Now you see why the Cake v. Pie is a such a rich debate in my house. I seriously think Steven needs to re-evaluate his response in the light of such thoughts.
I think he already answered this in one of the q&a. He chose cake.
Pffffffft. Pie > Cake
Agreed! I definitely prefer pie over cake.
Cheesecake is so good. One of the best types of pies in my opinion
Look a Rockaberry on Internet. Its cheese Cake paradise.
Looks good to me! I'll check it out if I ever get the chance to
Some of their pies look more cake-like but I don't know how they make their crusts. I wont really get into breaking them down in terms of traditional terminology. I don't really know how they make their pie shells (pastry vs cake).
Depends how far one wants to go on the spectrum from a true pie vs true cake. Cheesecake is traditionally closer to the pie side of the spectrum than the cake side of the spectrum if that makes sense.
Anyways, looks good!
Well its because they are Cake-Pie. Some have Pie crust some other have Cake and then all their cream is cheesecake flavor of something
I think he already answered this in one of the q&a. He chose cake.
Pffffffft. Pie > Cake
Agreed! I definitely prefer pie over cake.
Cheesecake is so good. One of the best types of pies in my opinion
Look a Rockaberry on Internet. Its cheese Cake paradise.
Looks good to me! I'll check it out if I ever get the chance to
Some of their pies look more cake-like but I don't know how they make their crusts. I wont really get into breaking them down in terms of traditional terminology. I don't really know how they make their pie shells (pastry vs cake).
Depends how far one wants to go on the spectrum from a true pie vs true cake. Cheesecake is traditionally closer to the pie side of the spectrum than the cake side of the spectrum if that makes sense.
Anyways, looks good!
Well its because they are Cake-Pie. Some have Pie crust some other have Cake and then all their cream is cheesecake flavor of something
Well their menu on the official website labels them as Pie, not cake-pie. Maybe they don't know the difference? Aside from what I previously mentioned.
Now you see why the Cake v. Pie is a such a rich debate in my house. I seriously think Steven needs to re-evaluate his response in the light of such thoughts.
Lol. I can see why! I looked up the history of cake. Didn't dive too far into it yet either. Apparently it's got some interesting viking history as a gift.
I would love for us to type down some questions we have for @Steven Sharif about AoC! Maybe we can upvote the ones we think are best and hope that @LieutenantToast can pick the 10 most upvoted ones and make Steven answear them!
I would definitely recommend sharing your question for Steven about Ashes of Creation in our monthly Q&A post once that's available, so that we can grab it for a chance to be answered live on stream! In general we choose questions to answer at random, rather than looking at "likes", so that everyone has a fair shot at getting an answer (not just those who may have other friends on the forums).
Looking forward to seeing what questions you all share for this month's stream once that thread goes live!
Apparently cheesecake dates back to ancient Greece. Those romans conquering the world at the time spread lots of spoils across their empire and eventually the world including cannabis for fibres, medicinal and recreational purposes. Those Greeks held on to such a delicacy for several thousand years. Apparently it's recorded to be served for at least 2000 years dated from 230 A.D ( 1800 BC?). All that fine wine and desserts they've been holding out on. The interesting things about ancient civilisations. I wont even get into wine and other botanicals products. Technically certain alcohols were medicinal as well to consume aside from sanitary reasons. Something actually cool about ancient Egypt is they figured out electricity currents and batteries.
one would be surprised how many plants and things a-like were transported and cultivated around the world. Things many countries are famous for did not originate there that we assume do to this day.
It's funny, some folks see cheesecake as a shared compromise in the Pie Cake Venn Diagram. However, I see cheesecake as neither cake nor pie, so it's over there in it's own little fenced off area, never to be touched.
It's funny, some folks see cheesecake as a shared compromise in the Pie Cake Venn Diagram. However, I see cheesecake as neither cake nor pie, so it's over there in it's own little fenced off area, never to be touched.
As you can see, we live in a very odd universe.
Blasphemy! lol
It's clearly a pie! But seriously, if it's made in a pastry based shell it's a pie. If not, it's a cake. The main difference is how pastry dough is made versus cake batter. Now I'm thinking about pancakes... mmm
@CROW3 now we're getting into dough types vs batter types... so many recipes and classifications! lol
See another way to look at it is the way it is spelt. Cheesecake is not " cheese cake " you do not label chocolate cake as " chocolatecake ". One could use this as a basis for a debate but something similar and unrelated directly is how alcohol beverages are specifically classified.
Most people dont know the difference between Whisky and Whiskey let alone Scotch vs Bourbon. It's not just the spelling but the recipes procedure amongst other reasons for the different spelling for identification purposes. It's not the best example for a side by side comparison but it's interesting to think about. Alcohol based beverages have a lot of recipe and procedure restrictions for naming and classifications that differ from country to country. I can debate why beer is technically a wine based on recipe rules and procedures just how wine derived from grapes isn't classified as fruit wine. I could also say that beer is technically fermented tea, coffee.. or is it a brew?
@Enigmatic Sage - I think we can start a crafting guild. Cheesecake can be one word. Ultimately, it just tries too hard to be in both clubs, and therefore shouldn’t be in either, just like any overly earnest person.
I love bourbon, but prefer ryes. Used to drink *a lot* of whiskey (and would have argued that whiskey is the only one that matters ☘️). Can’t stand scotch though - too peaty for me. I’ve dumped out JW Blue and Laphroig is equal to ipecac.
@CROW3 lol at the crafting guild. I had a feeling.
I've definitely had my fair shares of alcohol. It tastes so good coming fresh off the still. mmm. The different phases within the cuts can be quite delicious and aromatic. Unfortunately I should not drink alcohol anymore. It could potentially cause some life threatening problems since surgery. Cannabis isn't that good for me either. I wont go into details on human body, toxicity and organs. Things are ok in moderation once in awhile but I generally stay sober these days.
Scotch is delicious! you should reconsider. Some can be quite peaty, I will agree on that. Bourbons are really nice too. No, I'm not an alcoholic I just had lots of opportunities for tasting and sensory for the different classifications of alcohols. Where I live, we spell it Whisky but are more liberal similar to Whiskey.
Ironically, many of the most popular alcohols are under one umbrella world wide. Some of the better ones I have had are from more craft sized operations compared to commercial sized. Just because they call it premium doesn't actually mean it's premium by other standards. Craft is another word that is quite misunderstood. People think it's based off recipes but it's actually directly related to size of operations and product out per year regardless of batch size. Let's say I got education in this amongst other industries
It's funny, some folks see cheesecake as a shared compromise in the Pie Cake Venn Diagram. However, I see cheesecake as neither cake nor pie, so it's over there in it's own little fenced off area, never to be touched.
As you can see, we live in a very odd universe.
Blasphemy! lol
It's clearly a pie! But seriously, if it's made in a pastry based shell it's a pie. If not, it's a cake. The main difference is how pastry dough is made versus cake batter. Now I'm thinking about pancakes... mmm
But, cheesecake isn't pastry, it's got a biscuit base. You smash up the biscuit you're using (gingernuts are absolutely the best for this - don't let anyone tell you it's digestives), and then you cook it off in some butter so it'll mush together, and then you use that mixture as the base of the cheesecake. It's not a pastry pudding.
It's funny, some folks see cheesecake as a shared compromise in the Pie Cake Venn Diagram. However, I see cheesecake as neither cake nor pie, so it's over there in it's own little fenced off area, never to be touched.
As you can see, we live in a very odd universe.
Blasphemy! lol
It's clearly a pie! But seriously, if it's made in a pastry based shell it's a pie. If not, it's a cake. The main difference is how pastry dough is made versus cake batter. Now I'm thinking about pancakes... mmm
But, cheesecake isn't pastry, it's got a biscuit base. You smash up the biscuit you're using (gingernuts are absolutely the best for this - don't let anyone tell you it's digestives), and then you cook it off in some butter so it'll mush together, and then you use that mixture as the base of the cheesecake. It's not a pastry pudding.
lol. don't even start! You know the answer to that.
Ok, here’s another question for Steven - care of John Hodgeman.
If you had to choose a superpower between flying or invisibility, what would you pick?
🧐
Flying, for sure. It just has way more practical applications.
It depends on limitations and their affects. How high can I fly? Do physics such as air density and atmosphere composition affect me? Can I breathe in thinning atmosphere? Am I immune to thermal changes such as cold? How fast can I fly? Do I have to flap my arms? These are important factors in such a decision.
Invisibility - Am I invisible to thermal imaging? Do I have to be naked or does my gear, tools, and clothing cloak with my body? Is it “Predator style” cloaking or truly invisible? If I bleed, urinate, defecate does it become visible as it leaves my body?
More information is required for such an important decision.
Ok, here’s another question for Steven - care of John Hodgeman.
If you had to choose a superpower between flying or invisibility, what would you pick?
🧐
Flying, for sure. It just has way more practical applications.
It depends on limitations and their affects. How high can I fly? Do physics such as air density and atmosphere composition affect me? Can I breathe in thinning atmosphere? Am I immune to thermal changes such as cold? How fast can I fly? Do I have to flap my arms? These are important factors in such a decision.
Invisibility - Am I invisible to thermal imaging? Do I have to be naked or does my gear, tools, and clothing cloak with my body? Is it “Predator style” cloaking or truly invisible? If I bleed, urinate, defecate does it become visible as it leaves my body?
More information is required for such an important decision.
It depends on type of flying. Magical/superhero like modern superman? wings?
Not being able to breathe in an environments limitations based on ones anatomy doesn't have much to do with flying other than gas and gravity depending on type of flying. If you suffer from lack of respiration efficiency then that is on the one using the mechanic outside of their physical limitations.
Invisible refers to visual detection. Depends on the bases of visual allowances from realism to fantasy. They would essentially only be detectable based on touch, smell, taste and auditory sensory. Don't really want to break this down with physics and wavelengths but you get the idea. Technically thermal/infrared would be visual depending on the visual organ allowances. Anything associated with the body would be truly invisible including biological discharges such as urine, fecal matter, sweat etc.
But you could break it down into specifics for what would be invisible vs truly invisible on the spectrum. I like where you're going with this though!
Superpowers are based around limitations of reality and what is normal. What is consider "super" based on subject. Think about superman. His race isn't considered super to themselves? that's just normal. So what would be super powers to them?
A similar perception could be related to god(s) and aliens. Depending on mythology/religion,
who is to say gods are not aliens and vice versa. Based on the fiction of superman and other fictional stories, some are technically aliens and considered god-like compared to the control sample being a human.
So technically, a human getting wings anatomically correct to allow them to properly fly would be considered a superior form. This would imply that it could be a super power depending how far on the spectrum of super powers one would like to explore in relation to control sample being an realistic average human. It may not be as superior as magical and/or superman's gravity and physic defying ability regardless of environment but it could still be considered a super human power.
One could also debate that superpowers are just a reality not yet discovered as they are considered fiction outside of our normal perception and reality.
Superpowers are based around limitations of reality and what is normal. What is consider "super" based on subject. Think about superman. His race isn't considered super to themselves? that's just normal. So what would be super powers to them?
A similar perception could be related to god(s) and aliens. Depending on mythology/religion,
who is to say gods are not aliens and vice versa. Based on the fiction of superman and other fictional stories, some are technically aliens and considered god-like compared to the control sample being a human.
So technically, a human getting wings anatomically correct to allow them to properly fly would be considered a superior form. This would imply that it could be a super power depending how far on the spectrum of super powers one would like to explore in relation to control sample being an realistic average human. It may not be as superior as magical and/or superman's gravity and physic defying ability regardless of environment but it could still be considered a super human power.
One could also debate that superpowers are just a reality not yet discovered as they are considered fiction outside of our normal perception and reality.
Heh. The second effect of this question is exactly where you went, let's call it the 'superpower fine print.' The ability to fly would allow someone without any changes to them physically be able to fly at a thousand miles per hour. Simple as that.
If you haven't guessed, this isn't just a question about invisibility or flying.
Superpowers are based around limitations of reality and what is normal. What is consider "super" based on subject. Think about superman. His race isn't considered super to themselves? that's just normal. So what would be super powers to them?
A similar perception could be related to god(s) and aliens. Depending on mythology/religion,
who is to say gods are not aliens and vice versa. Based on the fiction of superman and other fictional stories, some are technically aliens and considered god-like compared to the control sample being a human.
So technically, a human getting wings anatomically correct to allow them to properly fly would be considered a superior form. This would imply that it could be a super power depending how far on the spectrum of super powers one would like to explore in relation to control sample being an realistic average human. It may not be as superior as magical and/or superman's gravity and physic defying ability regardless of environment but it could still be considered a super human power.
One could also debate that superpowers are just a reality not yet discovered as they are considered fiction outside of our normal perception and reality.
Heh. The second effect of this question is exactly where you went, let's call it the 'superpower fine print.' The ability to fly would allow someone without any changes to them physically be able to fly at a thousand miles per hour. Simple as that.
If you haven't guessed, this isn't just a question about invisibility or flying.
so now you're indicating because of the human being gaining the super power to fly they can automatically handle the g forces associated with its speed?
Too many variables. Beings like "superman" were able to handle their normal abilities because of their bodies being able to support it within their physical limitations. So based on that comparison, one would assume a human gaining the super power of flight would potentially be limited to their physical capabilities. Sure, objects could be moved really fast in terms of acceleration and velocity, but could their body handle it?
Perspectives and specifics. Depends where on the spectrum the definitive reasoning one wants to accept the reasoning behind such vague statements for ability preferences if having to choose one.
One could debate the source of the ability. Gained through the spectrum of magic vs mutations etc. The body mutating to accept the limitations of the power associated with the mutation could make sense but that would still have to be quite specific to the power of flying and mutation limitations. There is and should always be limitation to abilities. Just like some gods are mortal vs immortal and their spectrum of limitations. Some gods and higher beings had specific abilities compared to others depending on mythology/religion.
Not all powers are equal as their origins could vary drastically with conditions and limitations.
It's like saying because your ability allows you to "fly" and/or "maneuver" in the vacuum of space that you're automatically UV radiation proof and don't need to breathe regardless of anatomy. Limitations and conditions exist for a reason.
Then it's not just the super power of flying, it's the adaptations and situational conditions that follow it.
Hi Steven,
How do you balance the pressures of running such a large project with the need for your "inner child" to have fun along the way?
We've seen plenty of game studio CEOs over the years that are largely disconnected with the creative process and just focus on the finances. What keeps your sense of enjoyment and enthusiasm at such a high level in a process that must have a large amount of technical grind to work through?
Hi Steven,
How do you balance the pressures of running such a large project with the need for your "inner child" to have fun along the way?
We've seen plenty of game studio CEOs over the years that are largely disconnected with the creative process and just focus on the finances. What keeps your sense of enjoyment and enthusiasm at such a high level in a process that must have a large amount of technical grind to work through?
There is a huge difference between a ceo and a creative director. Big companies have finance focused ceo's because big companies have shareholders and debt. Steven has both roles and is the largest 'shareholder' in that most of the game is funded off his own money. He's the person he needs to please. Being involved as the creative director even this deep in the development process is definitely part of how he keeps his passion alive. It's a very hands on job with a lot of people sharing ideas with you. Ceo's are more relationship and structure focused. Less about hands on solutions.
I think one of my biggest take aways for how he handles the technical grind is that he actually takes an interest in learning the technical aspects like how they start a build or how servers work or what the ai bugs look like. He clearly makes a focused effort to not just 'let it be someone else's problem.' He clearly listens to his people enough to be explained these very technical grinds and makes it his job to know. Good CEOs do this but it's not that common. Once you understand the technical problem it's less an obstacle in /your/ way and more so a challenge for the team to tackle together which is less grindy than the alternative (this is me making an assumption about his mindsets but I am fairly confident in it.)
He is also pretty vocal about the way he approaches company culture. Game nights, dnd, magic, just generally being personable with the staff and taking an interest in their interests. It's an indy company so the culture requires being more of a people person than a ceo at a big company needs to be. Staff morale affects productivity directly. He is a part of the staff and keeping 'childlike wonder' and a willingness to explore in the whole staff is key to avoiding burnout in creative oriented professions. Maintaining a sense of togetherness keeps cohesion up and friction lower which keeps that 'wonder' from getting bogged down in petty politics or the grind of technical obstacles.
On top of that he is still a gamer. Creative jobs require constant input from the outside world to keep you charged up and fresh with ideas. Finance focused professions less so. There is a lot more of a feeling that there solved solutions in finance (which is less true than people think but eh.) He definitely still games regularly.
So yeah I know your question was for Steven, but watching him in q&a and other interviews makes this answer really obvious to me due to my own professional background.
Hi Steven,
How do you balance the pressures of running such a large project with the need for your "inner child" to have fun along the way?
We've seen plenty of game studio CEOs over the years that are largely disconnected with the creative process and just focus on the finances. What keeps your sense of enjoyment and enthusiasm at such a high level in a process that must have a large amount of technical grind to work through?
There is a huge difference between a ceo and a creative director. Big companies have finance focused ceo's because big companies have shareholders and debt. Steven has both roles and is the largest 'shareholder' in that most of the game is funded off his own money. He's the person he needs to please. Being involved as the creative director even this deep in the development process is definitely part of how he keeps his passion alive. It's a very hands on job with a lot of people sharing ideas with you. Ceo's are more relationship and structure focused. Less about hands on solutions.
I think one of my biggest take aways for how he handles the technical grind is that he actually takes an interest in learning the technical aspects like how they start a build or how servers work or what the ai bugs look like. He clearly makes a focused effort to not just 'let it be someone else's problem.' He clearly listens to his people enough to be explained these very technical grinds and makes it his job to know. Good CEOs do this but it's not that common. Once you understand the technical problem it's less an obstacle in /your/ way and more so a challenge for the team to tackle together which is less grindy than the alternative (this is me making an assumption about his mindsets but I am fairly confident in it.)
He is also pretty vocal about the way he approaches company culture. Game nights, dnd, magic, just generally being personable with the staff and taking an interest in their interests. It's an indy company so the culture requires being more of a people person than a ceo at a big company needs to be. Staff morale affects productivity directly. He is a part of the staff and keeping 'childlike wonder' and a willingness to explore in the whole staff is key to avoiding burnout in creative oriented professions. Maintaining a sense of togetherness keeps cohesion up and friction lower which keeps that 'wonder' from getting bogged down in petty politics or the grind of technical obstacles.
On top of that he is still a gamer. Creative jobs require constant input from the outside world to keep you charged up and fresh with ideas. Finance focused professions less so. There is a lot more of a feeling that there solved solutions in finance (which is less true than people think but eh.) He definitely still games regularly.
So yeah I know your question was for Steven, but watching him in q&a and other interviews makes this answer really obvious to me due to my own professional background.
Have to agree with all of this, but with the added point that Intrepid does have a company president/COO that is not Steven.
In a mid sized company, a COO's job (for the few mid sized companies that have one) is to basically run the company/admin side of things.
The fact that Steven has put someone in that role that he trusts implicitly tells me he isn't actually doing any of the work involved in running Intrepid Studios, the company, and is instead entirely focused on Ashes of Creation, the product.
After all, the easiest way to ensure you can focus on the creative side and not get caught up in the finances is to not bother with the finances yourself.
Comments
Well its because they are Cake-Pie. Some have Pie crust some other have Cake and then all their cream is cheesecake flavor of something
Well their menu on the official website labels them as Pie, not cake-pie. Maybe they don't know the difference? Aside from what I previously mentioned.
Lol. I can see why! I looked up the history of cake. Didn't dive too far into it yet either. Apparently it's got some interesting viking history as a gift.
I would definitely recommend sharing your question for Steven about Ashes of Creation in our monthly Q&A post once that's available, so that we can grab it for a chance to be answered live on stream! In general we choose questions to answer at random, rather than looking at "likes", so that everyone has a fair shot at getting an answer
Looking forward to seeing what questions you all share for this month's stream once that thread goes live!
Apparently cheesecake dates back to ancient Greece. Those romans conquering the world at the time spread lots of spoils across their empire and eventually the world including cannabis for fibres, medicinal and recreational purposes. Those Greeks held on to such a delicacy for several thousand years. Apparently it's recorded to be served for at least 2000 years dated from 230 A.D ( 1800 BC?). All that fine wine and desserts they've been holding out on. The interesting things about ancient civilisations. I wont even get into wine and other botanicals products. Technically certain alcohols were medicinal as well to consume aside from sanitary reasons. Something actually cool about ancient Egypt is they figured out electricity currents and batteries.
one would be surprised how many plants and things a-like were transported and cultivated around the world. Things many countries are famous for did not originate there that we assume do to this day.
As you can see, we live in a very odd universe.
Blasphemy! lol
It's clearly a pie! But seriously, if it's made in a pastry based shell it's a pie. If not, it's a cake. The main difference is how pastry dough is made versus cake batter. Now I'm thinking about pancakes... mmm
See another way to look at it is the way it is spelt. Cheesecake is not " cheese cake " you do not label chocolate cake as " chocolatecake ". One could use this as a basis for a debate but something similar and unrelated directly is how alcohol beverages are specifically classified.
Most people dont know the difference between Whisky and Whiskey let alone Scotch vs Bourbon. It's not just the spelling but the recipes procedure amongst other reasons for the different spelling for identification purposes. It's not the best example for a side by side comparison but it's interesting to think about. Alcohol based beverages have a lot of recipe and procedure restrictions for naming and classifications that differ from country to country. I can debate why beer is technically a wine based on recipe rules and procedures just how wine derived from grapes isn't classified as fruit wine. I could also say that beer is technically fermented tea, coffee.. or is it a brew?
What a world
I love bourbon, but prefer ryes. Used to drink *a lot* of whiskey (and would have argued that whiskey is the only one that matters ☘️). Can’t stand scotch though - too peaty for me. I’ve dumped out JW Blue and Laphroig is equal to ipecac.
If you had to choose a superpower between flying or invisibility, what would you pick?
🧐
I've definitely had my fair shares of alcohol. It tastes so good coming fresh off the still. mmm. The different phases within the cuts can be quite delicious and aromatic. Unfortunately I should not drink alcohol anymore. It could potentially cause some life threatening problems since surgery. Cannabis isn't that good for me either. I wont go into details on human body, toxicity and organs. Things are ok in moderation once in awhile but I generally stay sober these days.
Scotch is delicious! you should reconsider. Some can be quite peaty, I will agree on that. Bourbons are really nice too. No, I'm not an alcoholic I just had lots of opportunities for tasting and sensory for the different classifications of alcohols. Where I live, we spell it Whisky but are more liberal similar to Whiskey.
Ironically, many of the most popular alcohols are under one umbrella world wide. Some of the better ones I have had are from more craft sized operations compared to commercial sized. Just because they call it premium doesn't actually mean it's premium by other standards. Craft is another word that is quite misunderstood. People think it's based off recipes but it's actually directly related to size of operations and product out per year regardless of batch size. Let's say I got education in this amongst other industries
But, cheesecake isn't pastry, it's got a biscuit base. You smash up the biscuit you're using (gingernuts are absolutely the best for this - don't let anyone tell you it's digestives), and then you cook it off in some butter so it'll mush together, and then you use that mixture as the base of the cheesecake. It's not a pastry pudding.
Flying, for sure. It just has way more practical applications.
Well, Steven calls it "Ashes". It's only us who call it "AoC" cos we can't get around the idea that we don't use the first letter of each word
lol. don't even start! You know the answer to that.
It depends on limitations and their affects. How high can I fly? Do physics such as air density and atmosphere composition affect me? Can I breathe in thinning atmosphere? Am I immune to thermal changes such as cold? How fast can I fly? Do I have to flap my arms? These are important factors in such a decision.
Invisibility - Am I invisible to thermal imaging? Do I have to be naked or does my gear, tools, and clothing cloak with my body? Is it “Predator style” cloaking or truly invisible? If I bleed, urinate, defecate does it become visible as it leaves my body?
More information is required for such an important decision.
It depends on type of flying. Magical/superhero like modern superman? wings?
Not being able to breathe in an environments limitations based on ones anatomy doesn't have much to do with flying other than gas and gravity depending on type of flying. If you suffer from lack of respiration efficiency then that is on the one using the mechanic outside of their physical limitations.
Invisible refers to visual detection. Depends on the bases of visual allowances from realism to fantasy. They would essentially only be detectable based on touch, smell, taste and auditory sensory. Don't really want to break this down with physics and wavelengths but you get the idea. Technically thermal/infrared would be visual depending on the visual organ allowances. Anything associated with the body would be truly invisible including biological discharges such as urine, fecal matter, sweat etc.
But you could break it down into specifics for what would be invisible vs truly invisible on the spectrum. I like where you're going with this though!
A similar perception could be related to god(s) and aliens. Depending on mythology/religion,
who is to say gods are not aliens and vice versa. Based on the fiction of superman and other fictional stories, some are technically aliens and considered god-like compared to the control sample being a human.
So technically, a human getting wings anatomically correct to allow them to properly fly would be considered a superior form. This would imply that it could be a super power depending how far on the spectrum of super powers one would like to explore in relation to control sample being an realistic average human. It may not be as superior as magical and/or superman's gravity and physic defying ability regardless of environment but it could still be considered a super human power.
One could also debate that superpowers are just a reality not yet discovered as they are considered fiction outside of our normal perception and reality.
Heh. The second effect of this question is exactly where you went, let's call it the 'superpower fine print.' The ability to fly would allow someone without any changes to them physically be able to fly at a thousand miles per hour. Simple as that.
If you haven't guessed, this isn't just a question about invisibility or flying.
so now you're indicating because of the human being gaining the super power to fly they can automatically handle the g forces associated with its speed?
Too many variables. Beings like "superman" were able to handle their normal abilities because of their bodies being able to support it within their physical limitations. So based on that comparison, one would assume a human gaining the super power of flight would potentially be limited to their physical capabilities. Sure, objects could be moved really fast in terms of acceleration and velocity, but could their body handle it?
Perspectives and specifics. Depends where on the spectrum the definitive reasoning one wants to accept the reasoning behind such vague statements for ability preferences if having to choose one.
One could debate the source of the ability. Gained through the spectrum of magic vs mutations etc. The body mutating to accept the limitations of the power associated with the mutation could make sense but that would still have to be quite specific to the power of flying and mutation limitations. There is and should always be limitation to abilities. Just like some gods are mortal vs immortal and their spectrum of limitations. Some gods and higher beings had specific abilities compared to others depending on mythology/religion.
Not all powers are equal as their origins could vary drastically with conditions and limitations.
It might be possible you’re over-thinking this. 😆
lol. Nope, not over thinking it. Details matter.
It's like saying because your ability allows you to "fly" and/or "maneuver" in the vacuum of space that you're automatically UV radiation proof and don't need to breathe regardless of anatomy. Limitations and conditions exist for a reason.
Then it's not just the super power of flying, it's the adaptations and situational conditions that follow it.
How do you balance the pressures of running such a large project with the need for your "inner child" to have fun along the way?
We've seen plenty of game studio CEOs over the years that are largely disconnected with the creative process and just focus on the finances. What keeps your sense of enjoyment and enthusiasm at such a high level in a process that must have a large amount of technical grind to work through?
There is a huge difference between a ceo and a creative director. Big companies have finance focused ceo's because big companies have shareholders and debt. Steven has both roles and is the largest 'shareholder' in that most of the game is funded off his own money. He's the person he needs to please. Being involved as the creative director even this deep in the development process is definitely part of how he keeps his passion alive. It's a very hands on job with a lot of people sharing ideas with you. Ceo's are more relationship and structure focused. Less about hands on solutions.
I think one of my biggest take aways for how he handles the technical grind is that he actually takes an interest in learning the technical aspects like how they start a build or how servers work or what the ai bugs look like. He clearly makes a focused effort to not just 'let it be someone else's problem.' He clearly listens to his people enough to be explained these very technical grinds and makes it his job to know. Good CEOs do this but it's not that common. Once you understand the technical problem it's less an obstacle in /your/ way and more so a challenge for the team to tackle together which is less grindy than the alternative (this is me making an assumption about his mindsets but I am fairly confident in it.)
He is also pretty vocal about the way he approaches company culture. Game nights, dnd, magic, just generally being personable with the staff and taking an interest in their interests. It's an indy company so the culture requires being more of a people person than a ceo at a big company needs to be. Staff morale affects productivity directly. He is a part of the staff and keeping 'childlike wonder' and a willingness to explore in the whole staff is key to avoiding burnout in creative oriented professions. Maintaining a sense of togetherness keeps cohesion up and friction lower which keeps that 'wonder' from getting bogged down in petty politics or the grind of technical obstacles.
On top of that he is still a gamer. Creative jobs require constant input from the outside world to keep you charged up and fresh with ideas. Finance focused professions less so. There is a lot more of a feeling that there solved solutions in finance (which is less true than people think but eh.) He definitely still games regularly.
So yeah I know your question was for Steven, but watching him in q&a and other interviews makes this answer really obvious to me due to my own professional background.
https://youtube.com/watch?v=Yhr9WpjaDzw
Have to agree with all of this, but with the added point that Intrepid does have a company president/COO that is not Steven.
In a mid sized company, a COO's job (for the few mid sized companies that have one) is to basically run the company/admin side of things.
The fact that Steven has put someone in that role that he trusts implicitly tells me he isn't actually doing any of the work involved in running Intrepid Studios, the company, and is instead entirely focused on Ashes of Creation, the product.
After all, the easiest way to ensure you can focus on the creative side and not get caught up in the finances is to not bother with the finances yourself.