3 ms·

Sadly at Rockstar it's likely that employees are curious, but are under so much pressure for deadlines, and working such long hours, that they don't have time t

Sadly at Rockstar it's likely that employees are curious, but are under so much pressure for deadlines, and working such long hours, that they don't have time to follow their curiosity.

switchbak 4y ago
When problems are this obvious, it's surprising that someone doesn't have a look, even if they're busy. Maybe I'm asking too much/projecting here, but I just don't understand how people put up with fairly obvious semi-breakage as much as they do. I have this at my current job, I seem to be the only one (not really, but seems like it sometimes) interested in finding out why things are slow/broken and investing the time to fix it. If you're "busy" all the time, but put up with things that slow you down, you're hamstringing yourself by not fixing the brokenness. When only a small number of people take the time to fix things (typically other's issues), that becomes very demotivating. That would be like being on an all-day ski tour, and feeling too rushed to bother getting rid of the slush on your skis. Yes, you feel rushed because you're moving slower that usual. Taking 4 minutes to kick the slush off will make you much faster on the overall trip. (Sharpening the saw analogy, etc). Sometimes "busy" is a state of mind, more than it is a reflection of reality. I know each situation is unique, but I've seen this enough times to understand that it's often a form of dysfunction rather than a reasonable reaction to the work situation. This is like when people used to say "we're too busy to write tests". Well, maybe you need to get better at communicating the trade-offs to the broader business, and be a bit more assertive about non-functional aspects that are still important to address.
- 0xFACEFEED 4y ago
  > Maybe I'm asking too much/projecting here, but I just don't understand how people put up with fairly obvious semi-breakage as much as they do. > I have this at my current job, I seem to be the only one (not really, but seems like it sometimes) interested in finding out why things are slow/broken and investing the time to fix it. You will quickly shed yourself of this philosophy if you become a business owner. You can test those waters by releasing a non-trivial open source project that gains a non-trivial amount of users. There will always be at least 100 things that are broken in some way but not impacting the core business. You'll have to pick only 1 to work on. And, if you're unlucky, some frustrated customer may write a blog post about issue #65. An issue that you're fully aware of but haven't prioritized. Guess what you'll do as a business owner? You'll prioritize that issue since it's now very visible and maybe even throw $10,000 at the customer who took time to do their research; as is what happened here. > This is like when people used to say "we're too busy to write tests". Well, maybe you need to get better at communicating the trade-offs to the broader business, and be a bit more assertive about non-functional aspects that are still important to address. Or perhaps the need for tests was communicated and the business made the decision to not prioritize it. You may not like that decision. Mind that the decision to "not write tests" is never explicitly stated so simply. No one wants to look bad. Instead that decision is expressed through minimizing its level of priority compared to other things. Still don't like the decision? Well you have three options: 1) Ignore the stated goals of the company and do what you think is right instead. In which case you're acting against the interests of the company that's paying you. 2) Sacrifice your own free time in order to provide your idea of value to the company (that may actually be valuable! but that the company doesn't value enough to prioritize) 3) Do what the company asks with plausible deniability. Also known as kicking the can. Also known as not my problem. Sometimes doing #1 or #2 could greatly benefit you. Perhaps that thing you're doing (eg: writing tests) will somehow measurably improve the business in the future WITH PROOF so that you'll get get recognized. Or perhaps there's management shake-up and the new leadership perfectly aligns with your philosophy, etc, etc. But that's rare. More often than not your attempt at fixing the company's problems behind the scenes will go unnoticed and unrewarded. And if you do get rewarded, often times it's a pittance compared to the amount of time you invested. My personal philosophy is I simply do not work for companies that don't align with what I value. For example, to me, it's exhausting and unrewarding to work at a company that doesn't appreciate a GREAT user experience.
- glenneroo 4y ago
  From reading a lot of comments on HN, I think you might be in a semi-privileged position if you have enough time left over (and/or are allowed by management) to find slow/broken code and then are allowed to even commit code with doesn't have a JIRA ticket (created by someone else) attached :) Dysfunctional... possibly true but isn't that (unfortunately) more or less the norm in IT? Not to say it shouldn't be fixed but at the end of the day you have 'x' time to ship 'y' features in order get paid 'z' dollars so that the company can continue to survive... combined with "management" often under-estimating with respect to time, requirements and (un)foreseen hurdles.
asdff 4y ago
Why are they working so hard on an 8 year old game? Aren't they just basically producing content packs now? Doesn't even seem like the playerbase cares when there are gamebreaking bugs ongoing for months.
astrange 4y ago
Rockstar doesn't publish new games very often, so if they have deadlines they're internally-set ones.

Sadly at Rockstar it's likely that employees are curious, but are under so much pressure for deadlines, and working such long hours, that they don't have time to follow their curiosity.

switchbak 4y ago

When problems are this obvious, it's surprising that someone doesn't have a look, even if they're busy. Maybe I'm asking too much/projecting here, but I just don't understand how people put up with fairly obvious semi-breakage as much as they do. I have this at my current job, I seem to be the only one (not really, but seems like it sometimes) interested in finding out why things are slow/broken and investing the time to fix it. If you're "busy" all the time, but put up with things that slow you down, you're hamstringing yourself by not fixing the brokenness. When only a small number of people take the time to fix things (typically other's issues), that becomes very demotivating. That would be like being on an all-day ski tour, and feeling too rushed to bother getting rid of the slush on your skis. Yes, you feel rushed because you're moving slower that usual. Taking 4 minutes to kick the slush off will make you much faster on the overall trip. (Sharpening the saw analogy, etc). Sometimes "busy" is a state of mind, more than it is a reflection of reality. I know each situation is unique, but I've seen this enough times to understand that it's often a form of dysfunction rather than a reasonable reaction to the work situation. This is like when people used to say "we're too busy to write tests". Well, maybe you need to get better at communicating the trade-offs to the broader business, and be a bit more assertive about non-functional aspects that are still important to address.

0xFACEFEED 4y ago
> Maybe I'm asking too much/projecting here, but I just don't understand how people put up with fairly obvious semi-breakage as much as they do. > I have this at my current job, I seem to be the only one (not really, but seems like it sometimes) interested in finding out why things are slow/broken and investing the time to fix it. You will quickly shed yourself of this philosophy if you become a business owner. You can test those waters by releasing a non-trivial open source project that gains a non-trivial amount of users. There will always be at least 100 things that are broken in some way but not impacting the core business. You'll have to pick only 1 to work on. And, if you're unlucky, some frustrated customer may write a blog post about issue #65. An issue that you're fully aware of but haven't prioritized. Guess what you'll do as a business owner? You'll prioritize that issue since it's now very visible and maybe even throw $10,000 at the customer who took time to do their research; as is what happened here. > This is like when people used to say "we're too busy to write tests". Well, maybe you need to get better at communicating the trade-offs to the broader business, and be a bit more assertive about non-functional aspects that are still important to address. Or perhaps the need for tests was communicated and the business made the decision to not prioritize it. You may not like that decision. Mind that the decision to "not write tests" is never explicitly stated so simply. No one wants to look bad. Instead that decision is expressed through minimizing its level of priority compared to other things. Still don't like the decision? Well you have three options: 1) Ignore the stated goals of the company and do what you think is right instead. In which case you're acting against the interests of the company that's paying you. 2) Sacrifice your own free time in order to provide your idea of value to the company (that may actually be valuable! but that the company doesn't value enough to prioritize) 3) Do what the company asks with plausible deniability. Also known as kicking the can. Also known as not my problem. Sometimes doing #1 or #2 could greatly benefit you. Perhaps that thing you're doing (eg: writing tests) will somehow measurably improve the business in the future WITH PROOF so that you'll get get recognized. Or perhaps there's management shake-up and the new leadership perfectly aligns with your philosophy, etc, etc. But that's rare. More often than not your attempt at fixing the company's problems behind the scenes will go unnoticed and unrewarded. And if you do get rewarded, often times it's a pittance compared to the amount of time you invested. My personal philosophy is I simply do not work for companies that don't align with what I value. For example, to me, it's exhausting and unrewarding to work at a company that doesn't appreciate a GREAT user experience.
glenneroo 4y ago
From reading a lot of comments on HN, I think you might be in a semi-privileged position if you have enough time left over (and/or are allowed by management) to find slow/broken code and then are allowed to even commit code with doesn't have a JIRA ticket (created by someone else) attached :) Dysfunctional... possibly true but isn't that (unfortunately) more or less the norm in IT? Not to say it shouldn't be fixed but at the end of the day you have 'x' time to ship 'y' features in order get paid 'z' dollars so that the company can continue to survive... combined with "management" often under-estimating with respect to time, requirements and (un)foreseen hurdles.

asdff 4y ago

Why are they working so hard on an 8 year old game? Aren't they just basically producing content packs now? Doesn't even seem like the playerbase cares when there are gamebreaking bugs ongoing for months.

astrange 4y ago

Rockstar doesn't publish new games very often, so if they have deadlines they're internally-set ones.