Jump to content
The Dark Mod Forums

The recipe for a good mission?


Macsen

Recommended Posts

Unfortunately, it's all relative. There are many people in the world who have done things that are of great benefit to mankind, and could equally scorn you for having done nothing worthwhile (either because you're not capable, or can't be bothered)

Stupid people are innocent. Intelligent people who don't use it for the greater good could be said to be the idiots.

 

That's an entirely different matter, and you're really reaching off into deep space to justify something that wasn't even an issue. Intelligence isn't necessarily the defining factor in referring to someone as an idiot, stupidity and idiocy don't have to be related.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 154
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

I think it's pretty interesting too oDD. But the reason I do is because I think that unless you have a sub-normal capacity that is easily demonstrable it's really down to learning that makes anyone "stupid".

 

In the film Trading Places a bum and a trader swap places. The point of the film isn't idiocy per se but I think that anyone, given the motivation and the opportunity, can be as "intelligent" as anyone else.

 

Of course there is the bell-shaped curve/Gaussian distribution but let me put it this way:

For my example I'm going to use, instead of the questionable IQ scale, a theoretical Definitive Quotient scale that I just made up. The DQ is not testable since it is only theoretical but it is Gods Own Truth in terms of someone's "intelligence" at that moment in time.

 

At present we have a bell shape with 100 DQ as the mean and 50 DQ just at the bottom, 150 DQ at the top. The curve looks like this:

 

bellshape.gif

 

Most people have DQ around the mean, but the people you are talking about oDD are towards the bottom of the scale, getting to around 50 DQ. We are not including people who are born with chromosome disorders, brain damage, developmental problems etc.

 

Now I think that the people with under 100 DQ have the potential to increase their DQ (as does everyone else) but they either don't have the chance or don't want to. People cannot be bothered. People have all sorts of "reasons" for not trying. In my highschool we had "sets" for Math, 1 as highest to 5 as lowest. 1, 2 and 3 had the people who would be allowed to take Math at 'A' level, 4 and 5 were essentially remedial classes. The people in set 1 were those that would probably take higher A level Math (called S level I think). I was in set 3. I worked hard and became top of set 3 and was "promoted" to set 2. I never made to set 1 though.

 

I believe that most people in sets 4 and 5 could make it to the higher sets but I remember those kids and they were all the laziest kids, the ones who messed around all the time, never played sports at all and were generally just unmotivated. The ones who would copy homework off the next one and so never learn what was right or wrong about it. These are the guys who had DQs closer to 50. I was slap bang on 100 to start with and pushed myself up to the 120s. I'm not the golden example though. There were kids in my school who were chronic underachievers who came back from summer holiday with a different attitude and excelled from then on. And there were some guys who were in the top sets up to 15 and then just dropped because they were too busy being "cool", smoking pot and partying.

 

Alot of this is to do with family, encouragement and culture. In the UK there are a disproportionate number of people of Asian origin, relative to the population makeup, in Medical School which, in the UK, is notoriously difficult to get into. Why do these kids get in? Is it because as a race they are brighter than us white Britishers? I don't think so. It's because they have the drive and the encouragement at home. Most degrees are not hard, they just require hard work. If you put in the effort you will most certainly increase your DQ, and I think that if everyone put in the effort the lower end of the DQ scale would by more like 85 or 90 with no-one scoring less than 75. Sure, there are those that innately learn better, but mostly it's down to hard work.

I want your brain... to make his heart... beat faster.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The problem is that the lower your 'DQ', or IQ is, the less is your motivation to want to do better. That's why those kids at the bottom of classes are lazy and mess around, they simply don't care, and they no doubt have similar parents who don't care either.

Of course effort plays a factor as I said, innately smart people can fuck around and do nothing with their lives.

As for the asian medical students, well I'm sure you'd also see a disproportionate number of Polish immigrants who are builders/plumbers etc, but statistics like that don't really show anything, and are related to circumstances. Your argument that the motivation of a family can produce ability where none existed before, doesn't hold up, since you're not taking into account all the asian kids who are pushed as hard as possible by their families, pressured far harder than most white kids, and still don't make it - you're only looking at the success stories.

And you missed the point of 'Trading Places', it was not as your describe, it was the opposite, since the Eddie Murphy character did not start off as stupid, it was more to do with how accidents of birth give people opportunities or lack of them, than the innate ability of the swapped characters.

That's obvious though, you only have to look at the current US presidency to see that being born into the right circumstances, regardless of your ability, will hand you huge opportunities.

And of course, being born in to poor circumstances, but having great innate intelligence, will give you a good chance of succeeding, but having low innate ability, AND being born into poor, or even just mediocre conditions, gives you very little chance, unless you put in a herculean effort, but as I said, the problem is, if you're in those circumstances, with a low IQ/DQ, with bad parents, and poor schools and teachers, where is that effort or motivation supposed to come from.

I agree that not many people are lost causes. Almost anyone, given sufficient help and motivation, can do reasonably well.

Civillisation will not attain perfection until the last stone, from the last church, falls on the last priest.

- Emil Zola

 

character models site

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm not so sure I'd link low intelligence with lack of motivation. Certainly there is a cycle where the poorly educated end up sending their kids to worse schools and those kids end up as poorly educated as the parents.

 

But that still doesn't tarry up with your initial statements about low intelligence being a disability. If those kids don't care why the hell should anybody else? That's not a disability, that's a chosen path. Are you suggesting that "poor motivation" be classed as a disability now?

 

People find the situation that kids in Africa are in tragic. What I find tragic are the drongos in this country that have all the opportunity to be whatever they want in the world, don't bother and then begrudge other people for setting their goals higher and achieving it. There is a really idiotic anti-intellectualism here.

 

And what do you mean by "you'd also see a disproportionate number of Polish immigrants who are builders/plumbers etc, but statistics like that don't really show anything, and are related to circumstances"? There are easily fathomable reasons that there are many Polish builders and plumbers here - there is a workforce deficit and the cash they earn here goes further in Poland. What have the Asian kids who fail have to do with it? The whole point of the example is that there are proportionally more success stories amongst Asians as compared to their non-Asian British countrymen. The vast majority of Asians that came to this county in the last century were uneducated and did low paid work. They and their offspring are far better off on the whole than the equivalent white population now - they are far more upwardly socialy mobile and it is due to hard work.

 

I didn't miss the point of Trading Places - it was the same as what you described, about opportunity.

I want your brain... to make his heart... beat faster.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

People find the situation that kids in Africa are in tragic. What I find tragic are the drongos in this country that have all the opportunity to be whatever they want in the world, don't bother and then begrudge other people for setting their goals higher and achieving it. There is a really idiotic anti-intellectualism here.

 

And what do you mean by "you'd also see a disproportionate number of Polish immigrants who are builders/plumbers etc, but statistics like that don't really show anything, and are related to circumstances"? There are easily fathomable reasons that there are many Polish builders and plumbers here - there is a workforce deficit and the cash they earn here goes further in Poland. What have the Asian kids who fail have to do with it? The whole point of the example is that there are proportionally more success stories amongst Asians as compared to their non-Asian British countrymen.

 

It doesn't work. You're saying they're doing really well becasue they're being moitivated by their culture and families, and not becasue they are particularly smart.

In that case, why aren't they all doing well? Why are there any failures if it's all to do with attitude and motivation. Would it be because some of them just haven't got the ability, no matter how much pressure and motivaiton they get, they can't make it.

I'd agree that poeple who are a little bit below average can still get to the top with that sort of extra motivation and hard work, which explains the asians you speak of - but people near the bottom of the scale? All they need is someone to say 'come on, pull your socks up you divs!, or 'I believe in you Johnny, you can make it son!', and they'll all be brain surgeons and physicists?

You paint too simplistic a picture. I suppose you're one of these people who think anyone can learn to write music at the level of Bach or Beethoven, and it's just a matter of putting in a little bit more piano practice than the next guy. I might as well call you lazy for not learning to write music at that level.

There are physical differences in our brains. We're not all the same and do not have the same abilities or potential, that should be obvious to anyone, but you're insisting it's all to do with laziness and anyone can make it if they try. I think you may have been watching too many Hollywood movies.

 

 

I'm not so sure I'd link low intelligence with lack of motivation. Certainly there is a cycle where the poorly educated end up sending their kids to worse schools and those kids end up as poorly educated as the parents.

 

But that still doesn't tarry up with your initial statements about low intelligence being a disability. If those kids don't care why the hell should anybody else? That's not a disability, that's a chosen path. Are you suggesting that "poor motivation" be classed as a disability now?

 

I'm talking about their ability to make adequate decisions - that's an essential part of success, and if you don't have it, due to lack of intelligence, I'd call it a major disability, yes.

Civillisation will not attain perfection until the last stone, from the last church, falls on the last priest.

- Emil Zola

 

character models site

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Are you suggesting that "poor motivation" be classed as a disability now?

I certainly would. Potentially a temporary disability (yes, there is such a thing; a broken arm is a temporary disability), but a disability nonetheless.

My games | Public Service Announcement: TDM is not set in the Thief universe. The city in which it takes place is not the City from Thief. The player character is not called Garrett. Any person who contradicts these facts will be subjected to disapproving stares.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

We're used to threads going off-topic around here! Anyway, I think it's an interesting conversation. ;)

My games | Public Service Announcement: TDM is not set in the Thief universe. The city in which it takes place is not the City from Thief. The player character is not called Garrett. Any person who contradicts these facts will be subjected to disapproving stares.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I certainly would. Potentially a temporary disability (yes, there is such a thing; a broken arm is a temporary disability), but a disability nonetheless.

 

NotEnoughCoffee is a temporary disability for me, too. LowOnSugar counts, too :P

"The reasonable man adapts himself to the world; the unreasonable one persists in trying to adapt the world to himself. Therefore, all progress depends on the unreasonable man." -- George Bernard Shaw (1856 - 1950)

 

"Remember: If the game lets you do it, it's not cheating." -- Xarax

Link to comment
Share on other sites

What I mean oDD is that for these Asians the bell shaped curve is skewed to the right because of the motivating factors. Their average is around 120, whereas everyone elses is 100. It's still a bell-shaped curve though so there are still people in the high achieving group who are ranked towards the bottom of that scale. This is still higher than the bottom end of the typical scale though.

 

Ignore the values on this:

learn7.gif

Look at the colours. The RED curve is the norm (the average of averages if you like), the Asians I'm talking about are represented by the BLUE curve, and people in deprived situations are the GREEN.

 

But, and you've hit on this with the Bethoven comment, there is a group of people that are just naturally more intelligent regardless of social group, opportunity, etc (Good Will Hunting types) and they are on the BLUE curve anyway. I'd argue that Bethoven was one of them and he would have been at the upper end of the scale.

 

What I'm saying is those people on the GREEN curve have the ability to move to the top of their scale (towards the 1 on that graph) if they put the effort in. And if ALL people who would otherwise naturally by on the GREEN curve put in effort that curve would cease to exist and everyone would be on the red, or a new curve between green and red. Either way hard work will get you places. Imagine if all the wasters at school and in life just decided they were going to really give everything their best shot.

 

As to lack of motivation being a disability - I don't consider it a disability on it's own. If there is an underlying cause, depression for example, then I can understand that the underlying cause is a disability. But lack of motivation and laziness on it's own is just plain old chosen laziness.

 

Ha ha. At least HalfWit realises that his comments were (and here's a tip - they continue to be) pointless.

I want your brain... to make his heart... beat faster.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don't know why you're making up these graphs. I already know what your point is - that anyone can do well if they try harder, and I don't agree with it. You can't prove that, your central point, with a graph.

What I'm saying is, that as you get lower on intelligence, brain function, learning capability, your decision making deteriorates with it, and therefore it's a double whammy - not only are you less capable of learning, but you don't particularly care, because of your scant ability to make adequate decisions, both on a small level, and on the large scale that project what you want to make out of your distant future.

If that's not a disability, I don't know what is.

So I can't agree that if someone is stupid, it's just because they're lazy - at least not in all cases, and therefore, how do you decide.

 

I assume, as a doctor, you have the same attitude with patients? i.e. you have no time for those with self inflicted wounds to do with smoking, drinking, eating the wrong diet, accidents involving any sort of activity that isn't absolutely necessary - basically only people who definitely couldn't have done anything to avoid their illness deserves any help or sympathy?

'you stupid bastard - if you'd only spent 30 minutes exercising every day for the last 20 years you would have avoided that heart attack - now get out of my sight!'.

Civillisation will not attain perfection until the last stone, from the last church, falls on the last priest.

- Emil Zola

 

character models site

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Oh, you presume so much.

 

I got the graphs through google image searching and they are not there to prove a point but to demonstrate my theory. I certainly don't think my theory is watertight - it's just my opinion.

 

I agree that people with certain very low levels of intelligence are disabled, but where are you drawing the line? If you are talking about people without diagnosable and demonstrable problems that place them outside the normal ranges then the very unintelligent may be socially disabled - in that they will never improve their standing in life - but I think that perhaps you and I have a different take on what the word disabled means.

 

To further my point about Asians in the UK, and in conjunction with your "double whammy" suggestion - which I kind of agree with, it's not unfeasible after all - there are kids in these families with low intelligence who suffer from lack of motivation and, as you describe, poor decision making ability.

 

But if they are made to work hard by their families they will slowly learn, yes? And they could reach that intelligence threshold that allows for increased motivation or decision making (whatever "threshold" that is).

 

I just don't think you should write anyone off as a lost cause which is what you are seeming to suggest.

 

---------------------------------

 

In my job I do not pass any such judgments as you suggest. Of course if there is clear cause/contributer for an illness or something that will make an illness worse in someone's lifestyle I'll let that person know, but that is only because it is in the best interests of that person and it's my job to act in their best interests. If people who've had a heart attack choose to continue smoking that's entirely up to them. Lifestyle choices are hard to change, for anyone, and of course I recognise that. In fact, and you may surprised to hear this, neither I nor any of my colleagues pass judgement on even the drug addicts and drunks that roll into A&E and are violent or abusive. We just deal with it, even though we recognise that the high levels of drug and alcohol related A&E attendances are a drain on resources.

 

I actually have a lot of sympathy for people with bad starts in life who end up wasting away (that's why I think that the situation here is akin to that in Africa, as I mentioned in a previous post). People are free to make mistakes - utilitarianism in health care only extends to specialist stuff like expensive cancer treatments and the like, people with sporting injuries - which can logically be thought of as self-inflicted - aren't treated any differently to the spontaneous heart attack where there is a strong family history/genetic pre-disposition. People aren't born with medical degrees and even things YOU might consider common sense, like regular exercise and a healthy diet, aren't apparent to everyone and they may just be ignorant. But, like I said, I don't like to write anyone off as a lost cause.

 

 

Why you suggest I have any "attitude" at all is odd. I've not used an insult when referring to the unintelligent, so why should you suggest I do it with patients?

 

Anyway, you're going down a needlessly inflammatory route, once again. Yawn. It's a little immature tbh and if you wish us to continue discussing anything, at all, I suggest you think about growing up a bit or I'm just going to essentially put you on my ignore list. That would be a shame because you often seem to discuss things I'm interested in, but you know what? - the choice is yours.

I want your brain... to make his heart... beat faster.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Surely you must realise I'm being facetious at certain points, even though I don't use simlies.

However, I think it's a mistake to ignore the usefulness of getting someone heated or offended in a debate by exaggerating or polarising. When they are in that state, they are far more likely to say what they really think, rather than some rehearsed intellectual bluff, and the former is always more interesting to me.

 

To further my point about Asians in the UK, and in conjunction with your "double whammy" suggestion - which I kind of agree with, it's not unfeasible after all - there are kids in these families with low intelligence who suffer from lack of motivation and, as you describe, poor decision making ability.

 

But if they are made to work hard by their families they will slowly learn, yes? And they could reach that intelligence threshold that allows for increased motivation or decision making (whatever "threshold" that is).

 

Yes, people a little below the average can be helped by motivation and harder work, but I don't think that continues to be the case as you go further down the scale. The amount of motivation and hard work required must obviously increase to huge proportions, and quickly become unrealistic, and true only in a technical sense.

 

I just don't think you should write anyone off as a lost cause which is what you are seeming to suggest.

I didn't suggest that at all.

I'm suggesting that you shouldn't write people off as lazy because they're stupid and/or haven't done as well as you in life. You're suggesting that all lack of achievement (that isn't clearly due to environment) is self inflicted and the result of laziness.

'Laziness' implies wilful negligence, so to be lazy, a person would have to be shown to have a complete grasp of all the subtle and salient facts, an adequate ability to make appropriate decisions - and then deliberately choose to do the lazy thing in full knowledge of the consequences.

 

Why you suggest I have any "attitude" at all is odd. I've not used an insult when referring to the unintelligent, so why should you suggest I do it with patients?

 

I think calling someone lazy is an insult - if it isn't true, and you can't know whether it is or not unless you have a lot of information about them. If you're happy to point and make judgements and offer no sympathy to stupid under-achievers, and say it's their own fault, I imagined you might do the same to people with self-inflicted illnesses that they could have easily avoided by being smarter.

It seems an arbitrary distinction to me.

Civillisation will not attain perfection until the last stone, from the last church, falls on the last priest.

- Emil Zola

 

character models site

Link to comment
Share on other sites

We are talking a lot about intellect versus effort. I believe the the real issue here is maturity (or a lack there of) and the juvenile mindset intruding on a space that is normally a bit more mature. but I really don't want to talk about that.

I'm having to edit my post for the third time becase my connection keeps killing half or more of what I want to say.

early in this thread we were attempting to define what makes a mission good. we talked about human vs. undead/machine/monsters, story line, plot twists, puzzle use, and loot placement to name a few. these things are all style choices and don't inherently make a mission good or bad by themselves even though certain people prefer a certain style over others. for example if you are a person who likes mansion heists with nothing but human AI I can bet that you will not automaticaly like every mission thrown together in a mansion. if it is done poorly then you won't like it. also even if you hate undead missions I bet that you have probably found one or two of them that were so well made you enjoyed them. my point is that we need to make a guidline for new mappers that will teach them how to make a good mission in any style they like. THAT is what this thread should have be about. we have some good examples of good mission building outside of style mentioned but mostly they got ignored because everybody agreed on them and it just isn't fun to argue about something everyone agrees on. some of these things were: multiple entrances/freedom of movement, how/when/where to use bottle necks, etc. If we want to help our new mappers make good missions we need to move beyond style and get down to the brass tacks. I would like to hear from the comunity's most experienced mapper on what they think makes a map work no matter what style it is. these are the thing we are looking for, not "67.9834% of the community hates undead mission so keep it human"!

Edited by nobody
Link to comment
Share on other sites

In the film Trading Places a bum and a trader swap places. The point of the film isn't idiocy per se but I think that anyone, given the motivation and the opportunity, can be as "intelligent" as anyone else.

 

I don't know how anybody can erally believe that. If your are bodily disabled you can never outrun the world champion in sprinting, because your body simply doesn't allow it. Why< do you think that it would be different for mental feats? Bodies are not the same. W are not all born totally equal and just change based on our environment. The moment we are born, our limitations are built into us, the same way our strengths are built into us. The environment can change part of it, but you simply can't overcome it when all everything else is the same.

Gerhard

Link to comment
Share on other sites

In that case, why aren't they all doing well? Why are there any failures if it's all to do with attitude and motivation. Would it be because some of them just haven't got the ability, no matter how much pressure and motivaiton they get, they can't make it.

 

It's simply impossible that all are doing well. the gaussion distribution will always hold. Only the parameters may change.

 

If all individuals are performing at about the same level you would still find that some get better ratings and others worse, even though they may have the same opportunity and abillities. But this is simply because of external circumstances, which also play a role.

 

You paint too simplistic a picture. I suppose you're one of these people who think anyone can learn to write music at the level of Bach or Beethoven, and it's just a matter of putting in a little bit more piano practice than the next guy. I might as well call you lazy for not learning to write music at that level.

 

That's exactly what I meant with my previous posting. It's simply not true to assume this. And calling all the non-Mozarts lazy bastards because they are not as good as Mozart is quite an simplification and ignorance.

 

I'm talking about their ability to make adequate decisions - that's an essential part of success, and if you don't have it, due to lack of intelligence, I'd call it a major disability, yes.

 

Well, it must not be a disabillity ni the strictest sense of the word, but it's certainly a disadvantage.

Gerhard

Link to comment
Share on other sites

You may not be able to run as fast as some other guy now, but if you train for it you may. But your analogy is a pretty good one. Look at all the unfit people out there. Now, fitness being what it is, you have to compare yourself to people of the same age or there abouts. In the age bracket 30-35 there are X number of unfit people. If everyone in that age bracket did more exercise the average group fitness would increase and there would no longer be any people in the lower fitness bracket.

 

As to a world champion - yes, there are people who you will never beat, people who are born with superior potential. But a. you may be that person - if you never try you'll never know and b. you don't NEED to be the best, just better than you are now.

 

Of course if you are born with no legs you'll never be a runner. But people who have disabilities like that are equivalent, in this example, to people born with brain damage, learning disabilities etc.

I want your brain... to make his heart... beat faster.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

But, and you've hit on this with the Bethoven comment, there is a group of people that are just naturally more intelligent regardless of social group, opportunity, etc (Good Will Hunting types) and they are on the BLUE curve anyway. I'd argue that Bethoven was one of them and he would have been at the upper end of the scale.

 

What woul dhave happened with Beethoven if he had grown up in different circumstances. Suppose his parents would have been coal miners which are happy with their live. You think that Beethoven would have been known today? Maybe yes, but I wouldn't hold my breath.

 

As to lack of motivation being a disability - I don't consider it a disability on it's own. If there is an underlying cause, depression for example, then I can understand that the underlying cause is a disability. But lack of motivation and laziness on it's own is just plain old chosen laziness.

 

I wonder what laziness really means. If somebody doesn't work for his goals he is considered lazy. But the question is why he doesn't want to work for it. Would more motivation help? I'm not so sure. If a personallity is of that type, then motivation from other poeple may not help at all, because it's built into his personallity, and you can only change so much about it.

Gerhard

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Of course if you are born with no legs you'll never be a runner.

 

I don't think so:

 

http://www.iht.com/articles/2007/05/14/business/track.php#

 

and:

 

http://www.runnersworld.com/article/0,7120...12361-0,00.html

"The reasonable man adapts himself to the world; the unreasonable one persists in trying to adapt the world to himself. Therefore, all progress depends on the unreasonable man." -- George Bernard Shaw (1856 - 1950)

 

"Remember: If the game lets you do it, it's not cheating." -- Xarax

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don't think these links proove that you can compete without legs. It just prooves, that you can substitute legs with appropriate devices and use them instead. If you are born without legs you can still be a runner, because modern technology can compensate for it. That's great news for disabled people, but it doesn't have anytrhing to do with the argument that you can achieve anything just because of motivation.

Gerhard

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don't think these links proove that you can compete without legs. It just prooves, that you can substitute legs with appropriate devices and use them instead.

 

Uhm, these two sentences contradict themselves. If you can proove that youc an substitute legs and use them instead, then you can compete without legs. :)

 

The guy without legs runs way faster than I can even with my legs. :)

 

If you are born without legs you can still be a runner, because modern technology can compensate for it. That's great news for disabled people, but it doesn't have anytrhing to do with the argument that you can achieve anything just because of motivation.

 

I think it has everything to do with it. In this case their motivation makes up for the lost leg. These prostetics aren't just "snap on and run", you need tons of motivation to even go out, select some, buy them, train a long time with them, deal with sideeffects and so on, and that *just* to achive something as simple as walking around.

 

For me, walking around is easy, I just wake up and start walking. And yet, most days I just sit in front of my computer and can't motivate myself to go out, especially if it is cold and rainy outside :)

"The reasonable man adapts himself to the world; the unreasonable one persists in trying to adapt the world to himself. Therefore, all progress depends on the unreasonable man." -- George Bernard Shaw (1856 - 1950)

 

"Remember: If the game lets you do it, it's not cheating." -- Xarax

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Uhm, these two sentences contradict themselves. If you can proove that youc an substitute legs and use them instead, then you can compete without legs. :)

 

Yes. But that's a pointless argument. It's like saying: You can't lift a weight of 1 ton, and then you come and say "Of course I can, I just have to climb into a tower crane, and control it to lift that weight."

 

The guy without legs runs way faster than I can even with my legs. :)

 

That's the point. He HAS legs, they are just not his biological original equipment.

 

I think it has everything to do with it. In this case their motivation makes up for the lost leg. These prostetics aren't just "snap on and run", you need tons of motivation to even go out, select some, buy them, train a long time with them, deal with sideeffects and so on, and that *just* to achive something as simple as walking around.

 

Well, the same problem exists for anybody. Kids also have to learn to use their legs. It's not as if they are born and they start to run around. It's hard work to learn walking on two sticks, so it's really not something different. And it's always the case when you learn something. I couldn't drive on the street with a car, I had to learn it. I also had to learn bicycle driving, or skating and a host of other stuff.

 

For me, walking around is easy, I just wake up and start walking.

 

Yes, but it wasn't always so, even for you. ;)

Gerhard

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


  • Recent Status Updates

    • Petike the Taffer  »  DeTeEff

      I've updated the articles for your FMs and your author category at the wiki. Your newer nickname (DeTeEff) now comes first, and the one in parentheses is your older nickname (Fieldmedic). Just to avoid confusing people who played your FMs years ago and remember your older nickname. I've added a wiki article for your latest FM, Who Watches the Watcher?, as part of my current updating efforts. Unless I overlooked something, you have five different FMs so far.
      · 0 replies
    • Petike the Taffer

      I've finally managed to log in to The Dark Mod Wiki. I'm back in the saddle and before the holidays start in full, I'll be adding a few new FM articles and doing other updates. Written in Stone is already done.
      · 4 replies
    • nbohr1more

      TDM 15th Anniversary Contest is now active! Please declare your participation: https://forums.thedarkmod.com/index.php?/topic/22413-the-dark-mod-15th-anniversary-contest-entry-thread/
       
      · 0 replies
    • JackFarmer

      @TheUnbeholden
      You cannot receive PMs. Could you please be so kind and check your mailbox if it is full (or maybe you switched off the function)?
      · 1 reply
    • OrbWeaver

      I like the new frob highlight but it would nice if it was less "flickery" while moving over objects (especially barred metal doors).
      · 4 replies
×
×
  • Create New...