RE: We chat about videogames and videogame accessories.
03-25-2013, 04:49 AM
(This post was last modified: 03-25-2013, 04:50 AM by Not The Author.)
On Game Design Education and Associated Bullshit
Show Content
Spoiler
Fffffff okay look
See, the problem here
I have opinions about shitty Game Design educational practices from having had to sit through two years before figuring out, holy shit, these people are going about this entirely the wrong way, so
The problem here isn't so much that the author is giving you terrible advice on how to set up the camera, it's
Why is the author giving you advice on how to set up the camera at all?
Yes, that is a technical issue that people putting together a game are going to have to figure out and deal with. But it has nothing at all to do with game design.
Critically, there's this obvious and faulty assumption that you, the game designer, learning from this book about game design, in a course that is supposed to introduce game design... are specifically going to be developing games for consoles. Their supposition (on top of preventing the player from being able to look up or down at will) is that you're gonna be programming for something that needs a controller, which is just... completely blind to any side-on, top-down, PC, or non-digital game.
My own textbook falls prey to this as well when it starts going on about how you're gonna need to know how to do 3D modeling- in the chapter about character design. Again, a technical issue that may not even matter if you opt to forgo 3D imagery. On top of that, 3D modeling is something that'd affect more than just character design; on top of that, character design ought to be more about how to convey a character than through what medium they are conveyed.
There's even mention, funnily enough, of how you should be able to prototype your game on paper, so you can test if your mechanics work before the code is implemented. But the thing just assumes- and, I mean, yeah, it's the bigger, better-known industry, but- there's just this unspoken assumption that Game Design means Game Design For Consoles Or Computers. There's a sense to it, but it's not very well-thought-out.
Part of the issue, I'm sure, is that education itself isn't set to adapt to new developments, and the whole reason the games industry is big right now is because of all the new developments going on. There probably won't be a book about Kickstarter for another decade or so, let alone one that's education-focused.
But, even beyond that, beyond academia's sluggish reaction speed, there's this... subtle supposition, I think in part because most-if-not-all game design teachers are industry vets, that... like, they're teaching us how to construct games, not design them. They're calling it Architecture and teaching Carpentry. I only noticed it because I got fed up with how... misdirected all the teaching was and decided to switch majors. As it turns out, the one GD course that's required for the Minor but not the Major is actually better at teaching pure design than any other course I've taken in the program. It is hideously and endlessly frustrating.
Gettin' mad on the internet
(03-25-2013, 01:14 AM)BRPXQZME Wrote: »The textbook we are using in Intro to Game Design still says to use L and R buttons, just one more reason our class has devolved into "point and laugh at the author."
Fffffff okay look
See, the problem here
I have opinions about shitty Game Design educational practices from having had to sit through two years before figuring out, holy shit, these people are going about this entirely the wrong way, so
The problem here isn't so much that the author is giving you terrible advice on how to set up the camera, it's
Why is the author giving you advice on how to set up the camera at all?
Yes, that is a technical issue that people putting together a game are going to have to figure out and deal with. But it has nothing at all to do with game design.
Critically, there's this obvious and faulty assumption that you, the game designer, learning from this book about game design, in a course that is supposed to introduce game design... are specifically going to be developing games for consoles. Their supposition (on top of preventing the player from being able to look up or down at will) is that you're gonna be programming for something that needs a controller, which is just... completely blind to any side-on, top-down, PC, or non-digital game.
My own textbook falls prey to this as well when it starts going on about how you're gonna need to know how to do 3D modeling- in the chapter about character design. Again, a technical issue that may not even matter if you opt to forgo 3D imagery. On top of that, 3D modeling is something that'd affect more than just character design; on top of that, character design ought to be more about how to convey a character than through what medium they are conveyed.
There's even mention, funnily enough, of how you should be able to prototype your game on paper, so you can test if your mechanics work before the code is implemented. But the thing just assumes- and, I mean, yeah, it's the bigger, better-known industry, but- there's just this unspoken assumption that Game Design means Game Design For Consoles Or Computers. There's a sense to it, but it's not very well-thought-out.
Part of the issue, I'm sure, is that education itself isn't set to adapt to new developments, and the whole reason the games industry is big right now is because of all the new developments going on. There probably won't be a book about Kickstarter for another decade or so, let alone one that's education-focused.
But, even beyond that, beyond academia's sluggish reaction speed, there's this... subtle supposition, I think in part because most-if-not-all game design teachers are industry vets, that... like, they're teaching us how to construct games, not design them. They're calling it Architecture and teaching Carpentry. I only noticed it because I got fed up with how... misdirected all the teaching was and decided to switch majors. As it turns out, the one GD course that's required for the Minor but not the Major is actually better at teaching pure design than any other course I've taken in the program. It is hideously and endlessly frustrating.
Gettin' mad on the internet