The second week of the course presented a definition of Creativity, gave some applications, and offered a challenge that put me outside of my comfort zone.
The second week started with a review of creativity definition and tooling. Something that I studied when I did Graphic Design in Brazil.
I remember that time I got interested in the definition of Creativity. I got distracted from the work of this week. I spend some time on google scholar reading some reviews about Creativity. A systematic review of Creativity Measuring presented a Creativity definition and reviewed the most common perspective of this analysis (Said-Metwaly, Noortgate and Kyndt, 2017). It was amazing to read this kind of work, and a the same time, it was frightening. I felt like facing a challenge that I’ll not be able to surpass.
Reviewing the techniques
Some of them I was already familiar with for a long time, like Brainstorm, Collage, and Mind maps.
And something new like:
- Opposite thinking
- Mash-up
- Crazy-8
- SCAMPER
I can barely explain the Crazy-8 and already forgot most of the steps of SCAMPER. I’ll need some time to internalize them as techniques that I can appropriate myself. However, Mash-up and Opposite Thinking sparked my interest.
I focused on the first one and applied it to my challenge. And this was amazing. This technique consists of a systematic approach to review the basic assumptions over a problem. Through 6 steps/interaction timeboxed (~10 minutes). I provide a solid framework to rethink a question from a different perspective.
The introduction of a new approach helped me to find new possibilities. But I didn’t abandon the one that I’m familiar with mind-map. I use it as part of my work routine and couldn’t leave it.
The last topic about computational Creativity was the most distant of my practice. And for that, I feel that I could apply some studies. I felt into a procedural level generation code to a game jam that I’m working. I added it to my future projects.
And a different approach
After some time spent on a course provided by Unity (Design and Publish Your Original Game: Unity USC Games Unlocked), I discovered the concept of Concentric Design. It consists of a circle of interaction over an idea to build a game, and it resembles a lot how SCRUM and other Agile methodologies discuss interactions and time boxes. Again other concepts that I spent some time reading but yet without enough domain about it. In opposition it sound to me a little bit odd for how long this method is used in Game Industry.
Struggled in fears
My main struggle for this week was sitting and do the challenge. I spent to much time to find a theme. And at the end, I got afraid to produce my solution after see so many entries on the forum. I think this was another critical part of the process: stop to compare myself to others. My learning process is different. Sometimes it will be better, sometimes not that good.
References:
historyofhowweplay, V., 2020. How Do You Make A Game?: A Look At Design Documents Throughout History. [online] The History of How We Play. Available at: <https://thehistoryofhowweplay.wordpress.com/2018/06/16/how-do-you-make-a-game-a-look-at-design-documents-throughout-history/> [Accessed 13 October 2020].
Internet Archive. 2020. GDM June 2002 : UBM Techweb : Free Download, Borrow, And Streaming : Internet Archive. [online] Available at: <https://archive.org/details/GDM_June_2002/page/n17/mode/2up> [Accessed 13 October 2020].
Said-Metwaly, S., Noortgate, W. and Kyndt, E., 2017. Approaches to Measuring Creativity: A Systematic Literature Review. Creativity. Theories – Research – Applications, 4(2), pp.238-275.
Lucas Souza 