next »

[DJFloppyFish]

or are you just happy to be alive?

[s0]

i do care, yes.

but i tend to have a low opinion of my own skills

[Shackhal]

Professionaly, yes. I do care. It's your portfolio, anyway. If you are bad, you are screwed.

Indiely-ish, no. You get better doing things over time, anyway.

[J-Snake]

or are you just happy to be alive?

That won't last for long. You have to do something. It makes yourself stronger, and more fulfilled, to have some goals. There is no excuse.

[DJFloppyFish]

drive is definitely important, you should always be wanting to improve. that said, there is a virtue to being able to simply lose yourself in your craft and not concern yourself with doubting your skills.

[JWK5]

The desire to be good at something is rooted in the desire to be in control, which none of us really are. When we say "good at" what we are really saying is "able to predict the steps likely to produce a given outcome", be it consciously or subconsciously (or perhaps through muscle memory). It has been my experience the more you are focused on being in control the less control you have, it makes you rigid and resistant to change. Adaptability is where real progress is made, the ability to learn on the fly and constantly adjust to suit the situation. You don't need to be "good" at anything to adapt, you just need to be willing to try and willing to allow yourself to change with the challenges you face. The more you adapt, the less pressure life is able to exert on you, the happier it might make you to be alive.

[J-Snake]

The desire to be good at something is rooted in the desire to be in control, which none of us really are. When we say "good at" what we are really saying is "able to predict the steps likely to produce a given outcome",

My problem with that misleading attitude is when it is used as excuse for buggy games. Because it is hard, but likely possible to avoid them.

[Schoq]

the only reason I ever try to learn anything is so I can feel smart

[ProgramGamer]

I am perfectionist to the point where I consistently give up on projects because I estimate that I will not be able to finish them. And yes, I do care a lot about how good I am at things. Not many people realize, but it's the reason I'm so good at drawing, because I constantly want to improve and discover new techniques. In recent years I have learned to somewhat accept a certain level of quality as acceptable, just to keep me from burning myself of something.

[surt]

I do care because I need to feel superior in order to look down on others.

[Canned Turkey]

I feel I have a realistic understanding of how good I am at things, and it makes me happy. But my skill/talent in gamedev and art, no matter how good or bad, doesn't change how I live my life outside of the indie community, so in that way, I guess you could say I don't care.
But I still strive to get better.  

[JWK5]

The desire to be good at something is rooted in the desire to be in control, which none of us really are. When we say "good at" what we are really saying is "able to predict the steps likely to produce a given outcome",

My problem with that misleading attitude is when it is used as excuse for buggy games. Because it is hard, but likely possible to avoid them.

It's not an excuse for a lack of effort, it is a reason to be more flexible when it comes to finding solutions.

It reminds me of people playing fighting games. There are a lot of people who are really good at pulling off the combos but often they get stuck on it, repeatedly and belligerently trying to make the combos they're good at their only route to victory. They "know" they are "good", and their skills are "supposed" to give them the advantage and in easy situations (fighting amateurs) their beliefs are reinforced. However, because of this they telegraph their actions and it becomes easy to predict and counter them. Technically, they are good players because they have a solid handle on the mechanics of operating their characters, but because they can not adapt once they hit a wall (a player that can read them) they become terrible players. They can not reliably function outside any situation that does not fit their rigid skill set. Being "good" holds them back.

In terms of buggy games, maybe the creators are trying too hard to solve they problems with what they "know" works rather than letting go of that and trying approaches outside the scope of their current skill set. Maybe they are too focused on what they do "good" and not willing to adapt.



Or as your avatar puts it:

[jamesprimate]

interesting discussion! the premise of the question sort of shifts depending on the context, as people do the same things for a variety of reasons. are these "things" done for esteem among your peers or for a job or as a means to express something or just for enjoyment? all completely valid, but the meaning of the question changes for each one. "good" in the context of expressing something could be "accurately realizing your intention", whereas "good" in the context of a job could be "paying the rent with you skills".

i have thought about this question a lot. when i was younger, for a time i was very concerned with being perceived as being "good at ______" or "the best at _______" by those who i saw as my peers, and went to great lengths to prove that to myself with technique and degrees and awards. but thats a really narrow pursuit, creating "art-within-the-context-of-things-that-people-who-judge-art-will-consider-to-be-meritorious". sure, some interesting things can come of it, but its really just acceptance-seeking.

the reason has probably changed many times since then, but for now "good" to me means "this is an authentic expression of a mood or concept that is accurately communicated", and to answer the question: yes i care about that a lot!

[Mittens]

I don't know any other way to get people to take notice of me other than to be exceptionally good at something. So far though, I've found perusing mastery only intimidates, alienates, embitters or otherwise repels people

 

[Mittens]

interesting discussion! the premise of the question sort of shifts depending on the context, as people do the same things for a variety of reasons. are these "things" done for esteem among your peers or for a job or as a means to express something or just for enjoyment? all completely valid, but the meaning of the question changes for each one. "good" in the context of expressing something could be "accurately realizing your intention", whereas "good" in the context of a job could be "paying the rent with you skills".

i have thought about this question a lot. when i was younger, for a time i was very concerned with being perceived as being "good at ______" or "the best at _______" by those who i saw as my peers, and went to great lengths to prove that to myself with technique and degrees and awards. but thats a really narrow pursuit, creating "art-within-the-context-of-things-that-people-who-judge-art-will-consider-to-be-meritorious". sure, some interesting things can come of it, but its really just acceptance-seeking.

the reason has probably changed many times since then, but for now "good" to me means "this is an authentic expression of a mood or concept that is accurately communicated", and to answer the question: yes i care about that a lot!

Do you think you've found a motivation beyond acceptance-seeking or has the acceptance you are after just changed form?

[J-Snake]

It reminds me of people playing fighting games. There are a lot of people who are really good at pulling off the combos but often they get stuck on it, repeatedly and belligerently trying to make the combos they're good at their only route to victory. They "know" they are "good", and their skills are "supposed" to give them the advantage and in easy situations (fighting amateurs) their beliefs are reinforced. However, because of this they telegraph their actions and it becomes easy to predict and counter them. Technically, they are good players because they have a solid handle on the mechanics of operating their characters, but because they can not adapt once they hit a wall (a player that can read them) they become terrible players. They can not reliably function outside any situation that does not fit their rigid skill set. Being "good" holds them back.

Ok, but what are you really saying? Practicing combos and only fighting your brothers and sisters is not enough to get good at fighters. As you are implying you have to adapt to your opponent. Thus you have to train yourself to read and adapt to the current state of mind of various opponents. That should be your major focus. You have to know what you are setting out to do before you focus on it. For example my main focus in game development is gameplay and mechanics, other focus more on visuals etc, and few are trying to be great at everything at once.

Of course you cannot be best at every discipline at once but you have to know what you want to focus on.

[s0]

So far though, I've found perusing mastery only intimidates, alienates, embitters or otherwise repels people

what do you mean?

[Mittens]

So far though, I've found perusing mastery only intimidates, alienates, embitters or otherwise repels people

what do you mean?

I mean, so far as I've experienced, achieving a goal or skill level doesn't make people impressed or happy for me, it makes them resent me. Trying to do better at my craft is seen as showing-off or taunting.
None of my peers care about my work, they don't want me to do better or get better, if anything, the opposite is true. 

[J-Snake]

Are you talking about your experience within the Kingdoms Rise environment, or is it a more general note? I am certainly impressed by the production quality of your game. But I can image if you travel amongst good artists then the quality bar has to be quite high. For me it looks like there are more excellent artists than game designers and programmers out there.

It might be that your game looks closer to an AAA title than a small hobby project. So people are likely to judge it by different standards. Compared to other AAA games your game, and art, might look just average (meant not as an insult, of course).

[Mittens]

Are you talking about your experience within the Kingdoms Rise environment, or is it a more general note? I am certainly impressed by the production quality of your game. But I can image if you travel amongst good artists then the quality bar has to be quite high. For me it looks like there are more excellent artists than game designers and programmers out there.

It might be that your game looks closer to an AAA title than a small hobby project. So people are likely to judge it by different standards. Compared to other AAA games your game, and art, might look just average (meant not as an insult, of course).

Yeah, I understand why I get feedback biased a certain way on the internet for KR, that's not really what I'm talking about. I'm more referring to my local AFK situation. I guess I just looked to the wrong people for approval. Right now I'm finding it hard to get motivated to do any work because I don't feel like I have anyone's approval to gain.
That's why I wonder if/how it might be possible to find a way I can make the things I want to exist even when the entire world feels indifferent.
Thanks anyway for the esteem boost