You didn't read the post. I'm advocating for an ideal. I am attacking the premise that hierarchies are the basis for ideals.
do I have to quote that **** about smart people making things simple at you again nerd I never claimed that hierarchies are the basis for ideals or anything of the sort. I said that ideals can be used to personally rank order individuals based on what you value (which is likely extremely similar to everyone else, unless you're an anomaly) So if that's not what you're insinuating, then you seem to be arguing with thin air. Peterson isn't here. I am.
@icyhotspartin My opinion isnt wrong, its just the way i view what the idea of what your ‘true self’ is. And thats fine that you disagree. The picture was meant to illustrate the difference between Multi and my perspective of life at a fundamental level, and how it relates to our opposing philosophies of level design. Its a random picture i pulled up from google, not to be taken literally.
OK. So the 'true self' is the path derived from the choices this person makes. What influences the choices this person makes? Is it the 'true self', or something else?
So here's my idea for a mini series: Christopher Walken is obsessed with barbonaise, using it in his coffee, hair, cleaning supplies, moisturizers, etc. Keanu Reeves has a head injury that makes his world all his movies, except that he's stuck in the persona from Bill & Ted. Chris adopts Keanu, but is a terrible parent, and requires the use opinion cards, wearing a child leash, etc. But they love each other and their respective roles dearly. Episode 1 is based off Keanu eat a red and blue skittle, and claims to "see matrix everywhere".
Just saw the addition - I'm not arguing with you. Nor am I arguing with Peterson. I am making an argument against using Peterson's Hierarchies model for anything because of its philosophical foundation - or lack thereof. I am trying to get you to focus your good argument a bit more, which you have kind of done. If it is rooted in reality and objectively-derived principles, then by all means, it is a proper hierarchy and useful for this kind of thing. If it is derived from merely *personal* values (and I take this to mean non-introspective values, i.e. deep values measured against objective principles), then it's only useful as a starting point for introspective analysis of your deeply held values. You've got to understand that I am coming from the perspective that there is an ideal in level design, just as there is in any kind of medium, and with any kind of subject matter. And that, yes, there are hierarchies of works and designers that might express this better or worse within a medium, style, or theme. But these have to be derived not from the perceptual proof, but from the principles that this proof concretizes. Dude put down the weed holy ****.
Sorry it took awhile to reply, busy day. I’m actually agree with a lot of what you say here. I believe humans don’t dig into every move they make. From making a life long career decision to deciding what pair of shoes to put on in the morning. Every move has a purpose and mind set behind it, we just choose not to dig at every little decision we make. It would make us go insane. so I agree, if I truly thought about what I enjoy the most out of Halo design, the pit and guardian probably wouldn’t be on the list. But when I kickstart Halo 3 my initial maps I want to play customs on is the pit and guardian. I don’t dig, I don’t question why I love the pit and guardian, I just know I have fun playing there more than the other H3 maps. I <3 you too
See I agree with you, and like I've told many people many times after releasing that 1st episode of halo design, whenever Lockout BR's comes up on the mcc voting panel I chose it without hesitation every time. My instant gut reaction to seeing that picture and starting weapon, mentally, is positive. Same goes for The Pit. So you kinda have to dig and ask yourself why that is. It's by the same stroke of cheap satisfaction that it appeals to us. Especially in a ranked environment I know EXACTLY how frustrating those maps can play at a high level through no error of my own, and as time goes on my experience becomes increasingly negative. I enjoy aspects of those maps, in the sense that I enjoy the clean sight lines and flat geometry for nade bounces. I enjoy the individual fights and encounters that happen on Guardian and The Pit, but this illusion flies out the window the moment we're losing by 3 kills and locked down at the 50 yard line. It's incredibly frustrating and revealing on the design of the map and there's nothing interesting or fair about it, the effort needed to succeed FAR outweighs the effort needed to maintain success. And that's a problem. So the idea that there is NO joy or pleasure in these experiences is obviously false, I'm not a robot who's never voted for the Pit lmao because I still do. The problem is it's shallow, and I no longer am willing to confuse that frustration and gut reaction with "good design"because I know how situational the pleasure is. ESPECIALLY once you experience something better, richer. There is nothing in Halo quite like a good competitive match on Chillout CE, or Prisoner with proper cycling. And ill admit this with a little hesitancy but the best 2v2 experience I have ever had even beyond that was playing Arcanum 2s, against people who truly and genuinely understood the map. There is nothing, nothing more satisfying than predicting key movement and positioning your team ahead of time to punish it and it has everything to do with mental simulation. Not to mention, losing on this map is infinitely less infuriating because it's actually a fair experience. I'm sure every person here reading this can understand the appeal of super fiesta, and what the draw is. Spawn with op bs weapons and get tons of kills, and yet no one is jumping out of their chair to identify it as "well designed". Why is that? It routinely has the highest population of any playlist ?It's most casual players go-to playlist upon launching the game. And it's also cheap and unfullfilling. Even succeeding in a broken environment has the taste of bitterness and by that same reasoning you don't jump for joy when you land a Spartan charge kill like you would a 180 no scope. One is demanding and skillful and deserves attention and the other doesn't. The things that last the longest are probably not the ones that have instant appeal and that's really the root of objective design. And every single person reading this post knows that, feels it, and behaves according to that truth whether or not you think you believe it.
There is so much I can say on this topic but it really requires ironing out the progression of logic to make it bulletproof and that's a lot of typing I don't want to do. I've been sporadically jumping around until now but just about every decent designer here holds the same principles true in their reasoning and behavior. All I've done is take these different truths and make the next logical leap to the source.
Well said, I agree with every point made. One point though about the pit situation you described. As frustrating as that situation is, I love being in it. I was always the kid who in a pick up game of basketball, if we lost by 10 points, I didn’t want to switch teams to make it even, I wanted to run it back. Over and over until we finally won. I hated changing teams or conditions in competitive games to make it more fair. Must just be my competitive side. My point is as absolutely controller throwing frustration that pit situation you listed is, I love it. Because eventhough I end up losing the game 9 times out of 10 I always want to be in that situation. Because when you do win and make a come back in an unpenatrable set up, it’s so satisfying. That’s a little off topic, but maybe it contributes to the appeal I have for the pit. But anyways, I agree with your entire post. Going off your point about how satisfying it is to out maneuver on key maps, I think that’s what makes Halo so great. In my opinion the most important gameplay aspect is movement. Out manuever and out flank the opponent. It’s truly a chess match.