4 ms·

The conclusion: > Finally, based on our analysis of the data we collected, we make a few recommendations to game developers. First, be sure to practice good ri

by norswap 10y ago

The conclusion: > Finally, based on our analysis of the data we collected, we make a few recommendations to game developers. First, be sure to practice good risk management techniques. This will help avoid some of the adverse e ects of obstacles that you may encounter during development. Second, prescribe to an iterative development process, and utilize prototypes as a method of proving features and concepts before commit- ting them to your design. Third, don't be overly ambitious in your design. Be reasonable, and take into account your schedule and budget before adding something to your de- sign. Building o of that, don't be overly optimistic with your scheduling. If you make an estimate that initially feels optimistic to you, don't give that estimate to your stake- holders. Revisit and reassess your design to form a better estimation. It's amazing how common-sensical this all his. But then again, we could all use a little more common sense sometimes. As Charlie Munger would put it: "It is remarkable how much long-term advantage people like [Warren Buffett and myself] have gotten by trying to be consistently not stupid, instead of trying to be very intelligent."

LionessLover 10y ago
When the results look bad it doesn't mean people don't follow common sense. For example, when the project would never get approval and a budget with realism but will get both when risks are left out when asking for money it's common sense to ignore risks. The team has a budget for another year, and what happens then is a different problem. The main objective of employees is not to get projects done, it is to get paid. Unfortunately our system has created perverse incentives: What manager or entrepreneur can afford to take a step back and say "what I'm proposing may not work, let's stop the project"? We have chosen to work under a pressure as if our lives are at stake (and they are - not our bodies, but our livelihood). The guy selling worthless shit, getting people to buy stuff they don't need, that may even be bad for them (or for those producing them) does not have problems. The same guy voluntarily giving up his job where he would have to do things he thinks are actually bad and/or useless is seen as a "parasite" on society - he's not working and we still have to feed him??? You bet all my estimates show the project is worthwhile if I don't have an (equally good) alternative.

by norswap 10y ago

LionessLover 10y ago

When the results look bad it doesn't mean people don't follow common sense. For example, when the project would never get approval and a budget with realism but will get both when risks are left out when asking for money it's common sense to ignore risks. The team has a budget for another year, and what happens then is a different problem. The main objective of employees is not to get projects done, it is to get paid. Unfortunately our system has created perverse incentives: What manager or entrepreneur can afford to take a step back and say "what I'm proposing may not work, let's stop the project"? We have chosen to work under a pressure as if our lives are at stake (and they are - not our bodies, but our livelihood). The guy selling worthless shit, getting people to buy stuff they don't need, that may even be bad for them (or for those producing them) does not have problems. The same guy voluntarily giving up his job where he would have to do things he thinks are actually bad and/or useless is seen as a "parasite" on society - he's not working and we still have to feed him??? You bet all my estimates show the project is worthwhile if I don't have an (equally good) alternative.