Jump to content

Units look.. samey


Recommended Posts

  • Replies 54
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

could you also just make a mod, with a totally fantasy setting, like elves and stuff but not LOTR. Sort of like Morrowind, if any of you have played that game?


What were you getting at about my signature? I was confused, too much information not summed up for my pea sized brain :)

Link to comment
Share on other sites


A pessimist sees the difficulty in every opportunity; an optimist sees the opportunity in every difficulty.

There will almost always be some degree of adversity (a price to pay) associated with suffering any potential adversity or in not overcoming it. The watchwords for dealing with that are to, "Turn adversity into opportunity".

I was merely talking about HOW one might go about turning adversity into and opportunity. It is part of an attitude and a way of looking at things that can lead to a more successful outcome. To repeat myself:

The What:

permits one (or groups) to realize greater success than would otherwise be achievable though it is not just being optimistic except in the sense of,

The Hows (not an exhaustive list)

well, here's something that we might turn around, stand on its head, turn inside-out, expand, deflate, disassemble and put back together in a different form of its several parts (Lego blocks, frex), morph into a slighty different shape tyhat changes purpose/result, tweak just a bit to achieve a desired or different result(s) by 'pushing' the attributes through the sorting sieve of morphological analyses... applying all of those methods of 'creative thnking' that can be applied to analysis in addition to through straightline inductive and deductive reasoning as well as knowledge gained of study of 'its' systemic parts to include its defined limits and constraints (deliberate design limitations) that may not be overcome (or exceeded) with respect to its time, place and circumstance of use.

All of the above are methods manners of creative thinking applied to a system that in this case has to include the man-maching interface for it to 'work'. The design document defines and states the limits of the system. All created systms by definition must have design limits.

Here's my definition of a system that I wrote up for my own 'edification' some years ago to aid me in getting a better grasp of what I was doing at work in the design and development of training programs (but which can be applied to just about anything 'systemic' (to include such as a computer game of some sort):

Why bother with Systematic Training?


Any ‘system’ is, has been, designed to make a product whether natural or created.  A system is a system by definition of limits.  A system may be either large or small, complex or simple. It may be as simple as a shoe box or as complex as Pan American World Airways.  It may be made up of hardware, firmware, software, or any combination thereof.  It may be a system of words such as governing rules or procedural guidelines.  A system may be an aggregation of biological components or physical components or both.  A system may be either natural or created or an amalgamation of both.  A system may also have a human component; most created systems WILL have a human component.  A system may incorporate all of the foregoing within its defined limits.  Whatever it is, it has form that lies within the recognizable limits of its design, and form follows function.

If no human element is required, the system is simply a ‘machine’ either natural or created that is made up of parts combining together to do something for a known and useful purpose.  As most designed systems require some measure of man-machine interaction, the machine depends on man (or woman)  doing something with it so that the system can produce a desired product.  Because it does, man himself becomes a necessary part of the system.


The benefit to be gotten by operating a man-machine system is clear.  That is, getting the most product in the shortest time at the least expense.  The machine-part of the system will operate efficiently if it works, if it can do what it was designed to do.  However, the man-part of the system may not be able to give to the machine all that it it is capable of receiving in doing its part.  So, the goal of systematic training is also clear; that the man learns how to give to or take from the machine as good as it can get or give.  Done, the greatest possible return on investment in the system is realized for everyone concerned; product, profit, advantage or progress.


Kenneth R. Wood, 1983, Pasadena, California

Though the definition is directed toward the developjment of adult training (high tech as it were), it is useful to know what a system is or 'can be'. That's merely the beginning though because one (or a group) then want to produce the best possible product, the system, within the limits and constraints defined in its design. That is where, then creative thinking 'modalities' may be applied to the design in order to enhance its value as a working document that lays the foundation for what must be done in order to create the system. So, I spell out some of those modalities of created thinking as may be applied to straight-line analysis in getting the best possible job done... though remember that by definition a system always has some pre-established limits, ergo constriants, that are imposed upon the development team.

It is good to know what a system is, or can be, as we are always here in the process of creating a 'new' system that is in many ways quite complex in its 'parts'.

As for 'how to think on it', I cannot go into more detail than to briefly state, OK, here we have an element of this game system. What if we look at this 'thinig' and 'turn it around' or turn it upside down (any of those things stated above), what will happen then? Will that make the game better? More fun? How will just turning that thing around so that it is opposite of what we originally specified for this element affect the game--changed the interaction of some or all elements, and if so to what extent? Turning a thing around on itself is only ONE way to look at a thing... as you can see in that 'first quoted' blurb above.

We begin the design process by having certain pre-conceived notions about what it is that we want to do and so state that. Then going on from there we go through all the other processes involved in 'thinking on it' in order to see it we can find ways that wiould 'make it better'. In this manner then the design document that drives the creation of everything else with respect to this system goes through many 'iterations'.. as it has done and we have learned more about what can be done, why it shoould be or might be better 'that a way', when would happen (or not), where (within the machine-part or the man-part or as a matter of interaction between the two), and the how of it.

This is, in the largest sense, how myself, Acumen, Wijitmaker, and others, the artists, sound folks, historians, programmers contributing on the 0ad team have proceeded and are wrt the design and development of the game. As far as a clearer definition of what that is all about than I give here, I'll suggest that you take a course in Creative Problem Solving or bootstrap yourself by acquiring a good book on the processes involved... you won't be sorry that you did. :P

We don't often change the DD around now as it has to have a high degree of 'stability' so that the members of the various departments can continue to do thier work based upon it... only when we might have discoved something really significant resultant to ongoing learning to do it as we are doing it. So the latest iteration of the DD has it pretty much in what we might call 'lockdown state'.

Nothing wrong with your brain, mate, that a little more 'education' couldn't help. Hope this helps out your understanding a bit. :)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

lol, still bit confused. But i think i get the general point. That to get something better, you have to keep looking at things to find out what can be improved. So this links into the custom units by making the gameplay much much more improved and fun? Oh and btw, im no good at problem solving, just good at opinions of things i think(mayber not even very good at that) but thanks for explaining it :)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


  • Create New...