Jump to content

  • Log In with Google      Sign In   
  • Create Account


Member Since 10 May 2004
Offline Last Active Yesterday, 11:28 PM

Posts I've Made

In Topic: When is it ok to fail? When you are very rich.

25 February 2016 - 04:31 AM

Which means "ok to fail" is completely false. It should be "ok to fail if you have billions". 

Which, as we are telling you, is not true. Spending a *portion* of your resources, that could be lost if the endeavour fails, is a risk. For Google, that portion is millions. For the little guy, it could be spending 500$ to commission some art. Personally, I am taking a risk of spending quite a bit of time(and some money) on my own indie game, that could very well fail miserably, but do I have a full-time job in the game industry that pays the bills, so if my own game fails I won't end up in the streets, I will just have spent much time working on it without making profit. The person that funds it(in order to contract artists for the assets) is also taking a risk by spending some money, but is not putting his whole fortune into this, not even close. In sort, we are both "little guys" that are spending *some* resources on a project that can fail, but even then we won't be destroyed. Thus, it is okay for us to fail - obviously we are hoping not to smile.png.

"Risk" doesn't necessarily mean "either this succeeds or I literally die in the streets". Obviously, you take as much risk as you can afford.

In Topic: When is it ok to fail? When you are very rich.

24 February 2016 - 06:30 AM

One question...is your wife working a full-time or part-time job to keep the household afloat, including your expenses while you work on the project? Because if she does, she's basically funding your game. In business terms, she wants to see a return of her investment, or else she's going to end your partnership. Seems reasonable smile.png

In Topic: When is it ok to fail? When you are very rich.

24 February 2016 - 02:00 AM

When is it ok to fail? When you are very rich.


Or when you're a "little guy" but have an alternative source of income, like a day job, and work on your personal project on your free time. Or when you're single with nobody depending on you, so you don't mind if you spend some time in a homeless shelter, so you decide to give your "crazy idea" a go, because, who cares.


If you can't do that, or you have people depending on you, then just forget about your personal project and take the day job, so you can, you know, survive. Having a family to feed and hoping you'll make serious money from your indie gamedev endeavours is liking hoping to win the lottery.


In any case, I'm guessing Teller was talking about companies and start-ups anyway, with actual funding from investors, not lone developers...

In Topic: Macho pride humbled

18 February 2016 - 08:12 AM

I must be missing something...how can the acceptance rate be 71% when the gender is not "Github-identifiable", and 62% when it is, but 78% for all women contributors(gendered or neutral)?

In Topic: So I was watching Extra Credits yesterday

24 July 2015 - 10:50 AM



Even if you could improve your talent pool (and not distract them from their current roles), you are only likely to succeed in increasing the number of White Dudes working on a project. You might get a couple more women involved but again likely to be White Women which suffers the same diversity problem.


I was specifically addressing the question of writers working on characters other than themselves, I believe. (I think that when I came to post, someone else (Oluseyi, perhaps) had already provided at least one answer to directly changing the pool of applicants.)

However, I'm not sure that it wouldn't help, even if only a little: seeing more representations of people like them might encourage non-white/non-male people to enter the industry in greater numbers. The less the industry is perceived to be a bastion for white males, the more inviting it is likely to be to people of other demographics, it seems to me.

Changing the demographics of game development studios needn't be achieved through a single solution; multiple efforts can work together, I feel.


Very much agreed. And I'd go even further and say that artists and writers should create characters unlike themselves just to hone their craft. Besides any moral good you might be able to do, besides any underserved niches you might be able to profit from, improving as a creator includes pushing your comfort zones.


I'm a moral individual, but that doesn't prevent me from writing a psycopathic villain. I'm middle class, but I can write poor or rich. I can't claim any first hand knowledge of the female experience, but I listen to them, I read what they write, I imagine myself in their shoes and so I learn to create fictional versions of them. Then I see where it feels fake, and I improve.


It doesn't have to be a 'what it means to be Mexican memoir', just convincing, interesting characters of many backgrounds who are shaped but not defined by their culture. Even if they don't make it into any games, modelling a chubby woman instead of another 36-24-36 babe in a skimpy outfit is great practice: many classic artists found fat a far more interesting and challenging body type to hone their skills with. I don't think "I can't create that" is ever a good response by a creative type.



OTOH, there will be some that will say "oh look, a white dude made a movie/book/game with a strong black woman as protagonist and he gets showered with appreciation for doing so, while actual black women have trouble getting support/funding to tell their stories".


I've heard feminist women of color saying white male writers *should* write characters like that, and that "it's out of my experience" is not an excuse for someone that it's his job to create characters, and I've heard comments like the above too. Both have merit, and I'm kind of confused of what's "right", or maybe one should just go ahead and do what they think and accept the fact they're inevitably going to get flak by some people no matter what they choose.