• Create Account

Banner advertising on our site currently available from just $5! # Landfish.com 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. 55 replies to this topic ### #41Spyder Members - Reputation: 122 Like Likes Like Posted 05 October 2000 - 03:06 AM quote: Landfish, one thing I think that needs to be determined: What is the main purpose of landfish.com. Is it mostly to document your projects and views about the game industry and how Landfish is going to be different, or is it more to attract potential people to help fund Landfish''s projects? I agree with this. What is your intent? It doesn''t look good for a moderator to start a forum and make an ad for their own site. One could ponder if the forum was created to recruit possible candidates to your projects. I am sure this is not the case, but it is not entirely clear. Sponsor: ### #42felonius Members - Reputation: 122 Like Likes Like Posted 05 October 2000 - 05:08 AM quote: Original post by ahw felonius : I read somewhere that geniuses don''t have bigger brains, as some may think. Rather they have better connected brains, they use them more efficiently, and can make connections between things people would have never connected, hence the cool ideas they can come up with. Yup, you are right. My wife soon graduating a medical doctor and she have had taken a year of to do some brain research (We are hoping her article gets accepted in Journal of Comparaitve Neurology within a few months) and there is many surprising things in that field: * Alcoholism does NOT kill neurons. * Brain size has nothing to do with intelligence - but then again this really depends on what you define as intelligence. Einstein had a small brain. * Males have a higher ratio of of white matter fibers to neuron than females, so with this it is actually likely (but not certain) that males are more "intelligent" than females - this one result is political incorrect and is not referred to in the media. But my wife told me so I believe it. quote: I have been bothered long enough by my lecturers to know that most of the stuff we do in computer games is not real Art as defined in schools of Fine Arts ... now on the same line of thought, Leonardo Da Vinci painted his Mona Lisa as a commanded work ... (not that I think this is a masterpiece, but people like to refer to that one), Michael Angelo was commanded the roof of the Sixtine Chapel, etc. Aren''t you saying here that what we call "fine arts" are really craftmanship? quote: The ideas now ... *that* is another story. And that''s where you need a creative guy. And a person who can explain those ideas, and put them so that other people, with skills in various domains, can make them come true. A person that can explain other people is also a craftman. I know we will never reach consensus here, there are no true right and wrongs in the case I think. But I really don''t think this "creative guy" is there. Throwing gaming ideas around is something that you get better at with training and I call it a craft like anything else. For instance, I times past I was a dedicated Dungeon Master in AD&D for years and I must say that the quality of the scenarios that I made really improved over the years. This had nothing to do with creativity - it was a matter of training - learning how to use things that I observed in book movies and my life to put them into a story. As I said, I don''t really believe in creativity. But this is a religion thing - so it has hard agreeing if we believe different things. I actually do not believe in "intuition" either. In my opinion "intuition" is the occurrance of skills or knowledge that are subconscious to the person having them. "Intuitive" things are something that cannot be argued but are true to person having it. In my experience the problem with intuition is that it often turns out to be wrong. It is only when some piece of knowledge rises from the intuitive level into the conscious level and you can bring forth arguments for what you decide and conclude that it can be called reliable knowledge. Put simply, you might say that something you only know by intuition to be right you don''t really understand. Jacob Marner PS: Ahw, this is really some powerful discussions we are having here in this topic and the other one on design documents. It is great. Cheers. ### #43ahw Members - Reputation: 263 Like Likes Like Posted 05 October 2000 - 05:50 AM felonius : ahaha, medicine doesn''t care about politically correct, or media coverage. It''s the media that turn an idea into something political... (my father''s a doctor, so I am a bit aware of all the bullsh!ts going on in Medicine ... uuugh, ugly). fine arts are different from craftmanship. I was actually trying to say that some of the works considered by the public like masterpieces, and work of art. Are actually more craftmanship than art. They were created with the skill of a genius, but in essence are not creative as such. Of course, a real artist can always put his creativity in the gaps left by the command (like the background, in the Mona Lisa.) yes, I am not gonna turn you into an artistic, intuitive guy, if you are of the engineer, logical type. wouldn''t you be a Virgo by any chance ? The creative guy, as I see it, would be the person coming up with ideas, and motivating his troops, leading them. I believe that you have to apply to what you are the best at, to be effective. And some people are more effective at being original, finding ideas, generating thoughts, motivating the people around. Then you need people who can turn the volatile ideas into tangible things : code, artwork (illustrations, that is ), music, etc. ("Il n''y a pas de sot métier", there is no stupid job) There is no *best* job, or bad job. A skilled artist with no ideas is worthless. A creative idea without the skills to realise it is nothing more than an idea. Sometimes I try to do everythng by myself, but I perfectly know that it''s not the best way to do it. I jsut haven''t found the complementary people I need, yet. As for the intuition thingie... well, you *have* to be an Air sign, it''s just so typical Some people don''t understand what intuition is, and thus can''t use it. Just don''t For me, the more I listen to it, the better I work. When I stop to think too much, I f*ck up big time ... Complementarity is the key. Now of course, I am completely off topic, but hey ! ### #44Buster Members - Reputation: 100 Like Likes Like Posted 05 October 2000 - 06:12 AM Your site has no content, you have no completed projects. What is the point? ### #45felonius Members - Reputation: 122 Like Likes Like Posted 05 October 2000 - 07:26 AM Hmm, we are getting really of topic here ahw... quote: Original post by ahw yes, I am not gonna turn you into an artistic, intuitive guy, if you are of the engineer, logical type. wouldn''t you be a Virgo by any chance ? No, I am a Capricorn. quote: The creative guy, as I see it, would be the person coming up with ideas, and motivating his troops, leading them. I can do that. In fact I love it. That why I am into gaming in the first place and not database application development (very boring but pays better). By the terms you describe creative, I see myself as creative, but I really can''t the difference between that and craftmanship. In those terms I am very creative when a design the architecture for a game engine. quote: Some people don''t understand what intuition is, and thus can''t use it. Just don''t I have used my intuition and I still use it, I just don''t trust it as well as good arguments. And as an instructor at my university I have seen so many failed reports because people had an intuition about something and it turned out to be wrong. For myself, it was especially in my Math classes that I realized that intuition is not to be trusted. My intuition (or "hunch") was very often far for the what really was going on. Take for instance a sailor; he has a good intuition about what happens at sea in various situations. This is knowledge has and has gained over many years, putting it in his mind but he can''t express or explain it. Because of his experience (again it is about training) his intuition may be very fine, but say some new situation occurs that he hasn''t tried before. He may now very well think that he is experienced and trust his intuition for the solution, but if he hasn''t tried it before you cannot be certain about the outcome and he may be wrong. Intuition is kind hubris. By saying this I mean that intuition is worst when you think you have it in some area but don''t. And if you have a well developed intuition and you have academic degree you ought to be able to explain why you make some dicision. I if you can do that then it is no longer intuition but knowledge that you are truely aware of. Software development attempt do things that hasn''t been done before so by definition you are doing something new all the time. For the new parts intuition does not hold because you have no experience. Haven''t you heard the saying that you really learn something when you have to explain it to others. This forces you to think on "why" something is instead of just accepting it. This brings something from the intuitive level to the aware level. For many things in my daily life and just use my intuition - for instance in how I act with other people - but when doing something that takes much time and has high stakes I think it is important to play safe and don''t trust it. It is good for initial ideas, but they should be weeded out of they can''t hold in an argument. quote: For me, the more I listen to it, the better I work. When I stop to think too much, I f*ck up big time ... My point is, could it be that by stopping up and thinking you might actually stop something early that otherwise would be f*cked up anyway but at a later state. It is better to stop bad ideas early than bring them to the end. If you can''t argue for some idea, and why it is good, you are taking a risk that it is bad, but if it is thought through the chances of success are higher. The problem with intuitiion is also that it usually gives one complete solution to a problem or only gives one idea in a certain topic. If you just accept this you might very well miss alternatives. And if you have several alternatives you shouldn''t use the one that you intuition tells you, it might not be the best. Jacob Marner Note: Sorry landfish for this off-topic discussion in your thread, but I think it is quite interesting. ### #46Landfish Members - Reputation: 288 Like Likes Like Posted 05 October 2000 - 11:44 AM Alright, I need to clarify. The website is a piece of Brochureware, nothing more. It clarifies for people what we''re doing so that instead of taking an hour I just point them to the site. As I said, I am not looking for a critique of my strategy, this is how I work. If it wasn''t working for me, I wouldn''t do it. If I fail, so be it, you will all have the last laugh. As for writing, programming and art being straighforward, they ARE. That doesn''t mean they are easy! But these people in a development context are doing what''s been laid out for them, not laying out what must be done. I am a writer, I would not berate the task. But straighforward it is, at least by comparison, when you''re writing to a design doc. I can understand the purpose of clarity of goal, but I don''t agree, and several writers and educators of writing, painter, screen writers, will disagree as well. As syd field wrote, "sometimes when you''re trying to write one screenplay another decides it wants you to write it, and it won''t leave you alone. Don''t fight this. You type up the first three pages, and file it away for another day. Then get back to what you were working on." It needs to happen, for some people, maybe not for you. My team and I are pretty sure of what we''re doing, and we have NOTHING to lose, we all have lives. We think we can do it, and that''s the only real measure. (BTW, the clarifying text has been added to the projects site, if anyone wants a looksee...) ### #47Shinkage Members - Reputation: 595 Like Likes Like Posted 06 October 2000 - 10:57 AM quote: As for writing, programming and art being straighforward, they ARE. That doesn''t mean they are easy! But these people in a development context are doing what''s been laid out for them, not laying out what must be done. That just isn''t true! Take programming for example. How many projects do you think are defined by the technical limitations of what the programmers are able to accomplish. Many times the ENTIRE design of a project will be changed due to the programming side of things. Saying that those people are just responsible for doing what''s put in front of their faces on a silver platter is somewhat underestimating their position in the grand scheme of things. As another example--have you ever tried to develop a complex piece of software using object oriented methodologies? This takes as much creativity and design as anything that writers or game designers are responsible for. It is ANYTHING but straightforward. Landfish, this thread has piqued my curiosity. Do you have experience on the technical side of things, or just the writing/creative side? ### #48Landfish Members - Reputation: 288 Like Likes Like Posted 06 October 2000 - 11:07 AM I''m neither, and both. I''m a producer. I have always been a defender of the creative principles of programming. I really understand just how open and creative a process it is. At least as much as writing or art, if not more (probably not more...). BUT the context in which I was describing, after the most skeletal of structures is layed out, IS straightforward when compared with the SAME process being used to form a good idea for a game. It just is. Straightforward doesn''t mean easy, just that it''s always readily apparant what must be done, even if not HOW to do it. I''m not even taking a side in this statement, and it is a matter of opinion so why fight it? ### #49ahw Members - Reputation: 263 Like Likes Like Posted 06 October 2000 - 11:22 AM I think it was with felonius I was discussing the Software Engineering side of things, wasn''t it ? So I''ll add my pennies to your discussion. you *can* develop a project without ''real'' methodologies (other than prototyping and constand feedback). And OO methodologies are an absolute pain in the a$s. You really need to have crashed a project because of insufficient methodology to realise that you need one. Otherwise most of the time, you can get away with it.
On the other hand, it''s a good thing to have a nice methodology. It''s jsut it takes more time, and while learning the methodology, you don''t really do the projects. But since you are planning different projects, I think it would actually be worth your time to check out the different methods you could use to manage projects. It''s not really creative, but a projet leader needs to be a ''leader'' type, like you LF. So I think that would be a good read for you.
Not that I can blame you for not knowing SoftEngineer ... even the poor teacher gets bored trying to convince us it has its use.
But it has, rest assured it has ... my former employers probably didn''t realise, but I sure did

(or maybe I am totally off topic)

youpla :-P

### #50felonius  Members   -  Reputation: 122

Like
Likes
Like

Posted 07 October 2000 - 03:02 AM

quote:
Original post by ahw

I think it was with felonius I was discussing the Software Engineering side of things, wasn't it ?

SoYou really need to have crashed a project because of insufficient methodology to realise that you need one.

Hey ahw,
What are you doing?!? :-)
You are arguing for my side of the discussion :-)
Have you been provoking me all along? :-)

Jacob Marner - the engineer type of guy

Edited by - felonius on October 7, 2000 10:03:02 AM

### #51Landfish  Members   -  Reputation: 288

Like
Likes
Like

Posted 07 October 2000 - 04:47 AM

This is really an arguement I hate having because people tend to assume I''m a writer, and I''m not. Well, no more than anyone.

Let me put it this way. Most preliminary design work (both creative and technical, which certainly includes the work done by programmers) is very theoretical. If you make a mistake at this point in the process, it''s near impossible to tell. This means it is not straightforward.

The actual implementation, often done by the same people as the formerly mentioned process, is straightforward by comparison. A problem arises, it must be fixed, there are the following ways of doing so, each with it''s own strengths and weaknesses. The only time everything gets entirely scrapped during this process is if someone screwed up in the earlier, metaphysical process. This means that implementation is straightforward by comparison.

Implementation in HARDER, but straightforward.

### #52felonius  Members   -  Reputation: 122

Like
Likes
Like

Posted 07 October 2000 - 05:32 AM

quote:
Original post by Landfish

Let me put it this way. Most preliminary design work (both creative and technical, which certainly includes the work done by programmers) is very theoretical. If you make a mistake at this point in the process, it''s near impossible to tell. This means it is not straightforward.

The actual implementation, often done by the same people as the formerly mentioned process, is straightforward by comparison. A problem arises, it must be fixed, there are the following ways of doing so, each with it''s own strengths and weaknesses. The only time everything gets entirely scrapped during this process is if someone screwed up in the earlier, metaphysical process. This means that implementation is straightforward by comparison.

Implementation in HARDER, but straightforward.

I can certainly agree with this. If you consider "DEVELOPMENT" to be the same as "IMPLEMENTATION" then yes, development is straightforward.

What confused many people is that the term "development" usually also includes such aspects as doing the object oriented design and making the technical research before you start programming. These elements are not straightforward whereas the actual programming (after the design is complete) is - assuming that you made a good design that is - otherwise implementation can be very hard, even impossible.

In fact, in the graduate part of the Computer Science education at my university we can''t get credit at all for programming. Programming (implementation) is good for proving that a design or theory works, but no more than that.

Jacob Marner

### #53Landfish  Members   -  Reputation: 288

Like
Likes
Like

Posted 07 October 2000 - 05:54 AM

K, now that we''ve buried that, what were we talking about again? Oh yeah, the Projects. Does the new text on that page clear up my intentions a bit?

### #54Nazrix  Members   -  Reputation: 307

Like
Likes
Like

Posted 07 October 2000 - 11:25 AM

The new text does clear up the intentions better

A note on organization.

It seems to me that the page www.landfish.com/landfish.html should be the opening page when you go to landfish.com. Then have a link that goes to what is now www.landfish.com where it lists the different types of games (RPG,FPS,Action). I think that would make more sense.

"" "'Nazrix is cool' -- Nazrix" --Darkmage --Godfree"-Nazrix" -- runemaster

Edited by - Nazrix on October 7, 2000 6:26:41 PM

### #55Landfish  Members   -  Reputation: 288

Like
Likes
Like

Posted 08 October 2000 - 04:07 AM

Some of the changes have yet to be uploaded. For instance, there will be a "main page" link amongst the genré links on the very first page. The explaination on the projects page WAS up, but it''s dissappeared. In case you hadn''t noticed, we''re having server trouble.

That''s all I can see for now.

### #56 Anonymous Poster_Anonymous Poster_*   Guests   -  Reputation:

Likes

Posted 13 October 2000 - 05:23 AM

""" "''Nazrix is cool'' -- Nazrix" --Darkmage --Godfree"-Nazrix" -- runemaster" --Anonymous poster

couldn''t resist

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