Artistic Creation and Engineering

Artistic Creation and Engineering

I have two experiences that make me feel about this problem. These feelings have no answer. Just think about it.

First of all, the complexity of game production caused me to lose my face in the Middle Ages. Many setbacks. Second, I am making a living, and the software production process that occupies 1/3 of the game production process still does not really grasp the key points and get satisfactory results.

Participated in a software demand analyst training. I was asked a question. The software process is an artistic creation activity or engineering activity (by the way, as a software engineer, I don't hear an old professor who smokes, drinks, and engages in military engineering talking about software engineering, incomplete Life ).

As a former artist, a former musician, and a person who has been involved in artistic creation for more than 10 years, my interpretation of the Process of artistic creation is as follows: Based on Personal Aesthetic Experience, creative inspiration, innovation, and artistic skills. After repeated modifications, I tried to create a work, so that others could get a certain aesthetic experience and entertainment function by watching the work. This process is essentially based on personal feelings and creative activities.

As a senior C ++ programmer and an old programmer and engineer who tries to create an advanced 3D engine toolkit and high-tech game software, my understanding of game software production is as follows: based on the multi-person team with horizontal participation (dozens to hundreds of people), as well as the creation activities of logic (software), technology (Planning), and art (art and music) spanning several years, and follow the inherent process, supplemented by dynamic changes, and make electronic and entertainment products and provide entertainment services based on engineering activities under the guidance of a relatively unchanged methodology.

Then, whether the production software itself is artistic creation or engineering activities.

First, software production is logical creation. Logical creation is based on inspiration. Although there are methodological guidance (computer programming methods, oo principles, etc.), it is ultimately the logic creation of programmers for a specific problem. Then we improved and modified the creation. Meet the requirements. New product creation, new product requirement definition, program design, coding are all creation processes. The creativity of this process cannot be ignored. We often compare the use of a language to a craft similar to tire repair. This is true for engineering practices and training in specific companies. However, there is only one type of tire, only one type of material is rubber, and only one type of glue can be used for repairing. It has little to do with programming.

Secondly, software development in a company must be engineering at a macro level. Similar to a bridge or a high-rise building. They are all from setting goals (requirements), creating blueprints, and improving the design (Design and interface ). Construction of foundation, concrete pouring (FRAME), decoration (function code), acceptance (test), delivery (deployment), sales (billing) and other steps. There is a lot of people, collaboration, fixed goals, fixed methods, fixed processes, fixed standards, and step by step. This is a project.

The following are the Baidu entries. I think it's reliable.

In a broad sense, a project is defined as a process in which a group of people collaborate for a certain purpose within a long period of time. This means that a group of people spend some time doing one thing together.

As far as software engineering is concerned, software engineering is to study and apply how to develop and maintain software with systematic, standardized, and quantifiable procedural methods.

Engineering is totally irrelevant to artistic creation. However, software production is related to both. This involves a metaphysical issue. That is, whether creative activities can follow the guidance of a set of methodology and theoretical systems. Communicate with colleagues at work. I am not sure about this issue.

In music, especially serious music creations, music creations must follow a rigorous theoretical system and methodology. This is a system such as "Harmony acoustics", "tune practice", and "Basic Music Theory. Even in jazz, pop music, and modern music, it is also an extension and change to these classical music theory systems.

Then what is game creation like.

For example. A question about planning.

Due to the project relationship, I theoretically concluded that the bio (2-foot and 4-foot) and gravity-free racing game modes cannot bring Enough gameplay.

The theory is based on the Game Analysis of the racing mode. Simply put,

1. The racing speed comes from feedback on the control and control of the racing object.

2. The necessary condition for controlling a racing object is the diversity of feedback resulting from different operations in different States. And the interaction time between the control object and the environment is long enough. This is the key.

Expand: Feedback from the vehicle's tires, suspension, rolling friction, sliding friction, rigid body dynamics, fuel refueling, brakes, left and right front wheel direction control, and contact with the road surface, the feedback to players is very diverse, so that the sense of speed and the sense of control when turning and braking are very strong.

3. The feedback obtained due to player control is more authentic. The operation difficulty is controllable.

This is like driving a forward, a front-and-rear drive, and a middle-and rear-drive sports car racing on the road. The control and response of these three vehicles are far from the ground. Natural driving experience is different. For more information, see the gt5 manual ultimated car guide.

Anti-push creature/gravity-free mechanical racing game:

Since gravity-free machinery has nothing to do with ground friction. Unlike an airplane, it is related to aerodynamic elements such as wing tail and velocity. The control-related feedback is poor. This poor feedback element causes extreme game loss. To put it simply, the feedback of gravity-free racing cars is less likely than that of real racing cars in the left and right directions.

Because the creature is 4 feet on the ground, it is always a static friction with the movement of the animal body. There are no changing factors such as sliding friction and rotation and flip of the rigid body. It also makes the control Feedback element extremely poor. Players receive very little operation feedback. Because the four feet are still relatively static when they touch the ground, the interaction time between the operating objects and the environment is almost 0, resulting in almost zero game interaction. Therefore, the game performance is almost 0.

This is the game development history over the past decade, and there has never been a bio-racing game.

The metaphysical theoretical derivation can verify the feasibility of an innovative game. However, this kind of engineering cannot guide the creation and production of an innovative game. This is the process of planning a game. It is based on creation, but can be verified by theory.

Analogy software production. Is it based on creation and guided by engineering methods?

The answer given by the trainer is that in software production, subject activities are engineering. Creation is only performed locally. I agree.