Fact 1: According to the impeccable “dreyfus model of skill acquisition”, it takes 10 years (tĂ©n indeed) to fully grasp something. Of course this doesn’t mean people don’t know how to use something if they don’t spend years and years practicing – no, it just means you’ll need a lot of experience to fully master something. And that can be anything: from cooking to programming to driving.
Fact 2: people don’t like change. They like repetition because it doesn’t require as much energy (because a primitive part of the brain is used called the basal ganglia, which is responsible for routine jobs) as focussing on something new.
Changing something in your life requires a lot of positive energy and will prove to be hard, even a marginal thing like getting up earlier. Changing your attitude towards change in general is proven to be extremely difficult.
Fact 3: change causes stress because we’re not used to the new “thing”. It will take at least 4 weeks before that pays off – before you experience less stress by trying to change a stressful thing in your life. That’s quite ironic, don’t you think? This partly explains why changing stuff is hard: you’ll encounter more instead of less stress the first few weeks.
So, if we convinced ourselves to use something new (which was hard and required a lot of perseverance), how do we convince others do do the same, given the above facts? I love to observe people as they struggle to fit the thought of changing something into their brain after suggesting it. People who aren’t used to change (another reason to self-reflect) may even refuse to try and understand what you just said. Another effect may be the *mind = blown* thing – which could be good, if they actually understand and apply it afterwards.
To add some context, a colleague and I gave a crash course in Javascript – as a dynamic and functional language, not as a “GUI editing tool”, Javascript’s unfortunate but popular nickname. For most people, this was something completely new. For some people, it put them off (we may have shown too much pitfalls, hehe).
Since then, I wondered why and if this had something to do with their knowledge of javascript before the course. Maybe it’s because “Javascript is a kalashnikov in the hands of an infant” (I love that expression one of the attendants thoughtfully came up with). Maybe it’s because the way we presented the material.
The real reason is that most people are used to programming Java and not Javascript. Both languages differ a lot and making the switch is extremely defiant. It’s changing the very way you think when coding. Ouch, we could’ve hit a wall there.
I’m sure I was enthousiastic enough while giving the course and it’s also a fact that enthousiasm is contagious but that surely wasn’t enough to convince everyone.
How do you fix this (preferably without blackmailing)? I’d love to know, don’t hesitate to let me know!
It may not be that easy, what I’m actually trying to do is not giving a Javascript course but opening other (potentially very closed) minds to let new ideas flow in.
A quick follow-up on the previous post!
As I was trying to keep my backloggery account up-to-date, I saw I still needed to finish a couple of those old DOS games. Sigh, why is finishing games so difficult? So I came up with a plan, picked a couple of games on each platform that I intend to finish “off” (hehe) in the near future, including Hocus Pocus from Apogee. Those guys were my favorite publisher back in the day and I still have firm feel-good memories of everything Apogee-related, so I thought the game won’t let me down.
Right. So I played through all four stupid fucking boring castles. Urgh. The game is from 1994, and *the* platform game, Super Mario World, was released in Japan in 1990. You’d think Hocus Pocus offers something cool, you know, non-liniar level design, “next-gen” hAx graphicxsz etc. None of those. The game offers…
- Extremely boring levels where you have to fetch at most 9 objects to finish the level. Without a map, expect to be going back and forth a bit.
- Extremely frustrating levers which you have to set in some random order, in order to pass: most of the times, you’re just trying out all different combinations.
- Extremely boring monster designs: every other level, they offer the same monsters in another skin (wow they’re snakes now! Oh wait, it’s the same as the crabs?)
- Extremely boring boss battles: the bosses are so bad-ass they don’t even move, how about that? The occasional fireball to dodge and that’s it.
The end boss hit me, call a doctor! Oh wait he's almost gone.
Yeah that kind of shattered my dream about this game. Anyway I’m still glad I finished the game, one down 99 more to go, right? It’s pretty easy to finish and I think I managed to do it in 4 hours or less (about 1 hour for a castle run on normal difficulty).
The most prominent memory of those games has been shattered, I can feel my mind bending and twisting to be able to fully process these emotions. *Sniff* Could it be that most games Apogee released back in the way were all a bit like Hocus Pocus? Hopefully outdated the day they were released, outmatched by their console platform counterparts? Deep down, I know this to be true!
As long as I can remember, I’ve been an avid retro gamer. When I was little, I used to drag my old gameboy (you know, the big fat thing with 4 AA batteries in it, which still plays when you drop it off the stairs) with me everywhere. I used to play on my grandfathers 80386 PC, with the latest cutting-edge ISA sound cards and VGA graphics. That all sounds funny nowadays, but just thinking about those games still make me want to play them.
It got worse: I know the Duke Nukem I episode I shareware levels by heart. Let’s call it dedication, although at that time, I didn’t even realise once you buy the game, you got 2 extra episodes, each with 9+ new levels. My grandfather sometimes got computer related magazines with shareware floppy disks (including a virus, if I remember correctly), and I played the heck out of those things. My father even bought Raptor via mail order directly from Apogee in America, and we got Mystic Towers (the full version) for free. Awesome, I love you Apogee, I still do, even if you’re long gone… (see my older articles: Apogee’s Legacy or skip to the videos part)
Mystic Towers, an awesome Apogee DOS game
These events in my youth had a pretty big impact on me. That made me think, why do people love retro? Why do we like nostalgia? I know why I do: it’s a part of me, I grew up with these things and once those things evolve into something completely different, you feel disconnected. Modern games which focus on realistic graphics (look at me, bashin’ away!) make me sad for a lot of different reasons. But I’m sure kids who grow up playing this generation of games will think the same about the next generation, and so on.
I think people love retro because when you grow up, you suck up knowledge like a sponge. Your environment shapes your future self and you are heavily influenced without actually knowing it when you are a child. These memories are wired to very emotional moments in your life, and you will reflect on these moments in the future to remind yourself of who you are and who you want to be.
Doing something you like creates a positive stream of energy, and especially when you are young, these moments are wired in your brain to never be forgotten. And that makes me a handheld lover and a retro gamer. I’m pretty sure I’ll deny new things trying to enter into my life later on, just like most older people who dislike technology. The older you are, the more difficult it is to adapt to something new, something that is the completely opposite of “retro”.
Maybe you’ve already heard of the “Dreyfus model of skill acquisition” – if not, it’s basically a model which states that everybody goes through certain stages when aquiring any skill. There are five stages in total: novice, advanced beginner, competent, proficient and expert. You shouldn’t use this model to label people as “novice” in general, it applies to skills like driving, nursing, woodworking, programming, … – and also learning itself. So the skill to aquire skills can also be described using the Dreyfus model.
As an avid self-improver, getting to know this model well is very exciting. Not because it’s just another skill labelling attempt, but because it enables people to stop and reflect. You can for instance try to identify how good or bad your skills you use on a daily basis are using this model. This gives you an opportunity to become better at it, since you’re getting to know yourself and knowing yourself is step one to getting to know others as well.
The highly inspiring talk Dan North gives in his “keeping agile agile” presentation made me think about how enthousiasm and being passionate about something affect your ability to become even better at something. Do you remember this feeling (image source):
BOOM, Mind = Blown, right?
Well, I do. It’s the feeling we are all looking for: to finally “getting” something. To have this “aha” moment, as Your Brain at Work calls it, as teachers (or Dan giving his presentation) are fooling with your mind to make you go “oh wow that’s interesting, gotta think about it”. What they are actually doing is helping your brain jump over an impasse by changing your focus. They are “suggesting” that you look at the subject from another view, rather than giving you a straight answer. This enables us to find “the answer” ourselves, and gives us the satisfactory feeling of “getting” something.
That was the neuroscience-minded explanation Your Brain at Work gives. Since you choose to invest time and energy to pay attention to the teacher, you naturally want to increase your own skill level in the Dreyfus scale. Just by having that “aha” moment, you can evolve from being competent to proficient or even expert. This feeling also makes us focus more and be even more engaged into the matter. It’s basically an upward spiral: the more you get the “aha” moments, the more your brain releases dopamine (which is mostly good) and the more you get involved.
So, if you’re a competent person who just managed to “see” something thanks to a shift in focus suggested by someone else, congratulations. In order to keep on improving, you can keep on asking yourself these two simple questions: (Simple but effective self-assesment!)
- How am I doing, what scale am I at?
- How do others think I am doing?
The funny thing is, if you ask the majority of people how they are doing, most people in stages up to advanced beginner actually rate themselves too high, because they’re ignorant but don’t yet manage to see that. Other people who are in stages proficient and expert rate themselves too low because they’ve seen the potential complexity of the skill, because they “get” it. Ignorance is a bliss, right. This results in a compressed scale: everyone thinks they are doing okay, not bad but not great either.
What I learned through practice by delving into the inner workings of Javascript is that the more I know about it, the more I get these “mind is blown” (KA-BIEM) moments, and the more I afterwards think I know so little about it. That’s exactly my point here. It’s said that in order to become a full zen master expert at something, you have to practice the skill for about 10 years. That’s right.
Most people somehow end up being competent. Classical example: learning to drive. You need a set of rules to follow (use your mirrors, fiddling with the gearbox, …), but the more you drive, the more it becomes automation. That’s what the competent skill user does: auto-pilot, but still using rules as backup. As we’ve learned from Your Brain at Work, automative tasks are executed by the basal ganglia part of the brain which is highly energy efficient. That makes us able to converse and drive at once. Don’t try to argue with an advanced beginner while he’s driving!
If you want to improve your skill by becoming proficient, you have to choose to become better at it, and to invest time and energy in it.
I think I may have drifted a bit off-topic here but I love the “aha” feeling and I just got several of ‘em – killing spree!
Okay, since it’s the first of many to hopefully come”brain reflection” posts I’ll put here, I guess I’ll need to explain why I’d dare to do such a stupid thing. You see, the mind deceives (and wanders, so focus please) easily – it’s not stupid at all to try to explain and think and thus reflect about thoughts going on, between your own brain cells. The more you “think” about yourself, the more you are able to notice your own behaviour and the more you’ll be able to manipulate and change the outcome.
This is not new, it’s somethting called being mindful. Mindfulness, or self-awareness (or by others called in-need-for-self-aid-crazyness) is the study of one’s own inner workings. It’s noticing little things, like detecting how you are feeling about something, what you are doing and why you should continue (or not) doing it, …
If you’re interested in any kind of self-development (this makes your life incredibly more involved and this does not only apply to people trying to “manage” others), you should read “Your brain at work” by David Rock. It’s one of the most enticing books I’ve ever read and inspires me to finally start “brain dumping”. I’ve first met that term in “Pragmatic Thinking & learning” by Andy Hunt, which is the book that got me on the right track.
I normally avoid all (by my brain marked as) “psychological” kinds of books like the plague, but the latter is a bit more geared towards technical software development stuff and really got my attention. It’s also an easy read and explains everything using an organic mindmap made by the author. Anyway, as soon as I read that book, I started digging and looking for more. I stumbled upon “Learn to Power Think“, wich is a bit less cognitive and a bit more self-helpish. That made me connect the dots and my brain instanly changed from “keep away from psycho-stuff” to “absorb as much info about that topic as you can”.
Of course one cannot just read all those self-improvement related books without actually taking action. So action #1 was setting up a personal wiki (http://www.jefklak.be/wiki – in Dutch, sorry) and dumping all (technical and non-technical) information I wanted to store there. It actually saved my butt more than a few times at work – simply by keeping track of thing!
Action #2 was extending the wiki with a personal notebook I keep with me all the time – or at least try to. It should contain todo lists and loose ideas (and crazy ones too). I’ve had some trouble trying to “organize” it, but the solution was simple: the introduction of GTD or Getting Things Done by David Allen. The principle he explains is not something he invented but something he found to be the most productive for humans to keep track of incoming data of any kind. This could be meeting requests, simple grocery lists, other tasks, but more imporantly ideas sprouting from our mind.
The thing is, once you have an idea, you’ve got to do something with it! These things vanish within a few seconds if you don’t write ‘em down quickly. That’s where the notebook comes in. Or the blocknote by the bedside cabinet. Or the mini notepad in the car. Don’t forget a pen.
Anyway I’m drifting off again. As you can see, all these things are highly connected: being open for new ideas, noticing ideas and the ability to capture ideas (= paying more attention to what your brain does, so being mindful) and actually storing them and calling upon them to process or convert into further actions (= having a great system which you regulary check, so using some form of GTD).
I hope this convinced the lone person who’s read all this to read some of these books or to maybe start writing too. It helps widen your horizon, blogs do not all have to be attention seekers. These posts are primarily for myself. Too bad I have to write them in English, oh well: it expands my power to express myself!
Report Content
- Part 1: Irenicus’ Dungeon
- Part 2: The Circus Tent & Slums Slaves
- Part 3: A Tanner & More Slaves
- Part 4: The Astral Prison
- Part 5: Daystar & Mae’Var
- Part 6: Some Beholders & a Lich
- Part 7: Druid Grove & Guarded Compound
- Part 8: Planar Sphere & Kangaxx!
- Part 9: The Shadow Temple
Introduction
With a small group of Forgotten Realms fans at Shrimprefuge, we decided to take on the Baldur’s Gate world using only one character (hence solo). For most of us, this will be the first solo run so I figured we (and other readers) could use a report writeup as the characters progress through the game.
Before picking the class bard and kit blade, I did some basic research on how to play and which strategy should work – and which won’t. The most resourceful report was definatly andijvieschotel‘s one from the BioWare forums. Thanks to him, I managed to get through some very otherwise tough portions of the game, especially in the beginning. Let’s get on with it, shall we.
The Blade Kit
For those who are not very familiar with Bards in Baldur’s Gate, here is the official kit description.
The blade is an expert fighter and adventurer, whose bardic acting abilities make him appear more intimidating and fearsome. His fighting style is flashy and entertaining, but is also quite deadly.
Advantages
May use Offensive Spin and Defensive Spin abilities once per day per 4 levels. Offensive Spin lasts 24 seconds, granting the blade +2 to hit, +2 to damage, and an extra attack. As well, all of his attacks do maximum damage for the duration. Defensive Spin lasts 24 seconds, roots him to the spot, but gives -1 AC per level of experience. This armor class bonus does not go over -10.
May place three slots into two-weapon fighting style.
Disadvantages
Only has one-half normal Lore value.
Only has one-half Pick Pockets percentage;
Bard Song does not become better with levels.
Ported to the Nintendo DS
by
TheChuckster, WinterMute, Jefklak
DSDoom is a port of Doom to the Nintendo DS based off the Prboom source tree because of its purity and portability.
PrBoom is a version of the classic 3D shoot’em’up game Doom, originally written by id Software. See the file AUTHORS in this distribution for a list of authors and other contributors, and a history of the projects PrBoom is derived from. dsdoom is made available under the GNU General Public License. See the file COPYING included in this distribution for details.
Important: There will be no more active development. Please do not mail or ask in the comments section about any new version, as there will be none. The source code has been released, feel free to add as many features as you want. I only copied this page from the old Jefklak’s Codex webpage for future reference, nothing more. Please be aware that there are already several newer, ds doom 1.1 spin-offs available on the internet.
Core mechanics
A concept almost as old as Pong, the Godfather of nowadays gaming. You climb up and down little ladders, collecting various forms of loot. And guess what – you’re being chased by blood thirsty (well yeah, sort of) eurhm, red humanoid shaped *things*. On your way through each puzzle, there are multiple ways of dealing with them. From digging a hole and watching earth grow as fast as it can, squashing the enemy, to picking up little and very big bombs. Of course, the objective in each level is to collect all loot displayed and get the hell outta there.
Simple, yet effective and above all: very addictive if served right. And believe me, this one is. Based on the classic “Lode Runner” principle explained above, Lode Runner: the Legend Returns indeed returns to keep you occupied for as long as needed. The game improves and extends the core game mechanics with extra tools to get rid of enemies (and friends by accident when playing cooperatively, whoops!). Every few levels, the big “tileset theme” changes, together with a very nice soundtrack. The area’s differ from jungle to cave and icy mountains. All enemies stay the same though: red and hungry.
Platform games, one of the most dominant game genres in gaming history. They spawned a whole lot of spin-off series (run-and-gun, platform puzzles, Apogee’s shareware system, Mario 64′s 3D platform debut). Platform gaming has been the dominant type on every gaming platform for quite a while, but classic platforming is rarely seen on nowadays computers. Consoles have taken over the 3D platforming aspect while handheld games kept producing 2D variations (Castlevania, Wario Land), but what happened to PC platformers? Try to sum up more than five recent commercial classic 2D platform games. Euurhhghmmmhghyhg… Right.
Unfolding the History of Platform gaming would be rather boring and you can read the details at Wikipedia. So let’s instead try to sum up that list… The first, and most obvious entry would be of course Captain Claw by Monolith, since I’ve mentioned the game more than once before. Being a game from 1997, one can imagine more exciting recent 2D platform games for the Personal Computer.
I’m getting fairly tired of defending Arcanum on various *cough, console lovers* message boards and against friends. Everybody seems to prefer Oblivion-style Roleplaying gameplay mechanics. Fine by me, but don’t try to piss RPG Codex members and me off by complaining about the bug fest in Troika’s games. During my more than 5 playthroughs (admittedly never got to the finish, fooling around with different characters is even funnier), I never encountered a single “bug“. Except the obvious not-so-finished questlines in later stages of the game. Point the finger to the publishers, not to Troika.
Because, in Arcanum, everybody reacts on everything in a unique way. No NPC interactions are scripted (as seen in the NPC Interaction tests)! This makes debugging a more than difficult task of course. Read the interview for details. Here’s the most important part, carefully preserved for future quotage:
- keeru
super good
- Mr. Samsa
Nice little guide. I realize this is old but games like this were at the turn of the...
- SpeedyDasher
Monster Bash in only 25:09 for the first episode: http://youtube.com/watch?v=...
- Brendan Groot
Have you ever thought about adding a little bit more than just your articles? I...
