| (no subject) |
[Nov. 8th, 2009|03:40 pm] |
It's 70 fucking degrees here, in November. On the bright side it made lunch very pleasant; but this is crazy. To be honest, I'm excited for the winter; I really love the melancholy of cold weather and sunsets at 4:30. Right now is a time of change, a time where I'd like to be more reflective and that's why some good old cold weather doesn't bother me at all.
Meanwhile, this honors project continues to eat up time without definite answers. I've been surprised at some of the discoveries I've made; post-structuralist theory has actually given me important insights, namely by showing me that I have a lot more freedom than I thought I had so long as I accept that much of what I'm doing will simply define a syntax of some sort or another rather than align with or rub against the expectations of those who use my program. I suppose Iser/Ingarden get the MVP award, but Derrida came through in the end (sort of.)
The main elements that have gone into this project are as of now Conversation Analysis, Narratology, Information Theory, Deconstruction, Phenomenology and of course Aristotle's Poetics. Man, that's a load of name-dropping, and I don't quite see where they've come together yet. I'm finding though that these things are allowing me to take an approach that is more about approximations than rigid rules, which is extremely important. I've got my work cut out for me, I'll stop boring everyone to tears with this technical talk.
Recently though, I've found an intimate between what I thought to be two separate pursuits in creating more "artistic" games--the representation of lifelike "characters" and having a narrative form out of actions in a game. Doing either leads to the other; in order to have narrative there needs to be some amount of human factors, narratives being the accumulated repercussions of events. Characters, on the other hand, aren't static, they grow and they remain lifelike by surprising us, which requires that the set of actions for input and output in a game be sophisticated enough to make agents that are lifelike. This is a bit of a simplification, I'm sure people will have all kinds of objections, at least with the way I've put it.
Ultimately, I think that the common thread is in how games are currently set up as opposed to how they should be. As one person once told me a long time ago, and rightfully so, "I don't care about what's on the surface, they can be circles and squares for all I care; it's the internal logic that matters." This is what needs to change; right now we're working with mechanical processes that are easily decoded to the point that any reasonably intelligent person is completely detached from what comes at them on the screen. What's needed is a type of gameplay that constantly asks for interpretation on behalf of the player so that the surface of the game doesn't simply fall off to reveal an ugly machine. Maybe this is what Crawford was trying to do when he wanted to go from "puzzles" to "interactions." |
|
|
| (no subject) |
[Oct. 27th, 2009|04:56 pm] |
Yet another test messed up because of anxiety. Nothing I didn't understand, nothing I found difficult; I just lost the ability to keep focused as I got more and more worked up over my careless mistakes.
This has to stop. I haven't spent the last two years pushing myself hard just so I could fuck up a test that should have been child's play. |
|
|
| (no subject) |
[Oct. 15th, 2009|11:04 pm] |
I'm quite tired right now. It's only 11, but I've been sick the past couple of days, so it feels much later than it should. This would help explain why it's been taking me forever to get this paper done and why I still haven't finished it. After that I have an econ problem set to do.
I didn't have to make such an elaborate thesis for a paper, and right now I am starting to wish I had been less ambitious; but I know why I do this to myself. Writing half-assed work, not giving it my all and doing more than I need to--it's not fun. Regurgitating knowledge isn't fun, bullshitting isn't fun. The challenge is interesting, so long as I don't crash in a few hours. I really ought to have more stamina than this.
Just have to talk about Iser, Fish, Eliot, Gaset and Foucault and voila I've made my point about this crappy thesis! |
|
|
| (no subject) |
[Oct. 13th, 2009|12:56 pm] |
It's strange how "high culture" and "low culture" can sometimes mix up.
I didn't realize it until now, but I actually do think that "Changes" by Tupac is a beautiful song. And I mean that in total seriousness. |
|
|
| (no subject) |
[Oct. 10th, 2009|10:48 pm] |
I've been bashing my head against a wall with regards to minor theoretical problems again and again and again when it's hit me. The number one rule of game design.
Make a prototype when the idea is 20% complete and keep playing it and working on it from there. You can't use theoretical thinking to predict how it will turn out.
Now I know where to get some of the answers that I'm looking for. I'll have much more solid ground. I'll start writing code tomorrow. |
|
|
| (no subject) |
[Sep. 28th, 2009|01:57 pm] |
|
What if Derrida is just the Zeno of our time and 100 years from now, some extremely bizarre discovery (perhaps in physics) disproves him? |
|
|
| A Socratic Dialogue that ought to happen at my dining co-op |
[Sep. 26th, 2009|05:02 pm] |
Carnivicus is a meat-eater at Old Barrows, a dining co-operative. Veganicus also goes to Old Barrows. Veganicus believes that meat should never be served at Old Barrows, despite the fact that many at Old Barrows eat meat and that Old Barrows has traditionally had an easygoing food policy.
Troubled by this, Carnivicus investigates the nature of the problem by questioning Veganicus:
Car: So why is it that we cannot have meat in Old B?
Veg: Because slaughtering animals for food is wrong.
Car: So if you don’t approve, then why don’t you not eat it?
Veg: Because I would still have to pay for the meat, which I do not support.
Car: So you should not have to help pay for anything that you disapprove of?
Veg: Exactly.
Car: Then tell me, if there were a conservative Christian in the co-op, and he disapproved of homosexuality, then should Old B not let homosexuals into the co-op?
Veg: That’s ridiculous, the conservative Christian doesn’t have to pay money towards what he doesn’t approve of.
Car: But they do; every person costs money to be fed and the conservative Christian may not want to spend his money on a co-op that condones homosexuality.
Veg: You’re still being ridiculous because what you’re talking about is discrimination, and that’s wrong.
Car: So if the viewpoint of the Christian were not wrong, we should oblige to it.
Veg: Yes, that is true.
Car: So by that logic, we should not have rice in the co-op if somebody is morally opposed to rice.
Veg: That’s ridiculous! Why should somebody be able to stop us from eating rice?
Car: Because you just said that if the person’s objection is not wrong, then we should oblige to it.
Veg: Well, it can’t be arbitrary.
Car: So then we should oblige to somebody’s objections if their viewpoint is not wrong nor arbitrary, but right.
Veg: Yes, that works.
Car: So by saying that meat should not be allowed in the co-op, you are insinuating that being opposed to meat is right.
Veg: Yes, I fully believe that.
Car: But what if not everybody believes that being opposed to meat is right?
Veg: Well I believe that eating meat is wrong.
Car: Just like how a conservative Christian believes that homosexuality is wrong.
Veg: But it’s different.
Car: How is it any different?
Veg: The conservative Christian is pushing his beliefs on other people
Car: And you’re not?
Veg: You know what? I’m ethically opposed to meat and I don’t believe in your greedy capitalist ethics! You’re completely wrong!
Car: You didn’t hear anything I said before did you? |
|
|
| (no subject) |
[Sep. 24th, 2009|06:55 pm] |
I really don't know how music from a video game, especially one that I never was particularly fond of, can stir up such emotion in me. You'll all probably think its weird, but there's something about this song that keeps striking a chord with me.
|
|
|
| (no subject) |
[Sep. 14th, 2009|05:32 pm] |
|
If all Derrida is trying to say is that discourse can't be reduced to anything else (is all that exists), then I'm a bit disappointed. |
|
|
| (no subject) |
[Sep. 10th, 2009|11:03 pm] |
|
I never really listened to or cared for classical music as a teenager-didn't really listen to any at all until sophomore year of college when I started listening to Shostakovich. It seemed for a while that I really only liked 20th century classical, listening to a lot of Steve Reich and John Cage. Recently though I've been listening to a lot of Beethoven's piano Sonatas and it's hit me that I really just don't like orchestral music most of the time despite how much I respect it; it's piano solos that really grab me. There's a particular minimalism to the piano that gives it a contemplative sound no matter how perky it is; and when a person can make a piece that's truly atmospheric from just the piano, there's a sparseness to it that just makes it that much more beautiful than the sound of multiple instruments all working to make as much sound as possible. Maybe one day I should make another attempt at learning classical piano... |
|
|
| (no subject) |
[Aug. 19th, 2009|05:09 pm] |
|
Is it just me or is Lady GaGa's style reflective of pop music dealing with a new target audience? By that I mean the fact that hipsters (and maybe the gay community?) have become a lot more vocal in steering the direction of pop music. Now that every hipster is spending their spare time listening to Beyonce and Lil Wayne, is the industry responding by changing pop artists? |
|
|
| (no subject) |
[Aug. 16th, 2009|03:05 pm] |
Just now I've made the decision not to take a class on Non-Euclidean Geometry. I was super excited for it, it sounds like an incredible class, but as painful as the choice is, I can't let my school year go awry. My pride feels punctured by such a thing, I've been such an excessively proud person all of these years, always needing to prove to people that I "have what it takes," whatever that means. But it just seems to be the case that I have three big reasons not to take a suicidal courseload: (1) my honors project could get brutal, and if that's the case I'll need reserves of time, the project must be successful at all costs; (2) I'd be going down the wrong road to force myself to be constantly medicated this year, these medications have deprived me of a lot of important things and I need to limit their usage, (3) simply put, I need to not be a hermit and cut off my entire social life, which is what I did last year. There are a lot of important things to get done this coming year, and if things go awry on account of being overworked this coming year, I could fuck myself over. I have to use every bit of my willpower against my pride, and yes, my intellectual curiosity, to stay on this pragmatic course and make this important decision: if things go sour this year on account of too much stress, it may be a mistake that sets me back a very long way.
That said, I have to make sure I don't soften up on my training. This decision can't function as an excuse to be a schlub. |
|
|
| (no subject) |
[Aug. 4th, 2009|12:19 am] |
Research for my honors project has been slow and painful this summer--a lot of useless information and a lot of theoretical nitpicking. As things draw down, I'll put down Gerard Genette and Noam Chomsky and all those other great things so I can get down to the most important things.
Tomorrow, I break this project down into smaller parts and work on one part at a time, reverting to theory only when necessary. Eventually I'd like to finish a couple more books, but I take my aversion to reading anything today as a sign of what I actually need to do.
When I'm done breaking the project down into parts best I can, I will create a plan to finish those parts as best I can. Then I will get to work on finishing the design hypothesis that I am currently working on. I hope that this will allow me to get off to a good start this year and leave me some time this summer to get away from everything.
Here goes. |
|
|
| (no subject) |
[Jul. 25th, 2009|06:09 am] |
|
Woah, just had the ultimate dream inside a dream experience. I was dreaming about going to sleep after the gathering from last night with Shulan, Jenni, Scott, John and Chrissi's camp friends. The expensive bottle of tequila was in it, as was the awkwardness between Chrissi's coworkers and my group--but they were more overt. The entire thing began as something of a carbon copy of last night but with the subtext made overt and it just grew from there. Then I woke up because sleeping in my bed (in the dream) was creepy for some reason. |
|
|
| (no subject) |
[Jul. 17th, 2009|03:59 pm] |
Snape might be the half-blood prince, but there's only one true Prince...
And maybe this guy too:
That is to say, the movie was a very poorly narrated piece of work. Here is something much more entertaining:
|
|
|
| (no subject) |
[Jul. 17th, 2009|11:32 am] |
|
I've been on a cheesy ambient/lounge kick recently. Cafe Del Mar Vol. 6, you can tell it's cheesy just by the name. |
|
|
| (no subject) |
[Jul. 4th, 2009|03:09 pm] |
|
America is the worst country in the world, except for all the others. |
|
|
| navigation |
| [ |
viewing |
| |
most recent entries |
] |
| [ |
go |
| |
earlier |
] |
| |
|
|
![[info]](http://l-stat.livejournal.com/img/userinfo.gif){kind=small}
thelosthoplite's journal