Jump to content

  • Log In with Google      Sign In   
  • Create Account


On my previous post--not an attack.


Old topic!
Guest, the last post of this topic is over 60 days old and at this point you may not reply in this topic. If you wish to continue this conversation start a new topic.

  • You cannot reply to this topic
7 replies to this topic

#1 Shinkage   Members   -  Reputation: 595

Like
Likes
Like

Posted 03 July 2000 - 06:50 AM

First off, I apologize to all who were bothered by what I said in my previous post. I must say that I was by no means being viscious. I have to say though, it brings me to question the value of real debate on this forum. Again, I''m sorry that you took it the way you did.

Sponsor:

#2 Nazrix   Members   -  Reputation: 307

Like
Likes
Like

Posted 03 July 2000 - 07:33 AM

I don't think that you were vicious, but you were pretty inaccurate.

What you accused Landfish of was the very antithesis of everything he's been saying.

So many have either blindly believed everything Landfish has said or blindly opposed everything he said. Debate is fine, but your accusation was totally off.

Granted that's merely my opinion...I think you got a little more heat from Landfish than usual, 'cause people have been just jumping all over him blindly quite a lot.



"The road of excess leads to the palace of wisdom." --William Blake

Edited by - Nazrix on July 3, 2000 3:06:39 PM

#3 Shinkage   Members   -  Reputation: 595

Like
Likes
Like

Posted 03 July 2000 - 09:10 AM

Well, when you''re vocal with your opinions you need to be ready to back up what you''re saying to people who happen to strongly disagree with you. As for what I was saying being the antithesis of what Landfish has been saying, I really don''t think so. I read through a good number of his posts before saying what I did, and I think my point was valid. Perhaps I used the word "artistic" where I shouldn''t have, because the current tendency to try to elevate games to being some new form of artistic medium is only an aspect of what I am talking about. I am more addressing the need to make radical changes in the way we do things. At times it seems that people propose these changes just for the sake of proposing changes. And this topic is not even confined to the subject of game development. It seems to pervade every aspect of our society--doing certain things just for the sake of, well, doing them. Does anybody else notice this? Maybe I am alone.

Again, Landfish, if you don''t see yourself as doing this, then by all means DISAGREE with me. Call me wrong! Tell me how I''m wrong! It''s all part of a mature an intellectual debate which I very much enjoy. When I call someone on something for which I think they are wrong, that person has every right to call me wrong right back and back up their opinion.

#4 Khawk   Senior Staff   -  Reputation: 1361

Like
Likes
Like

Posted 03 July 2000 - 09:19 AM

My reason for closing it has nothing to do with my opinions or otherwise. I closed it because it was off topic, much like this post is. However, I will let this post continue for a little while longer to be nice.

Kevin

#5 Nazrix   Members   -  Reputation: 307

Like
Likes
Like

Posted 03 July 2000 - 09:36 AM

Shinkage, Landfish has said countless times that very same thing you're saying: That people often do things without defining why.

I agree...it happens in every artistic medium...movies, games, television...

It happens in religion a lot(I really don't want to get started on this one).

Landfish has made comments that were outside of the norm for game design on purpose to make people think of doing things that are not like everything else. Above all else, he has has to question everything...even his own ideas...It was even in his Sig!

Granted, that's what you were doing (questioning him), but I think he sort of over-reacted because everyone keeps totally missing the point (which is your very point..to question everything...see the irony? )


I think the Landfish of a month or so ago would have debated with you more, but it seems his patience has been worn down.


Edited by - Nazrix on July 3, 2000 4:39:14 PM

#6 Shinkage   Members   -  Reputation: 595

Like
Likes
Like

Posted 03 July 2000 - 11:13 AM

First off, the original post was not off topic. Perhaps it was a bit abstract in terms of the process of game design, but it had its points. My point has been that although he has been trying to get everyone to think "outside the box", he is just as guilty as anyone. Afterall, thinking ENTIRELY outside the box is no better than thinking ENTIRELY inside it.

Come to think of it, how is this really off topic? After all, game design is in a good deal about the processes by which we think, and that''s what I''m going after here. Maybe it''s the Taoist in me, obfusicating things beyond comprehension.

PS Nazrix, have you ever listened to Tommy by The Who? I think you would agree with what it''s saying about organized religion

#7 Nazrix   Members   -  Reputation: 307

Like
Likes
Like

Posted 03 July 2000 - 01:25 PM

quote:
Original post by Shinkage

Afterall, thinking ENTIRELY outside the box is no better than thinking ENTIRELY inside it.



Again, I totally agree with that. I believe that Landfish would as well. I know that it could have seemed as though he was going way out there for the sole purpose of being "out there" and different, but I believe that was more of a way to be a bit more confrontational and get people to think differently

(not that Landfish is the only one to ever think differently, but he did emphasize that so he tends to get a lot of credit for it).

I really think you're misunderstanding him, but that's just my opinion...

quote:

PS Nazrix, have you ever listened to Tommy by The Who? I think you would agree with what it's saying about organized religion



I know I have heard of it but not heard it.
I always thought The Who were a bit over-rated, but perhaps I should listen to them

You really don't want me to get riled up on religion. It's a very frightening thing even to me


Edited by - Nazrix on July 3, 2000 8:27:09 PM

#8 Anonymous Poster_Anonymous Poster_*   Guests   -  Reputation:

Likes

Posted 05 July 2000 - 08:38 PM

Is it possible to think outside the box too much?

If my hand were held in a fist, and I could never uncurl it, what would it be called?

Crippled

Now, if my hand were held open, and I could never close it into a fist, what would it be then?

The same, crippled.

From this, one may interpret that one derives one''s strength from versitility, not rigidness. Being anything but yourself is crippling yourself. It is a landfish says, "you must carefully consider everything before you do it. If in the end you find that the old way is best, you would be a fool not to use it." He said something like that, I remember it.

This piece of Zen might have been brought to you by a letter and a number. Those might be known as "fish", and "land". In reverse order.




Old topic!
Guest, the last post of this topic is over 60 days old and at this point you may not reply in this topic. If you wish to continue this conversation start a new topic.



PARTNERS