[BaculumMeumEst]

jon blow is a great example to bring up. he's extremely talented and focused on his craft, and has been churning for decades, unburdened by family, to produce his work, with very talented engineers contributing (including muratori). in the last twenty years, they have shipped two puzzle games.

i don't say that to suggest it's unimpressive, but rather to point out that adopting his methodology of avoiding anything resembling modern languages and tooling comes at a cost. the cost includes a huge hit to productivity. if everyone built games the way these two suggest, there would be orders of magnitude fewer of games available. if everyone built software the way these two suggest, there would be orders of magnitude less software available. i'm sure they would be fine with that outcome. the rest of the world probably would not.

[fullarr]

I think your concept of productivity is faulty.

The point being made is that your increased speed to market comes at a cost

Yes there are many applications that probably just don't need to exist but you can make a living cranking out

Not everyone should do any one thing all the time. But we have to be careful not to always discard hard work in favor of speed and convenience.

Jon Blow and Casey Muratori are reminding people to take responsibility for what we're doing. Learn how things work and be ambitious.

[nradov]

Why?

[fullarr]

Watch the video

[BlargMcLarg]

Eh, Rare was putting out multiple games in a short timespan of larger size in programming teams fairly small in the 90s. The tools themselves don't seem specific to inducing incredibly large development times when the game developers before Blow managed to do it faster and better.

Your point still stands (there's research floating around proving it) but Blow isn't the best example.