How so?

I made games primarily for Windows which we also compiled for Linux. It is mostly input/output stuff, aka hardware issues. That is, audio issues, input issues, storage issues, dependency issues. Modern game engine mostly handle the rest. It wasn’t such a big deal to fix, but most gamedev lacked experience with Linux, and most projects are already over budget and late, so fixing Linux for an extra 2-5% of sales didn’t make much sense at small scale. Proton kind off fixed all of this tho.

I have the impression that being “good” at the game wasn’t even a concern back then. I remember a lot of players being completely unbothered about their own character levels and wealth. Players were busy building communities and driven by small and personal achievements. Sometime I wish gaming had remained niche and never reached the masses. The early 00s was such a sweet spot.

Normal feels like I am controlling the vision frustum (where I want to look at), and inverted feels like I am moving the camera itself, as if it was a physical object. I can play both but I definitely have to remind myself what I am trying to control when making the switch.

I vastly prefer non-inverted, because I like the idea of just pointing where I want to look at. I hope it makes sense. All of this apply mostly for games with orbit camera.

Posting about the stuff I am knowledgeable about sometimes gets me the most downvotes.

Yeah, payroll was outsourced and they met with the firm once or twice a year. The firm took care of mostly everything legal, including insurances and tax benefits afaik. The head of “HR” was a lifelong friend of the owner so I guess he didn’t want to go there.

My experience in a big software company was different and probably just like yours. The people there were rockstars.

Yeah, 4 employees out of 20.

The fact this department even existed is a mystery to me. They didn’t even screen candidates or participate in interviews. It was basically 4 glorified secretaries. To be fair they also managed the payrolls, which consisted of sending the same excel file to he accountant each week. Realistically we would only have needed 1 person to keep track of whatever might pop up and to make sure the payroll system was up to date. The owners liked to screen and do the interviews themselves.

At some other place I worked we had 1 admin/accountant person working like 1 or 2 days a week for a business of about 40 employees. Again the owners were taking care of new hires.

HR as a department seems largely useless unless you’re hiring 365 days a year and have so many employees that you can’t keep up with all the requests. HR people are usually terrible at screening candidates anyway.

Holy. One place I worked at had way too many HR personnel. It was crazy. I happenned to have my workstation directly next to them. They quite literally did nothing all day. Nothing. At. All. It blew my mind.

So why did we have so many? Well at basically every company-wide meeting this dep was putting on the biggest theater performance of being overwhelmed by “governmental endless bureaucracy” or something. So they always tried to hire more of their own friends. Temporary roles always became permanent and we ended up with 20% of the company working HR. The owner of the company, bless his heart, really could not say no.

My experience with HR in most companies has been hit and miss, but this one example really opened my eyes. Of course if you hire people who are basically actors you run the risk of forming an HR dep that is very dramatic and manipulative.

I can’t really blame the workers for taking advantage of an easy job and making a great living out of browsing Facebook and gossiping all day. But it really suck that the actual good workers were over-worked because other areas of the business were under-staffed. Virtually nobody else had the political impact in the hiring process HR had. Obviously this business wasn’t run by genius.

30% of which already go to Steam in the case of Garry. Plus wages, taxes, rent, equipment. You add another 10-20%+ on top which you can’t predict now because of Unity. Plus all the paid libraries and licenses already charging per seats or game revenue.

That being said, devs like Garry absolutely make banks and 400k is not that huge of a chunk for him. He, and a lot of devs, would probably be paying more on a royalty system like UE, which is the real irony here. But yeah, what most people lament is the slimeyness of the move and the terms.

It is incredible really, I worked with C# for so long, and I tend to be very critical of the stuff I’ve used for a long time. For C#, I am struggling to figure how I would improve it, because all the stuff that suck in C# is usually the lesser of two evils.

Of course if you hate classes, types, managed memory or anything invented in the last 20 years you will hate it, and I’ve met people like this. That is why you gotta keep learning as a dev, you don’t want to be one of those.

The database should be made in Flash.

Virtually no anticheat worked on Linux just a few years ago except maybe Valve and Blizzard in-house solutions. Games that are out and already committed to a specific anticheat can’t do much but to wait, so it is not really on them. Changing the anticheat solution mid-way on a released game would piss off so many people you can’t imagine. On a brand new game though, I would agree that this should be considered.

There are tons of reasons my dude. You can still have platform-dependant technologies in your game even if the base engine itself supports linux.

It is almost always due to the anticheat programs.

The best codebase I have ever seen and collaborated on was also boring as fuck.

• Small, immutable modules.
• Every new features was coded by extension (the ‘o’ in S.O.L.I.D)
• All dependencies were resolved by injection.
• All the application life cycle was managed by configurable scopes.
• There was absolutely no boiler plate except for the initial injectors.
• All of the tests were brain-dead and took very minimal effort to write. Tests served both as documentation and specification for modules.
• “Refactoring” was as simple as changing a constructor or a configuration file.
• All the input/output of the modules were configurable streams.

There is more to it, but basically, it was a very strict codebase, and it used a lot of opinionated libraries. Not an easy codebase to understand if you’re a newbie, but it was absolutely brain dead to maintain and extend on.

Coding actually took very little time of our day, most of it consisted of researching the best tech or what to add next. I think the codebase was objectively strictly better than all other similar software I’ve seen and worked on. We joked A LOT when it came time to change something in the app pretending it would take weeks and many 8 pointers, then we’d casually make the change while joking about it.

It might sound mythical and bullshity, and it wasn’t perfect, it should be said that dependency injection often come in the form of highly opinionated frameworks, but it really felt like what software development should be. It really felt like engineering, boring and predictable, every PO dreams.

That being said, I given up trying to convince people that having life-cycle logic are over the place and fetching dependencies left and right always lead to chaos. Unfortunately I cannot really tell you guys what the software was about because I am not allowed to, but there was a lot of moving parts (hence why we decided to go with this approach). I will also reiterate that it was boring as fuck. If anything, my hot take would be that most programmers are subconsciously lying to themselves, and prefer to code whatever it is they like, instead of what the codebase need, and using whatever tool they like, instead of the tools the project and the team need. Programming like and engineer is not “fun”, programming like a cowboy and ignoring the tests is a whole lot of fun.

The whole point of social democracy is to borrow concepts and values from socialism, I never said it is socialism. I am not even sure what you’re arguing about and why you’re so obstinate on such a pedantic point.

First off, good luck finding a definition of social democracy out there that can skim over the parallels with socialism. At this point I tried in good faith, but obviously you have a problem with the actual definition of social democracy, this is not something I made up, this described as such everywhere.

You’re free to use whatever made-up definition of your own, as I am sure someone as obstinate and strongly opinionated as you are won’t be moving an inch, as it would seem there is no chance you will actually research what is social democracy. Sure it is a nationalism movement or whatever you say. This could have been an interesting conversation, but yeah I suppose you’re here to bludgeon your strong opinions on people and to be insufferable about it. Have a good day.

Part of it yes, it is a mixed economy. State-owned corporations whenever it makes sense, welfare state, income redistribution, regulation of the economy, all in all within capitalism. Again, Social Democracy is just a subset of socialism applied to capitalism. Full-blown ownership of the means of production by the workers, without a private sector, that’d be just plain socialism or communism.

I am not sure what to tell you, I live in one of the few social democracy in America. Maybe have a look at the Wiki? It is a socialist model by definition, and the state does indeed own infrastructure around here. Care to link to your definition of social democracy?

Liberalism + Socialist, which imply something in-between, because yes, otherwise we’d just say socialism.

It is very hard to have rational disccussion when people disagree on the basic observable facts, ignore the “rules” of debate, and are struggling with critical thinking. You can meet difficult people on all the political spectrum, but certain idealogy attract more difficult people, and certain stuff mainstream conservatives believe right now has absolutely no basis in reality.