but I'm sure any programmer worth their salt will back me up in that even Valve can't produce anything that would remotely wow people anymore.
That’s an absurd statement. You have no idea what the game plays like. It could be crap, but it could also be great. If you were saying “X company used to be great, but their recent products have been bad, so I don’t have faith in this,” that would be one thing, but you say “even Valve,” so it sounds like you think Valve is still great, but making something that wows people is just fundamentally impossible.
There is no need to be so secretive, the only reason they do any of this crap is as a marketing ploy and honestly just from the screenshots the game looks thoroughly unremarkable.
Maybe they want to get feedback on an early design without being committed to that design by hype? Maybe they’re concerned about someone making a shovelware clone and beating them to market?
If I see a studio announce a game that's going to be release within a year and refuse to show anything beyond a teaser trailer, I'm assuming it's shit and they're hiding behind marketing hype.
No idea where you’re getting this from. It has no official release date. It’s an early build. Hence that NDA. If you’re just “chatting generally” about hypotheticals, it shouldn’t have any bearing on this particular case.
The most Valve managed to do with their programming tech with CS:2 was the interactive smoke and in reality they were just a bunch of destructible textured cubes floating in the air to make the simulation a bit more believable. I saw a programmer in Godot quickly replicate it no problem so it's not as if they were that amazing.
I don’t know why you’re conflating “code complexity” with “fun mechanics.” Many people enjoy and play CS2. Is there some reason that the smoke was a particularly poor implementation of what they were trying to do? Perhaps you should explain that instead.
I'm not that lacking in self-awareness
You got sick of people pointing out your lack of self-awareness and annoying habits, so you started saying “I’m self-aware” without changing any of the stuff that made people say you weren’t self-aware. Hilarious.
That’s an absurd statement. You have no idea what the game plays like. It could be crap, but it could also be great. If you were saying “X company used to be great, but their recent products have been bad, so I don’t have faith in this,” that would be one thing, but you say “even Valve,” so it sounds like you think Valve is still great, but making something that wows people is just fundamentally impossible.
Maybe they want to get feedback on an early design without being committed to that design by hype? Maybe they’re concerned about someone making a shovelware clone and beating them to market?
No idea where you’re getting this from. It has no official release date. It’s an early build. Hence that NDA. If you’re just “chatting generally” about hypotheticals, it shouldn’t have any bearing on this particular case.
I don’t know why you’re conflating “code complexity” with “fun mechanics.” Many people enjoy and play CS2. Is there some reason that the smoke was a particularly poor implementation of what they were trying to do? Perhaps you should explain that instead.
You got sick of people pointing out your lack of self-awareness and annoying habits, so you started saying “I’m self-aware” without changing any of the stuff that made people say you weren’t self-aware. Hilarious.
Tim Cain certainly was not thinking of Valve when he made that statement about workplace mediocrity.