Fallout What in the Hell could redeem a system like VATS?

[thesheeep]

Oh, and intelligence CAN be trained and IS trained, from the moment you interact with others. Hence why a child who has had no contact with other human beings behaved like a wild animal as opposed to a normal, functioning member of society.

A retarded example, as pretty much everything you write.

An intelligent child that has had no human contact could become a "normal, functioning member of society" in a relatively short time.
While a child born dumb could never achieve that "transformation".
Intelligence determines how far your "mental skills" can go with training and how long it takes to train them. Hence why some children have no trouble at all in school, and don't even have to study much at all for best grades, while others need to learn half the day to achieve even basic grades.

 

[Sigourn]

A retarded example, as pretty much everything you write.

Literally a Google search away, retard.

I'm sure you will chalk it up as the amazing coincidence that the kid behaved like an animal because it was retarded from birth, and not because of the solitary confinement.

 

[ItsChon]

I'm sorry for resorting to logic.

Are you okay? You used the most extreme example to justify your asinine claim that a large part of intelligence is taught. That's not logic, it's either retardation or you being disingenuous. Do you want me to pull up the statistics on the head start program that was federally funded hundreds of millions of dollars, and turned out to be a complete waste of money? Intelligence can't be fucking taught, period. Just because a child needs the bare minimum of human social interaction to not be completely fucked in the head, doesn't mean that intelligence can be taught.

Truth is, we can only exploit our full potential if we are nurtured properly.

Your initial post had nothing to do with that, stop trying to back pedal out of the shit hole you've dug yourself in. Intelligence can't be trained. No one is talking about "exploiting our full potential."

It's less about intelligence and more about how more/less lazy you are (or how much you care about yourself, to be frank).

What? This is an absolutely shit response so maybe I'm misunderstanding you, but are you really implying that high IQ people that don't want to be a bouncer or a truck driver are too lazy to do these jobs? If that's the case, then open your eyes. It has nothing to do with being lazy, but everything to do with not wanting a shit job like a bouncer or a bus driver. Even if you made the pay the exact same as that of a doctor or a lawyer, most high IQ people wouldn't want to do something as inane as a bouncer/bus driver.

How many of such plyometric exercises that require an absurdly strong men (Olympic tier) are currently used in the different industries?

Doesn't have to just be a strongman, but any capable adult male. When it comes to hard manual labor jobs, such as construction, or roofing, how much of that do you see being done by machines? Yes, these jobs require more than just being strong, but being strong is certainly a requirement for these things. So in response to this idea that being strong

 

[Sigourn]

Are you okay? You used the most extreme example to justify your asinine claim that a large part of intelligence is taught.

Read again: I never said intelligence is "taught". There's a difference between "trained" and "taught". "Taught" implies you can transfer infinite intelligence onto a person. Trained implies you can use it, develop it. And as my "most extreme example" shows: I'm absolutely right.

Your initial post had nothing to do with that, stop trying to back pedal out of the shit hole you've dug yourself in.

Just because your reading comprehension is shit doesn't mean I'm trying to back pedal.

What? This is an absolutely shit response so maybe I'm misunderstanding you, but are you really implying that high IQ people that don't want to be a bouncer or a truck driver are too lazy to do these jobs?

Unsurprisingly, your reading comprehension IS shit. I said the opposite: that you can be a capable individual but are too lazy to go far in life, so you settle with jobs like being a bouncer or a truck driver.

Doesn't have to just be a strongman, but any capable adult male.

I'm especifically asking for a strongman, though. Why? Because most people are "capable adult men", but most people aren't Olympic-tier strongmen. So why should the average capable adult man earn a lot for something that most average adult men can do?

Now, if there were essential jobs that absolutely required Olympic-tier strongmen to pull off, then yes, these people would be paid very well. Which is pretty much why footballers earn so much money, more than your average doctor or lawyer.

This discussion is autistic.

 

[ItsChon]

Read again: I never said intelligence is "taught". There's a difference between "trained" and "taught". "Taught" implies you can transfer infinite intelligence onto a person. Trained implies you can use it, develop it. And as my "most extreme example" shows: I'm absolutely right.

What the fuck kind of bullshit semantic argument is this? You can't "train" intelligence. Knowledge =/= Intelligence. Intelligence is measured by your IQ, and as far as we know, it's impossible to raise someone's IQ. Your example doesn't show a fucking thing you moron. The reason children in isolation are stunted at a mental level has nothing to do with intelligence/training. I'm not going to bother explaining it to your down syndrome ass, because if you manage to conflate your bullshit example to fit into your theory that intelligence can be "trained", you're too far gone as is.

Just because your reading comprehension is shit doesn't mean I'm trying to back pedal.

My mistake, I thought you'd seen the error in your ways. No, you're still just a fucking moron that thinks intelligence can be "trained".

that you can be a capable individual but are too lazy to go far in life, so you settle with jobs like being a bouncer or a truck driver.

That's even more retarded than what I thought you were saying. The US Army, an organization that will take almost fucking anyone; and has the necessity for people to perform the simplest of jobs, including but not limited to digging ditches, doesn't accept people with an IQ lower than 83. Do you know why? Because they've deemed that teaching anyone with an IQ of 83 to do anything that could be remotely of use to the Army, would be worth more than the benefit that they'd receive from them. And do you know how many people in the US have an IQ of 83 or less? Literally ten percent. That's 30 some millions of people, and I'm not even factoring in the amount of people with IQ's of up to 90, or 95.

The left peddles bullshit about how there is white privilege, and the system is stacked against you; while the right peddles bullshit that every single person that isn't successful or that is in poverty didn't work hard enough. Both of these are wrong, and you're a fucking idiot for believing the latter. You're right, this discussion is autistic. Go read a book and educate yourself on how the brain functions.

 

[Cael]

What the fuck kind of bullshit semantic argument is this? You can't "train" intelligence. Knowledge =/= Intelligence. Intelligence is measured by your IQ, and as far as we know, it's impossible to raise someone's IQ. Your example doesn't show a fucking thing you moron. The reason children in isolation are stunted at a mental level has nothing to do with intelligence/training. I'm not going to bother explaining it to your down syndrome ass, because if you manage to conflate your bullshit example to fit into your theory that intelligence can be "trained", you're too far gone as is.

While true, it is likely that people constantly mix this up because all of our IQ tests are designed with Western education in mind. There was a study done some time ago that outright stated that standard IQ tests are biased towards a modern education and while it does give an indication of intelligence, it is not as good an indicator as people think it is. I can't remember the specifics, but it had something to do with mathematics and language semantics as well as how students in a modern education system is trained to look out for certain tricks.

 

[ItsChon]

-snip-

Eh, sort of. There are certain things that do require Western Education, but it's not really like that. You really need to take an IQ test to understand how it works, but you can take someone whose gone through elementary/middle school, and they'd be able to pretty much do everything that they would need to in an IQ test. A lot of the questions are things like pick which one doesn't belong out of these three, and they show you a picture of a lamp, sunglasses, and a ladder. That's a basic one, and it keeps on getting harder. Take a look at this test here,

https://www.mensa.lu/en/mensa/online-iq-test/online-iq-test.html

An IQ test is basically questions like these. Lots of pattern recognition, as well as different tests regarding memory and verbal ability. Don't get me wrong, some schooling does help your score in a way. For example, taking advanced placement Physics in High School (and doing well), made me noticeably smarter. I took an IQ test several years ago when I was younger, and I have no doubt that I would do better in some sections because taking Physics helped me in certain aspects. And of course, they have standardized IQ tests for other countries like Russia or China. As a general rule of thumb, don't take IQ as a word of law, but more of a general ballpark. If you get a score of 128, that has variance of around 2-3 IQ points both up and down.

The main reason people mix up IQ isn't because of confusion regarding how they are designed, but because people feel uncomfortable talking about something as oppressive as IQ. I was blessed with an IQ that'll allow me to do most anything I want, and this is reflected in my schoolwork and standardized school work. I'd probably feel like shit though if I had an IQ of 110, and no matter how hard I tried, I capped out at around an SAT of say 1200 for example. Not stupid, but you're not going to be successful Lawyer or Doctor with an IQ like that; just how life works. And when you start bringing in IQ differences present between racial groups? That's when you start getting into really dangerous territory.

 

[Edija]

I'm not really involved in the discussion but I'd like to call both of you guys to fight me IRL

 

[ItsChon]

I'm not really involved in the discussion but I'd like to call both of you guys to fight me IRL

I'd win.

 

[Lurker47]

 

[Sigourn]

What the fuck kind of bullshit semantic argument is this? You can't "train" intelligence.

Yes you can.

 

[ItsChon]

Yes you can.

You must not unde-

Holy shit...Everything adds up!

Spoiler

Stop holding onto hope that you can do anything about your hundred IQ. Focus on lifting weights or maybe being real nice, I'm sure you'll be fine.

 

[King Crispy]

Don't gloat, ItsChon; you're on a fast track for a similar if not the same tag.

 

[ItsChon]

Don't gloat, ItsChon; you're on a fast track for a similar if not the same tag.

My bad bro.

Edit: Why the hell won't my sig show up? Ruins the joke.

 

[Sigourn]

Yes you can.

You must not unde-

Holy shit...Everything adds up!

Doesn't change the fact that you can.

 

[ItsChon]

-snip-

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3950413/

I leave the discussion with this.

 

[Sigourn]

-snip-

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3950413/

I leave the discussion with this.

Never talked about IQ in any of my posts, so you can leave the discussion with that link up your ass. Train your intelligence ASAP.

 

[Tygrende]

Competence in RPGs reflects character skill, not player skill. I'm not good at FPS games, but it shouldn't matter because my character is good at shooting things. That's where VATS comes in. Do you also expect me to literally remove Caesar's tumor?

According to this reasoning, RPGs shouldn't allow the player to control the player character at all, that's projecting the player's intelligence and knowledge onto the character. PC should be controlled by an AI instead, its competence based on the character's intelligence score and his in-game knowledge.

Progress Quest is clearly the only true RPG is existance.

 

[Sigourn]

Competence in RPGs reflects character skill, not player skill. I'm not good at FPS games, but it shouldn't matter because my character is good at shooting things. That's where VATS comes in. Do you also expect me to literally remove Caesar's tumor?

According to this reasoning, RPGs shouldn't allow the player to control the player character at all, that's projecting the player's intelligence and knowledge onto the character. PC should be controlled by an AI instead, its competence based on the character's intelligence score and his in-game knowledge.

Finally someone who has trained his intelligence.

As it stands, the only thing separating cRPGs from Action RPGs is the elitism from fans of the former who suck too much to play the latter.

 

[Moonrise]

Finally someone who has trained his intelligence.

Yeah, that reduction to absurdity highlighted his mental faculties alright.

 

[Tygrende]

Yeah, that reduction to absurdity highlighted his mental faculties alright.

Reduction to absurdity is a perfectly valid form of argument and in no way fallacious. If your argument leads to an absurd conclusion, it's just not a very good one.

In principle, there is little difference between using your own fine motor skills to improve PC's shooting and using your own intelligence/knowledge to improve PC's decision making. I can easily make a Fallout 1/2 character with 1 INT and turn him into a tactical genius capable of outsmarting any and all enemies in the game, just like I can make a NV character with low guns skill and turn him into a somewhat competent shooter. Both are fine if they are implemented with reasonable limits, challenging the player's abilities is one of key components of games in general.

 

[Moonrise]

I can easily make a Fallout 1/2 character with 1 INT and turn him into a tactical genius capable of outsmarting any and all enemies in the game

The reason for the absurd conclusion is because you can't fathom not metagaming, which is a you problem. This isn't something that can be overcome with a silver bullet--not at the table, and not in video games. What you're saying is that you're a terrible role-player, incapable or unwilling to act in accordance with the abilities of another. If you roll low INT, act like it. Shouldn't be hard.

 

[Tygrende]

The reason for the absurd conclusion is because you can't fathom not metagaming, which is a you problem.

Your argument and its absurd conclusion have nothing to do with metagaming or how me, you or anyone else plays video games, I never even said how I play them. It has to do with the fact that you see some kind of meaningful difference between using your own fine motor skills to improve PC's shooting and using your own intelligence/knowledge to improve PC's decision making.

This isn't something that can be overcome with a silver bullet--not at the table, and not in video games. What you're saying is that you're a terrible role-player, incapable or unwilling to act in accordance with the abilities of another. If you roll low INT, act like it. Shouldn't be hard.

The exact same thing can be said about RPGs that challenge your fine motor skills. If you make a character with low guns skill, simply act like you don't know how to shoot. Again, very little difference.

 

[Moonrise]

RPGs that challenge your fine motor skills

I'm gonna have to check the logs, but that may be the most decline sequence of words ever uttered here.

 

[Lurker47]

Lol, I love how mods don't babysit this site. So many weird fights break out.