[game_edu] Mutual respect - WAS: loopy Proposal - The Aggies!

[Darius Kazemi]

That's a good point, Mark. Academia in particular bears the brunt of the
whole C.P. Snow "two cultures" issue, and that distinction doesn't really
exist in the game industry.

I think part of the issue with industry respect might be that no two
professional game developers I've worked with, or for, have had the same
list of qualities they'd like to see a college student graduate with. While
I personally might have tons of respect for School A and think that School B
probably graduates sub-par students, there are other developers for whom
those perceptions are entirely reversed.

For example, here in Boston, many of the game companies are biased in favor
of graduates who come from traditional universities and often traditional
degree programs. This is because many of the game companies here were
founded by graduates of MIT, Harvard, BU, WPI, etc. So naturally we
gravitate toward people with a background we can identify with and can
quantify in some way through our own experience. I've found the opposite
prejudice in other areas of the country, where many of the companies were
founded by "garage" programmers.

-Darius

On Dec 5, 2007 11:16 AM, Mark Baldwin <mark at baldwinconsulting.org> wrote:


> Mike,

>

> You make the statement "It should also attempt to heal the rift between

> the

> "creatives" and the "techies""  Can you go into more detail as to what you

> are thinking as this seems to be almost an antithetical observation to the

> nature of computer games and the game industry.  The game industry

> requires

> that there not be a rift, because such a rift is a guarantee for failure

> in

> this industry.

>

> Are you seeing this in academia?   I'm starting to wonder if that is what

> the industry is seeing as well at a basic level and why industry has

> trouble

> accepting academia.   So long as academia thinks these things are separate

> and uniquely different, then industry says "You don't get it" and sees

> academia as not being relevant.

>

> For example, you mentioned research into AI.  While usually in academia,

> AI

> is a techie field, it absolutely is not and cannot be in the field of

> games.

> The reason for this is tied to the purpose of game AI.   The primary

> purpose

> of game AI is to entertain the game player.  This is a goal that is

> completely outside the scope of most AI research, and MUST include the

> creative.   Therefore, if academia is really going to take the knowledge

> of

> Game AI forward, it cannot have a rift between creative and techie.   It

> has

> to merge the two as the game industry long ago succeeded in doing.

>

> Cheers,

> Mark

> ******************************************

>  Mark Lewis Baldwin

>  Associate Professor

>  Game Design and Development

>  University of Advancing Technology

>  303-526-9169

>  mbaldwin at uat.edu

>  http://baldwinconsulting.org

>  mar80401 (YIM, AIM, Skype)

> ******************************************

>

>

> _______________________________________________

> game_edu mailing list

> game_edu at igda.org

> http://seven.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/game_edu

>

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://seven.pairlist.net/pipermail/game_edu/attachments/20071205/4fcae64f/attachment.html>