| ▲ | ozgrakkurt 2 days ago | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
This is not a reason for accepting it imo | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| ▲ | mywittyname 2 days ago | parent [-] | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Optimization takes up time, and often it takes up the time of an expert. Given that, people need to accept higher costs, longer development times, or reduced scope if they want better optimized games. But what is worse, is just trying to optimize software is not the same as successfully optimizing it. So time and money spent on optimization might yield no results because there might not be anymore efficiency to be gained, the person doing the work lacks the technical skill, the gains are part of a tradeoff that cannot be justified, or the person doing the work can't make a change (i.e., a 3rd party library is the problem). The lack of technical skill is a big one, IMO. I'm personally terrible at optimizing code, but I'm pretty good at building functional software in a short amount of time. We have a person on our team who is really good at it and sometimes he'll come in after me to optimize work that I've done. But he'll spend several multiples of the time I took making it work and hammering out edge cases. Sometimes the savings is worth it. | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||