty obvious choice for me...

Intelligence, common sense, character and taste are all subjective if you go into enough detail. Doesn't change the fact that many people think they can measure intelligence and give it vast priority over other merits.

EDIT:

My point was simply that it is absurd to completely dismiss IQ tests and instead use "What games does this person like?" as a measure of intelligence. Even if IQ tests are a complete crock of shit, that doesn't change the insanity of statements like "everyone who enjoys Halo is stupid."

Then why did you even bother arguing with me? I could have saved 5 minutes of my time...

 

[Wyrmlord]

Look guys, it's not about intelligence.

Some of us can still say that Oblivion manages to be fun for the first 3 hours or so.

However, by all reasonable standards, you can't just say a game is good because you managed to enjoy it for the first 3 hours. That's because anyone who plays games wants to extract enjoyment from them for an indefinite period. Nobody ever thinks, "I am buying this game simply so I can put it away next week." For now, it is one of your sources of entertainment, and you expect that it will continue to provide it.

If you are going to excuse it; well, that's not going to help. Your purchasing power determines what will be available in the market, and the day you excuse a game that has largely bored you simply because you thought it was fun for a very brief moment; well, that excuses the developers for all their future projects.

It's not about being unintelligent. It's about being a terrible consumer, which is a genuine problem. If you don't atleast try to discriminate the products you buy, they will not do anything for you.

 

[Volourn]

"It's not about being unintelligent. It's about being a terrible consumer, which is a genuine problem. If you don't atleast try to discriminate the products you buy, they will not do anything for you."

Then the so called hardcore gamers ala the Codex are the dumbest most terrible consumers ever as they'll continually buy games they *know* they will hate from companies they hate. That's moronic.

 

[Wyrmlord]

"It's not about being unintelligent. It's about being a terrible consumer, which is a genuine problem. If you don't atleast try to discriminate the products you buy, they will not do anything for you."

Then the so called hardcore gamers ala the Codex are the dumbest most terrible consumers ever as they'll continually buy games they *know* they will hate from companies they hate. That's moronic.

True, and one can even do alot worse than most Codexers.

F. E. in some forums, there are gamers who think it is their obligation to buy every RPG that comes out, somehow because "you can't call yourself a hardcore gamer unless you've experienced the whole spectrum" (actual quote from another place).

They all make such wierd rationalizations for it; that a "real" gamer is in touch with everything out there.

 

[Rhalle]

No-one with an IQ of 110+ can honestly associate "maturity" with PRONZ and GIBZ past the age of 16.

After that you are left with either a mad, ironic appreciation. Or black despair.

Oh, and I wonder if DA's Laidlaw is related to Valve's Laidlaw.