Jump to content

  • Log In with Google      Sign In   
  • Create Account


Member Since 07 Nov 2002
Offline Last Active Today, 11:40 AM

Posts I've Made

In Topic: Does Valve have a good working methodology?

Yesterday, 10:17 PM

EDIT: I'm not saying that Valve's flat hierarchy is a lie or something like that, but I'm just referencing a different point of view about the whole thing, which is a nice reference.


Nice read.  Keep in mind that it is from within Valve that she created the castAR technology.  Valve's culture allowed that to happen.  If she were in another company, perhaps castAR would have never been born.


Clicks will happen in any social structure.  Even more so in the traditional hierarchical structure.  This is why there are people who are good at climbing the corporate ladder.  They happen to click well with their bosses (or perhaps intentionally), creating some sort of "we are the cool people, you are not" barrier.  They climb up not because of any particular excellence in the field, just because they know the right people within the company, just as the old saying goes that it's whom you know, not what you know.

In Topic: Does Valve have a good working methodology?

Yesterday, 05:29 PM

Somewhat related:



There's also the part 2.  Check it out.


The whole idea of this loose structure is based off trust.  Without trust, this won't work.  So obviously, if you have an enormous company with poor management teams and where 50% of employees aren't happy, you can't just switch to this structure and expect everybody to get happy and get along.  This is something that has to be built from the ground up, starting from the core original employees, and the support from the management.


Managers of a Big Co sometimes want to keep that power.  Why?  They don't trust their employees will do the right thing.  They treat them like some kind of farm animals, resources that needs to be caged and directed to maintain order.  This is fine and well, but domesticated employees will do nothing but being told.  Without direction, they will refuse to work.  When there is no project to work on, nobody will come up with a new exciting project, people will simply sit and idle.  Not because they can't start one, because they don't want to.  Why should they?  They don't get paid extra for it, and perhaps if the project did end up successful, the managers or other people will try to steal the credit -- because there's no trust among the employees.


While a structure that's as loose as Valve's encourages employees to be independent, so they can have some 'ownership' or 'investment' to their projects, which ultimately benefit the company as a whole.  The idea is for employees to understand that the company trusts them to do the right thing, and that they should be the one turning the gears, not being the cog in the wheel.

In Topic: What can we do to help remove the industry misconception?

21 October 2014 - 05:30 PM

Without doubt, there are some parts in these games where they did it just for the sake of satisfying male fantasies, and discredit women.  There are others, however, that do reflect realities in life, past and present.  How can anyone make any game that takes place in ghetto neighborhoods (e.g. GTA), without including strip clubs?  Or, make games based on historical events in the past when women were actually social victims.  They were 'whences' back in pirate age, but that doesn't mean you can't make any references to whences in your pirate game without being labeled sexist or misogynist.


That's censoring history because it becomes politically incorrect.  That's not right.  What some of the feminists like to do is to broaden the context of their agenda that it includes things that we can no longer change like history.  That's when their arguments fall apart, and put us where we are right now.  Don't bring back old games like Mario and Zelda, or even games that have been released, as if asking the developers to recall and change.  These games have sit well in many people's hearts.  Attacking and labeling these games as sexist won't make a convincing argument.

In Topic: What can we do to help remove the industry misconception?

19 October 2014 - 11:37 PM

Just males?

Predominantly, but I was specifically talking about the group of people who launched the death/rape threats.  If there were females among them, that'd be bewildering.


I don't know about you, but when I've worked for game developers, we've made the games that we've been paid to make, and the people paying don't give a shit what the game is - it's just an investment to them.
So the Gender make-up of the coding team doesn't make much difference.

Sure, but there are people who direct these games, right?


My suggestions is that, if you can't convince the big companies (they are usually market driven), female indie developers should work on their own games, and produce something that triumphs over other games, both popularity and financial-wise.

In Topic: What can we do to help remove the industry misconception?

19 October 2014 - 10:55 AM

I think the problem, from reading more, is that it appears that when people say "gaming industry" they seem to be clumping everything into that phrase (gamers, developers, publishers, reviewers, critics, etc.).


That's correct.  Gamers aren't particularly a charming population to pick from either.  We are talking about the gamut of males from kids, adolescence, to 40-year olds.  We don't know where these death and rape threats come from.  Anyone with an access to the Internet can launch a death threat.  Most people love to bark but lack the balls to execute.  So to quote the entire game industry from these segment of population alone is not quite an accurate representation, but it's very sensational.  The media loves it.


However, to bash the entire game industry and all the games it has created simply because some individually-picked games show sexualized gender is also what causes this uproar.


When you put 12 boys in one place, what do you think they would do?  They would do boyish stuff.

When you put 12 girls in one place, what do you think they would do?  They would do girlish stuff.


Game industry is heavily dominated by men now.  So, naturally, the byproduct of such community will be oriented toward men, whether that's robots, explosions, big cars, big guns, or sexualized women.  I don't know why women aren't attracted to science or game industry in the first place, but you can't blame the entire industry simply because of lack of interest from one particular gender.  If I am not attracted to fashion, should I blame the industry for focusing too much on women?  Shall I boycott stores like Macy's and JCPenney for allocating 80% of their floor space for women products, and the other 10% kids and 10% men?


You can't blame men for being men, and likewise you can't blame women for being women.  Why is that when men have problems, we are told to suck it up and be strong, but when women have the problems, everyone else has to accommodate?


If women want the change, I think they should just move forward and change it.  Death threats?  Bring it.  Get shotguns.  Nobody said life is easy or fair.  It's never been.