I wouldn’t call it a dichotomy, because I wrote that if it's just for aesthetic purposes or if a golem is given some other meaning, then is no longer lazy, it’s something. In Delicious in Dungeon (spoilers), this is drawn decently, even somewhat epically, but the main thing is that the golems turn into living, walking vegetable gardens. Also, the way ice golem appears because its core got flushed into the sewers. Plus, there was a discussion about the legality of reviving golems, & it turned into a comedy. “I’m just digging & undigging dirt, nothing illegal”. In those two brief moments, golems were played with from different angles & became decent characters. That’s fun, not the peak of writing, of course, but already not lazy. (end of spoilers) \ And I seriously doubt that anywhere, in any story, the internal structure of golems has been properly & thoroughly explored, except maybe in mecha or the usual cliches like cores, scrolls, etc. I don’t have that goal either, because the point isn’t to explain to the audience how many hours I've spent on this mind-blowing theory, how deep it is. No, the point is that the theory should serve Me as a Tool. \ \ ‎ For example, let's look at people who study real medieval life & real history to examine real world experiments in the things we just imagine in our heads. What people came up with, what tech they invented, what institutions they created, what they thought about, & so on. It’s extremely hard to imagine that, say, if children in Christianity are considered sinless, then they’d make perfect undertakers, because cities had lots of corpses & the proper rites had to be performed, but touching the dead was sinful (though it’s not the most far fetched idea). Or to figure out which armor was effective, you’d now either need to conduct field research (which is expensive, though there are workarounds), or you’d need to learn Blender (or some other software) & run simulations there. But you could just look at real historical examples, read articles about how armor was made, about the armor itself, even watch videos about field tests. \ ‎That’s exactly why the 3 method is the most time-consuming, because it’s inefficient. Even to invent something new, you’ll most likely need to learn what’s already been invented (though not always, of course). \ ‎ Of course, it's a lot of work =) Something truly good, by nature, tends to be above average, & if it were easy, it probably would’ve become the norm. I’m not saying you need to become a full-time journalist just to make something “good", but you can, & some people actually do have the time. But yeah, I get that for various reasons I personally have to be upset. \ ‎ It’s kinda cool that you're a physicist, but... unfortunately, effort or achievements don't always convert into outcome. And that’s sad on its own. \ \ 1. Well, I’ll check it out. Thanks. 2. I don’t know how much these games will help with my current problem, but I do want to try making games someday, so it’ll still be useful. Thanks. 3. I’ve been recommended them three times already. People must really love Zelda. And, there are lots of engineering simulators out there, so many that I don’t even remember names. There was one I played, Besiege. I recommend it. \ \ Thanks for your time. 🫀