• 0 Posts
  • 73 Comments
Joined 11 months ago
cake
Cake day: August 3rd, 2023

help-circle
  • This is my stance as well. I have a decade of experience and I have been a workaholic, so at this point I wouldn’t want to work somewhere with that bs anyway. I also have experienced one great HR team.

    That being said, I know how the game is played. A decade ago, I listed a dozen things on my resume I would have had trouble to demonstrate, but nowadays I can just build a nice story that is 100% truthful from cherry-picked facts. Sad truth is that if you’re too candid you might come off as too disengaged nowadays. I’ve seen it happen in interviews. Best to pretend that your life led to this moment, and that you’re that kind of person to find exciting whatever kind of work it is. If you lack experience for entry-level roles, just fill the gaps with lies.


  • It’s the same for every place you need to apply or pitch an idea where the places are limited. Criterias just get absurd, and even acing the criterias might not be enough. People who rise are simply the better bullshiters.

    Years ago my friend received a call for a job, within minutes the HR person asked if he had a good experience with a certain language and he flat out said no, even though he had some very basic knowledge. The interview ended right there. I just couldn’t believe that he wouldn’t lie, he was perfect for the job, but HR does not care. He’s been in the same role for 10 years and unwilling to “lie” to get a promotion or a new role, so that is where we are. This 30% of honest employees is probably not getting the best jobs.


  • Yeep, I think everyone with half a brain feared for the peaceful transfer of power early in his presidency, or even back during his first campaign. Reporters asked him every now and then if he’d accept the results and he always answered wannabe-dictator shit. Then to the leading to the 6th of jan it was plain as day that he would pull something with the mail-in bailots as a justification to overthrow the government. Then of course it fucking happens, and a third of the country is playing dumb. If you were reading the alt-right popular forum you knew it was meant to be their big day, a lot of people were armed that day but they pussied out


  • 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 love Valve, but I really don’t understand why gamers give Steam so much praise. It is a closed platform filled with DRM on which you don’t truely own a copy of the game (unlike gog), and on top of that they take a 30% cut of every sales and transactions which is enormous for small studios to pay. Support is poor and the algo/front page distribution of traffic and promotions is a black box.

    Don’t get me wrong, Gabe seems like a sensible human, and Steam is successful because it offered such a great service to players. But it’s been almost 20years now since Steam, and I have not seen Valve slow down the greed. They don’t need the money as this point. They don’t need 30% of every game sale on PC. This is just as greedy as the other company people hate.





  • Maybe I am crazy but I always thought it was lazy as fuck to have meetings for absolutely everything. Like, how about you spend some time researching and analyzing a subject on your own before calling a meeting for every little step of the way.

    Now I understand that there must be a balance, but man there was so many of those meetings where nobody has a clue on the subject and it is just pointless talking for over an hour. Another meeting is scheduled with another party as soon as that one meeting is over, and it is just back-to-back meeting with everyone in the company, slowly but surely deriving a solution from everyone opinion. Seems to me like people who do well in those environments are the lazy workers who just want to spend their whole days chatting in meetings.

    Can we, at some point, derive a solution based on experimentation and verifiable facts? Can someone come up with a summary analysis with recommendations and possible solutions? Why does everything has to be the result of endless meetings, endless compromises with people without a clue, and end up being a shitty design-by-committee feature.

    Anyway, could be just be a me thing, or specific to that place I worked at.


  • So, I figure all modern corporate offices are exactly the same then. There is some good stuff in there, but it is so over the top and forced that it sort of ruin the benefits imo.

    Positivity is great, even if it is forced a little, but hiding all negativity, issues and criticism make forced positivity completely useless. Not to mention that at the office I worked there was virtually always one or many of your “bosses” in earshot, in every situation. There wasn’t a daily, a meeting or a workstation in that job where some guy responsible for my promotions and employment wasn’t listening. This is how you make sure nothing of value is ever said in your dailies and retro meeting. It’s all great!

    Now let’s play the game of figuring the smallest politically correct nitpick to mention during the retro so that we can check that self-improvement/self-organizing checkbox in front of the boss. What, you think over 10 hours of useless scrum meeting is wasteful, on top of the actual important meetings? Well, better not mention it. I mean you could, but shitting on scrum will get you canned. Do you think the way points/hours/complexity is evaluated completely miss the mark? Or are you tempted to mention Goodhart’s law when reviewing whatever metric in Jira? Well, better not do that, because you might as well say that your boss’s job needs not to exist. Better not mention anything that might compromise someone else in front of the boss, or anything that could be used against you in a review.

    Because that’s the thing, since no one ever admit to mistake and make themselves vulnerable, if you’re the only one to do it it’s gonna raise “red flags” and you’re gonna hear about it in your next review. Better give a good not-so-anonymous review to your immediate managers too, raising any sort of issues could prevent one, or both of you from getting promoted with increased pay.


  • I did not really mind when I worked at a ~10 people company, it kind of made sense. Working on a floor with over a hundred people in an open office was miserable. There was always someone on Zoom or people having live meeting in earshot.

    Blow my mind that all those office managers and floor planners and supposedly expert at organizing a work environment think that it make sense to cram in hundred of people working on wildly different stuff together at earshot distance. How hard would it be to create big divisions so that you only get to hear the 10 or so people which you’re directly involved with. Anyway, there was clearly an “everyone must be an extrovert” culture thing going on. The higher ups sure seemed to enjoy hearing and seeing everyone everywhere all the time.