Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="EzekielRaiden" data-source="post: 9028762" data-attributes="member: 6790260">Incidentally, I was thinking of exactly what you describe in your second paragraph when I said, &quot;sometimes even just one subtype&quot; of G&amp;S and &quot;superior at delivering a specific kind of G&amp;S-based play.&quot; (Edit: That is, thinking of the fact that there are these two distinct styles of G&amp;S, lite vs crunchy.) I don't think I thought of you by name, but given our interactions over the years, I'd be lying if I said you had had no influence on that.Because this really is an unusual dichotomy, where it seems like both sides fully agree on the reason for the action, yet there are two modes and most folks get pushed toward one or the other, ne'er the twain shall meet. Either extensive structure, iterated upon so it becomes ever more precise and correct, or minimalistic structure, reduced as much as possible so error becomes merely a matter of incorrect decisions. As you say, it's a matter of whether one treats the difficult spots as &quot;this is a design problem, to be addressed by doing more design,&quot; or as &quot;this is an evaluation problem, to be addressed by giving better evaluations.&quot; Ultimately, both require something to grow in complexity and intricacy; it's just whether that complexity is formal procedure or informal intuition.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="EzekielRaiden, post: 9028762, member: 6790260"] Incidentally, I was thinking of exactly what you describe in your second paragraph when I said, "sometimes even just one subtype" of G&S and "superior at delivering a specific kind of G&S-based play." (Edit: That is, thinking of the fact that there are these two distinct styles of G&S, lite vs crunchy.) I don't think I thought of you [I]by name[/I], but given our interactions over the years, I'd be lying if I said you had had no influence on that. Because this really is an unusual dichotomy, where it seems like both sides fully agree on the [I]reason[/I] for the action, yet there are two modes and most folks get pushed toward one or the other, ne'er the twain shall meet. Either extensive structure, iterated upon so it becomes ever more precise and correct, or minimalistic structure, reduced as much as possible so error becomes merely a matter of incorrect decisions. As you say, it's a matter of whether one treats the difficult spots as "this is a design problem, to be addressed by doing more design," or as "this is an evaluation problem, to be addressed by giving better evaluations." Ultimately, both require [I]something[/I] to grow in complexity and intricacy; it's just whether that complexity is formal procedure or informal intuition. [/QUOTE]

Verification