Jump to content

Ask The Director 2.0


Recommended Posts

Can I sit in the front seat?

Only if it's okay with the driver.

 

Human thought requires language, language requires thought, so my question is which one came first? Language or thought?

Thought does not require language, so obviously thought came first.

The reason you think in sentences is because our brains have evolved to do so. Earlier people, those without language, thought in images or feelings. Similar to the way animals think.

 

Nice try at a deep question though.

What came first...

 

The Chicken or the egg? :)

The egg came before the modern chicken, because that's how the modern chicken would have had to be born. That being said, there is probably an earlier form of chicken that laid that egg. So on and so forth.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

So, how exactly does a language form from thoughts that rely entirely on images? How does someone think about things they have not seen if they cannot describe those things?

Okay, so it's pretty apparent that I'm going to have to explain to you not only how language works, but also how the human mind works at some length.

 

Language doesn't form from thoughts, it forms from the desire for outward communication. If there were no need for outward communication among humans, then we wouldn't have a language, and we would think in terms of images rather than words. In other words, if you thought of a red cape you would think of the color red rather than the word red and the shape of the cape rather than the cape itself.

 

Interestingly enough, this is evidenced by a type of Autism. Autism effects the persons social and communication skills to the point where the person doesn't even try to learn any languages. A decent number of them never do, either. Instead, they sit in their "own little worlds" and do things such as play video games or draw. This proves that they do have the ability to think, as such tasks would be impossible without that ability, without having learned any forms of communication. There are quite a few people who have Autism who are pretty gifted when it comes to painting or drawing as well.

 

One of the reasons this may be is because they do not think with words like you and I do. They think with images. So when they think of a dog, their brain holds an image of the dog which they can then translate to the paper by drawing. When WE think of a dog, we think of the descriptive words for the dog and attempt to translate those to the paper using techniques for shaping.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Why does 343 try to be like call of duty?

They don't. That's a massive generalization that doesn't do your argument justice. 343i was trying to incorporate things into Halo that were massively popular in CoD, and the reason they did that (and this will blow your mind) is because people were actually asking for it.

 

I kid you not. People have been asking for killcams since Halo 2. People have been asking for insta-spawn since H3. If Bungie still has their Halo forums archived, you can go back and actually see a few dozen threads with people talking about how Halo should have these things.

 

 

Battlefront 3 or just Battlefront ( ugh official title! ) ( the one being made by Dice ) is confirmed to be a first person only game not third person what are your thoughts on this? :)

I don't really mind it. I generally played the first two in FPS unless I was scanning for targets, and these days TPS can't be played competitively without some ingenious cover systems. TPS in multiplayer makes it difficult to sneak or snipe because you can see people trying to sneak and you can see the sniper shot and exactly where it's coming from.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Thank you for proving my point! If you you want call of duty features play call of duty!

 

Which brings me to my next question. Why does the majority of the halo community want those featurs? I mean halo was great with out and now it just doesn't have the same feel. Maybe I am just the one with bad taste

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

Thank you for proving my point! If you you want call of duty features play call of duty!

Which brings me to my next question. Why does the majority of the halo community want those featurs? I mean halo was great with out and now it just doesn't have the same feel. Maybe I am just the one with bad taste

Well the thing is, killcam and the other features are fun in CoD and Halo is a game that's never the exact same twice. The line of thought behind the wanting these features in Halo was that it might be fun. I am a good ol' fashioned H2 guy, and even I thought it might be fun to have a killcam. Especially in snipers because of campers. In theory, those features would have been great in Halo. In practice, not so much. Well, for some people I guess it's fun.

 

 

Would you consider Dwarf Planets ( like Ceres and Pluto ) to be real planets?

Not really. To me, a planet is a celestial body that is large enough to have a dominant orbit. Dwarf planets don't have dominant orbits, so they can't be called actual planets. Not to mention their size. They are bigger than moons, but if a large enough planet got close enough to them they would become moons.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 3 weeks later...

So this might be a little too early but what do you think the next gen consoles would be able to process?

You are correct when you say that it might be a little too early. We don't know how much technology will advance by the time they come out with a new generation of Sony and Xbox consoles.

 

Do you think Sony and Ms will come out with a new console within the next five years? :)

No. Sony and Microsoft have been making 10 year consoles. Nintendo is the company that creates 5 year consoles.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I got a problem for you. in halo nightfall they have a HAVOC nuclear device which is 30 mgt. but they say it will wipe out 100km my question is will it wipe out 100km and if not how much and the yield   

Alright, so first a megaton is appx 4.184 petajoules of energy. So a 30 megaton device would be about 125.52 petajoules of energy. The largest bomb detonated (to my knowledge) would be the Tsar Bomba (The AN602 Hydrogen Bomb) that detonated at about 50-58 megatons (210 to 240 petajoules). The Tsar Bomba's blast radius was only about 35 km.

 

So no. It wouldn't. It may be able to take out 3/5 of that amount of landscape (i.e. 21km), but it wouldn't be able to take out 100km.

 

UNLESS

 

1. Perhaps the HAVOC was a shaped device that limited upward energy and instead focused on emitting the energy in an outward radius. Even then it's unlikely to have reached 100km, but perhaps closer to 50-60km

2. They were including nuclear fallout in their statement. If the HAVOC detonated in an area with a low/windy atmosphere, then it's possible that the nuclear fallout may have reached 100km

3. It detonated in space. In space, not only is there no one to hear you scream, but there's less resistance to an explosion, meaning the explosion can spread out a lot further than it would in-atmosphere.

 

What would happen if you were made of antimatter instead of regular matter? Would you have to be kept in a vacuum to keep your atoms from annihilating regular atoms?

Yes, that's how antimatter works. Although I'm not entirely certain whether a living being actually could be made of antimatter.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Please sign in to comment

You will be able to leave a comment after signing in



Sign In Now
×
×
  • Create New...