Skip to main content


Me at 10 years old: Developers knows the #videogame they're making inside and out!
Me after 15 years working in software engineering with dubious QA practices: We're lucky if they'd ever played the game.
Up to 2 or 3-persons studios, yes. Beyond that, I can't make any promise.
Have you seen the speedrun of Psychonauts where the designers watch it?

It's *really fun*, both because the designers are shocked by what is happening, but also their theorising about why it happened
I'm not surprised and it should be an interesting watch. I haven't played the game yet and I intend on it, so I'll save it for later, but I'm interested in a link.
@silverwizard@Hypolite Petovan

I love the comments. Will watch a bit later.

> "This is Chris's fault. I told him this would happen."

😁
Honestly, as a person who writes a lot of games - seeing someone who had used my game without me, and then later seeing their reactions.
Even simple systems are incredibly complex. It all comes down to trust (well-placed or not).
@Brad Koehn β˜‘οΈ Indeed, and it doesn't prevent enjoyable products to come about.
My impression is that it highly depends on the studio. The boss of the German studio Piranha Bytes said in an interview that it's part of their philosophy that they must like playing their own game, otherwise it's not good enough. Looking at many other games I don't feel that this is any priority to them. Prime example for me: stellaris (paradox interactive). In principle a fun game with lots of potential, but people can hardly play into late game or multiplayer because of horrible performance and unreliable netcode. Here, even if the devs wanted to they couldn't play a match to the end πŸ˜‰
Like I said, "we're lucky if". It doesn't rule it out completely, just makes it unlikely!
⇧