Week 5 - Sizing Up Design (Prototypes)

Maybe if a prototype had been built, a lot of effort might have been saved... Oh... This 'is' the low fidelity prototype :P

As usual, I'll start with discussing the lecture before moving onto the group project.

Lecture 5

The lecture started off with a brief mention of our group projects, before moving onto talking about prototyping (which was briefly touched on in the previous lecture). I regard the main point of prototyping is to expose design issues. It lets you see what works and what doesn't. It allows things that may not have been considered to come to the front for better or worse. Once you have a decent prototype, then it can be used to communicate ideas and guide implementation. But you want to make sure it performs before you go onto any other stage. It was stressed that iterative design includes prototyping.

Prototype Fidelity. Prototyping can be a simple as a basic quick drawing, or as complex as a digital/manufactured  model. Simpler prototypes are considered Low Fidelity, while more complex prototypes are considered High Fidelity. It's generally best to start with low fidelity prototypes, since they are more disposable. I know that with the things I have drawn, it's hard to throw something away if I've put a lot of time into it, even if I do think of something better later. It becomes a case of "That will do". By focusing on low fidelity prototyping initially, hopefully the right kind of design will begin to form before too much of a commitment is made. However, you never know when inspiration is going to strike, so there are never any guarantees.

Prototype Types. It was stated that there were three kinds of prototyping: 1) Exploratory, 2) Experimental, 3) Evolutionary. Exploratory being you quick low fidelity ideas to find the direction you want to go in. Experimental being mid level prototyping to work out fundamental qualities of the design (may be either low or high fidelity). While Evolutionary is iteratively working on the design, bringing it to a point of refinement (high fidelity).

Design Inspiration. Design ideas can come from Extrapolation, Invention, or Iteration. Extrapolation is modifying existing designs. Invention combines new ideas with existing designs. While Iteration is more about exploring and evolving an existing design without changing it's fundamental concepts. I myself much prefer the first two.

Experience Enhances Originality. Originality is improved by having a wide range of general experiences.
I remember a friend just scribbling on a page. I told him that was a very nice monkey he drew. He didn't understand. I took my pen and highlighted the appropriate lines, revealing the monkey within his scribble. He was pleased.
Ideas can come from anywhere, even scribble. But if I did not know what a monkey looked like, I would never have seen the 'hidden' image. Similarly, when designing, unrelated visions/concepts/experiences can give rise to cognitive connections that give you that 'eureka' moment. I myself am always designing, looking at the world around me, and seeing more than what is there. However, design means nothing if it is not brought to some kind of fruition. Ideas need to be developed and made into something tangible and worthwhile. I note to myself that in the group project, I feel that since I am older, I have more experiences to draw upon than the other members. This has the dual effect of making me feel I need to have higher expectations of myself, yet maintaing humility since any good designing on my part may be just due to more worldly experience.

Width, Depth and Reflection in Design.  When designing, ensure you explore many concepts (width/divergence), so as to have many potentials. However, there needs to be a depth to the development (depth/convergence), so that the end product is refined. At each step, continually reflecting on the design and trying to see how it could be improved, will ensure the best possible results for your time spent.

In the lecture, we also looked at the ideas that slowly, over many years, lead to the development of the Pump that is still used today.

Group Project - "Flow" (Week 3 of 4)

I feel that our group didn't get very far this week. On seeing the 'lava' design that I put forward last week, everyone basically decided that was the design that we were going with, and didn't really develop their ideas further. I have refined my design a little more in my head, but  I'm holding off doing anything more until we can do it as a group. We will be meeting during the Easter break.

This week, the group tutorial session was mainly about doing the trial presentations that we didn't get to do last week. There were three more groups than normal, since Friday was a public holiday, and other groups attended our session. I'll briefly list what was presented:

• Group 24 - Flow of Time. Represented by a cube, with each of four walls having nine rotatable cubes representing the seasons. Clear design, meets criteria, only needs refinement.
• Group A - Flow in Perception. Represented by a series of arches with points of intersection that gradually shift as you walk along a path. Kind of like a distortion effect of a Fun House. Good idea, still a little vague in execution.
• Group 25 - Flow of Time. Represented by an hour glass. Idea defined, but execution needs to change due to using glass, which is not a material that can be used in this project.
• Group 26 - Flow of Time/Space. Represented by circular maze with images of a tree going from sapling to maturity and back again as you go along path. A sundial is in the centre. Sound idea, vague on construction.
• Group 29 - MY GROUP. Abstract Physical Flow. The Lava design previously discussed.
• Group 27 - Fibonacci Flow. Lots of ideas and potential, but no real design yet.
• Group 28 - Abstract Physical Flow. Represented by the 'effect' that flowing water has on other objects. Kind of like the 'reminisce' of flow. Not yet set on a method of execution.
• Group B - Flow of Time. Represented by plants growing up a statue. Aided growth by flowing tears from the statue. A few powerful messages behind the design: Life-Death, Reclamation. Design is still evolving and not ready for refinement.
• Group C - Flow of Energy. Mentioned yin/yang and double helix. Still exploring ideas with no concrete design yet.

Feedback on Our Group Design.

This following is what one of our group members recorded:

• Reasoning for the Design decisions.
• What size, why was the size chosen?
• The reason behind the specific representation (lava).
• Is there a better way to represent flow?
• Try to improve the design.
• Explain choices for design.

Some of these questions were actually answered in the mock presentation. I think everyone in my group latched onto the lava design because it was simple, elegant, not to difficult to actually build if we had to, and was already thought out to a high degree. Also, most importantly, it conveys the idea of 'flow' very well, while still being an abstraction of it's idea source (flowing lava).

What I feel gave rise to the main comments I myself heard, were the following areas:

• Design Strategy. It was said that a lot of "I" was heard (and not team). Our particular design strategy was to each come up with two different designs, and allow them to compete with each other like gladiators to see which was the strongest. Unfortunately, this resulted in the situation where just one of us was responsible for the chosen design discussed in the trial presentation. It was a mistake to only talk about the final design. For the final presentation, we will have to ensure that the other designs are mentioned, stating clearly that many ideas were explored before settling on what the group considered the best design.
• Design Breadth. There is some truth in the 'going with only one good idea' comment that I heard made. I would have liked my team mates to not just yield so quickly when they saw the design I initially presented. Feedback was given between group members to help development of ideas, although the 'lava' design remained the strongly favoured choice. Still, our above strategy allowed us to have great breadth in design options, which allowed for this design to be proposed in the first place. Once again, the fault was more in failing to express this in the trial presentation.
• Group Design. Since we are firmly cemented on our design idea, we do need to work as a team to realise it. We have already discussed working to our strengths. One member is going to be in charge of bringing everything together using Prezi for our presentation. Two others are doing research for the design, and will most likely be in charge of a simple physical prototype for the design. While I will most likely be doing the drawings for our presentation, since that is one of my strengths within the group. However, such things will be discussed (and done) more over the Easter break. Throughout all this, the design should also be refined, using input and knowledge from all the members (especially the researchers). At this point, I also feel we all need to be involved in the actual presentation, but that depends on how the others feel too. But regardless of who presents what, we should make clear all the team effort involved (which is the real purpose behind doing this project).

There are no project pictures for this week. However, by the end of the Easter break, our group will have gathered it's resources. So next week will be mostly pictures (hopefully).

Week 4 - (Team) Building on Design

There are no limits to design. However, poor communication and a lack of awareness of the properties of building materials; these things can lead to disaster. Obviously 'stairs' were also left out of the design brief too :D

Once again, I'll comment on this week's lecture first before turning to the second stage of our first group project on 'Flow'.

Lecture 4

This weeks lecture dealt with four topics:

• The group projects.
• Learning.
• Working in a team.
• Prototyping.

The Group Projects - There was some confusion about the project, and this was clarified. Our design had to be made out of natural materials. However, we could illuminate our design with any light source, natural or not. The confusion had an effect on me, but I'll talk about that in the project section of this blog/journal. Other than that, it was mentioned that good designs are usually elegantly simple (within context), and that the building materials used (both feel and look), are an important consideration within the design. I was very happy to see a reference to Antoni Gaudi in the lecture material, since I mentioned him as someone I admired in week 2. Of course an architect that focused on an organic look, is a fantastic reference to check out for a project about 'flow', made from natural materials. Preaching to the choir in my case :)

Learning - We looked at how method/rules are important things to follow when inexperienced. But as experience is gained, tasks will be tackled in a more contextual way, with method/rules being less relied upon. If this was thought of in terms of gameplay, a noob is not going to really know what to do, and will follow instructions to gain some direction, or otherwise do things by trial and error. However, and experienced player knows what best general methods to apply, knows the layout, knows what works and what doesn't in any particular circumstance. They no longer need much instruction. Learning is achieved by doing, so the time must be put in to it so as to gain success. It was also mentioned that learning is not a steady climb. People must be prepared to endure pits of frustration and plateaus of little additional insight. But persistence gets you through.

This week I had also gone to a presentation at the Queensland Library. It was the first in a series of presentations/interviews entitled "Game Changers". This particular one was an interview with Shainiel Deo, CEO of Halfbrick Studios,  a games development company. I mention it here in this blog since I consider it equivalent to extra reading for this subject. I arrived late since I had my group project session just before this, but better late than never. What Shainiel said during the stage interview just reinforced much of what has been said about learning/success throughout this design subject. You must have a vision/plan; you must have the drive to weather any storm; you must be consistent and hold true. There was much more of relevance, but I'll leave it at that. I will say that Shainiel Deo has set a very high objective for himself. I myself have much lower goals to achieve first, even if I do have what are only longterm 'dreams' at this stage.

Speaking of being consistent, my tutors implied that we should have more than one blog/journal entry each week. I myself believe in slowly adding to a draft, and then submitting it once a week, with further amendments made to posts afterwards as necessary. My posts have a certain style that I intend to consistently maintain. This is what works for me, although I acknowledge that others may be different.

Working as a Team - I feel it's worth restating points from the lecture just as a reminder to myself. I've already experienced much of this having been in the workforce for years, operating from employee up to management. So a summation feels adequate.

• Positives - supporting strengths, feedback/insights, sharing workload, inspiration, and fun
• Negatives - trust issues, co-ordination, differing opinions/tastes/standards.
• Group Norms (Development) - forming, storming, norming and performing. So far in the group project, there hasn't been any storming. But in my working life, thats another story.
• Group Norms (Roles) - leader, clown, note taker, divergers, convergers. In the past, I've taken on all these roles. I feel that it's an advantage to fit in as needed, or perform multiple roles.

I looked up the link (http://www.referenceforbusiness.com/management/Gr-Int/Group-Dynamics.html). I particularly agree with the comments made by Eric Schmit in the short video. I do feel group decisions are better, but you do need to have deadlines and be open to dissent. While I do prefer the team mentality, when I lead, my own weakness is perhaps not being stringent on the deadlines for others. I've also been witness to the multiple negative effects caused by someone who can not accept dissent, which affects more than just decision making. I'll remember these leadership issues with: Do Motivate, Don't Murder.

Prototyping - Introduced briefly, but will be discussed more in the next lecture.

Group Project - "Flow" (Week 2 of 4)

Last week was about brainstorming and coming up with ideas. I finished by listing my own top five possible design areas. Via email contact, one other group member suggested that we each come up with two designs each to present to the group. We all decided to go with this, as it should mean we have eight good ideas (four group members) to work with. I decided to go with my first two of my top five. So I would be presenting 'Emotional Flow' and 'Lava Flow'. The group tutorial session was a bit stressful. I came 20mins late as I was unavoidably held up at work. Stressful for both me and the other team members. Yet I had thought up what I considered to be two good designs to put forward.

The group session with the tutors mainly focused on learning to use Prezi (http://prezi.com) to present our design. There were meant to be trial presentations by all the groups, but that didn't take place. That means that I can't give feedback yet on what other groups are doing. So discussion will be limited to our own group. The two designs I put forward will be discussed first, followed by a brief of the other members main designs.

Emotional Flow Design

Source of Inspiration
Photo found from http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Scream

My concerns last week were that the idea of 'flow' might be lost in the design. It could have great impact, especially since it is possible that seeing it from different angles could allow the vision of different emotions/images. While this was my first idea, I favour it second.

Stage One - What is drawn above is an attempt to show what I envisioned in my mind. I don't really know how to develop it further without a prototype of some kind (digital or manufactured). The complexities in how the images would sit on the individual flowing pieces would require the images to be projected onto them. I would only be going to a prototype if this was the design the group selected, since it would be a lot of work.

• Materials. I would want to use layered cardboard for the shapes, as the glued layers would keep the cardboard in the desired curls. Light wood would be used for the supporting rods. A network of wood structs would form the supporting base. Rather than a cartoon face, photos would be projected on and then marked. The viewing plate is wood, although it could be anything really. 
• Light Source. The light source is just a torch in a cardboard supporting cradle. However, the torch could be carried around to other viewing plates if there were multiple images.
• Size. This could be any size, although since it must be temporary, I probably would not go bigger than a picnic table in area, and no more than two meters tall. It would be made out of light material that can be made detachable, so it should be simple to put into place.
• Location. This could really go anywhere. I would put it here just because it's close to the university with a lot of people.

A red dot shows site location within the Botanical Gardens.
Map from http://www.brisbane.qld.gov.au/facilities-recreation/parks-and-venues/parks/city-botanic-gardens/

Lava Flow Design
This design proved very popular with the other group members.

Source of Inspiration.
Photo found from http://photography.nationalgeographic.com/photography/enlarge/rope-lava-photography.html

Above is my initial design for 'Lava Flow'. As mentioned last week, I wanted to abstract whatever I did so that it's not just a replication of nature. I considered that if I could get someone to have the impression of flowing lava, then the word "flow" is being made to crystallise in their minds. When people think of lava, they think of it 'flowing'. Message conveyed (maybe).

Stage One - Most of my initial manipulations were just in my mind, thinking of various stylised flows. But once the idea of having a spiral to simulate liquid flow came to mind, I knew I had my basic shape. I had no plan on how I was going to make it turn, but I intended to use a red light to give me my molten core. This is represented in the first cross-section above.

Stage Two - Now the tutors in the group class were under the misapprehension that the light source had to be made of natural materials too. However, despite initially causing me distress, that added restriction  lead me to come up with an idea on how to get my design to turn. So thanks tutors. Once I started thinking that I had to have some kind of flame in there, the idea of using thermal dynamics to turn the creation soon followed. So I would have a solid 'flow' object, imitating liquid flow, powered by air flow. Kind of all fits together. All I would need to do is have thin wedges/membranes to direct inflowing and outflowing air so as to generate turn. This is very roughly depicted in cross-section 2. The next stage would be to create a small prototype to see whats needed to get some turning action. But    that will wait for the groups input.

• Materials. Red tissue paper (or thin paper like in paper lanterns) would fill up gaps in my spiral to both look like hot lava and stop air flowing out all over the place. I envisage the spiral itself being made of stained wood and paper, with dirt glued to it to give the appropriate earthen look. I added a base with water acting as a separator, so as to cut down of friction. The base would also be made of wood and clay/dirt.
• Light/Power Source. Now I'm uncertain at this stage what amount of air driven power is needed to turn this creation. I drew multiple candles in the above diagram so as to try and generate enough heat. But since I am not restricted to natural light sources, one good gas powered flame might be enough. It only needs to turn slowly for my lava simulation. There should be little friction. However, the design may need a centre 'yoke' to ensure no friction with the sides.
• Size. Since this design is meant to be portable and non-destructive to it's environment, I would not have it be bigger in circumference than a round table top like you see at cafe's. But if given no restrictions on materials or impact of it's environment, it could be far larger.
• Location. The project specifies that the design must be in the Garden Point Botanical Gardens. Firstly I wanted some place that looks natural. Second, since it's not going to be huge, I wanted it close to a path so that it could be seen. Third, I wanted it at least a little sheltered from the wind, so that the weak forces turning my design are not too harshly interfered with. Lastly, the area needs to be fairly flat, since my turning section is floating on a thin layer of water. So I chose the location pictured below.

A red dot shows site location within the Botanical Gardens.
Map from http://www.brisbane.qld.gov.au/facilities-recreation/parks-and-venues/parks/city-botanic-gardens/

The actual site for the Lava Design.

Designs from other Team Members

First Other Group Member - Flow of Time/People (Meeting Point)

This design is very large, considering that the seat inside is the size of a park bench. Originally, the design was meant to have water flowing through it. However, I think that idea was shelved when it was realized that the design is temporary, and should not scar it's deployment site. The centre is a sundial (flow of time). The barriers are there for 'flow of people'. It is lit by tiki torches. Suggestions could be:

• Scenes of seasons depicted on the inner walls (Flow of time strengthened).
• Perhaps scenes of flowing water/wind/sand depicted on the inner walls (standard Flow images).
• return the water feature to the design, but have it on the walls (original Flow idea).

Second Other Group Member - Flow of Motion (Dancer)

This design could be of variable size. Movement is powered by hydraulic pressure (via a foot pump). I believe that the motion is rotation with jets of water shooting out the arms. However, there is potential for other movement using the hydraulic principles involved. I suggested looking at collapsible puppets for further ideas (http://kr.ioffer.com/w/1274364). This design could be very entertaining.

Third Other Members design yet to be added... (Edit: pictures not supplied)

Week 3 - Launching into a Design Odyssey

The Waterfall Method, and the Spiral Method, are two ways of thinking about the steps that can be taken to produce a good final design. From my cartoon, it can be deduced that I would rather use a different mental construct. However, if I wanted to make a patron think I'm doing epic things to produce their design (because I would be),  then these two methods at least paint a decent picture :D

This week we began our first group project, but I'll start with my thoughts on the lecture.

Lecture 3

This weeks lecture was mostly about design methods, particularly those that pertain to software development. Design Methods aid us in ensuring that we approach designing in a way that will hopefully produce the best results. It was also pointed out that 'design methods' are good for giving patrons/clients/customers some idea, and comfort, about the effort and sequence of events that a designer is putting into their project. To properly perfect something, it usually involves working on it over and over, which means iteration. So most useful design methods will have iterative steps.

The Waterfall Method (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Waterfall_model) does not natively have iteration in it's basic presentation, but loops back to earlier steps are added to give it greater validity. The Spiral Method (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Spiral_model) at least has iteration at it's core. Other methodologies such as Prototyping, Incremental Development, Rapid Application Development, Agile Software Development, Object Orientated Development, and Top Down Programming can be found following this link (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Software_development_methodology). Yet there can be a myriad of design methodologies, each to suit a different job, or simply to reflect a companies own devised procedure.

My design about design :P

For a more simple and effective methodology, we can look at Iterative Design, which follow the three steps of Design, Prototype, and Evaluate. A methodology does not necessarily need to be complex. This methodology will produce successful results mainly due to it's fundamentally recursive nature, even if it does look a bit like child's play :D

In terms of learning, an important point that I thought I should keep in mind is that experts tend to be more context sensitive. In other words, an expert will look at a problem and automatically bring the appropriate information set to mind. Being an expert is not just about 'knowing', but also 'filtering' as well.

Another point to always keep in mind is that, when designing, there can be different weights given to the products physical, aesthetic, and symbolic aspects. Going back to 'Dear Esther', that we examined in week one, it was a game produced more for it's aesthetic (and perhaps symbolic) attributes, rather than its physical (game play) aspects.


Lecture Material that was looked up

• Dino Dini (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dino_Dini) - a games developer who specialised in football games, and seen as the godfather of the soccer game genre. No wonder I didn't know him since I'm not a fan of sports games myself.
• IDEO (http://www.ideo.com) - a successful design firm to be noted for possible future professional endeavours.
• Donald Schon (http://www.infed.org/thinkers/et-schon.htm) - most known for his theory about reflective thinking and learning, which is a key part of this design subject that I'm studying.
• Half-Life 2 (http://www.valvesoftware.com/publications/2006/GDC2006_HL2DesignProcess.pdf) - although I have not played Half-Life 2, I was already aware of it as a well designed game, and know some of it's design elements. So I looked up the Half-Life 2 design process, as I thought perusing that process would perhaps give me more insight as a future designer. I noted the strong focus on the 'game player'.

Group Project - "Flow" (week 1 of 4)

• The aim is to be able to produce some built object that would be placed in the Botanical Gardens, that is a representation of 'Flow', and visually communicates this to the viewer. Part of the design is for it to be illuminated at night.
• This first group meeting was all about brainstorming as a group and producing basic unrefined ideas.
• We had four members in our group. There should have been five, but one person assigned was not present.
• The pictures that follow are 'as is', as they were done in the group meeting. Since this whole project is a learning exercise, I thought it would defeat the purpose if I 'improved' anything afterwards.

These are scans of my own 'ideas' map.

My Thoughts on this Brainstorming Process:

• I felt constrained by lack of space. In my next group project, I'll just start with thinking each page is a quadrant, with the 'start point' being in the centre of the 'four' pages. That way I'll be better able to draw, and still keep related thoughts connected.
• I need to work on my quick drawing skills. There is technique even for basic drawings, that do not contradict intuitive/creative thought.
• As a group, we came up with ideas that I would not have done so on my own. Some of which I would like to develop if the group also agree.
• Sometimes seeing each others simple pictures did spark new lines of thought, that may not necessarily of been what the picture originally represented. For example, on seeing my 'hearts', that lead another group member to bring up all the different deeper 'flows' of emotions. My picture was based on a simpler idea, expressed quickly by 'hearts'.
• There are many ways to depict flow. At best, any end product design will only capture a fraction.
• Some ideas which I think would make great cartoons, would make a bad built object, which is what the project is about. So exploring directions outside what I'm normally inclined to do, was a good thing.

This was the representation of brainstorming of another group member. There were three pages, but one picture was out of focus. The ideas captured here are by graphically linked words, minimal pictures.

A third members brainstorming. Ideas are a lot more graphical, yet not so obviously linked. Although I suspect that the member who produced this can see understandable links. For example, their 'bookcase' picture may hold linked ideas. That is a technic I will remember.

I do not have pictures of the forth members work, as he was packed up and wanting to go at the end of the workshop. However, his thoughts/ideas are included in the all of the above photos/scans.

Other Groups

There were 6 groups present at our time-slot. Our group went first, and with each group that went after, there was a lot of repetition of course. I will list what I thought where the main ideas that were different from each group.

2nd Group

• Ecosystems - while our group had the cycle of life/nature, they took it a step further.
• Flow of Traffic/People - they identified that congestion makes it more notable.
• Fibonacci sequence.
• Dreamtime- the flow of culture.

3rd Group

• Assembly Lines
• Music - styles, ambient, metronomes.
• Momentum - Pi and rhythm.

4th Group

• Fashion & style
• Migration
• Black Holes

5th Group

• Fate and Destiny
• Mexican Waves

6th Group

• Magnets and Perpetual Motion

Final Thoughts for Week 1 of the 'Flow' Project

There are many ideas that I thought were great ways of representing flow. However keeping in mind that we have to devise a built object, that makes certain ideas difficult. If I were to pick the top five ideas based on what I currently envision, I would pick:

• Emotional Flow - A plus is that this could be done so as to get great impact (For example - Edvard Munch's 'The Scream'). A minus is that the concept of flow might be lost amongst other projections.
• Lava Flow (Hardened) - Easy to identify as flow if well made, but might risk merely being a reflection of nature rather than being 'designed'. Abstraction required.
• Momentum - Fun possibilities for displaying kinetic flow, but could possibly be dangerous to people/children if there are moving parts (or large moving parts).
• Vibration - another fun possibility, but results in noise pollution.
• Water Flow - who doesn't like an interesting water feature. But could result in something more commonplace and ordinary if not done very well.

Of course, after discussion with the rest of the group, better selections may arise. While I was very tempted to draw things on my own, I thought I shouldn't yet, since this is a group project. In the next group session, there should be the start of some idea selection and refinement.

But frankly, I think one of these inflatable people (as pictured below) would satisfy all the criteria of this first project. Can I not pretend that our group designed and made it :P
(Please Note: It could be made out of paper and powered by an air-bladder/bellows, which would making it smaller, less durable and no good for advertising. Yet it would still be a good 'flow' design. So it's not a total joke.)

Picture from http://www.inflatableairdancers.wavyads.com/inflatable-advertising-australia.php

Week 2 - Questing for Design

I drew this in reflection of the lecturers story about having to do a design repeatedly, even though there was nothing wrong with the first design.

Initial Impressions

Once again, there were no tutorials/group-work this week, so everything is all about the lecture. I saw the aim of this weeks lecture to be an introduction to 'design methodology'. That is, we looked at the series of steps in the design process that, in taking them, would more likely yield a better final design. Design itself is an art, but all art is enhanced by knowing, and making use of, the relevant techniques. The path to a good design can be a bit of an adventure, so discussions were basically about the best way to conduct your quest for a Holy Grail (I mean 'Awesome Design').

Lecture 2

First things first, we were asked to look up various things/people, so I'll start with those:

• Visual Thesaurus - The lecturer seemed disappointed that no one mentioned this in the first weeks journal posting. To be honest, considering I have a nice thesaurus sitting on my book shelf already, I didn't think the slight advantage of a visual layout is worth a subscription fee for the site. I just considered this part of thinking of things visually, which I can do just as well using my ordinary thesaurus. But it's something I'll have an awareness of for perhaps future need.
• Herbert Simons - (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Herbert_A._Simon) Considering that much of what Professor Simons did applies either directly or indirectly to what we are studying, I can see why he is a figure of importance. Of particular immediate relevance are his 'Three Stages of Rational Thinking', which are 1)Intelligence, 2)Design, and 3)Choice. So design is a key part of rational thinking.
• Bill Joy - (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bill_Joy) Developer of the original UNIX operating system. Considering that I myself primarily bought a Mac because the Mac OS is based on UNIX, my respect is imbedded with my choices.
• Jonathan Ive - (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jonathan_Ive) I do have both an iPhone and Macbook, and I'm sure that part of the Apples success is due to the design work of this gentleman. He of course leads a team and may not be the author of every single successful design element. Yet that just gives him more credit as a leader as well as a designer.
• Phillipe Starck - (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Philippe_Starck) I remember him as being someone that another student revered. While I acknowledge that he is a successful industrial designer, his work does not inspire me personally.
• William Gibson - (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/William_Gibson) Another student's personal icon. A novelist/writer, he is a designer in a similar sense to Jules Verne, in that he writes about, and even predicts the future. Although he may be considered the father of the 'cyberpunk' genre, my personal technological images of the future are derived from other sources.
• Dorodango - (http://www.dorodango.com/create.html) I think that the whole reason we were given this as a link is to reflect upon how the design process is like a dorodango. You start out with something crude, and then keep refining it until you have something polished and beautiful, even if it started out as just mud.
• Outlier - I must of misheard something, I do not see the relevance of what I looked up. I'll have to check with other students when I see them. After checking with another student, he let me know i was Outliers: The Story of Success (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Outliers_(book)). When I first looked it up, I had seen only that an outlier was something outside the norm in statistics. But now that makes sense for the title of the book. My 'not knowing', will make me remember it more.

Now the lecturer stated that we should know the names of people who inspire us, and seek out sources of information that apply to the field we are studying for. In my own case at least, I have felt that having the vast resources of the internet at hand has lessened the need to know facts and figures. I focus mostly just being 'aware' of knowledge, and knowing it's potential application. I watch TV programs like "Good Game", watch various 'design' documentaries, read forums and do systematic online searches to maintain a good knowledge base. For example, I watched a documentary years ago that could be somewhat relevant to our first group project, about the design, construction, logistics and installation of the Big Blue Bear (http://www.denver.org/what-to-do/museum-art/lawrence-argent-blue-bear). The knowledge is in my mind even if the designers name and location were not. Yet I acknowledge that for better communication with peers, and to not seem as responsive as a bowl of fruit in lectures, I should perhaps rely a little less on Google.

Who/what inspires me? Some few follow:

• Jenova Chen (http://thatgamecompany.com/company/people/jenova-chen/) - What Jenova Chen and the others in ThatGameCompany are doing is what I would like to do. He, and they, are making the kind of games that I admire most. The company philosophy is something that matches my own aims. When I first heard that the first group project we would be doing for this subject was called 'Flow', my memories of playing the game Flow immediately came to mind. That was a game that Jenova Chen was responsible for. The companies most recent game, Journey, is one that I already mentioned last time.
• Antonio Gaudi - (http://arizonasunshine.hubpages.com/hub/Organic-Architecture-of-Antoni-Gaudi) For organic architecture, I've long admired the works he had created. If ever I go to Spain, I'll certainly want to see his 'unfinished' cathedral (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sagrada_Fam%C3%ADlia).
• Anime in general - Just as others are inspired by literature, I've been greatly inspired by anime for both it's art style and the interesting subject matter that it brings up in it's more notable works. The anime Ghost in the Shell (1995) was an inspiration for the movie The Matrix (1999). Internet social issues were explored in Lain (1998). Dennou Coil (2007) (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dennō_Coil), depicts a world where virtual reality is meshed with the real world. I could quite easily imagine this occurring in my lifetime, and I'm not as young as some doing this design subject. This particular science fiction helped reinforce my motivation to study 'Games and Interactive Entertainment'. I would see such a merging of worlds as the next big info-tech step, in a realistic and non-physically invasive way. I would be satisfied just making great games, and making some kind of living doing so. Yet I also see much more potential than that.

Other Points in the Second Lecture

Divergence/Convergence Giant.
Think about it, then bash away :)

It was stressed that the practice of design in a professional sense is for the benefit of other people, and is often conducted as part of a team. The design process must tackle the double headed giant of 'Divergence' and 'Convergence'. This is where designers generate multiple ideas, and then follow them through, systematically refining down to the best single design. I see this as being like a pick-your-own-adventure game book. There are many branching choices, many leading to death (I mean disappointment). Some paths may lead nowhere, but sometimes do provide pivotal information or special powers (I mean inspirational design ideas). But usually, there are only a few paths leading to a satisfying ending and quest completed. Design may follow a general path of Briefing, Research, Ideation, Development, Documentation, Testing, Making and then Evaluating. Of course, there can be many loops throughout that general path. Another simpler looping cycle would be Analysis, Synthesis, and Evaluation.

It was discussed that ideas could be generated by 'brainstorming', so as to 'populate the design space' with possibilities. This is essentially 'Divergence' as mentioned above. There was one more picture in the lecture slides that was not commented on in the lecture. I will not speculate about it.

The first group project was introduced, and we were told we had to design something that visually represented 'Flow'. However, I will leave reflections about the group project until next week. I'll have to be far more succinct next time with both group work and lectures to report, and my pictures will be project related. But I'll finish with this picture we were given in relation to the first project, as I wondered about it's meaning :D

This picture was provided in lectures. I've added my own comments in blue.

Week 1 - In the beginning...

I drew this picture except for the koala sign.
See: http://www.connect4designs.com.au/road-street-signs

Fore-note (and fore warned!)

For any who may accidentally wander into this blog, this is my online journal specifically created for a Queensland University of Technology (QUT) subject called "Introducing Design".

Since this is part of a "Games and Interactive Entertainment" degree, what will be discussed will be skewed in that direction. Essentially, this blog/journal will comment on subject matter from the lectures, group projects, and set tasks. Yet this will still remain a reflection of me, displaying my own interests and style in so far as is possible. Since the first week was mainly just intro stuff, and there was not any group work, I'll take the opportunity with this first post to hopefully show myself more. This blog may continue after the subject ends, or it may not. However, this is at least the start of something, running a course not entirely under my control. (You know... there's a back seat driver - at least for now). So lets see where it goes...

Pre-Lecture 1

For myself - the most notable thing provided prior to the lecture was a link to Richard St. John's 3min talk about the "8 secrets of success". 

http://www.ted.com/talks/richard_st_john_s_8_secrets_of_success.html

I think most people like the "persisting through crap" part of the talk. 

One of the other talks on the TED website that I liked that incorporated technology was the following:

http://www.ted.com/talks/marco_tempest_the_magic_of_truth_and_lies_on_ipods.html

After all, I feel that games, to some extent, are about the art of illusion.

Lecture 1

In the lecture, we were given two topics to ponder. I'll start with those before giving my thoughts on the rest of the lecture.

Topic A The 'Water' Cartoon

We were asked to look at this cartoon, and reflect upon how the impossible in real life can be depicted as possible in various media.

Since this is my blog I'll start by saying that I really don't like this cartoon, since I don't find it particularly clever or funny. In terms of drawings presenting such impossibilities, I would much prefer to use as an example some of the works of M.C. Escher (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/M._C._Escher). Escher' work is a different kind of impossible, but more interesting because of it.

Of course, there are many movies that show the impossible brought to life. I'll just mention the movie 'Labyrinth' (1986), since the 'stairs' scene in this short You Tube video (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0gLNDHw_DzE), is inspired by the 'stairs' drawing (Relativity, 1953) of M.C. Escher. But the movie Labyrinth had real life settings/props, so couldn't capture the full impossibility. Yet with computer generated graphics, todays movies, presentations and games can all embrace anything that can be imagined. Even the movie The Matrix (1999) doesn't go as far as it could, despite setting a new standard in visual effects at the time.

The above cartoon could digitally be made so as to look very believable, while experience tells us such things are impossible unless there is some unknown technology/force at work. The game Portal (http://www.valvesoftware.com/games/portal.html) demonstrates how impossible situations can be set up in a believable way. After all, you could have the situation of infinitely falling through portals for example. Yet this principle can extend beyond the graphical. These days you can have hundreds of people interacting in a game. And despite the limitations of real space and time, you could have all these people being represented as equal-distant from each other in the game world, for physics and the concerns of physical space need not be applied. Yet physics tend to be applied to game worlds, simply to make them more believable. In these virtual worlds, there are no limitations other than what we impose upon ourselves. The indie game Anti Chamber ( http://www.antichamber-game.com) is a puzzle game that does a good job of turning reality on its head, although that is also what detracts from the enjoyment a little, since you can not take anything for granted when expected environmental laws are broken. The challenge for a game designer becomes not only to free themselves from conventional thinking (since there are no limits), but also to chose/include limits that will give credibility and a sense of 'reason' to that which they create.

Game design is an art like any form of design. Knowing what to accentuate, and what to diminish; what to leave out, and what to put in; what will appeal, and what will detract. The list goes on.

Topic B "Is the game Dear Esther really a game?"

Dear Esther: http://dear-esther.com

An example review and comments: http://au.gamespot.com/dear-esther/reviews/dear-esther-review-6349936/

My answer to the question has to be yes.

There would be those who would argue no, primarily since:

•  It has very restricted player input, with only basic directional control along set paths, and little interaction beyond 'looking' at objects in the environment.
• It also lacks any real win condition, possessing only an obvious visual 'destination' that simply draws you along what could be seen as just a visual book, and leaving you with no answers.

However, I do not feel that either of these two points detract from Dear Esther being a game for the following reasons:

• The venerable video game "Pong" (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pong) was a basic tennis-like game. It had very limited controls, yet was, and still is, considered a game. I feel that if a player has control, even if limited, then this automatically takes it out of the movie/story category. While it would have been very nice if it did have more interaction/control, this is not a necessity. The interactive aspect means that what the player is in-gaged in may not play out exactly the same way, unlike books/movies. Also, Dear Esther can randomly give up different information when you look at the same objects, so it actively does go as far as to incorporate chance and differentiation beyond that which just the players themselves provide, even if in a limited way.
• As for the lack of a 'win condition' or some other definitive resolution, lets look to other media, and take as an example the Australian classic book/movie "Picnic at Hanging Rock" ( http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Picnic_at_Hanging_Rock). What was officially released had no conclusive 'ending', yet that is part of what made it a more powerful story, since it left you with a mystery. And just like for Dear Esther, it displeased some people because of that. Dear Esther simply uses the same technique, but in an interactive media. We are often told when playing games "It does not matter if you win or lose, it's how you play the game". Dear Esther simply focuses on 'how you play', and the journey. Speaking of journey, the game Journey (http://thatgamecompany.com/games/journey/) is also not unlike Dear Esther in some respects, since it focuses on emotion and the 'experience'. Although Journey has many more gameplay elements, so is not doubted as being a game like Dear Esther. I simply don't consider a 'win condition' to be paramount for a game, otherwise we would have the case that any game that ends in a draw suddenly ceases to be a game.

From my own standpoint, I see little distinction between both 'Games' and 'Interactive Entertainment'. I consider them synonymous with each other, the distinction only being made for those who have a more polarised point of view. Dear Esther is interactive with in-built rules, an element of chance, and serves as entertainment, so I see it as a game. Of course, that doesn't mean that it's a good game. But that is a different topic.

Other Interests in the First Lecture

We were given a list of 8 objects:

Typewriter, Cake, Car, Chicken, Horse, Pencil, Snake, and Paint.

We were asked to group these items in pairs, which was easy. Then we were asked to group these items in groups of four, which was more difficult. At the time, my mind was a blank. But later at home I came up with what should have been an obvious grouping, and drew the cartoon below. Sometimes you just can't see what's right in front of you :D . I did think we were going to come back to these objects yet again at the end of the lecture, since they were presented as an exercise in the many ways of how we conceptualise things. I thought we would be asked to think again about these objects, but more outside the box; however that never occurred. Didn't stop me running amok with the idea though :P

Disclaimer: This cartoon I drew in no way reflects my own inclinations. If anyone has any concerns with the distribution of drinkers to non-drinkers, or if you think the non-drinkers look decidedly dull, then you should address your concerns to the subject lecturer who selected these objects :D

Another thing discussed was that rather than taking notes in a purely textual way, we should create conceptual trees or diagrams. My first thought was "He's trying to turn me into a tree hugging hippie!', and a suitable cartoon popped into my head, although I decided there was no need to draw it. My second thought was "Hmmm..  sounds similar to a 'flow' diagram; you would think I'm studying IT... oh wait!" LOL. But seriously, joking about it is my own way of remembering. By turning things into cartoons and images in my mind, I'm forming multiple conceptual links. In essence, it was the linking of things through either real association, or imagined ones, that this first lecture focused on. Yet conceptual diagrams also serve to help see different alternatives, possibly to allow innovative expression. I do expect a lot of 'conceptual diagrams' in my near future, although I may make 'embellishments'.

Much of the rest of the lecture was dedicated to subject introduction, time management and assessment; none of which belongs in this blog/journal.

So this ends week one, but I'll be into the breach again next week :)