You know it occurs to me that half your un-credited argument seems to be half assed and pulled from that back of the brain on this one.
Stop trying to be god at game design when it doesn't even sound right.
Its the equivalent of that reporter who interviewed that guy who said he ate "activated almonds" to sound smart in front of public, when he's clearly an idiot for trying so hard.
Un-credited argument? Its loving art, not goddamn math. There is no "here's my strict proof of how I feel". I eat, breath, and stuff art, so I think I know just a
little bit more about it than you. I'm not claiming I know anything about game design either, so I don't know why you put those words in my mouth. My entire argument is about the necessity of theory is, well, unnecessary. You get these kids straight out of college with a load of information on "how things should be done" and they latch on to that like no one's business. Yet they have no
experience at all, just a bunch of words. The MOST important loving thing here is experience. What good is theory if you have no way of knowing how to apply it?
An artist who studied music theory and has been playing for 2 years will be better than an artist who just plays music for 2 years. Theory is under-appreciated since all too many people care only about the physical skills involved, and give no stuffs about why people enjoy music or games.
They may be better technically, but there will be no soul. It will not be "musical", just
information. Thats the difference between something that works, and something that is
fun.
Verdi and Mozart didn't just start throwing random notes together until their stuff sounded good. They learned and understood why music inspires people, and so they played to those strengths.
They use it as a tool to create what they invisioned and heard in their heads. That's where it starts, not from some technical bullstuff you think it may have. They don't just take modules of legatos and arpeggios and chordal progressions and slap them together
just because it works. They used it to build upon something that was
musical.
You need to have both physical skill and theoretical understanding to make the best works. I am sick and tired of people thinking that because they play games and because they have a copy of Unity that they can make a good game.
Where do you think the theories came from? Those guys compared what they did differently and talked about it. The reason Jonathan Blow is so damn good and popular is because he understands exactly what the forget is going on in his games, and he speaks to the public about the theory of game design and the process as well.
No you dont need the theoretical understanding. There are countless artists who have the theory, way past what you even have, that sometimes don't even use it. Because sometimes they don't even have to.
You don't need schooling, but it loving helps if you do some level of research before you attempt to make an original concept.
Yeah it does
help, but in no way is it
necessary.
loving lol.
Here's the "I have theory so therefore I have to loving use it all the goddamn time because oh no what will I do without it".
I don't pretend. I'm not the smartest, and I never said I was. I point out exactly what I think at any given time. I'm brutally honest. Maybe you dislike me because you don't like hearing a different opinion to your own.
He apparently spent years writing the backstory. Maybe he could have spent that time studying how to make a better video game. There's a difference between art and making something for yourself.
Or maybe I dislike what you're saying because you seem to try to force a de-facto, end-all "opinion".
Also art
is making something for yourself, otherwise it isn't art. Its self expression and freedom.
