Pumpkin isn’t just the name of a gourd.
Anyway, [I had no idea how else to start this]
I might be suffering from my first burst of manic energy since taking a week long nap so bear with me, as I get down to the point; game development.
Today, ranting at length to someone about the obstacles I was facing using Unreal actually led to some useful solutions, not just because I think about things more clearly when I put them into words [a great reason why everyone should talk to themselves out loud about every thing as a tool for self knowledge]... but also because he’s awesome and when faced with a problem in concise terms -much like me- he’s subject to every instinct to look it up himself and try to figure out both the problem and possible solutions. He’s not one to volunteer unwanted advice, but it is the nature of our relationship that we openly welcome each other’s input. I will have to credit him upon game release for being so supportive and helpful, if for no other reason than for attentively listening to me rant. Anyway, I do want to document my journey here as a help to those who come after me wanting to develop their own game. If my ranting about my process is helpful to you, or you think it may help others, please reblog.
1.
I HAD been having issues understanding exactly how Unreal expected me to handle and construct a lot of things. Like, games have levels, and even “open world” games are often benefited from being separate levels that appear cohesive due to various mechanisms [including level streaming, I’ll get to that eventually] BUT it was very unclear to me how the engine expected me to handle and arrange that in relation to “maps” and “worlds”, and how one would navigate effectively “transferring” the player between “levels” or playable “areas” in the run of the game, whether there were native tools for it, or whether I would have to code it myself in C++, etc... Some of the confusion was specifically BECAUSE of the documentation and the fact that it uses the words “world” “map” “level” and even “layer” somewhat interchangeably in various instances and for various things. The issue comes in where all those word are both words in the English language used to describe stuff, but ALSO the name of a -very specific- Thing in the engine, and --due to it not always being clear how the engine interacts with the code right off the hop-- it’s not always clear from context which way the words are being used, and what tools and in-built functions they might be referencing, especially for someone who can’t see half the menus.
So here’s the thing [the answer]. In terms of plain English for people not familiar with anything, since I’m not assuming my potential audience -or student- has ANY prior experience. “levels” as in game levels or playable areas, are individual maps. They are “stored” --or accessed in-program-- in the maps folder at the bottom with the other assets. You make a new one from choosing the option to create a new “level” from the visible or invisible file menu, which you can do from a gray-scale .png to start with a height-map you could make in say, photoshop. You can tell it what percent size to import it as, where the pixel to km ratio is something debated in forums, but you'll get a feel for how big your map defaults to from the image you are using. You can load in all your “maps/levels” as “levels” using this process and there are nodes that can handle stuff like level streaming and making things a continuous space and moving the player from one to the other, etc... When I find video tutorials that actually help me with a process at the time I get to it [or pages in the technical guide] I'll post them here. [meaning this post, other posts, or my blog here in general].
The next problem I was having was not knowing how to access the C++ code in unreal. Turns out you need to install visual basic [or another compiler, but unreal likes visual basic and was made to work with it in particular]... and though I can't see it... there is an option in the file menu to generate C++ code and open the compiler or “editing program/window” for it. I would assume it does something to include some aspect of what you have with the nodes so far?? This I have been unable to confirm as I have not installed visual basic specifically or clicked the invisible button to do this in my file menu. If someone wants to comment or re-blog with info on this go nuts. You are of course meant to be able to make -at least a passable game- without this because a selling point of the engine is that you aren't supposed to need coding experience, which I guess makes sense of it being such a separate thing, but I guarantee you I will find the nodes [ie, blue-prints, for those who are confused by me calling them nodes] limiting at some point and will absolutely want direct access to the code [I am assuming this but this is my pattern with templates and similar things so far, I'm very particular]. I'll keep updating with increasing levels of understanding of how exactly this engine handles various levels of algorithm, in the terms that I understand it, in case someone else has my approach and way of conceptualizing things and is equally confused/put-off by some of this.
The way your code is nested and organized is often dictated by the progression of your game in some way, traditionally often by separate physical spaces coming with different rules, and not having the option to go back. In many ways linear story progression shapes the structure of a game program in ways that simply DO NOT WORK with an open world game. Non-linear story and the ability for the player to do anything at any time means structuring the program for that, and the progression of the game -in the code- around different kinds of progression and possibilities. And so the traditional program structure I am used to doesn't quite apply here, and it's starting to look like -if it was mostly in c++- there would be a lot about the code that's all just a lot of “while” statements in the main program loop... and while that might be how open world needs to be structured, I do need to organize it somehow, and figure out what exactly needs to be at various levels of nested “loops” of various kinds. I also need to determine whether or not I should primarily use the “blueprints” for the game-flow itself and just code the details in c++ directly. This -on the outside- seems like it's the more obvious and better choice/solution, except the specific questions I have that would inform that choice do not seem to have any answers available online, in guides, in tutorials or the the engine documentation... so I'm still trying -on some level- to figure that out, but I feel like I'm slightly closer than I was before.
What would really help me is seeing an example algorithm or flow chart of how an open world puzzle game is generally constructed. Not even specific game code, just a rough example of a flow chart, since I haven't made a game this complex before or an open world game before. I'll figure it out, but seeing some example of one working structure would help me do that a LOT faster... this -however- does not seem to be an available resource, despite how many engine developers SHOULD have a vested interest in people making successful games with their engine. I did find some video-game related flow chart memes though, and those were funny I guess.
So those are some obstacles/challenges I've been facing [or trying to resolve], other than a lack of processing power on all my machines. And I'll add more as they come up and as I come to solutions for them that might give some insight to others. [I'll also be talking about the steps in development that I've gone through so far, or have at least done a lot of foundation work on, that is also a good checklist to go through for others developing their own game].
The REASON why the question of how levels and maps work is so important for me -as to be an obstacle- at this very stage in development is this:
Because it affects my “first step” in actually developing the game [as in moving past the concept phase and into the concrete creation]. For me, the first step is creating the full map I've designed/decided [the whole game, for me, in concept, is already concretely decided].
Due to the way levels work, and the way I'm creating the map as a height map first, and the way the game handles level streaming and moving from one level to another, it means I need to make the divisions of areas -that need to appear as one- fall on perfectly straight lines [not as in flat or level, but as in at the straight edge of a .png file], and the heights be the same on either side of that border [between the multiple eventual .png images].
This means making the height map for a whole area --that's meant to be connected-- in ONE file and trying as much as possible to not need to edit it in the engine, then deciding on rectangular divisions of the map to divide the image into before loading it as separate “levels”.
If I end up needing to edit the ground heights AFTER that point, it means editing two separate levels next to each other and trying to make sure it's done precisely enough that there's no height difference between the two and that I don't need to place extra assets -that would be obvious- along any border. I would like to do that as much as possible before loading it into unreal because it makes my life easier.
In places I have edges that are technically separate areas, I DO NOT want obvious divisions, and even if I have to break up the map, I DO NOT want it to feel less open world due to lengthy /obvious loading screens, or the sense that there are areas you can see but not access/get to. Obduction was guilty of both these things, and to me it made it feel a lot -less- open world, even than something like Myst games which are obviously divided areas, with loads in between and even more stuff you can't get to... somehow Obduction felt more limited [at least to me] and I want to avoid the things that made it feel like that. BOTW felt open, but also didn't have the same immersion in each environment because they were close enough together -despite some visual barriers- that you could often see clearly separate places/biomes in the distance, and that too is something I want to avoid. I don't want to get too much into what exactly I am doing with it [call it me delusionaly keeping secrets as if I have some formula/execution of ideas I don't think someone else has thought of, but I want people following the development of the game to still be surprised, and I don't want anyone with vastly more resources than me beating me to the punch on my own exact process or ideas], but I also do want to create some sense of what can be expected, and help others on my same journey.
I have decided to break up my map into various “levels” due to the fact that I want a really big map but I also don't have a lot of processing myself and I don't want the game to need a lot of resources to run because I want to make it as accessible as possible to older systems. I even have further specific solutions in mind of how to make the game capable of running on much older systems without sacrificing anything about the visual integrity or amazing realism I am aiming for. I do feel like these innovations are unique to me as of now, as I have not seen these things done in other games, even if that's a product of “not bothering” because most game developers probably don't care about making sure their game is accessible to specific people, so long as it sells enough copies to make enough money.
I want very open spaces, but without navigating being tedious or requiring the extra processing power, even I would think I'm asking too much, if I didn't have a very specific an nuanced plan of exactly how to accomplish that. Yes, it takes more work from me and longer time to develop but YES it's worth it to me, because YES I care that veteran fans of puzzle games --who may be old and disabled and unable to even access a decent i5 processor-- also be able to run my game and have it function well and look really good. I care about the hypothetical individual who may or may not feel like they are missing a good experience by not being able to play the game, because I know how I feel when a shiny new puzzle game comes out and it's crappy to try to play on the best computer I can afford.
And now, Scereyaha's certified steps to developing a video-game:
Decide to make a game. Choose being open to the possibility that you can learn everything you need to and find the resources you need to eventually get it done, even if it requires working around jobs, or health problems and paying for a lack of resources with time and effort. Set time aside to do it and find a process that works for you. Think of what has lead you to success on other kinds of projects and integrate that into your game plan. Look at the skills necessary to build a game and decide you are capable of learning those skills. Game engines now make it so you don't need coding experience, but that will come with some limits. [Check]
Decide what kind of game you want to make and what your goals for it are. Think about the underlying reasons why that kind of game appeals to you and what you and others enjoy about that kind of game. Create what you want to see existing in the market. Is it a puzzle game, a simulator, a walking exploration game, a shooter, an interactive story? [For me; Puzzle game, open world, first person, exploration, a zen but challenging experience with beautiful environments and compelling themes << I have these environments and themes pinned down in detail, I'm just not giving spoilers]
[ignore the numbers because tumblr fucked them up, there’s like 14 steps or something]
Do research, play other games in that vein or that have strong similarities to what you want to do, decide what works, and what frustrates you or that you think should or could be done better. Think about and research why people play that kind of game and think of innovations you would like to bring to those games, new things you wish others did. Think of a game you would ideally like to play. Read reviews about other similar games and see what aspects of those games bothered people or worked against what those games were trying to do. Know your goals and know your audience. Discover what you get out of those games and think of ways to expand on those things. [Check, I've posted about this before]
Decide on the themes and flavour of your game. Decide on how it will generally look, its aesthetic. Decide what level of realism or what art style suits your game and is within your capabilities or the capabilities of the program you are using. Most engines are geared towards realistic 3d or flat drawn 2d games. What style you pick will be determined by what art you can do yourself, or what assets you have or can afford access to, or what artist you can afford to pay to make assets and images for you. [I'm handling all that stuff myself from textures to graphics to 3d models, but that's not something everyone wants to sign up for, and that's okay, you might be a small group or one person.] Decide the general type of game play, linear story? Top down? Open world or not? Exploration or story heavy? Play to your strengths. Exercise to develop new strengths if you find yourself lacking, study examples of it being done well and try it. These questions will also depend on your engine, or if your writing the raw code yourself, is it a flash game? A browser game? What suits your vision and is financially viable for you? [For me, As realistic as possible and only stylized enough to look cohesive and intentional where the realism isn't perfect, puzzle games have a proud tradition of being pretty, and problem solving paired with exploring awe inspiring or beautiful environments create a mental state I enjoy and want to share. I can do any art or rendering I need to by myself with enough time. I am willing to invest this time. I am using unreal for reasons mentioned in previous posts.... unless I get pissed off at it and just end up developing my own engine, but I doubt I'd be willing to add that kind of time investment to something that's already this “big”.]
Decide what platform it will be for and what controllers people will use for it. Also look into what that means for market value and how it will limit the game.
Decide what you are willing and not willing to invest in the project and how much you are willing to adapt your vision for things like time constraints, money, resources, or bringing other hands onto the project. Decide your limits and figure out what you need to be prepared for and what you need to set aside. Research what it takes, don't let parts of the process be a surprise after you've sunk time or maybe money into it. Figure out what you'll learn to do yourself, and what you will outsource to others or pay for. [Other than buying a new computer, and maybe a good microphone, I don't plan to spend any money, I plan to develop any needed skills that I don't already have myself. I do not plan to buy assets, or parts of code, or sounds or anything else. I am aware of how much work that means for me. Other than talking about it with people I know, I don't plan to bring others onto the project.]
Decide in greater detail what your environments will look like, do some concept art and research reference material. If you aren't good at imagining complex visual things especially, work out “on paper” what these things will look like in your chosen style. Keep in mind environments inform -and are informed by- game play, physical obstacles are a game-play mechanic. [I have research, references, and firm mental images, I haven't spent time on concept art yet in part because I'm developing it myself, and not pitching it to a studio or looking for financial support for it. I know what all my environments will be and what will define my areas and make them unique. I might need to work the map down to finer details but I'm already getting close to the point where it's starting to matter more what structures I'm including on the map and at what size, so I'm running into needing to pin down my exact scale before working to finer details.]
Decide what assets you need. Flat images, textures, UI object, cinematic, models [buildings, background interact-ables, npcs, wildlife, still life photos, literal stuff], atmospheric effects, sounds. What tools will the user have and how will they be accessed or represented? How will the map work? Will they have an inventory? How will it be arranged? What items can be picked up and how will they be accessible? A lot of UI's in games are HORRIBLE. Consider how to make what the user needs accessible without crowding the screen or looking bad. Decide how the user interface will work with the aesthetics and theme of the game... I feel like this is an often overlooked part of game development, it should not be a last minute thing or feel poorly designed or “tacked on” it should not break immersion or interrupt game play, it should be intuitive enough to navigate and access that the player doesn't think about it. Demonstrating “player state” is part of the UI.[I know exactly how I am managing the UI, where things will be and how they will be accessed. I know the kinds of graphics I am using and what tools the user will have, I'm about to put together folders on my computer dedicated to each area, inspiration and references, and development of what specific assets will be in each area and the sounds, colours and environmental effects, ect, I may also produce concept art for my own purposes and area specific lists and notes and will be deciding what kinds of puzzles I am incorporating and where. I have lists of the exact assets I will need for my game as a whole already and in what order I need to create and add them].
Also consider accessibility, as I've said before. Stylized fonts are really nice, but so is making sure everyone can read them. Coloured elements are cool, but making sure things can be told apart by something other than colour is necessary for some people to play the game. [I plan on doing as much as I can to make the game accessible, including font-face and subtitle options. I might make the main font a dyslexia friendly one if it just looks good like that, or I will create two fonts. I want to also confirm the environments look good to the colour-blind. If I make enough money on the initial game release, I would like to make translations and also a “voice” option for game-play for the visually impaired... or the immobile/infirm, if I can manage that. Though there are some things in a puzzle game that just can't be made accessible to someone who can't see visual puzzles.] There are obviously limitations on how accessible a video-game can be but there's no sense in dis-including people from the experience if a couple tweaks lets them partake too. [One thing that would help me is if people who are colourblind got out some colour charts and circled precisely what areas of them look indistinguishable from each other on a computer screen, like specific boundaries of where things look the same, I'll also look for existing tools, but I'd like to make sure that while the colours look good to everyone else, they ALSO look good to the colour-blind... or make a separate game play option that achieves this depending on how complex that turns out to be.]
How will you demonstrate progression to your player? What happens if they “die”? How does them not dying or re-spawning make sense in the game universe logic? Are there fail states? Will progression be obvious in the UI? Or demonstrated in the game somehow? How will you give the player goals to work towards so they don't get bored or feel like they don't know what to do next? How will you show or tell your player what to do and what they are trying to accomplish? Is it creative? Is there a story to follow? Decide these things and what they mean for the environments and needed assets and graphics. [I have decided on what UI and in game elements will make progress and change observable to the player.]
How will you make sure the player is fully equipped with everything they need? Are you relying on standard controls for that kind of game? Will there be tutorials or learning/beginner areas? How will you make learning the controls feel like part of the game? Are you relying on real world knowledge acquired outside of the game? Or are you making sure the player has been presented with everything they need to know to do what they need to in the game? [My introduction to mechanics is integrated into the opening of the game, I have a firm plan of how I will do this. I believe in assuming intelligence, in a puzzle game, not a specific education, and not brazen confidence. I will make all the information available in-game if I can within any measure of reason, and I will demonstrate to the player when they have succeeded.]
How will your game open? In a tutorial level? With a cinematic? Dropped into the action? [My game happens to open with a cinematic before everything else, I know how I will create this in the engine, roughly, and I know exactly what it looks like and how it will go and the exact lines. I'd share more details but I have a really cool idea for the beginning of my game and I'm not ready to share yet, but I'm excited for people to eventually experience it]
Create a map of your actual areas that include the features you need and that make sense with game play. Figure out what it will look like in the game and how the design works with your themes and assets, and the viewing angle or navigation of the game. [open world is pretty self explanatory, there are some puzzles that will take up the screen when accessed, others will be in the environment itself, as per puzzle games, I have designed my map and how it will limit or encourage player exploring and I know what each part of the map will look like to some level of detail. I still need to pin down some greater level of detail for specific areas that somewhat depend on scale or other aspects that I haven't quite nailed down yet but I know roughly what assets I will need in each area, and in theory what they will each look like.... I do need to pin down the exact boundaries of these areas though, given the map limitations and construction]
Determine what promotion you need to do for your game early on, or if you plan to develop it independently and without donations until it's ready to be released/sold. Decide the NAME of the game and how to market it in a way that it will meet and exceed any of the expectations you set and that people will get excited for. [I'm going to work on it until phase 1 in done, and then re-address how I'm releasing or funding the project, but I mostly just plan to work on it till it's done and then release it for full price when it's finished, or release phase one for free, and then charge for the completed game. What you are offered will always be what you get for the price it's offered for, I do not want to take money in advance for something I might not finish... I also understand this might take me a while. I have a name for my game and the eventual -possible- online version that suits the theme of my game and hasn't been used before.]
Decide if this is something you really want to see through. Decide what and how you will charge for it, if you will charge for it, and if it makes it worthwhile to you, or is a reasonable expectation... If you know what you are doing, you have your art and sound direction and your work cut out for you... start really developing the art and assets and doing/learning the engine and coding.
And at that you are ready to start creating the game [I'll add stuff if I've overlooked a part of my own process or need to go back and re-address something, but I don't think nailing anything down more firmly that that makes sense until you have a better feel for how everything you have planned is actually working out, and how it actually is to create/acquire these things, everyone's process is different so we'll all need to go back to the drawing board to different extents and on different things]. In general though you want to identify as many obstacles as you can as early as you can and find solutions before there's too much riding on it. [Not avoid the issue until you've already invested a bunch of other work].
Scereyaha's certified steps to actually creating this damn game:
Bitch about the game engine and demand the universe tell you what it even is, like what is it even. Very important. No but seriously, figure out in exact terms what exactly you need answers for as soon as possible and ask the right questions, find resources.
I'm starting with my map because I need to work out it's function and scale to inform my decisions about any further details, I want to be able to add assets to the “landscape” as I create them so I can see how it all looks together as I go. Once my environment is complete, I will start working on structures and then puzzles. I'm creating it to be saved as .png, and painting it in detailed gray-scale so it can be loaded as a height-map down to a fairly good detail of what I need it to be so I can move to texturing it and working out the exact scale in the engine itself to inform the rest of my environment and asset creation. Little terrain details will come later, but I swear to you that doing it this way is letting me create a large ass map down to a relative detail in about a week's worth of work... by one person, and that ain't too shabby, id be done by now if I had been familiar with the engine and if I hadn't slept for a week. [I'm willing to put together a tutorial on this, once I'm far enough along that I know it worked as well as I think it will. I have already tested what I have so far, and asides from a lack of processing power it's coming out EXACTLY how I would expect, and it looked great, I know exactly how to teak what few issues it had, even in that early test and I should really have the basic map down soon, now that I have the “levels” thing sorted out.] I would show you the map but it's kind of spoilers. [One I have a chunk of something to show you that doesn't give too much away I'll share some screen grabs.]
Once I have my map worked out as far as I can get it without having exact assets to tweak it around, I'm going to start working on texturing it and figuring out how to make a sky and atmosphere effects and celestial bodies like a sun and moon and stars and stuff. I'll also probably be adding stuff like weather and atmospheric effects, etc... This and the lighting will let me see how my assets will look -more or less- in the final game as I am creating them. [The downside of no co-conspirators is having to do all the work myself... the upside is being fully informed about every part of the process and being in complete control of everything, and able to jump to whatever part of whatever task makes most sense next... which will let me micromanage the shit out of this for maximum efficiency.]
As stated I'm going to define the edges of the “levels” and of the more specific areas and biomes and put together specific folders with everything relevant to each specific area so I start building a real cohesive feel for them and can determine how big each area needs to be to make sense and contain what I want. I encourage you to do the same. From that point I will be able to make a list of itemized -specific- assets needed for each area and for the whole game that I can start work on and have an informed scale for. [The difference between knowing you need kinds of trees, and knowing how many of what specific types of trees you need for each specific area]
As sated -more or less- Phase one is basically building the environment as a walking simulator -whether I release it or not will mostly depend on how long it takes- and once I get down to the point where I am just creating assets and adding them to the map and have everything else handled, I will start simultaneously working on specifics of navigation and then mechanics, and specific puzzles, and then addressing the overall game flow and progression in detail. As well as the basic UI
After it's an enriching environment with puzzles in it, will come the cinematics [or the main cinematic will come before the puzzles], the more complex UI, and then things like little animations and the development of moving spawning NPCs, and stuff. This way I will have a playable game at various stages and I can adjust my plans base on how long or involved each step is [and whether or not I start dying TBH.] If I can release the main area as a walking sim I can start selling asset packs I've created to fund the rest of the game without risking that games will come out using my assets before my game is ready. I don't want to create all those assets and end up with a game that people think was pieced together out of the asset store. It would also let me release A game in some reasonable amount of time and generate feedback while I tweak the game and add puzzles. We'll see.
That is the game plan so far, and I'll keep you all updated as I go.
So far the game's map is HUGE, there are at least 100 or so TYPES [as in “trees” are a “type”] of “living” assets I'm making just for the environment, short of NPC-like things [aka not moving significantly or with behaviors], and not counting rock formations or non-living assets. There are over 200 unique areas with possibly different biomes overlapping them, probably 50 or more “phenomena” type sets of assets and atmospheric elements, some are area specific, and 1 or more unique points of interest per mentioned area... And I can't find my list of puzzle types on this computer, but at least 20 different planned kinds of puzzle so far that are different on a fundamental level of design an function [not just a unique “kind” of puzzle, but whole different types of logic and mechanic, to say nothing of visual representation and superficial differences... these are a thing I suspect I'll be handling directly in c++], That's what the plan is so far. I know it sounds ambitious, it is.
To re-address this question, for the record. The reason why I am starting my quest into game development with a vision so ambitious as the game I eventually/ultimately want to create is because that is how I learn everything. It seems ambitious and isn't everyone's method but it's actually how I do everything and how I learn best. If I am going to spend time while learning working on anything, why not be putting that effort toward the one thing I really want to create? [This philosophy is somewhat informed by my level of transferable skills and my limited health and energy to do anything and my constant existential anxiety.] It certainly would not be a healthy or helpful approach for everyone or even most people, but I assure you it's what works best for me. I like starting things that I can keep building on and reworking and fixing and experimenting with until I create something amazing, and I'm good at doing it without any of the edits or seams showing [at least when left to my own devices]. It's not naivety or blind youthful ambition leading me down this path, I promise. [I also taught myself how to do any kind of knitting in one day by jumping into knitting a miniature cable-knit sweater with no pattern, and now I have the sweater, it looks great on the doll and I can knit, and even understand patterns.]
I'm not saying I don't face challenges or obstacles, or that I'm uniquely skilled or amazing in some way; I'm saying almost anyone can eventually accomplish most independent tasks that they find internal motivation to want to, and if they play to their strengths and abilities [a person with no interest in puzzle games isn't likely to be very driven to make one], adapt what they are capable of into what needs to get done, and face a lack of knowledge or understanding with the attitude that the information is out there and they can go find it; and the lack of skill with the attitude that they can develop it; and the lack of physical or mental ability with the attitude that they can find a way -around- it or a good substitute. [even if that solution is outsourcing a part of the process to someone else which is a thing we can't all afford.] Obviously we all face different challenges and I myself am among the physically and emotionally [in quotations because for me it's less cognitive involvement and more a direct physical question of hormones and endocrines, not to say my life doesn't also just suck sometimes] disabled and broke AF category of people, and there are some things that are just impossible for some people and at some times, or just aren't worth what it would take, that's for the individual to decide.
What I am getting at is that most of the time when someone is amazed at something I can do and is sad they can't do it themselves, the only reason why I can and they can't is because I approached it with the attitude that I could learn to, and they see it as something they aren't capable of, so even though we are equally capable of intellectually understanding it and physically doing it, I can and they can't, mostly because they don't bother trying. And when I encounter the attitude in people that I couldn't possibly accomplish something, it's because they have the attitude that --THEY aren't capable of it so why should I be?-- or that --People can't just do those things.-- or that --It takes a special kind of person to be able to do that, who has some undefinable quality that they or I don't posses--. My mother, for example, doesn't think she can understand science or computers, so she just turns her ears of the moment I start talking about technology in any way and won't try to use a computer, at least she was like that for years, even spending an entire adult learning course making Clippy blow up instead of doing the lesson plans, but it's not that she's not capable of understanding, because the moment I addressed that she was doing this, she realized it was a bit rude, just tuning me out all the time, and we talked about her issue being a lack of confidence and not a lack of intelligence, and she started trying to understand for my sake, and found she actually understood what I was taking about. We're now working on getting her a computer of her own so she can use it to see her grandchildren.
I'm not saying that a person's lack of ability comes solely from their own belief they aren't able to do something [I myself have gotten rightfully irate at people trying to tell me the only reason why I don't want -or think I shouldn't have- kids is because I don't know my own abilities or limits, that everyone has “ideas” about what they can and can't do as if they know better]. That would be ableist and shitty and not what I mean at all. You get to decide your limits and what you want, and what's best for you.
What I'm saying is that dismissing possibilities due to a lack of confidence is something people are practically programmed to do by -especially western- culture, and especially because self-esteem issues have become so prevalent. People tend to approach things they can't already do, or aren't based directly off a skill they already have mastered, like it's something that would be too hard to learn, or something they aren't capable of. They buy into thinking of people in terms of “types” of people and don't think they're the right “type” of person for a specific hobby or skill [Like internalizing stereotypes]. The one major drawback of technology is that we are now handed finished products by the “industry” instead of by skilled individuals or small groups and it creates this illusion that “ordinary” people aren't capable of creating these same things, given enough time, or training and resources. In a lot of ways having things done for us by technology combined with the insecure-narcissism of previous generations, and combined with a lack of education about how things are actually made, amalgamates in infantalizing newer generations into thinking so many things are just “beyond them”. And yet resources and information are more at our fingertips than ever... Everyone is subject to this, we were all raised into it. Different people rise above different parts of their cultural conditioning and person psychology at different rates and in different ways. This is just one way in which -by the age of 30- I have some shit a little more figured out than some, though I'm sure they have different shit more figured out than I do.
[Hence why a small group of people may --in spite of multiple examples of groups of 20 or less people creating exactly the quality and scope of game expected from a larger studio-- insist to me that I can't expect we could do the same because we're not a Triple-A studio. And hence why I get pissed off at how dismissive that is, when all I'm asking for is that we not decide what our limits of quality are before we even get into the work, and see what we're capable of, and why I get annoyed at the attitude that I'm somehow the one being naive.] *cough* as a random -non specific- example. [I'm sure they'd be in stitches reading about how I plan to 10 up them -and everyone else- all by myself in a basement, “If it takes me 10 years, and to the precipice of my grave!” please don't hyperventilate guys I don't actually want any harm to come to you. Even if maybe one of you was a raging bitch to me ;p ]
...And I get a little annoyed when people tell me I'm naive for having confidence in my ability to learn, or accomplish something, or treat me like an insulting egotists when I try to tell them -upon being asked- that the reason I have a skill or accomplished something that they don't/didn't is because I faced it with the attitude that it was something I could do. There is really no greater secret to what I have accomplished or learned to do -or will- than that, I'm NOT special or better than other people, and THAT'S my point. I just started doing the thing expecting I could get good at it and then I did, and I developed transferable skills, even the process of learning something -or teaching yourself- becomes a transferable skill, those things start to snowball at some point, along with healthy confidence [you know the kind often seen as over-confidence -or egotism or bitchiness- in women, basically because sexism says we should be humble and self-depreciating, or the level of confidence that's dismissed as delusional when observed in someone who is disabled...]. And -for the record- neurology and intelligence are both plastic and adaptable things, that's a biological fact, you learn how to learn, and you learn how to apply different logic in different ways, and you even learn muscle memory, it's an ongoing process. Your I.Q. And ability to synthesize understanding from information isn't a static thing, it's something you can practice, it's something that grows, strengthens or diminishes in time depending on how much thinking you do and how you take care of your brain.
There are still things I don't want to invest time in learning because it wouldn't be worth it for me and I have other priorities, and still a couple thing I don't want in my life -in part- because I am physically not capable of keeping up with the demands [like having kids, though there are other reasons], everyone has stuff like that, BUT there is a difference between ---telling yourself “I'm choosing not to invest myself in learning this because it's not worth it for or to me.” and loving yourself and being okay with that decision--- and ---telling yourself “I could never develop a skill like that because I'm too stupid or incompetent, or not the right kind of person. ” and feeling bad about yourself because of it--- And there's certainly a difference between either of those and being a dick to someone else for “daring” to think themselves capable.
It's okay to have limits and to be aware of what those are... just maybe double check sometimes if it's entirely your judgment that has lead you to that conclusion, and not something pushed onto you, conditioned into you or decided for you. Nobody gets to decide that for you, but you should examine it for yourself and on your own terms. We buy into a lot of bullshit and sometimes that bullshit is about ourselves, and we're generally better off figuring out what parts of that bullshit are holding us back, and taking ourselves out of it when we're ready.
Because I'm willing to bet you are far more capable than you give yourself credit for, it's generally true of people, and I assure you that even if you aren't, you're still worthwhile, and sometimes it can be fun to just try things without judgment. If you want to do something, try it, you might surprise yourself... or it might be fun to be laughably bad at it and try anyway.
The first time I tried knitting, I tried to learn to make a granny-square... by looking at one, and having my mom verbally describe how it was done. This is something that would be enough for me to learn a lot of other things, even very complex things. Despite this, the most I managed to do was create something that looked like a 4 leaf clover made of yard. It was laughably bad. I laughed, my mom laughed at me and with me... it was a good time. It was years before I picked up knitting again, not because I was disheartened or felt incapable, but because I was busy doing other stuff... and you know how the rest of that went... but here's the thing, I still have no fucking clue how to make a granny-square, not knitting or with crochet. Can't do it... I can knit a miniature cable knit virgin slayer sweater off the top of my head with ribbed collar and trim, small enough to fit a monster high doll, on the first try, with no pattern... but fuck if I can knit or crochet a granny-square. And you know what? I don't care. There's nothing I want to make that requires that particular skill, so it's not worth it for me to learn. But it was also fun to try, and I don't feel bad I can't. And maybe I'll make a small bouquet of coloured clovers some time for my mom as a cute gift, and maybe it'll remind her we all have different strengths... and maybe that's good too.
I can paint complex shapes like a human nose... but I still can't get clouds to look the way I want. I'm working on it, and fucking up a LOT, and that's okay.
I also spent years not willing to invest the time and energy it would take me to learn the particular coordination playing video games would require, because some of my conditions make it particularly challenging for me and it just wasn’t worth it for me. And people gave me shit about it, but it was never something I felt bad about. I don’t learn to drive because there’s no point given some of my conditions, and I get hard core shit for that constantly, still not going to feel bad. I can’t safely play sports at all, so I’m not bothered that my hustle sucks. I’m laughably bad at most sports, not because I’m not “the right kind of person” -or a woman- but because I haven’t decided it’s worth investing the risk and effort it would take me to get good, and that’s okay.
I encourage you to try stuff without fear of failure and without feeling bad about yourself if you don't get it right, right away or ever, it's good for you. Testing your limits can be fun and even enlightening, when you do it on your own terms. [Your friend Google is right there to make suggestions that range from helpful to “helpful”. And Mr. Library is crying in the corner because he doesn't feel relevant anymore, but he'd gladly give you his 2 cents too.]
*whispers* make a video game with me. You don't have to see it through, but if you're interested maybe try it, see how far you get and when you get stuck, see how far you can get un-stuck by your own hand.
