> A game that illustrates that success is tied to performance is factorio.
Sure, performance is important if you are making a game with that level of simulation. Most games (or software in general) don't go for that level of simulation/performance.
For every Factorio, there are thousands of games that work just as well without that level of simulation. From FPS to trashy mobile games that are just a well disguised slot machine.
> There’s games that are ridiculously simple in comparison let your fans spinning for no reason, grind to a halt or crash.
Sure and Morrowind used to corrupt your save-files in a horrible manner. It still sold as hot cakes. Even though I remember it being a hog on my resources.
Warcraft 3 had an unpatched memory issue people used to extend its programming capabilities, until it turns out said issue could be used for RCE, so Blizzard had to break every existing custom map (like DOTA, not like custom melee map) to fix it. It started several independent genres.
------------
Point is you don't need to think about every ms of execution if you are writing 99.9% of software. Sure you can take some precautions and use some tried and true methods (using immutable trees for editing).
But even those come with caveats. You have only so and so complexity budget, will you spend it on features or performance? Almost always the answer is features.
That’s right but the point I was trying to make that there are whole categories of features you cannot implement if performance doesn’t allow it.
I‘m not looking at this from a pure business perspective because it’s not fruitful. We all know that you can produce crap and make a huge buck, because of marketing, dark patterns, manipulation, exploitation, luck and so on.
I‘m saying there are good examples where building things from a lower layer up does not only make sense, but is necessary for creative freedom and quality they achieved.
Sure, performance is important if you are making a game with that level of simulation. Most games (or software in general) don't go for that level of simulation/performance.
For every Factorio, there are thousands of games that work just as well without that level of simulation. From FPS to trashy mobile games that are just a well disguised slot machine.
> There’s games that are ridiculously simple in comparison let your fans spinning for no reason, grind to a halt or crash.
Sure and Morrowind used to corrupt your save-files in a horrible manner. It still sold as hot cakes. Even though I remember it being a hog on my resources.
Warcraft 3 had an unpatched memory issue people used to extend its programming capabilities, until it turns out said issue could be used for RCE, so Blizzard had to break every existing custom map (like DOTA, not like custom melee map) to fix it. It started several independent genres.
------------
Point is you don't need to think about every ms of execution if you are writing 99.9% of software. Sure you can take some precautions and use some tried and true methods (using immutable trees for editing).
But even those come with caveats. You have only so and so complexity budget, will you spend it on features or performance? Almost always the answer is features.