307 réponses à ce sujet

[TEWR]

Gunderic wrote...

The Ethereal Writer Redux wrote...

Dariuszp wrote...

1+1+1+1+1+1+1+1+1+1-1+1+1+1+1x0 = ?

Here. Test for your inteligence. If you fail - you cannot play DA II (joke)

dammit.... 0 isn't it.


12... I think.

Don't think you can play Dragon Age 2 anymore. 

EDIT: going by the first answers ( not 12 ).

all I saw was x 0 and I ignored everything else.

[Sutekh]

The Ethereal Writer Redux wrote...
all I saw was x 0 and I ignored everything else.

Which was exactly the Evil Plan, methinks.

"Someone", somewhere, is doing some moustache twirling, I tell you. 

[TEWR]

Sutekh wrote...

The Ethereal Writer Redux wrote...
all I saw was x 0 and I ignored everything else.

Which was exactly the Evil Plan, methinks.

"Someone", somewhere, is doing some moustache twirling, I tell you. 

You!


I remember that you're Snidely Whiplash! Quit twirling your evil twirly moustache of evil twirliness!

[Zanallen]

Yes, it is 12. To correctly answer this equation you'll need to know the order of operations and notice the single subtraction within the mass of additions.

[Realmzmaster]

Zanallen wrote...

Yes, it is 12. To correctly answer this equation you'll need to know the order of operations and notice the single subtraction within the mass of additions.

You  have to remember the order of mathematical operaters and that when of the same order it goes from left to right.
But the problem is as much an exercise in observation as math. You have to notice the subtraction sign amid all the additions.

P      Parentheses
E      Exponents
MD  Multiplication Division
AS   Addition  Substraction

[Zanallen]

And I absolutely hate math, so I don't see that problem as an indicator of intelligence or ability.

[Persephone]

Ringo12 wrote...

Gotholhorakh wrote...

The Ethereal Writer Redux wrote...

 I just said that Shooters have low point of entry (shooters are simple and very easy to play) so it's perfect for stupid people.

you literally just said that shooters are made for stupid people in your first sentence....

No. A low point of entry making it perfect for stupid people is not the same as saying it's MADE FOR stupid people, or that only stupid people play them.

Ambidextrous tin openers are perfect for left-handed people. They are not MADE FOR left-handed people.

Dragon Age 2 is perfect for stupid people.

And The Witcher 2 is perfect for sexist people.

See what I did there?:innocent:

Edit: Before TW2 fans pounce on me.....this is SARCASM.

Modifié par Persephone, 28 juin 2011 - 05:10 .

[Persephone]

Dariuszp wrote...

1+1+1+1+1+1+1+1+1+1-1+1+1+1+1x0 = ?

Here. Test for your inteligence. If you fail - you cannot play DA II (joke)

I suck at math but my guess is 14.

[KnightofPhoenix]

EDIT: nah that sounds mean when it wasn't intended.

Modifié par KnightofPhoenix, 28 juin 2011 - 05:05 .

[Dariuszp]

Persephone wrote...

Ringo12 wrote...

Gotholhorakh wrote...

The Ethereal Writer Redux wrote...

 I just said that Shooters have low point of entry (shooters are simple and very easy to play) so it's perfect for stupid people.

you literally just said that shooters are made for stupid people in your first sentence....

No. A low point of entry making it perfect for stupid people is not the same as saying it's MADE FOR stupid people, or that only stupid people play them.

Ambidextrous tin openers are perfect for left-handed people. They are not MADE FOR left-handed people.

Dragon Age 2 is perfect for stupid people.

And The Witcher 2 is perfect for sexist people.

See what I did there?:innocent:

Edit: Before TW2 fans pounce on me.....this is SARCASM.

But I do agree and I'm TW2 fan Geralt is "alpha male" who want to f*** every pretty women. Sexist ? No. Just a straight male. Hawk want to fu** everything - male or female. Good that you cannot add goat to your companions but I do worry about the dog (joke).

PS: yeah it's 12. You multiply before everything else so you ignore 1x0 because it's 0. Also you ignore 1-1 because it will be 0. Then add everything else. Anyone who said 14, not 12 or something like that is wrong Still it's just a joke. Just like I suks in chemistry, someone dont need to be good with math. Even when whits is basic things and you use math in everyday life. Like someone said:

(1+1+1+1+1+1+1+1+1)+(1-1)+(1+1+1)+(1x0) = 9 + 0 + 3 + 0 = 12

Modifié par Dariuszp, 28 juin 2011 - 05:45 .

[Gunderic]

Persephone wrote...

Ringo12 wrote...

Gotholhorakh wrote...

The Ethereal Writer Redux wrote...

 I just said that Shooters have low point of entry (shooters are simple and very easy to play) so it's perfect for stupid people.

you literally just said that shooters are made for stupid people in your first sentence....

No. A low point of entry making it perfect for stupid people is not the same as saying it's MADE FOR stupid people, or that only stupid people play them.

Ambidextrous tin openers are perfect for left-handed people. They are not MADE FOR left-handed people.

Dragon Age 2 is perfect for stupid people.

And The Witcher 2 is perfect for sexist people.

See what I did there?:innocent:

Well, Geralt is perfect for women. Might count as sexism.  

Modifié par Gunderic, 28 juin 2011 - 05:49 .

[Karlojey]

A lot of people, like myself, would disagree with you OP. But good for you that you got your money's worth A lot of us was expecting something close to DA:Origins, which didn't happen, hence the disappointment.

[MegaBadExample]

Can't believe what I just read...*Double checks* OK. Well in that case, good for you. But it sucked for me.

[Persephone]

Dariuszp wrote...

Persephone wrote...

Ringo12 wrote...

Gotholhorakh wrote...

The Ethereal Writer Redux wrote...

 I just said that Shooters have low point of entry (shooters are simple and very easy to play) so it's perfect for stupid people.

you literally just said that shooters are made for stupid people in your first sentence....

No. A low point of entry making it perfect for stupid people is not the same as saying it's MADE FOR stupid people, or that only stupid people play them.

Ambidextrous tin openers are perfect for left-handed people. They are not MADE FOR left-handed people.

Dragon Age 2 is perfect for stupid people.

And The Witcher 2 is perfect for sexist people.

See what I did there?:innocent:

Edit: Before TW2 fans pounce on me.....this is SARCASM.

But I do agree and I'm TW2 fan Geralt is "alpha male" who want to f*** every pretty women. Sexist ? No. Just a straight male. Hawk want to fu** everything - male or female. Good that you cannot add goat to your companions but I do worry about the dog (joke).

An "Alpha Male" .........*cringes*. Meh, sexist drivel. So every "straight male" wants to "f*** every pretty women (Sic!)"??? Really? They are all such pigs? Thank God I know that this is not true. As for Hawke "wanting to screw anything", that's a bloody lie, as it's up to you whom you romance, same as.......oh......DAO. JE. BG. Wait.....ANY Bioware game. SHOCKER. I dunno about YOUR Hawke though......given that you obviously haven't played DAII but a game you made up.

And "joking" about sex with animals to bash DA2/Hawke? You disgust me. Utterly.

Modifié par Persephone, 29 juin 2011 - 07:52 .

[Persephone]

Gunderic wrote...

Persephone wrote...

Ringo12 wrote...

Gotholhorakh wrote...

The Ethereal Writer Redux wrote...

 I just said that Shooters have low point of entry (shooters are simple and very easy to play) so it's perfect for stupid people.

you literally just said that shooters are made for stupid people in your first sentence....

No. A low point of entry making it perfect for stupid people is not the same as saying it's MADE FOR stupid people, or that only stupid people play them.

Ambidextrous tin openers are perfect for left-handed people. They are not MADE FOR left-handed people.

Dragon Age 2 is perfect for stupid people.

And The Witcher 2 is perfect for sexist people.

See what I did there?:innocent:

Well, Geralt is perfect for women. Might count as sexism.  

I AM a woman. Your point being that EVERY woman should be at Geralt's feet, begging to be ravished & then dropped like trash? No thanks. (And I love his character, despite that. Maybe Yennefer will show a different side there)

[KnightofPhoenix]

Well technically, Geralt can choose not to screw anyone either. Only exception is Triss at the beginning of TW2, but I am sure we can RP that they just had a friendly sleep over or were drunk :innocent:

Modifié par KnightofPhoenix, 29 juin 2011 - 07:41 .

[Persephone]

KnightofPhoenix wrote...

Well technically, Geralt can choose not to screw anyone either. Only exception is Triss at the beginning of TW2, but I am sure we can RP that they just had a friendly sleep over or were drunk :innocent:

And Triss magic-ed away her clothes because......they were in the way.

[Teddie Sage]

This thread isn't about Dragon Age 2 anymore. I suggest the mods to close it down.

[KnightofPhoenix]

Persephone wrote...

KnightofPhoenix wrote...

Well technically, Geralt can choose not to screw anyone either. Only exception is Triss at the beginning of TW2, but I am sure we can RP that they just had a friendly sleep over or were drunk :innocent:

And Triss magic-ed away her clothes because......they were in the way.

Cause it was hot of course!

[wolvklawz]

Best game ever, no. But one thing has changed over time. With games like Fallout 3, DA:O etc still in my collection, all of which so huge and massive I have even picked up the strategy guides, its nice to mix it up with DA II from time to time. Yes a classic, kick ass RPG is huge, massive etc etc. But the nice part about DA2 is I am able to get the RPG aspect, a little action and actually acomplish something in the time I invest into it. In other words, DA 2 earned a permanent spot in my collection, and between session of playing the massive RPG's I know and love, I find time to play and roughly beat DA 2 with little major time. Does that make sense? Its like, DA 2 isn't bad, its just...small compared to other RPG's I play. Its just nice to have something that doesn't take me hours to plan out my character, decide what I am going to do etc and then get side tracked for hours. I bust through it, completing quests, enjoying the fighting, just...kinda like enjoying a candy bar. But it isn't a full course meal like the original, FO3, FONV, etc etc etc.

[Realmzmaster]

wolvklawz wrote...

Best game ever, no. But one thing has changed over time. With games like Fallout 3, DA:O etc still in my collection, all of which so huge and massive I have even picked up the strategy guides, its nice to mix it up with DA II from time to time. Yes a classic, kick ass RPG is huge, massive etc etc. But the nice part about DA2 is I am able to get the RPG aspect, a little action and actually acomplish something in the time I invest into it. In other words, DA 2 earned a permanent spot in my collection, and between session of playing the massive RPG's I know and love, I find time to play and roughly beat DA 2 with little major time. Does that make sense? Its like, DA 2 isn't bad, its just...small compared to other RPG's I play. Its just nice to have something that doesn't take me hours to plan out my character, decide what I am going to do etc and then get side tracked for hours. I bust through it, completing quests, enjoying the fighting, just...kinda like enjoying a candy bar. But it isn't a full course meal like the original, FO3, FONV, etc etc etc.

Good point! And yes it makes sense. The problem that some forum mates have is that they wanted another full size meal and not the candy bar or dessert. Also the candy bar was not the favor they wanted.
I enjoyed DA2 for much the same reason. It had its flaws but for me it also had a certain amount of charm. Note this is my opinion. YMMV

Modifié par Realmzmaster, 29 juin 2011 - 08:58 .

[tiernanlshaw]

Dariuszp wrote...

Yeah but here you talk about multiplayer. That's different. I was talking about single player. Multiplayer is different story because everyone have same amount of health, armor (in some games). They can select weapons that they like. They need skills to dodge/shoot, brain to outsmart enemies and experience.
Best example - Bad Company 2. How you know that someone is fresh in BC2 ? After he shoot from a window he hide behind wall. Send him a granade... he will learn.

no its not different. at all.  not even close.  shooters ARE the mulitplayer mode.  its the campaign thats optional.  you dont buy a shooter for the single player.  you just dont.  its a waste of 60 bucks and only 6-8 hrs of gaming in most cases. 

any "stupid" person can play any game.  you can go through origins on casual without having to use any abilities.  just hit attack once on each enemy.  in every game the difficulty scale is what determines whether a game is more easy out of the box and thus "for stupid people".  this is true in every genre.  and quite frankly some of the best gamers in gaming are playing shooters.  the skill when the top dogs step into a match in gears or modern warfare (or any call of duty) or halo is friggin ridiculous.  these guys and gals can play.  be it on keyboard or sticks.  rpgs are not made for smarter gamers.  they have not always been the way they are now.  when i was a a kid i loved the final fantasy games, now i cant stand them.  it feels like reading a book.  a cheesy one.  im just going through the paces to see a 30 million dollar cinematic.  theres nothing "role-playing" about them at all. 

single player rpg's are a niche'.  always have been, always will be.  the best thing about a good one is literally the role-playing available.  thats something that isnt neccesarily translatable into intelligence.  its doesnt take a smart individual to follow the main story arc of origins on causal.  and even beating it on impossible is a restricted accomplishment.  its not liek you can take your mad wardening skills into an arena and match it up against another persons warden and party members.  not to say people dont do it.  mmorpgs like WoW are hugely demanding on communication, build, intelligence, and skill.  even more so on a pvp server.  but even the hardest and truest to form single player rpg does not offer this challenge.  in the end youre still fighting against preprogrammed computer generated ai.  they do not "think" like a human opponent does.  this in my mind does the opposite of what youre suggesting.  it makes the game much more accesable to anyone that wants to try it.  its hard to not beat any rpg for anyone who wants to no matter how "stupid" they are. 

mostly i just hate the comparison.  just because youre better at this than you are at that doesnt mean that that suddenly becomes something easy for "stupid" people.   and in my experience people who try to diss on shooters do so because theyre the noob that keeps getting wasted by the 6 yr old camper.  why cant people jsut say "its not my cup of tea".  why does playing shooters have to mean your playing something thats more accesable to "stupid" people.  its remarkably arrogant.  especially considering the smartest indiviudal i personally know has a ridiculous iq, got a perfect score on their sats and is on his way to his first doctorate and wouldnt touch a game with a ten foot pole, and when i forced a controller in his hand to play a shooter with me he was downright awful at it.  so would a more accurate statement be that truly smart people dont even bother playing games?  no.  i think a more telling statement would simply be his reaction to the scenario.  instead of throwing the controller down and declraing it a waste of time, he sat there with me, gave it his best shot, and constantly marvelled at the skill of the other players playing the game.  there is no blanket "stupid people" game genre, or a type of game that easier for "stupid" people.  there is only different strokes for different folks.  not every one is good at everything, and not everything is for every one.  its remarkably arrogant and foolish to label any gaming genre as "easily accesable for stupid people".  get over yourself man. 

[Dariuszp]

tiernanlshaw wrote...

Dariuszp wrote...

Yeah but here you talk about multiplayer. That's different. I was talking about single player. Multiplayer is different story because everyone have same amount of health, armor (in some games). They can select weapons that they like. They need skills to dodge/shoot, brain to outsmart enemies and experience.
Best example - Bad Company 2. How you know that someone is fresh in BC2 ? After he shoot from a window he hide behind wall. Send him a granade... he will learn.

no its not different. at all.  not even close.  shooters ARE the mulitplayer mode.  its the campaign thats optional.  you dont buy a shooter for the single player.  you just dont.  its a waste of 60 bucks and only 6-8 hrs of gaming in most cases. 

any "stupid" person can play any game.  you can go through origins on casual without having to use any abilities.  just hit attack once on each enemy.  in every game the difficulty scale is what determines whether a game is more easy out of the box and thus "for stupid people".  this is true in every genre.  and quite frankly some of the best gamers in gaming are playing shooters.  the skill when the top dogs step into a match in gears or modern warfare (or any call of duty) or halo is friggin ridiculous.  these guys and gals can play.  be it on keyboard or sticks.  rpgs are not made for smarter gamers.  they have not always been the way they are now.  when i was a a kid i loved the final fantasy games, now i cant stand them.  it feels like reading a book.  a cheesy one.  im just going through the paces to see a 30 million dollar cinematic.  theres nothing "role-playing" about them at all. 

single player rpg's are a niche'.  always have been, always will be.  the best thing about a good one is literally the role-playing available.  thats something that isnt neccesarily translatable into intelligence.  its doesnt take a smart individual to follow the main story arc of origins on causal.  and even beating it on impossible is a restricted accomplishment.  its not liek you can take your mad wardening skills into an arena and match it up against another persons warden and party members.  not to say people dont do it.  mmorpgs like WoW are hugely demanding on communication, build, intelligence, and skill.  even more so on a pvp server.  but even the hardest and truest to form single player rpg does not offer this challenge.  in the end youre still fighting against preprogrammed computer generated ai.  they do not "think" like a human opponent does.  this in my mind does the opposite of what youre suggesting.  it makes the game much more accesable to anyone that wants to try it.  its hard to not beat any rpg for anyone who wants to no matter how "stupid" they are. 

mostly i just hate the comparison.  just because youre better at this than you are at that doesnt mean that that suddenly becomes something easy for "stupid" people.   and in my experience people who try to diss on shooters do so because theyre the noob that keeps getting wasted by the 6 yr old camper.  why cant people jsut say "its not my cup of tea".  why does playing shooters have to mean your playing something thats more accesable to "stupid" people.  its remarkably arrogant.  especially considering the smartest indiviudal i personally know has a ridiculous iq, got a perfect score on their sats and is on his way to his first doctorate and wouldnt touch a game with a ten foot pole, and when i forced a controller in his hand to play a shooter with me he was downright awful at it.  so would a more accurate statement be that truly smart people dont even bother playing games?  no.  i think a more telling statement would simply be his reaction to the scenario.  instead of throwing the controller down and declraing it a waste of time, he sat there with me, gave it his best shot, and constantly marvelled at the skill of the other players playing the game.  there is no blanket "stupid people" game genre, or a type of game that easier for "stupid" people.  there is only different strokes for different folks.  not every one is good at everything, and not everything is for every one.  its remarkably arrogant and foolish to label any gaming genre as "easily accesable for stupid people".  get over yourself man. 

WRONG. I was talking about Single player shooters and Single player RPG. They you talk about Single player RPG and multiplayer Shooters. You are wrong mate and you miss whole point.
"Perfect for stupid people" is that you use WSAD for movement, SPACE/CTRL to jump, sit, RMB to aim and LMB to fire. E to use. That's it. This is EVERYTRHING you need to know in SP shooters. Better players are trying to avoid enemy bullets...
So it's easy to start.

What is good RPG game ? RPG game is a game where you must have a plan. If you rush to battle just like that you will die and it's game over. If you dont invest points in your character with brain - he will be weak and he will die easly. If you dont think about your actiions you can have consequences that you dont like. If you kill some inocent folk in a town - guards will hunt you down. When you talk it can end by your death, fight or aqquaring new friends.
You need to think in normal RPG games.

What they do with DA II is that they remove thinking part. Dialogues ? No matter what you select - outcome is the same. Some details can change but nothing important. You dont even need to read because you have icons. Red for badass right ? Heart to f*** someone. You dont need to plan your character. You just select skills and do some button smashing on keyboard (aim for R and numbers 1-9). Whatever you do, there is no real consequences and game ends always the same.

That's difference between todays games for stupid people and casual players that just want some nice interactive animation (cannot blame them) and good games.

Also you miss point when i say it's perfect for stupid poepole because this games have low point of entry. Not that only idiots play them. Yet you still want to write something when you dont understand what someone elase wrote. There is whole conversation there you know ? Learn how to read. Then read whole conversation 10x and then write response. Good luck.

PS: Sorry for my english

Modifié par Dariuszp, 30 juin 2011 - 06:59 .

[Gunderic]

Persephone wrote...

Gunderic wrote...

Persephone wrote...

Ringo12 wrote...

Gotholhorakh wrote...

The Ethereal Writer Redux wrote...

 I just said that Shooters have low point of entry (shooters are simple and very easy to play) so it's perfect for stupid people.

you literally just said that shooters are made for stupid people in your first sentence....

No. A low point of entry making it perfect for stupid people is not the same as saying it's MADE FOR stupid people, or that only stupid people play them.

Ambidextrous tin openers are perfect for left-handed people. They are not MADE FOR left-handed people.

Dragon Age 2 is perfect for stupid people.

And The Witcher 2 is perfect for sexist people.

See what I did there?:innocent:

Well, Geralt is perfect for women. Might count as sexism.  

I AM a woman. Your point being that EVERY woman should be at Geralt's feet, begging to be ravished & then dropped like trash? No thanks. (And I love his character, despite that. Maybe Yennefer will show a different side there)

Can't you choose not to cheat on Triss? And I was only joking. 

Modifié par Gunderic, 30 juin 2011 - 07:04 .

[D.M]

I just hope Dragon Age Origins can have a HD remake version.

AND Dragon Age 2 can be added in OTHER CAMPAIGNS which is called Hawke's Chronicles.