DOOM III INFO - PLEASE READ

"And as a matter of fact, Ultron, I really really like smart people. That's why it's so frustrating to see so few of them. Thankfully, though, I happen to think John Carmack is a very insightful guy (from years of reading his musings on both technical matters and the bigger picture(s) of being a game developer, company executive and a smart person).

I have always felt that blind positivity (naivity) is a bad thing, and it is this that allows under-par products to exist in the long run. We would all be better off if we were more critical to all kinds of creative output, in the same way that competition is good for the achievement level in almost every other conceivable area."

First of all this has nothing to do with intelligence. While agree that "blind positivity" is a bad thing, and criticism is a good thing. There is a difference between destructive and constructive criticism. Being constructive doesn't mean being unrealistic or blind. Destructive criticism only hampers the critical process with excess baggage. It's okay to tell people what you think the focus should be, but to slam them because you think they don't have the right focus is a different story. You end up not criticizing the issue, but the idea-maker.

That's not constructive. That's distractive.

You're points were good, Mac10, but not the way you slammed ColdOne for it was unneccesary. You started out by introducing your ideas in a very negative way. Calling him an "idiot" and his post "stupid" didn't endear anyone to you.

You can go about life introducing yourself that way to people if you like, but that doesn't mean the people you introduce yourself to have to like you. You can't make a first impression twice. (man I feel old pulling that quote out of the hat) :)

> "And as a matter of fact, Ultron, I really really like smart
> people. That's why it's so frustrating to see so few of them.
> Thankfully, though, I happen to think John Carmack is a very
> insightful guy (from years of reading his musings on both
> technical matters and the bigger picture(s) of being a game
> developer, company executive and a smart person). I have always
> felt that blind positivity (naivity) is a bad thing, and it is
> this that allows under-par products to exist in the long run. We
> would all be better off if we were more critical to all kinds of
> creative output, in the same way that competition is good for the
> achievement level in almost every other conceivable area."

> First of all this has nothing to do with intelligence.

What the /hell/ are you talking about? These quotes are taken out of context - from several /unrelated/ posts, dealing with completely different topics! You can't just paste them together at will and then follow up like they are the synopsis of someone's (my) stance in the matter at hand!

I have not (yet) said that criticism and intelligence are two sides of the same coin, though I could probably hit you in the middle of the face with a good case that there is a link between intelligence and the ability to analyze, the latter being a prerequisite for criticism - constructive /and/ 'destructive' as such (as well as for /goal-oriented, productive creativity/, but I hope I made my point on that in the original post).

As a side note - and to quote you back, "..this has nothing to do with intelligence". /This/ has nothing to do with intelligence? What are you referring to? The first half of the quote is about nothing /but/ intelligence..!

> While I agree that "blind positivity" is a bad thing, and criticism is a
> good thing. There is a difference between destructive and
> constructive criticism. Being constructive doesn't mean being
> unrealistic or blind. Destructive criticism o!
> nly hampers the critical process with excess baggage. It's okay
> to tell people what you think the focus should be, but to slam
> them because you think they don't have the right focus is a
> different story. You end up not criticizing the issue, but the
> idea-maker. That's not constructive. That's distractive.
> You're points were good, Mac10, but not the way you slammed
> ColdOne for it was unneccesary. You started out by introducing
> your ideas in a very negative way. Calling him an "idiot" and
> his post "stupid" didn't endear anyone to you. You can go about
> life introducing yourself that way to people if you like, but
> that doesn't mean the people you introduce yourself to have to
> like you. You can't make a first impression twice. (man I feel
> old pulling that quote out of the hat) :)

Again, I feel I have to make a couple of things clear. I have no problem with seeing the difference between so-called 'constructive' and 'destructive' criticism. The difference between the two is that 'constructive criticism' focuses on what is good and tones down what is bad, while 'destructive criticism' does the opposite (but keep in mind that it is the /bad/ stuff that has to go, or at least be reconsidered - in other words, needs to be criticized!). The first approach is of course the gentler, positive approach, useful for dealing with mentally weak and insecure people - like children and people that are not good at what they do.

The problem that very often arises in creative settings - and this was the point of the second half of the quote - is that people are so much focusing on the positive stuff that they become blind to the /crap/ that hitches a ride along with it. The same problem can also be seen in "friendly" environments, where people don't want to "be mean to their buddies" or are just unable to see the faults of their friends because they like (or respect!) them as /people/ - or just don't have the guts to tell someone that their work stinks because it would create an uncomfortable atmosphere for them (all this of course, in addition to environments housing mostly under-par minds that themselves are not capable of distinguishing the good from the bad - ...same kinds lump together).

Forums like this suffer a bit from such phenomena, where unbridled enthusiasm rules, and allows the creativity - that undoubtedly exists - to wander off without any plan or ultimate goal, thereby watering out its value to the extent that it has no taste.

That said, my point with the original post was not to make any friends or offer constructive criticism to the nerdy Doom3-feature-masturbators that dominate this and similar places, but quite the opposite: To 'put my foot down' (hopefully kicking out a few teeth in the process) and tell you people what I think of such feelgood, positivity crap - not to mention the processes responsible for it. These things /really/ bother me - on a much larger scale than the new Doom game, and I have little sympathy for the let's-pat-each-other-on-the-back mentality that prevails in society at large.

I don't care if any of you like me. As a matter of fact, it is a lot easier to say what needs to be said if you don't. And at the same time, it is an interesting exercise in seeing how unable you people actually /are/ at discerning the essence of things when it comes wrapped in emotional flypaper. Which in /itself/ was the whole essence of the original post (like picking out the real essence of Doom when all you can focus on is the more obvious appeal of the BFG and cut-off heads on poles)!

Finally, Ultron, if you read my first post carefully, you'll see that the bulk of it really concerns 'the issue' and not the 'idea-maker'. He only got his through a couple of /direct/ insults that were /meant/ for the 'idea-maker' in the first place.

So long, suckers.

Ultron said:

> You can go about life introducing yourself that way to people
> if you like, but that doesn't mean the people you introduce
> yourself to have to like you. You can't make a first

This one almost slipped away:

Of course, I don't introduce myself that way to not-stupid people...