HackerTrans
TopNewTrendsCommentsPastAskShowJobs

nnq

no profile record

comments

nnq
·há 7 anos·discuss
Heh, sorry, I've been to harsh with the comment I guess... it's probably just me personally being "highly allergic" to this particular toony-style. I think it sort of falls in some "uncanny valley" of design, being neither stylized/abstract/low-poly-ish enough, nor realistic enough, nor fully-pixelated/blocky/minecrafty, but just in-between.

In general I like styles that either:

- just go all the way in the stylized direction, like Bad North [1], The Witness [2] or even Clash of Clans [3] (to be honest I also dislike CoC-style popular with mobile games nowadays, but at least it's consistent/harmonious in its candy-plasticky look)

- OR they actually try to do the realistic-style part, like the classic Age of Empires, or toony-ish-ralisticky like more modern Northgard [4]

- OR they fully embrace the blocky style like Minecraft, or the 8-bit/pixelated style of clearly retro-style games

"In between" styles just look... annoying, giving a "sand in your eye" mental sensation of the early 90s games that were too shallow and childish. It lacks some "higher harmony" thing that I can't describe any better. I get this "allergic" reaction also when I see this style in clothing or architecture or whatever.

Anyway, keep up the work if you and others enjoy it, don't be discouraged by people that just prefer smth else!

I'm just a bit sad bc I probably would've liked the game mechanics, but the style totally turns me off.

[1] https://store.steampowered.com/app/688420/Bad_North_Jotunn_E...

[2] https://store.steampowered.com/app/210970/The_Witness/

[3] https://play.google.com/store/apps/details?id=com.supercell....

[4] https://store.steampowered.com/app/466560/Northgard/
nnq
·há 7 anos·discuss
The graphic style - oh, my eyes!!! Please team up with a designer, or with a different designer!

...I don't mean the quality, it's understandable resources are constrained. I mean the actual artistic decisions... it burns your visual cortex with all those colors and textures fighting each other. What's the theme, "kindergardeners on acid meeting Elvis"?! or "South Park but in Fortnite drawn while drunk"?
nnq
·há 7 anos·discuss
I still can't believe it how these kinds of things are not OBVIOUS to ALL UI and UX designers out there! This resources should be drilled into every UX/I designer's head. It's amazing how much pain and frustration can be avoided by following such simple rules. I imagine a kitten being squished in a blender alive every time I see checkboxes used as radio buttons... or people avoiding to use radios and toggles where they make clear sense...

The hell with material design and all the other fads, learn these basics first please and don't screw them up!
nnq
·há 10 anos·discuss
So you're rephrasing the question to mean that you see it as 'hunter gatherer mode' thinking (doing it in a practical and short term economically-successful way) vs. 'civilized builder mode' thinking (doing it the way we know it should be done) and that they are antagonistic, and that because of the way our society is structured 'hunter gatherer' mode thinking leads to better economical results?

This ends up as a pretty strong critique of capitalism's main idea that market forces drive the progress of science and technology.

Your thinking would lead to the conclusion that we'd have to find a way to totally reshape/re-engineer the current world economy to stop it from being hugely biased in favor of "hunter gatherers that strip the fertile valley dry" ..right?

I hope that people like you are working on this :)
nnq
·há 10 anos·discuss
Hi Alan, the question that troubles me now and I want to ask you is:

Why do you think there is always a difference between:

A. the people who know best how something should be done, and

B. the people who end up doing it in a practical and economically-successful or popular way?

And should we educate our children or develop our businesses in ways that could encourage both practicality and invention? (do you think it's possible?). Or would the two tendencies cancel each other out and you'll end up with mediocre children and underperforming businesses, so the right thing to do is to pick one side and develop it at the expense of the other?

(The "two camps" are clearly obvious in the space of programming language design and UI design (imho it's the same thing: programming languages are just "UIs between programmers and machines"), as you well know and said, with one group of people (you among them) having the right ideas of what OOP and UIs should be like, and one people inventing the technologies with success in industry like C++ and Java. But the pattern is happening at all levels, even business: the people with the best business ideas are almost never the ones who end up doing things and so things get done in a "partially wrong" way most of the time, although we have the information to "do it right".)
nnq
·há 11 anos·discuss
> the ability to read it left to right seems like a huge win

It's only a win if your mind actually needs the "left to right representation". For me, reading that "if" is more like:

    1. oh, so this condition is and-ing 2 child conditions, so they must both be true
    2. now the first sub-condition... ok, so it just sees if form-method is truth-y
    3. now the 2nd one... ok, so we're comparing if two things are equal... let's see what these things are
    4. so request-method must be equal to post
...and the full code-to-English translation would be, for me, something like this: "if two things are truthy, the first of which being form-method, and the second being that there is equality between request-method and :post". This is how it would sound like if I translated my thoughts of this code into English :)

The advantages of people who think more like you would be that:

    1. you probably find it *much easier* to explain your thoughts about code to others, since translating thought to words is a piece of cake for you (I envy you verbal thinkers for this a lot! :) )
    2. you can easily map code to math formulas, and figure out differences between them (I can do this easily too, but I just need to use a more complicated algorithm in my head)
The advantages of the people who think more like me would be:

    1. breaking complicated stuff into smaller pieces that can be understood off-context is easier (try breaking up the sentence I just wrote above at each comas and see that they kind of make sense separately too)
    2. thinking about meta-code (code that generates code like Lisp and Scala macros) is much easier: because our mind's representation is closer to the machine's AST representation, writing code that writes code that writes code etc. feel just as "natural" as everything else to us. For example, when thinking about implementing an ORM, my first thought is something like "oh god, if the language I'm working in just had *real macros*, I could write all this in a few hours and couple hundreds line of code, and not need a mind-bending hierarchy of classes to do it" :)
As an example of meta-thinking in a verbal language... try reading some Kant or other such philosopher ...it's just too hard to be able to get to any result fast enough, so probably a bad idea...

The whole point I'm trying to make is simply that people think very very differently! Indeed, the Lisp advocates should stop repeating the "it's awesome" mantra and understand that it's only awesome for those with the brain wired a certain way, and it's probably painful for the others.

Nirvana would be to port Lisp's features to a more math-like and English-like language. But nobody has been successful at this. Both Scala macros and Template-Haskell are truly fucking hard if you try to actually use them for getting stuff done. So I count them just as failed experiments. But there's always hope :)
nnq
·há 11 anos·discuss
You're probably a verbal thinker, and English-like code matters a lot to you I guess. Probably lots of programmers are.

For me, a mostly visual thinker that ends up building and visualizing a code tree in his head anyhow, Lisp is very readable because I can more clearly see the tree without all the noise.

And when it comes to math, staying close to standard math notation is a clear winner, and this is why all lisps have ways of writing infix for formula-heavy code, stuff like http://data-sorcery.org/2010/05/14/infix-math/ and others. But lispers don't use them that much because they simply get used to the Lisp notation more.

...oh, and Common Lisp is NOT an example of readable Lisp. It's probably the most unreadable and obsfucation-friendly of them all :)

Take a look at some Clojure code for something that's just as readable as Python after you "get you eyes used to it" (jargon for learning to ignore the parentheses and learning the special meanings of the "funny symbols" like :, ~, # and a few more): https://github.com/weavejester/compojure/blob/master/src/com...