Quote:Original post by edwinbradford

Quote:Why do you find it shocking that programmers sometimes do 'creative' things?

*sometimes*. Of course they do but you can't equate the level of creativity from a science of engineering background with one from the arts, I think most people would accept that as a given.

Most people are also drooling morons, and don't know anything about what programmers actually do.

Nor, I suspect, do you.

Quote:

Quote:Surely the title 'designer' applies to anyone who 'designs' things?

If I design a building tonight will that make me an Architect?

Yes, if your building is structurally sound, incorporates heating, ventilation, air conditioning, plumbing and electrical requirements, meets building code and includes a budget analysis with costs of materials and a building schedule. A design for a building is a lot more than a drawing. Resolving the overlapping constraints placed on an architectural design project often requires a fair amount of creativity - oh, and sometimes the client also wants the building to be pretty or make a statement or intrigue the public. "The Gherkin" comes to mind.

Quote:I cannot see good designers coming any more from Artist roles than from Programming. But the entertainment industry is a lot bigger than just artists and programmers.

So... what's your point, exactly?

The "entertainment industry" is a lot bigger than just games, and the non-games parts typically don't hire programmers as designers, either. But maybe, just maybe, the reason that video games hire people with some exposure to programming and computer technology as designers is because their final product is a computer software program?

In most industries, designers have a complement of artistic and technical skills. You simply fail to view some of those skills as technical because they don't necessarily require comparable investments of time and equipment in acquiring them. You hire people with a baseline of facility in the means of production of your final product, but also with a familiarity with the diverse social, economic, political, psychological and other factors that will influence the final product.

Quote:Original post by Oluseyi

Quote:Original post by edwinbradford
Is it healthy for the creativity of our industry that game play design is being done by people trained to think logically and not creatively?

Logical thought isn't creative?

Too many artists believe this false dichotomy, and appropriate creativity exclusively for themselves, typically annoying or insulting technical professionals in the process.

Exactly.

Programming definitely offers the opportunity to be creative, even if you are working towards a known goal.

Creativity isn't strictly limited to art, and in fact the type of creativity nurtured by programming is often more relevant to the design of games - you are designing rules and mechanics with logical interactions. You have other people (artists) to offer visual design input.

EDIT:
In addition, there is a huge benefit in a game designer being able to prototype mechanics themselves and develop them in their own time - In the same way, a fashion designer might make a mock-up of an item of clothing as a proof-of-concept.

Quote:Original post by edwinbradford
Thanks for the quick replies. No-one has another example of an industry where "designers" are not trained in art or design then? Especially in the entertainment industry of which we're a part.

And if that would be the case, does that mean we should put different people on it, just to make the label fit? Or maybe it's just the label that is wrong, and we should've called it gameplay engineer instead.

Quote:it healthy for the creativity of our industry that game play design is being done by people trained to think logically and not creatively?

You're obviously not a programmer.

Being a programmer takes a lot of imagination, it's not just a process from A to B (Logic), a lot of time and energy is spent on figuring out what the hell B is (Imagination).

Believe it or not, even business programmers need a lot of imagination, even though they're never trained to be 'creative'.

But I wonder.

How is someone 'trained' to be creative?

As far as I know, artists only learn [insert art medium] techniques.

As an aside: A lot of creative games were created without the use of trained visual artists, they just don't look pretty, but then neither does a book--Unless you keep staring at the illustration.

Quote:Original post by edwinbradford
Is it healthy for the creativity of our industry that game play design is being done by people trained to think logically and not creatively?

Yikes. Up until this point I thought you were just starting a healthy debate. But this statement just screams ignorance. You have NO idea what programming is about.

And for the record, a great game designer can be anyone who can vividly visualize a fun interactive experience, has an outstanding ability to communicate, and has the sincere modesty to admit when he/she is wrong. It doesn't matter what their background is IMO (although it often helps).

Quote:Original post by Hodgman

Quote:Original post by edwinbradford
Subject matter says it all. I come from a long career in graphic design where of course designers are trained for around 4 years in the faculty of arts.

Of those of you who are working in companies commercially, are your game designers from creative or engineering backgrounds?

When I worked in Gambling, the *game designers* mostly had actuarial/finance/mathematical backgrounds, though I did know one who did computer science.

However, the *graphic designers* there did have art backgrounds...

I also know of one hand-held games company that is currently looking for a game designer, and they want someone with a background in "information design" (i.e. NOT programming OR art).

information design? what is that like a propoganda minister or someone for marketing or something?