A game engine programmer walks into a bar…

A game engine programmer walks into a bar, asks for a beer or two and starts chatting, especially with that green eyed hot girl. After some small talk she asks him what he’s doing for a living. “Oh I work in a video game company you know…” “Oh really, that sounds cool! And what do you do there?” And there it comes. He can try changing the topic, being mysterious, accidentally spilling his glass, or he can try to answer that question without sounding soporific.

About a year ago a colleague asked me how you would explain to someone who is not in the video game industry – not in software, not even in anything related to technology for that matter, to a normal person you know – what your job consists in when you work on a game engine. “Well it’s… blah blah…” Nah, too long, it’s already boring. The explanation should be brief, easy to get and possibly sort of cool. After a couple of tries we agreed on a description we thought worked.

Working on a game engine is like building a stadium.

Once you have a stadium, you can have all sorts of games played inside: football, basketball, athletics… All you need are rules and some equipment, and then the players can get in. Just like in a game, once you have the engine, all you need are the logic and the assets. You could even have a gig. But you might not be able to have ice hockey or swimming competitions if your stadium is not meant for it. Just like a game engine allows certain kinds of games and not others.

I found this metaphor to come in handy when, you know, talking to normal people about what you do. Now for the rest of the conversation with the hot girl (or hot guy, no sexism here), that’s up to you. ;-)

Résumé d'une soirée Flickr

Paperman, by Disney

I was delighted to discover the last Disney short film, Paperman, which was released to the public a few days ago. Almost completely in black and white, with a hint of red, this animation a small gem of directing.

If I may try myself at a analyzing the image, notice how the light is used to support the story.

The guy is lit according to his mood: a strong but soft rim light when he is happy, a dim and dull ambient light at work, a strong and harsh side light when the moment is intense. Notice for example how his face has soft shadows at the office, but strong shadows right before he runs. Notice too how the paper planes pull him from the shadow back into the light.

The woman is lit depending on how unreachable she gets: the more difficult she is to reach, the less lit she is. As she gets in her train, she is surrounded by shadow. Similarly, when she is seen from the window, the whole building is bright, drawing attention to her, but the room is still dark as she is unreachable. As the paper planes get closer, she gets more and more light. When she passes the door, she gets back in the shadow.

Of course when they reach each other and finally meet, they both are in the light.

The science gap

I mentioned before the video by cartoonist Jorge Cham, illustrating the explanations of a CERN researcher on the Large Hadron Collider and the Higgs boson. This video was great and explained in layman’s terms the matter (pun intended) of this huge research project.

Today I watched a TEDx talk by Jorge Cham, tackling with what he refers to as the science gap, between the people who do science, and the general public. A part of his talk explains the story behind the Higgs Boson animation, and this story alone makes the talk worth watching.

Featured on the new Flickr iPhone App

Three days ago one of my photos on Flickr was invited by the Yahoo! staff in a group for some news related use. I had no real idea where it would end up and supposed it could be an illustration for an article or maybe their blog. I accepted nonetheless.

E

Yesterday I was delighted to hear from a contact that my photo appeared in the trailer of the new Flickr App for iPhone.

> 100

There are only a few days left until this blog turns one year old, and today, according to Feedburner, it has 104 feed subscriptions. 103 plus the one I use to check everything is working fine. That doesn’t really mean anything: it first went above 100 about two or three weeks ago, to fall back immediately after, and did so a few more times, just like it probably will in the upcoming days. But still, symbolic number and all that.

To continue with figures, this post is the 88th, and there 14 comments so far, not many but of a great value on average (of course that doesn’t include the hundreds that get filtered every week by the spam filter). By the way, you see that cliff near the center? It was in May and I believe it was due to a mention from Timothy Lottes on his blog. The number of subscribers basically almost doubled in a week.

A quote stuck in my head after a friend of mine was being sarcastic about new blogs: “let’s see if it’s still alive after 50 posts and as many subscribers”, he said (or something close; that was years ago). So I guess this blog is well alive by these standards.

Anyway, I just meant to thank you all for reading.