Starcraft Personality Test

[Nissa]

That sounds like something I do when I'm trying to write -- like moving away part of my mind, so that the inspired part can make something happen.

[TheEconomist]

That, and I'm pretty sure Blade is male.

Sorry I wasn't very clear with my point. I had 3 major points.

1) That that kind of intuition is caused by the right hemisphere of the brain.
2) That women, who have more usage of their right hemisphere, had a knack for these kinds of things so the term "woman's intuition" was created.
3) Men, while still able to have same kind of intuition, tend not to because they historically suppressed those parts of thinking and because men are more left brain dominate, with the exception of left handed people (who tend to be right brain dominate) and a few percentage of people who are right brain dominate and right handed.

Basically, I wasn't saying that men can't do these things. I was saying that men are put as a disadvantage because their brains were usually wired differently and because they suppress it.

[Nissa]

Oh, I'm not worried about any of that.

Moo.

[RetlocLive]

Your favorite race: protoss (SC1), they were basically an army of Predators.
Your disliked race: protoss (SC2)...they're basically nothing but space Draenei nowadays...
Your three favorite characters: Raynor (SC1), Kerrigan (SC1), Tosh, Honorable mention: Abathur
Your three least favorite characters: Kerrigan (SC2), Mengsk (SC2), Aldaris, Honorable mention: Raynor (SC2)

[Nissa]

Your favorite race: protoss (SC1), they were basically an army of Predators.
Your disliked race: protoss (SC2)...they're basically nothing but space Draenei nowadays...
Your three favorite characters: Raynor (SC1), Kerrigan (SC1), Tosh, Honorable mention: Abathur
Your three least favorite characters: Kerrigan (SC2), Mengsk (SC2), Aldaris, Honorable mention: Raynor (SC2)

Alright. Sorry it took me so long. I had to babysit tonight.

Themes: Straightforwardness, Honesty, Trust, Bluntness, Effectivity over mysticism.

Romance: Yeah. Not the sugary, sappy kind, though. You're plenty capable of the chocolates and roses type of romance, but you're not the type known for sweeping women off their feet. Your primary appeal to women is that you're open, and you don't play games. Dating is about fun more than it is about impressing anyone, for you. You're also pretty funny.

Typing: ISTJ or ESTJ by my guess (keep in mind I'm a Myers-Brigg noob, so take that with a grain of salt). One of the things you enjoy most is getting stuff done. You're not a workaholic, but generally you have at least a vague idea of where you want to go in life -- not always an idea of how to get there, but you'll figure that out as you go along. You trust yourself, and you're willing to trust others. While you don't always volunteer information about yourself, you have no problem opening up and being honest with others. You're rarely afraid of being honest with others, even if what you have to say isn't exactly palatable to the person you're speaking to. You feel it's better to tell the truth and assess what to do from there than lie and potentially allow stupid conflict to happen. You love the open and honest truth, in clear detail so that the next decision can be made quickly and with certainty. I have a strange feeling that you have a hidden ideal or desire in your heart, one that is more lofty or daring than most people would dream. Either that or you simply believe in doing good for those around you in all you attempt. You admire those that are tough, driven, and not intimidated by others into abandoning what they want.

Leadership: Absolutely. You don't generally have the desire to gather others around you just to have followers, but when you see a problem, you know you have to do something about it. You're the one that goes "Hey guys, let's figure this out" and then others willingly listen to what you have to say. Over time you've accumulated a lot of trust from those you work with, particularly considering your honestly, love of efficiency, and genuine concern for/appreciation of others. As a follower, you prefer to work at least semi-independently. You don't want your job to hinge on having to follow the orders of dumb people. Even under a good leader, you prefer at least some degree of autonomy.

Dislikes: Stupid conflicts and de-railings. You're that kind of guy that reads a book and watches a movie, and then a bad twist of some sort will happen, and you react with "oh come on, that's just stupid!" You have no problem with people believing in things or being different, so long as those beliefs and differences don't get in the way of progress. Nothing grates your nerves more than someone who gets in the way of efficiency or goal-reaching and says "but what about [issue]?" You're not overly emotional, and feel disdainful of those that put too much importance into them. You also are pretty dang sick of "mystical prophesies" in fantasy stories (well, then again, so is everyone else....).

Personality issues: You're not all that sure how to handle it when someone disagrees with you, or when overly emotional people point out a problem that you feel is trivial. Emotional cultural quirks and traditions throw you off, and when they get in your way, you can be extremely insensitive. You can be very quick to shut down or avoid someone who doesn't understand the importance of your opinions, brings up an irrelevant issue, or thinks you're wrong. Or suggests that you use a more polite tone of voice.

Advice: Strive to listen to others more. Your drive to get stuff done can shut your ears to naysayers, but naysayers sometimes have important logical points. Or maybe they have no point at all, but you are obligated by rank or manners to politely consider their opinion. Manners make a superior man, and self-control will win the day here. And you know what? Pointless things are sometimes fun. Relax a bit and enjoy the seemingly irrelevant now and again. Sometimes it's beautiful.

Notes: Liking and alternatively disliking Protoss for the reasons stated indicates a desire to move forward and a love of toughness. Raynor, SC1 Kerri, Tosh, and Abathur are all driven characters who know at least vaguely what they want (good, revenge, freedom, and genetic advancement, respectively), and are willing to work with worthy companions to get it done. None of them, even Kerrigan, have trouble taking orders/advice from others if it means progress toward a goal. And, in the case of the primary three, so long as they have a choice in the matter.

SC2 Kerri, SC2 Mengsk, Aldaris and SC2 Raynor are all major obstacles. The SC2 characters mentioned are dumb, overemotional airheads who have forgotten who they are and what their goals should be. Aldaris is an over-emotional mofo who gets in the way of the liberation of Aiur and overreacts to finding out the truth about Raszagal. None of these characters appear to take as much as ten minutes of time to think about if what they're doing is stupid or not.

[Equiliari]

You wanted feedback, well here it comes. Sorry it took so long :P.
I am assuming you want feedback on how you did in order to perhaps improve, so I am going to be brutally honest.

Romance: Sure. You're not much of an initiator, though.

Correct.
+1

When hitting on a girl you would prefer to develop a friendship with a girl and let a relationship develop from that, rather than try to make a stranger interested in you. That's when you decide you want to be in a relationship. You like to take your time when it comes to this sort of thing.

Here I actually I don't know for certain as I lack the experience. I do have the experience on the opposite side of the matter thou.
But would I prefer to know a person better before initiating a relationship of any kind? Yes. And I would think most people would.
+0

Typing: You're definitely hiding a side of yourself from those around you, whether on purpose or just automatically by nature.

Everybody does this. Too vague or general.
+0

You admire people who have plans of their own

MMhwell, that depends entirely on the plans. I can't admire someone just because they have plans.
-1

and prefer to get things done rather than ponder over them a long time.

Part of me says yes, another part says no. It all depends. Rushed decisions are dangerous. And admire might be a bit of a stretch.
+0

Whether they do this directly or with help from followers doesn't matter for you.

True. The result is what matters. To most people.
+0

You're efficient

No. Big miss. LoA can verify. :P
-1

set on your goals

If I have a deadline on them, maybe.
+0

and not particularly rowdy or obviously enthusiastic about things.

Unless it is a thunderstorm outside (in which I will stop with whatever I am doing, procrastination or work and go outside), true.
+1

Emotions, when coming from you, are subdued, quiet, and rational.

I would certainly like to think they are rational but... subdued and quiet they are +1.
Unless it is anger. -1
+0

More is going on in your head than comes out from your actions and words.

Yes.
+1

I'd guess you're an ESTP or ENTP.

I consider the Myers-Briggs test meaningless as it is based on unproven theories, limited binaries, gives inconsistent results and is disregarded by psychologists. The only thing it is good for is entertainment.
Outside of that thou... I am neither ESTP or ENTP.
-2

You're pretty good at ignoring the comments of stupid people.

This one is a bit difficult. I do not know someone is stupid before they have proven to be so, and that might take a long while to figure out for me. So at first, I am not good at ignoring the comments of stupid people, even after I might start to think they are stupid (-1), but once all attempts of rationalization has failed, then yes, I am. +1
+0

Leadership: Absolutely.

Nope. So very much nope.
-1

Your sense of calm and logical ways of thought inspires people to hear you out.

Maybe, but I am in no way leadership material.
+0

Sure, you don't always talk a lot, but when you do, your words mean something.

Yes, and sometimes my sentences mean stuff too. But alright.
+1

When the goal ahead is clear, you're generally good at seeing it through.

Oh yes, but it better be darn clear!
+1

Dislikes: You dislike stereotypes

Yes. I dislike most generalizations, of which stereotypes are a big part of. It makes things inaccurate and thus prone to misunderstanding.
+1

and also things that are too simple.

Well "too" anything is an instant dislike for most people. I can see the beauty in simplicity.
+0

You enjoy puzzling over things, but when something's too easy to figure out, it gets on your nerves and you can't take it seriously.

Or, I dig deeper. Or I lose interest. Althou usage of the word "too" again makes this a bit too general and vague for me to give you any score in either direction :P.
+0

Personality issues: It appears that you have a large-scale view of the world, seeing it like you're examining something in your own hands.

Yes, I do view the world as a large massive ball of wibbly wobbly stuffy wuffy things that are in reality of utter insignificance in the broad picture... yet darn interesting.
And don't worry, I am capable of loving and living even thou I am at the realization that it is all meaningless.
+1

This can lead two directions: either being too overwhelmed by the strains of history and social science to believe you could ever change everything

This.

Advice: People are only capable of changing so much.

Already well aware .

I said up there you know what to do when the goal is clear, but that means you have to know what goals to make.

Or what makes them clear.

and be aware that intellectuals are very capable of screwing up the world [...] because they don't always realize how much ideas have consequences.

Very, VERY much aware. I have discussed with people that are way more intelligent and experienced than I am, but who were... I believe the term is "batshit crazy" (In the sense of believing he was the one true messiah and speaker of the old testament god, and had 60 (I forgot the number and wrote a random unusually high number for cats but I actually had to check, the actual number was 208!!!) cats living with him). But the guy was eloquent and well spoken. And his arguments well founded and logical.
And part of why this is possible is their their ability to rationalize things that are in reality flat out wrong to themselves and to others.

In other words, you don't feel that any of them accurately portray real people.

Indeed.

So all in all as a feedback on your personality test:
I feel that a lot of your characteristics on me are invoking the Forer effect a bit too much. As with everything you have your hits, but in my view most of them are based on such broad strokes that would in many cases fit almost anyone.
All put together I will personally not give it a pass. Because the misses you make are what I would consider very big when it comes to my personality.

Hope that was not too harsh

[Nissa]

Nah, it's alright. I've got to get better at this one way or another, and that's by hearing what you didn't like. The fundamental flaw in all of this is that I'm not analyzing you directly, but rather trying to judge you by an outside factor. I like to think I do pretty good with nothing but Starcraft characters to go by.

Eh, part of my iffiness about qualifying my sentences is that I don't want to offend people. Sometimes people take this stuff the wrong way, like I'm trying to put them in a box or judging them.

[TheEconomist]

[Insert obligatory bitchy comment on recent developments with underlying meaning about something entirely different.]

[Hawki]

Favourite Race: Terran (SC1)
Least Favourite Race: UED
Favourite Characters: Jim Raynor, Sarah Kerrigan (infested), Abathur
Least Favourite Characters: Every SC1/BW/Retribution PC bar the cerebrates

I'm past caring about debate - no doubt most people know where I stand. But having taken a VARK test recently, it'll be interesting to see what Nissa can provide.

Edit: Looking back at other posts, I saw some precedents that allowed me to change my choices. So, on that note:

-Least Favourite Race: Changed from Protoss (SC1) to UED. While I found the protoss race (race, not characters) of SC1 to be bland and poorly executed prior to their own episode (SC2 protoss haven't had the best deal either, but I prefer the race aesthetic essence/art design/voice effects, hence why they weren't originally chosen), the UED is a faction I actually resent in terms of its presence.

Favourite Characters: Replaced Valerian with Abathur. I'm confident with Raynor and Kerrigan in that they have defined arcs that extend over multiple games. And while Valerian does indeed go through an arc of his own, we don't see a lot of it (see the start and end point in HotS, but not the middle), and while his characterization is great in the DTS and I, Mengsk, his actions in 'Flashpoint' are...eh. Abathur is...well, Abathur. While he doesn't develop in the same way other characters do, he's an example of a character that doesn't need to. That, and he's easily the most unique character in HotS and I would argue, most unique zerg character all around.

Least Favourite Characters: Original list was Duke, Daggoth, and Artanis (SC1). And while those are characters that I all take issue with in some form, there are worse characters existing in the setting. And by 'characters,' I mean the player characters. True, there are worse actual characters in the setting. I have a dislike for Lester and Sarge given that they represent the cinematic segregation of SC1, but at least they had personality. I dislike Nyon from SC2 in that he has no personality, but at least he had purpose. The listed player characters however, in their listed forms, have no purpose, and no personality. They add NOTHING. This may be a cheat, and I'm not sure how Nissa can interpret it, but...well, I said it. Not sure how that translates in a psyche test, but...well, go figure.

[TheEconomist]

I have never disagreed with a list of characters more. Who is responsible for this madness?

Oh, good to have you back Hawki.