|
Post by vespuleth on Apr 4, 2005 2:58:36 GMT -5
so, on the note of a little more philosophical discussion, what do you guys think, is this statement true or not true?
discuss thoroughly.
|
|
|
Post by KingSpoom on Apr 4, 2005 5:12:18 GMT -5
I think the statement is only half true. In order to survive, you don't really need a wide range of skills or differences. Perhaps in order to thrive you do, but not survive. However, diversity within one person I don't care for. Sort of like the all around person, jack of all trades. I never cared for them because they don't have any strengths. The statement I do believe in is "Over-specialize and you breed in weakness". There is a point where something becomes usefull to you, and then there is another point where you are so focused on it, that it starts to become a hinderence.
How many of you pick Mario in mario kart? Or some other average guy in a game with differences? People like that can't really develop strategies that help them out. Mario's decent at top-speed and decent at acceleration. You just drive and hope for the best. Now, if you pick bowser (slow acceleration, high top-speed), you drive trying to avoid getting hit, and you use stuff as a shield instead of a weapon. I usually play as peach. High acceleration, low top-speed... In a game where hits are very often, I'd rather be able to get right back into the race. Plus I'm good at doing the turn thing and boosting my speed.
So to summarize, I think you need strengths to exploit in order to survive.
|
|
|
Post by WarDragon on Apr 4, 2005 10:27:16 GMT -5
true, if teh world was all the same we would be bored.
|
|