General philosophy thread

[Crims]

Just an addendum to that above message
I'm sure whatever I say is completely just spawned from my mouth but at least making sense.
I've planned several games and as great as it is to be creative all the time there's much more to life, which uncreative (money centric) work helps a lot with. It's always been about balancing income with creative pursuits, and the only reason that's been questioned (kind of unfairly) is because of anxiousness about making the product that is ideal. I honestly feel more comfortable making both with this dialogue ongoing.

 

[Tiffany]

It's always been about balancing income with creative pursuits, and the only reason that's been questioned (kind of unfairly) is because of anxiousness about making the product that is ideal. I honestly feel more comfortable making both with this dialogue ongoing.

We hope that you continue on this positive journey and create something really awesome!!

 

[Arantor]

I just mentioned Kenney in another thread, he's *absolutely* an example of this. He is a guy who releases games on itch.io, as well as apps for making things (for example, he's got a thing where you can take bits of models, assemble them together almost like Lego and get a 3D model out of it), and primarily is funded by purchases, asset bundles (mostly free but people donate) and also Patreon. And it's been enough that he can do this and still look at buying a building to set up as a mini game maker space in the Netherlands for game makers to come in.

As for me, I always dreamed I'd become good enough at my creative endeavours to do it as a day job but it never quite turned out that way. Instead my day job is writing PHP and that's... sometimes almost as good.

I did think about approaching my boss and negotiating a part time schedule (e.g. only work Mon-Thu and no Fridays for 80% the pay) but I don't think I'd use the time for creative pursuits like I'd want.

 

[Crims]

I just mentioned Kenney in another thread, he's *absolutely* an example of this. He is a guy who releases games on itch.io, as well as apps for making things (for example, he's got a thing where you can take bits of models, assemble them together almost like Lego and get a 3D model out of it), and primarily is funded by purchases, asset bundles (mostly free but people donate) and also Patreon. And it's been enough that he can do this and still look at buying a building to set up as a mini game maker space in the Netherlands for game makers to come in.

As for me, I always dreamed I'd become good enough at my creative endeavours to do it as a day job but it never quite turned out that way. Instead my day job is writing PHP and that's... sometimes almost as good.

I did think about approaching my boss and negotiating a part time schedule (e.g. only work Mon-Thu and no Fridays for 80% the pay) but I don't think I'd use the time for creative pursuits like I'd want.

After spending 2 days looking at Unity tutorials, I couldn't be assed to do it at any rate that isn't semi hobby. Kenney has a plan and that will get a business and game made really quickly. Maybe collaboration would speed that process up a lot!

I'm savvy with the games industry though it's always A. One man lifting and B. Not enough concise good tutorials.

 

[Crims]

Philosophically, is it wise to design media for the elderly? What are the ramifications of a society that exists through arbitrary walls?

 

[Tiffany]

Philosophically, is it wise to design media for the elderly? What are the ramifications of a society that exists through arbitrary walls?

I believe in designing with a broad brush, without making distinguishing demographics groups, such as age in a concept, unless the specificity is necessary depending on the nature of the product. In design, you really never know who you might reach and assuming the elderly can't learn something new may be limiting some potential. So I'd say, no walls, dream a concept, design it and make your out reach.

 

[Crims]

EDIT because I didn't comment. I think it's good to enable design for designs sake, and blue sky thinking is heavily used at the moment. I'm more imploring the notion of iterative designing. There's a culture of 'everything is alright and for everyone' with more than enough specificity (youngest generations, female or male usually referred to) when you notice the target audience is actually a certain type of person which I'm referring to with the arbitrary walls comment.

I'll take the opposing view. I think all products should aim to be usable by people over 60. The use of a touchscreen phone has been a bane for me and I would love to return to Blackberry key boards. As a Product design student I found nearly all products ridiculous and short sighted because they have no consideration of the elderly. And modern product design, websites and algorithms, is even worse in that regard constantly sabotage of the long term and aiming for kids.

 

[Retro]

@Crims indeed it's easy to ignore those with less dexterity, disabilities etc - until it affects you.

For this reason, UI design cannot be a one size fits all. Reasonable options should be implemented to make life easier for such people.

Good examples of this are Windows with their comprehensive accessibility options, and Apple with similar options on their iPhones and iPads, plus unrivalled support for fully blind people. I've actually used it for a blind person I supported at work and it was amazing.

 

[Crims]

I'd go a step further and say modern technology as a whole is not meant for 90% of people. Very few have a working balance with their relationship with technology and it has had a net detriment as a whole.

@Crims indeed it's easy to ignore those with less dexterity, disabilities etc - until it affects you.

For this reason, UI design cannot be a one size fits all. Reasonable options should be implemented to make life easier for such people.

Good examples of this are Windows with their comprehensive accessibility options, and Apple with similar options on their iPhones and iPads, plus unrivalled support for fully blind people. I've actually used it for a blind person I supported at work and it was amazing.

 

[Arantor]

I'm savvy with the games industry though it's always A. One man lifting and B. Not enough concise good tutorials.

This is in no way specific to the games industry. In any industry, any environment you will find the heavy lifters and the coasters.

As for a lack of good tutorials, I have some theories on this too.

First up, a lot of the tutorials are written... how can I say this charitably? By barely-not-beginniners for beginners. A lot of tutorials assert that things are so without having the knowledge to explain why (and never follow it up). And the result of which is that you have a stunning variety of tutorials that are 'here are the steps I used to build x, now you can build anything as long as you want an x'.

And there are plenty of snippets and thought pieces for super advanced, super explicit things, complete with details why. But the middle part where you already know the fundamentals and you're trying to get from the fundamentals to something more... that's a massive gulf and has always been so.

Blackberry key boards

A thing unusable by a staggering proportion of the populace. The keys are simply too small for many - in practice they are actually smaller than the keys on a current gen iPhone keyboard. And that's before we talk about the problems in general with keyboards and those with motor control impairment.

comprehensive accessibility options

Something I wish more websites bothered to think about. It's genuinely hard. Even 'proper responsive' is beyond many designers these days. It's not just a case of showing/hiding things on mobile, folks. If that's all you're doing, you're probably doing it wrong.

And modern product design, websites and algorithms, is even worse in that regard constantly sabotage of the long term and aiming for kids.

I think the problem starts with the fact that things aren't really *designed* any more.

On the one hand you have all the focus groups, which makes any given thing 'design by committee' (i.e. the least worst option for the most number of people) rather than targeting a specific demographic and designing for them explicitly. You can't accommodate all of the people all of the time, and nor should you. Find your niche, do it *well*. The users will thank you for it in practice.

On the other hand, you have the brain measles that is big-A Agile (see also Scrum, Kanban et al) that are basically attempts to shorten the design phase and design-as-you-go on the hopes you can change course as new things are learned about the userbase and use-cases. Which inevitably means you didn't do requirements gathering well enough up front. (You *can* do agile development but you really have to think about what that means and be absolutely sure about a number of the requirements that you know cannot change ahead of time.)

Also, I leave you with this nugget of imagination which, while clearly satire, absolutely feels like meetings I've been in and been the expert in the room.

To view this content we will need your consent to set third party cookies.
For more detailed information, see our cookies page.

Accept third party cookies

If this doesn't explain some of what's wrong with current product design, I don't know what will.

 

[Crims]

And there are plenty of snippets and thought pieces for super advanced, super explicit things, complete with details why. But the middle part where you already know the fundamentals and you're trying to get from the fundamentals to something more... that's a massive gulf and has always been so.

There's just no advanced tutorials. Back in 2010 I saw a few tutorials actually employing game design from the Source community, which built weapons from the ground up, with no reference to using rigidbodies on everything.

A thing unusable by a staggering proportion of the populace. The keys are simply too small for many - in practice they are actually smaller than the keys on a current gen iPhone keyboard. And that's before we talk about the problems in general with keyboards and those with motor control impairment.

I don't think touchscreens are superior in this regard, and were simply chosen due to accessibility and mass availability.

Something I wish more websites bothered to think about. It's genuinely hard. Even 'proper responsive' is beyond many designers these days. It's not just a case of showing/hiding things on mobile, folks. If that's all you're doing, you're probably doing it wrong.

This is why HTML was so good. Intuitive website design is not usable by 90% of people and a static webpage has everything in convenient places you can build a memory about.


Yeah, design is oddly enough a profession done by rote for a publisher, which basically removes any concept of actual designing. A majority of design jobs aren't even the job title. With the introduction of "business as a business for the sake of business" actual quote, agile and scrum is there just for arbitrary competition . Saw it studying Product Design and dropped out because of it. I joined a course named that to design, not to do woodwork which it apparently is. Product Design now as a phrase is used simply as a holdoff from a previous generation.

 

[Arantor]

There's just no advanced tutorials. Back in 2010 I saw a few tutorials actually employing game design from the Source community, which built weapons from the ground up, with no reference to using rigidbodies on everything.

That's a symptom of a particular ecosystem not producing anyone who is actually that advanced to be able to produce such tutorials. In the Unity ecosystem I think there definitely are people that exist but these people typically make their money by selling the advanced level material as assets or as training courses.

Something something ongoing corporatisation of everything.

I don't think touchscreens are superior in this regard, and were simply chosen due to accessibility and mass availability.

I think they can be, though. I think you can spin out different keyboards to suit the situation infinitely better, or reframe the situation with more appropriate UI because the entire device's frontage is now the interface.

The only reason we don't is because it's inconvenient - but then again I've never been a huge fan of the phone form factor, I'm habitually an iPad user precisely because I do a lot of typing and no phone has a keyboard adequate.

At least with a touchscreen the possibility exists to produce a better interface than what's there. Bit harder to do with physical keys.

This is why HTML was so good. Intuitive website design is not usable by 90% of people and a static webpage has everything in convenient places you can build a memory about.

If a given design is not usable by 90% of people, I would find it difficult to justify the title of 'intuitive'. Especially as I work for a design agency with actual UX people who I've watched spend months design user journeys for applications to make them as meaningful as possible.

I think what this really says is that design is *hard* and vastly more people give it a go than are ever capable of actually implementing it intelligently.

 

[Crims]

Next prompt:
Whats an idea you'd be able to, once submitted, be content that you've accomplished? Philosophy within a context.

 

[Arantor]

This one sits at the heart of a lot of what I do. I am, by trade, a 'creative person'. My job is to make ideas real in some fashion, whether my own or someone else's. Sometimes the task is 'I have a problem, conceive me a solution for it' which is even more so.

I suppose the question for me personally is whether the task is a problem to be solved or a 'thing'. My criteria for this is very complicated and highly subjective but boils down to 'if I am solving a problem by making something, the scope of what I am making is very likely the final scope' so once it is complete I am content.

But many of my own ideas are not so simple and exist less about solving a problem than to create a 'thing'. I suppose you could in a way call this art, insofar as all creative works are inherently art tempered by tradecraft. da Vinci painting a portrait for money would do a workmanlike job and take a fee - it's still art, but it's not Art, it's just a picture made for money at that point. Once something crosses the line from tradecraft to Art, we hit the inevitability that all art is merely abandoned, never finished. We arrive at a point that we can accept as done - whether it is, is entirely another matter. Very few of my ideas land in this bucket, however.

 

[Crims]

Today I was wondering what work would actually fit with my lifestyle. I think i'd mostly like to make a new album. It's not really that important, however it would feel amazing laying out all the ideas I have. Of course that's not something to rush.

 

[Crims]

Magic in modern times: feasible or bound to be cliché? Authors have been fairly safe with it.
(It's philosophy due to the unphysical nature of nowadays)

 

[Retro]

There's quite a lot of magic in modern TV series, so people still like the fantasy.

 

[Tiffany]

I personally like magic intertwined in movies if it fits the theme; movies can take you to places you can't go, so it's fun. The only time it's quirky to me is if the series I'm watching is a crime drama, for example, and the writers decided to put some magic or science fiction dynamics into the episode, then that doesn't work for me. It looks like the writers just couldn't think of anything else and why would a modern day crime drama have a science fiction moment?

 

[Retro]

Yes, agreed, that's why I like fiction. It's like one almighty what if.

There shouldn't be any unexpected magic or sci-fi in an episode though.

 

[Arantor]

Any sufficiently advanced science is indistinguishable from magic. So theres always room for magic!

but if you’re going to do magic, it needs to have boundaries and rules on some level to avoid deus ex machina effects and “by the power of plot” where the magic comes and goes at the whims of what the plot dictates.

 

[Crims]

Any sufficiently advanced science is indistinguishable from magic. So theres always room for magic!

Hmm, yes indeed. I always preferred adventure magic to DnD style.

There's quite a lot of magic in modern TV series, so people still like the fantasy.

Like?
I mean GoT was as far from 'let's use magic' as it could get away with.

I personally like magic intertwined in movies if it fits the theme; movies can take you to places you can't go, so it's fun. The only time it's quirky to me is if the series I'm watching is a crime drama, for example, and the writers decided to put some magic or science fiction dynamics into the episode, then that doesn't work for me. It looks like the writers just couldn't think of anything else and why would a modern day crime drama have a science fiction moment?

Exactly! I remember the supernatural stories used in all the old sci-fi and normal TV shows like Buffy, X-Files and whatever's. There's a notable absence of really good magic and philosophy in modern literature and television. Supernatural was a common theme until only recently.

 

[Retro]

Like?
I mean GoT was as far from 'let's use magic' as it could get away with.

This series, for example:

Once Upon a Time - Es war einmal ... (TV Series 2011–2018) ⭐ 7.7 | Adventure, Fantasy, Romance

1h | 12

www.imdb.com

 

[Crims]

This series, for example:

Once Upon a Time - Es war einmal ... (TV Series 2011–2018) ⭐ 7.7 | Adventure, Fantasy, Romance

1h | 12

www.imdb.com

Good shout, actually. The main stuff that's popularised tends to not include it in a creative fashion, so that's fun to see lol

 

[Crims]

Well, my answer to the question is more about what kind of magic, and how specific types of magic have been less used:
1. Philosophical ideas like Eternal Sunshine,
2. Supernatural elements, a reference to mystic properties in real life
3. Incorporation of daily life and magic - there's a lot less "magic enchanted buses" in our media compared to 10 years ago, and tbh I rather prefer the idea of the unknown than the modern "everything is known and dull" concept.

Generally I'm allowing myself to just kind of forget geography as a whole and bring back that "ooh that's really interesting."
More importantly is that we know objectively it makes content more interesting (including GoT) and yet it's falling out fashion due to people overlooking their ideas.

 

[Retro]

Crims, I think this trend is because people are becoming less religious overall over time. A rather controversial statement, but one I've seen in various objective reports on religiosity. The world will be a better place without religion, which gives you a rather obvious hint on where I stand on this issue.