 |
|
|
|
|
|
||
|
|
||
|
|
||
|
|
|
|
|
|
||
|
|
||
|
|
||
|
|
|
|
|
|||||||||||||||||
Add Forum to Favorites | Send Topic To a Friend | View Forum FAQ | Track this topic |
Last Thread Next Thread |
| Interview with Jonathan Blow |
|
 |
Omega147 Member since: 9/23/2001 From: Salt Lake City, UT, United States |
|||
 Posted - 5/22/2007 3:56:33 PM |
||||
| Link seems broken. It redirects to the following page, which doesn't appear to exist: http://www.gamedev.net/business/features/jblow/jblow.asp |
||||
|
||||
 |
Gaiiden GDNet Content Lead Member since: 8/30/2000 From: Lincroft, NJ, United States |
|||
 Posted - 5/22/2007 9:18:03 PM |
||||
| fixed - thanks! ________________ Drew Sikora President, Programmer - Blade Edge Software Executive Producer, Newsletter Editor - GameDev.net Community Relations, Live Events Mngr - Game Institute IGDA Chapter Advisor - New Jersey |
||||
|
||||
|
Omega147 Member since: 9/23/2001 From: Salt Lake City, UT, United States |
|||
|
Posted - 5/24/2007 4:35:46 AM |
||||
| Concerning the article, I liked Jonathan Blow's insight into the events surrounding the recent Slamdance. I had heard about the controversy and how several people withdrew their entries, but Jonathan's views on why he personally pulled out were interesting. Other than that, the interview isn't too great. The questions that were asked seemed very typical, and really didn't appear to connect with Jonathan at all, which is seen in the unenthusiastic responses he gives. At times there are glimpses into what makes Jonathan tick, but those moments are quickly buried by the disjoint, unrelated questions that follow. I'd give the article a 2 out of a possible 10. |
||||
|
||||
 |
Emmanuel Deloget GDNet News Lead Member since: 8/27/2003 From: France |
|||
 Posted - 5/24/2007 12:24:06 PM |
||||
Quote: Actually, the questions have been chosed very carefully. It was not my idea to ask questions about Jonathan's work as it was not a technical interview (I might keep this for a future interview). It tried to focus on questions that pop up quite often in the forums, most notably in The Beginners and in The Lounge - that's why the questions are very typical (and it's even hinted in the introduction). Moreover, if you read the introduction, you probably saw that this is the first interview in a series - and what interested me here was to ask the same questions to different developers, in order to get different views on the same subject. The answers, when you compare them from one developer to another one, are quite surprising. But I guess you'll see that later  . Of course, I still asked a few "personnal" questions, based on what people usually do in their daily job. But thanks anyway for the 2/10 - at least, it's not 0 .-- Emmanuel D. [blog, in French] [blog, very bad googlized translation] [NEW: English version of teh blog! (WIP)] |
||||
|
||||
|
Omega147 Member since: 9/23/2001 From: Salt Lake City, UT, United States |
|||
|
Posted - 5/24/2007 6:45:32 PM |
||||
Quote: To me, asking the direct questions that everyone asks is part of the problem here. Developers get asked the kind of questions seen in the interview all the time, and most of the answers Jonathan Blow gave can be seen in many other such interviews with other developers--the article is being repetitive in that sense. Jonathan's responses struck me more as common sense knowledge as well, and he really didn't give that many insightful words into the inner workings of the gaming industry. Maybe Jonathan was just a poor interviewee altogether, I don't know; I may have to change my rating later on as the series progresses. I think better results could have been gained in the interview by asking questions that gave or hinted at the expected response, but did so in a roundabout way. For example, instead of asking "How do you take your games from concept to completion?"--which is a very, very broad question that will vary largely between every designer and studio altogether, and would take a while to explain or to reach any relative feedback--perhaps asking "What were some challenges you faced when making __game__?" could have triggered some more useful discussion. The latter suggested question would have prompted Jonathan to divulge into some process during the making of the game which hit a snag, followed by what was done to overcome it. This doesn't directly answer how to take a game from concept to completion, but it does provide a look at what was done/attempted during the game's creation, which in itself reveals some process of the game creation experience, and it gives a solution to that particular problem. The alternative question proposed is kind of typical as well and shouldn't be accepted at face value. The point is to create dialogue that is both meaningful as well as relative, without boring the interviewee; how that is achieved, exactly, will vary. The question itself doesn't have to be unique, it merely needs to trigger unique responses. |
||||
|
||||
|
Micahn Member since: 5/25/2007 From: Port saint lucie, FL, United States |
|||
|
Posted - 5/25/2007 1:12:59 PM |
||||
| I have known Jon for many years now and think very highly of him. I have played his first game Wulfram for about 11 years now and still think it is one of the best games online. The game play of it is unlike any other game I have found so far and well is just fun to play. When he talks about game play that no one has seen before that is just what he done in Wulfram many years ago. Anyway I wish him the best of luck in anything he does in the future. |
||||
|
||||
| All times are ET (US) |
Last Thread Next Thread |
|
