Sorry, I know you’re trying to be nice, but his example with CS2 was the worst part. He didn’t say anything about whether it worked well. You’re extrapolating that because you assume it wasn’t a retarded example. His actual complaint was that it wasn’t complicated or fancy. I even asked him to clarify if there was anything bad about it, because the complaint didn’t appear to make sense, and his response was:
I never claimed it was a poor implementation, I simply pointed out it was nothing special
In other words, it worked fine, it did what the game needed, but because it wasn’t done in a fancy new way that Valve invented themselves, it’s bad.
Sorry, I know you’re trying to be nice, but his example with CS2 was the worst part. He didn’t say anything about whether it worked well. You’re extrapolating that because you assume it wasn’t a retarded example. His actual complaint was that it wasn’t complicated or fancy. I even asked him to clarify if there was anything bad about it, because the complaint didn’t appear to make sense, and his response was:
In other words, it worked fine, it did what the game needed, but because it wasn’t done in a fancy new way that Valve invented themselves, it’s bad.
And again, I’m asking you to explain why it is a problem that the code is “average” if it works the way it needs to.
Please explain why the wheel needs to be reinvented when the current implementation of it accomplishes the design goal.