Verbal Reasoning

[stillman]

It's strange, but it's as though we actually HAVE played the game. It's been a few weeks, and we've gone over so many topics, obsessing over everything. It's as though scrambling for all the latest bits of news and scanning the gameplay demo has made us into creationists: we've assembled all the views and have created in our own minds an interpretation of what the game is "probably" like to play.

And who better to handle this huge task than we, the Diablo junkies, the d2 experts of whatever game aspects we chose to master in our 10 year rampage through the Diablo games, the forum readers and replyers who've dabbled in conjuring up ideas of what a perfect d3 would be like. Who better than all of us to say what would work better. Are we not visionaries from our d2 days? Surely, we can see many issues that could emerge after another 10 years with another Diablo game. Perhaps there can be no better experts at playing d3 than all of us who, paradoxicaly, have never played it for one second.

And to add to our profound insights of how the game is "most likely played", we can only fantasize about getting our hands on it. This makes us envision our future long hours grinding it out with our avitar of choice. We pound out the playing hours in our minds, pretending to handle the end game grind or the conquest to beat the sweat shop workers whom we anticipate will force us to exploit our way past them, if possible. We see so very clearly, no matter what challenge the company thows at us, we will be able to not only defeat it like a locksmith defeating his own devices, but have complete confidence of doing so years before we have an ounce of actual experience. We do so with a bowazon who doesn't exist yet, and who may never exist in the new world. We do so with a trapper or smiter with no substance or gasoline to go on but abstract hopes and ambitions.

And if these children are never born, does this make us bad parents? It is not the lack of oportunity so much as a known impossibility for these creatures to ever arise. It is probable that whatever task we performed best at in the past will be contorted so as to make it a new facet in the future. Even so, the efforts are not wasted. The new children of d3 will be desendants of giants. Though living in the shadows of thier ancestors, the new wave of demigods will employ the very similar mechanisms used in the ancient past. They will indeed bend a bow in whatever way is possible to be deemed suitable for comparison to past glory. Thus, the dreams will sublime at least somewhat into a recognizable shape from the past. Not all was wasted in the hopeful mastery of what is yet to exist.

One could easily wonder if even makers of the game are a match for us. They are but a relatively small team. We are a mass of comunicators, exchanging extremes and exploits. Those of us who have not learned of hammertime will certainly have a chance to in mere seconds, need be. Then, they will add to the bonfire that is the heap of knowlege of the genre we are facing. So the learner becomes a guru having assimilated game-breaking points from others. The problems remain unwitnessed, saving so many of us from having to investigate. Meanwhile, the makers must delve into the core of the heap itself and find thier own solutions. If we prosper this fast, do the makers stand a chance to put forth anything we aren't prepared for? In a ghostly sense, we have already beaten the game.


PLEASE ALLOW YOURSELF ONLY 10 MINUTES TO ANSWER THE FOLLOWING:


1. In paragraph 2, the author brings up a paradox, which is a situation that can never exist. What impossibility below is most comparable to the situation in the passage?

A. Students are smarter than their teachers.

B. People are already experts in their work field without any work experience.

c. A patient is better suited to telling a physician what the best treatment choice is.

D. An audience with past experience and collective thinking via computers make the programming of new challenging games impossible.



2. When the author mentions "a locksmith defeating his own devices", what argument is this metaphore supporting?

A. Once a company sells a product, the buyers should be permitted to do what they want with it.

B. A company is only defeating itself by thinking it can build a perfect product which can never be abused.

C. The product a company makes is subject to manipulation by those with previous experience.

D. The product a company makes can be bought by wrong-doers who may eventually use it in sweat shops.



3. Based on the passage, what might a real-life parent claim when advocating in favor of the virtual "bad parent" discussed in paragraph 4?

A. The parents should be alowed to dream of their future children, even if their expectations are known to be too high.

B. The children's replacements will become demigods anyway, so efforts were not wasted.

C. The parents can hope for perfect children, as long as efforts are not wasted resulting in only shadows of former greats.

D. The parents are not bad because they merely dreamed of perfect children when they knew it was impossible.



4. Hammertime refers to a specific event in a program. A programmer who is opposed to this event suddenly found a technique to prevent its' future occurance, but he wants to increase sales by keeping the customers hopeful that the event remains possible. After incorperating the technique into the program, what would be his best strategy based on the attitudes expressed in the passage?

A. He should remove the technique because the large number of customers' combined efforts will surpass his programming abilities.

B. He should leak FALSE information into the customer community explaining a one in ten thousand chance of the event occuring to skillful players.

C. He should encourage his co-workers to keep the technique a company secret, ask for a promotion, and make an official announcement to customers that any attempt to replicate the event is prohibited and punishable.

D. He should do nothing.



5. Which uncanny aspect contributes to the main theme of the passage?

A. A mass hypnosis effect has risen from programmers entrancing their customers with new products.

B. A mass hysteria effect has led to over-confidence in customers who now believe they have reached guru status.

C. A premonition effect has occured invoked by modern comunication and a technological arms race of programmers versus customers.

D. An imagined apparition of customers' avitars that don't even exist yet, or are based on past avitars, are already overpowering elite programmers.

[DeadorK]

I cannot tell if you are being sarcastic or what. I couldn't even finish the quiz.

[Nostavar]

Am I in English class?

[stillman]

Yes. It is a very serious test. You must try to ignore the emotionally charged attitudes expressed in the passage and answer all 5 questions. The questions are very challenging and are designed to test your verbal reasoning skills. I will post the answers at a later date. Good Luck!

[LarryPaul]

edit: stillman beat me to the punch.

[Grawner]

what is this?

[5zigen]

b c d b d

seems like business school test writing...

[sbn]

Lol...I think this should be required reading before anyone posts another complaint, whine, rant, petition, etc..

Game announced in June 2008. Release, we have no idea. Date today, July 29. We have had one month to digest probably 2% of the game, yet a good number of overly vocal people simply want this game changed beyond reason. To those that do, please read the OP's post, you need it.

[Sein Schatten]

Hammertime?

It's Seaking time!
**** YEAH!!!

[Felix]

Last paragraph is an excellent example on which to conclude the train of pure nonsense that runs through the whole overthinked post. Questions are badly thought out, as answering one question makes a followup of choices also true.

Take question 2 for example: A locksmith defeating his own devices. The locksmith is the gamemakers, but those defeating it is the players. The metaphore is incorrect.

If you answer c to the question then, which I take is the ops intention, then a, b and d become equally correct. And that is the only paradox at large here.

I'll answer for you; Gamers don't know whats best for them.

I'll give another possibility of answer, which I call "None of the above", It's about a locksmith defeating his own devices:

E) One day the scientists of the world felt they had now accomplished all. It was a fine day and the sun was shining, so they mustered up their courage and gathered on a field, there they proclaimed to God: Look God, we mastered you and we beat you, never needed from you to become like you. We can walk on water, we can create people from the dust, we are truely like you. The Heavens opened and a merry face looked down upon them, he talked: Well then cocky children, lets see your skill's and show how they surpass mine.

Full of confidence the Scientists walked down to the beach, and began gathering sand. But then again the Heavens opened and God reappeared. And this time he said; hey hey, that's my sand. Make your own.

[Lord_Jaroh]

I gots me d, b, d, d, d

I do understand a lot of what is said, even though I may not agree intirely with it. I do believe a sequel worthy of the name and our following can be built. I'm just hoping that Blizzard is up to the task of doing it.

I would rather have a "The Dark Knight" than a "X-Men Last Stand".

EDIT: Felix, that is a mighty quote. :)

[ciphernemo]

It's strange, but it's as though we actually HAVE played the game. It's been a few weeks, and we've gone over so many topics, obsessing over everything. (...)

It's strange, but being in the presence of such a highly-charged and opinionated forum makes us think we're suddenly qualified to analyze human behavior as if we're a freakin' psychologist with a PhD in "Internet-based textual communications; the good, the bad, and the flame bait".

In the only paragraph above, the author points out the obvious flame bait, while presenting the very real possibility of breeding trolls in future posts.

PLEASE ALLOW YOURSELF 10 MINUTES TO ANSWER THE FOLLOWING:

1. If you're reading this, do you want a refund for the time you've wasted?

A. Absolutely
B. May be. Is it worth an 8-socket piece of armor?
C. No.

2. Did you suddenly experience a flashback when reading what the OP wrote, as if in English class, or taking the SATs?

A. Grrrr, yes!
B. Not sure... I think I failed English in both high school and college.
C. Dude, my head hurts.

3. Based on the garbage posted by the OP, how relevant was this to D3?

A. Not at all relevant.
B. Not at all relevant.
C. Not at all relevant.
D. All of the above.

[Gorny]

Folks, I (and I'm sure the other mods too) are growing tired of constantly giving warnings to one and all about posts that are rude, flame, disrespectful and frankly unconstructive and spam type posts. So from me there will be no more warnings.

I'm going to start handing out temp bans.

Consider yourselves warned.

[Felix]

Lol...I think this should be required reading before anyone posts another complaint, whine, rant, petition, etc..

Game announced in June 2008. Release, we have no idea. Date today, July 29. We have had one month to digest probably 2% of the game, yet a good number of overly vocal people simply want this game changed beyond reason. To those that do, please read the OP's post, you need it.

Ehh did you understand it? He says the complainers are the better designers.

[5zigen]

Ehh did you understand it? He says the complainers are the better designers.

Actually, what he's implying is that the gamers think they're better than the designers and that the gamers, while having never played the game, have more knowledge about the subject (collectively) than the developers.

Additionally, It's implied that regardless of what the developers do, they cant easily close the game from exploits.

Also, he's implying that the gamers, somewhat similar to overbearing presents, have incredibly high standards for the game because they felt for their avatars the same way a parent feels for it's unborn child. This is a pretty common occurrence with most game sequels, particularly ones which had such amazing character depth as D2, or at least tried. Thus why you see the "big" outcry with the axing of the necromancer.

Whether it's all true or not is debatable, but a large amount of it resonates with the dynamic of at least this forum and probably others.

Just as an example, the gamers beat the developers in D1 very early on. From gambling sniffers, to duping, to tppk, to botting, to minor things like having a 2nd account for BO and killing the same boss for it's first drop multiple times, and seemingly innoculous things like hammerdins being excessively overpowered. Collectively, as gamers, we probably have the most knowledge about these exploits. I know that some people try to argue that as long as it's "in the game" it's fair play, but this is kind of misleading as duping was "in the game" in d1.

Don't be so quick to dismiss the OP, there was a lot of thought in that half a page of writing, some of it is true, a lot of it is arguable, but I don't think any of it is easily dismissible.

[Azymn]

Don't be so quick to dismiss the OP, there was a lot of thought in that half a page of writing, some of it is true, a lot of it is arguable, but I don't think any of it is easily dismissible.

Amen. Whether you agree with the OP or not, it's thoughtworthy.

Also, I can speak a bit to the 'other side' of things. I was the sole programmer for a mod for the Jedi Knight series, and interacted with hundreds of people during development. I received countless suggestions, scathing criticisms, and boatloads of questions during that time. There were many good suggestions I hadn't thought of, and far more than I could implement in a reasonable time frame. There were also many criticisms, and I read them all, hoping to make the mod more appealing and the gameplay funner. In the end, the feedback was invaluable, but if I hadn't stood my ground the mod would have tried to be too many things to too many people.

I guarantee that Blizzard is reading over all the major D3 forums to see what feature requests/complaints are feasible and fun. That said, there comes a point where developers have to make hard choices about the game because they understand the inner mechanics better. They want the game to be fun for as many people as possible. They want to reward the faithful fans. It's easy to forget that it takes minutes to post an idea that could take months to implement. They will make mistakes, but they can also make the game far better than if it were to evolve through a purely democratic process.



On a side note...answering "D" to Question #4 seems like a clever way of saying "Stop. Hammertime."

[ciphernemo]

If Gorny's response was to my post, then sorry about that. I hope stillman knows I am just joking around: nothing personal. :)

[stillman]

I would like to thank everyone for reading my essay and participating--albeit somewhat-- in tackling the questions. I must admit, I should have left more instruction in the OP. The essay was to make for a fun change and provide a challenging test. Lord_Jaroh got the main idea that the goal is understanding essay even though it is difficult to agree with. In life, sometimes we have to just put up with disputable opinions (like from our bosses) to get the task done. The essay started off with an easy familiar topic, but then became harder to comprehend as you progress. Now, on to the answers!

Question 1. Answer B
Answer A is not applicable, because the relationship of the programmers to their customers is not teacher and student, respectively. Furthermore, the programmers aren't mentioned until a later paragraph, and we are told to look at paragraph2, which only discusses the players.
Answer C is similarly wrong; there is no relationship established in the paragraph. Although the essay itself eludes to A and C as being correct, we must focus on paragraph 2.
Answer D relates to the theme of the overall essay, which makes it a tempting, but wrong choice. It also lures readers in with the word "impossible" which is synonymous with paradox.
Question B is correct, because it is the paradox being discussed in paragraph 2. It's tempting to discount it since it doesn't seem that impossible, but it is the only answer choice tied to paragraph 2 which tells us directly that the players have no actual experience.

Question 2. Answer C
Felix is correct in that the metaphore is wrong. However; this is one of the challenges we must face to solve the problem at hand. Felix is also right in saying that answer choice C makes the others correct. However, the question asks us "what ARGUMENT is the metaphore supporting?" We must focus on the argument. Answer A is too specific; the author is not saying customers should be allowed to do what they choose with a product after they make the purchase. Similarily, the argument here is not about the blunderings of programmers and their futile efforts which is what answer B suggests. Answer D is also too specific. Although it is true, we are not asked wether or not it is true. We are asked to find the argument supported by the locksmith metaphore, which is answer C. Although the "company" and "sweat shops" are mentioned in the paragraph, these are small details. The main idea is revolving around the players (note "we" is used frequently throughout the paragraph) and their manipulations (Answer C). Congratulations to 5sgen for getting the first 2 questions right!

Question 3. Answer A
We must imagine what a "real-life" parent would say while defending a "virtual parent" in a video game world. First, we must understand that the virtual parents are players and their children are avitars of the past (or future, who don't exist yet).
Answer B mentions the children's "replacements" as being demigods and thus justifies the childrens non-existance. This makes the real parents sound like they're favoring only the best children. We can presume this is too politically incorect for a good argument by real-life parents. Answer C paints a similar, morally questionable picture where the parents insinuate efforts are wasted if the children only turn out to be less than great.
Answer D, I admit, has a fault in its' design. I indtended it to mean that as long as children don't even exist yet, the "parents" cannot not bad. Of course, if the children don't exist, then there ARE NO parents. Thus, the answer was intended to negate itself, and become one of the wrong answers. Since I did not make the statement in answer D sound as inteded at all, choice D is too similar to A. Therefore, if you chose A or D, like 5sigen, count it as correct.

Question 4. Answer D
This one is very tricky. Answer A is wrong because we are told that the programmer is opposed to the event. Since he just implemented his technique into the program to stop this event, it makes no sense for him to remove it. We may be led to this answer because of the cavalier attitude in the passage which states that whatever the programmers do is of little effect. However, it is key to fixate on the information in the question stem. Answer B initially sounds good. We may think that leaking the information or tease about a possible event in the program would spur the "expert" players to find it. However, with a "one in ten thousand chance" for "skillfull" players, masters (according to the over-confident author) looking for the event would definitely discover it if it were possible. The author is so confident of players' abilities that they would hypothetically realize very soon that no such event is possible or they would have conquered it early. Thus, they would soon lose the hope of finding it. One of the goals of the programmer in the question is to maintain this hope, so answer B is wrong. Answer C sounds very tempting and sets us up for a wrong choice. Keeping the technique a secret and asking for a promotion sounds all good. But if the programmer anounces a penalty for attempting to replicate the event, SOME players would be detered from doing so. Now, the attitude expressed in the passage tricks us, making us think that pronouncing a deterent would only provoke players to break the rules, and thus remain hopeful of finding the event. However, since some portion of players would actually be detered, they would not bother looking and lose the hopefulness the programmer desires. The question asks for the programmer's "BEST strategy", so if there is any better choice, answer C should be eliminated, which brings us to...Answer D. Keep in mind the question stem states that the programmer had already implemented the technique. So, all he has to do is wait. The questions asks us to consider the best option "based on the attitudes expressed in the passage". According to the author, players will boldly defeat whatever the programmers throw at them. With no information about the technique given to players, they will always believe they will will discover it on thier own with their superior collective thinking (Note: in answer B they would quickly learn that they've been lied to and would give up). So all the programmer should do is sit back, do nothing, and let the players search to their hearts' content (answer D).
Congratulations to Lord_Jeroh, and Azymn (I think) for getting it right in his jocularity.

Question 5. C
Again, we have answers that are true, but we are told to find the main theme of the entire passage. 5sgen got the main idea of the central theme. Answer A is wrong because it glorifies the programmers, when the author is glammorizing the players who surpass the programmers. Question B states that the players are overconfident. Although this is clearly evident in the passage, the author is not admiting that anything is wrong with the players, so it is not his central theme. Also "hysteria" implies that the players are out of control when the author is arguing that the players are in complete control.
Anser C is correct. A premonition is a form of ESP (extrasensory perception) which is considered a paranormal phenomenon where one can see an event in the future. The author is describing his knowing of events that have yet to happen. We can presume at least some of the events described in the passage are bound to become reality, even though there are no witnesses to the future events. For instance, players WILL play avitars in the future based on the former glory of previous avitars. There WILL be sweat shops, exploiters, etc. The statement "invoked by modern comunication and a technological arms race of programmers versus customers" provides the grounds by which the author claims his premonition is possible.
Although answer D is true according to the passage, it is not the central theme. It is simply supporting evidence in the middle of the essay. The imagined avitars are only a part of the story. Also, answer D implies that the avitars are responsible for overpowering the programmers, when it is really the players. The main theme involves the mass comunicaiton of players which is setting up an eerie situation were they are able to forsee the future. The first and last paragraphs describe this situation.


The questions are below for easier reference.


1. In paragraph 2, the author brings up a paradox, which is a situation that can never exist. What impossibility below is most comparable to the situation in the passage?

A. Students are smarter than their teachers.

B. People are already experts in their work field without any work experience.

c. A patient is better suited to telling a physician what the best treatment choice is.

D. An audience with past experience and collective thinking via computers make the programming of new challenging games impossible.



2. When the author mentions "a locksmith defeating his own devices", what argument is this metaphore supporting?

A. Once a company sells a product, the buyers should be permitted to do what they want with it.

B. A company is only defeating itself by thinking it can build a perfect product which can never be abused.

C. The product a company makes is subject to manipulation by those with previous experience.

D. The product a company makes can be bought by wrong-doers who may eventually use it in sweat shops.



3. Based on the passage, what might a real-life parent claim when advocating in favor of the virtual "bad parent" discussed in paragraph 4?

A. The parents should be alowed to dream of their future children, even if their expectations are known to be too high.

B. The children's replacements will become demigods anyway, so efforts were not wasted.

C. The parents can hope for perfect children, as long as efforts are not wasted resulting in only shadows of former greats.

D. The parents are not bad because they merely dreamed of perfect children when they knew it was impossible.



4. Hammertime refers to a specific event in a program. A programmer who is opposed to this event suddenly found a technique to prevent its' future occurance, but he wants to increase sales by keeping the customers hopeful that the event remains possible. After incorperating the technique into the program, what would be his best strategy based on the attitudes expressed in the passage?

A. He should remove the technique because the large number of customers' combined efforts will surpass his programming abilities.

B. He should leak FALSE information into the customer community explaining a one in ten thousand chance of the event occuring to skillful players.

C. He should encourage his co-workers to keep the technique a company secret, ask for a promotion, and make an official announcement to customers that any attempt to replicate the event is prohibited and punishable.

D. He should do nothing.



5. Which uncanny aspect contributes to the main theme of the passage?

A. A mass hypnosis effect has risen from programmers entrancing their customers with new products.

B. A mass hysteria effect has led to over-confidence in customers who now believe they have reached guru status.

C. A premonition effect has occured invoked by modern comunication and a technological arms race of programmers versus customers.

D. An imagined apparition of customers' avitars that don't even exist yet, or are based on past avitars, are already overpowering elite programmers.

[Felix]

Actually, what he's implying is that the gamers think they're better than the designers and that the gamers, while having never played the game, have more knowledge about the subject (collectively) than the developers.

Additionally, It's implied that regardless of what the developers do, they cant easily close the game from exploits.

Also, he's implying that the gamers, somewhat similar to overbearing presents, have incredibly high standards for the game because they felt for their avatars the same way a parent feels for it's unborn child. This is a pretty common occurrence with most game sequels, particularly ones which had such amazing character depth as D2, or at least tried. Thus why you see the "big" outcry with the axing of the necromancer.

Whether it's all true or not is debatable, but a large amount of it resonates with the dynamic of at least this forum and probably others.

Just as an example, the gamers beat the developers in D1 very early on. From gambling sniffers, to duping, to tppk, to botting, to minor things like having a 2nd account for BO and killing the same boss for it's first drop multiple times, and seemingly innoculous things like hammerdins being excessively overpowered. Collectively, as gamers, we probably have the most knowledge about these exploits. I know that some people try to argue that as long as it's "in the game" it's fair play, but this is kind of misleading as duping was "in the game" in d1.

Don't be so quick to dismiss the OP, there was a lot of thought in that half a page of writing, some of it is true, a lot of it is arguable, but I don't think any of it is easily dismissible.


I still think it is all easilly dismisable. Diablo 1 came out in a time were we ventured from singleplayer to multiplayer. From reading the book from start till end, till staying in the book for as long as possible.

Implying the discoveries of these new playstiles, farming, exploiting and what have we not, as the players being a superior breed to the developers, is romanticising ones own virtues by degrading better people. All players do is play clever in hindsight, and all the players are, are guineapigs to online play.

Try and read the "brainstorm for DIII ideas" or any other idea thread. I'm sorry but much of it is lame and gamebreaking ideas. The rest wants to implement Alterac Valley, the Arena, the Auction House or any other thing they seen in a recent game. They deliver the idea in a packet they apparantly think is their own, which just about says it all. Real life > OP's theory.

[Felix]

Mind if I take the test?

Ad 1) You start with pointing out the logical;

And who better to handle this huge task than we, the Diablo junkies

a few lines down you claim this sentence is now a paradox;

Perhaps there can be no better experts at playing d3 than all of us who, paradoxicaly, have never played it for one second.

Okay what are you saying?

A) Are we still logical, because then you are saying; that someone who has played Diablo series will know more about DIII than someone who has never played Diablo series.

B) Either that or you are saying; We on this board knows more about DIII than the developers does at this moment.

It turns out you are leaning to B and that is a paradox, if it was true. But that is not the case. Easy proof to stick it to you; who's feeding who tidbits of information?

Ad 2) You admit the metaphore is off, so the question should be; what am I really thinking? Well what you really think is what you give as the correct answer:

The product a company makes is subject to manipulation by those with previous experience.

Compared to what? To those who never played Diablo? If so is that correct? Can the dupers run straight up to Cain and find out that their old dupe from DII still works? Does anyone who knew manipulations in DII have pre knowledge of how to manipulate DIII? Or are we talking boss running here? But then thats not manipulation but exploitation if it is anything. And something that will take a new player 5 secs to understand and bring on equal terms with the rest.

Ad 3) Well on a whole I think you are in over your head here. Which is also what seems to come out of your answer to your question.

Ad 4) "Hammertime" comes in from out of the blue and disappears as quickly. So guess what you're thinking and again not writing... Well he should fix it and then leave it alone is your correct answer (and yes you are correct), if you happen to be talking about an overpowered skill or exploit.

So again we must guess at the question from this vague and feeble text. But I assume we are talking about the N.E.R.F here. Ok so it's op it should be nerfed. I'm with you here. Unless "Hammertime" is the secret cow level of course. Which would give more meat on the text, and make for a more debatable subject, but sorry thats just me trying to find something to talk about.

Ad 5) hmm...hmm... sorry but I can't take your text seriously. Foreseeing exploiting and bossfarming is not being in hold of extrasensory perception or any other unnatural state of mind. And what you base your premonition on is not knowing about the game beforehand, it's based on knowing yourself.

Yes I will cheat in chess if I can, but I can't, but I would if I could. I can cheat in computergames, what am I gonna do? kkthxbai

[a brick]

I know the quiz is over but oh well..

Great piece of writing in my opinion. I bet u took long hours formulating that and i believe quite a lot of it. I'm not very good at english so I tried to answer the questions but they were very difficult.

Good job is all I'm saying. And your right about people's belief that they know things are true about something that doesn't even yet exist. :) yup.