Of course, just like he's interested in only one aspect of 'freedom.'
Truly free software would not require you to do anything.
RMS is all about forcing people to do things. It's not evil/bad/whatever depending upon your outlook, but it certainly isn't freedom, it's highly restrictive.
This is what makes what he was saying seem actually 'crazy'... He doesn't seem to understand how the stock market works at its most absolute basic level (much less dark pool arbitrage.)
Scary, because when you listen to him he tends to seem much smarter than the average congressman (certainly a backhanded compliment if ever there was one...)
To be honest, anything not involving Lucas would be an improvement - however small. That man took something wonderful and wiped his a** with it. I regret not strangling him when I was next to him on 101 in Mill Valley...
Exactly. The plot can be fantastic, but consistent to itself in order to maintain the 'suspension of disbelief.' Very well said old man... Cheerio, eh, wot?
...If she's planning on getting a job instead of teaching.
Every software engineer should read this when they're ready.
It condenses decades of pain/suffering/learning concisely and provides a framework for many of the things that I've learned and experienced but had to rediscover all too often.
If you plan on starting a software company, being a critical part of a startup, or scaling someone's product - you had better read it - it will likely save you huge amounts of time, money, effort, and risk.
My parent, of all people, gave me a very nice set to replace the beat up ones I've had just two Christmas holidays ago. It had a fourth book! Combinatorial Algorithms FTW!
Even if you don't reference them, they're sort of instant nerd street cred if you have them lying around. Hehe
My issue isn't that there aren't lots of implementation detail to seemingly obvious logical manifestations of everyday objects, my issue is that the game designer is trying to make it sound like that aspect of their job is difficult. It isn't. It's possibly tedious, but it's not hard.
Now, that aside, being a GREAT game designer IS hard because the creativity necessary isn't something that can really be taught - but again, this isn't what the person in the article was referring to.
Yes, and a Game Designer will know who the target audience is, the genre, and the platform (important.) It doesn't make a door any harder to design, it does make it harder to implement.
It's clear that the Game Designer was trying to say "It's not as simple as saying we have doors in the game", but it sounds a lot like someone saying (and I'm ripping off another poster here) "Being a model is like, super hard... You have to stand around all day, and then they expect you to walk... It's not like we just show up and they pay us..."
I understand, but trying to make a door sound complicated as opposed to trivially simple is a bit too far (imho.)
The issue is that Game Design isn't difficult from the technical point of view, it is difficult from the creative point of view. Game Implementation is difficult from the technical point of view.
Anywho, I know what you mean, but it still seems a rather egregious example.;)
I should have added that the real challenge doesn't lie with the Game Designer, it lies with the Gameplay Engineer who has to correlate the design person's wishful thinking.
Compare that to "we need to store patient data..."
Do you know what HIPAA is? Is this going to be accessible over networks/internet? How are you planning for archive/restoration? How will we handle auditing? Should it be over web services or custom server? How are we going to manage permissions? How do we securely persist on the client side?
Seriously? The door exercise is strenuous mentally? Anybody with actual software engineering experience will tell you that ALL software features result in design complexities, and a door in a game is pretty simplistic one - whether networked or otherwise.
...if you don't have the means and/or resources necessary to live comfortably during that period AND you're not willing to make the sacrifices necessary otherwise - then don't go.
Seriously, wtf is up with people thinking that they should get everything they want all the time?
Most people will put more effort into something that will be public (both out of positive motivation and the negative motivation of shaming.)
Open Source will always, in general, be better than closed source. Again - in general. There are people who will engineer things properly irrespective of whether or not someone will be browsing your github account or checking it out of the company's private server... Too bad there's not more of them;).
Slashdot Mirror
Many a tyrant can make the same claim...
Of course, just like he's interested in only one aspect of 'freedom.'
Truly free software would not require you to do anything.
RMS is all about forcing people to do things. It's not evil/bad/whatever depending upon your outlook, but it certainly isn't freedom, it's highly restrictive.
Lol... Touche... ;)
Wait, does that make SIEMENS a start-up? ;)
...a 'startup'?
That's a mid-sized to approaching large company...
This is what makes what he was saying seem actually 'crazy'... He doesn't seem to understand how the stock market works at its most absolute basic level (much less dark pool arbitrage.)
Scary, because when you listen to him he tends to seem much smarter than the average congressman (certainly a backhanded compliment if ever there was one...)
To be honest, anything not involving Lucas would be an improvement - however small. That man took something wonderful and wiped his a** with it. I regret not strangling him when I was next to him on 101 in Mill Valley...
I want my Moller Skycar now!
...how that attitude worked out for them.
10 years from now there won't be watches without some sort of connectivity except for specialty pieces designed from the outset to satisfy luddites.
Exactly. The plot can be fantastic, but consistent to itself in order to maintain the 'suspension of disbelief.' Very well said old man... Cheerio, eh, wot?
...If she's planning on getting a job instead of teaching.
Every software engineer should read this when they're ready.
It condenses decades of pain/suffering/learning concisely and provides a framework for many of the things that I've learned and experienced but had to rediscover all too often.
If you plan on starting a software company, being a critical part of a startup, or scaling someone's product - you had better read it - it will likely save you huge amounts of time, money, effort, and risk.
Totally agree.
My parent, of all people, gave me a very nice set to replace the beat up ones I've had just two Christmas holidays ago. It had a fourth book! Combinatorial Algorithms FTW!
Even if you don't reference them, they're sort of instant nerd street cred if you have them lying around. Hehe
It really gives a resume that little extra something.
Btw, it comes from the name of a Dwarf's warhammer in a story in Dragon magazine.
I agree.
My issue isn't that there aren't lots of implementation detail to seemingly obvious logical manifestations of everyday objects, my issue is that the game designer is trying to make it sound like that aspect of their job is difficult. It isn't. It's possibly tedious, but it's not hard.
Now, that aside, being a GREAT game designer IS hard because the creativity necessary isn't something that can really be taught - but again, this isn't what the person in the article was referring to.
I love that "Feature Creep" is both adverbial and can be a noun. "Oh, look, it's the feature creep..." ;)
Made me laugh, and I used your analogy in another post...
Yes, and a Game Designer will know who the target audience is, the genre, and the platform (important.) It doesn't make a door any harder to design, it does make it harder to implement.
It's clear that the Game Designer was trying to say "It's not as simple as saying we have doors in the game", but it sounds a lot like someone saying (and I'm ripping off another poster here) "Being a model is like, super hard... You have to stand around all day, and then they expect you to walk... It's not like we just show up and they pay us..."
I understand, but trying to make a door sound complicated as opposed to trivially simple is a bit too far (imho.)
The issue is that Game Design isn't difficult from the technical point of view, it is difficult from the creative point of view.
Game Implementation is difficult from the technical point of view.
Anywho, I know what you mean, but it still seems a rather egregious example. ;)
I should have added that the real challenge doesn't lie with the Game Designer, it lies with the Gameplay Engineer who has to correlate the design person's wishful thinking.
Compare that to "we need to store patient data..."
Do you know what HIPAA is?
Is this going to be accessible over networks/internet?
How are you planning for archive/restoration?
How will we handle auditing?
Should it be over web services or custom server?
How are we going to manage permissions?
How do we securely persist on the client side?
Seriously? The door exercise is strenuous mentally? Anybody with actual software engineering experience will tell you that ALL software features result in design complexities, and a door in a game is pretty simplistic one - whether networked or otherwise.
EXACTLY
It's your choice, which would you prefer, the "hardships" of graduate school (LOL) or flipping burgers?
Hell, if you're worried about eating, be a bartender. I tended bar on weekends in school and the kitchen staff hooked me up all the time.
...if you don't have the means and/or resources necessary to live comfortably during that period AND you're not willing to make the sacrifices necessary otherwise - then don't go.
Seriously, wtf is up with people thinking that they should get everything they want all the time?
Agreed, this is known to just about anyone with an interest in nuclear proliferation issues, or the history of post 1948 Israel.
...home?
Most people will put more effort into something that will be public (both out of positive motivation and the negative motivation of shaming.)
Open Source will always, in general, be better than closed source. Again - in general. There are people who will engineer things properly irrespective of whether or not someone will be browsing your github account or checking it out of the company's private server... Too bad there's not more of them ;).
Actually the correct fix...
Instead of applying revisionist views that have no Constitutional basis.
Oh, the irony...