Gamasutra: The Art & Business of Making Gamesspacer
View All     RSS
October 24, 2014
arrowPress Releases
October 24, 2014
PR Newswire
View All
View All     Submit Event





If you enjoy reading this site, you might also want to check out these UBM Tech sites:


 
No, You Can't Make Video Games
by Aleksander Adamkiewicz on 07/03/12 12:36:00 am

The following blog post, unless otherwise noted, was written by a member of Gamasutra’s community.
The thoughts and opinions expressed are those of the writer and not Gamasutra or its parent company.

 

UPDATE 01.08.2012

Due to this article now exploding on twitter, because Perrin tweeted it, I have to clarify a few things that seem to be misunderstood.

A. This article is directed towards people who want to work in the industry, not amateurs or hobbyists.

B. The article does not deny anybodys right to make games, nor does try to -discourage- making videogames (or any games in general)

C. This article is concerned with tone and the portrayal of gamedesign in general presented by Perrin in his talk, nothing else.

D. I did not write this article to offend or attack anyone for making videogames.

PS: I would wish that the people making snide comments about me on Twitter would stop and instead join the discussion here and give me a chance to defend myself in more than 140 characters.

 

This article is a response to a video titled "You Can Make Video Games" made by Richard Perrin that I recently watched on youtube. The condensed version can be found here (~10 mins) while the complete talk given by him at AmeCon 2010 (a UK anime/manga/gaming convention) can be found here (~40 mins).

 

What I'm going to write is certainly going to rub people the wrong way and sound incredibly elitist and arrogant, thats why I'll start with some praise for the talk.

Around halfway in both videos Richard presents free tools and resources to use in game creation and explains a bit what they are all about and what they can do.

Thats great and I really liked this part because its hard for people to scour google for resources on their own and evaluate their usefullness, especially if its the first time someone is going to think about making a game, or if their google-fu is weak.

I also appreciate Richards enthusiasm and I do not want to criticize it, what I want to criticize is that both videos (the short version especially) is presenting a wrong impression of game-design and his enthusiasm can (or in my opinion inevitably will) lead to misguided expectations.

In essence I want to spare people the disappointment by being suckered by his enthusiasm.

Quotes from the talk will be in italics.

 

No, You Can't Make Video Games (Movies/Novels/Be An Astronaut)

 

The truth is simple, not everyone has the aptitude and skills required to make games (or anything for that matter).

Telling people that they do, is irresponsible.

 

"... all you need is the desire and some determination." 

 

It's the fault of how the Echo Boomers generation works and how our parents, Generation X, approached uppbringing.

In many cases our uppbringing was piggybacking on the trends of the hippy movement, filling your child with love, care and telling it how wonderful the world out there is, how the child can be everything it wants if it only wishes for it hard enough.

"Mom, I want to be an astronaut when I grow up!" - "Sure darling, you can be whatever you want! :)"

This feel-good message left many of us struggling after highschool, living with our parents for longer (statistically), often changing professions and ending up worse than we started, always looking for something.

The message gave children the wrong impression that they can achieve whatever they want if they wished for it enough. It created a generation lacking any direction in their decission-making with far too big expectations and far too little skills.

Everyone was a misunderstood Bill Gates.

 

"...the only thing stopping you from making games right now is YOU!"


Before I go any further I want to make one thing very clear.

I don't want to stop people from trying, discovering their potential, or discovering they don't have the aptitude, for themselves.

What I want to emphasize is that its just not as easy as the talk makes it out to be.

Its not just your lack of "conviction" (Richard doesn't call it "lazieness" per se, but its implied) that is holding you back from making games.

 

"Forget about the design document [...] you don't need a 20 page epic on how your game is going to work. Start playing with it, start trying ideas out [...]"

 

Richard, I'm really not averse towards the "hands on" approach to learning, but fucking around in Unity will not make a game, and won't make you a game designer.

The same way fucking around in Photoshop will not make art, fucking around in iMovie will not make a movie, and fucking around with Word will not make a novel.

As long as you are advocating this as a learning process, and make clear that all of your early projects will be -shit- and not worth anyones time, I'm ok with this, but you make it sound like this is -all- you need to succeed.

 

"...don't feel like your first game needs to be this amazing original creative thing..."

"...we need more voices, we need more people making games."

 

No, we really don't, unless you want to encourage the creation of white noise in the medium and devalue everyones work.

Yes, I know how elitist and arrogant this sounds, but it's something I learned the hard way as a graphics designer.

I will attempt something hard here, I will try to make a slippery-slope argument without it being a fallacy.

Look at the situation in graphics design or even photography.

Everybody and their mother has access to image-manipulation software and cameras, essentially for free. We have created a situation where -everyone- creates things, all the time. We create so much content, that -good- content with merit is drowned out by the noise.

Evidence?

DeviantArt.

DeviantArt is the place where art goes to die in noise.

The situation right now is that most companies don't want to invest in graphics design if they can "hire" one of their employers sons that has a pirated copy of Photoshop:

 

 

The obvious paralell to DeviantArt for games is Newgrounds.

The medium doesn't need the noise of more 8bit platformers and sprite-based nostalgia-driven RPGs without other merit than

"HEY GUYS, REMEMBER FINAL FANTASY!?"

Be honest Richard, you wouldn't want to play these games, nobody would, even the creator wouldn't.

I know, because I tried.

I made "games" in RPG Maker.

They added nothing, neither to my skill, nor to the medium, they were a waste of my time and anyone elses that I shared them with.

They weren't even games, they were "game fanfiction".

It's the same with fanfiction writers and fanmovies, its people that think they know how novels are written or movies are made and that a camera and a typewriter is enough.

 

 

Well you better be a fucking universal genius then.

You need content for your games and this content will require you to have certain skills, and sooner or later you will run into limitations what you yourself will be able to do and the tools you are working with.

Either you will need to learn how to do do the things you can't do (in my case this would be coding, audio-editing, writing) or you will need to get someone that can do these things for you.

 

"...you heard it all before, it's not true."

 

Yes Richard, these are all true.

This isn't some kind of conspiracy perpetuated by game-designers. Making games is hard, it takes a lot of time and hard work to create something of value.

Most people can't make games, but they want to have made games.

The guys like me that argue on forums and blogs about game design can't make games, just like movie enthusiasts can't make movies.

Sometimes it's ok to admit you are not capable to do things and leaving well enough alone.

I can't make music, but thats ok with me.

 

Yes there are.


Related Jobs

Next Games
Next Games — Helsinki, Finland
[10.24.14]

Senior Level Designer
Magic Leap, Inc.
Magic Leap, Inc. — Wellington, New Zealand
[10.23.14]

Level Designer
DeNA Studios Canada
DeNA Studios Canada — Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada
[10.22.14]

Analytical Game Designer
University of Texas at Dallas
University of Texas at Dallas — Richardson, Texas, United States
[10.22.14]

Assistant/Associate Prof of Game Studies






Comments


Jonathan Jennings
profile image
It's one of those situations where we work in a very fun and immensely creative and artistic field and YET people dont understand that it is work , does take a lot of time , focus, and attention. like all forms of entertainment be it sports , or film people see the end-result and think to themselves " It seems like it would be an incredible experience to make that!" yet they weren't there the long nights of coding and arguing art direction . through trying to have both an incredible looking and performing game . and naturally we can't blame them the same attraction to game development is probably why most of us work in this field , HOWEVER the fact is to develop a game it takes commitment and a desire to provide something enjoyable even and even wanting to make it enjoyable does not assure it will be .

We work in an incredibly hard to understand industry that many enjoy and observe but very few understand . I won't say that not everybody CAN make videogames because while it takes a significant investment i don't think there is much that stops the average human being from researching and picking up a an old version of 3ds max or making a basic text adventure in an old version of visual studio .

I agree and disagree i think it's less about reducing our craft to the belief that anybody who has picked up a controller could produce a viable game and more about us educating people on what Game Development truly is and that while the purpose is to create an enjoyable experience , the recipe for an enjoyable experience is EXTREMELY hard to nail .

Aleksander Adamkiewicz
profile image
I agree, instead of "encouraging", lets educate.
All I'm saying here is, wishes alone don't make games.

I equated RPG maker games to fan-fiction in my article, and the more I think about it, the more it holds true.

I think that most everyone of us can "physically" make a "game" (a piece of software that will make things "go" on the screen with user input) but its going to be game-fan-fiction.

Just because we lowered the barrier of entry doesn't mean everybody can make videogames.

Aubrey Hesselgren
profile image
Well, everyone's got to start somewhere. Making games is hard, which is why people need to be encouraged, rather than told that they've failed before they've started.

P.S. Apparently, I must be immune to all the "noise" created by lower barriers to entry, since for some reason, I don't feel the need to play every game that ever existed. Great games percolate up through the noise by word of mouth and journalists with good taste championing the things that would otherwise slip through the cracks.

Sturgeon's Law applies to all mediums that have ever existed. And somehow, none of those has been taken down by there being too many voices in them.

Aleksander Adamkiewicz
profile image
Sadly its the reality, you will fail over and over again until you succeed.
Claiming anything else is dishonest.

I never said not to try. In fact I said the exact opposite.

From the article:

"I don't want to stop people from trying, discovering their potential, or discovering they don't have the aptitude, for themselves.

What I want to emphasize is that its just not as easy as the talk makes it out to be.
[...]
As long as you are advocating this as a learning process, and make clear that all of your early projects will be -shit- and not worth anyones time, I'm ok with this, but you make it sound like this is -all- you need to succeed."

I find -just- encouragement to be a complete waste of time, its not productive in any sense.

Aubrey Hesselgren
profile image
Did something bad happen to you for trying?

"They added nothing, neither to my skill, nor to the medium, they were a waste of my time and anyone elses that I shared them with."

Dude, don't worry. We all make stinkers in our careers. And not just at the start! I've seen world renowned veterans flummoxed by the situations they're in, grasping for any way out. When your naivety catches up with you and you realize that you're not the Godlike creator you imagined you were, it feels like your world is being ripped apart. And it is. And that's a good thing!

You look back, and actually, you've learned more than you realize. It might not be applicable tomorrow, or in your next game, or the game after that, but it always comes around. You replace all that pent up gusto with something real. It gets better.

I don't think Perrin is attempting to "shield" people from the truth. He just wants them off the starting blocks, walking the path, getting better with every trip and fall. I've met loads of devs who know what they're talking about "in theory" but would gain so much more if they got their hands dirty and felt what it was like to really make stuff for themselves. Sure, you get your dings and your scrapes as you go, finding out how hard the road really is, but you get wiser as a result. Bruised egos heal and find their place.

Aleksander Adamkiewicz
profile image
"Dude, don't worry. We all make stinkers in our careers. And not just at the start! I've seen world renowned veterans flummoxed by the situations they're in, grasping for any way out. When your naivety catches up with you and you realize that you're not the Godlike creator you imagined you were, it feels like your world is being ripped apart. And it is. And that's a good thing!"

This is a point of contention for me, I feel that being better prepared for the reality that our world works in is more beneficial than dreams and feel-good propaganda.

Call me a pessimist if you want, but I prefer realist myself.

I dont think Perrin is shielding people from the truth either, I think his talk/summary was purposefully leaving out the "other side" of the argument. It was a bad representation.

I wouldn't go so far as to call it deceptive, but certainly inaccurate.

In my opinion its better to prepare people for what it really means, rather than present a candy-filled PG13 version.

If someone made a talk about how amazing it is to be a lumberjack, hanging out with people, experiencing nature, getting physical exercise, preserving wildlife and taking care of our precious forest, but left out that ill be breathing saw-dust 8 hours a day and how dangerous the work was, i'd be jumping on it the same way.

Maybe the talk wasn't supposed to come off that way, but it certainly did for me.

Robin Clarke
profile image
If you find you have to pre-empt criticism of your argument with a caveat that it's going to rub people up the wrong way, you're basically telling me that you can't make a convincing case for what you're arguing. But that's okay, not everyone can make compelling arguments, and if they tried to learn, where would we be then? Exactly.

Where to start?

Noodling around in shameless imitation of one's influences is how people learn to write, paint and make music. Games aren't any different in this regard.

The attacks on DeviantArt and Newgrounds are baffling. Yes, they both attract a lot of crap. But they also provide supportive communities and a stage for creatives who are determined to improve their skills and learn to be receptive to what an audience wants.

I've lost count of the number of developers who have built up their reputations to the point of being able to pursue games professionally thanks to Newgrounds and similar portals such as Kongregate and Adult Swim. Please, drop a line to Tom Fulp, Derek Yu, Adam Saltsman etc. Get a better handle on what's going on in that scene. Judging Newgrounds by the rubbish going past on the 'new submissions' conveyor belt is to do it a huge disservice.

No amount of shit devalues anything good.

Now, I have my reservations about the Anna Anthropy/Rob Fearon etc. mentality of a million monkeys with a million laptops cranking out mountains of tiny 48-hour game jam scribbles in the hope of sifting out rare flashes of gold. For some that will be the limit of their game making ability. For others a way to amuse themselves between more 'serious' projects. And for others a stepping stone to more ambitious work. Who are we to say that this activity has no value and should be discouraged?

Yes, making games is hard and requires commitment. But there is still a huge problem of a perception that you still need to be able to code, and commit 1,000s of hours since childhood, and know degree-level maths to get anywhere. Every game jam I've been to has exploded that myth for someone.

It's absolutely blindingly self-evidently obvious that we don't have enough people (and certainly not a broad enough spectrum of people) making games. You just have to look at the masses of gamers descending like hungry jackals on anything remotely out of leftfield that gets posted on RPS.

Danny Day
profile image
Funny, the approach you're decrying helped me not only build my own career, but also helped create a vibrant game development scene in South Africa.

I feel like you're getting stuck shouting that people shouldn't play football unless they'll do it professionally one day, shouldn't sing unless they're going to be performers, shouldn't cook unless they'll be chefs. There's enjoyment and self-discovery to be had everywhere, suggesting that people shouldn't pursue what they enjoy makes no sense to me at all. Sure, wishing for success doesn't help, but that's not what the original video is talking about.

I'd rather have a world filled with amateur photographers, sportspeople, game developers and musicians, that way more people would appreciate the skill and finesse of the geniuses in their fields.

Aleksander Adamkiewicz
profile image
I believe I never made the argument you are responding to.

Danny Day
profile image
@Aleksander: I wrote the above in response to your slippery slope argument. What are amateur sports leagues if not the Deviant Arts of their disciplines? What, exactly, is wrong with Deviant Art in the first place? About the only real issue you've raised so far is that feeling entitled hasn't helped anyone - the rest I find very hard to agree with.

Aleksander Adamkiewicz
profile image
Danny, I've yet to meet a person that treats making games the same way they treat playing football or other hobbyist activities like photography.
Similarly i have never met a person that does logo-design purely "for fun" and doesn't expect to some day go into the industry and make a living with it.
Nor do I see people building houses "for fun".

Game-design is a specific thing that requires an investment of time and effort far beyond your analogy of playing football. Its comparing apples to oranges.

Amateur Sports Leagues are nothing like Deviant Art.

My issue isn't with amateurs or non-amateurs, and i am not denying anyone their right to make games, my issue is with -tone- and the inaccurate portrayal of reality.

Danny Day
profile image
@Aleksander: That's a shame, I know a ton of people that do all of those things. Everything from building games because they enjoy it, through to building houses for fun. Seriously. Houses for fun. And not just in the context of "Oh no, Africa has severe housing issues", globally. I started building games because I enjoyed making them, drawing mazes was better than solving them.

I guess that's why so many people seem to have issues with this article: Many of them started like I did, building things for fun eventually became a career. So when you say that people can't make games and it's not easy, what are we supposed to gain from your sentiment as a whole? That people should stop dabbling? That people shouldn't call themselves designers? That people shouldn't produce noise?

I think that the issue people take is that you seem to be coming across as saying that new people shouldn't enter the industry. Because how else does anyone pick up anything new, other than trying it first? Amateur leagues and Deviant Art are all populated by the same processes that populate professional teams and top design firms. Your argument, thus far, doesn't provide any way to distinguish "worthwhile" trying from the kind you seem to disagree with so much. Perhaps if you elaborated on that, it might work better as an argument?

Aleksander Adamkiewicz
profile image
"I think that the issue people take is that you seem to be coming across as saying that new people shouldn't enter the industry. Because how else does anyone pick up anything new, other than trying it first? Amateur leagues and Deviant Art are all populated by the same processes that populate professional teams and top design firms. Your argument, thus far, doesn't provide any way to distinguish "worthwhile" trying from the kind you seem to disagree with so much. Perhaps if you elaborated on that, it might work better as an argument?"

Like I said in the article, trying to learn game design (the hands on approach) is absolutely necessary and welcome.

Like I clarified in the update, my issue isn't as much with the amateurs or students, its with the tone of the talk/lecture by Perrin which in my opinion wrongly represents reality.

One of Perrins points in the talk was, that you don't need to be a coder, an artist, or game-designer to make video-games.
And I beg to differ, you need to have -some- kind of aptitude for -something- related to game-design.

Perrin also says this line ad verbatim: "[...]so everyone can make video-games, well, unless they are completely thick, then they can't." *laughter from the audience*

I wonder how many people from the audience actually went and tried to make something with a tool like game-maker afterwards and actually figured out that that was a completely disingenuous statement.

Its hard to forget when you are an expert in a field that there are people out there that will -never- be able to do what you do, because they don't have the aptitude.
It seems so easy for me to use photoshop an ape could make something in it right?

Wrong, not everyone has the aptitude to do it or to understand it. And its not their fault, and its not like they are "thick" or "lazy" as suggested by Perrin with that line.

I -tried- making something in the tools that Perrin mentioned, just to see if he was maybe right, I couldn't even make a simple square "go" on screen without a four hour tutuorial.

I can create magical worlds in Photoshop and blazing spaceships in Blender, but i just can't make games, the same way I can't be a race-car driver, and its not that I'm "thick" or "lazy" for not trying hard enough.

Sometimes its hard to understand/remember that we are not all the same, and that what is simple to you, is like sorcery to others.

Danny Day
profile image
@Aleksander: So does that mean you're not going to continue blogging? ;)

I'm pretty sure that there's no way you spent the same amount of time TRYING Game Maker as you did your first graphics editing program. Once people learn one complex skillset, we seem to expect that other complex skillsets are going to be easier for us to learn. This is a false assumption that we all make: Related skillsets may well be learned faster, OR they might be made harder to learn by poor habits being carried over from the similar-feeling things we already know how to do.

If you'd put the same amount of time into making games that you did into graphic design, you'd be talking differently. But instead you accepted your own advice and decided that it meant you just couldn't do something... And yes, I know you're going to point to your chemical engineering thing and say "But look at all that effort", it's a completely different beast: We're talking about creative endeavors here. What did you create as a chemical engineer?

So yeah, it's the trying that was missing. Also, ironically, the community. Good feedback on what you're doing helps your efforts be more focused, which helps you learn more and challenges any assumptions you may be carrying with you. So that whole being upset at Deviant Art thing? That's not helping either.

Sam Driver
profile image
"The truth is simple, not everyone has the aptitude and skills required to make games (or anything for that matter).
Telling people that they do, is irresponsible."

The aim of the talk to which you are responding is not to tell people that they innately have the skills to make a game, but to tell them that those skills are obtainable by themselves with enough work. The concept of someone not having "the aptitude" to learn a skill is rarely applicable outside of the more extreme cases of reduced neurological development or damage. Certainly some people seem to be able to develop skills in certain areas faster than others, but that does not preclude their development entirely. With time, dedication, and the near-infinite resources of the Internet anyone can learn the skills used in game development. As you say in a comment above, "wishes alone don't make games." But that is a strawman: no one is arguing that games can be made by wishing upon a star.

What's especially amazing about the field of game creation is that it uses such a wide range of skills, yet has tools and techniques that allow the creator a great deal of flexibility in what skills they exercise. Game Maker and Construct give an introduction to the logic flow needed by a game without the steep learning curve of a first programming language. Those that find visual art creation to be challenging can create games with an abstract graphical style; if they spend just a few hours learning about colour theory the result can look excellent.

The implication throughout your piece that, for instance, being able to program is somehow an innate skill that people either have or lack is grossly unfair to those that have worked for years or decades to develop the skill. Perhaps you do need something innate to be Mozart, but you do not need to be world class in all areas to create a good quality game.

To address a few particular points:

I think that your creation of a new category of "game-fan-fiction" to contain the video games made by people that your article claims cannot make video games is rather dishonest. They are video games. They may not be very good video games, but no-one's first work in a field is of high quality.

"This feel-good message left many of us struggling after highschool, living with our parents for longer (statistically), often changing professions and ending up worse than we started, always looking for something."
You are attributing an awful lot to just one change in parenting attitude, which itself wasn't universally applied. I suggest that the reason for increased time spent living with parents is primarily due to the significant increase in cost of housing compared to average wage. I suggest that often changing jobs is heavily influenced by the almost complete loss of the concept of "a job for life" in the corporate world. I further suggest that people feeling dissatisfied with their current state and finding themselves looking for something more is innate to the human condition.

Your attempt to make a slippery slope argument without fallacy inevitably failed. You cite the example of photography and graphic design as a field that is meant to have been destroyed by the white noise of lowered barriers to entry. Yet there are still professional photographers and graphic designers, in fact more than ever before. Newgrounds and DeviantArt have plenty of poor quality content, but also plenty of good content. That good content is quite effectively highlighted and brought to the top by a range of mechanisms. The presence of thousands of pictures of Sonic characters does not detract from other work.

Robert Fearon
profile image
"you wouldn't want to play these games, nobody would, even the creator wouldn't."

I WOULD. Totally would. Why wouldn't I?

Aleksander Adamkiewicz
profile image
Here you go:

https://dl.dropbox.com/u/12895612/Azzaron.rar

Happy gaming!

Robert Fearon
profile image
I got killed by a Hero Hunter!

Julian Pritchard
profile image
We all have to start somewhere. And it is most likely that the first game that any of us will make will be bad. But in order to make good games we must first make bad games, and learn and grow. This is true with all skills. I cannot simply pick up a guitar and play like Van Halen, nor can I study music and expect to play Van Halen. But by practising my ass off for eight hours a day for a some years I can, but for that first year I will be bad.

Only through arduous work can one improve their craft. And that first point is making a game. That is what I believe Mr. Perrin's point was. To encourage people to take the first step.

Do the masses of art on Deviant art diminish the works of John Howe, or even the artist who post fine work on the website: no.

Is Deus Ex a lesser game because people can easily make games: no.

Will there likely be more designers pushing the boundaries of our medium because someone said to them "You can make games", and they decided to make a crappy game, and grow from there: YES!

allan umble
profile image
aleksander adamkiewicz stands fuming inside a kindergarten classroom, atop a pile of broken crayons and shredded colouring books. 'this... is... not... ART' he squeals in a righteous fury.

Aleksander Adamkiewicz
profile image
I'd appreciate it more if you addressed arguments in my article.

Richard Walsh
profile image
Did you actually watch Richard's video? Or did you just take some snippets and cut them apart? In the first 10 minutes, he clearly says it's not about making a good game, a big game, or a commercially successful game. It's about making something small and easy to start. To get your hands dirty and discover the basics. So your argument that lots of content is required seems to be assuming "making games" means "making games like WoW or Call of Duty". I think this article had a lot of potential, and it was wasted due to your choice of words, sensational title, and poor execution. Yes new game makers, your games will likely be crap for the first bunch, or forever. BUT WHO CARES. Make games because you love games and love creativity and self expression. Don't make games with the intent of becoming a millionaire rock star or engine making god like John Carmack.

Aleksander, I think you need to revisit what "game" and "art" mean, and rewrite this article to get your (seemingly well intended and dare I say valid) point across. You lost most people at the title, and made a lot of people angry. Maybe that was your goal...I don't know.

Perhaps you should stick to graphic design and leave writing to real writers. Wouldn't want Gamasutra becoming the DeviantArt of writing, would we. /trollface

Richard Walsh
profile image
Looks like you updated to clarify your intent. Thanks for that.

The most key differentiator is "This article is directed towards people who want to work in the industry, not amateurs or hobbyists.".

I agree that to get into "industry" game creation (meaning, "my job is to write shaders" or whatever), this article is much more relevant.

Aleksander Adamkiewicz
profile image
This post had zero traction before it got tweeted by Perrin, so I dont think it made people angry, nor was it its intention.

Aaron Steed
profile image
"The truth is simple, not everyone has the aptitude and skills required to make games (or anything for that matter).

Telling people that they do, is irresponsible."

You know, one day I changed my mind. I suddenly completely disbelieved your very statement and left behind a life of wiping tables that I'd been doing for 7 years.

I went back into education. I chose to believe that I could do anything I put my mind to.

I've been making games full-time for the past 5 years now. I am lucky enough to say that I don't hate Mondays.

Where would I be if I listened to statements like yours?

Aleksander Adamkiewicz
profile image
"You know, one day I changed my mind. I suddenly completely disbelieved your very statement and left behind a life of wiping tables that I'd been doing for 7 years.

I went back into education. I chose to believe that I could do anything I put my mind to."

I studied 3 years of pharmacy before becoming a graphics designer. I put all my mind and effort to it.
I failed the entry exam for the 4th year two times in a row with my grades deteriorating from year 1-3.

Are you suggesting I didn't try hard enough? Because I can assure you my livelihood was at stake with loans piling up and I was more than determined to pass.

Then I went into graphics design and everything became a breeze. I found my aptitude in gfx-design. I'm not a pharmacist, i cant do organic chemistry.
I simply cant. I am limited by who i am.
Similarly im also not a race-car driver nor an astronaut, because i cant.

This is exactly what I'm talking about, some people can do things, and others don't.

Telling everyone that they can do anything they want if they just try hard enough is irresponsible and false.

Devin Wilson
profile image
We need _more_ unexpected game design auteurs, not fewer.

The caveat you wrote since this thing blew up is utterly unconvincing. To address points A and B, the exact thing you seem to be doing is discouraging amateurs from making games.

"The same way fucking around in Photoshop will not make art, fucking around in iMovie will not make a movie, and fucking around with Word will not make a novel."

This is where I can agree with you, if only slightly. You have to fuck around with Word for *a long time* to make a novel. You could write a poem in a couple of minutes, though. A couple of seconds, really.

You seem to think that you're being modern and responding to the democratization of media, but you're actually decades out of date with your views on art. People with attitudes like yours are on "the wrong side of history" over and over. If people like you had their way, Claude Monet would've given up after Impression, Sunrise. Igor Stravinsky would've burned his scores of The Rite of Spring after it premiered.

Games have rules. Game design doesn't.

I'm sorry, but you come across as bitter, elitist, and ignorant. If you're not those things, you should write your opinions more carefully.

Aleksander Adamkiewicz
profile image
"You seem to think that you're being modern and responding to the democratization of media, but you're actually decades out of date with your views on art. People with attitudes like yours are on "the wrong side of history" over and over. If people like you had their way, Claude Monet would've given up after Impression, Sunrise. Igor Stravinsky would've burned his scores of The Rite of Spring after it premiered."

Never before in history has humanity had access to instant and global communication like we have today. Never before in human history has humanity had a lower barrier to the arts.
I think that comparing the situation of today to Monet and Stravinsky is misguided as their works were not under the scrutiny of 7 Billion people on the internet (as this hubbub proves).

But nevermind that, because its not the point of the article, its only an illustration used for the criticism.
The point of the article is aptitude.

"This is where I can agree with you, if only slightly. You have to fuck around with Word for *a long time* to make a novel. You could write a poem in a couple of minutes, though. A couple of seconds, really."

Indeed I could write a poem just now. Will it be a good poem?
I have no aptitude for poetry.

I wouldn't try even if you encouraged me to do so with a lecture called "You can write poems!"

Not everyone has the aptitude for doing things they like.

My article never said not to try. My article just criticized the tone of Perrins talk which made it out to be as if everyone had the aptitude.
The truth is, most people don't.

"Games have rules. Game design doesn't."

In a philosophical sense? Maybe, its debatable on the same level as "what is permissible in art?".

In a technical sense, yes it does.
Game-design isn't strictly art, its equal parts engineering, and engineering certainly has -some- rules.

Devin Wilson
profile image
Let me preface this by saying that we clearly have fundamentally different perspectives. For this reason, I'm happy to end our conversation sooner than later, but I don't want to come across as edging for the last word.

"I think that comparing the situation of today to Monet and Stravinsky is misguided as their works were not under the scrutiny of 7 Billion people on the internet (as this hubbub proves)."

I simply don't understand what you're trying to argue here. Sorry.

Let me present you with a poem:

"Indeed I could write a poem just now. Will it be a good poem?
I have no aptitude for poetry."

What do you think of it? I kind of love it. I can't take (full) credit for it, though.

Is it good? I have no idea. I don't really have an academic appreciation for poetry, nor do I have the compulsion to label art as "good" or "bad" except in how I appreciate it subjectively.

Anyway, it appears that you've never made a game. It's curious, then, why you write from a position of authority on the matter of making games.

First of all, the technical expertise required to make a board game is negligible. You can make a board game with... well, another board game! Taking a chess set and making new rules for the pieces and their interactions is making a game, and this has been done for a very long time. What special "aptitude" is required for creating Yoko Ono's White Chess?

But I digress, as you're clearly talking about computer games.

Do you think it's a coincidence that people who make computer games are strongly disagreeing with you, someone who does not make games (from what I have gathered)?

The tools for making games are getting simpler every day. Now, I have my own issues with things like RPG Maker, Game Maker, etc... but the things you can make with these kinds of software are not non-games. The creators of said games are not non-game designers.

Do you need a degree of expertise to program shaders and make a complex virtual economy that makes a well-balanced multiplayer strategy game? Of course! But that's such a narrow slice of what games can be.

There are no rules to anything, except when there are. What I mean by that is this: if you want to be a free member of a society, you need to follow certain rules (laws). However, these rules are not absolute. They're qualified by your desire to be a responsible member of society, and their relevance is limited to a certain context.

We see this in non-digital games: the enforcement of rules in a game like chess comes from a respect for your opponent. Again, qualifiers. You can move your pawn backwards if you really like, but your opponent will probably grimace and walk away. However, if you're not under any social pressure to play chess "properly", you can move the knights diagonally and put the bishops in the toilet!

Even physical laws are qualified by the fact that they're effects on objects and forces in our known universe, as observed by us (and the 20th century showed us that this is a HUGE qualifier).

So why would we have absolute rules for game design? There's no real governing body of legitimate game design, nor are there unmanageable negative consequences of "breaking the rules" of game design. I know this because I make unconventional games! Yeah, my games don't make me millions of dollars, but they satisfy my desire to create abstract systems to express views of mine.

Your views disrespect the individual desire to express oneself for fear of failure at the hands of some abstract jury that doesn't really exist. This isn't healthy, not for anybody. Your piece is discouraging, and there's no getting around that.

Aleksander Adamkiewicz
profile image
"Anyway, it appears that you've never made a game. It's curious, then, why you write from a position of authority on the matter of making games."

Didn't you read the article:

"I know, because I tried.
I made "games" in RPG Maker."

I never published games, doesn't mean I never made them or never tried to make any.

I also don't write from a position of authority. Are you serious? What authority?

Or are you just now trying to redefine "game" to what it suits you in the discussion, while in the previous paragraph defending that anything you want is a game, and that you cant tell if its good or not, Quote:

"The tools for making games are getting simpler every day. Now, I have my own issues with things like RPG Maker, Game Maker, etc... but the things you can make with these kinds of software are not non-games. The creators of said games are not non-game designers."

"First of all, the technical expertise required to make a board game is negligible. You can make a board game with... well, another board game! Taking a chess set and making new rules for the pieces and their interactions is making a game, and this has been done for a very long time."

Yes, thats why I design card-games and RPG modules, because i know fuck-all about programming and have no aptitude to learn it, again, I TRIED.

"What special "aptitude" is required for creating Yoko Ono's White Chess?"

You have to be Yoko Ono.

"So why would we have absolute rules for game design?"

I reject your strawman because I never suggested ABSOLUTE rules for anything.
But there -are- rules.
In the same way we have color-theory or the "golden rule" in graphics design, there are guidelines, and you break them at your own perril.

We are talking about -design- here and not about art.
Design has (some) rules. If you then proclaim your creation as art, is a different question and discussion.

"Your views disrespect the individual desire to express oneself for fear of failure at the hands of some abstract jury that doesn't really exist. This isn't healthy, not for anybody. Your piece is discouraging, and there's no getting around that."

If you want to read it that way, so be it, it seems I cant change your mind.

Devin Wilson
profile image
I'll just say I apologize for overlooking your comment about making games.

I think I've made my point(s).

Alex Popescu
profile image
it's definitely true that not anybody can do everything the want, but that is mostly because they are not passionate enough about what they are trying to do. Even if it doesn't work at first, and you fail, if you are dedicated enough you try again. The fact that you gave up chemistry and started working on graphics shows that you didn't care enough for chemistry not that you were not smart enough to do it. people need to find out what they do best because they need to find out what is appropriate for them. it's all about what gives them enough pleasure to keep them on a seat several hours per day. results will follow if you do it long enough.

there is a major flaw in your article and that is: everyone (EVERYONE) starts as a hobbyist/amateur and then they become professionals, and I am talking about anything here. if we don't have amateurs, we won't have professionals. How did you start? you "went" into graphics design and next day someone hired you? guess not.

Alex Popescu
profile image
also I have played enough AAA games that look and sound great but they are complete crap when it comes to gameplay. they just try to sell on the blood/violence/extreme points but they bring nothing to the world. maybe those big companies that release crap should stop making games and leave it to people that actually care.

Alexander Martin
profile image
Your article would be akin to one called "DRAWING PICTURES IS IMPOSSIBLE" followed by a flawed essay about how difficult it is to create a beautiful graphic novel epic.

A -- Perrin's article has nothing to do with working in the industry.
B -- It sure SEEMS like it's attempting to discourage people from making video games (or, seriously, what else did you mean to do with a title like "No, You CAN'T Make Video Games"?). The fact that your article's title is so stupidly, pointlessly inflammatory is probably the reason you're catching so much flak.
C -- Again, as far as I can tell from the condensed version, Perrin says not one thing about 'gamedesign in general' (except for that it has no rules, and I agree with you -- out of context -- that it is a bad statement).

TIP #5

Fucking around in Unity will make a game, and it will make you a better game designer. If you'd spent that time instead dreaming up game design docs: you will not have a game, and you will have learned nothing.

TIP #2

If you feel a game must have thousands (if not millions) of beautifully-rendered polys and an original orchestral soundtrack and ten thousand lines of code, then no, you're right, you can't make video games without a team.

~~~~~

Most people can make games in the same way that most people can draw pictures, or play a drum. We have progressed technologically to the point that you no longer need to create your own drawing materials or your own canvas and these things can, in fact, be extremely inexpensive. You may have them already within arm's reach.

Curtiss Murphy
profile image
Making games is hard. But, I disagree with your premise. People CAN learn to make games, or there would be no games. Is that a tautology? Must be some kind of 'ology'. ... And, your parents were right - you CAN do anything you truly set your mind to do. ... almost ... but it's a lot harder than you think.

(Consider 'Mindset' by Carol Dweck)

Paul Donald
profile image
Making games is hard, but if it is something you love to do then it is worth the time and effort no matter what the outcome. I am currently making my second game and doing all the work (design, coding, art and sound/music) myself. Even it is a complete flop I can say I enjoyed making it and learned a ton along the way.

Falk F
profile image
I think Neil Gaimans statement "If you don't know it's impossible it's easier to do." applies very well to making games. The barriers of entry to making games aren't as high as they are made out to be. I made small games with the RPG Maker with a friend in school and we where having lots of fun doing so. How could that possibly be a waste of time?!? It certainly taught us more about teamwork than school ever did. heh If you consider making simple games a waste of time then it might just not be your thing altogether. Which is fine ofc. but that doesn't mean others can't start making games and discover their true passion for it.

Toby Grierson
profile image
The astronaut bit is a bit of a bad example IMHO.

If you want to be an astronaut, the biggest point of failure other than luck (you might have a medical condition and there are lots of applicants) is not seriously trying for it; slacking off in high school, not going to college, etc.

-Someone- is going to space and at some point that someone was a stupid little nine year old. Then they joined the Navy and worked their ass off to be a pilot or worked their ass off to be a relevant scientist, exposing themselves to the -chance- of becoming an astronaut.

"Wishing hard enough" is a red herring. It's about the fact that you're probably not physically different enough from more successful people to justify not trying.

Bad graphics designers are another story; usually one of people who think they don't have to work at it and people who are too arrogant to learn from others. Is it all related? I dunno.

Carter Gabriel
profile image
http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0469263/

Evan Greenwood
profile image
I was posting about this on another forum, thought I'd repost here so you (Aleksander) can read it. My post is basically in support of Aleksander's position, but with some criticisms as well (for those of you that don't want to slog through it, my post is pretty long). Also sorry about talking about you, Aleksander, in the third person.

I thought the "You can make games" video was generally quite reasonable and certainly helpful in a practical way. For programmer-designer inclined people...

But for some artists or musicians who want to make games but don't have programming inclinations (or possibly even game design inclinations) I can see how that same advice could come off as useless, kind of subtly insulting and frustrating (especially as this advice is so common).

I'd imagine this is where Aleksander is coming from (and his argument he's being met by lot of hate from baffled programmers-designers).

If this is true then Richard Perrin's video isn't really meant for Aleksander or people like him who want to make games but should probably not follow the "You can make games" approach. I think these people get disproportionately little representation in the indie space, which must be frustrating (and as such Aleksander's argument seems a bit misplaced and an overcorrection and bitter).

Aleksander Adamkiewicz seems to be interpreting Richard Perrin's video as "Everyone can make good games" and there is definitely substance to that interpretation. Richard does suggest that everyone's voice needs to be heard, that through making games you will become good at making them, that "we must make the games we wish to play in the world", that the only thing holding you back is yourself.

And so Aleksander responded with an article trying to say "But not everyone is well suited to making games by themselves and saying otherwise is misleading and irresponsible". Which is fair I think, only that, for most people in Richard Perrin's audience, Richard's talk is just fine and they cannot see where Aleksander's frustration comes from.

What I'm taking out of this is that there is a lot of very optimistic programmer-designer-centric advice on making games out there, which doesn't suit everyone. And that I'd expect a small backlash, from more people who feel they have been misguided, in the future.

I'm a professional programmer-designer, and I basically did exactly what Richard suggests. But I have watched a lot of friends and colleagues struggle with turning games into something sustainable and I have watched many of these lose a lot of money and suffer. People get hurt making games when they aren't well equipped. I'd certainly feel Richard's advice was more useful (and responsible) if it better outlined the challenges involved in turning game making into something sustainable... even though that presumably wasn't Richard's goal (if that makes sense?).

(Aleksander does stress he isn't trying to discourage people from making games in his preface to the article, taking the title of his article literally is obviously missing the point if you bear in mind the title of original talk. And he says he is motivated by wanting to improve the discourse, and that's fairly laudable. I'm not going to suggest he has other bizarre clandestine motives or call him an elitist or something nastier.)

But... I feel that the biggest problem with Aleksander's article is that he doesn't suggest an alternative to the advice that clearly failed him. I think that that would be a really useful discussion.

Albert Diaz
profile image
As with anything on an open forum, to any topic, there will be three basic reactions, and some shades of color in between, in this case I mainly see:

1. Omfg you are so wrong you elitist jerk! How dare you burst people's bubbles!
2. Who cares?
3. Yes I agree, hard work is hard work, and not everyone can do that.

As an aspiring student with dreams of working in this industry, both the original video by Richard Perrin and Aleksander Adamkiewicz' post helped me in some way.

It is important for me to note what Alex wrote as point A, at the beginning of his post: "This article is directed towards people who want to work in the industry" which happens to be someone exactly like me.

What Alex is saying is basically what all my teachers are telling me: hard work is hard work, and not everyone can do that.
Last semester, I saw classes that start with 20 people, then in the end there are only 6 left. When I asked the guys why they were dropping the class, they all invariably answered "I had no idea this was so much work" or "This is too hard, I'm going back to film instead".

Both the drive toward success (That I got from Perrin's video), and a series of reality checks (Which is what I think Alex saying) are absolutely necessary for someone to realize his/her limitations, and perhaps to solidify the determination necessary to overcome them.

On a related note, I happen to agree with Evan Greenwood that Aleksander's post would have been better received with a clear constructive advice toward people like me, who want to work in this industry one day, other than, and i quote:

"The truth is simple, not everyone has the aptitude and skills required to make games (or anything for that matter). Telling people that they do, is irresponsible."

My two cents.

Tyler Moore
profile image
Thank you for your honesty in writing this. People too often embrace the whimsy and fantasy while forgetting the reality we live in. Sure, there's benefit in it, otherwise why bother, but there's a fine line between persueing a dream and being foolishly naive.

Aleksander Adamkiewicz
profile image
@Evan Greenwood
"I thought the "You can make games" video was generally quite reasonable and certainly helpful in a practical way. For programmer-designer inclined people...
[...]
And so Aleksander responded with an article trying to say "But not everyone is well suited to making games by themselves and saying otherwise is misleading and irresponsible". Which is fair I think, only that, for most people in Richard Perrin's audience, Richard's talk is just fine and they cannot see where Aleksander's frustration comes from."

The talk was presented at an anime-con, I'm not sure if "Perrin's audience" (the presumed programmer-designers) were to be found there. Perrin's talk was aimed at the everyman, he made as much clear in his response on his blog. (which frustratingly I can't find anymore).

This next part will also address @Albert Diaz but is connected to what Evan said about being constructive.

"On a related note, I happen to agree with Evan Greenwood that Aleksander's post would have been better received with a clear constructive advice toward people like me, who want to work in this industry one day, other than[...]"

What would you like me to say?
This is exactly the point I was trying to make with my article.

From experience, people who have both aptitude and conviction are -already- making games, they do not need to listen to Perrins talk. They already started toying around in RPG Maker or Unity, they already signed up to game design camps or game design schools.

Those are the ones that will succeed.

The example you brought up with your friends quitting out of class I saw in my education as a GFX Designer as well. The exact same thing happened, I started with a class that barely fit in the classroom and finished with 4 other students.
This is systemic in most fields of higher study, the same happened when I was studying Pharmacy as well, except i was one of those who quit. I quit not because it was hard, yes it was, but i just didn't have the right combination of conviction and aptitude and no amount of motivational speeches could change that.
I call the right combination of aptitude and conviction "talent".
Jobs like game design, graphics design or higher studies like physics, chemistry, IT, etc. require a different, very specific, sort of person than other more mundane occupations might.
Not just creatively, intellectually, or because they are hard, but because they need something special.

-Most people that are successful in the above mentioned fields don't just bring conviction or passion, they bring a sort of obsession with the subject. This obsession can not be learned, it can not be motivated nor can it be created, it is an integral part of that person.-

The people who want to do something and have the aptitude just -do-, they don't need motivational speeches and they don't need reality checks.

If you need Richard Perrin (or anyone else) to tell you that "yes, you can do it!" (YES WE CAN!) then you are most likely not one of those people. Perrin's talk fails because he is trying to introduce people to game design that are by virtue of being his audience unsuited for game design.

So you see, I can't give any "clear constructive advice", nor can Perrin for that matter, because what you need to succeed is either innately in you, or it isn't.

Good luck to you.

Kilon Alios
profile image
This blog post is a collection of so much nonsense that I cannot even begin to explain how wrong it is.

Messing around with photoshop is not art ?

Making games is hard ?

DeviantArt is the place where art goes to die in noise ?

You can't make music, but thats ok with you ?

What this blog is all about is 100% highly biased personal opinion.

"The truth is simple, not everyone has the aptitude and skills required to make games (or anything for that matter"

Making games requires skill ? since when ?

In short the truth is uber simple, sit down and develope your skills day by day , get as good as you want to be , there are zero excuses.

"I cant ", "I dont have talent" , " i want when I was a kid to become an austranaut and I did not" etc is a bunch of excuses.

The world is divided to two kinds of people those who invested enough time to achieve their goals and those who have not. There is no magic, there is no excuse . Just do it.

Stephen Goldberg
profile image
I think some of his analogies were poor, but the principle of the post has much meaning. I do believe from personal experience that pessimism, from a business perspective, can be very beneficial.

After I graduated High School I was employed by a golf cart shop. The shop sold and repaired golf carts. I started off as an entry level, cleaning and detailing carts. After gaining some experience and confidence I started selling carts. The first day I started selling carts I was overconfident. I knew the ins and outs of these things, I could answer any question the customer asked, but I soon found out that didn't matter. My confidence was, i may say, shattered, but I soon developed a pessimistic point of view. If I went to work thinking I would seal the deal with 1 out of say 20 customers then my bar wasn't set too high. In other words I was not setting an unrealistic expectation only for it to be crushed, which may lead to giving up.

This is not to say people shouldn't set goals and move towards them, and I do not think the post has that message. Creating a game requires a lot of work and knowledge, and filling peoples heads with those 'middle of the night get rich schemes' is irresponsible.

Anselmo Fresquez
profile image
Even here you do it. You say that every single person has the ability, the aptitude to do anything whatsoever they desire. That means that you do, I do, the kid working at the gas station does, the middle-aged woman raising two kids does. It's simply untrue. Once upon a time, everybody tried to learn to play guitar because they wanted to be the next rock icon. We can say only a few exceptional people had the talent to actually make it and of those who could have been stars even fewer did the work needed to get there. Can you honestly say that every single person you have ever met could sit down and debug scripts? In my experience, people have trouble with basic math.

Anselmo Fresquez
profile image
I agree with the message of this post. I meet people all the time who think if they only had [fill in the blank] they would be successful. This may be a bit abstract, but as humans we specialize at whatever we do. If I get home from work, crack open a beer and watch seven hours of television... that's what I'm going to be good at. Watching. Consuming. On the other hand, I have always been in the top 20% of anything I have applied myself to. The reason is that even though I probably don't have a high IQ (I knew a few real smart kids back in my geek magnet school, everything was just 'easy' to them--it was nauseating) I know that 80% of anything is just showing up and doing the damn work, every day, for hours and hours a day until you practically can't stand it. The problem is that people have no work ethic. Public school takes the one-size-fits-stupid approach. You can't learn it in college, because let's face it--nobody cares. So where do you go to learn work ethic? You don't. That's why 99.99% of everybody who tries, fails. Only the real self-starters, the eccentric, borderline-psychotic people are the ones who manage to do things. Take 10 people who you think of as very successful, now can you imagine them just browsing the web, stumbling upon people telling them "hey man, you can do stuff if you wanna!" It's laughable. I sometimes think the whole race has gone mad, assuming that everything should be easy and if its not--then it's just plain impossible and those who succeed are just lucky. That's the real mindset out there.

Pete Lines
profile image
So people shouldn't try to do anything and should just accept the job they hate and spend all their time doing nothing productive because it doesn't matter they'll always be a failure?

I'm thinking guidance counselor shouldn't be your career choice. :)

Joshua LaFrance
profile image
I can see you tried hard not to make a post full of anger, I understand what you are saying, and for the most part agree with you. I am currently in my 1.5st year of game design at college. Since 6th grade I've known I wanted to make games, but like everyone else I thought it was me telling people my ideas and them coding it for me. Of course I'm not that naive anymore, but I feel that's how people picture the "Design" side of games.

I like your realist attitude towards the subject and agree that it's just not for everyone. Out of my 30+ class I started with only about 15-20 remain in the program. No one should be discouraged to try and learn game design, but they shouldn't be "sheltered" from the truth either. I wish all professions had books and videos made about what it's like on the inside of their industry. As for games contributing to noise, I am absolutely sick of crappy games or clear as day rip offs of other games. The internet needs a website that will host "beginner games" for people to receive feedback from their games from players and creators. Instead of looking at their game that has 5000 plays, they should be looking at comments like, "I enjoyed the game, but I feel this could be better" or even negativity like "The hit boxes in this game is complete shit and you shouldn't make games again." That way the feint hearted will give up on trying to make it into one of the most competitive industries and also so people will realize that their "gem" is in fact a bad game and will become a better designer.

I apologize for any spelling errors, I am in a rush to leave, but had to get this off my chest while it was still in my mind. Good read though.

Aldy Pangestu
profile image
I agree with you. I myself took this stance against my drawing friends in high school and got shunned because of it, but I felt my opinion is justified since they were doing it occasionally just for the pride of being able to draw, much like the internet joke that "people buying a nikon or a canon is a certified professional photographer".

That's it, I just wanted to give a shout out that you're doing your job/role properly. Keep up the good work :D

Terry Stone
profile image
As I do agree that not everyone can create video games, I also agree that everyone has to start somewhere. I do not believe this post was ever to discourage people from learning to make video games, it was made to educate people that it is not as easy as it seems. In other words do not get into this field of study if you are not serious about what you want to accomplish. I think it is great to learn new things, but making video games has to be a grueling job. People talk about this type of work as if I can imagine it I can create it. This is nonsense, just because people can see how the outcome should be does not mean they have the skill to make it so. Kudos if you want to go to school to learn these skills, but please know it is not an easy task and will take time to get everything down. This is all this author was trying to say. Good job on your post it was very informative.

Curran Hicks
profile image
So then what i want to know, where should somebody start, and what determines if they have what it takes to do it?

Jonathan Peterson
profile image
Good article! I've just started jumping into the realm of game development and this, by far, was the article that made me want to do it more. There are a lot of articles out there that feed positive reinforcement without the real world "Hey, slow down buddy. Get your facts straight." Most say it will be trying, but you can still do it. (Which is basically what you're saying, just a more realistic tone.) Some of these comments strike me as funny, however. There is a common affliction within any profession that makes people believe that others can't do what they do (or as well). But the fact is, everyone has learned everything they know. So, anyone CAN do what you do (and perhaps better). Yes, I do believe that the whole "you can do anything" thing is completely out of control. But only when it is applied to making money to said thing. Ya still gotta do your crap job, prob. Damn if you/I can't still make a dope game, though. Here's hoping.


none
 
Comment: