What if there is an IQ limit on being a great game developer?

My IQ is only a bit above average and I've watched videos of some of the best indie game developers and suspect they have a higher IQ than me.

So do you think there could be an IQ limit on being a great game developer?

Or who are best indie game developers and what are their IQ's or what is your IQ and how well are you doing at game development?

Ideally your IQ score and your best games rating would be good data points.

PS: What IQ do some of the most famous indie game developers have e.g. Notch, Blow, Braben, Carmack, Braybook ... ?

The thing is that's individual IQ and there is some amazing research on group or team intelligence -> The Science Behind Team Intelligence (fastcompany.com)

 

BS IQ is a valid measurement of human intelligence.

Or please provide scientific papers that dispute IQ's relevance to humanities abilities to solve problems and provide a valid alternative?

PS the US Army do not accept recruits with below 85 IQ scores as they are unable to work within a modern military system (Jordan Peterson).

 

It's a moral matter you imbecile. If you think distilling the multifaceted idiosyncrasies of the human mind down to a simple number is a reasonable manner in which to... 'rate' people, then you can kiss my fat Australian nutsack.

Humans are not numbers.

 

I will tell you this, you can do almost anything with average IQ it will just take you much longer than person with high IQ.

 

Right, because the US military is the epitome of rational thinking.

 

Have you ever met someone with very low IQ ?
In case of military they could prove to be dangerous to themselves and their colleagues.

 

It may be valid but it does not allow comparing two human's levels of intelligence and definitely not what they accomplish in life.

Consider this:

• person may have had a bad day while taking the test
• test wasn't taken according to standards (time, quiet room, etc)
• IQ tests don't take into account creativity, emotional intelligence and all that
• IQ tests that aren't EXACTLY the same are not comparable, you'll find a lot of supposed IQ tests on the Internet that aren't real IQ tests or simply allow you to spend as much time as you like on them ...
• -- many more reasons why single-number IQ values are an extreme oversimplification of human intelligence --

But in the end, this is what is way more important than IQ for determining success: one Indie developer may simply have had more luck, or the right connections, or doing the right thing at the right time on the right platform, better marketing aptitude, touched fundamental feelings with their graphics or gameplay, spent a lot of time polishing and playtesting, etc etc etc

None of that has to do with a number you get from some test.

 

Note the strong correlation between IQ and job complexity.

Or would you want a low IQ doctor?

 

This thread is radicoulus.

You don't need an papers.
IQ measuring is pointless and only used for psychological purposes.

When I was kid, and went to do test, because of my dyslexia, I remember doing test ok. But rather slow. Some type of questions were based on knowledge, some on excesire of specific techniques.

I tell you that, If I went again day after, even with different type of questions, my IQ would be higher.

I never care. Never used dylexa papers on exams. And it never stopped me from doing Universities.

What matter in any profession, regardless IQ, is being determined and consequent in reaching life goals.

Also, lazy people won't achieve anything business wise, regardless of IQ.

 

If anything IQ tests show that people tackle the same problem in different ways. As a measure of intelligence, IQ tests should be banned.

And... I just realised this is another @Arowx superstar thread.

 

Would you rather expect a janitor to continuously improve his/her intelligence on the job, or a doctor, engineer, scientist?

Intelligence is a muscle, too. In turn, a craftsman will surely train more of the other muscles than your average scientist.

 

No because I don't believe in such a garbage concept. But I have met people who potentially never had the right opportunity to learn, or were never taken seriously, or were born into unfortunate circumstances. Or any infinite number of reasons as to why they are in the circumstance they are today.

All humans have the potential of brilliance. All humans are different. We just live in a sh*tty world where idiots like this thread's poster believes everything boils down to a stupid number.

 

The thing is programming ability is inherently problem solving and an IQ test is just that. So there should be a strong correlation between game development potential and IQ.

Or what other ways are there of programming to solve game problems other than programming?

 

Think of: diminishing returns. The attitude is at some point more important than your IQ. You'll find a lot of articles and books mentioning the "star programmer" syndrome that killed teams, projects, companies.

On some level you are correct, you will find it hard to be a great programmer with a sub-100 IQ. Statistically speaking.

But you don't need a 130 IQ to be a great programmer. 100 will do just fine if you know and/or are willing to learn best practices. Problems that are really difficult to tackle are being worked on in a team anyway.

 

Please provide an evidence based scientific argument to back up your beliefs?

 

How about learning your lesson from the last time you made a post steeped in the fallacious notion of IQ's. That went so well didn't it?

Clearly you're too stupid to have learnt your lesson.

 

In general IQ tests represent the thinking-correlation between the persons who thought the given questions and the person who answers the questions.
Not more not less.
The reason why IQ test results correlate with educated people is because people with high education write the questions.

 

stop watching jordan peterson.

1. he's not very smart
2. he says outrageous things because that earns him more money

Also, the us military does not have an IQ requirement. 10 seconds on google can confirm that. There is an asvab requirement, which is the militarys own general aptitude test.

More important than "how dumb am I?" is "how lazy am i?"

Somebody who takes whatever a controversial figure says as truth without doing the bare minimum fact checks must be lazy, in my opinion. I doubt a lazy game developer could get very far.

But the thing about laziness is, you can go from laziest bum to hardest worker who ever existed with the flip of a switch. How fair is that?

 

So a score of 31 at 0.8 correlates to 24.8 percentile or an IQ of around 90.

 

take a close look at this site your are linking. Does it look like a legit scientific journal to you?

the asvab is not an IQ test, it is an aptitude test. If you can tie your shoes, or you can be instructed to tie your shoes by receiving loud, simple verbal commands one at a time, you can score a 30.

Virtually anybody who is not suffering from a full blown mental disorder can pass and be able to do something useful in the military.

Jordan peterson preys upon people, young men especially, who suffer from poor self-esteem. This sort of nonsense is meant to make people feel like they are special in a good way, when in fact they are mediocre in a bad way.

It's no secret some people are quicker than others, but in a discipline as broad as game dev nobody is going to have all the right smarts in all the right places. It takes a team. Carmack didnt make doom alone, and almost anybody can make a better version of Doom today in no-time using modern tools and sans a team. Because teams of developers over the past decades have been improving the toolsets and recording all the wisdoms gained along the way and its all just out there on the internet, free for the taking.

The stupidest thing you can do is start believing that you are smart.

 

IQ is an important indicator, but nothing decisive.

If You put enough work and good mental attiude You can learn and achieve more or less what You want. Sitting still and passive wont move u forward.

Really its the least thing You should worry about...look at me from IQ tests i had to take in the past i am quite high on the scale, but I never released any game...Conclusion...IQ is not the decisive factor, You just have to focus and push urself for Your dreams .

 

The Dunning Kruger effect.

 

I mean, you've read Arowx's Threads™. We're clearly past that point.

 

lol, dude I served with at least a handful of people who were practically braindead. And I was in a unit that takes three levels of volunteering for special training to get to.

 

i don't expect for him to learn anything here. THis is for the children. ArowX just does what he does for whatever reasons.

 

@Arowx
here's a question for you.
You've made a handful of games. Have you achieved the goals you've wanted from game dev? If not, do you feel IQ is holding you back?

Hypothetically, lets say that you are able to prove beyond a doubt that in fact you are too stupid to make some sort of game. So, what are you going to do about it? Quit? Get some help?

 

No, not dunning kruger effect.

Definitions doesn't mean you know a thing. A definition is a conclusion, which is the beginning of stupidity.

If you define yourself as smart, you have made a conclusion. You have made a conclusion about an ongoing process. This is probably the first and dumbest thing anybody could ever do.

Once you make conclusion, you think you understand the thing, so you stop watching it. Then something new happens, but you have no idea why. Because you weren't paying attention. You believed you knew already, so why pay close attention?

Then, because you believe you are a real smart guy, you make a bunch of "educated guesses" about why what happened, happened. But its complete nonsense, because you have no idea what is going on anymore. You are lost in the sauce. It's like you are an idiot. All because you thought you were smart.

IQ has nothing to do with this process. Anybody can do it.

 

Well said.

This whole IQ thing falls into a common trap: when people take correlation as causation.

It's dangerous to take any 'result' at face value, then dust off your hands and call it job done. Every issue is complex, and so are people. Being reductionist about human idiosyncrasies can be devastating to large swaths of people.

You can chalk up a lot of atrocities committed by humans towards other humans to this.

We're all different and that's what makes us beautiful.

Or is this all too understanding for Mr Sociopath Arowx?

 

It's an interesting cognitive bias that people adopt when they think they know more that they do about a subject.

So @BIGTIMEMASTER and @spiney199 could have cognitive biases against IQ.
Or @Arowx could have a cognitive bias for IQ.

The real interesting part is having a honest and scientifically backed discussion on the subject that challenges our biases.

Fact: I've been game developing for a while now and had very little success so what is the difference between me and indie game developers that have done way better than me.

Is IQ a factor and if so it seems to be insurmountable as IQ is not plastic or dynamic and actually lowers as we get older.

 

Oh please the IQ test is like a puzzle it tests basic mathematic reasoning and abstraction puzzle solving something very relevant to programming and therefore game programming.

However does it test creativity and finding fun game mechanics?

 

have you asked for help? Feedback? Gotten in contact with successful developers?

That seems like a smart thing to do.

What seems stupid is to think it boils down to a magic number that you can only determine by taking an abstract test and sit there, accomplishing nothing, wondering if you are above some arbitrary, meaningless threshold.

After you published a game, did you do something like an after-action-review? Get second opinions? Identify weaknesses and develop a plan to overcome them?

here is one difference between you and carmack: he had team of professionals and some money. Do you have those things?
He had a brand new, untapped market. Do you have that?

Stop overesteeming people. Nobody is great - just right place and time, and they might have been paying attention enough to recognize the moment or it might just be luck (usually it is).

 

It's a matter of work ethic, not IQ.

If you have done all the work you can muster and still havent found the answer, get help from others!

If you lack the sort of "smarts" needed to figure out the right color pallete or soundscape or how to make attractive marketing art and such, thats why people work in teams! It's the smart thing to do.

 

What if the things you are talking about are more natural for higher IQ people than low IQ people?

 

reaching out to others might feel more natural for extroverted types. For probably most of us basement dwelling solo-dev types its like pulling teeth. But what else are you going to do?

 

I do love how your statements address nothing and are just more endless drivel and questions that don't warrant an answer.

Imagine being designated a number based on a test and have a bunch of other people infer far too much about this one, completely meaningless number.

Wait, that does happen in educations systems around the world. And it's not a good thing.

Let's ask some real questions. Maybe:

• What kind of person is most attracted to game development?
• Would games benefit in bringing people outside this (probably diverse) demographic?
• If so, what can we do to attract these people?

Notice how none of these are exclusionary.

 

And what if it comes down to individual circumstance, of which people usually have no control over?

And not a meaningless number.

 

@Arowx

im just gonna say one last word of warning about jordan peterson then leave this thread alone -

if somebody is saying a lot of big words fast and you get this impression like, "wow I am confused as hell but this person seems like they know a lot", that is red flag that you are being played.

Intelligence simplifies, it doesn't complicate. Einstein has some quote about that.

The proof is in the results. Peterson is giving life advice, but his life is a train-wreck. How do you reconcile that? Words don't actually mean anything. Results are the proof.

 

Only it is if it correlates to how quickly you solve logical and mathematical problems say with programming.

 

OK what's your IQ and your best games rating?

 

The thing is if IQ correlates to problem solving then a smart person can probably overcome individual circumstance problems.

 

Wow. I'm going to say this on behalf of the many people who would would find this comment degrading: f*ck you.

What a "pull yourself up by your bootstraps" comment.

Please take the time to consider that in many cases it's very hard to change ones individual circumstances.

 

like most normal adults, I dont know my IQ, and I wouldnt consider taking a test to be worth the time.

my best (and only published game) rating is mostly positive on steam. Just click the link in my sig.

Not very impressive but it means a lot more than jordan petersons life advice, doesn't it? If you are trying to make a game, that is. I am also not a drug addict, or pariah of any communities I worked professionally in, and I'm debt free and in good health.

but if you are trying to get good at making games i'm not the target you seek. Find any of these long time, successfull indie devs out there. I've never contacted one and been ignored. People like to help.

if you are going to bug somebody though, you need to have some worthwhile questions to ask. "What is your IQ?" is not worthwhile question.

Something like, "ive made a few games, here they are:____, but they don't sell. I think the reason they don't sell might be..... do you agree? Do you think its something else? If there is one weak link, what do you think it is?"

the principle is, use somebody elses eyes to try and identify your own weaknesses. Once you pinpoint that, then you can try and find out if other people have same problem, and what they did to overcome it.

 

Look at the chart notice that only Medical occupations require above average IQ.

The question I'm asking is do great game developers have higher IQ's?

 

people who are "great" at anything are going to be above average.

i am sure there is plenty of morons involved in the making of great games, and plenty of geniuses who never amounted to squat.

You are focused on wrong target.

 

And we're all telling you that's a pointless, exclusionary question.

 

You actually just nailed the Corona politics failture from the past 2 years .

 

Only as the chart clearly shows that to be top tier in any profession you need to have a higher IQ than the average in your field only it does not have a game programmer/designer bracket.

And computer occ bracket spans 90-130 IQ with lower 90-100, mid 100-120 and higher 120-130.

I suspect game development follows a similar trend, it would be interesting to do a survey and understand the correlation.

 

Why do you respond as if I care.

Why do you respond as if anyone cares.

 

A high IQ doesn't necessarily mean that person A with IQ 130 is more intelligent than person B with IQ 110.
I mean, there are a couple of reasons why:

1) You don't know how much time A has put into learning things that relate to better IQ scores in comparison to B.
2) You don't know how much interest B had in learning IQ related things in the past in comparison to A.
3) You don't know how much effort A puts into the test in comparison to B.
4) You don't know how B could theoretically evolve in his future in comparison to A.
5) In the case that A really has higher raw intelligence than B, you don't know how long A can focus his raw intelligence during the day in comparison to B. This basically means that B, even with lower raw intelligence, could theoretically be more productive over time.
6) You don't know how much A prepared for the test.
7) You don't know how much B prepared for the test.
8) You don't know the life-style of A.
9) You don't know the life-style of B.
10) You don't know the personality of A - he could be very ambitious.
11) You don't know the personality of B - he could be very lazy.
12) You don't know how A reacts to time pressure.
13) You don'T know how B reacts to time pressure.

One other example:
Let's assume B is an indie dev and makes an IQ test today and achieves 110.
Then he trains for 1 month, makes another IQ test and achieves 125.
Will B+1month be a greater game developer than B+0month and therefore be the more successful indie dev?
Probably not. It's still the same guy and the 1 month would be better spent in learning game-dev related content than preparing for an IQ test.

IQ tests are definitely an indication for something if you put it into the right context and combine it with the personality of the tested person and maybe some other personal data, but IQ tests will not show you that person A is definitely more intelligent and capable than person B always and forever.

 

There is a obviously some overlap in the skills required to do well in a traditional IQ test and being a good programmer (maths, logic, problem solving, etc).
However I don't think it's a sensible measure of someone's ability to work as a programmer, and certainly not as a game developer more widely.
That's why no serious employer in the games industry will ask you to do a generic IQ test to show off your skills in an interview, when they can give you a coding test instead (or test aimed specifically to a given role).

But even the results of a programming test shouldn't be the be all and end all.
When I've interviewed people for game development roles it's not so much the test results you are interested in, but the scope of the discussion about the test you have with the candidate afterwards, to help you judge personality traits, willingness to learn, communication skills, etc.

In short, IQ tests are relatively pointless in the real world because there's always better ways of judging someone's ability in a more holistic way.