Thoughts of Jonathan Blow? Is Jai just going to be paul graham's arc all over again for system level languages?
 CRIME Shirt $21.68 |
 |
CRIME Shirt $21.68 |
Thoughts of Jonathan Blow? Is Jai just going to be paul graham's arc all over again for system level languages?
>Daily Jai shill thread
Adding to filter list.
>Is Jai just going to be paul graham's arc all over again for system level languages?
No, it's going to be nothing like Arc. Jai actually has very practical and useful features meant to solve very specific problems identified from real game dev experience.
Arc was almost the opposite, in terms of being obsessed with ideological concerns over practical features. http://www.paulgraham.com/hundred.html
Given the number of lame shitposting that always shows up, it seems reasonable to suggest that it's a shitposting thread not a shill thread.
I think jai is gonna have trouble competing with zig, since both cover a similar design space
Yeah I'm not predicting Jai will be a definite success. I don't know. But Arc (and Bel) are basically theoretical exercises about abstract language design in a modern world full of abstract dynamic languages.
>actually has very practical and useful features meant to solve very specific problems identified from real game dev experience.
Like?
https://www.forrestthewoods.com/blog/learning-jai-via-advent-of-code/
And bear in mind that certain language advantages can be very hard to articulate without experience, if it has to do with consistency and how everything fits together rather than a list of bullet points like "compiler directive #complete requires using all values of an enum in a switch"
I've read that article
I haven't seen any gamedev specific problems the language claims to solve
> Jai actually has very practical and useful features meant to solve very specific problems identified from real game dev experience.
The few features it has are routinely implemented by macros or templates in C or C++ respectively. He just doesn't know shit about programming so he decided to reinvent the wheel for what amounts to implementing a library. This is hilarious to me because there ARE shittons of features that could be added to a gamedev language to fix painpoints a real gamedev (i.e. not him) could have issues with (there's a reason other game devs can make a fast game in 3 years with their own engine and just 1-2 devs, while he got a whole team and made a slow as molasses shitshow in 8 years despite how ridiculously simple the game was), yet he doesn't implement any of them.
you're a lucky woman, he looks like a balding christian bale
>It's not hard to make X you just have to know how to program and do Y
>spends years and years on programming language
Guess it wasn't as easy as you thought eh jon
cope
he wanted to create a language that he would use for games
and now he's writing his new game in it. It's a success
>now he's writing his new game in it
Really? I don't really like Jon, but I do love when people channel their will into a project. Congrats Jon, you've earned it.
The witness is so excellent, he has earned my purchase on any future game he puts out day 1.
I recently started watching his programming streams, surprised how easy they were to follow.
I like people with opinions, they are interesting. Jai will probably not be big but if it has as much thought as the witness out into it it might turn out to be something beautiful.
Kek. Nice try blow, j. Nobody thinks of the witness as anything but a joke. Runs worse than chang's asset swap in unity despite using a fraction of the geometry, assets, shaders, and poo code. Plays even worse, a one trick pony of a game. You will never make a good game, blow.
>i cant run it on my crapple
ok.
It ran on my very mediocre PC built in 2020 at like 500FPS, the frick kinda rig are you running?
>2016 game runs on brand new 2020 hardware (no evidence)
Shill harder
heard he a twitch streamer now
The Witness is rubbish but it did inspire someone to create The Looker, which was actually really good. I guess he can get some credit for that.
His rants are fun to listen to on occasion, even when he doesn't really know what he's talking about. Some of his talks are good too. No, not that one.
He's one of the most productive unproductive programmers out there, which is sort of an interesting achievement. But I don't know how much advice to actually take from him; if he isn't the King of Nodevs, he's at least one of the princes.
>He's one of the most productive unproductive programmers out there
That's a good way to put it, I catch him on stream sometimes and his knowledge runs deep, but he isn't doing much with it.
>troony image
Didn’t even read your post, seek help.
You're sick.
>if he isn't the King of Nodevs, he's at least one of the princes
This is pretty much all eceleb programmers. Blow and Casey became popular as personalities not as developers.
Mike Acton engine director for 10y at insomniac games echoing his point.
Bet some shitstain here is going to call him unproductive noship too.
> insomniac games
> 10 years of Marvel's garbage
Yeah, he should've been a noship, would be less embarassing that way.
>say some dumb shit on gaytube
>that is somehow productive
every time with you eceleb worshipping zoomzooms.
>All of my opinions come from literal who's on the internet talking about game programming
Absolute fricking moronation. Not only is game programming largely an anomaly in development, these are also some of the worst coded games on the market
>Not only is game programming largely an anomaly in development
what's that supposed to mean
>t. I've never done any projects bigger than shitty indie games and small academic things for uni
That's a question, I'm asking you what you mean
And the fact that you have to ask why games are different from other software really says why you shouldn't be taken seriously. Game dev
>No real QA
>Minimal testing
>Real time constraints
>Not scalable (game client isn't going to scale past 1 user)
>Low level hardware access with D3D/OpenGL, Vulkan, Metal, etc
>"Leaf node" of software stack. I.E. no other software consumes games. Unlike like CAD or display servers
I could go on for hours here. If you need to ask this question you are exceptionally moronic and clearly haven't written any large projects in your life
None of those are unique to gamedev, also gamedev has QA and testing
The presents of all of those constraints*are* unique to game dev. Name a single example of another area where those constraints exist.
>Game dev has QA
No it doesn't. For several reasons. One big reason being that games are a fundamentally subjective experience so "quality" is also a subjective experience. None of the indie games mentioned in this thread would get a pass from me. Game dev also notoriously doesn't use unit testing, integration, and end to end testing doesn't really make sense for games either. You might see behavior testing but it's never automated.
Normal software doesn't work like the indie game world. Indie devs will never be real developers.
Game development is pretty similar to other user-level application development, just with higher performance constraints
Game dev absolutely has QA and if you don't know what you're talking about you should just stop posting instead of making up bullshit
No real QA
>Minimal testing
>Real time constraints
>Not scalable (game client isn't going to scale past 1 user)
>Low level hardware access with D3D/OpenGL, Vulkan, Metal, etc
>"Leaf node" of software stack. I.E. no other software consumes games. Unlike like CAD or display servers
You haven't addressed any of this. Just asserting "YES IT IS LIKE THIS" doesn't make it so. Your favorite eceleb means nothing to me. Game dev has almost zero overlap with any other branch of development.
>YES GAME DEV HAS QA
Ok, show us
None of those things are unique to game development, as I've already said. Game developers employ hundreds of QA testers, have a QA department, and a formal QA process. If you lack even basic knowledge of the topic, it's not on me to educate you
>I've already said this
Without backing it up. As I said several posts ago. Game dev is an anomaly and a more than a bit of a joke in the software world
embedded dev has real-time constraints. All top-level applications "don't scale" and have one user. Working with graphics APIs is one something more unique to game development, but of course all sorts of applications deal with low level code
Are you illiterate by any chance?
You aren't mentally well
Meds, NOW schizo.
Some embedded dev has constraints. And some embedded dev has hardware access requirements. Not all but a big chunk. But they usually do have some kind of scaling requirements. The list I provided is unique to game dev. No other area of software dev has every member of that list. It's really obvious that you don't have experience developing software
Every area of software dev has a unique set of parameters, that doesn't really mean anything though. If you know how to develop other software, you can work in game development, and vice versa, they are not significantly different
>Every area of software dev has a unique set of parameters
Really? Because that isn't what you said before. Your previous posts said the opposite in fact. In the past you argued with me over every little detail about game dev that was self evident about the game dev process and didn't believe that there was a unique set of factors that went into developing a game.
> If you know how to develop other software, you can work in game development, and vice versa
Lol no. Going from real software development to game dev sure. But if you start as a game dev you're basically fricked. Game dev doesn't prepare you for any of the work you have to do testing software, supporting software, architecting software, documenting software, I could go on here for a long time honestly but you're just not worth it
>they are not significantly different
See my first paragraph. And your first paragraph for that matter. I'm guessing you're either some ESL 3rd worlder or a Kiwihomosexual. Based on your reading comprehension
>Really? Because that isn't what you said before. Your previous posts said the opposite in fact.
Every single parameter you named is present somewhere else is software development - none of them are unique. Each field of software development have their own unique set of parameters, but none of them individually are unique. This isn't hard to understand. Game development isn't an outlier at all. If you work in game development you can go on and program anything else
It's funny that half of your posts are just you reassuring yourself that you're right because you don't actually know what you're talking about
>Game dev doesn't prepare you for any of the work you have to do testing software, supporting software, architecting software, documenting software, I could go on here for a long time honestly but you're just not worth it
That's bullshit. Programming is still programming. Whether you can do fine in another dev depends entirely what you mean by fine and what you actually did in game dev.
Game engines have architecture, even handling gameplay loops in basically whatever is architecture unless you literally just connected dots in some no code engine. Testing you can learn fairly easily, supporting software is just programming, documenting software happens in game dev a lot (do you think there are no docs for Unity/Unreal?).
I clearly pissed off this nocoding game dev very badly. Look at the amount of same gayging because I made self evident points about gamedev. It's hard to imagine how any software gets developed anymore when literal morons are running around telling me that
>Games have extensive QA
>Game dev is like all other kinds of software
Cartoonishly stupid. Your "degree" from full sail "university" was a waste of time and money.
>
That's bullshit. Programming is still programming. Whether you can do fine in another dev depends entirely what you mean by fine and what you actually did in game dev.
Game engines have architecture, even handling gameplay loops in basically whatever is architecture unless you literally just connected dots in some no code engine. Testing you can learn fairly easily, supporting software is just programming, documenting software happens in game dev a lot (do you think there are no docs for Unity/Unreal?).
>
Every single parameter you named is present somewhere else is software development - none of them are unique. Each field of software development have their own unique set of parameters, but none of them individually are unique. This isn't hard to understand. Game development isn't an outlier at all. If you work in game development you can go on and program anything else
It's funny that half of your posts are just you reassuring yourself that you're right because you don't actually know what you're talking about (You)
>
Scientific computing has everything you just listed and often more. So you can shove your list up your ass.
>I clearly pissed off this nocoding game dev very badly. Look at the amount of same gayging
lmao cope
Oh please. He's clearly not a nocoding game dev. He's a nocoding nogame nodev.
> No other area of software dev has every member of that list.
Scientific computing has everything you just listed and often more. So you can shove your list up your ass.
Well to be fair scientific computing does have some of the items on that list. I don't think it has all of them though. It also had a few more constraints that I didn't mention. But really if you're comparing scientific computing to regular software development or trying to make it out like scientific computing is mainstream you really need your head checked
>Every single parameter you named is present somewhere else is software development
Yes, you're right. Individually. Game dev has all of those parameters. Name another area of software development where each and every one of the parameters is also present. You really are very moronic but let's show the world how moronic Kiwihomosexual posters are.
>Game engine development
>Is the same as gamedev
NGMI
>Name another area of software development where each and every one of the parameters is also present
Easy, working on 3D rendering software. But this is irrelevant. Gamedev has its own unique set of parameters, but so does every single field of software development. Gamedev is not its own unique special snowflake field that's different to everything else
>working on 3D rendering software.
Nope, not even close to the same constraints. You don't run a game on a server farm, but you do run 3D rendering software on those.
>You don't run a game on a server farm
You run multiplayer games on server farms
The server software for a game is not usually handled by gamedevs and isn't itself a game.
>The server software for a game is not usually handled by gamedevs and isn't itself a game.
Incorrect on both counts, stop talking out your butthole
You can't just make up shit when you're talking to people who actually know what they're talking about
The sheer irony of this post is almost of artistic quality.
I accept your concession
Only the clinically insane could possibly interpret this as any kind of concession. What's wrong? Out of """argument"""?
You just made something up, you can't dispute it so you resort to insults
You can render 3D graphics on a server farm or you can run multiplayer games on server farms
Calling them "surpisingly simple" is inaccurate. They can be simple or complex, depends on the game
>Calling them "surpisingly simple" is inaccurate. They can be simple or complex, depends on the game
I'm not him, but it feels like you have no actual rebuttal to his claim, but are pretending otherwise, presumably out of ego.
What's that supposed to mean? If you have game that just does some basic online shit, like some telemetry or achievement tracking or whatever, that's simple
If you have an MMO game, it's going to have a complex server
Substantiate your claim or frick off. It's not hard (and you're wrong by the way).
Ok sure let me share the code for a commerical MMO with you, gimme a sec
So you admit you can't actually refute his claim?
We are talking about the code of closed source games, what exactly do you expect?
See
Tons of games out there. Take a look at the Quake knock offs like Unvanquished.
There are no real open-source MMOs afaik
There may be many hobbyist projects that call themselves MMOs, but they aren't very representative of reality
>Hobbiest MMOs with small player bases
If I programmed a game with 2 players it's still more successful that the unpublished games you've written
https://www.phoronix.com/news/MTg3MjM
If it has a playerbase then I would consider it a real game
People play Unvanquished and xtonic
They aren't MMOs
Still effectively demonstrates that that you don't need a complex server implementation. cry about it all you want. My earlier points about game dev being an anomaly still stand. It has nothing in common with enterprise software, very little in common with scientific computing, maybe a tiny about in common with embedded. It also has basically zero QA. Cry harder homosexual
https://www.phoronix.com/news/MTg3MjM
>Still effectively demonstrates that that you don't need a complex server implementation
No it doesn't you idiot. Some games are more complex than others. Those games are Quake forks, as far as architecture goes they're pretty damn simple
Gamedev has QA departments. You have no fricking clue what you're talking about
>Game dev has QA departments
They seem to do a shitty job then. I remember the Fallout releases. And the Skyrim release. And for that matter vanilla WOW. Hell even the WOW devs said that the server software was fundamentally simple but they had to make it work for thousands of concurrent users. At one point there was even an example of the database scheme they used for player inventories on the devblog.
Screech about this as much as you like. Several people have found this very entertaining
>They seem to do a shitty job then.
Because all other software just works so well!
Stop making things up about stuff you don't understand
>I don't understand
I literally was a senior SQA at an enterprise software company
If that were true you would understand why your post was wrong
Got to go with the schizo
on this one.
>It has nothing in common with enterprise software
Thank god for that.
>It also has basically zero QA. Cry harder homosexual
The largest category in modern game credits is QA.
https://www.mobygames.com/game/143581/doom-eternal/credits/windows/
AAA studios typically have 50+ people just constantly replaying daily builds as a full time job (and games are typically made by multiple studios/subsidiaries, so hundreds of people in total).
Out of all the examples listed, gamedev has the most in common with enterprise software
What he means by QA is with regard to game design, not with regard to the software aspects of the game.
QA is testing software you idiot, you don't "QA" game design it's an artistic field
>monkey still seething that he can't perform basic logical reasoning
>quality can only exists in software
>bridges? No need, it's not software
>Paint pigments? Not software, who cares if the brown is actually orange.
>music? Nah, just scream into the mic and send it out. No need to check what it sounds like
lol
There is no QA for art or music. QA is when you test if something works. Gamedevs have QA apartments there to test if their game works, if it does what it's supposed to do and doesn't have any bugs
And the QA dept did their jobs perfe...
https://doomwiki.org/wiki/Doom_Eternal_version_history
The goalposts have been moved into the stratosphere
Aside from an enormous about of same gayging going on here I am astonished at the level of moronation here. You actually think that game dev
>Is not district from broader "software dev"
>Games have extensive QA
And since we're in a thread about a moronic indie dev
>Indie games are well rested
No wonder good games aren't made anymore
Game dev is a category of software development like web dev or embedded dev. It isn't it's own super special field different from everything else. Yes, they have extensive QA, people have literally posted proof of this
No they haven't. And no games aren't tested. Half the time games aren't even finished before they're released. Look at the newest version of mount and blade. It was years in bets and still a buggy mess
>And no games aren't tested
Yes they are, go look at the credits of every game and look at the QA / testing team
And? If you've worked in QA you know that what matters is what actions are taken. QA is unpopular exactly because half the time people don't listen when you said there's a bug
And he is wrong. Games are tested. As you said, game testers just test the game, it's on the programmers to fix the bugs, which they may or may not do. Anyone who has worked in software development knows this, which just goes to show that the one or two schizophrenic morons dominating this thread don't have the slightest clue
>QA is unpopular exactly because half the time people don't listen when you said there's a bug
QA is unpopular because it costs money, telemetry data is free.
Anon I...
3/4 were from one person. Sorry you got caught up in the mess anon
>making multiple replies in a thread is "samegayging"
Making multiple replies to one post and appearing to be multiple people. You literally just admitted to same gayging.
Gamedev notoriously has minimal QA. Somethings like rendering pipelines are very challenging to unit test so I completely understand why. But to claim that modern games are thoroughly tested and that actions are taken when a bug is found is just wrong. Look at industry failures like Cyberpunk and Fallout 76. These weren't small indie studios. These were the big boys of the industry with professional QA departments. They still released as buggy unfinished messes. And you're defending it. This is a moronic argument. And by extension, you are
You got caught with your pants down, now you're pulling all the tricks: bikeshedding, attacking strawmen and backpedaling at the speed of light. Not a good look for you, junior.
Try English.
No it's same gayging. 1 person stepped forward
1 person making multiple replies to differnet posts isn't samegayging. Are you on drugs?
3 separate posts all referencing mine. All from the same person who is probably (you)
I made 3 posts in reply to 3 other posts. This isn't "samegayging", it's a discussion. Are you samegayging because you've replied to me 3 times?
Back to india, pajeet.
They're replies to different posts you fricking moron
Gamedev has the same amount of QA as all other software, if not more. You have literally NO IDEA what you're talking about, you're posting conjecture about things you don't understand
Just because QAtards (your heroes and the career you're aspiring to, apparently) are clinically moronic, doesn't mean they aren't paid to sit around pretending to do their job.
you're both autistic morons arguing past each other but between the two, you seem to be the more annoying one who should frick off and chill for a bit before coming back and trying to make some kind of point anyone might actually care about.
Give an example of a large program (millions of lines of code, 100s of programmers) with zero bug fixes.
I never said zero bug fixes. I simply pointed out that the other anon cherry picked a single game with a large QA department and even then it wasn't perfect. You actually proved my point with your statement. But pleat go on. I find it very funny to listen about how game dev is so similar to scientific computing and embedded development
>cherry picked a single game with a large QA department
literally every game made by a large studio has a large QA department
I dont even know what your point is.
Games have lots of QA, definitely on the same order as any substantial non-game software.
Games are incredibly complex programs (physics and npc/logic bugs are inevitable just can't apriori test those from some first principles static analysis style, only repeated 'real world' game playing to suss them out)
QA until all bugs are fixed would take decades and cost billions (people find novel bugs in old ass snes games today).
You cannot find all bugs in *any* large program via QA.
>Games have lots of QA, definitely on the same order as any substantial non-game software
LMFAO. Games are tested and utilize QA resources and adhere to best practices better than aviation software or financial software running on mainframes. This really needs to win an award for being really moronic.
Well yes there are many reasons. But I meant within the company QA is usually hated because you tell hotshits like Joe Blow that their game is broken and we shouldn't put our name to it.
The point
>Game dev is an anomaly. It doesn't follow software industry best practices for QA or testing. This is self evident but can also be seen in many recent AAA releases
You really are backpedalling at the speed of light
My original claim
Remains the same. I have not been alone in pointing out how absolutely moronic the attempted rebuttals have been.
I rebutted your post like an hour ago but you lack the basic logical reasoning ability to follow it
You listed the traits of game development - I could make a list of the traits of any other form of programming. Game development isn't special
Your failed rebuttals made references to embedded computing, scientific computing, render farms, and other areas of software development which several other anons have pointed out really have nothing in common with gamedev. Your really have to be a special kind of stupid to be in the camp of people who think writing an indie game in any way qualifies you to land something on Mars for fricks sake
>Your failed rebuttals made references to embedded computing, scientific computing, render farms
I didn't make that post
You listed a set of traits to describe game development. None of these traits are individually unique - all are present in other fields of programming. You can say that the set itself is unique, in that there's no other fields that have the same set, and this could be true, but every field has their own unique set. So I ask you, how does this make game development different to any other field of programming?
All of them are INDIVIDUALLY present in other areas agreed. But the thing that makes game dev an anomaly is that all of those parameters are present in a single project. Of course every field of programming is different. But that set of parameters makes game dev uniquely different. Just try to apply that set of constraints to literally any area of software that isn't entertainment. Try applying the DLC approach to game dev to financial software
>Implemented transactions
>Encryption still in bets
>We want users to use our experimental banking software without any encryption or security protocols for 2 years while we try out different solutions
And you'll get fired so fast it'll make your head spin
And every field of software in uniquely different, so game development is not an outlier. Each field has its own unique constraints, challenges, and ways of doing things
>aviation software
737 MAX
Ariane 5
Mars Climate Orbiter
Nice QA you got there.
>Gives 3 examples for projects that are orders of magnitude more complex
Didn't do a good job of refuting my point there. In this thread we have anons comparing game dev to a fricking space mission. Stop and think about how moronic that is
>In this thread we have anons comparing game dev to a fricking space mission.
John Carmack said games were more complicated that rockets
And then his rocket company failed and he had to sell out. He doesn't exactly have a great track record when belittling non-game software and then trying his hand at it, look it up. The problem is that the complexity of these things lies outside lines of code, something he never seems to understand as he repeats the same analysis mistake every single time.
>The problem is that the complexity of these things lies outside lines of code
That was the point.
The software in the rockets is easy stuff -anyone can write it.
>The software in the rockets is easy stuff -anyone can write it.
This is false, you need pretty extensive sophistication to be able to write that software without causing the rocket to fail.
What's true is you don't need 200 sophisticated rocket scientists to write it, only 1 will do.
Therefore, in terms of software engineering, it's simple, but in terms of software design or implementation, it's complicated -- just not in terms of software.
This is why he's always been wrong when proclaiming XYZ is simple and he'll totally revolutionize it just hold his beer for a year.
How NOT so? It failed to deliver on anything at all and stopped operating after doing toy competitions that usually involve highschool and freshmen amateurs. It went so badly that the employees fricked off and made their own company to get away from this clown.
You know that his rocket company was a hobby project right?
>everything i fail at is just a hobby
Pretty impressive (and wrong) cope right there. Mind trying again, this time with the wiener out of your mouth?
>And then his rocket company failed
So?
They're piss simple compared to a videogame but whatever helps you cope with your condition.
Same gay energy here. Similar length 1 min apart. No, rockets are more complex than any video game
>52s = 1m
A swing and a miss, newbie redditard.
>A board of developers that doesn't know how to use inspect element
Not today homosexual
What do you expect from a thread about a no coder, no dev, no release, indie games. People who say that writing snake on a Nokia is more complex than writing software for the shuttle
You've spent the entire thread strawmanning, making illogical arguments, insulting people, and talking about things you know nothing about
Keep telling yourself that. And while your at it please give me your CV where you detail your extensive experience with
>Embedded development
>Game development
>Aviation software
>Enterprise software development
>Probably something else but who can keep track in this moronic thread
Where you clearly demonstrated that game dev is in anyway comparable to other fields. The claims made by people in this thread are utterly absurd.
>Games today are well tested
>Game development is just as hard as programming massively parallel physics simulations
today are well tested
They are, that testing might not necessarily be acted upon, someone who's actually worked in software development would be aware of this
>>Game development is just as hard as programming massively parallel physics simulations
Game development is more complex than physics simulations
>someone who's actually worked in software development would be aware of this
That rules you out. I made this point. I fact I was the first person in this thread to make that point.
>Game development is more complex than physics simulations
And this makes you moronic
You have been completely btfo throughout the thread on every moronic "post" you've ever made. Why do you even keep posting? Do you enjoy being laughed at? Bet you think everyone who points your mistakes is the same person, too.
>Game development is more complex than physics simulations
lmao CS majors God complex is just hilarious sometimes
>b...but I had to make a pointer of pointer, it's just as hard
>le scawy math symbol so complex
Says more about you than about anything or anyone else. Here's the code to solve it by the way.
Can we see your works?
>Here's the code to solve it
lmao no
No, you cannot see my work, it is under NDA.
>lmao no
Well done on demonstrating you have no idea what it is you even posted.
Tell me about the high quality 50+ QA team you used to implement this math exercise. (Hint, to understand the math you need at least calc 2)
Good for you on flunking calc 2 but how is that relevant to anything?
Lol I passed it in my first try. Tell me more about BOT's cartoonish ideas of QA and gamedev qa
>math symbols are hard
Math symbols don't mean anything because you can't fight numbers with a gun
>another moron who claims he understands what this is about because he knows what an integral sign is
You already proved you have no idea what that is and just posted it because you got scared of integration symbols.
shh, shhhh it's okay anon. You don't know, it's okay to admit it.
Physics is more complex than counting beans, just make peace with it.
Explain what this is about in your own words.
Nobody. Literally not a single person in this thread said anything remotely like that.
Great. Implement it. And then show me how you tested it. And since it's a math problem it shouldn't be too tricky to do formal validation.
Well done! With this post alone you have proven:
- You have no clue what you posted
- You have no clue what programming is or does
All at once.
Lol. Try again. No coding indie devs so butthurt today.
I assure you. I have worked as a software engineer and in QA. And I can say with certainty that you have used at least one of the projects I developed.
Yes, the process you described where QA exists as a separate department used to exist. It largely doesn't anymore and in many workflows people that test and fix are the same people. b But that's a side issue. Even if they are different there must be a process in place for developers to fix the bugs that are found in testing. If there isn't then you might as well not have QA since functionally you just have QA rubber stamping everything that the devs do and the devs don't get called out for shit work.
So you see it doesn't matter if the number of people working on a project technically fall under QA. If the QA process sucks then there functionally was no QA. This is obvious to anyone who has worked in software development but I know I'm talking to an unemployed indie game dev who thinks that programming snake on a Nokia is harder than programming a rocket
Not an argument
Of course there's a process to fix bugs. Why wouldn't there be? Developers finding and fixing their own bugs isn't QA. That's not what a QA department does. a QA department is just testers
>Of course there's a process to fix bugs
Great. Why aren't they fixed in games before release? Skyrim, fallout, mount&blade, cyberpunk. The list goes on. These all released with horrible bugs that needed to be fixed before release. It literally doesn't matter if the studios responsible for these titles paid 1 QA tester or 1,000,000 testers. They still failed because the game breaking bugs were still there and almost immediately noticable. 10 years later and there are still Skyrim bug videos being released on YouTube. Functionally zero QA
>Developers finding and fixing their own bugs isn't QA
Actually it is but that's not the point. It is QA, what it isn't is a QA department. Developers writing, testing, fixing, and documenting their own code has become extremely common in the past 10 years and again, someone who has worked in the industry would know that these auxiliary roles have effectively been eliminated in real software development. If there's a handful of game studios using older methodologies that kind of highlights the point that gamedev is an anomaly in software development.
>a QA department is just testers
Also not true even with older methodologies. Most QA positions had other roles including suggested fixes, work arounds, documentation, and feature recommendations. It is very clear that you have a limited degree of knowledge or experience in software development based solely on the content of your posts.
>Great. Why aren't they fixed in games before release?
Because products have schedules
Surprised you don't know this mr software engineer
>Developers writing, testing, fixing, and documenting their own code has become extremely common in the past 10 years
No it hasn't, developers have always fixed their own code, why wouldn't they
>Because products have schedules
Functionally zero QA. As has been stated over and over and over. If you paid someone to do QA on your project (your very skewed definition of QA) but then don't fix the bugs or do anything that the QA tester recommend, then you functionally had zero QA. Therefore gamedev and to a point gamedevs don't do QA QED.
>No it hasn't, developers have always fixed their own code, why wouldn't they
You seem to operate under the mistaken belief that most of the software industry uses waterfall. It doesn't. Formal QA departments are basically a historical curiosity at this point. Something zoomers think about when they watch office space or similar 90's movies. With the widespread acceptance of Agile and the growth of DevOps testing and development is usually the same role.
You think because a game has bugs in it, that no bugs have been fixed? You aren't very smart are you?
>Formal QA departments are basically a historical curiosity at this point.
Gamedevs do agile and have formal QA departments
You think that QAs didn't notice the bugs in Cyberpunk? This is the argument you're going with? Gamedev doesn't do QA.
>Gamedevs do agile and have formal QA departments
Then why are you describing waterfall. It's like you don't realize that QA has been either replaced by devs or automation at this point. You can find totalwar devblog from the 2000's talking about how they used labcomputers to run automated tests overnight. This isn't a new thing. You haven't done any real development in your life. But you do nothing besides lash out at people and project your own insecurities onto them.
>You think that QAs didn't notice the bugs in Cyberpunk?
Of course they noticed them, they just didn't fix them, because the game was poorly managed and rushed out the door
>Then why are you describing waterfall
I'm not describing waterfall or agile, developers fixing their own shit is just a regular part of the programming process
>you do nothing besides lash out at people and project your own insecurities onto them.
You've been doing this this entire thread, I have no insecurities, meanwhile you've been here, 300 posts, still coping because you can't accept that gamedevs actually do QA
>Of course they noticed them, they just didn't fix them
That would be the smoking gun. Functionally zero QA. Gamedev has zero QA. Game developers are not held accountable for poor quality code.
>I'm not describing waterfall or agile, developers fixing their own shit is just a regular part of the programming process
Actually no, that's called agile. What you have been screeching about this entire thread is waterfall. That has a QA department. Developers fixing their own shit is the opposite of what you've been talking about. Again this is obvious.
>You've been doing this this entire thread, I have no insecurities, meanwhile you've been here, 300 posts, still coping because you can't accept that gamedevs actually do QA
See my point above. You have never worked in software development. You don't know what QA is. You don't know the differences between manual and automated QA. You don't know the difference between waterfall and agile. You don't what the SDLC is. You don't know what the difference between development and DevOps is. You think that ignoring QA is the same as following a QA process. You think that programming snake on a Nokia is as complex as launching a rocket.
You don't know how to code. You have never coded. You certainly have never been employed as a developer
>Functionally zero QA. Gamedev has zero QA
Let me provide a very simple example
A game has 100 bugs. 90 of these bugs are caught before release. 10 make it through. Does gamedev have zero QA? Think carefully before you answer
>Actually no, that's called agile. What you have been screeching about this entire thread is waterfall.
If you make a typo while programming and you go back and fix it is that agile or waterfall?
>You don't know the differences between manual and automated QA. You don't know the difference between waterfall and agile. You don't what the SDLC is. You don't know what the difference between development and DevOps is.
I know all of these, none of them are relevant to your point
>You think that programming snake on a Nokia is as complex as launching a rocket.
Strawman
>You certainly have never been employed as a developer
And I'm guessing you got fired for being a complete fricking lunatic, you must be so unpleasant to work with, you're so hostile and full of yourself
Your little handful of formulas is not complex
>No, rockets are more complex than any video game
Developing rockets is a lot more expensive and risky than a videogame. That's not the same as complexity.
Holy shit you are moronic.
Nice try, but there have been more moronic statements in this thread.
you've made the overwhelming majority of them.
Every single post by you is a more moronic statement than his, yes. For once, you managed to be right.
>aviation software or financial software running on mainframes.
These are baby tier and fairly simple programs (thats why you can actually fully test them).
>The point
>>Game dev is an anomaly. It doesn't follow software industry best practices for QA or testing. This is self evident but can also be seen in many recent AAA releases
This is a moronic thing to argue about. It's not crazy as a general point but the back and forth autism nitpicking the nature of QA and testing is absolutely moronic on both sides, especially yours. Game industry absolutely does do QA and you arguing vehemently at people for saying this just makes you look like a huge butt-fricking idiot.
For christ sake we've been over this so many fricking times. You're seriously going to tell me that gamedev tests as much or as deeply as something like a guidance system
software with real-world consequences gets formally verified and reviewed. This software is also a lot less complex than "unsafe" software like web, games and applications, so it's much easier to test and make guarantees about. It's a meaningless comparsion to make
If you compare games to other unsafe software, it gets tested just as much, probably more
moronic post. Random indie game developed yesterday was tested more than software which has been in production for literally decades. The level of stupidity even for a troll is astounding
Is it possible for you to make a post without a ridiculous strawman? Are you just being dishonest or are you stupid enough to believe that's a real argument?
>You're seriously going to tell me that gamedev tests as much or as deeply as something like a guidance syste
No I'm not. Nobody said that or frankly even gives a shit about this straw man. You hallucinated it because you're a fricking moron.
Threads on BOT are usually shit. Jon blow threads are no exception. But you are personally responsible for making this one extra bad. I was just here comparing Jai to Arc and then all of a sudden you came in here sperging about stupid bullshit.
Seems like it derailed when you started posting. It's not a straw man argument if you read the fricking thread and if you can read English. Same for this. Not only are you unable to define the term, you don't know where to apply it or what it means. It's also an informal fallacy. Again, not that you know what that means.
The people comparing game dev to programming rocket ships have been btfod, not me. Ask any functioning human being
You don't "btfo" people making self-congradulatory posts calling yourself right
You don't "win" by same gayging and having random internet morons agree with you. Where do you think this is? Kiwihomosexuals? Your arguments were fricking moronic
>everyone who points out my mistakes is the same person
Unironically take your meds.
>n-no I-I totally w-won because... I said so!
What the frick is wrong with you? Seriously. I have never seen someone like you before. There are plenty of morons, schizos, inbreds and other undesirables around but you're a special nutcase even among them.
This is an image board. Not a message board. We don't like each other's posts. We don't get followers. You ideas were fricking moronic.
>Gamedev is totally as complex as any other area of software development!
Check your ego son.
Strong likelyhood of same gay
It's pretty clear you have no clue what you're talking about just from how hard you try to make your claims as vague as possible. Not that this has helped you be any more right (it hasn't, you're wronger than a Black person in victorian england).
If you're bullshitting, it's easy to make definitive claims, because you just care about winning an argument and not telling the truth
If you care about the truth the answer is usually "it depends"
t. professional bullshitter.
There are several open source MMO's. Why don't you take a look at the server side code for those? Most of the server side code does things you can't trust the client to do. Like coordinates and collision
>There are several open source MMO's
Post some
>Post some
github.com/Meridian59/Meridian59
You don't render games on a server farm. Google tried and failed with stadia. The server side of MMOs is actually surprisingly simple.
You do real that you're replying to several people
>>Is the same as gamedev
>NGMI
It's a subdivision of game dev. Blow in particular did both. A bunch of developers had to develop their own engines. You also missed the point that engine isn't an on/off thing. You will build your own architecture on top of even existing solutions depending on how stiff they are.
I literally work in scientific computing and you couldn't be more full of shit.
Scientific computing is a rather large field, Jamal. Making a web interface for arduino tempurature and humidity collector doesn't cover all of it.
Making a web interface for arduino tempurature and humidity collector (which isn't even remotely in the realm of scientific computing) would be the only case where you could make your claim even remotely work, which is probably why you chose this strawman: it's all you know, pajeet.
What I am saying, Jamal, is that just because your area of saentific compooting doesn't tick off all those matters, it doesn't mean that some other area doesn't (and a lot of them clearly do). But you go ahead and rewrite yet another matrix multiplication subroutine in C.
Yet, you can't even name one (1) (that's because there is none, and you don't have the faintest clue what scientific computing could possibly even be, as evident by your posts so far).
The only way for his comment to make sense is if they meant no testing as in no SDET/automated testing pipelines or ci cd. In which case he'd be right that the field is very lacking in that regard but honestly that's just one part of QA so he'd still be moronic
I'm not going to pretend that game devs haven't cried endlessly about poor QA/no QA on projects before. In fact I'm pretty sure that was something that came up for cyberpunk
>the field is very lacking in that regard
Not really, there just isn't a lot of need for it
>But we continue to release broken games
Zero QA in game dev
A game has 100 bugs. 90 of these bugs are caught before release. 10 make it through. Does gamedev have zero QA?
Disingenuous argument. AAA games release with game breaking bugs day 1 and still expect you to pay more for the final version. No other area of software is like this
Western AAA games do, yeah. Even then there’s still good western devs that aren’t like this, namely some indies and studios like Valve. Japanese AAA is usually fine for this too. Even FromSoft, who don’t do anything technically impressive ever and have rather inefficient engines, generally don’t release games as broken piles of shit that stay broken for months on end. Worst you could say was the PC port of Elden ring that got patched after a few days.
No, that's just testing.
He fricked up unity with his ECS meme then recently got fired from unity for it. He is worse than a nodev.
>recently got fired from unity for it.
did he?
https://twitter.com/mike_acton/status/1654169432598478848
He announced him leaving unity around the same time unity did a bunch of layoffs.
ECS snake oil has literally disemboweled the game industry, choked it to death on its own bloody entrails, torn its head off, and fricked the thrussy
Games are buggier than ever, they get delayed for years, they're not violent enough, and they're so bloated that you can only install one at a time
No professional devs have actually fallen for the ECS meme, the only thing it has done is poison the minds of clueless indie nodevs
Stupid idea but no real harm done
It turned Overwatch from the most popular game franchise of its (console) generation to a smoking crater of a trainwreck with a million canceled features
>Overwatch
Like I said, no real harm done
It doesn't bother me personally, I've never played it, but that's an example to prove that ECS is a mind virus here to deface Western games like the pagans defaced Roman statues
Unless you have insider knowledge you couldn't actually say that with any degree of certainity
Yes I can because ECS is literally sabotage
I agree that ECS is shit, but unless you know what happened you can't say that it's responsible for anything that happened to the game
Blaming ECS for Overwatch being shit is such a bizarre take that it almost comes off as Blizzard apologia.
Defending ECS is a sure sign you're a communist trying to burn down cities and pass gun control
Oh, you are a schizo. Makes sense.
What are you, a psychiatrist? You're out of your depth here, leave the technical discussion to the adults in the room and go back to electrocuting the homeless
Saying Overwatch failed because of ECS with absolutely no knowledge of the situation is in no way a technical discussion
You don't have the qualifications to understand what makes a discussion technical
You lack reading comprehension, go on random political tangents (I'm guessing a mutt/angloid genetic defect may be responsible here), and provide no evidence for an incredibly baffling claim.
Tell me you're a brainwashed ECS cultist without telling me
I wasn't defending ECS.
Imagine if I said Overwatch was a bad game because a bunch of gay Black folk broke into Jeff Kaplan's house and sodomized him. If someone pointed out how ludicrous this was, would they be defending gay Black person rape?
Well to be fair, overwatch really was a bad game because of gay Black folk, except it's jeff kaplan who put them there and not the other way around.
OW was an okay casual game when it came out, then quickly pivoted into being the worst competitive game of all time. The liberal homosexualry was just insult to injury.
No, no anon. You don't understand. I don't mean the ingame homosexualry, I mean the hired homosexuals making the game.
Meds.
Yeah because Unity was so much faster without it, right?
Unreal Engine uses it you fricking clown
accurate
Excellent post, anon. Succinctly yet thoroughly describes it accurately.
imagine getting dabbed on by a parody
I wouldn't even mind, it's an insanely good parody. Jon did seem to get Blown the frick out by it though. I hear he used to ban people for mentioning it in his chat.
I want him to host a podcast with Steve Jobs. Jobs Blow Podcast
Cringe guy with entertaining hot takes, that's it.
He's a gamymer producer, he's making a useless C replacement, the name "Jai" is utterly soulless, his political opinions are shit, he's more interested in art and philosophy than science and his life advices are shit. He's a 40/50 something guy without a family and will never have one and think this is the right way to live. I'm pretty sure he'd say to you that you should get sterilized.
This guy is so far up is own arse.
>He's a 40/50 something guy without a family and will never have one and think this is the right way to live.
He's a 40/50 something guy without a family and will never have one and copes by claiming that this is the right way to live.
>he's more interested in art and philosophy than science
is that bad?
The Witness is a deeply scientific game
solving puzzle has not much to do with doing science, unless of course the puzzle are literally about discovering physic laws or chemical laws and properties or stuff related to biology and organisms, about engineering, etc..
you could make a game like and it would be awesome but it's not at all what the witness is and jonathan blow couldn't make this game in a million years, he does not have the brain for it nor any real interest for science for that matter
After playing Braid, ill buy any games this guy makes.
i don't give a crap about his programming language.
the only person that will ever love him is his mother
I'm sure there's a plenty impressionable morons who are ready to suck his or Muratori's wiener
Well, sure, but none of them are female.
Good intentions but currently failing in implementing it. idk its not even out yet
I thought it was bel
PT1
He has typical boomer take on language design, aka a midwit take of someone who did too much C and never bothered to understand a single other PL. And man does it show. "Muh ebil garbage collector" nonsense etc.
His Jai take is somewhat sensible for gamedev, and the language has some cool features (array of structs vs struct of arrays is easy to switch between). I think he has some compromise for making manual memory management easier by marking the struct fields as owned by the struct. I learned it from one of his earlier talks about it. He does metaprogramming too, but in a Black personlicious way. He should've gone the Carp way (aka lisp syntax w/ C semantics) if he wanted it to be reasonable, but he was apparently intellectually hurt by lisps when he was in college. I think Jai has a good chance of become popular once it's open-sourced, since Rust is just total hot garbage, and what he has seems to be just a better C, which is exactly how he markets it, and so that might as well work.
now do a blogpost about the pastagay
>since Rust is just total hot garbage
what's hot garbage about it? /gen
The borrow check rejects too many valid programs, which generally means you either have to drop down to unsafe, or wrap everything in RC or other boxes to 'cheat' it into compliance (this has runtime performance implications and you might as well use a refcounted or even gc'd language at that point).
It also has very annoying 'stacking constructs' (just like ML and its types) where you have to unwrap().and_then().and_then().unwrap()... to get anywhere and a lot of other syntax dirt of that type. Additionally, dependency and build management by cargo, while far ahead of the crapshoot that's in the likes of C++, is very tuned to the workflow of webdevs, which is to say it's nearly impossible to properly freeze dependencies into a releasable form or to make simple, fully controllable build scripts (instead you have to go through a mess of stuff to basically rewrite cargo for your own use). That's not as bad as, say, the ocaml situation, but it's another drain. Related to that, it strongly encourages, and the ecosystem is widely organized this way, microdependencies, which greatly increase supply chain attack surfaces, among other issues such as requiring GB's worth of deps for what would normally be ~1k lines of code.
Other issues include maintainability, including refactorability, where it suffers greatly from the way lifetimes work. Although that's been improved overtime, it is pretty common that having to add a feature requires rewriting major parts of a system because of lifetime incompatibility regarding ownership, often resulting in using a blackboard or singleton pattern to once again bypass the whole system.
It's also still an unstable language, having the same "feature creep"/bloat problem C++ (especially past 11) has despite its young age, but also has backward compatibility problems (by 1.5.0, for instance, "only" 95% of crates on crates.io that worked with 1.0.0 were still working).
>The borrow check rejects too many valid programs, which generally means you either have to drop down to unsafe
nothing wrong with that, the entire std library is just safe wrappers around unsafe, which just happen to suffice for a vast majority of programs
>unwrap().and_then().and_then().unwrap()...
that's not really avoidable?
>dependency and build management by cargo
that is a somewhat notable grievance i have as well i suppose, i do have to wonder however if the issues with that are reasonably avoidable either
>lifetimes
issues with lifetimes i hear about a lot, i myself don't really experience them any more though, so i guess it's just somewhat of a skill thing?
>feature creep
hate that too, yea
> which just happen to suffice for a vast majority of programs
That's the first problem: it doesn't. 100% of non-trivial software is full of unsafe or microdependencies that do this but hide the details, or a combination of those.
>that's not really avoidable?
It is easily avoidable since other languages do not have this problem. My proposed situation here is twofold: first, there ought to be a way to combine or compress those things into one block. Second, there should be syntax to deal with this in one fell swoop based on the premise that in practice, you want the same escape behavior 80% of the time, and a different but repeated behavior another 15% of the time, so only the remaining 5% actually needs to be verbose in any way.
> i myself don't really experience them any more though, so i guess it's just somewhat of a skill thing?
You probably box everything, it escapes the issue once again. It's every long-time rust dev's goto tool.
>100% of non-trivial software is full of unsafe or microdependencies that do this but hide the details, or a combination of those.
as i said, that's just what the std is, nothing wrong with that
>It is easily avoidable since other languages do not have this problem
correct, they usually have way worse problems
>there should be syntax to deal with this in one fell swoop
the ? does this largely, other than you can't really do anything since the ugly .unwrap has to be ugly to be visible when scanning code in case whoever made it fricked up and it can actually error
>You probably box everything
i don't, lifetimes just come to me naturally
>It's every long-time rust dev's goto tool.
more like every javabrained dev's (not referring to you in particular, just prior experience)
>the ? does this largely
Not good enough
>the ugly .unwrap has to be ugly to be visible when scanning code in case whoever made it fricked up and it can actually error
Why does it have to be visible? Why can't you just read the code and know what effects it will have, like in C/C++?
>Why does it have to be visible?
Because you're not supposed to unwrap in production you humongous homosexual. Unwrap is a development tool. First you just focus on the happy path and then you do error handling properly.
>Why can't you just read the code and know what effects it will have, like in C/C++?
lmao you have absolutely no way to read a C/C++ code and know if it can throw unless you read the entire call tree, moron.
And similar monadic error handling in C++ is doable byt done the exact same way, with stuff like .value_or_die(), .value_or_else(), .value_unsafe() and so on, and generally macros which are much uglier than ?
This all seems like a lot of cope for taking a language designef ro "safety" and abusing it for misuse cases that fundamentally aren't safe AKA programming
rust embraces the fact programming is unsafe, while most of the languages pretend it isn't
>rust embraces the fact programming is unsafe
It does the opposite, it tries desperately to make it safe
You absolutely ARE supposed to unwrap in production and that's how it's used across the rust ecosystem.
>Not good enough
can't be
>Why can't you just read the code and know what effects it will have, like in C/C++?
because you don't know what effects it will have in C/C++, sometimes it will just silently error and you won't know because there's no .unwrap() you can search for in the code
>the ? does this largely,
It's the idea but it only covers a small fraction of chaining cases.
>other than you can't really do anything since the ugly .unwrap has to be ugly to be visible when scanning code in case whoever made it fricked up and it can actually error
No other language has this problem so that's obviously not true. I have also never seen anyone praise this part of rust, so clearly nobody seems to find this is an issue in other languages.
>i don't, lifetimes just come to me naturally
Larping I see.
>only covers a small fraction of chaining cases.
can't really do better
>No other language has this problem so that's obviously not true.
all those other languages have way worse problems
>I have also never seen anyone praise this part of rust
literally anybody any time they praise rust it includes its error handling prominently
>Larping I see.
they just do, you just need to get good
I have literally never seen anyone praise rust error handling, but I've seen plenty of grief about it. The only part anyone seems to even remotely like is the use of variant types (not the implications), and that sure as frick isn't a rust concept.
>I have literally never seen anyone praise rust error handling
then you have literally never seen anything
>isn't a rust concept
nothing in rust is, not the enums, not the error handling, not the lifetimes, nothing, all lifted from other less or more well known languages
I guess it's true what they say, rust users are all delusional trannies. Sad! No wonder only the insane even remotely consider using your "language".
>rust users are all delusional trannies
the entirety of cs is held up by trans girls, if you can't acknowledge that, you can't acknowledge reality.
The aliasing xor mutability aspect of borrowing is novel AFAIK
As far as I know there was nothing new over what cyclone was doing (which itself just used techniques from mlton).
Cyclone has regions but it doesn't have Rust's approach to mutability.
Don't drool too hard on yourself there, call your special needs nurse to wipe that off you.
?
Yeah, that's what I thought.
No, seriously, what's the part you don't understand?
The part where you can breathe without assistance despite your... condition. Here, I found this picture of you.
>I have literally never seen anyone praise rust error handling,
What the frick? You live in a bubble.
PT2
Also he is a total static gay and doesn't even want to accept the fact that interactive development is imporant, says he will recompile and launch the game every time he edits the code. No wonder Shitness took 8 years to develop.
His game design follows a formula: "Let's have 0 story, develop some cool mechanic, and do >9000 puzzles in it, with tiny variations in each." He's a literal English major, aka the guy who thinks that having some top-down design idea will make for an artistically-rich game. And like it is with all english majors with funny ideas, the results are disappointing, it's just >9k puzzles which explore some stupid theme in the end.
I would respect him more if he found a way to make his garbage games 10 times as fast to become a quadrillionaire. But no, he gotta prove he is an arts major every step of the way.
Personally, I think his games are kind of bad, and I dropped them after ~30 minutes, then just watched some reviews, which were all way more entertaining and deep.
Also, he's a Californian. Otherwise, he's pretty based and is fun to listen to. Of all the programmers out there, I like him better than fricking Cormack.
Sledgehammer programming. Jonathan Blow. - YouTube
Jonathan Blow plays Visual Studio - YouTube
>Personally, I think his games are kind of bad, and I dropped them after ~30 minutes, then just watched some reviews, which were all way more entertaining and deep.
Maybe this is my inner literature major speaking but I do think this invalidates your opinion (about his games, not about the rest). If you find the reviews are deeper than the 30 minutes you played then this has certain implications about everything after the 30 minute mark.
I hear you, sure. But I mean it's also significant that I attempted to play his games and that they didn't capture me pretty much at all, which I guess is a case for many people. Many people who played witness didn't recommend it to others. You can't just dismiss that.
And mind you it's not because I dislike puzzle games: I loved Limbo, Inside, Machinarium. Excellent games.
The pacing and the art is important, you know, and perhaps the actual quality of the puzzles, right? I am not being judgemental, but I will hold onto the opinion that he's a better programmer than a game designer.
One of the things art can do is make you think about something. Instead of spelling out a conclusion it can provide you with the pieces. Putting them together in your own mind is an intrinsically rewarding experience (some people study math just to chase that high) and also provides you with a better-integrated understanding than any explanation can guarantee.
Games can provide this experience in small carefully controlled ways. Outer Wilds is my favorite example, coming to realizations is a core part of the gameplay loop. But it's controlled because you're forced into it, you have to make these realizations to advance.
The basic puzzles in Braid and The Witness do this in even smaller localized ways, aha moments about how the mechanics work and how they interact with puzzle layouts. But they also do it in large uncontrolled ways, and the tricky thing there is that you have to put in the work yourself, you have to really mentally engorge what's going on and keep ramming the blocks together and tasting the ideas. You have to put Braid's love story and science story and game mechanics in your head and vigorously shake them around either as you're playing the game or while you're taking a shower. And then these inexpressible patterns and commonalities and emotions fall out. You couldn't get them any other way. They're not facts, they're mental states.
The super special secret ending of The Witness portrays a mental state that you can only attain by playing the game for hours and doing content that's 100% optional, just out of intellectual curiosity. And it would not work if the content weren't optional.
Not everybody likes this. No art is for everyone. But if you're willing to put in the effort there's a lot of value that can only be gotten from a slow open-ended game that can be completed without really getting it. It's the cost of making this kind of art.
(I do think the puzzles are perfectly serviceable without this layer, I've enjoyed worse.)
Yeah, I remember him talking about the shower realization moments in some talk, as the feedback he got from some players.
Maybe I will play outer wilds one day.
> The super special secret ending of The Witness portrays a mental state that you can only attain by playing the game for hours and doing content that's 100% optional, just out of intellectual curiosity
> intellectual curiousity
Funny how you call autism these days. Let's be real here, bro, there is probably like a couple dozen people in the whole world who actually beat the damn game, and all of them did it either purely out of boredom or because they had too much time on their hands or because facing the real world was the worse than playing some autistic ass game.
> Not everybody likes this. No art is for everyone. But if you're willing to put in the effort there's a lot of value that can only be gotten from a slow open-ended game that can be completed without really getting it. It's the cost of making this kind of art.
I don't think the shower realization mechanics warrants that the puzzles have to be boring or that the game has to be puzzles at all, just that that the game has to take longer than a day to beat, and that the problems that the games presents are interconnected in some way.
The stuff they will call art these days just to warrant some truly shitty or boring game experience, oh boy.
>Maybe I will play outer wilds one day.
You should, it's very good. I enjoyed it more than the Witness and I wouldn't need to write this drivel to defend it, its merits aren't hidden.
>there is probably like a couple dozen people in the whole world who actually beat the damn game, and all of them did it either purely out of boredom or because they had too much time on their hands or because facing the real world was the worse than playing some autistic ass game.
It's unironically a fun game. A little slow to start, but the desert puzzles hooked me and from then on I stayed hooked.
>I don't think the shower realization mechanics warrants that the puzzles have to be boring or that the game has to be puzzles at all, just that that the game has to take longer than a day to beat, and that the problems that the games presents are interconnected in some way.
Puzzles are essential for most of what it tries to make you think about. And the different sections are connected in that they all make the same point in different ways. They're not really puzzle pieces.
It's true that you don't need puzzles to inspire shower thoughts. You don't even need gameplay. You can just write a book! But it'd be hard to write a book that makes you think the specific thoughts this game makes you think.
Dial 8 dumb troony. Maybe you can use your troony game for a dial 8er. Don't die l8 in any case.
credits where it's due, The Looker got most of what The Witness was doing and had some nice ideas for its own mechanics. like the one where you draw on a canvas and a voice tells you to add more loops. for a parody meme thing it's quite competent in the gameplay portion. it rightfully makes an ass out of the voicelines in TW but aesthetically it's ugly and offputting.
this is precisely what The Looker could never do. it doesn't take itself seriously nor does it expect to be taken seriously. and being satire it's at all times one step removed from being genuine and engaging. I still think about the witness and replay it sometimes and it grabs me everytime. coating everything in a layer of satire and irony is souless zoomer shit. it rots the brain, I've seen it happen to entire groups of friends, I've experienced it on myself. the best thing about the looker is that it's kinda funny for the short time it lasts. the second best thing about it is that it lasts only a short time.
This post was written by blow, j.
unlike drew segfault and the rest of us, blow actually has better things to do than to post here
You sure about that? The styles of those posts are just up his alley and nobody sane could possibly come up with shit like that. It's true, I haven't caught a screenshot of him being on BOT onstream, but a lot of his rhetoric smells like reheated BOT.
he's too busy trying different forms of coffee enemas
A compelling theory. Then, who's behind those posts, exactly? Surely it has to be someone somewhat well known in his entourage.
I think you're on to something there. Looking at the "gamedev is more complex than scientific computing" posts in here. The gamedev dude clearly got his ego hurt.
compilation takes no time at all in same languages using sane compilers
You ever done game programming, son? Interactiviy is useful because you don't want to lose the state of the game, which may be unique and hard to replicate. Interactivity also makes it easy to fix shit on the fly, and to test ideas fast.
>You ever done game programming, son?
You clearly haven't, modifying engine code while a game is running is just going to break the system
OK, boomer.
Yes, I'm a boomer, I know what I'm talking about
You're a zoomer who doesn't
OK, boomer.
t. never done any kind of game dev, not even 2d tetris clone toys.
modify your game code while it's running is only a good idea for top-level code, like a script or a data file or a shader. Games are complex pieces of machinery and poking at the underlying engine code is pretty pointless because it's such a complex web of dependencies and initailization orders
>there's a reason other game devs can make a fast game in 3 years with their own engine and just 1-2 devs
barely anyone has done this
disagree with him all you want, barely anyone makes their own entire 3D engine then game
>disagree with him all you want, barely anyone makes their own entire 3D engine then game
Virtually everyone did that before unity. A lot of studios still do that.
Speaking of,
>modify your game code while it's running is only a good idea for top-level code, like a script or a data file or a shader. Games are complex pieces of machinery and poking at the underlying engine code is pretty pointless because it's such a complex web of dependencies and initailization orders
Unity and unreal, which are the only paradigm you know, allow that with no issues. You have never made even the smallest, simplest game. Stop posting. Or post questions instead since this thread is full of your betters.
>A lot of studios still do that.
Studios, not 1-2 people
>Unity and unreal, which are the only paradigm you know, allow that with no issues.
Neither of them allow this, they're compiled
Studios of 1-2 people, dumbass.
Studios of 1-2 people don't make their own 3D engine, that's extremely rare cause it's a lot of work
Neither of them allow code modification at runtime
>I am too moronic to even so much as use scroogle before self-owning
>I WIIIIIIN
Reality doesn't bend to your will, sorry to burst your bubble.
I googled it and got this on the first answer
>You can use scriptableObjects to have is so you can change data, swap out data and functions all while game is running and changes are persistent, but I don't think you can change the code live right now, I think that is something they are working on tho.
>literally too dumb to google
Can't make this shit up.
That was the answer I got off Google
Yes, this is why I said you are too dumb to google.
Nope, I Googled the question and got that answer, I can show you others if you want but I trust you're smart enough to Google too
Go seethe about a topic you actually know something about
Thanks for repeatedly posting self-owns where you describe in details how moronic you are, but I don't think we need any more of those, we get the picture.
You'd think you would leave the board after continually embarrassing yourself and getting proven wrong every time you start an argument
>n-no u
I'm getting second-hand embarrassment at this point. Seek help.
I'm not the guy gibbering like a nutcase
Whatever helps you sleep at night 🙂
>Neither of them allow this
Wow, I thought you were a unity kiddie and thus didn't know shit outside of it. Turns out you don't even know anything about game dev even at the level of unity kiddies. Embarrassing.
its a silly discussion since although unity allows hot-reloading of code, it's super fragile and has a lot of restrictions, making it near-useless
Even a 30 seconds delay adds up quick. And for games you have to compile not just code but also assets, which is typically pretty slow. Also you have to reload everything everytime you compile. Every single non-joke gamedev setups a dynamic recompilation system first thing, so they can keep the game running and just hit a key (or automatically detect changes) to reload the part of the game that was changed without having to go back and go through all the asset loading and manually reproduce a state.
>Let's have 0 story
This is based, more games should have 0 story. One of the things Blow is absolutely right about is that videogames are a bad medium for narrative storytelling. I don't enjoy puzzle games that much but cutscene "games" are intolerable. I don't want to be subjected to a full episode of a really shitty TV show with cringe uncanny valley 3D models instead of real actors instead of the game I wanted to play.
The problem is cutscenes, not story. Video games are a mediocre vehicle for film but can be a great medium for storytelling if you play to its strengths
Blow Jobs
i'm stuck in the witness
<esc>:q!<enter>
has he really only ever made 2 games?
He made 3, but the 3rd, wulfram, killed his game studio (it was in 1996) because it was so bad.
He looks like carl pilkington
Probably is of CS
>Thoughts of Jonathan Blow?
His streams are comfy. Nothing that'll melt your brain.
>Is Jai just going to be paul graham's arc all over again for system level languages?
I don't know. Wait until it's out in the wild and morons like BOT start to code in it. Making a wild assumption here that actual morons in here can code ( not ).
people who use Jai have been posting on BOT
Not seen any threads in here related to what BOT has done with Jai though. So I'll make another wild assumption and say you're a lying homosexual and you should fricking have a nice day.
>I haven't seen it therefore it didn't happen and I'm going to tell you to have a nice day
Mentally ill moron
Seen something that doesn't exist.
>Mentally ill moron
someone was posting about it in the gamedev thread
>Making a wild assumption here
There are many streams showing people with jai access programming in it and even digging into the internals because jai's compiler and most often the 'standard library' is broken and must be patched before anything at all runs with it lmao
This is an absolute giga chad, responsible for many good things in modern western civilization
He also made braid and started the indie/small developer revolution, after steam created a platform for him
Autistic gamedev with 1 (one) successful game (not due to technical reasons).
Somehow became a guru with a large following.
He says what lots of people think but aren't famous enough to be known. As opposed to someone like you who exists downstream of tech evangelists and developer advocates who have no hard qualifications at all, just lots of free time to promote whatever memes their company wants.
The single dumbest post in this thread by miles has just been found!
jonathan blown
after I'm done with him
engine not needed
Name one software company that does QA these says.
Every single ``````modern````` program is bloated, laggy, crashing piece of shit.
>Thoughts of Jonathan Blow?
He made a Super Mario clone with 21st century hardware, but thinks that you need to be some kind of low level programming genius to make games. You don't need to be a C++ low level ninja to do that, you could have used Python with some high level game library or whatever.
I like that one guy did a Witness clone on his own as a joke, though. It shows how "hard" it really is when you're not a moron that sniffs his own farts.
>Is Jai just going to be paul graham's arc all over again for system level languages?
Yes. Just look at JavaScript, it took over because "worse is better". Being first is crucial; the replacement for C is being chosen right now, and Rust, Zig etc are being adopted, but his bullshit language is not.
The funniest thing is that Jon Blow refused to play The Witness parody because he doesn't like being made fun of because he put a lot of hard work into the game
Nothing demonstrates someones lack of character more than the inability to laugh at themselves
Between the ego on display and the outright stupidity of posts like this
makes me think Joe Blow is replying to this thread. Absolute top kek.
I proclaim this thread to be officially a schizo thread. You don't have to be hide now, brothers, come fully on out at last.
Jesus wept.
That guy in your pic is clearly autistic, just look at his face
Dumbest fricking BOT thread I've been in in a while
Is he the Andrew Tate of BOTays?
>4 people all call each other samegays
>Saves programming and civilization.
Nothing personal, kid.
programming and civilization...
with videos gaymes.
yeah that will fix everything
Good puzzle games that test your IQ.
Also, JAI isn't a game.
>Good puzzle games that test your IQ.
You now have your IQ "tested" and have it quantified. Now what?
Now I'm ready to use JAI to fix tech.
shut the frick up
Mad b***h
I don't think there is anyone on earth who, if suddenly given authoritarian power, would more ruthlessly annihilate what we now know as "video games" than Jonathan Blow
He is, in any case, more of a video game reformer than a video game advocate
>Thoughts of Jonathan Blow? Is Jai just going to be paul graham's arc all over again for system level languages?
What was the Graham arc? Make everything in lisp? People ship tons of shit in C/C++ lite so I wouldn't compare it to that.
Jon Blow is a high-minded and interesting moron, so I expect JAI will be full of brilliant stuff but fundamentally it will be designed wrong in some major way that reflects his wrong understanding of human beings. But since no programming language is perfect anyway his might be as good as anything else, or better.
He's 100% smarter than his detractors though. I'll never forget the way the masses were duped by that movie into thinking Blow was upset about Soulja Boy not understanding Braid when it was clear that he was talking about 120 IQ reddit appreciators who were incapable of getting his point and preferred to construct elaborate "it's about the Nuclear Bomb" type theories, but being somewhat of a midwit himself I don't think Blow understood that he was just developing a moronic audience, I think he instead chalked it up to general incommunicability of deep things. Or maybe he was just being polite because he's not actually edgy enough to publicly insult his fans
He and his fanbase evidently think that gamedev is just as hard as landing a rocket on Mars. They are also proud of the QA work done in modern video games. They are functionally moronic.
>he's not actually edgy enough to publicly insult his fans
He literally does that constantly.
>incommunicability of deep things
He wouldn't know deep if it raped him up the ass.
>I don't think Blow understood that he was just developing a moronic audience,
The only reason anyone even knows his name is because he created and encouraged a moronic audience. His takes are exclusively compatible with morons (like you).
>so I expect JAI will be full of brilliant stuff
There are plenty of people with jai access streaming themselves using it. It has 0 interesting or new features.
>it will be designed wrong in some major way
Currently, it is designed wrong in the sense that the algorithms in the standard library are amateurish and slow and the compiler is broken in some parts that need to be manually patched by users whenever they update jai despite having been in the work for 9 years and by no means being a solo project.
>He's 100% smarter than his detractors though. I
Definitely true.
Most detractors are incapable of even formulating an accurate representation of his arguments much less actually saying anything remotely interesting of their own.
>it will be designed wrong in some major way that reflects his wrong understanding of human beings.
I actually don't think this since the kind of people who'd want to use a memory-management language aren't normal human beings in the first place. (see: 100% of developers who use C++ and Rust)
I think the bigger issue will be taking too long to release it and (potentially) not being sufficiently accessible for the level of adoption necessary to have a solid development ecosystem.
>I actually don't think this since the kind of people who'd want to use a memory-management language aren't normal human beings in the first place
this is so true that it's almost making me want to change my mind and retract my post
I like how much he triggers 4cheddit LARPers
In this thread, a man seethes for 300 posts because he didn't know games had QA and is unable to admit he was wrong
>He was wrong
That would be you. Game dev is notoriously not tested. Again, let's look at AAA games. But only the ones that released as a complete package. That should narrow it down to about 3
We have collectively presented you with ample evidence that games have fulltime QA teams and that they're quite large.
All you've done all thread is piss and shit yourself.
Here you are again, once again pissing and shitting yourself as you've done all thread. "waaa mommy he said I'm wrong waaaah! I'm always right waaah help me mommy!" like this. It's truly a sight to behold, to be sure.
No, I've clearly presented the argument time and again and yet you provide no real evidence of your argument. You posted one link to a single game which wasn't even created by the dev team.
Same gay
There's a reason I told you to take your meds. You're hallucinating. Again.
Samegay no, you haven't presented an argument. You've just endlessly said the same moronic line over and over about gamedev extensively QAing. It doesn't.
Why do you refuse to take your meds?
You just posted yourself in a doctored image that you same gayged twice. Go home and take your meds
We've been through this. You can outsource QA to 1,500,000,000 pajeets and it doesn't make your argument any less moronic
Only one who needs doctoring around these parts is yourself. Meds are good for you. Take them.
>You can outsource QA to 1,500,000,000 pajeets
Yes, you can, and then you would be doing QA, which refutes your argument, that games don't do QA
>Paying rando sub contractors is the same as doing QA and creating a development process forcing devs to follow.
Holy. Fricking. Shit. You are moronic
Well considering that I consistently get 3-4 replies each 1minuet apart to my posts and yet the reply count doesn't go up it's a safe bet. And it's really just 58, not 172
Actually it can be. But that's not the point. The point was that software which is in production for long periods of time needs continual support and QA as bugs are found and features added. Something that largely doesn't happen with games.
rando sub contractors is the same as doing QA and creating a development process forcing devs to follow.
Complete gibberish. QA tests your game and files bug reports. This is a no-skill job, anyone can do it
And what's the point of having QA without a development work flow not to implement the changes QA recommends? Clearly these studios don't do QA or patching (which is very often the same role in smaller companies, not waterfall style QA departments) because they release with a shit ton of bugs.
I think you need your meds
As you have never worked in software, you don't understand what QA is. You seem to think QA is finding and fixing bugs, that it's something developers do. QA is testing. Non-developers play your game and submit bugs to the programming team, who may or may not fix them. Games aren't buggy because the testers did a poor job, they pretty much always find the bugs. It's because the programmers didn't fix them. But it's also not the fault of programmers, because programmers program what they're told to program by their managers.
Yes anon, 13 seconds and 40 seconds and 24 seconds and 52 seconds and 1m30 are all the same timestamps. You are sane and do not need your pills, the pills are evil and only exist to cloud your mind. Your doctor is really a demon trying to steal your soul. Run! Run before he gets you!
Please go to MobyGames and look at the credits for any AAA game
You don't need to cherrypick, they all have large QA teams
cherry pick summa deez my boy
Your argument has been repeatedly shown to be moronic. You are inarticulate and barely coherent. The tiny nugget of a point you actually do have is trite: "videogames are not the single most rigorously tested category of application given in the entirely of software development." No one disagrees with that. Yet somehow, you have managed to convince everyone else who wastes the time to read the thread of the incontrovertible fact that you are moronic. I've never seen such a one-sided massacre on BOT.
>let's look at AAA games
Yes, please do, please go on MobyGames and look at the staff for ANY AAA game and see the gigantic list of testers
And we see broken buggy releases.
So? What does that have to do with testing? Testers don't fix game bugs you stupid piece of shit
The cartoonishly stupid state of BOT. Remember folks, this is the same camp that unironically says gamedev is harder than physics sims
And I see you can't refute what I'm saying, as usual
This really is this most mentally ill board on BOT
Many people have pointed out how stupid your statement is. What passes as "extensive QA" in gamedev doesn't amount for any real QA in normal development
Gamedev probably has more through QA than regular software. Regular software isn't any less buggy than games, but it's a lot easier to test and validate. And once again, testers do not fix bugs, they report bugs, you cannot refute this so you just ignore it and insult everyone who tells it to you
We've been over this. Gamedev does not have more QA done compared with regular software. Gamedev is largely a one and done affair. Once you release the game you're done with it. Normal software has to be supported sometimes for decades after it was made. You're pulling that out of your ass.
One release vs long term support has absolutely nothing to do with QA
It's not that you're wrong, you have absolutely no idea what you're talking about, so you can make confidently wrong posts and believe you're absolutely right, because you have no frame of reference
>SDLC has nothing to do with software support
Holy. Fricking. Hell
Samegay
>meds status: not taken
>What is, right click inspect element
This is only a technology board anon
That's literally what we were talking about. That's literally the point of this argument
Yes anon, everyone in this thread is the same person. You're the only sane person here, the other guy is using 172 proxies just to get you personally.
We're talking about QA. Support isn't QA
>>SDLC has nothing to do with software support
Who said anything about support? We're talking about QA. You understand these aren't the same thing right?
Genuine question. Are you 12?
A post about me got over 300 replies? Why are you guys so obsessed?
Please give me a blowjob, blow, j. I post in these threads trying to catch you just for this! What's your price, bby?
>363/18/58/3
HOLY AUTISM BATMAN
This, what the actual frick happened here? Thank God it's over.
It's never over.
The ride never ends fren.
>Muh obscure jrpg is different
Maybe the development culture in Asia is different than the west. I'd believe it. Do I think it's better? From what I've seen and heard no.
>Studios like valve
Valve hasn't really been a game developer for years now. They've done some small one offs but nothing as big as half life 2. The
>Gamedev is so much more complex than physics simulation
Crowd seems to be stuck in the 2000's era of software
>Elden Ring
>sold 25 million copies
>broke all kinds of sales records
>obscure
I accept your surrender.
Exception proves the rule
>Not only is game programming largely an anomaly in development
>what's that supposed to mean
If means you would never get away with the kind of sloppy bullshit you see in web dev, movie render farms or mobile apps, the games industry would turf you out immediately.
The average game is so poorly coded. The average gamedev is useless as a regular programmer
All you’re doing is revealing you exclusively play slop like Assassins Creed and Cyberpunk. Plenty of AAA games don’t have the kind of issues you’re talking about.
I've been very open about what games I play. I've mentioned Skyrim, mount and blade, several FOSS games, and you can probably guess that I've played the Witcher as well. I've listed many AAA that had game breaking bugs on release that were either never patched or patched long after release. Going back to my original claim
>Gamedev is an anomaly
Where else is this bullshit acceptable
>Where else is this bullshit acceptable
In your mom
Both of you autists arguing kys. you are both losers