3 ms·
> today you no longer need to be as brilliant as John Carmack to achieve success That is a lie. To achieve anything similar to what Quake and Doom were at thei
by 10098 13y ago
> today you no longer need to be as brilliant as John Carmack to achieve success
That is a lie. To achieve anything similar to what Quake and Doom were at their time, one must possess raw undiluted talent and no amount of tools, libraries or online resources are going to help.
If it was that easy, we'd see masterpieces pop up every few months. But instead the market is flooded with mediocrity. Which really should come as no surprise, because we know that 90% of everything is crap. That includes people: most people (including myself), unfortunately, aren't half as smart and talented as they think they are. Which is why we struggle to create things that could be considered merely "good", and "great" is completely outside of our reach.
- altero 13y agoBS. You do not need "raw undiluted talent" to create stuff like Instagram. Most successful games today are light years behind 20 years old counterparts.
- 10098 13y agoPlease read my comment more carefully. > To achieve anything similar to what Quake and Doom were at their time... Most of the games are by no means as important as Wolfenstein/Doom/Quake were when they first came out. id software laid the foundation for the modern FPS genre and defined the way the industry evolved for years to come. Instagram is just a dumbed-down flickr with a mobile app.
- baq 13y agoMy personal favorite modern parallel is SpaceX vs Facebook. Social network that sells ads vs the stars.
- manuelflara 13y agoIt says "to achieve success" (think Candy Crush et al), not "to create a masterpiece".
- 10098 13y agoIn that case his point is moot. Of course you don't need to be as bright as Carmack to achieve some definition of success. You can be a furniture salesman and achieve success that way. But it's like saying that water is wet. His argument only makes sense if he implies that you don't need to be as smart to repeat id software's success these days, which I think is incorrect.