@Sir Sloper: First off, thank you for gracing my thread with your presence
You've been a huge fountain of information, inspiration and have unknowingly shown me tough love. I can honestly and without question say that you are one of the main reasons I did not drop my long-term passion for game design and development. If it weren't for your input I would be content with being a gamer, focusing on my writing career, and would have long since discarded any notion of design even as a hobby. Although I don't consider myself above or much further than a Gamer/Fanboy I have to thank you for making your experience and knowledge so easily accessible.
I have to disagree with your post though (to some extent).
Yes, my choice of words could have been more accurate. However, it was taken out of context. I'd wholeheartedly agree if the quoted statement stood alone. As it was intended, the commentary was about comparing Design & Development. I meant to say that design (thoughts, organizational aspects, iteration) is more cerebral, artistic and creative than Legendre was painting it out to be. While development (programming, 3D modeling, and such) is more logical, adheres to more rigid constraints leaving little room for artistry and there is often no way around certain things. By nature, these disciplines in the development phase are unequivocal with indisputable aspects.
I have in fact read article (aka lesson) 14 multiple times at different points through out the years. I know exactly what it is you wish to enlightenment me on. Thanks again Sir
@Archaris: Hello again Archaris, glad to have you back in the conversation
You made some good points which made me conscious of the unbiased/varying nature of my perspective (if only by actively acknowledging it; I know its there lol) with this:
I could agree to some people liking only development without design (like coders who like to code, whatever it is), but someone who likes designing and not liking developing? That does not make sense to me...
To which I reply with - If one side of a pendulum/spectrum is plausible why is the other unacceptable/unthinkable?
Out of respect and appreciattion I was gonna quote/add some commentary to Lady SunAndShadows' posted re:re: reply. On my second and a half read through of her post however, it dawned on me that I rather not quote or comment. Not because I don't have anything to say. On the contrary, I have so much to say and feel so strongly about her post that I found it more fitting and respectful to NOT comment. It was beautifully, accurately, purposefully as well as distinctively worded so I couldn't possibly allow myself to skew any of it by disecting it in my mind.
Thank you for your input Lady SunAndShadow, it is thoroughly appreciated
The other part that which struck a chord was (paraphrasing here):
Builders precisely follow the blueprints made by architects. They are not allowed to change almost anything or else a building would surely crumble. On the other hand, the development process can stray so far from the original design document that what the designers envisioned and what is delivered can often be so different.
Game designers are not like architects. They are not even remotely similar.
Wonderfully thought out analogy in my opinion (even though Kylotan countered it pretty well) with a great explanation to your points/reasoning. Kudos
@WodinOneEye: That has to be, by far, the closest comparison to the sentiment which has driven the majority of my reactions and behaviors pertaining to my ideas. Well said, I felt a very strong connection and adamantly agree with everything you've said.
These parts significantly resonated within me:
The nature of your 'idea' will significantly effect any answer you can get. It is a paradigm shift that noone in the industry will seriously consider
...or that many within the industry will commonly apply in practice. Even if the shift were to begin occuring, it won't be largely supported/practiced by many in the western culture (for atleast another decade as you said).
This is (in my opinion) because physical examples are collectively malleable and have assessable traits which can be agreed on across the board. That allows for things like realistic deadlines, budget constraints and tools/technological capabilities/ceilings to be calculated.
Our (as in you and I),proposed means of operation implore thoughts in place of physical examples. Ideas/thoughts have all the capabilities of physical examples and more due to being infinitely malleable/nebulous by nature. This poses infinite problems as well as infinite possibilities which is a playground few would dare tread on.
Two things have to occur for this to become plausible in a professional setting. Again, this is all opinion:
This ties into part of the point that Kylotan was making when he said:
All you are really saying is that game designers have not learned how to be very good at their job yet. This is because we don't really understand games very well. If people truly understood games fully, it would be possible to produce a precise design that a programmer could turn into a completely functional and playable game.
As a side note, Kylotan, I loved what you said here (mainly how you said it):
the point was that anybody who is truly involved in the design process is also truly involved in the implementation process.
One of these things that would have to occur would be advances in communication and iteration techniques/skills across the board for all disciplines.
That means more diverse education within each member off a team. Everyone would need to have a decent grasp of everyone elses discipline while having a strong sense off their own, allowing them to realistically process as well as pass on ideas. If each member can atleast grasp a sense of what the ramifications of their own work can cause a coworker, things become more harmonious by principle. They can both minimize conflict as well as constructively contribute through suggestions or streamlining of the others work.
The second would be a stronger sense of poise and discipline to allow the "treading on an infinite playground" to be plausible.
If every single member of the group is equally dedicated to maintaining a certain level of poise and discipline, never letting it falter below that level,certain things become less of an issue. If this level of focus were carried out in all their actions, priorities become simple to meet, giving more time to delve into extra content or focus on quality. There wouldn't be any restrictive time constraints or fear of not reaching deadlines. This fear and pressure alters behaviors and forces certain common results which tend to weaken the quality of projects. A deadline wouldn't need to be established/required in this sort of environment because the time frame will realistically present itself (and be accepted or dismissed) if everyone is working at peak performance.
As a side note, peak performance does NOT mean worked to point of high end negative (there are forms of positive) stress. Peak performance is when your resolve/poise is in harmony with your surroundings/environment.
The other thing that would be less of a worry is budget constraints. I'm not saying a budget isn't required, that's ludicrous. What I'm saying is that if money wasn't the primary focus, people wouldn't be as greedy. AltarOfScience commented/contributed handsomely to this point:
Well one major problem is how little entertainment success has to do with the product itself. So much of it is tied up in name recognition, popularity, marketing, and other such nonsense.
You really only need a baseline quality in a product and then its all about perception and marketing.
This means a budget can be managed more conservatively without the need to compromise quality or over indulge in salaries. In a sense you wouldn't feel the budget cap nor would you be stressing over the minimum required assets to see a project through if the product came first and potential gross/marketing/popularity came last (not second). <~~~ Ahh, if only people were that unanimously passionate, uninhibited, motivated, dedicated and inspired by their work. We would have such a rise in quality (of product, work ethics, happiness?) and progress within the industry.
They are obviously farfetched ideals/principles to implement in western culture, but not entirely unrealistic in my opinion. I know that my reason for having these standards as a person aren't normal or common. Alot of it is derived from about two decades of traditional martial arts training. Basically, I don't expect everyone to become Vulcans, able to mind meld in order to share ideas exactly as they envision them. I also don't expect everyone to adopt a monks sensibility and work ethics. Its a nice thought though lol
Adding these principles to practice would effectively cause a sense of infinite potential in my opinion. But I'm a pragmatic realist (for the most part I like to dream too!) and the world isnt perfect. There will always be limitations. Allowing ideas to be more affluent within a proffesional environment and loosening the safe:risk ratio won't cause this fact to magically ceast to exist.
Another part which sparked something within me was:
DO you know it will work ? Thats sometimes the hardest of all -- to realize an idea just wont work (or rather work in the right way so players would actually want to play it).
Ideas ARE a dime a dozen, but demonstratable ideas cost alot more...
..and as convenient as interactive/demonstrable ideas are, they can simply be unrealistic/implausible/unfeasible/impractical to develop JUST as a demonstration tool.
This is what I was trying to put into words when I was originally flamed and accused of "too much dreaming and not enough doing".
My stand was (and probably still is) mistaken for a lack of willingness to flesh out a prototype. The fact is that I an not willing to flesh out a prototype specifically for the sake of demonstration.
It can be argued that a prototype specifically for demonstration, would be work done towards your project (as experience if nothing else) and can ultimately be used within the final product. But as you so elegantly put it, demonstration of the material kind are expensive and time consuming. So much so, that the scope/scale of something as I wish to develop, would not allow it and could quite possibly rendering it pointless. The amount of time and effort I'd spend even producing a prototype could easily cause an overlap of technology, cultural relevance, fall steeply under the trend curve as well as be out developed by up and coming concepts.
My reasoning behind this is well demonstrated by an event (may not be monumental but it had relevance to me later in life) in gaming history. The lesson came in form of a development team (Team Tachyon of Techmo if I remember right) who worked on the revival of a classic known as Rygar aka Argus no Senshi which was released between 1986-1987. The result, was Rygar: The Legendary Adventure, a title that was released in 2002 and did quite well in my opinion. The thing is, some digging into development journals and minor research will explain the 15 year gap in between releases had to do with something similar to what I'm mentioning. Trust me, the gap was not due to loss and subsequent rekindling of interest.
So for those who were wondering and partially challenged me on it:
Yes, I do have some reasoning, history, and research behind my choices/actions which falls back to when I said:
Thank you for your input Sir WodinOneEye, althought you wrote so little the potency of your words meant a great deal to me. It was greatly appreciated (wish they had a bow/namaste smiley lol)
..as I have, to some extent, consciously kept things at a design phase.
Lastly, I'm not gonna name names or point fingers but you guys are bickering about semantics and losing focus on the main topics at hand. Lets try to tone down the pretentiousness a bit, then take a step back. We're getting lost in disagreements on analogies and metaphors while agreeing on the same topics
Man... I'd really like to thank every single one of you for contributing to this thread. You guys have seriously turned it into quite a discussion whle keeping the negativity to a minimum.
Heres to the productive sharing that sure to come throughout my prospective time spent on these forums
Edited by SinisterPride, 26 January 2013 - 06:52 AM.