did you play when those came out shoe? the language just for 5 was pretty confusing. took me months to put together a definitive guide on every rating's language, and many were substantially misleading as it was. questions regularly came up on the forums for years, and to a significant extent for the life of 2.0.

maybe i wasn't clear enough in my characterization - its not about having enough words, the issue was trying to make 9 statements where there was a clear hierarchy, it got too wishy washy. even as it was it was hard to put it together. you have to remember, the 10 ratings are basically the same - but they wanted to use unique language for each - so you needed 10 ways each (or 9?) to say very low, low, medium, high, very high. thats a lot of ways of saying the same thing. throw in a high but on the low end of high, low but on the high end of low, a highish medium and a lowish medium, and its basically word soup.

seble was a pretty straight shooter, i was often surprised how directly he'd answer so many questions. not things about development schedules of course, but about the inner workings of the game. so, i basically disagree, i don't think he'd misrepresent on purpose and i don't see how it benefits him to do so.

edit - i wouldnt be surprised if they also felt it was reasonable to have medium as a wider range, there can be multiple rationale. i think its a reasonable thing to think, its just not the impression i got from seble. im not sure they psyco analyze this stuff the way you or i do. the first release of potential was a disaster anyway, it was wildly miscalibrated on many levels.

I like the recruiting color codes the way they are. As someone else said, it's fun trying to find a gem. Sometimes it doesnt work out.