[QUOTE=Elecbullet;46608496]
You can criticize the study as you please, but I don't see anything to make me dismiss out of hand the claim that girls would be better than boys at making video games.[/QUOTE]
Poor logic.
I also see nothing to support the argument that girls are better than boys at making videogames.
[QUOTE=itisjuly;46608505]Poor logic.
I also see nothing to support the argument that girls are better than boys at making videogames.[/QUOTE]
Well, that's fine logic.
[editline]30th November 2014[/editline]
Like I said, you can criticize the study and its claims; the other guys seemed to just be dismissing them out of hand with bad reasoning.
[QUOTE]However, the industry has been blighted with accusations of misogyny and harassment after female game developer Zoe Quinn became the target of abuse when her former boyfriend accused her of cheating on him with a games journalist, under the social media hashtag[/QUOTE]
Oh so that's why it felt like the article was trying so hard to prove some ulterior motive
[QUOTE=Elecbullet;46608537]Well, that's fine logic.
[editline]30th November 2014[/editline]
Like I said, you can criticize the study and its claims; the other guys seemed to just be dismissing them out of hand with bad reasoning.[/QUOTE]
The fact that this "study" is a poor click and shitstorm bait should be enough valid reason to dismiss it.
[QUOTE=Venezuelan;46608447]shitty tabloid makes sensationalist conclusion from innocuous non-conclusive study, facepunch perpetuates story to have something to be mad about and make sweet gamergate jokes, all while giving tabloid sweet sweet revenue and the cycle continues[/QUOTE]
this is yet another clear example of the corrupt feminist journalism elite running their misinformation campaign to kill videogames
Honestly, studies like this don't exactly help promote equality.
Yeah there's this one girl called Zoe Quinn and she's just the best at making games.
[QUOTE=Doom64hunter;46608718]Honestly, studies like this don't exactly help promote equality.[/QUOTE]
studies like this are done all the time, sometimes they're helpful to learn about psychological or neurological differences between boys and girls and whatnot. it's not really the researchers' fault that a shitty tabloid took their study and put a stupid sensationalist spin on it.
While this study is based on the activities of a couple of secondary school students, if this is true that would actually be kinda neat. Even if feminists spin it as "this is why you should be more accepting of girl developers", I would not object to it if it meant having more women in games development, especially considering that, at least in England, there aren't as many programmers nowadays thanks to the shit IT classes we had when I was 12-13.
just because something is more complex doesn't mean its better, especially if the game is unfun
[QUOTE=jiggu;46608570]Oh so that's why it felt like the article was trying so hard to prove some ulterior motive[/QUOTE]
Christ, talk about confirmation bias.
[QUOTE=papaya;46608116]at that sort of basic level I wouldn't call it 'programming'
I also wouldn't say complexity is an indicator of quality
[img]http://www.flipproject.org.uk/www/virtual_hosts/flip/wp-content/flip-screenshot.png[/img]
probably an old version (from 2011) but this is what the interface looks like
it's just one of those drag n drop things like gamemaker. It's not really real coding, just the concept of it.[/QUOTE]
Even gamemaker is more complex than that
[QUOTE=ilikecorn;46608133]The best code is the least complicated that gets the most done.. If anything too much complexity is an indicator of a poor coder. IE: why use 50 lines of code when you can use 15 and do the same thing.[/QUOTE]
Depends on your intentions, though. Sometimed those 50 lines of code may be better laid out and have extendability the 15 lines wouldn't, laying down a solid foundation and all that.
hey everybody lets all just cut out the middleman and just shit directly on our keyboards because that's going to have about the same effect as any discussion on this topic.
[QUOTE=FurrehFaux;46608078]Because your gender obviously affects how well you can code and isn't dependent on the person at all.[/QUOTE]
You can make factual statements about statistical averages.
To phrase them as "Girls are better than boys at making video games" based on a single observation from a single class of 12 year olds is a headline befitting the section title.
Complexity is a bad indicator of coding, by most standards, unless they were tested on the facepunch obfuscation challenge.
A large tree of nested if statements is a complex way to account for a lot of different conditionals, but there are often better selection sequences to use that save on performance and make code more readable.
Also, the "smarter" way to program is also often less efficient. Recursion may impress people with your knowledge of syntax and ability to visualize how a program works, but it can be more costly than a simple iterative version of the same function.
Ultimately, programming is like speaking a language, and the better coder is the one with more practice.
Also I'd like to see a study that didn't use a 5th-level language which requires no amount of mathematical modeling or syntax. Dumbing down the study to make it easier for the groups to compete with one-another is NOT scientific.
can we stop with the girl/guy better at x than guy/girl
[QUOTE=Michael haxz;46609552]can we stop with the girl/guy better at x than guy/girl[/QUOTE]
no because wee have to prove the sexes are equal
Isnt doing a job with the least amount of of complexity a good thing in programming? You want to take the least amount of work possible to do whatever it is you need to do, so just pure complexity doesn't matter much.
[QUOTE=Elecbullet;46608496]Poor logic
Poor logic
You can criticize the study as you please, but I don't see anything to make me dismiss out of hand the claim that girls would be better than boys at making video games.[/QUOTE]
"Programming" triggers and judging quality by complexity is a very poor marker, maybe a boy writes one trigger with a huge back story or a girl strings 50 one sentence triggers together, by that example the girl is superior even though the boys may be qualitatively better
Literally they are making a conclusion based off of a difference in style, I've read books from authors with a hundred chapters 5 pages long and 500 page books 5 chapters long, neither is quantitatively better if they both are qualitatively good
[editline]30th November 2014[/editline]
Also from the little programming I do, the less things going on at once the better
[QUOTE=elowin;46608154]lol
the only thing this study proves is that girls on average care more about school projects than boys do.
we already knew this.[/QUOTE]
so is that why i never give 2 shits on school projects that were supposedly "very important"?
[QUOTE=Rika-chan;46608954]Even gamemaker is more complex than that[/QUOTE]
I think he's just stating that Game Maker has a similar drag-and-drop interface for certain actions, as Game Maker does feature the ability to code in a writing system that somewhat resembles C++ with the cleanliness of Python. (though it does handle some things oddly, most of what I've wanted to do with the program is possible either directly, an in-program workaround or by having it check an external file coded in another language. At the very least, it's certainly capable of professional work for 2D user programs, and has been used for several indie games on Steam.)
Weird, because the vast majority of girls on gaming courses at my university are on Animation or Art courses. Design is like a snakepit.
[QUOTE=Mellowbloom;46609768]Weird, because the vast majority of girls on gaming courses at my university are on Animation or Art courses. Design is like a snakepit.[/QUOTE]
well if nothing else that means at least girls who want to work in games are less likely to pick the most worthless major
I wouldn't mind if this brought more women into EE or CS. We only have 4 female CS majors overall.
I think a lot of people in this thread are missing the point, I can't tell if it's intentional. What they are saying is that girls could do better in programming if the approach to learning programming was different. If learning to program incorporated what girls are good at, then they'll not only be more interested in it but also possibly even have potential to do better than boys.
If girls tell more elaborate stories, and you tie storytelling to programming, then their skills will be stressed much more and therefore increase faster. Starting them off with a "Hello World" approach is the exact opposite of this. How many 'learn to code' websites, books, and classes all start with that kind of simplistic first step? Most that I've seen.
If you were going to teach someone to play the piano, it might be best to start by teaching basic music theory, and how to read music. With other people you need to start by showing them how to play a song immediately. That hooks them and gets them enthusiastic about learning, then you teach the other stuff. Same with programming.
I tried to teach one of my friends who is female python, she was really interested in it but failed to understand basic concepts of programming even if explained rigorously.
On the other hand my mom is one of the best programmers I know.
This article is bullshit. People are different, and no member of a gender shares intrinsic competence with each others. We are a sentient species, not ants for fucks sake.
[QUOTE=NeverGoWest;46609948]I tried to teach one of my friends who is female python, she was really interested in it but failed to understand basic concepts of programming even if explained rigorously.
On the other hand my mom is one of the best programmers I know.
This article is bullshit. People are different, and no member of a gender shares intrinsic competence with each others. We are a sentient species, not ants for fucks sake.[/QUOTE]
Did you try this article's suggested approach? Use something like Scratch. It sounds just like Flip, except you don't need to install a game like Neverwinter Nights. It's visually oriented so she won't be put off by having to learn the language's syntax. She should be able to create something and have it running right away with your help. Meanwhile, once she's done some basic things, you can then explain those concepts while being able to directly relate them to the simple program she has already made. Explaining something concrete is always easier than trying to explain an abstract concept.
[QUOTE=ilikecorn;46608133]The best code is the least complicated that gets the most done.. If anything too much complexity is an indicator of a poor coder. IE: why use 50 lines of code when you can use 15 and do the same thing.[/QUOTE]
LOC is the worst fucking indicator for code complexity, ever.
Functions are often split up into more and more new lines to keep everything readable, and easy to understand.
feminists should do something about women and STEM majors (the ones that actually get you a job) but they don't. they're like women in the 1800s who would tell you that working at home was the natural order of things and that they prefer it to be that way. they're not ready yet. maybe for their d-day attack they should launch some sort of "it is not ugly to be smart" campaign where they stigmatize being a ditsy fucking idiot like a lot of women purposefully try to be. give it twenty years.
Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.
