Demetrious
Posts: 50
Joined: 4/22/2016 Status: offline
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: thewood1 The people I am talking about are the people that won't accept the concept that something is good enough. While continuous improvement is commendable business philosophy, so isn't understanding priorities and picking your battles. The devs are fairly clear about trade offs and priorities, there are just some people that will continue to drag them down a rat hole. Precisely. I think it's exacerbated by how many people don't understand that the abstractions of a simulation are, by definition, the point at which which it's practically impossible to improve it more. It's especially baffling via a vis Command, because I've never seen a program that had fewer abstractions than this one does. Abstractions are such an integral part of game and program design that I simply assume they're in play anywhere they'd make sense, with Command, and several times I've had someone say "oh no, that's fully modeled." It's honestly rather uncanny. Usually with this stuff it's the trade-offs forced by simple business considerations that confuse people more, as the factors are more opaque to the average end-user... but in CMANO's case the devs are wonderfully blunt about such factors (as you say,) and the depth of simulation mechanics are far in excess of what most games like this invest in, so the usual dynamics are reversed. But that's why we've got a forum to ask questions on.
|