0:45:57 1. Richness 2. Completeness 3. Surprise 4.Lightest Contrivance 5. Strength of Boundary 6. Compatibility 7. Orthogonality 8. Generosity. Put that in your notes!
An hour well spent. It's a shame some of Jonathan's examples were cut out from the video, though. I don't know if they were removed in the interest of time, or because they were seen as unimportant to the talk, but it would've been nice to see those extra few minutes. Any extra insights from Jon Blow are worth keeping, as far as I'm concerned.
@MsBickle76 It depends on the event- Some events have a strict no filming policy and sometimes the venue has very specific rules. At IndieCade, you're free to film as long as the Presenter/Speaker is comfortable with it. This video was captured by Ida Bendetto, an incredibly helpful and amazing IndieCade volunteer.
having now played through The Witness, it feels super weird when he is showing a video of early puzzle prototypes and the line crosses through itself..
@Leonhart231 I think I get the orthogonality - if a new mechanic largely overlaps with previous ones, it's excessive. An extreme case would be a gun that just looks different. Compatibility may just be something that "breaks" the game, making other mechanics no longer interesting. It would be like adding a jump ability to VVVVVV - it totally breaks many of the puzzles, taking away their challenge. Sometimes this can be good, like adding infinite rewind to a platformer, but then it's a new game.
Referencing the Portal 2 footage... Light bridges can have some consequences. I think I'll explore those in my next game. I've been looking for a good idea for a puzzle and I think exploring bridges made of solid light and their consequences would be interesting. Time to find the truth about light bridges, I suppose. :D
I must say, I agree with almost everything being said here, especially the part about trimming out anything that's "not truth." I am confused about the compatibility and orthogonality parts though - could someone offer their interpretation of what's said here? Damn these UA-cam character limits...
I wonder what they would do if I just follow Jonathan with my camera equipment whenever he is going to give a talk. Is it illegal to film at events like this, because all this stuff is just too important not capture. And a few of his talks have gone "missing" supposedly erased because of things he said or just the whole content of the speech.
here is my playlist on lectures (not all related) /playlist?list=PL4D9494E7FBEE09DE&feature=mh_lolz In the folder I also have, his appearance on the brainy gamer podcast and his appearance on the hotspot podcast.
I think that was about not limiting the player in arbitrary ways, such as having the player collect sand to use the "go back in time" ability, instead just let them use the ability as much as they want, and design the game around that.
Their conclusions are not metaphysical and they are not philosophers. They never claimed that. They are talking about constructing structures in games that resemble those in mathematics.
![[2019 TGDF] Making Games in 2019 and Beyond (Jonathan Blow)](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/aVb6-Rkz7W4/mqdefault.jpg)
0:45:57
1. Richness
2. Completeness
3. Surprise
4.Lightest Contrivance
5. Strength of Boundary
6. Compatibility
7. Orthogonality
8. Generosity.
Put that in your notes!
I can't stop thinking about the way Jon is sitting on that chair
An hour well spent. It's a shame some of Jonathan's examples were cut out from the video, though. I don't know if they were removed in the interest of time, or because they were seen as unimportant to the talk, but it would've been nice to see those extra few minutes. Any extra insights from Jon Blow are worth keeping, as far as I'm concerned.
1:05:27
I almost spit all over the keyboard when I heard that.
JON BLOW STEALTH GAME?? LIFE IS WORTH LIVING!!!
@MsBickle76 It depends on the event- Some events have a strict no filming policy and sometimes the venue has very specific rules. At IndieCade, you're free to film as long as the Presenter/Speaker is comfortable with it. This video was captured by Ida Bendetto, an incredibly helpful and amazing IndieCade volunteer.
Thanks for taking the time to post this video!
@YearwigY It's now publicly listed, we forgot to flip the switch! Thanks for the reminder :)
This video is a gem, how have I never seen it before.
@MsBickle76 No, we're not. It was a mistake and the video is now publicly listed! If you have a problem in the future, feel free to contact us!
having now played through The Witness, it feels super weird when he is showing a video of early puzzle prototypes and the line crosses through itself..
Why is this video unlisted? I'm saving it to my Jonathan Blow folder, with inspiration and notes for my indie game!
20 minutes into it, epic presentation
@Leonhart231 I think I get the orthogonality - if a new mechanic largely overlaps with previous ones, it's excessive. An extreme case would be a gun that just looks different. Compatibility may just be something that "breaks" the game, making other mechanics no longer interesting. It would be like adding a jump ability to VVVVVV - it totally breaks many of the puzzles, taking away their challenge. Sometimes this can be good, like adding infinite rewind to a platformer, but then it's a new game.
Watching this video has given me lots of inspiration. Thanks for posting it!
incredibly insightful talk, thank you for posting!
Such an amazing talk. I am really inspired.
Great lecture! I'm learning so much!
There are more but golden nugget at 44:24
Pure gold
at 0:26:07 there's a pretty annoying cut :P
@iamvfx No spoilers. We wish! Just a limit on the recording.
Did you do it? I can't get past the part where the yellow guy follows you around :(
there is a skip in the video at 26:10
Referencing the Portal 2 footage... Light bridges can have some consequences. I think I'll explore those in my next game. I've been looking for a good idea for a puzzle and I think exploring bridges made of solid light and their consequences would be interesting.
Time to find the truth about light bridges, I suppose. :D
Someone below says that the 10:50 mechanic sounds like a Witness mechanic.. And he was right.
I completed it, but didn't get all the shinies. Died over 2000 times and over 200 on the bit with the rising bottom.
I must say, I agree with almost everything being said here, especially the part about trimming out anything that's "not truth." I am confused about the compatibility and orthogonality parts though - could someone offer their interpretation of what's said here? Damn these UA-cam character limits...
10:50 sounds like a Witness puzzle
inspired me to get and complete VVVVVV no easy task!
I wonder what they would do if I just follow Jonathan with my camera equipment whenever he is going to give a talk. Is it illegal to film at events like this, because all this stuff is just too important not capture.
And a few of his talks have gone "missing" supposedly erased because of things he said or just the whole content of the speech.
45:15 about arbitrary a-ha moments.
The only bit I didn't get was the 2 dislikes.Surely anybody looking up this vid would be as inspired and lifted as I was?
another skip at 51:44
Why do you say that? Care to elaborate?
Who else here played The Witness?
+Digital Dissection ay yoooo
So you're a fellow Blow-er too eh? Nice to meet ya.
Yep, longtime Blow-er here. Hi!
He's pretty bold to talk about truths in absolutes. In a medium that's focussed on making new worlds that can be pretty controversial.
here is my playlist on lectures (not all related) /playlist?list=PL4D9494E7FBEE09DE&feature=mh_lolz In the folder I also have, his appearance on the brainy gamer podcast and his appearance on the hotspot podcast.
I hope Jon could talk about the generosity. I don't really get it.
I think that was about not limiting the player in arbitrary ways, such as having the player collect sand to use the "go back in time" ability, instead just let them use the ability as much as they want, and design the game around that.
--[ 1:38 ]--
Button to skip straight to the actual content
I had to write an AutoHotKey script to get past that part :)
hard to listen to March,...
@MsBickle76 if you do, I think thousands would subscribe.
Ah, here we got again, amateur philosophers drawing metaphysical conclusions 🙄
Their conclusions are not metaphysical and they are not philosophers. They never claimed that. They are talking about constructing structures in games that resemble those in mathematics.
There is no such metaphysical conclusion in this video. You are the one making "meta-physical" assumption.