There are games I follow the progress of just to see how bad the train wreck gets

Diconica

Well-Known Member
Apr 25, 2020
1,135
1,187
There are games I follow the progress of just to see how bad the train wreck gets.
By train wreck I don't mean the intended direction of the stories out come on the characters.
I mean the actual development being a train wreck.

Of those I have seen a few in which the authors realized they had issues and started working to correct them.
It probably would have saved them a lot of work if they thought about the issues earlier on. Most of those issues revolving around plot and character.
Several of the games are now abandoned and I am sure a number are destined for this pile in time.
The rest survive on die hard fans and good graphics rather than a plot story line that doesn't have issues.

I'm wondering if there is anyone else who does this. Not asking you to list any games because as I learned today talking bad about a game and its development can get moderators upset at you.
 

CocoVC

Newbie
Aug 10, 2018
76
170
I check the abandoned games thread and new games for gameplay ideas. And I do watch certain trainwrecks to make a mental note on how to NOT act when facing criticism and insults.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Diconica

Carrera

Active Member
Jun 25, 2017
501
1,173
I dont' follow them or nothin', but on the rare occasion something reminds me of the game I'll check it out. It's just rare that I get reminded, lately though people have been upvoting my review on a particularly TERRIBLE NTR game, that one deserves to be deleted considering how poorly done it was.
 

kytee

Member
Dec 17, 2018
323
722
There's a couple of games here that I like to keep track of because the threads are such entertaining dumpster fires. I also like to read threads on new games where the commenters tear the dev to shreds. It's all really fucked up, but sometimes a guy's gotta get his negative energy out. I don't actually participate in the discussions though, the persona of this account is too pompous for that kinda shit.
 

woody554

Well-Known Member
Jan 20, 2018
1,558
1,940
I sometimes visit some of the threads for morbid curiosity to see the cars still piling up even years after the bus crash. it's strangely fascinating in the same sense as watching the unstoppable wall of ice tsunami being slowly driven on land by wind, crushing everything under it.
 
  • Like
Reactions: chainedpanda

F4C430

Active Member
Dec 4, 2018
650
745
It probably would have saved them a lot of work if they thought about the issues earlier on.
Software Engineering 101. Unfortunately, it's not an easy thing to do which is why there are 4-year degrees in just Software Engineering. I don't find enjoyment in watching someone's project crash and burn, but i think it's a good learning experience.
 

Diconica

Well-Known Member
Apr 25, 2020
1,135
1,187
Software Engineering 101. Unfortunately, it's not an easy thing to do which is why there are 4-year degrees in just Software Engineering. I don't find enjoyment in watching someone's project crash and burn, but i think it's a good learning experience.
It's not so much about enjoying them fail.
It's more a fascination with how people fail to learn.
More than often they get advice and when it comes to what advice they take it is often the wrong one.
The reason they take the wrong advice its pretty much what they wanted to hear.

Today I had a discussion with my son about people evacuating Houston. Most people remembered the cars that ran out of gas on the free way because of sitting so long. It wasn't long after that we had a second storm and people did the exact same thing.
They just don't learn.

They have bad behaviors of choosing to listen to people who says what they want.
They get reliant on authority. IE they are sheep. I and a many others simply used other roads.
Take I10 heading west as an example. 10 feet from I 10 running in parallel is old 90 no one drove on it. The only thing separating it was a soft shoulder no ditch. That's in the Katy area. But there are hundreds of other roads that were safe to take out of there.
Would they do it. Hell no because they wait for people to tell them what to do.

People get reliant on map systems in cars. That has caused all sorts of problems. They literally don't know what to do when it is wrong or worse they try and do what it says anyways. That's lead to a number of fatalities.

We no longer teach kids in school to solve problems the right way.
We fail to teach them to leave emotions and feelings out of problem solving often these days they are taught the opposite.
As for college degrees I haven't hired a person out of college in the last 4 years.
I consider most technical degrees today worthless. I spent way to many hours retraining people. It isn't worth the money.
For a while I kept a list of certain course based on different colleges such as UofH had a great Chemistry curriculum probably because of all the industry around here had input on it. MIT had / has good courses. Still I've seen my share come from them I wouldn't hire. Not sure what the hell is going on there now. I used to keep track of friends and staff I knew to keep apprised of various ones across the country. Not worth my time any longer.

It's vastly more effective to hire someone on a conditional base hand them a test project and see how they solve it. If they can't perform to a satisfactory level on that I let them go and don't waste time with them. I've showed that to companies I consult with and partner with as well. I noticed even other companies I haven't worked with have started adopting some similar methods.

Only 27 percent of people with degrees work in their field. Most of those working out side of their degree field don't really make any more money. As for those in their degree field well I never finished my degree and used to get a lot of shit because I demanded often 2 or 3 times what others got around me and I got paid it. It especially pissed them off more when they found out I was only there for a short term basis to solve problems. Companies will hire and pay for you as long as they know you have skills they need and want to make use of.

Also you will here people say shit like specialize in some language or field. BS. I made what I made by knowing as much as I can about a lot of shit. It allows me to see how things connect better a more encompassing picture if you will. The only real draw back to it is that I have to keep up on all those things as things change. So I'm always learning. It also means when I talk to my employees I know when I am being fed horse shit or an excuse.

Anyway I like when a developer breaks my expectations and goes back and starts actually fixing their issues.
Out of around 45 I tracked over the last while I only seen 2 do so. I mean really fix issues not just patch a few bugs.
 

kzaazul

Member
Aug 4, 2020
128
270
There's a couple of games here that I like to keep track of because the threads are such entertaining dumpster fires. I also like to read threads on new games where the commenters tear the dev to shreds. It's all really fucked up, but sometimes a guy's gotta get his negative energy out. I don't actually participate in the discussions though, the persona of this account is too pompous for that kinda shit.
You know, I kinda feel bad for devs when I ready people tearing into them, but you're correct in saying people just need to get their bad vibes out, specially in these times.
 

Diconica

Well-Known Member
Apr 25, 2020
1,135
1,187
You know, I kinda feel bad for devs when I ready people tearing into them, but you're correct in saying people just need to get their bad vibes out, specially in these times.
Every writer and developer has to pay their dues at some point. Those that don't are very lucky or watched over.
Writers only get better by the feedback when they look at good feed back.
Same goes for most software developers.
 
  • Like
Reactions: kzaazul
Jan 9, 2021
96
271
Once in a blue moon you'll see a dev actually take criticism to heart and fix their game. For the most part, however, they don't really care all that much, they're much more preoccupied with publishing small bug fixes or small "content" updates to create the illusion that they're working and placate their patrons.
I get it, game dev is hard work, but are you really telling me in a month's work all you did was fix some typos and added a couple new lines of dialogue? Fuck off with that.
 

Fzeren

Member
Sep 25, 2020
230
681
Also you will here people say shit like specialize in some language or field. BS. I made what I made by knowing as much as I can about a lot of shit. It allows me to see how things connect better a more encompassing picture if you will.
Let's say I want to get a job in the field of X. How do I go about doing that? A university education would show my employer that I have the relevant expertise, but according to you, uni is bullshit. Okay, so no university, so how do I go about doing it? How do I prove to my potential employer that I have the skills they're looking for? Again, according to you, by telling them that I'm self-taught, and hoping they'll hire me on a conditional basis and give me a mock assignment.

And how do I get them to do that? For all they know, they're wasting their time on somebody who's trying to get a job for which they're not qualified, and they no doubt have multiple applicants anyway. What do you think is more likely; That they'll waste their time on a person who is likely either a liar or conceited, or filter out the applicants who don't have any proof of their supposed skills?

This is not an actual question. You're not going to give any answer that actually relates to how the job market works 99.9% of the time, and I certainly don't expect an honest answer from somebody so weasily as to not even admit to schadenfreude. This is just me venting because arrogant people saying blatantly stupid things frustrates me.
 

Diconica

Well-Known Member
Apr 25, 2020
1,135
1,187
Let's say I want to get a job in the field of X. How do I go about doing that? A university education would show my employer that I have the relevant expertise, but according to you, uni is bullshit. Okay, so no university, so how do I go about doing it? How do I prove to my potential employer that I have the skills they're looking for? Again, according to you, by telling them that I'm self-taught, and hoping they'll hire me on a conditional basis and give me a mock assignment.

And how do I get them to do that? For all they know, they're wasting their time on somebody who's trying to get a job for which they're not qualified, and they no doubt have multiple applicants anyway. What do you think is more likely; That they'll waste their time on a person who is likely either a liar or conceited, or filter out the applicants who don't have any proof of their supposed skills?

This is not an actual question. You're not going to give any answer that actually relates to how the job market works 99.9% of the time, and I certainly don't expect an honest answer from somebody so weasily as to not even admit to schadenfreude. This is just me venting because arrogant people saying blatantly stupid things frustrates me.
Don't get me wrong there are things university is the right answer for doctors.
Those who plan a career in research and not practical application depending on the field college can be a good answer.
Law because of the rules and laws in most states or countries makes that the primary or sole means of getting into it.
That said I know for a fact they had a off books bar test done a while back with people who studied on their own time and its percentage of people who pasted exceeds a certain California university. Kind of makes me think maybe we could find better lawyers if those rules were amended to just require passing the bar exam.

There are a number of ways you can build skills with out university.
Military, Trade schools, Adult education systems, OJT, intern...
A hell of a lot of companies like to promote from with in and have relaxed requirements for those working there.
A good number of other companies have on their job announcements things like work replacements for education or ability to demonstrate skills...
That brings us to another option for learning do it yourself. Most college professors aren't going to spend a lot of one on one time with you. So how are you learning. Well they give you books hold a few lectures and give you a number of assignments to figure out on your own in most cases. Then there are the labs.

If you really think you need that degree at the end of it apply for a life's work through Edison university in the field you want.
It will cost you a few thousand dollars but it is fully credited. They aren't a paper mill either.
That's a hell of a lot cheaper than paying the full curriculum.
You aren't going to get away with a half ass level of knowledge they fully expect you to prove you have the knowledge document the work you done in it.

Colleges don't teach you the skills you need. That's a misconception. If they did we employers wouldn't have to spend 9 to 15 months on average training you college graduates. Yea, seriously I wish what you said was the case. But it is total bull.
Do yourself a favor and research how many college graduates actually work in their field.
How many actually manage to succeed after college.

I'll hire someone out of the US Naval Nuclear power program before a college degree even without them having any training in the field. The reason is simple they will learn. They will do the job the way they are told and right and can make sound decisions when left on their own.

There are people who went the garage way who are more successful than most college graduates. They chose to learn. They had more time and money to dedicate to learning because while they held a job they were wasting it paying absorbent fees to a university. For the money you pay a college you can build an awesome as hell lab at home.

If you want to get into electrical start of working for an electric company. Get decent pay learn on the job and study at home NFPA doesn't take much to learn.

Comp Science. Buy a cheap computer learn to program. used pc $35 will get you in the door. I put together a full stack when I started out for a few hundred. Now there is an HP reliant server sitting 4feet from me on my office floor not in use even. I have a dozen smaller servers set around my house. You can rent rack space in a data center for a rack for about 450 a month if shop around. Learn front end and back end. Seriously, nothing like showing up at the door of a company showing you have a working demo of that nature to prove you can do the work.

Chemistry again home lab. Get a job working for someone like TI or an oil company on the ground floor it will pay for you to learn. They will most likely send you to internal classes and offer then to pay for college if that is what you want. You'll learn faster at home. You want to make sure to pay attention to the safety portion of chemistry like your life depends on it. It really does.

A lot of entry level jobs you can get with certificates in various things. A lot of community colleges allow you to get credit by exam. Use that to get in and learn on the job.

Most the time it comes down to proving to the employer you actually have an aptitude for the work and that you are trainable.
I once new a guy who took a test for Texas Instruments equipment engineering over 10 times before they ever promoted him into it.



Honestly, you have a better chance of being successful opening your own business than trying college if you use your head.
Most small business fail because of stupidity. Trying to expand to fast and take on to much debt and other similar issues.
Like trying to rent a building on the very first day of business when you have no customers. Never having tested the market ability of their product or service. 2 in 3 business fail do to


Owe another good thing about building and buying and repairing lab equipment for yourself. You can actually find a job doing that also. Your work at home will usually get you in the door.

Want to work with robotics. Learn industrial controls. PLCs programmable logic controllers. They are used a lot when it comes to industrial automation. Add to that the electrical and servo systems. It doesn't hurt to also learn pneumatic and hydraulic systems and controls.

In general when I used to go to job interviews I had a portfolio of my work I could show the employer. I also researched the employer and what the actual job entailed. Thus I could show in what ways my work was relevant to the job I was interested.
 

Dushniy

Member
Game Developer
Apr 5, 2021
270
661
You can never quite pull your eyes away from a car crash, could you?
Or maybe you go through a hotel hallway and one door is open. It's impossible not to look.
Anyway, yeah, it is fun to see some people shit the bed, especially if they were... not honest people to begin with.
 

woody554

Well-Known Member
Jan 20, 2018
1,558
1,940
While I disagree on a lot of stuff said about how people 'nowadays' are worse at X, I'll have to agree that I stopped interviewing applicants a decade ago because it just wastes my time. nothing they say in the interview means anything, and the CV is almost as useless. it's a performance, we're the audience, and the reality of their skill level seems to only have a strained relationship with their performance. probably most people who have hired hundreds or thousands of people can agree.

what I now do instead is pick one up based on application, avoid too smooth ones because it's just bullshit, and I make my decision based on if it seems at all likely that the person might have what it takes. then they get one trial day to show it, just throw them into the deep end and see if they drown. usually you see in 5 minutes whether someone can do it or not, which a 2 hour interview does not tell you.

and the ones who are good in the first 5 minutes, tend to become great. even if they start with very little. but their background can be just about anything. (I don't think education is useless, but the diploma you get for it doesn't mean shit in real world. you either did it well or not, but the grades don't tell the story. you can have top grades and be absolutely useless. and a drop out can be amazing.)

it seems to be more about your personality than your education. the good ones you can throw into pretty much anything, and they'll figure it out very quickly. and the bad ones, doesn't matter how much experience they have under their belt, they'll never become good. over years you can train them to become mediocre at best, but they'll never be good.

and it's not about intelligence either. some people can be very simple, yet still just amazing workers who you can always depend on. you never know until you see people in action.
 

ddakkal

Newbie
Jun 23, 2018
24
152
While I disagree on a lot of stuff said about how people 'nowadays' are worse at X, I'll have to agree that I stopped interviewing applicants a decade ago because it just wastes my time. nothing they say in the interview means anything, and the CV is almost as useless. it's a performance, we're the audience, and the reality of their skill level seems to only have a strained relationship with their performance. probably most people who have hired hundreds or thousands of people can agree.

what I now do instead is pick one up based on application, avoid too smooth ones because it's just bullshit, and I make my decision based on if it seems at all likely that the person might have what it takes. then they get one trial day to show it, just throw them into the deep end and see if they drown. usually you see in 5 minutes whether someone can do it or not, which a 2 hour interview does not tell you.

and the ones who are good in the first 5 minutes, tend to become great. even if they start with very little. but their background can be just about anything. (I don't think education is useless, but the diploma you get for it doesn't mean shit in real world. you either did it well or not, but the grades don't tell the story. you can have top grades and be absolutely useless. and a drop out can be amazing.)

it seems to be more about your personality than your education. the good ones you can throw into pretty much anything, and they'll figure it out very quickly. and the bad ones, doesn't matter how much experience they have under their belt, they'll never become good. over years you can train them to become mediocre at best, but they'll never be good.

and it's not about intelligence either. some people can be very simple, yet still just amazing workers who you can always depend on. you never know until you see people in action.
Just dropping someone into the deep water doesn't mean he would be a good worker for your company even if he succeeds tremendously..

Eventually, the interview process is also for yourself, to get the "vibes" of the applicant and to look if he is somebody you would be able to work with and not some arrogant, selfish or some weirdo who wouldn't fit with your team or company. You want to make sure the best you can he would blend in your company culture. I'm not saying the interview will indicate it in 100% but it will give you some idea - especially if the application process is about 4-5 interviews like in most of the high tech companies.

Moreover, of course high grades won't say a lot but they can at least indicate about a person who learns fast, who takes seriously what he does even if he isn't 100% into it (saying from my experience - there were courses I despised, but still put all of me into it. like your employee will have tasks he will despise, but how will he handle it, now when he doesn't have to prove himself like in his first assignment, will he tackle it the best he can? or will he slack and progress slowly or try to avoid doing it by procrastinating?)

Finally, taking somebody to work for you is a gamble in any way you look at it. So to reduce the odds you will miss the gamble the above are necessary IMO if you don't have another source of applicants, like if somebody you trust highly vouches for someone he knows or somebody who has strong presence in his field.
 

woody554

Well-Known Member
Jan 20, 2018
1,558
1,940
yeah, well. have you hired a lot of people? because after doing it for a years you develop a lot of shorthand for it. you instantly know when you're being manipulated. like when the applicant tells you they're team players and hard workers, you know they're liars. which is kinda what I meant with the too smooth applications. it's a sign of dishonesty, nobody is that perfect.

I've done if both ways, hiring 1000+ people over last 25 years. this is what I do now because it works better and wastes very little of my time.

of course the best sign is if someone you know vouches for them. people almost never suggest applicants unless they know they're great workers.
 

GingerSweetGirl

Engaged Member
Aug 23, 2020
2,530
12,155
I get my negative energy out with threads where it's clear the dev is scamming or conning the audience. Devs that are struggling or in over their heads don't give me much pleasure because there's a sense of honesty and good faith effort. But in situations where there's a clear bad faith effort, yeah I enjoy watching those devs catch hell.
 
  • Haha
Reactions: Julius Ash

DaScoot

Member
Game Developer
Jul 8, 2017
238
256
As big as it was, I was watching Breeding Season for at least the last six months before it crashed just as an example of what not to do. For all of the incredible amounts of money it was bringing in, it was being run like a college homework assignment and not a game development project. Every single release was late, and when it was up, it was either buggy as hell or so light on real content that it felt like the dev was trying to do a month's worth of work in the last week before release.

Honestly seeing a train wreck like that bring in $30k+ a month was very motivating for starting my own project.
 

Diconica

Well-Known Member
Apr 25, 2020
1,135
1,187
Just dropping someone into the deep water doesn't mean he would be a good worker for your company even if he succeeds tremendously..

Eventually, the interview process is also for yourself, to get the "vibes" of the applicant and to look if he is somebody you would be able to work with and not some arrogant, selfish or some weirdo who wouldn't fit with your team or company. You want to make sure the best you can he would blend in your company culture. I'm not saying the interview will indicate it in 100% but it will give you some idea - especially if the application process is about 4-5 interviews like in most of the high tech companies.

Moreover, of course high grades won't say a lot but they can at least indicate about a person who learns fast, who takes seriously what he does even if he isn't 100% into it (saying from my experience - there were courses I despised, but still put all of me into it. like your employee will have tasks he will despise, but how will he handle it, now when he doesn't have to prove himself like in his first assignment, will he tackle it the best he can? or will he slack and progress slowly or try to avoid doing it by procrastinating?)

Finally, taking somebody to work for you is a gamble in any way you look at it. So to reduce the odds you will miss the gamble the above are necessary IMO if you don't have another source of applicants, like if somebody you trust highly vouches for someone he knows or somebody who has strong presence in his field.
People pretend to be everything but who they are most the times in interviews. They are on good behavior. You really don't see who they are until they feel comfortable and let their guard down some.
Maybe if you are good enough at picking up on micro-expressions you can detect that deception. One way of doing it is video tape the interview with a closeup on the face. That means taking extra time going back through the interview after the fact and watching the video to tell what they were deceptive on.
There are problems with sociopaths don't reflect it easily. In fact all the expressions you see from them are trained ones they want you to see. Also various drugs can reduce expressions and emotions. Also things like Botox can mask them.

Most high tech jobs I did the company called me in and the process was this is who you will be working with. In fact the last company said here is a test take it. 20 minutes after that they said we have an offer for you. No interview at all. In fact the longest interview process I ever went through was for a specific government agency. I came into the interview. The guy says look I called you in here today not for this job but one we have opening up 1 month from now. It pays more and your skills more align with it. The reasons I say it was the longest well I had to fill out two applications and wait a month.

High grades aren't that great of indicator of how a person performs.
It shows mostly short term memory retention and not long term learning or practical application.
Their inability to apply what they were taught is demonstrated in the post graduation records such as number of people working in their own degree field and high unemployment among current graduates.
A student with medium grades that sticks it out is a better indicator of someone who won't quit.
Often you will find that same person's grades are that low because of what else was going in their lives.
Sorry the guy who got a huge college loan or grant and didn't have to worry about paying bills and didn't work through college better have a 90+ average or what the fuck were they doing? I'd rather have the person who had a world of shit on their plate and kept going regardless what their grades are like.

There are other source or ways to find people. Active recruiting. You know scouting out employees of other companies and government agencies or even the military. It really isn't hard to find competent employees. It's a lot harder to find competent college graduates.