Sariat wrote:

lol, tit... heh. I like English(Country, not Key) insults. Hehe.

;)

I got more of those :P

It gives more sense of accomplishment in the game

for the game developer. Its effect is somewhat more iffy for players; you're compressing multiple competitive hierarchies into a single universal ladder. For players that want competition, this is a plus, as they know that whatever they do achieve is all the greater for the added competition they fought against; for players who aren't so competitive, though, this eliminates niches in the pecking order and makes accomplishments easier to overshadow. A game with 10 different server worlds can have up to 10 different player "bests" of anything, but in a single-world game there can be only one.

It allows the game to be more fun

for the game developer. Players are denied the ability to play with whom they want to, and instead are forced to play the game with the players that the administrators want them to. Moreover, it makes customization more difficult--with the addition of a few host options, a game developer can quickly convert one game into many variations in a single package, and player hosts can pick which variation they want. Doing this with a single server scheme requires vastly more server resources and has a considerably harder time accomodating players equally.

After all, its not hurting

the game developer

to NOT allow them to host their own server.

Actually, I'm lying on this one; it is hurting the game developer, for all the various reasons listed above and below that take liberty away from the players.

In fact it adds control

for the game developer. It subjects players to the mercy of server administrators and their standards and prejudices, and cripples' players ability to see the game played to their preferences, because all those controls belong to the server admins and cannot be accessed by mere players.

which is one step closer to preventing harrasment

of game developers by players. It is many, many steps closer to encouraging developers and server admins to harass players, because players have no possible recourse; if they don't like how they're being treated, they're screwed, regardless of whether they deserve it or not.

in Byond games.

You only say that becuase you dont know what the real meaning of it is. Read my post below.

He's right, IQ is pretty meaningless... because it's based on a highly subjective test. Emotionally disturbed people may be (and have been) tested with very low IQ, because they're unable to focus on the test at the moment... but that's not reflective of their overall ability to learn. Furthermore, IQ tests are "calibrated", so to speak, based on a set of life experiences that aren't shared by everyone... same thing with how the questions are formulated.

IQ is a measure of how well you managed to do on an IQ test the last time you happened to take one. It's wonderful, if for any reason you happen to have a use for a measurement of how well you managed to do on an IQ test the last time you happened to take one.