I agree with the part about new art forms being poorly accepted because of them being new, but the medium is probably more under question than anything. Society as a whole views computers as magical boxes that can produce anything you ask of it. Most people don't know how technical and intricate these works can be. It is looked down upon because the artist doesn't make a physical stroke of a brush, but rather a mental one. Regardless of how the artist makes the stroke, the creativity must still be there. The creativity is the true heart of the work.
The game, possibly Dynasty Warriors 2, was actually not that good in my opinion. While this statement seems off topic it occurred to me that maybe Koei blanked the faces as a subtle marketing ploy.
"Hey, don't let 'em see the programmers. Our games are that bad ass and someone will try to steal them."
Come on now. It's not like the game doesn't roll the programming credits after you beat it.
I remember being led to the computer lab in school to play Oregon Trail, because it was what the public school system regarded as "educational". My more intelligent peers and I could care less whether the family made it to Oregon or not. It was who's family got farthest being naked with no food. The point I'm trying to make is even a moderate student will regard this type of training as a joke. Even as computers advanced in my high school years, we weren't encouraged to use them for problem solving. Instead, we learned word processing and spreadsheets. I'm sure the students who found that interesting then are making excellent paper pushers today. I know people who are full of useful, and sometimes interesting facts. Sadly, their knowledge of these things is limited to regurgitating this information. I don't think intelligence can be increased or decreased, only sharpened or blunted. Computers can make a person more knowledgeable, but not more intelligent. Those are two very different animals.
Slashdot Mirror
RIT works wonders on Nylon based plastics.
I agree with the part about new art forms being poorly accepted because of them being new, but the medium is probably more under question than anything. Society as a whole views computers as magical boxes that can produce anything you ask of it. Most people don't know how technical and intricate these works can be. It is looked down upon because the artist doesn't make a physical stroke of a brush, but rather a mental one. Regardless of how the artist makes the stroke, the creativity must still be there. The creativity is the true heart of the work.
The game, possibly Dynasty Warriors 2, was actually not that good in my opinion. While this statement seems off topic it occurred to me that maybe Koei blanked the faces as a subtle marketing ploy. "Hey, don't let 'em see the programmers. Our games are that bad ass and someone will try to steal them." Come on now. It's not like the game doesn't roll the programming credits after you beat it.
I remember being led to the computer lab in school to play Oregon Trail, because it was what the public school system regarded as "educational". My more intelligent peers and I could care less whether the family made it to Oregon or not. It was who's family got farthest being naked with no food. The point I'm trying to make is even a moderate student will regard this type of training as a joke. Even as computers advanced in my high school years, we weren't encouraged to use them for problem solving. Instead, we learned word processing and spreadsheets. I'm sure the students who found that interesting then are making excellent paper pushers today. I know people who are full of useful, and sometimes interesting facts. Sadly, their knowledge of these things is limited to regurgitating this information. I don't think intelligence can be increased or decreased, only sharpened or blunted. Computers can make a person more knowledgeable, but not more intelligent. Those are two very different animals.