In terms of work, the holidays were badly spent. Except for HTI, I did very little work for school. My portfolio was touched--I attempted many things, but few things concrete came out. Studio was not touched at all.
This slack that I had is now coming to haunt me. Now I have alot to catch up on studio and some more on portfolio. With an interim around the corner and a portfolio review at around the same time, I'm having serious problems keeping everything up in the air. Hopefully this will go well.
The other modules are relatively light at the moment. Although everything is going to ramp up very soon. 4 weeks. I will have to slog my heart out to keep my 4 GPA and get into GABMIT.
Thursday, November 5, 2009
Sunday, September 13, 2009
Week 17's Visualisation Exercise
Focus on the form, not just the “contents”, but you can include some soundbites-snapshots. What are the elements that make up the thoughts in your mind? And how do they work with/on each other.
For example think of something you love and hate--how are they represented differently in your mind (i.e. is it an image in colour, and with sounds, with emotions? Are the images located in different locations, etc. What happens if you change some aspect of the image (size, colour, replacement, add sound etc).
The elements that make up the thoughts in my mind are disembodied, metaphorical or abstract representations of everyday figures I come across. They are all represented in roughly the same way--their difference lies in the way they make me feel. Figures that I dislike make me feel discomfort and anger whenever I visualise them, while figures that I like make me feel comfort and smoothness when I visualise them. Figures that are neutral usually make me associate them with the events I came across them in.
What does HTI mean to you?
HTI is a compilation of simple and effective design ideas that are taught to us in HTI lessons. The objective of these lessons are to expose us to these ideas and slowly help us understand them in as layman a way as possible. It is supposed to be light, and the exploration that it encourages us to do should be simple, non-threatening and enjoyable.
Why are you not/motivated to do the weekly assignments for HTI2?
The topics that we explore in HTI2 are topics that are very foreign to me, and the depth that we have to plunge into these topics is scary, to say the least. Perhaps it is because of my lack of understanding, but I do not understand the point of most of the exercises and pondering that we have to do. We keep having to "dig into our unconscious" in order to tap into our sources of creativity--a method that I find very difficult to do. I feel as though HTI2 is trying to get us into a singular, standard frame of accessing creativity instead of helping everyone find his own way.
Nonetheless, I feel I will do my weekly HTI assignments if not for the weight of the other assignments that are also hanging over us. We are constantly bombarded with alot of assignments in our second year, and the amount of work that we have to do to complete each HTI journal is no help. The depth that we are required to explore into each topic by ourselves is extensive, to say the least. I take about 4 hours to write each entry on average, and half of the time I take is spent on reading to understand the topics so that I can adequately answer the questions. Most of the questions that we are asked simply ask for too much from us, and it is hard to find the motivation to do them after finishing our other assignments during the weekend.
For example think of something you love and hate--how are they represented differently in your mind (i.e. is it an image in colour, and with sounds, with emotions? Are the images located in different locations, etc. What happens if you change some aspect of the image (size, colour, replacement, add sound etc).
The elements that make up the thoughts in my mind are disembodied, metaphorical or abstract representations of everyday figures I come across. They are all represented in roughly the same way--their difference lies in the way they make me feel. Figures that I dislike make me feel discomfort and anger whenever I visualise them, while figures that I like make me feel comfort and smoothness when I visualise them. Figures that are neutral usually make me associate them with the events I came across them in.
What does HTI mean to you?
HTI is a compilation of simple and effective design ideas that are taught to us in HTI lessons. The objective of these lessons are to expose us to these ideas and slowly help us understand them in as layman a way as possible. It is supposed to be light, and the exploration that it encourages us to do should be simple, non-threatening and enjoyable.
Why are you not/motivated to do the weekly assignments for HTI2?
The topics that we explore in HTI2 are topics that are very foreign to me, and the depth that we have to plunge into these topics is scary, to say the least. Perhaps it is because of my lack of understanding, but I do not understand the point of most of the exercises and pondering that we have to do. We keep having to "dig into our unconscious" in order to tap into our sources of creativity--a method that I find very difficult to do. I feel as though HTI2 is trying to get us into a singular, standard frame of accessing creativity instead of helping everyone find his own way.
Nonetheless, I feel I will do my weekly HTI assignments if not for the weight of the other assignments that are also hanging over us. We are constantly bombarded with alot of assignments in our second year, and the amount of work that we have to do to complete each HTI journal is no help. The depth that we are required to explore into each topic by ourselves is extensive, to say the least. I take about 4 hours to write each entry on average, and half of the time I take is spent on reading to understand the topics so that I can adequately answer the questions. Most of the questions that we are asked simply ask for too much from us, and it is hard to find the motivation to do them after finishing our other assignments during the weekend.
My Thoughts on the Creativity Game
The creativity game was an unconventional and rather tough assignment to do. It was probably one of the hardest assignments I've had to do in my course, mainly because of my relative lack of knowledge in the topic involved. Granted, HTI has always been about exploring unknown, thought-provoking topics, but its assignments always had some kind of "guide", in the form of topics. This one just throws us into the topic of creativity and let us roam freely, so it was difficult planning for this assignment, because there was a fairly large amount of thinking we had to do.
It would've been a rewarding assignment if we had more time to do it. I think it was quite a tall order for us to have to produce a prototype in the time frame given, especially since the submission sort of clashed with our other assignments. By the time we were finished with our other assignments, we were left with a mere 1 week to put a prototype together with only a proposal that outlined the game's concepts. As a result, the entire project was quite a rush. We did not dare to explore too much, and we did not have time to do proper playtesting. If we had the entire holidays to do up the prototype (with an interim in between), I felt the end result would've been much better.
I also feel that this is an extremely demanding assignment. Making a game is a lot of work, and we're given only our holidays to complete it. While it would've been fine if we had no other assignments lined up for the holidays, this isn't the case. There are things of heavier priorities, like our studio work and portfolios, that we have to touch up during the holidays as well. Our studio work takes up a big portion of our final grade, while our portfolio is a very big determining factor in our job attachment at the end of our next semester. One of the things that I liked about HTI last year was how it was relatively light, and yet very rewarding. Most of our assignments were medium length essays that only took an hour or two to research and another hour or two to write. I feel that HTI2 has been the complete opposite, especially in the second semester--we're given so much more to do, but the things we explore always link back to some aspect of creativity. I also feel that we're guided alot less--the journal entries (especially the later ones) and this creativity game have plunged us straight into very in-depth psychology topics that took me alot of effort to understand.
If it is possible, I hope that next sememster's HTI2 can be lighter, both in terms of assignments, and in terms of how "layman" the topics we explore are. Lessons tend to plunge into the heavily philosophical side very quickly, faster than we are able to comfortably attune ourselves to the topic. I think that having a more layman approach would be more conducive to our learning, not only because we learn faster, but also because it is easier for us to follow these lessons.
I apologise if any part of this post has been offensive, but I wrote it in a very direct way to make sure I conveyed everything I felt. I can see that you put effort into designing our lessons, and I'm thankful for that. I just feel that conveying whatever I felt wasn't right about this lesson to you will make the lesson better.
It would've been a rewarding assignment if we had more time to do it. I think it was quite a tall order for us to have to produce a prototype in the time frame given, especially since the submission sort of clashed with our other assignments. By the time we were finished with our other assignments, we were left with a mere 1 week to put a prototype together with only a proposal that outlined the game's concepts. As a result, the entire project was quite a rush. We did not dare to explore too much, and we did not have time to do proper playtesting. If we had the entire holidays to do up the prototype (with an interim in between), I felt the end result would've been much better.
I also feel that this is an extremely demanding assignment. Making a game is a lot of work, and we're given only our holidays to complete it. While it would've been fine if we had no other assignments lined up for the holidays, this isn't the case. There are things of heavier priorities, like our studio work and portfolios, that we have to touch up during the holidays as well. Our studio work takes up a big portion of our final grade, while our portfolio is a very big determining factor in our job attachment at the end of our next semester. One of the things that I liked about HTI last year was how it was relatively light, and yet very rewarding. Most of our assignments were medium length essays that only took an hour or two to research and another hour or two to write. I feel that HTI2 has been the complete opposite, especially in the second semester--we're given so much more to do, but the things we explore always link back to some aspect of creativity. I also feel that we're guided alot less--the journal entries (especially the later ones) and this creativity game have plunged us straight into very in-depth psychology topics that took me alot of effort to understand.
If it is possible, I hope that next sememster's HTI2 can be lighter, both in terms of assignments, and in terms of how "layman" the topics we explore are. Lessons tend to plunge into the heavily philosophical side very quickly, faster than we are able to comfortably attune ourselves to the topic. I think that having a more layman approach would be more conducive to our learning, not only because we learn faster, but also because it is easier for us to follow these lessons.
I apologise if any part of this post has been offensive, but I wrote it in a very direct way to make sure I conveyed everything I felt. I can see that you put effort into designing our lessons, and I'm thankful for that. I just feel that conveying whatever I felt wasn't right about this lesson to you will make the lesson better.
Understanding Your Unconscious
Draw a Deep Doodle on the subject of how creativity relates to your unconscious and scan in and post in on your BLOG, and answer the questions below relating to it.
This imagery best represents how creativity relates to the unconscious. It conveys the idea that our creativity, represented by the light bulb, is powered largely by our unconsciousness. The light bulb, also doubling as the body of the person, powers the unconscious, which then powers the light bulb again, signifying a cycle. The idea that this tries to convey is that creativity is a holistic process that involves not just our minds, but our very beings.
1. Ask yourself: "From which part of my psyche do I think my creativity comes from?"
My creativity usually emerges when I'm in the process of solving problems to pursue an objective--that is, from my consciousness. When I'm in the "problem-solving mode", I use the most efficient way to achieve my objectives, and this is where my creative methods stem from.
2. Recall and relate some incidences when you used some psychological defences (as stated by Freud). Or did you encounter other aspects of yourself, like your Anima, shadow, or other personae that exist within you (based on Jung's theories)?
One quality that I know I lack, but I hope to possess, is self-confidence. I want to have the confidence to be able to stand up for myself in the face of a strong adversary, or do things that I know are right despite heavy opposition. When these situations do happen though, I tend to take the least troublesome way out--I compromise to satisfy others. Although this may not necessarily be a bad way to resolve things, I often find myself dissatisfied with the outcome, because I know I compromised out of fear. This often leaves me frustrated, because what I've done conflicts with my idealised identity of myself. During these moments, I find myself using dissociation to rid of these frustrations. I tell myself that what's done is done, and that the person that had done this isn't me, but a younger me that I've left behind. I tell myself that I was weak, but I will be stronger.
While incidences of me feeling that I lack confidence still occurs, as they happen more and more, I find myself applying more and more of Freud's Level 4 psychological defense methods, namely anticipation, identification and introjection. I learn to anticipate when situations that will attack my sense of self image will happen and prepare myself for them, tuning my mindset to become ready to confidently defend myself instead of compromise. I also identify myself with greater people who I respect and the ideas that they stand for to help reinforce my confidence.
I think I encounter what I believe is my shadow occasionally. Sometimes, out of nowhere, there will be this voice in my head that eggs me on to do unconventional things that are violent and sadistic in nature. The impulse will slowly grow and become unbearably strong for a moment before fading. Thankfully, I've never went ahead with any of these momentary thoughts.
3. Which school of psychology most closely relates to your ideas of the origins of creativity?
Analytical psychology most closely relates to my ideas of the origins of creativity. I believe that creativity stems from beyond our consciousness. It is the result of our unconscious self being unleashed. This unconscious self is deeply spiritual in nature, having a connection to the source of life itself, which gives it infinite depth from which it can draw its ideas from. Similarly, the school of analytical psychology places huge emphasis on the unconscious, which it considers a potent and very active part of our psyche.
4. Dig deeper and see what else emerges from your unconscious. Interprete this Deep(er) Doodle. Where can you place your imaginary figures and "friends" that you have drawn, in this snapshot/map of your unconscious?
If I were to expand on the deep doodle above, influential media and real-world figures will form a significant part of the picture. These figures would be wired all over "me", under the bulb, into the head, and even all over the bulb. This portrays the influence that the media has on me, and how they form an integral part of my values and identity. These influences that the media has on me has an effect on how I perceive the world around me, which influences my creativity and the things that come out of it.
This imagery best represents how creativity relates to the unconscious. It conveys the idea that our creativity, represented by the light bulb, is powered largely by our unconsciousness. The light bulb, also doubling as the body of the person, powers the unconscious, which then powers the light bulb again, signifying a cycle. The idea that this tries to convey is that creativity is a holistic process that involves not just our minds, but our very beings.
1. Ask yourself: "From which part of my psyche do I think my creativity comes from?"
My creativity usually emerges when I'm in the process of solving problems to pursue an objective--that is, from my consciousness. When I'm in the "problem-solving mode", I use the most efficient way to achieve my objectives, and this is where my creative methods stem from.
2. Recall and relate some incidences when you used some psychological defences (as stated by Freud). Or did you encounter other aspects of yourself, like your Anima, shadow, or other personae that exist within you (based on Jung's theories)?
One quality that I know I lack, but I hope to possess, is self-confidence. I want to have the confidence to be able to stand up for myself in the face of a strong adversary, or do things that I know are right despite heavy opposition. When these situations do happen though, I tend to take the least troublesome way out--I compromise to satisfy others. Although this may not necessarily be a bad way to resolve things, I often find myself dissatisfied with the outcome, because I know I compromised out of fear. This often leaves me frustrated, because what I've done conflicts with my idealised identity of myself. During these moments, I find myself using dissociation to rid of these frustrations. I tell myself that what's done is done, and that the person that had done this isn't me, but a younger me that I've left behind. I tell myself that I was weak, but I will be stronger.
While incidences of me feeling that I lack confidence still occurs, as they happen more and more, I find myself applying more and more of Freud's Level 4 psychological defense methods, namely anticipation, identification and introjection. I learn to anticipate when situations that will attack my sense of self image will happen and prepare myself for them, tuning my mindset to become ready to confidently defend myself instead of compromise. I also identify myself with greater people who I respect and the ideas that they stand for to help reinforce my confidence.
I think I encounter what I believe is my shadow occasionally. Sometimes, out of nowhere, there will be this voice in my head that eggs me on to do unconventional things that are violent and sadistic in nature. The impulse will slowly grow and become unbearably strong for a moment before fading. Thankfully, I've never went ahead with any of these momentary thoughts.
3. Which school of psychology most closely relates to your ideas of the origins of creativity?
Analytical psychology most closely relates to my ideas of the origins of creativity. I believe that creativity stems from beyond our consciousness. It is the result of our unconscious self being unleashed. This unconscious self is deeply spiritual in nature, having a connection to the source of life itself, which gives it infinite depth from which it can draw its ideas from. Similarly, the school of analytical psychology places huge emphasis on the unconscious, which it considers a potent and very active part of our psyche.
4. Dig deeper and see what else emerges from your unconscious. Interprete this Deep(er) Doodle. Where can you place your imaginary figures and "friends" that you have drawn, in this snapshot/map of your unconscious?
If I were to expand on the deep doodle above, influential media and real-world figures will form a significant part of the picture. These figures would be wired all over "me", under the bulb, into the head, and even all over the bulb. This portrays the influence that the media has on me, and how they form an integral part of my values and identity. These influences that the media has on me has an effect on how I perceive the world around me, which influences my creativity and the things that come out of it.
Saturday, September 12, 2009
Psychology and Creativity
After watching Don Norman's TED Video, think about the interplay/interaction of the Visceral, Behavioural and Reflective layers within the flow of gameplay as you formulate your studio project game, as well as for your HTI2 Creativity Game. How could you effectively harness the emotional design factors to maximise fun and enjoyment for your game? What would motivate your players to get involved deeper in the games?
Games are a subset of designs. Like design products, games are made for the enjoyment of people. By that logic, whatever that Don Norman said that applied to design applies to game design as well. Games that appeal to our visceral, behavioural and reflective layers appeal better to us. Therefore, it makes perfect sense that games should look good (visceral), have good gameplay (behavioural) and portray high-value to the user and for the user (reflective).
There's not much to reflect on about effectively harnessing the visceral and behavioural layers in games, because these two have been done so much already. Appealing to the visceral means making things look good in the game; the game packaging, the graphics, the interface design and essentially everything that you see on screen. Video games are continuously advancing in the graphics department, and the first thing new video game consoles boast about is graphical processing power. The game design industry knows full well of the importance of good graphics already.
Appealing to the behavioural level means making controls that fit the game and making sure that the player feels that the game is fair (i.e. if he loses, he understands that its his fault and not because he lacks information the game should provide), so that he feels in control. Again, the industry knows full well of this aspect's importance. Alot of game companies spend lots of money hiring playtesters, not only to weed out bugs in their games, but also to make sure that they deliver the right experience to the players.
What is relatively unexplored in games design is the reflective layer--making the owner of the game feel proud of owning such a game. The reflective layer is also the key to making a player want to get involved in a game, because it conveys that the game has value, that it is worth investing time in. All of the industry's critically acclaimed games have a reflective layer. This reflective layer mostly comes in two forms, either a very interesting story, or a very competitive gaming scene. The former drives people to play to find out more, while the latter drives people to play to better themselves, so that they can convey their worth by winning.
There is alot to explore in games design in the reflective layer, because there are so many more ways to make a game valuable in people's eyes, and games, being an interactive medium, is very well-equipped to do so. Games can control the overall experience so much better than other forms of entertainment because of its interactivity and the array of activities that it can get people involved in.
Games are a subset of designs. Like design products, games are made for the enjoyment of people. By that logic, whatever that Don Norman said that applied to design applies to game design as well. Games that appeal to our visceral, behavioural and reflective layers appeal better to us. Therefore, it makes perfect sense that games should look good (visceral), have good gameplay (behavioural) and portray high-value to the user and for the user (reflective).
There's not much to reflect on about effectively harnessing the visceral and behavioural layers in games, because these two have been done so much already. Appealing to the visceral means making things look good in the game; the game packaging, the graphics, the interface design and essentially everything that you see on screen. Video games are continuously advancing in the graphics department, and the first thing new video game consoles boast about is graphical processing power. The game design industry knows full well of the importance of good graphics already.
Appealing to the behavioural level means making controls that fit the game and making sure that the player feels that the game is fair (i.e. if he loses, he understands that its his fault and not because he lacks information the game should provide), so that he feels in control. Again, the industry knows full well of this aspect's importance. Alot of game companies spend lots of money hiring playtesters, not only to weed out bugs in their games, but also to make sure that they deliver the right experience to the players.
What is relatively unexplored in games design is the reflective layer--making the owner of the game feel proud of owning such a game. The reflective layer is also the key to making a player want to get involved in a game, because it conveys that the game has value, that it is worth investing time in. All of the industry's critically acclaimed games have a reflective layer. This reflective layer mostly comes in two forms, either a very interesting story, or a very competitive gaming scene. The former drives people to play to find out more, while the latter drives people to play to better themselves, so that they can convey their worth by winning.
There is alot to explore in games design in the reflective layer, because there are so many more ways to make a game valuable in people's eyes, and games, being an interactive medium, is very well-equipped to do so. Games can control the overall experience so much better than other forms of entertainment because of its interactivity and the array of activities that it can get people involved in.
Sunday, August 30, 2009
Studio: Rounding Off This Semester
Individual Tie-in Report with Games Design Studio Project on the process and development of your current Game Level Design. Discuss what you have learned as a whole, reflecting on your level of understanding of game design methods and game design theory. Obviously I want to know about your creative processes (or lack of) in creating your game as a group. Be honest about the gaps in your processes. How can you improve on them, etc. (BLOG THIS) (500 + words; more is good)
Having worked on my studio project for half a year has opened my eyes to many lessons—lessons that are best learnt through experience. The past semester has opened my eyes to many things about games design and development that have never crossed my mind before. It has also taught me valuable lessons about working as a team, which is actually harder than most people think.
One of the most valuable insights that this past semester has taught me is the importance of making a physical prototype of a digital game before the game’s actual production. The idea of physical prototypes was taught to us last year, but I didn’t believe in their usefulness initially, chiefly because of the difficulty of doing a proper translation of the digital game’s mechanics into physical form. I thought that if the physical prototype did not emulate its digital counterpart perfectly, then its playtesting results would not be of any use to the game’s development process. Our studio project’s physical prototype proved me wrong—while it was a far cry from being a perfect replication of what our digital prototype would be, it revealed several potential problems in our game’s level design. While these potential problems were relatively minor, it has shown me the potential usefulness of physical prototype playtesting. If such an inaccurate physical prototype could bring up relevant problems about our game, think of what problems we could’ve found out and solved if our physical prototype was more properly done.
The past semester has also taught me much about the game development process, which turns out to be a lot harder than I thought. Participation in the studio project has allowed us to get our feet wet with programming, texturing and modelling—processes which we had little exposure to in our past year. Due to our inexperience in these fields, our workflow usually chokes up because we plan for more work than we expect. This is especially true for modelling and texturing, which were so much more complicated than we conceived they were. I believe, however, that my team has learnt much from this past semester through getting their feet wet. Our planning for the next semester will most probably be a lot smoother than what we did this semester.
There’s nothing much for me to write about the game’s conceptualisation phase, however, as the only member who was mainly involved during this phase was our team’s lead game designer (who is also our producer). We did not have much influence over the game’s concept, so there’s not much exercising of my creative processes and methods during this project. I do realise that this was the wrong way of doing things. Our producer took it upon himself to churn out the game’s concept, but we could’ve and should’ve voiced out during that period about having more involvement in the game’s concept. Having one person conceptualise the game almost entirely led the rest of us to feel little ownership for the game, and this made us feel quite unmotivated whenever we worked on developing the game. It was also a cause for conflict on several occasions. If there was one thing that had to be done differently for our studio project during the past semester, it would be this—having everyone involved in conceptualisation would’ve helped us avert so many problems.
All in all, while this project was more of an ordeal than I think it was, there were many lessons that I have learnt too—life lessons that I could not have learnt otherwise, or in a textbook. While this project did not give me much of a chance to develop my creativity methods and skills, the lessons that I have learnt from going through are well-worth whatever ordeals and losses I might have incurred. I look forward to the next semester with both worry and anticipation—there are many more ordeals to overcome, but the things that I will learn will again be well worth the effort.
Having worked on my studio project for half a year has opened my eyes to many lessons—lessons that are best learnt through experience. The past semester has opened my eyes to many things about games design and development that have never crossed my mind before. It has also taught me valuable lessons about working as a team, which is actually harder than most people think.
One of the most valuable insights that this past semester has taught me is the importance of making a physical prototype of a digital game before the game’s actual production. The idea of physical prototypes was taught to us last year, but I didn’t believe in their usefulness initially, chiefly because of the difficulty of doing a proper translation of the digital game’s mechanics into physical form. I thought that if the physical prototype did not emulate its digital counterpart perfectly, then its playtesting results would not be of any use to the game’s development process. Our studio project’s physical prototype proved me wrong—while it was a far cry from being a perfect replication of what our digital prototype would be, it revealed several potential problems in our game’s level design. While these potential problems were relatively minor, it has shown me the potential usefulness of physical prototype playtesting. If such an inaccurate physical prototype could bring up relevant problems about our game, think of what problems we could’ve found out and solved if our physical prototype was more properly done.
The past semester has also taught me much about the game development process, which turns out to be a lot harder than I thought. Participation in the studio project has allowed us to get our feet wet with programming, texturing and modelling—processes which we had little exposure to in our past year. Due to our inexperience in these fields, our workflow usually chokes up because we plan for more work than we expect. This is especially true for modelling and texturing, which were so much more complicated than we conceived they were. I believe, however, that my team has learnt much from this past semester through getting their feet wet. Our planning for the next semester will most probably be a lot smoother than what we did this semester.
There’s nothing much for me to write about the game’s conceptualisation phase, however, as the only member who was mainly involved during this phase was our team’s lead game designer (who is also our producer). We did not have much influence over the game’s concept, so there’s not much exercising of my creative processes and methods during this project. I do realise that this was the wrong way of doing things. Our producer took it upon himself to churn out the game’s concept, but we could’ve and should’ve voiced out during that period about having more involvement in the game’s concept. Having one person conceptualise the game almost entirely led the rest of us to feel little ownership for the game, and this made us feel quite unmotivated whenever we worked on developing the game. It was also a cause for conflict on several occasions. If there was one thing that had to be done differently for our studio project during the past semester, it would be this—having everyone involved in conceptualisation would’ve helped us avert so many problems.
All in all, while this project was more of an ordeal than I think it was, there were many lessons that I have learnt too—life lessons that I could not have learnt otherwise, or in a textbook. While this project did not give me much of a chance to develop my creativity methods and skills, the lessons that I have learnt from going through are well-worth whatever ordeals and losses I might have incurred. I look forward to the next semester with both worry and anticipation—there are many more ordeals to overcome, but the things that I will learn will again be well worth the effort.
Saturday, July 18, 2009
Making A Creativity Game
What was your “experience” of this experiential learning process? What did you learn in this game about the connections between learning, creativity and play?
The session was fun and rather engaging, as we received many "creative aids" that helped our brainstorming session by allow us to see things in different ways. This session has reinforced to me the notion that creativity can be nurtured, and that it is through play that we nurture it. Play is enjoyable, so it allows us to remember the experience and thus learn from it.
How different is this process from “conventional” learning methods. Can it be applied to all subjects? What is the connection between experience and learning?
This is a step away from conventional teaching that works better because it gives us experience by making us do what is taught and then seeing the results that unfold. Experience has always been a better teacher than mere words, pictures and derived conclusions, simply because it gives us a "feel" of the entire process and thus makes us remember. It also helps us learn the small nuances of processes that cannot, or are too insignificant, to put in words.
Experiential learning cannot be applied to all subjects because it requires the creation of a scenario that is designed to give a certain experience without too many instructions (or it'll become nothing more than a lecture with hands-on). The lack of instructions is essential, because looking for a solution to problems is an essential part of every experience. Not everything can be learnt through experience simply because some things require you to have the technical know-how first before you get your hands dirty.
Reflect on the process of using games as research. What were the ideas, techniques and methods you learned from this process?
Using games as research allows us to grasp how certain mechanics will work without seeing them actually in action. It also made me realise that the best ideas aren't the ones that suddenly appear, but the ones that are tailored to fix a specific problem that specific scenario we're in faces.
Explain your first model of the creativity/learning process you created through this game. Include a flow-diagram of the game’s processes. What are the similarities and differences in the creative process for game-creation and other (creative) activities? Explain.
What other insights do you have about the psychology of learning, creativity, play and gaming?
Learning and creativity are linked. Creativity is a result of us looking for solutions to problems or questions through tapping onto past experience.
Play is linked to learning, because play presents us with obstacles that we will use our undivided attention (through play's immersiveness) to solve.
Gaming is an extension of play that makes the experience all the more immersive for us.
How else can you refine your creativity model? What are the gaps in your model? As you start to conceive your creativity model/game assignment, what’s the next step you need to take?
It is difficult to put down in words something as abstract as how to improve a creativity model, because how creativity is applied is relative to the problem one is facing. Creativity is finding new ways to solve problems, and having a creativity model will more often than not restrict a person's creativity because it is a certain set of rules one must adhere to.
That said, there are definitely ways to improve my creative thinking skills. By exposing myself more to things I haven't been exposed to, like places I haven't been to or games I haven't played, I will definitely be better equipped for creative thinking. A large part of creativity is drawing from the past for a solution that is not only new, but also best made to solve the problem at hand.
What are the implications of using games in this way? List some of the issues, pros and cons of doing games research in this manner. How reliable is this method of research?
Coming soon.
Think of some other psychological/social areas in which games can be used as tools of research.
Games can be used to research social interactions between people and human emotions, since 2 of the main reasons people play games are as follows: to experience something extraordinary, and to interact with people.
Bonus Question: As you imagine the possibilities of expanding the creativity process through new methods and techniques, media and technology, think up of an imaginary possibility (or two) of such a creative experience.
The ultimate experience of creativity would be one that throws us into a make-believe world completely and puts us on the seat of the omnipotency. In a position where we can do anything and everything imaginable, many possibilities that we initially did not see will be seen with more clarity and direction. Then, all that's left for us would be to refine these possibilities into something that is feasible in our three-dimensional world.
Compare your group’s brainstorming process with that of the game you created. What similarities and differences are there? What would this mean for a general theory of creativity, and for you to consider when you implement a creativity game?
"Anything goes."
That was the thought we had when we started on conceptualising the creativity game. We did not want to be limited by rules and procedures, and were only guided by one general objective: the game had to inspire creativity. While the game that came out wasn't exactly "anything goes", it was a game where you had to think on your feet; and while the game had rules and procedures, they were light and simple. What, I think, came out of that session was like a child of the creative processes that went through our heads--smaller in scope, but nonetheless effective.
The session was fun and rather engaging, as we received many "creative aids" that helped our brainstorming session by allow us to see things in different ways. This session has reinforced to me the notion that creativity can be nurtured, and that it is through play that we nurture it. Play is enjoyable, so it allows us to remember the experience and thus learn from it.
How different is this process from “conventional” learning methods. Can it be applied to all subjects? What is the connection between experience and learning?
This is a step away from conventional teaching that works better because it gives us experience by making us do what is taught and then seeing the results that unfold. Experience has always been a better teacher than mere words, pictures and derived conclusions, simply because it gives us a "feel" of the entire process and thus makes us remember. It also helps us learn the small nuances of processes that cannot, or are too insignificant, to put in words.
Experiential learning cannot be applied to all subjects because it requires the creation of a scenario that is designed to give a certain experience without too many instructions (or it'll become nothing more than a lecture with hands-on). The lack of instructions is essential, because looking for a solution to problems is an essential part of every experience. Not everything can be learnt through experience simply because some things require you to have the technical know-how first before you get your hands dirty.
Reflect on the process of using games as research. What were the ideas, techniques and methods you learned from this process?
Using games as research allows us to grasp how certain mechanics will work without seeing them actually in action. It also made me realise that the best ideas aren't the ones that suddenly appear, but the ones that are tailored to fix a specific problem that specific scenario we're in faces.
Explain your first model of the creativity/learning process you created through this game. Include a flow-diagram of the game’s processes. What are the similarities and differences in the creative process for game-creation and other (creative) activities? Explain.
What other insights do you have about the psychology of learning, creativity, play and gaming?
Learning and creativity are linked. Creativity is a result of us looking for solutions to problems or questions through tapping onto past experience.
Play is linked to learning, because play presents us with obstacles that we will use our undivided attention (through play's immersiveness) to solve.
Gaming is an extension of play that makes the experience all the more immersive for us.
How else can you refine your creativity model? What are the gaps in your model? As you start to conceive your creativity model/game assignment, what’s the next step you need to take?
It is difficult to put down in words something as abstract as how to improve a creativity model, because how creativity is applied is relative to the problem one is facing. Creativity is finding new ways to solve problems, and having a creativity model will more often than not restrict a person's creativity because it is a certain set of rules one must adhere to.
That said, there are definitely ways to improve my creative thinking skills. By exposing myself more to things I haven't been exposed to, like places I haven't been to or games I haven't played, I will definitely be better equipped for creative thinking. A large part of creativity is drawing from the past for a solution that is not only new, but also best made to solve the problem at hand.
What are the implications of using games in this way? List some of the issues, pros and cons of doing games research in this manner. How reliable is this method of research?
Coming soon.
Think of some other psychological/social areas in which games can be used as tools of research.
Games can be used to research social interactions between people and human emotions, since 2 of the main reasons people play games are as follows: to experience something extraordinary, and to interact with people.
Bonus Question: As you imagine the possibilities of expanding the creativity process through new methods and techniques, media and technology, think up of an imaginary possibility (or two) of such a creative experience.
The ultimate experience of creativity would be one that throws us into a make-believe world completely and puts us on the seat of the omnipotency. In a position where we can do anything and everything imaginable, many possibilities that we initially did not see will be seen with more clarity and direction. Then, all that's left for us would be to refine these possibilities into something that is feasible in our three-dimensional world.
Compare your group’s brainstorming process with that of the game you created. What similarities and differences are there? What would this mean for a general theory of creativity, and for you to consider when you implement a creativity game?
"Anything goes."
That was the thought we had when we started on conceptualising the creativity game. We did not want to be limited by rules and procedures, and were only guided by one general objective: the game had to inspire creativity. While the game that came out wasn't exactly "anything goes", it was a game where you had to think on your feet; and while the game had rules and procedures, they were light and simple. What, I think, came out of that session was like a child of the creative processes that went through our heads--smaller in scope, but nonetheless effective.
Marshall McLuhan and Media
Reflect on McLuhan’s ideas as you read through his works (The Medium is the Massage, for one), and do some research on his ideas and methods. Create a visual representation inspired, or based on, two of McLuhan’ written probes. But DO NOT not just interprete the probe literally, but illustrate the meaning of the probe as much as you can, even if the interpretation is an abstract visual representation.
The image above is my visual representation of several of McLuhan's probes relating to media. It is supposed to convey the idea of the degree of influence that the media has on our perception of things. The media influences how we act, how we dress, and even our values. The image also conveys the idea that our technology; our media, is like an iconic representation of humanity. We are technology.
The two probes that the image above best convey would be:
9) The most human thing about us is our technology.
11) The media work us over completely. They are so pervasive in their personal, political, economic, aesthetic, psychological, moral, ethical, and social consequences that they leave no part of us untouched, unaffected, unaltered. The medium is the massage.
Try out McLuhan’s Tetrad on two technologies/media. Sketch out the chain of effects as you apply the Tetrad (don't just stop at one—try three cycles). Try applying the Tetrad for game design, either in the form of the game, or in relation to objects/technologies/ideas within the game worlds you are creating. How could the Tetrad be used as a brainstorming/ ideation tool? Write down your thoughts on using the Tetrad in this capacity.
We don't need to "make" the tetrads an ideation tool, because just by using the tetrads already helps with ideation, as the tetrads makes us break down the subject at hand into simpler things. The tetrads helps us to see the components of a subject more clearly, helping us to draw more links between the subject itself and other relevant objects. It also helps get our minds churning when we form our tetrads, which is an aid in ideation by itself.
One way to interprete McLuhan’s ideas is that he considers technology as a language, and hence there is a pattern or grammar to technological expression. If gaming is considered a language, then what are its parts and the patterns that connect, and what form does this language create (metaphorically at the very least)? What is the game's equivalent of a word, sentence, paragraph, chapter, leading up to the complete work? In this light, could you consider McLuhan a structuralist? Discuss the implications of this interpretation of McLuhan's world-view.
It is impossible for me to draw an in-depth comparison between gaming and language, as I do not know much about the science behind language. What I do know about language, is that it has a certain structure to it, regardless of what language it is. The difference between languages mostly lie only in their syntax and vocabulary.
Gaming, like language, has a certain structure to it. A game concept is comprised of two things, the game mechanics and its context. While different, the game's mechanics and context come together to form a complete game. The game's mechanics is akin to the language's grammar or syntax, while the context is like the vocabulary. The game's mechanics is like a basic structure that enables the game to work, while the context gives meaning to the game itself.
The similarity that I can draw between a language and a game ends here. I don't think it is particularly useful to represent the parts of gaming metaphorically with the parts of language. Gaming and language are intrinsically different. They serve different purposes, thus their inner parts are vastly different from each other. To try and make a metaphor out of these parts will leave these metaphors with little meaning, as the whole point of a metaphor is to portray an intrinsic similarity between two objects. When the similarities between an item and its metaphorical representation is not resonant, then the metaphor becomes pointless.
I consider McLuhan a structuralist, as he uses a very "mechanical" way of interpreting technology. Like gears in clockwork, he believes that technology has patterns and trends--that the parts of technology are linked together.
His structuralist thinking means that his world view has the same implications as those of a structuralist. Seeing everything as a "gear" in clockwork is a great creator of ideas, in my opinion. I believe that there is a certain order that exists within our universe, and being able to spot patterns allows us to better uncover this elegant order that works in the universe, allowing us to see more things. Care must be taken though, as trying too hard to spot patterns may yield reverse results, causing us to fault as we try too hard to find non-existant patterns.
Create a “Mythic-metaphor” representing a current problem or issue in the world.
The deep doodle above is my mythic-metaphor, representing the problem of terrorism in the world. It shows an angelic figure battling against a devilish figure--a representation of the symbolic "good versus evil" scenario that is often presented in olden myths and contemporary media. It is an accurate depiction, seeing as how terrorists in our world today seem to have an unquenchable fixation on destroying things while the rest of the world are trying their hardest to stop these terrorists. The terrorists play the side of evil, hell-bent on destroying existence, while we play the side of good, trying to save existence.
One notable quirk about the image is how the angel is portrayed as masculine and more aggressive than the devil, despite it being the ambassador of peace. It underlines a basic flaw in our perception of good and evil. In the media, the main character is always portrayed as the saviour, the one who redeems people from the darkness and saves the world from it. At the same time, he is also the one who vanquishes the antagonist, who often is portrayed as the embodiment of evil. The irony of it all is that the act of vanquishing the antagonist sinks him down to the antagonist's level by making him the killer, yet people are perfectly fine with it. In the real world, society labels the people who are "good", and the people who are "evil", and it deems itself worthy of vanquishing those who are "evil". What gives society the right to determine who is beyond hope of saving? Are the people who are labelled "evil" in society made by society's prosecution? Perhaps good and evil isn't that simple after all.
The image above is my visual representation of several of McLuhan's probes relating to media. It is supposed to convey the idea of the degree of influence that the media has on our perception of things. The media influences how we act, how we dress, and even our values. The image also conveys the idea that our technology; our media, is like an iconic representation of humanity. We are technology.
The two probes that the image above best convey would be:
9) The most human thing about us is our technology.
11) The media work us over completely. They are so pervasive in their personal, political, economic, aesthetic, psychological, moral, ethical, and social consequences that they leave no part of us untouched, unaffected, unaltered. The medium is the massage.
Try out McLuhan’s Tetrad on two technologies/media. Sketch out the chain of effects as you apply the Tetrad (don't just stop at one—try three cycles). Try applying the Tetrad for game design, either in the form of the game, or in relation to objects/technologies/ideas within the game worlds you are creating. How could the Tetrad be used as a brainstorming/ ideation tool? Write down your thoughts on using the Tetrad in this capacity.
We don't need to "make" the tetrads an ideation tool, because just by using the tetrads already helps with ideation, as the tetrads makes us break down the subject at hand into simpler things. The tetrads helps us to see the components of a subject more clearly, helping us to draw more links between the subject itself and other relevant objects. It also helps get our minds churning when we form our tetrads, which is an aid in ideation by itself.
One way to interprete McLuhan’s ideas is that he considers technology as a language, and hence there is a pattern or grammar to technological expression. If gaming is considered a language, then what are its parts and the patterns that connect, and what form does this language create (metaphorically at the very least)? What is the game's equivalent of a word, sentence, paragraph, chapter, leading up to the complete work? In this light, could you consider McLuhan a structuralist? Discuss the implications of this interpretation of McLuhan's world-view.
It is impossible for me to draw an in-depth comparison between gaming and language, as I do not know much about the science behind language. What I do know about language, is that it has a certain structure to it, regardless of what language it is. The difference between languages mostly lie only in their syntax and vocabulary.
Gaming, like language, has a certain structure to it. A game concept is comprised of two things, the game mechanics and its context. While different, the game's mechanics and context come together to form a complete game. The game's mechanics is akin to the language's grammar or syntax, while the context is like the vocabulary. The game's mechanics is like a basic structure that enables the game to work, while the context gives meaning to the game itself.
The similarity that I can draw between a language and a game ends here. I don't think it is particularly useful to represent the parts of gaming metaphorically with the parts of language. Gaming and language are intrinsically different. They serve different purposes, thus their inner parts are vastly different from each other. To try and make a metaphor out of these parts will leave these metaphors with little meaning, as the whole point of a metaphor is to portray an intrinsic similarity between two objects. When the similarities between an item and its metaphorical representation is not resonant, then the metaphor becomes pointless.
I consider McLuhan a structuralist, as he uses a very "mechanical" way of interpreting technology. Like gears in clockwork, he believes that technology has patterns and trends--that the parts of technology are linked together.
His structuralist thinking means that his world view has the same implications as those of a structuralist. Seeing everything as a "gear" in clockwork is a great creator of ideas, in my opinion. I believe that there is a certain order that exists within our universe, and being able to spot patterns allows us to better uncover this elegant order that works in the universe, allowing us to see more things. Care must be taken though, as trying too hard to spot patterns may yield reverse results, causing us to fault as we try too hard to find non-existant patterns.
Create a “Mythic-metaphor” representing a current problem or issue in the world.
The deep doodle above is my mythic-metaphor, representing the problem of terrorism in the world. It shows an angelic figure battling against a devilish figure--a representation of the symbolic "good versus evil" scenario that is often presented in olden myths and contemporary media. It is an accurate depiction, seeing as how terrorists in our world today seem to have an unquenchable fixation on destroying things while the rest of the world are trying their hardest to stop these terrorists. The terrorists play the side of evil, hell-bent on destroying existence, while we play the side of good, trying to save existence.
One notable quirk about the image is how the angel is portrayed as masculine and more aggressive than the devil, despite it being the ambassador of peace. It underlines a basic flaw in our perception of good and evil. In the media, the main character is always portrayed as the saviour, the one who redeems people from the darkness and saves the world from it. At the same time, he is also the one who vanquishes the antagonist, who often is portrayed as the embodiment of evil. The irony of it all is that the act of vanquishing the antagonist sinks him down to the antagonist's level by making him the killer, yet people are perfectly fine with it. In the real world, society labels the people who are "good", and the people who are "evil", and it deems itself worthy of vanquishing those who are "evil". What gives society the right to determine who is beyond hope of saving? Are the people who are labelled "evil" in society made by society's prosecution? Perhaps good and evil isn't that simple after all.
Thursday, July 2, 2009
Memes and Branding Archetypes
Consider the meme (the idea as replicator/virus). Do you agree with Daniel Denett’s notion of the meme in his TED talk? What are the implications of thinking of ideas in these terms? Consider Susan Blackmore’s extension of the meme—the teme, in your reflections in your blog. What happens if you “extend” (in a McLuhanesque fashion) this idea to its logical extreme?
I agree with Daniel Denett’s notion of the meme that says how memes are replicating packets of information, though I disagree with his negative portrayal of memes—as harmful “viruses”; things that compromise our welfare and survival without giving anything in return.
Memes are very much like genes. They’re two sides of the same coin—polar opposites. While genes are responsible for the survival and the passing on of tangible and physical, memes are responsible for the passing on of the ideological and metaphorical. Just as genes try to replicate themselves, memes very much do too. It is true that memes have the capability to override our natural instinct of ensuring our own survival and reproduction, but that doesn’t make them “harmful viruses” that compromise our best interests in survival. Like genes, memes are subject to natural selection. Bad memes are eliminated simply because they aren’t good enough. Take communism for example—it fell because it was the weaker meme out of itself and capitalism.
While genes govern survival as a singular organism, memes govern survival as a species. If communism were to have gone global after the Cold War, the world would be in a less good state than it is now—more people would’ve died due to poverty and oppression, and there wouldn’t be as many humans as there are now.
Understanding ideas as memes gives us a wider perspective on the world of ideas—a “God’s mode” view on things. Memes show us the world of ideas and its intrinsic operations in its most basic form. It gives more scope to our ideas by allowing us to see things from an “origin point”.
It is interesting to note that Susan Blackmore’s idea about the “teme” is actually a subset of Marshall McLuhan’s idea about how media and technology are extensions of Man. “Temes” are extensions of memes—memes that are spread and sustained by machinery rather than Man himself. It might seem farfetched and right out of an epic sci-fi at first sight, but the idea of the “teme” actually tallies with one of McLuhan’s ideas about machines—that over-reliance on technology creates something called psychic stress, which causes us to lose consciousness over certain aspects of our life because technology takes care of them for us. An example of this is how taking television for granted may shorten our attention spans, as it causes us to take entertainment for granted.
If we “extend” the idea of “temes” to a point of extreme using McLuhan’s logic of media, the ever-increasing presence and power of technology will eventually cause “temes” to replace memes—machines will replace Man in determining what values and ideas are spread by influencing us from within, and we will be completely unaware of their influence over us. This isn’t just because reliance on them renders us unconscious to their effects on us, but also because technology is getting everywhere—even inside our bodies. We will become mechanical beings without our own awareness; and our decisions will be influenced by machines in ways so subtle that we will not be aware of their power over us.
Create a metaphor of an idea – but do not make use of the clichéd naked lightbulb concept, but come up with an original interpretation of the idea metaphor. Next, extend the logical conclusions of this metaphor till you get a image system (or ecology) of ideas relating to it. Starting out with a deep doodle, create a visual representation of this metaphor, with written notes explaining the idea.
I agree with Daniel Denett’s notion of the meme that says how memes are replicating packets of information, though I disagree with his negative portrayal of memes—as harmful “viruses”; things that compromise our welfare and survival without giving anything in return.
Memes are very much like genes. They’re two sides of the same coin—polar opposites. While genes are responsible for the survival and the passing on of tangible and physical, memes are responsible for the passing on of the ideological and metaphorical. Just as genes try to replicate themselves, memes very much do too. It is true that memes have the capability to override our natural instinct of ensuring our own survival and reproduction, but that doesn’t make them “harmful viruses” that compromise our best interests in survival. Like genes, memes are subject to natural selection. Bad memes are eliminated simply because they aren’t good enough. Take communism for example—it fell because it was the weaker meme out of itself and capitalism.
While genes govern survival as a singular organism, memes govern survival as a species. If communism were to have gone global after the Cold War, the world would be in a less good state than it is now—more people would’ve died due to poverty and oppression, and there wouldn’t be as many humans as there are now.
Understanding ideas as memes gives us a wider perspective on the world of ideas—a “God’s mode” view on things. Memes show us the world of ideas and its intrinsic operations in its most basic form. It gives more scope to our ideas by allowing us to see things from an “origin point”.
It is interesting to note that Susan Blackmore’s idea about the “teme” is actually a subset of Marshall McLuhan’s idea about how media and technology are extensions of Man. “Temes” are extensions of memes—memes that are spread and sustained by machinery rather than Man himself. It might seem farfetched and right out of an epic sci-fi at first sight, but the idea of the “teme” actually tallies with one of McLuhan’s ideas about machines—that over-reliance on technology creates something called psychic stress, which causes us to lose consciousness over certain aspects of our life because technology takes care of them for us. An example of this is how taking television for granted may shorten our attention spans, as it causes us to take entertainment for granted.
If we “extend” the idea of “temes” to a point of extreme using McLuhan’s logic of media, the ever-increasing presence and power of technology will eventually cause “temes” to replace memes—machines will replace Man in determining what values and ideas are spread by influencing us from within, and we will be completely unaware of their influence over us. This isn’t just because reliance on them renders us unconscious to their effects on us, but also because technology is getting everywhere—even inside our bodies. We will become mechanical beings without our own awareness; and our decisions will be influenced by machines in ways so subtle that we will not be aware of their power over us.
Create a metaphor of an idea – but do not make use of the clichéd naked lightbulb concept, but come up with an original interpretation of the idea metaphor. Next, extend the logical conclusions of this metaphor till you get a image system (or ecology) of ideas relating to it. Starting out with a deep doodle, create a visual representation of this metaphor, with written notes explaining the idea.
Saturday, May 23, 2009
Ideas & Metaphors
Start creating a schematic of an Idea System – a systematic method you can start to deploy in your game design activities. Is it like a Machine (an Idea Machine)? Is it a world, or is it embodied by a set of inhabitants? Can it be embodied as a Quest? Start fleshing out this Idea System in your journal. Where are you now in the ideation process for your gaming project? Sketch this out as a journey and show your progress and possible problems you may encounter.
After spending some time recollecting previous experiences of my creative attempts, I've come up with a map of what I think is a pretty accurate representation of my thought patterns in my creative process. Note that this mindmap isn't only representative of my creative process in game designing, but is applicable to anything that requires me to unleash my creativity.
One interesting thing to note about my ideation process is that the creative bits often come not in the early conceptualisation parts, but in the parts where I flesh out and fine-tune the product (the third and fourth phases in the map). This realisation struck me sudden and hard after my first year of game designing, but it brought me to focus alot more on unleashing creativity through the execution of concepts rather than through the novelty of my concepts. It is difficult to conceive of something entire new in this day and age, but easy to conceive of new ways to do old things and bring brand new ways of looking at age old things.
I wouldn't consider my ideation process mechanical though, because even though the processes behind ideation remain mostly the same, my ideation process focuses heavily on user experience. Art is, afterall, made for humans, so I make it a point to ensure that whatever I do evokes the right feelings and emotions in my audience. Machines use logic to reach a decision, but my ideation process focuses mainly not on whether things can logically work out, but whether they give out the right feeling to the audience. My ideation process is more like a little world--governed by certain ground rules and "laws", but with inhabitants that quite frequently do things that surprise me in both pleasant and unpleasant ways.
In my studio project, I forsee that the entire process will be similar to the way I laid out my ideation process in the mindmap. There will, of course, be problems met along the way in the form of initially conceived good-on-paper ideas that do not work, which means there will be a need to find solutions for them. There will be many of such problems, some of them small, others big and crippling; but in the end, I believe that no matter how much problems surface, they will all be fixed to a degree that is at least acceptable.
Is your personal system of ideation effective or are you using the same old recycled methods? How do you think you can be more efficient in getting top quality ideas, and to have good criteria for quality? In what ways can you boost the quality of your own ideas? How do you choose the right (and best) idea? How do you know?
I think that my personal system of ideation is quite effective, as it is organic and constantly yields me pleasing end results that are not quite what I've expected in the beginning. I have to admit, though, that it is far from being the best ideation system.
Some of the best ideas that have been conceived in the world did not come from ideation systems, which requires what I like to label "compulsive thinking" on the part of the person formulating the idea. These ideas were spontaneous--they came out in moments where the mind was still, as perfectly organic reactions from deep within the person. Einstein himself was once quoted as saying that thinking "plays only a subordinate part in the brief, decisive phase of the creative act itself" when asked to comment on his working methodologies.
I believe in spontaneous ideation because I have benefitted from it in many instances--moments of my life where I attempt endeavours without a "grand plan of success". My best presentation speeches, my best DotA games, my best socialising attempts--they were all achieved with minimal planning and expectations. I believe that my state of mind during these instances was free of the burden of plans, and thus it was functioning at full effectiveness in coping with whatever was needed of it at the moment.
I have yet to find a reliable way to factor in the power of spontaneity into my ideation system (largely because having an ideation system is having a plan, and being spontaneous means having no plans), but I believe that it can be done. When that happens, I believe that my ideation system will take a great leap forward. Right now, one of the ways I'm attempting to insert spontaneity into my creative process is by putting myself in places and situations that I've never been before. Not only can this potentially serve as a good source of inspiration, it's a great excuse to have for attending parties and such.
That said, let me reiterate that the best ideas are spontaneous ones, as they are the most natural (and as a result, best) reaction to what nature throws at us (this paragraph was to answer the last two questions, in case I haven't answered them with the wall of text above).
Consider the metaphor that your life is a game (and a really important one at that!). How then are you playing your life? What are the obstacles in your way? Who are the villains and helpers in this game? How can you play this game better? Explore this metaphor in conjunction with Question 1, and come up with more questions to answer on your own.
If life was a game, I would say that I've just learnt how to play it the right way, since I've been continuously working towards achieving the things I want in life, and I've been seeing positive results. In this sense, I believe the only obstacle in my way is my own confidence in myself, because it has been a huge determinant in whatever I did in life. Having confidence in life means succeeding, and succeeding means getting what I want, which leads to me being happy. Happiness then leads towards more self-confidence, which leads to success, and so on...
While this entire imagery of repetition that I've made up about my life may seem boring, I think it is a little blueprint that gives me fulfillment in life, and improving my life means finding ways to sustain this cycle. For some time now, I've been finding reliable sources of happiness in my life, because happiness is like a fuel that powers this cycle, and it is easily lost if you derive happiness from the wrong sources. The past few months of my life have thus been dedicated to finding the little things in my life that are worth being happy about--the rest of my life will continue to fall in place if I guard this aspect well.
After spending some time recollecting previous experiences of my creative attempts, I've come up with a map of what I think is a pretty accurate representation of my thought patterns in my creative process. Note that this mindmap isn't only representative of my creative process in game designing, but is applicable to anything that requires me to unleash my creativity.
One interesting thing to note about my ideation process is that the creative bits often come not in the early conceptualisation parts, but in the parts where I flesh out and fine-tune the product (the third and fourth phases in the map). This realisation struck me sudden and hard after my first year of game designing, but it brought me to focus alot more on unleashing creativity through the execution of concepts rather than through the novelty of my concepts. It is difficult to conceive of something entire new in this day and age, but easy to conceive of new ways to do old things and bring brand new ways of looking at age old things.
I wouldn't consider my ideation process mechanical though, because even though the processes behind ideation remain mostly the same, my ideation process focuses heavily on user experience. Art is, afterall, made for humans, so I make it a point to ensure that whatever I do evokes the right feelings and emotions in my audience. Machines use logic to reach a decision, but my ideation process focuses mainly not on whether things can logically work out, but whether they give out the right feeling to the audience. My ideation process is more like a little world--governed by certain ground rules and "laws", but with inhabitants that quite frequently do things that surprise me in both pleasant and unpleasant ways.
In my studio project, I forsee that the entire process will be similar to the way I laid out my ideation process in the mindmap. There will, of course, be problems met along the way in the form of initially conceived good-on-paper ideas that do not work, which means there will be a need to find solutions for them. There will be many of such problems, some of them small, others big and crippling; but in the end, I believe that no matter how much problems surface, they will all be fixed to a degree that is at least acceptable.
Is your personal system of ideation effective or are you using the same old recycled methods? How do you think you can be more efficient in getting top quality ideas, and to have good criteria for quality? In what ways can you boost the quality of your own ideas? How do you choose the right (and best) idea? How do you know?
I think that my personal system of ideation is quite effective, as it is organic and constantly yields me pleasing end results that are not quite what I've expected in the beginning. I have to admit, though, that it is far from being the best ideation system.
Some of the best ideas that have been conceived in the world did not come from ideation systems, which requires what I like to label "compulsive thinking" on the part of the person formulating the idea. These ideas were spontaneous--they came out in moments where the mind was still, as perfectly organic reactions from deep within the person. Einstein himself was once quoted as saying that thinking "plays only a subordinate part in the brief, decisive phase of the creative act itself" when asked to comment on his working methodologies.
I believe in spontaneous ideation because I have benefitted from it in many instances--moments of my life where I attempt endeavours without a "grand plan of success". My best presentation speeches, my best DotA games, my best socialising attempts--they were all achieved with minimal planning and expectations. I believe that my state of mind during these instances was free of the burden of plans, and thus it was functioning at full effectiveness in coping with whatever was needed of it at the moment.
I have yet to find a reliable way to factor in the power of spontaneity into my ideation system (largely because having an ideation system is having a plan, and being spontaneous means having no plans), but I believe that it can be done. When that happens, I believe that my ideation system will take a great leap forward. Right now, one of the ways I'm attempting to insert spontaneity into my creative process is by putting myself in places and situations that I've never been before. Not only can this potentially serve as a good source of inspiration, it's a great excuse to have for attending parties and such.
That said, let me reiterate that the best ideas are spontaneous ones, as they are the most natural (and as a result, best) reaction to what nature throws at us (this paragraph was to answer the last two questions, in case I haven't answered them with the wall of text above).
Consider the metaphor that your life is a game (and a really important one at that!). How then are you playing your life? What are the obstacles in your way? Who are the villains and helpers in this game? How can you play this game better? Explore this metaphor in conjunction with Question 1, and come up with more questions to answer on your own.
If life was a game, I would say that I've just learnt how to play it the right way, since I've been continuously working towards achieving the things I want in life, and I've been seeing positive results. In this sense, I believe the only obstacle in my way is my own confidence in myself, because it has been a huge determinant in whatever I did in life. Having confidence in life means succeeding, and succeeding means getting what I want, which leads to me being happy. Happiness then leads towards more self-confidence, which leads to success, and so on...
While this entire imagery of repetition that I've made up about my life may seem boring, I think it is a little blueprint that gives me fulfillment in life, and improving my life means finding ways to sustain this cycle. For some time now, I've been finding reliable sources of happiness in my life, because happiness is like a fuel that powers this cycle, and it is easily lost if you derive happiness from the wrong sources. The past few months of my life have thus been dedicated to finding the little things in my life that are worth being happy about--the rest of my life will continue to fall in place if I guard this aspect well.
Saturday, May 9, 2009
Semiotics and the World of Ideas
Go to the net and do some research on the Structuralists, and get familiar with some of the ideas they have expounded. How are these ideas useful to you as a game designer?
Structuralists, simply, are people who approach the study of human science by attempting to analyse a specific field of human life (e.g. mythology, linguistics) as a complex system of interrelated parts.
As a designer, I think that the structuralist way of looking at the world has provided me with valuable insight as it reveals to me another paradigm with which to look at the world at. Understanding how to see the world from different viewpoints helps me to reach a greater understanding of human culture as a whole, which is always beneficial to me as a games designer, seeing that an integral part of games designing is creating new experiences for the users.
I do think, however, that the structuralist's way of thinking can be detrimental to creativity in certain instances, because structuralism seems to me as though it has an unhealthy obsession with finding patterns in things. Some aspects of humanity can never be quantified--at least not by humans themselves--and this is what structuralists seem to be trying very hard to do (in my opinion).
Compare the idea of an idea, from a "normal" point of view, as opposed to the idea of an idea, according to Semiotics.
In society, an idea is often met with positivity. Ideas are associated with intellect and creativity, and people who put out ideas on a regular basis are usually seen as more capable than their more mellow peers. We forget that the idea can be preceded by the word "bad". That being said, my idea of an idea, expressed in as layman a way as possible, is this: a conception of an something based on prior understanding of the subject or subjects at hand. The semiotic take of an idea is probably not very much different; from my understanding, their take on it is that an idea is something that can be signified by signs (i.e. expressed in language, pictorials, etc.)
How are metaphors useful to your work? What are some metaphors that you are familiar with, know of, or use, in your daily life? Illustrate 3 metaphors in your Blog Journal.
Metaphors are useful in helping us imply certain ideas or invoke certain imagery in the minds of people who are playing my games. The human mind is something that enjoys inserting its own inputs into the things it perceives. In the case of games, having metaphors in a game causes the human mind to have more of an attachment to the game, as giving out messages in metaphorical form forces the mind to "fill in the blanks", making it feel a sense of belonging to the game. Using metaphors to give out messages also gives more depth and intrigue to the messages being sent out.
Metaphors also pervade our society--it is almost universally accepted, for example, that roses represent love and passion; that lions represent pride and strength; and that monkeys represent mischief.
On paper, conceptualise an Idea Map to map out the scope and limit of your own knowledge, not just of play/gaming, but of the larger known world of ideas. What are the Peaks and Valleys in your Idea World? What are the Swamps of uncertainties and Stormy seas of the unknown? Explore this world and journal your thoughts on this journey.
Upon drafting out an idea map, I've realised that the scope of my knowledge of this world can be categorised into three groups: knowledge of social issues and workings, conventional science and awareness of spirituality. I'll expound on each of these.
Knowledge of social issues and workings basically encompasses what its name implies--how well versed one is when it comes to interacting and dealing with people, and how much one knows about the events happening around us, both locally and globally. I like to think that when it comes to interacting with people, I'm quite aware of the various subtleties behind human communication, like the little nuances of body language. I can be, on many instances, aware of what people are thinking when they are communicating with me, though I have to admit that when it comes to dealing with difficult people and situations, I am lacking. I am also pretty oblivious to worldly events, except the most significant ones, like the recent swine flu affair.
Knowledge of conventional science is basically the understanding of how our world works--physics, chemistry and biology. Out of all of the conventional sciences, I am most fluent with physics, having a rather clear understanding of the ideas behind Newtonian mechanics, Albert Einstein's relativity, and a little bit of quantum mechanics. My scope of knowledge for chemistry isn't as advanced, though I do possess understanding of basic chemical methods and how they work. I have to say though, my grasp of the ideas of convential science does not go deep--for most cases, I only know their concepts, and am unable to apply their formulae to derive answers (except for Newtonian mechanics).
Awareness of spirituality refers to how much understanding one possesses of the world's variety of religions, and why people seek them so. The reason why I titled this category "awareness of spirituality" instead of simply "understading of religions" is because religions all offer pretty much the same thing--a source of happiness that is independent of the happenings of our world; something which everyone needs. I have explored this aspect of life quite abit and learnt much about religion as a result. While I do not claim to know very much about religions, I can safely say that most of the mainstream religions in the world point towards the same thing in different ways; and what is this thing that they point to, you ask? It points to achieving a state of mind that can be at peace regardless of what the everchanging wolrd around us brings.
Structuralists, simply, are people who approach the study of human science by attempting to analyse a specific field of human life (e.g. mythology, linguistics) as a complex system of interrelated parts.
As a designer, I think that the structuralist way of looking at the world has provided me with valuable insight as it reveals to me another paradigm with which to look at the world at. Understanding how to see the world from different viewpoints helps me to reach a greater understanding of human culture as a whole, which is always beneficial to me as a games designer, seeing that an integral part of games designing is creating new experiences for the users.
I do think, however, that the structuralist's way of thinking can be detrimental to creativity in certain instances, because structuralism seems to me as though it has an unhealthy obsession with finding patterns in things. Some aspects of humanity can never be quantified--at least not by humans themselves--and this is what structuralists seem to be trying very hard to do (in my opinion).
Compare the idea of an idea, from a "normal" point of view, as opposed to the idea of an idea, according to Semiotics.
In society, an idea is often met with positivity. Ideas are associated with intellect and creativity, and people who put out ideas on a regular basis are usually seen as more capable than their more mellow peers. We forget that the idea can be preceded by the word "bad". That being said, my idea of an idea, expressed in as layman a way as possible, is this: a conception of an something based on prior understanding of the subject or subjects at hand. The semiotic take of an idea is probably not very much different; from my understanding, their take on it is that an idea is something that can be signified by signs (i.e. expressed in language, pictorials, etc.)
How are metaphors useful to your work? What are some metaphors that you are familiar with, know of, or use, in your daily life? Illustrate 3 metaphors in your Blog Journal.
Metaphors are useful in helping us imply certain ideas or invoke certain imagery in the minds of people who are playing my games. The human mind is something that enjoys inserting its own inputs into the things it perceives. In the case of games, having metaphors in a game causes the human mind to have more of an attachment to the game, as giving out messages in metaphorical form forces the mind to "fill in the blanks", making it feel a sense of belonging to the game. Using metaphors to give out messages also gives more depth and intrigue to the messages being sent out.
Metaphors also pervade our society--it is almost universally accepted, for example, that roses represent love and passion; that lions represent pride and strength; and that monkeys represent mischief.
On paper, conceptualise an Idea Map to map out the scope and limit of your own knowledge, not just of play/gaming, but of the larger known world of ideas. What are the Peaks and Valleys in your Idea World? What are the Swamps of uncertainties and Stormy seas of the unknown? Explore this world and journal your thoughts on this journey.
Upon drafting out an idea map, I've realised that the scope of my knowledge of this world can be categorised into three groups: knowledge of social issues and workings, conventional science and awareness of spirituality. I'll expound on each of these.
Knowledge of social issues and workings basically encompasses what its name implies--how well versed one is when it comes to interacting and dealing with people, and how much one knows about the events happening around us, both locally and globally. I like to think that when it comes to interacting with people, I'm quite aware of the various subtleties behind human communication, like the little nuances of body language. I can be, on many instances, aware of what people are thinking when they are communicating with me, though I have to admit that when it comes to dealing with difficult people and situations, I am lacking. I am also pretty oblivious to worldly events, except the most significant ones, like the recent swine flu affair.
Knowledge of conventional science is basically the understanding of how our world works--physics, chemistry and biology. Out of all of the conventional sciences, I am most fluent with physics, having a rather clear understanding of the ideas behind Newtonian mechanics, Albert Einstein's relativity, and a little bit of quantum mechanics. My scope of knowledge for chemistry isn't as advanced, though I do possess understanding of basic chemical methods and how they work. I have to say though, my grasp of the ideas of convential science does not go deep--for most cases, I only know their concepts, and am unable to apply their formulae to derive answers (except for Newtonian mechanics).
Awareness of spirituality refers to how much understanding one possesses of the world's variety of religions, and why people seek them so. The reason why I titled this category "awareness of spirituality" instead of simply "understading of religions" is because religions all offer pretty much the same thing--a source of happiness that is independent of the happenings of our world; something which everyone needs. I have explored this aspect of life quite abit and learnt much about religion as a result. While I do not claim to know very much about religions, I can safely say that most of the mainstream religions in the world point towards the same thing in different ways; and what is this thing that they point to, you ask? It points to achieving a state of mind that can be at peace regardless of what the everchanging wolrd around us brings.
Subscribe to:
Comments (Atom)