7 ms·

Jeff has had 25 years to get good at it. Based on the reasoning in his article, it seems like he didn't try.

by alttab 7y ago

navigatesol 7y ago
>it seems like he didn't try. He got good at other things he cared more about it. Maybe he should hang out on HackerNews more, so he can be an expert on everything.
- deleted 7y ago
  [deleted]
- sfg 7y ago
  I'm so glad somebody sane has shown up. The guy is doing well, relative to his own aims and objectives, and has found a way to work within his limitations to hit a sweet spot that allows him to support his family in a happy life and provide games enjoyed by a loyal fanbase. What do we discover from HN? He's a lazy bugger that hasn't put any real effort in to respond to his customer's complaints and has failed to learn key lessons regarding his own business (that he has successfully run for twenty-five years). Sometimes this place is completely ridiculous.
  - atoav 7y ago
    This is what I said in a different comment: there are people like that in film too – they make films their whole life, found a certain level that they feel comfortable with and settle there. That is a perfectly fine choice and in no way should anybody talk bad about it. The only thing that bugs me however is when they try to come up with excuses why their works don't live up to the standard of other artists judge themselves by. Jeff listed some quite compelling arguments for his decision, most of them economical, but it still feels like an excuse of somebody who knows they could do better, which is kinda sad.
    - marvin 7y ago
      Why is that sad? He seems to be perfectly content, maybe except for about the fact that some people criticize him. You don't have to always strive to be among the world elite at everything. Often, mediocrity in some areas of life (professional or otherwise) is a perfectly valid choice that will lead to greater happiness in the end.
    - AnIdiotOnTheNet 7y ago
      Why should he expend effort getting better at something he doesn't really care that much about when he can spend his time getting better at things he does? People like you always seem to miss the thing about time being a scarce resource.
      - atoav 7y ago
        "People like me" are uttering these things, because "people like me" are facing the same or similar questions themselves. You are right about time being a scarce resource. This is precisely the reason why one shouldn't skimp on $IMPORTANT_THING: because it can greatly reduce the value of all the time put into the thing already. So you got me 180° wrong – if his motives were purely economical, I'd completely understand his arguments. But because it is not purely economical I see this as a vague sign that he might not value the time he put into it himself enough, which is never a good thing in the long term.
        AnIdiotOnTheNet 7y ago
        Why does the sum of the value of his time have to be expressed purely in profit? That's ridiculous. Way I see it, he's optimized for the amount of enjoyment he gets out of what he does while still being able to pay the bills with it. We could all hope to be so lucky.
        atoav 7y ago
        I nowhere said that it did.
- atoav 7y ago
  Well if you make games, and visuals are a part of a game, then knowing when your visuals need improvement is a crucial skill. Jeff doesn't needs to be an expert in everything, he needs to see what doesn't work and fix it, let others fix it or decide this is as good as it gets.
  - mcphage 7y ago
    > decide this is as good as it gets. He just wrote a very long article explaining just that.
    - atoav 7y ago
      And it reads like and excuse to himself, which is probably the reason for the reaction on HN. A bit like a film maker who says: "If only I had the budget, Hollywood has, I could totally do better films than them". Don't get me wrong, good art doesn't necessarily need a lot of money or resources. It needs the right eyes that know when it works and when it doesn't. He seems to aknowledge he doesn't have them and explains why he can't hire someone, all perfectly fine. But also sad, because if he could he clearly would.
      - kkarakk 7y ago
        No he's not saying he could make better games than AAA if he had funding, he's outright stating that his games are top notch in his niche(as per his belief and shown by his customer's faith in his products)
      - eropple 7y ago
        > good art doesn't necessarily need a lot of money or resources Having spent at least as much money, out of pocket, on a game that never shipped as JV spends to ship something consistent that feeds his family, I can assure you that this is not the case. Art is far-and-away the most expensive part of any game that wants mass market appeal. It just is. It doesn't matter if you're using a bunch of freelancers from countries that lost all their vowels along the way, it's still expensive. The solution, then, is to build a long-tail audience that'll buy your stuff because it scratches that itch, even if it doesn't to people who are just window shopping. You know--what JV has done.
atoav 7y ago
That would be my guess too. Another guess would be that for him visuals have simply never been a thing that was all that important – otherwise he would have tried to learn a thing or two about this important part of games on his journey. The thing people need to realize is that in compound arts like games, films, theatre every part is important. You can do a film with poor lighting if every other aspect is great and there is a reason why the poor lighting adds to the film as a whole. But you can't make films for 25 years and decide sound isn't all that important – unless you want to look like a complete amateur. Visuals are an important part of games and independent of the style (photo realism, toon, purely ascii, ...) a game is much more interesting to pick up and play when you feel somebody actually cared about what they put in front of your eyeballs. If you see a trailer of a film, filmed on a shaky phone with bad light and indistinguishable dialoge, you might decide to never watch it, even if it would've been the most interesting and moving story of all times. But that would've been the fault of the film maker, because they failed to convince you why you need to watch this film despite the technical flaws. That means you need to see the thing as a whole, only then you can decide which role each part ought to play.
- kkarakk 7y ago
  Limited visuals just enhance your judgement of everything else in the game - as long as you're willing to move beyond the limited visuals. Some people are, despite the tone of the haters.
- NateEag 7y ago
  > But you can't make films for 25 years and decide sound isn't all that important – unless you want to look like a complete amateur. Given that he's making a living with his current strategy, and has been for twenty-five years, he is by definition not an amateur, let alone a complete one. Indeed, the amateur is more likely the person who insists on making every aspect match their aesthetic ideal. They are not giving thought to what could make them profitable, instead focusing on building something that is precisely what they want.

Jeff has had 25 years to get good at it. Based on the reasoning in his article, it seems like he didn't try.

by alttab 7y ago

Jeff has had 25 years to get good at it. Based on the reasoning in his article, it seems like he didn't try.

>it seems like he didn't try. He got good at other things he cared more about it. Maybe he should hang out on HackerNews more, so he can be an expert on everything.

deleted 7y ago
[deleted]
sfg 7y ago
I'm so glad somebody sane has shown up. The guy is doing well, relative to his own aims and objectives, and has found a way to work within his limitations to hit a sweet spot that allows him to support his family in a happy life and provide games enjoyed by a loyal fanbase. What do we discover from HN? He's a lazy bugger that hasn't put any real effort in to respond to his customer's complaints and has failed to learn key lessons regarding his own business (that he has successfully run for twenty-five years). Sometimes this place is completely ridiculous.
- atoav 7y ago
  This is what I said in a different comment: there are people like that in film too – they make films their whole life, found a certain level that they feel comfortable with and settle there. That is a perfectly fine choice and in no way should anybody talk bad about it. The only thing that bugs me however is when they try to come up with excuses why their works don't live up to the standard of other artists judge themselves by. Jeff listed some quite compelling arguments for his decision, most of them economical, but it still feels like an excuse of somebody who knows they could do better, which is kinda sad.
  - marvin 7y ago
    Why is that sad? He seems to be perfectly content, maybe except for about the fact that some people criticize him. You don't have to always strive to be among the world elite at everything. Often, mediocrity in some areas of life (professional or otherwise) is a perfectly valid choice that will lead to greater happiness in the end.
  - AnIdiotOnTheNet 7y ago
    Why should he expend effort getting better at something he doesn't really care that much about when he can spend his time getting better at things he does? People like you always seem to miss the thing about time being a scarce resource.
    - atoav 7y ago
      "People like me" are uttering these things, because "people like me" are facing the same or similar questions themselves. You are right about time being a scarce resource. This is precisely the reason why one shouldn't skimp on $IMPORTANT_THING: because it can greatly reduce the value of all the time put into the thing already. So you got me 180° wrong – if his motives were purely economical, I'd completely understand his arguments. But because it is not purely economical I see this as a vague sign that he might not value the time he put into it himself enough, which is never a good thing in the long term.
      - AnIdiotOnTheNet 7y ago
        Why does the sum of the value of his time have to be expressed purely in profit? That's ridiculous. Way I see it, he's optimized for the amount of enjoyment he gets out of what he does while still being able to pay the bills with it. We could all hope to be so lucky.
        atoav 7y ago
        I nowhere said that it did.
atoav 7y ago
Well if you make games, and visuals are a part of a game, then knowing when your visuals need improvement is a crucial skill. Jeff doesn't needs to be an expert in everything, he needs to see what doesn't work and fix it, let others fix it or decide this is as good as it gets.
- mcphage 7y ago
  > decide this is as good as it gets. He just wrote a very long article explaining just that.
  - atoav 7y ago
    And it reads like and excuse to himself, which is probably the reason for the reaction on HN. A bit like a film maker who says: "If only I had the budget, Hollywood has, I could totally do better films than them". Don't get me wrong, good art doesn't necessarily need a lot of money or resources. It needs the right eyes that know when it works and when it doesn't. He seems to aknowledge he doesn't have them and explains why he can't hire someone, all perfectly fine. But also sad, because if he could he clearly would.
    - kkarakk 7y ago
      No he's not saying he could make better games than AAA if he had funding, he's outright stating that his games are top notch in his niche(as per his belief and shown by his customer's faith in his products)
    - eropple 7y ago
      > good art doesn't necessarily need a lot of money or resources Having spent at least as much money, out of pocket, on a game that never shipped as JV spends to ship something consistent that feeds his family, I can assure you that this is not the case. Art is far-and-away the most expensive part of any game that wants mass market appeal. It just is. It doesn't matter if you're using a bunch of freelancers from countries that lost all their vowels along the way, it's still expensive. The solution, then, is to build a long-tail audience that'll buy your stuff because it scratches that itch, even if it doesn't to people who are just window shopping. You know--what JV has done.

atoav 7y ago

That would be my guess too. Another guess would be that for him visuals have simply never been a thing that was all that important – otherwise he would have tried to learn a thing or two about this important part of games on his journey. The thing people need to realize is that in compound arts like games, films, theatre every part is important. You can do a film with poor lighting if every other aspect is great and there is a reason why the poor lighting adds to the film as a whole. But you can't make films for 25 years and decide sound isn't all that important – unless you want to look like a complete amateur. Visuals are an important part of games and independent of the style (photo realism, toon, purely ascii, ...) a game is much more interesting to pick up and play when you feel somebody actually cared about what they put in front of your eyeballs. If you see a trailer of a film, filmed on a shaky phone with bad light and indistinguishable dialoge, you might decide to never watch it, even if it would've been the most interesting and moving story of all times. But that would've been the fault of the film maker, because they failed to convince you why you need to watch this film despite the technical flaws. That means you need to see the thing as a whole, only then you can decide which role each part ought to play.

kkarakk 7y ago
Limited visuals just enhance your judgement of everything else in the game - as long as you're willing to move beyond the limited visuals. Some people are, despite the tone of the haters.
NateEag 7y ago
> But you can't make films for 25 years and decide sound isn't all that important – unless you want to look like a complete amateur. Given that he's making a living with his current strategy, and has been for twenty-five years, he is by definition not an amateur, let alone a complete one. Indeed, the amateur is more likely the person who insists on making every aspect match their aesthetic ideal. They are not giving thought to what could make them profitable, instead focusing on building something that is precisely what they want.