Jump to content

Recommended Posts

18 minutes ago, Soldat Du Christ said:

working on my mind map again for design (don't @ me if you want to dispute whether objective truths exist or not, we're not going there) 

 

Proposition 1: If a outcome is not universally positive it is not a objectively true

Example: What is considered 'good pacing' is a universally desirable outcome to various categories including Writing, Gameplay, Film, etc, therefore it is an objective truth

 

What is good pacing? Start with the observable fact that in life there is fluctuation across all phenomena; speed, mood, wealth, health, etc. Now, Observe how existing within the highs and lows of the aforementioned phenomena (poor health/ High health - Low economy/ High economy) Achieves the most positive growth.

 

Example: Being able to appreciate the highs when they are earned or otherwise gifted, because of having experienced the lows. While stagnation on the other hand restricts growth and disengages the observer, causing them to become dormant

 

So the goal is to provide highs and lows to the experiences. The delta may differ from experience to experience, they may be short lived, but they may not be stagnant!

Have you read the Dune series. A big part of it is about humanity stagnating and the prevention of that by setting humanity on a golden path.

Link to post
Share on other sites

rambling my thoughts some more... depth is not a moral obligation, only a additional desirable outcome. The only moral obligation in design is Balance (which implies a lot of things) and consistent advertisement (not lying about your designed experience to the observer, and not lying to the observer directly within your designed experience with false statements)

 

How this translates into what we do: An octagon as a space (ignoring the spawn mechanics, or game mechanics) is a morally upright space because it is balanced. Adding depth beyond this point DOES make the experience objectively superior as long as balance is simultaneously maintained. The reason why is because the more layers of skills the players can exercise within that space separates them into the winner/ loser hierarchy MORE ACCURATELY across more valuable skills. But again this does not mean the octagon becomes immoral, only not as superior 

 

So the moral of the story is to not condescend on shallow experiences just because they are inferior, even if you are ascended and can create really in depth experiences, don't dismiss the worth (as little as it may be) of shallow experiences, your works are still dirty rags

 

And for the opposite side of that spectrum, do not over hype the value of shallow experiences more than they are worth, know your place

Edited by Soldat Du Christ

1260918535_Forgemapsthumbnail.thumb.png.a0054255c7c5aba3a52c3cef60b4b815.png

Link to post
Share on other sites
14 minutes ago, Soldat Du Christ said:

rambling my thoughts some more... depth is not a moral obligation, only a additional desirable outcome. The only moral obligation in design is Balance (which implies a lot of things) and consistent advertisement (not lying about your designed experience to the observer, and not lying to the observer directly within your designed experience with false statements)

 

How this translates into what we do: An octagon as a space (ignoring the spawn mechanics, or game mechanics) is a morally upright space because it is balanced. Adding depth beyond this point DOES make the experience objectively superior as long as balance is simultaneously maintained. The reason why is because the more layers of skills the players can exercise within that space separates them into the winner/ loser hierarchy MORE ACCURATELY across more valuable skills. But again this does not mean the octagon becomes immoral, only not as superior 

 

So the moral of the story is to not condescend on shallow experiences just because they are inferior, even if you are ascended and can create really in depth experiences, don't dismiss the worth (as little as it may be) of shallow experiences, your works are still dirty rags

 

And for the opposite side of that spectrum, do not over hype the value of shallow experiences more than they are worth, know your place

Depth allows merit to shine through. When a judge reviews your case, ethically he is not to overlook details when determining who is right (right being the better player in this analogy). We are the judges as level designers insofar as we largely decide what is rewarded and punished within gameplay. Therefore, our obligations extend further than just delivering on what we advertise. Also, this is actually how I think about balance, at a broad level. It's the proper distribution of accompishment to the better player in principal - a principal then applied to every element of a multiplayer game, like potentially lethal weapons that are harder to use than weaker weapons, or dangerous spots with a lot of power.

 

I very well may lose to someone in an octagon that I could/should beat when given the opportunity within a map that rewards more than just aim, but also thinking ahead. A map with depth. That's the goal on my end. Think of it this way - God can be the only one to deliver true justice, because he knows all things, every detail, the entire depth of what we've done, thought, said, and even our intentions. If we build a map that ignores half of what a player could do, it would be like God ignoring half of what we've done. (which I have to say, he will in Christ, but only because Christ took the punishment already)

 

I really think this is the foundation of every game. Even the most "casual" experiences like fall guys is actually very competitive, and it works because it is. There's just no other reason to play a multiplayer game.

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Soldat Du Christ said:

working on my mind map again for design (don't @ me if you want to dispute whether objective truths exist or not, we're not going there) 

 

Proposition 1: If a outcome is not universally positive it is not a objectively true

Example: What is considered 'good pacing' is a universally desirable outcome to various categories including Writing, Gameplay, Film, etc, therefore it is an objective truth

 

What is good pacing? Start with the observable fact that in life there is fluctuation across all phenomena; speed, mood, wealth, health, etc. Now, Observe how existing within the highs and lows of the aforementioned phenomena (poor health/ High health - Low economy/ High economy) Achieves the most positive growth.

 

Example: Being able to appreciate the highs when they are earned or otherwise gifted, because of having experienced the lows. While stagnation on the other hand restricts growth and disengages the observer, causing them to become dormant

 

So the goal is to provide highs and lows to the experiences. The delta may differ from experience to experience, they may be short lived, but they may not be stagnant!

 

you reasoning is completely backwards, but at least you're trying to structure it

 

questions:

outcome - of what?

universally positive - for whom?

The first question, I think, presupposes an event, a chain of cause and effect. Is this natural? Man-made?

The second question presupposes that Objective Truth hinges on the consensus of all subjects in a given universe that the outcome of a particular event is positive for each of them, personally - this is nothing more than subjectivism in disguise

 

what i think you're getting at is this:

human beings are a particular type of entity that exists and can recognise cause and effect (conceptual faculty and a conception of time are packaged here) - we can recognise patterns, some of which exhibit alternations between positive and negative bornes at a particular frequency

then this is all jumbled into level design and the contention is that players in a game will experience a particular frequency of positive/negative moments, and that, I assume, a good map will give a similar frequency for both contestants, and that therefore the aim of the level designer is to balance the level so that players will always end up having the same frequencies as each other....

 

...which is why CoD is so successful, because the average lifespan is ike 15 seconds and is punctuated by the positive of respawning and the negative of dying, though I think it's a little more complex than that

 

In short, I think you're off course

 

the aim of the level designer is to create a space in which players have an opportunity to SHAPE THEIR OWN experiences in a COMPETITIVE EXPERIENCE - not to have those experiences pre-set by the geo

 

and octagons are dog as competitive multiplayer maps because they're literally a duel all the time on a flat plane so there's nothing interesting except for the input skill and reaction to immediate threats, there is essentially 0 abstract strategizing on such a map - so in that sense, yeah, the geo is balanced - but it is dog, as two evenly matched players will grind, and an unevenly matched player will get btfo'd without fail. there's no opportunity to make the plays that actually keep the game interesting and entertaining. Great for warmups though - so, depending on your purpose.... 

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Soldat Du Christ said:

working on my mind map again for design (don't @ me if you want to dispute whether objective truths exist or not, we're not going there) 

 

Proposition 1: If a outcome is not universally positive it is not a objectively true

Example: What is considered 'good pacing' is a universally desirable outcome to various categories including Writing, Gameplay, Film, etc, therefore it is an objective truth

 

What is good pacing? Start with the observable fact that in life there is fluctuation across all phenomena; speed, mood, wealth, health, etc. Now, Observe how existing within the highs and lows of the aforementioned phenomena (poor health/ High health - Low economy/ High economy) Achieves the most positive growth.

 

Example: Being able to appreciate the highs when they are earned or otherwise gifted, because of having experienced the lows. While stagnation on the other hand restricts growth and disengages the observer, causing them to become dormant

 

So the goal is to provide highs and lows to the experiences. The delta may differ from experience to experience, they may be short lived, but they may not be stagnant!

We can't determine real truth by universality in experience. You may be able to treat this as a principal for a time, but if it's not actually true, eventually you'll run into some problems. More than this, we already know that truth does not always equate to a desirable outcome. Think about your map in CSGO, well designed and disliked by plenty in that community.

Link to post
Share on other sites
16 minutes ago, Westin said:

We can't determine real truth by universality in experience. You may be able to treat t his as a principal for a time, but if it's not actually true, eventually you'll run into some problems. More than this, we already know that truth does not always equate to a desirable outcome. Think about your map in CSGO, well designed and disliked by plenty in that community.

 

Not even so much universality in experience, but also universality in judgement, which Soldat's reasoning lets into the door. Like you said in your previous post, we are judging these spaces according to their merits (plays, the type of play, scoring, engagement, aesthetics, etc.) and each come to our own conclusions about them as they relate to our particular ends - but if we apply the same method and start from the same premises, we will come to the same conclusions. If our ends differ, then our judgement of those conclusions as they relate to our ends will also differ. So, in a certain sense, universality in judgement is impossible, except among those who share the very same ends, methods, and premises. 

 

NOW! Tangentially, this is why words are important, and are not just fingerpaints as Salty would have us believe. Words are objective, or should be, anyway, as they are conceptual placeholders. They are created by people to designate objects and concepts, units, abstract ideas, everything that we process, so that we can effectively deal with the content of our minds and communicate them to other people. If you can convince another person to take up your method, premises, and ends, using words, then you can speak 1:1 with them. It's like a meta-language to be operating in the same conceptual framework.

Link to post
Share on other sites
54 minutes ago, Soldat Du Christ said:

rambling my thoughts some more... depth is not a moral obligation, only a additional desirable outcome. The only moral obligation in design is Balance (which implies a lot of things) and consistent advertisement (not lying about your designed experience to the observer, and not lying to the observer directly within your designed experience with false statements)

 

How this translates into what we do: An octagon as a space (ignoring the spawn mechanics, or game mechanics) is a morally upright space because it is balanced. Adding depth beyond this point DOES make the experience objectively superior as long as balance is simultaneously maintained. The reason why is because the more layers of skills the players can exercise within that space separates them into the winner/ loser hierarchy MORE ACCURATELY across more valuable skills. But again this does not mean the octagon becomes immoral, only not as superior 

 

So the moral of the story is to not condescend on shallow experiences just because they are inferior, even if you are ascended and can create really in depth experiences, don't dismiss the worth (as little as it may be) of shallow experiences, your works are still dirty rags

 

And for the opposite side of that spectrum, do not over hype the value of shallow experiences more than they are worth, know your place

I agree with all your reasoning here.  I don't know if an Octagon is the best example because there are 2 basic tenants you could break down video game skill into, and that would be both mental and mechanical skill.  I don't think an Octagon gives you the chance to outhink the opponent given that you have the ability to do so.  Also I'd say it doesn't necessarily even show mechanical skill in many ways, being movement skill namely.  But, I understand your point and agree 🙂

Link to post
Share on other sites
48 minutes ago, Westin said:

Depth allows merit to shine through. When a judge reviews your case, ethically he is not to overlook details when determining who is right (right being the better player in this analogy). We are the judges as level designers insofar as we largely decide what is rewarded and punished within gameplay. Therefore, our obligations extend further than just delivering on what we advertise. Also, this is actually how I think about balance, at a broad level. It's the proper distribution of accompishment to the better player in principal - a principal then applied to every element of a multiplayer game, like potentially lethal weapons that are harder to use than weaker weapons, or dangerous spots with a lot of power.

 

I very well may lose to someone in an octagon that I could/should beat when given the opportunity within a map that rewards more than just aim, but also thinking ahead. A map with depth. That's the goal on my end. Think of it this way - God can be the only one to deliver true justice, because he knows all things, every detail, the entire depth of what we've done, thought, said, and even our intentions. If we build a map that ignores half of what a player could do, it would be like God ignoring half of what we've done. (which I have to say, he will in Christ, but only because Christ took the punishment already)

 

I really think this is the foundation of every game. Even the most "casual" experiences like fall guys is actually very competitive, and it works because it is. There's just no other reason to play a multiplayer game.

I'll think on this response for a bit, lots of meat to chew on

1260918535_Forgemapsthumbnail.thumb.png.a0054255c7c5aba3a52c3cef60b4b815.png

Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Westin said:

If we build a map that ignores half of what a player could do, it would be like God ignoring half of what we've done.

Or, it's removing other abilities to test our ability to perform specific tasks.

 

 

In essence, this is what most sport and game is. 

 

Track and Field is a good example of sport that heavily strips other abilities humans are capable of to test our ability to perform specific functions. There is nothing "immoral or unjust" about that. When I partake in a 100meter dash ,  and cannot win because I wasn't able to bring my bike that I used my hardwork to purchase, that's not God Ignoring half of what I'm capable of 😂

 

Could you imagine if sprinters were allowed to tackle eachother  or use the full scope of there physical and mental capabilities to defeat eachother.  Limitations, boundaries and agreed upon rules are extremely important in sport and game. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
29 minutes ago, SaltyKoalaBear said:

Or, it's removing other abilities to test our ability to perform specific tasks.

 

 

In essence, this is what most sport and game is. 

 

Track and Field is a good example of sport that heavily strips other abilities humans are capable of to test our ability to perform specific functions. There is nothing "immoral or unjust" about that. When I partake in a 100meter dash ,  and cannot win because I wasn't able to bring my bike that I used my hardwork to purchase, that's not God Ignoring half of what I'm capable of 😂

 

Could you imagine if sprinters were allowed to tackle eachother  or use the full scope of there physical and mental capabilities to defeat eachother.  Limitations, boundaries and agreed upon rules are extremely important in sport and game. 

Good job Nathaniel, you've missed the entire point of my post once again, for the millionth billionth time. I respect the consistency my dude.

 

Within the context of a game, you can test all skills at once. The singular task of a multiplayer game is to win - not just to test your aiming with an octagon or senses with a puzzle - it's both and everything at once. Players don't somehow lose focus on one or the other if you have both, it just heightens the ceiling of what the player can do. Both tasks can still be completed with 100% competency at the same time, and therefore allows the better overall player to win. Your comparisons to a swiss army knife are foolish, because people aren't that limited, we have different abilities and those abilities stretch insanely far when it comes to problem solving, if the map or game allows for it. At the same time, allowing for this is acting as the fair judge I talked about, while the judgement of God was just an illustration - not the analogy itself. It's like you speed-read my posts just to get a reply out there as fast as possible, I swear.

 

At the end of the day, all of this useless "word finger painting" is just that - useless. Maps speak for themselves.

 

 

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, JB_ said:

Wise words from Jamie Griesemer 

 

 

 

I already linked to the timestamp but watch from 46:45 to 52:08... Love GDC

 

 

Oh nice!  Never realized this talk had been released.

I published some of Jaime's stuff a while back: https://www.nextleveldesign.org/index.php?/content/articles/balance-of-power-jaime-griesemer-r61/

His blog is also worth looking up: https://rewardingplay.com/

Link to post
Share on other sites
13 hours ago, Westin said:

Maps speak for themselves.

 

But our ability to understand what they speak can be greater or lesser, dependent on how well we understand the language they speak.  I can confidently say that shortcomings in understanding of that language can and does cause all sorts of nasty misjudgements, poor evaluations, miscommunications and misunderstandings to occur.

 

A map may provide many softly spoken ways to succeed, but if the listener doesn't keep a keen ear open to this they may believe the map never spoke at all. 

 

More often then not, I feel many need the map to yell at them, speak in bold slow pronunciations, for some to recognize and acknowledge what is being said at all. 

 

[EDIT] This isn't to say the maps themselves cannot be poor communicators, but it's important to recognize that communication occurs between two parties and thus the responsiblity for good communication and understanding must be placed on both parties not just one. 

 

Edited by SaltyKoalaBear
Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

 

 

I had this idea to put a cold storage like cooling thingy here for no reason other than it looks cool if I can fix it up. Then I think I'm gonna make the gold room go up high in the tree like this...

 

 XDc_clVV1iuFKN6c6X2VURAndxif5Ul5dLbkxt_C

 

Basically you'll see my neck when you look up in the gold room.

 

 

I'm almost done laying out all the stupid walls, then I can do the trees and add more detail to more areas if I want.

ae81e0111b3545ba89c91c5f90b7e778.jpg

 

 

Edited by JB_
Link to post
Share on other sites
39 minutes ago, Limeyy said:

Back from living in the woods.  Missed you guys, its incredible how much the community evolved.

 

Would a write up of designing and building a greenhouse be of interest to people here?  A lot of design principles and science crossover, and I'll be working on cad models, GIS mapping, and transcribing my journal on the project during the winter when I can't work. I plan on making everything opensource in the long run, just want some feedback if this would be a welcome place to post.  

oh shit, it's limewire

 

limewire.jpg

Link to post
Share on other sites
58 minutes ago, Limeyy said:

Back from living in the woods.  Missed you guys, its incredible how much the community evolved.

 

Would a write up of designing and building a greenhouse be of interest to people here?  A lot of design principles and science crossover, and I'll be working on cad models, GIS mapping, and transcribing my journal on the project during the winter when I can't work. I plan on making everything opensource in the long run, just want some feedback if this would be a welcome place to post.  

Ah yeah!  You found us.  :classic_biggrin:

And yes please, I would love to learn about your design and building process for a greenhouse.  That sounds awesome!

Link to post
Share on other sites
19 minutes ago, a Chunk said:

Ah yeah!  You found us.  :classic_biggrin:

And yes please, I would love to learn about your design and building process for a greenhouse.  That sounds awesome!

I need to finish the leveling before the weather gets too cold, but here is a little sneak of what I started, don't want to reveal too much at the moment as not everything is final in the draft, and I have a long way to go.   I plan on getting rather comprehensive, including automated watering systems, hydroponics, aeroponics, cloning, breeding, heating and ventilation, etc.  My dad used to run greenhouses on the adjacent property that I'm currently putting up; about 100 yards away between the front doors, now overlooking new neighbors.  It's been a long  time coming, and have been super excited to finally have all the stars align to get it done.  More to come as I progress, I'll post the doc link when I get a good chunk of the writeup done.  Have some pics to give an idea of the scope of the project.   

 

Spoiler

Overview of property I'm developing:

1879737221_home(2).jpg.4a4834678508826da0593793ef3d4f58.jpg

 

Interior I was left with:

1806927619_1003201238(1).thumb.jpg.3c86bfe0f1a297eb04469d4769255e07.jpg

 

What I plan on making it into (unlabeled):

tablelayouttent(121x52).thumb.jpg.97fbea1af1f763542ac9da4718ad62c3.jpg

 

 

 

PS: Been looking forward to this webinar, timing couldn't be better to develop a workflow digitally: https://ue.unrealengine.com/ENG-1856-WBN-11-2020-Geospatial-Data-in-UE_RegistrationLandingPage.html

Link to post
Share on other sites
15 hours ago, Limeyy said:

I need to finish the leveling before the weather gets too cold, but here is a little sneak of what I started, don't want to reveal too much at the moment as not everything is final in the draft, and I have a long way to go.   I plan on getting rather comprehensive, including automated watering systems, hydroponics, aeroponics, cloning, breeding, heating and ventilation, etc.  My dad used to run greenhouses on the adjacent property that I'm currently putting up; about 100 yards away between the front doors, now overlooking new neighbors.  It's been a long  time coming, and have been super excited to finally have all the stars align to get it done.  More to come as I progress, I'll post the doc link when I get a good chunk of the writeup done.  Have some pics to give an idea of the scope of the project.   

 

  Hide contents

Overview of property I'm developing:

1879737221_home(2).jpg.4a4834678508826da0593793ef3d4f58.jpg

 

Interior I was left with:

1806927619_1003201238(1).thumb.jpg.3c86bfe0f1a297eb04469d4769255e07.jpg

 

What I plan on making it into (unlabeled):

tablelayouttent(121x52).thumb.jpg.97fbea1af1f763542ac9da4718ad62c3.jpg

 

 

 

PS: Been looking forward to this webinar, timing couldn't be better to develop a workflow digitally: https://ue.unrealengine.com/ENG-1856-WBN-11-2020-Geospatial-Data-in-UE_RegistrationLandingPage.html


3-LANE

Link to post
Share on other sites
On 12/5/2020 at 7:19 AM, SaltyKoalaBear said:

But our ability to understand what they speak can be greater or lesser, dependent on how well we understand the language they speak.  I can confidently say that shortcomings in understanding of that language can and does cause all sorts of nasty misjudgements, poor evaluations, miscommunications and misunderstandings to occur.

 

A map may provide many softly spoken ways to succeed, but if the listener doesn't keep a keen ear open to this they may believe the map never spoke at all. 

 

More often then not, I feel many need the map to yell at them, speak in bold slow pronunciations, for some to recognize and acknowledge what is being said at all. 

 

[EDIT] This isn't to say the maps themselves cannot be poor communicators, but it's important to recognize that communication occurs between two parties and thus the responsiblity for good communication and understanding must be placed on both parties not just one. 

 


Regardless of language, would you print a book in Braille for sighted people?

Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
×
  • Create New...