If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(Escapist Magazine)   Lord British: Game designers suck and smell of elderberries   (escapistmagazine.com) divider line 85
    More: Fail, Richard Garriott, Lord British, game designer, William Wright, PC gamers, designers, flavors  
•       •       •

4394 clicks; posted to Geek » on 23 Mar 2013 at 12:15 PM (1 year ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



85 Comments   (+0 »)
   
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

Archived thread

First | « | 1 | 2 | » | Last | Show all
 
2013-03-23 12:22:05 PM
Methinks, Lord British, that thou believeth thine excrement does not offend the nose.
 
2013-03-23 12:23:15 PM
British, tell me, just how well did Tabula Rasa do?
 
2013-03-23 12:24:49 PM
It's a lot easier to teach a talented game designer enough programming to talk to the programming team than it is to teach most programmers how to be creative enough (in the right way) to design games.

/was a game tester on Ultima I
 
2013-03-23 12:25:08 PM
www.blogcdn.com
 
2013-03-23 12:29:28 PM
Ultima 9 sucked.

But I'd rather play one of his failures than the latest Call of Madden's Medal of Duty or whatever...
 
2013-03-23 12:36:16 PM
Lord British, thou hast lost an eighth. Go back to the shrine of humility and try again.
 
2013-03-23 12:36:33 PM

Psylence: Ultima 9 sucked.

But I'd rather play one of his failures than the latest Call of Madden's Medal of Duty or whatever...


This!  As the addendum at the end of the article points out, the headline was a bit misleading.  British has a good point, game designers suck in general with a few exceptions (which are listed in TFA), which he blames on the lack of education in that area.  I can agree with that.  Game design is still looked upon as an occupation akin to pro skateboarder or something like that.  Something your parents want you to have a 'back up plan' for.  So there aren't too many game design majors out there.
 
2013-03-23 12:37:21 PM
There's a lot of talented designers out there, they just don't want to work for EA, Ubisoft or Activision.  We're watching the renaissance untold in the form of kick-starters and other indie productions, sure there's the occasional great one from one of the major players but most of the really innovative stuff is coming from the smaller shops.  I've got my eye on Paradox these days, they have a healthy amount of crappy titles themselves but they also seem to cater towards a lot of stuff I'm interested in while avoiding the sludge of Call of Battle VXXI:  DLC's Revenge.
 
2013-03-23 12:48:01 PM

BumpInTheNight: There's a lot of talented designers out there, they just don't want to work for EA, Ubisoft or Activision.  We're watching the renaissance untold in the form of kick-starters and other indie productions, sure there's the occasional great one from one of the major players but most of the really innovative stuff is coming from the smaller shops.  I've got my eye on Paradox these days, they have a healthy amount of crappy titles themselves but they also seem to cater towards a lot of stuff I'm interested in while avoiding the sludge of Call of Battle VXXI:  DLC's Revenge.


That reminds me, I need to try out Dungeonland. Also, as far as talented designers, I'm looking forward to Star Citizen.
 
2013-03-23 12:50:24 PM

Psylence: Ultima 9 sucked.

But I'd rather play one of his failures than the latest Call of Madden's Medal of Duty or whatever...




Its the exact problem he's railing against.
Game design is almost dead, refuses to get on the cart, because studios think they have the recipe sorted out. One perfect "call of battle" level expansion that will sell for eternity, cranked out like so many Boy bands.

Its to the point where players prefer the suck, because it at least gives some variety over the unoriginal AAA offerings.
 
kab
2013-03-23 12:53:31 PM

way south: Game design is almost dead, refuses to get on the cart, because studios think they have the recipe sorted out. One perfect "call of battle" level expansion that will sell for eternity, cranked out like so many Boy bands.


Yet they keep selling.  Perhaps gamers get exactly what they ask for.
 
2013-03-23 12:53:48 PM

RedPhoenix122: That reminds me, I need to try out Dungeonland. Also, as far as talented designers, I'm looking forward to Star Citizen.


Huge +1 to the Star Citizen, even if they live up to half their promises from the kick starter its going to be a hell of a game.
 
2013-03-23 12:55:26 PM
His post outrage apology is just as BS loaded as his initial statements.  The actual article is worsethan the headline.  By far the most damning and infuriating thing he said was "And every designer that I work with-all throughout life-I think, frankly, is lazy,".  Unless that statement was preceded by , "I am not saying ... but some are" then it is perfectly in context.

This interview demonstrated he is part of the problem, and not part of the solution, with the quality of design in the industry.
 
2013-03-23 12:57:37 PM
I think the article is skewed around the term "designer".. kind of a big term.  There are a lot of new titles I love playing, because they look freakin awesome, but ive got my old standards too, because they are good games.
I think he is alluding to the "game" aspect. and, yea, I agree. there aren't a lot of options. Shoot, Drive, Sport, or Roleplay.

Wheres the brain candy?

/loved the sticky ball PS2 game.. catamari? no it wasn't cooked squid but I got addicted.
//my 0.02
 
2013-03-23 01:00:36 PM
He's a prima donna...
 
2013-03-23 01:01:49 PM
Yeah this guy's arrogance made me not want to help fund his kickstarter. This article just cemented my feelings.
 
2013-03-23 01:04:38 PM

Goatman6.0: loved the sticky ball PS2 game.. catamari?


I kept hoping that Katamari Damacy would get a PC port... but sadly, no... :(
 
2013-03-23 01:06:29 PM
Does this surprise anyone?

Most authors suck.

Most actors suck.

Most directors suck

Most people suck at their jobs, but the few that shine REALLY shine.
 
2013-03-23 01:13:55 PM
The apology: I was not trying to toot my own horn, rather state that game design is hard.
The original statement: Other than a few exceptions, like Chris Roberts, I've met virtually no one in our industry who I think is close to as good a game designer as I am.

Yeah, total bullshiat. And you haven't designed a good game in ages, Richard. Even in the beloved Ultima VII, inventory management was more detailed that the combat system, and that's bad design.
 
2013-03-23 01:13:59 PM
I WANT CITY OF HEROES BACK, DAMMIT
 
2013-03-23 01:19:38 PM

kab: way south: Game design is almost dead, refuses to get on the cart, because studios think they have the recipe sorted out. One perfect "call of battle" level expansion that will sell for eternity, cranked out like so many Boy bands.

Yet they keep selling.  Perhaps gamers get exactly what they ask for.




If you've only been served porridge your entire life, you become an expert in the nuisances of its flavor. You can argue endlessly about how every different Box is a bouquet of variation.

If you are from the pc gaming master race, you can only pity those poor console gaming peasants wallowing in their filthy pit of lazily designed sequels.
The fact that the industry can't sell anything else is a sign of its stagnation problem. Its going to hurt when they try to push expensive new consoles for old game ideas.
 
2013-03-23 01:25:06 PM

Beta Tested: His post outrage apology is just as BS loaded as his initial statements.  The actual article is worsethan the headline.  By far the most damning and infuriating thing he said was "And every designer that I work with-all throughout life-I think, frankly, is lazy,".  Unless that statement was preceded by , "I am not saying ... but some are" then it is perfectly in context.

This interview demonstrated he is part of the problem, and not part of the solution, with the quality of design in the industry.


I'm pretty sure he meant INTELLECTUALLY lazy, as defined in his example. Most people he meets just want to make Call of Duty with better weapons.
 
2013-03-23 01:35:23 PM

Ivo Shandor: Lord British, thou hast lost an eighth. Go back to the shrine of humility and try again.


LOL.

Bet he wouldn't be so haughty if I lured him to the dock and blasted him with a ship's cannon.
 
2013-03-23 01:37:24 PM

vharshyde: British, tell me, just how well did Tabula Rasa do?


That was NCSoft farking that chicken. Everyone knew it wasn't ready to release.
 
2013-03-23 01:43:35 PM
"What's a paladin" ?
 
2013-03-23 01:43:50 PM

OhioKnight: I WANT CITY OF HEROES BACK, DAMMIT


*Fistbump of solidarity*
I had *just started* getting back into it: I discovered that it had gone FTP for a bit *before* I'd stopped paying, so I had a number of Credits. Was just starting a praetorian corrupter (and snagged the 'time control' secondary with the points I had, wanted to try it out), who was going to go hero...

And then the news came down. =(

So many good memories. I'm planning on running a supers pen and paper this summer for a bunch of friends that never played CoH. I'm going to steal a CRAPTON of content and story. >.>
/Only not EVERYTHING will be a nemesis plot.
 
2013-03-23 01:58:46 PM

I Like Bread: I'm pretty sure he meant INTELLECTUALLY lazy, as defined in his example. Most people he meets just want to make Call of Duty with better weapons.


They are essentially the same thing.  If your job is mostly to think, communicate those thoughts, and then execute on them, then being intellectually lazy is being lazy.   His other statements in the article reinforce his view that designers are essentially useless.  This is in direct contradiction to everything I have observed.

Every good designer I know:
- Is technically proficient
- Can at least script at a high level but also may be able to program decently
- Understands art and art pipelines
- Is organized
- Communicates well
- Implements directly, often helping out with code or art tasks
- Is EXTREMELY thorough and hardworking

His interview says FAR more about his complete inability to hire or lead than it does about any design as a whole.
 
2013-03-23 02:05:18 PM

Beta Tested: Every good designer I know:
- Is technically proficient
- Can at least script at a high level but also may be able to program decently
- Understands art and art pipelines
- Is organized
- Communicates well
- Implements directly, often helping out with code or art tasks
- Is EXTREMELY thorough and hardworking


Which leaves you with well made games that aren't fun at all, like we have a blight of these days.

And i think he was more saying 'lazy' in terms of people just copying other games and tweaking them slightly, instead of coming up with completely new ideas, anyway. You can't teach people how to have original thoughts and concepts.
 
2013-03-23 02:19:32 PM

J. Frank Parnell: Which leaves you with well made games that aren't fun at all, like we have a blight of these days.


That's the executives' fault.
 
2013-03-23 02:31:15 PM
Oh, I thought gaming just sucked because they release half a game at full price, then charge you six times that for asinine upgrades and tokens and extras and shiny gadgets....

This is what happens when "geek" culture is assimilated. Sorry.
 
2013-03-23 02:33:00 PM
J. Frank Parnell: Which leaves you with well made games that aren't fun at all, like we have a blight of these days.

Those points are listed as a direct counter to Garriott's statements about designers in the interview.  This is an incomplete list of what makes a good designer, the 10th amendment applies here.

And i think he was more saying 'lazy' in terms of people just copying other games and tweaking them slightly, instead of coming up with completely new ideas, anyway.

That isn't what he said, he said they didn't implement, couldn't code, weren't artists, and had no ideas.  He used lazy to mean useless.

You can't teach people how to have original thoughts and concepts.

You can.  You teach them to think through a mechanic or game to get to its core, and then think about different ways to approach it.  Design is a skill that can be taught just like programming, and it requires an equal amount of time and skill.

You can also teach people how to be open to original ideas and concepts, because there is no telling where, how, when, and to whom they might come.

The money people, and consumers, are to thank for the lack originality in most non-indie games.
 
2013-03-23 02:33:46 PM

Beta Tested: I Like Bread: I'm pretty sure he meant INTELLECTUALLY lazy, as defined in his example. Most people he meets just want to make Call of Duty with better weapons.

They are essentially the same thing.  If your job is mostly to think, communicate those thoughts, and then execute on them, then being intellectually lazy is being lazy.   His other statements in the article reinforce his view that designers are essentially useless.  This is in direct contradiction to everything I have observed.

Every good designer I know:
- Is technically proficient
- Can at least script at a high level but also may be able to program decently
- Understands art and art pipelines
- Is organized
- Communicates well
- Implements directly, often helping out with code or art tasks
- Is EXTREMELY thorough and hardworking

His interview says FAR more about his complete inability to hire or lead than it does about any design as a whole.


No. Just NO. The problem is that you and he have a completely different idea of what makes a good game designer. You do not describe a good game designer, you describe a good cubicle rat. Which is exactly his point. What makes a good gamer designer is creativity. And creativity is hard, yo, because for one the pool of ideas is limited and finding new twists on them is like finding new chord progressions in music that sound good. Then there is finding creativity which actually sells, which is again a whole another order of magnitude.

I agree with Lord British's point in that regard. Where I disagree with him is that game design can ever be made easy. If it was simple to make great games people would be doing it all the time. It is not so they don't.
 
2013-03-23 02:39:16 PM

worlddan: No. Just NO. The problem is that you and he have a completely different idea of what makes a good game designer. You do not describe a good game designer, you describe a good cubicle rat. Which is exactly his point. What makes a good gamer designer is creativity. And creativity is hard, yo, because for one the pool of ideas is limited and finding new twists on them is like finding new chord progressions in music that sound good. Then there is finding creativity which actually sells, which is again a whole another order of magnitude.


The other problem is that creaitivity, and creative new approaches to, asy, games, can oft be looked at suspiciously, as scams.
 
2013-03-23 02:42:56 PM

worlddan: No. Just NO. The problem is that you and he have a completely different idea of what makes a good game designer. You do not describe a good game designer, you describe a good cubicle rat.


I know my profession better than you do, and apparently better than some out of touch multi-millionaire as well.  Those skills, among others, are all critical to being a good designer.

Which is exactly his point. What makes a good gamer designer is creativity. And creativity is hard, yo, because for one the pool of ideas is limited and finding new twists on them is like finding new chord progressions in music that sound good. Then there is finding creativity which actually sells, which is again a whole another order of magnitude.

Creativity is not what makes a good game designer.  Creativity is the apparent result of the hard work, careful thought, experience, skill, and openness.

I agree with Lord British's point in that regard. Where I disagree with him is that game design can ever be made easy. If it was simple to make great games people would be doing it all the time. It is not so they don't.

Design, like any other profession in the industry, is and will remain difficult.
 
2013-03-23 02:50:23 PM
worlddan:
".And creativity is hard, yo, because for one the pool of ideas is limited and finding new twists on them is like finding new chord progressions in music that sound good. Then there is finding creativity which actually sells, which is again a whole another order of magnitude.

This, this and more of this. I'm not a programmer or a graphic artist, but I am a musician who loves games.  it seems to me like its become a rockstar lottery in the "gaming design" industry and yes, its easy to look back down the path one has blazed as an artist and say "you suck, keep up"

I agree. Primadonna

/loved Ultima
 
2013-03-23 02:53:27 PM

I don't know who this guy is, so Lord British to me has always been Player 2 from the Gradius, Parodius and Salamander games:


images1.wikia.nocookie.net
 
2013-03-23 03:01:25 PM

Beta Tested: worlddan: No. Just NO. The problem is that you and he have a completely different idea of what makes a good game designer. You do not describe a good game designer, you describe a good cubicle rat.

I know my profession better than you do, and apparently better than some out of touch multi-millionaire as well.


No, you are ignorant punk who thinks he is getting somewhere by punching up. When you too have made your millions by designing famous videos games, then and only then do you have any right to appeal to your own experience as authority.
 
2013-03-23 03:06:06 PM

worlddan: No, you are ignorant punk who thinks he is getting somewhere by punching up. When you too have made your millions by designing famous videos games, then and only then do you have any right to appeal to your own experience as authority.


Gave up trying to win your point that quickly did you?  You are right I haven't made millions, but I live and eat well enough while doing what I love.  Any more is just a bonus.  I appealed to no authority, making an actual argument a paragraph later.  I know reading is probably hard for you, but do try to get through an entire post before replying.
 
2013-03-23 03:09:29 PM

TappingTheVein: "What's a paladin" ?


i3.squidoocdn.com
upload.wikimedia.org
 
2013-03-23 03:15:43 PM
How does a game like MOO 3 get made?  How does a game like MOO 3 get released?   There were major bugs that made the game utterly and totally unplayable.  Is the amount of money they make on release enough to justify destruction of a brand, and the damage to your company's reputation?
 
2013-03-23 03:25:36 PM
Executives shoot for maximum returns. Maximum returns come from appealing to large numbers. Large numbers of gamers enjoy shooters and sports rehashes.

If you want it to change, you have to be willing to cockpunch the frat boy stereotype.
 
2013-03-23 03:28:05 PM

RedPhoenix122: BumpInTheNight: There's a lot of talented designers out there, they just don't want to work for EA, Ubisoft or Activision.  We're watching the renaissance untold in the form of kick-starters and other indie productions, sure there's the occasional great one from one of the major players but most of the really innovative stuff is coming from the smaller shops.  I've got my eye on Paradox these days, they have a healthy amount of crappy titles themselves but they also seem to cater towards a lot of stuff I'm interested in while avoiding the sludge of Call of Battle VXXI:  DLC's Revenge.

That reminds me, I need to try out Dungeonland. Also, as far as talented designers, I'm looking forward to Star Citizen.


Oh, BIG time.
/Chris Roberts even got a shout out in the article.
 
2013-03-23 03:32:31 PM

Beta Tested: That isn't what he said


"And every designer that I work with...I think, frankly, is lazy." Garriott says that for someone to be a "good" game designer, they have to really put in the hard yards like he did when he first started out, something that a lot of modern game designers just aren't willing to do. "They generally say, 'You know, I really like Medal of Honor, but I would have bigger weapons, or I would have more healing packs, or,' you know. They go to make one or two changes to a game they otherwise love versus really sit down and rethink, 'How can I really move the needle here?'"

Right after he says 'lazy', he explains what he means by that. Couldn't be more clear.
 
2013-03-23 03:51:05 PM

J. Frank Parnell: "And every designer that I work with...I think, frankly, is lazy." Garriott says that for someone to be a "good" game designer, they have to really put in the hard yards like he did when he first started out, something that a lot of modern game designers just aren't willing to do. "They generally say, 'You know, I really like Medal of Honor, but I would have bigger weapons, or I would have more healing packs, or,' you know. They go to make one or two changes to a game they otherwise love versus really sit down and rethink, 'How can I really move the needle here?'"

Right after he says 'lazy', he explains what he means by that. Couldn't be more clear.


I totally agree with you, but I think you are focusing in too narrowly on the example he gave.  You are right, he absolutely said that designers are intellectually lazy, but it wasn't  all he said.  He said we were all sorts of other kinds of lazy as well, including too lazy to acquire a skill like programming or art.  In the paragraph you quoted he says as much, and then uses the Medal of Honor thing as just one example.

"Garriott says that for someone to be a "good" game designer, they have to really put in the hard yards like he did when he first started out, something that a lot of modern game designers just aren't willing to do."

To me that is unambiguous, designers are simply not willing to be hard workers like other professions.  One way this manifests (in his eyes) is by only subtlety altering one or two things on an existing game.
 
2013-03-23 03:57:11 PM

Beta Tested: J. Frank Parnell: "And every designer that I work with...I think, frankly, is lazy." Garriott says that for someone to be a "good" game designer, they have to really put in the hard yards like he did when he first started out, something that a lot of modern game designers just aren't willing to do. "They generally say, 'You know, I really like Medal of Honor, but I would have bigger weapons, or I would have more healing packs, or,' you know. They go to make one or two changes to a game they otherwise love versus really sit down and rethink, 'How can I really move the needle here?'"

Right after he says 'lazy', he explains what he means by that. Couldn't be more clear.

I totally agree with you, but I think you are focusing in too narrowly on the example he gave.  You are right, he absolutely said that designers are intellectually lazy, but it wasn't  all he said.  He said we were all sorts of other kinds of lazy as well, including too lazy to acquire a skill like programming or art.  In the paragraph you quoted he says as much, and then uses the Medal of Honor thing as just one example.

"Garriott says that for someone to be a "good" game designer, they have to really put in the hard yards like he did when he first started out, something that a lot of modern game designers just aren't willing to do."

To me that is unambiguous, designers are simply not willing to be hard workers like other professions.  One way this manifests (in his eyes) is by only subtlety altering one or two things on an existing game.


I don't think he said that game designers lack or suck at coding or art; I think he said that people who don't do so well at coding or art end up as game designers, something they may not end up being the best suited for.

Which does make sense. It's a totally different role than programming or art. I should know, I've attempted both programming and art. TECCCHHHNNICCALLLY I qualify as a game designer and programmer, because I did manage to make a playable game (Text based RPG). Of course, I can't release it because the guy who owns the RPG system changed his mind once he got closer to a finished publishable product xD
 
2013-03-23 04:10:21 PM

Beta Tested: To me that is unambiguous, designers are simply not willing to be hard workers like other professions. One way this manifests (in his eyes) is by only subtlety altering one or two things on an existing game.


I think that's all he meant by lazy, not just one way it manifests. It's harder and more time consuming to create completely new code from the ground up for new and unique game dynamics you've invented, and easier to just rehash code and dynamics that have been used time and time again.

Like someone else mentioned, executives do play a part in this, because to them copying past successes is the best way to ensure profit, but game developers aren't completely blameless for going along with it so eagerly.
 
2013-03-23 04:10:44 PM
Isn't this kind of what happens once an industry becomes profitable and the MBA's suddenly start trying to run everything, but have absolutely no idea about the product.  This same phenomenon happened in music, TV, movie and now gaming.  The most successful companies are bought up by a conglomerate ran by some douche with an MBA and they proceed to try and maximize profits by rehashing the same old crap, because that's the safer bet than being adventurous and taking a chance.
Obviously the only solution is to destroy all the business schools at all the colleges and universities.  Most business degrees are just under communication degrees in the area of "degrees for people who probably shouldn't be in college".
 
2013-03-23 04:12:10 PM

Summercat: I don't think he said that game designers lack or suck at coding or art; I think he said that people who don't do so well at coding or art end up as game designers, something they may not end up being the best suited for.

Which does make sense. It's a totally different role than programming or art. I should know, I've attempted both programming and art. TECCCHHHNNICCALLLY I qualify as a game designer and programmer, because I did manage to make a pl ...


He was a bit all over the map.  Part of me wonders how much of this was the journalist, but a former co-worker of mine who used to also be a gaming journalist told me the story of his Garriott interview.  He greeted him in a crown, insisted on being called Lord British, and was in general just sort of out there.  Now that might have been an act, but my friend didn't seem to think so.

I was all ready to agree with Garriott about the  state of design in the industry. Unfortunately he goes off the rails immediately calling an entire discipline lazy and useless.

It is TRUE that the industry struggles with designers, but it isn't because they are inherently dumb, skill-less, lazy, and incompetent.  It is because design is not respected as a skill.  Because design is not respected as a something that takes time and effort to acquire on par with art or programming, the discipline ends up in a self reinforcing cycle of fail. This is driven by producers, publishers, and other leaders, not by the designers themselves.

There are plenty of excellent designers out there, his inability to find and hire even one in his entire career does nothing but point out how terrible and incompetent of a leader Garriott is.
 
2013-03-23 04:14:13 PM

Vertdang: RedPhoenix122: BumpInTheNight: There's a lot of talented designers out there, they just don't want to work for EA, Ubisoft or Activision.  We're watching the renaissance untold in the form of kick-starters and other indie productions, sure there's the occasional great one from one of the major players but most of the really innovative stuff is coming from the smaller shops.  I've got my eye on Paradox these days, they have a healthy amount of crappy titles themselves but they also seem to cater towards a lot of stuff I'm interested in while avoiding the sludge of Call of Battle VXXI:  DLC's Revenge.

That reminds me, I need to try out Dungeonland. Also, as far as talented designers, I'm looking forward to Star Citizen.

Oh, BIG time.
/Chris Roberts even got a shout out in the article.


So does Peter "my mouth is bigger than my talent" Molyneux.
 
2013-03-23 04:17:00 PM
Beta Tested:
To me that is unambiguous, designers are simply not willing to be hard workers like other professions. One way this manifests (in his eyes) is by only subtlety altering one or two things on an existing game.

That's pretty much the standard nowadays, though - and the game companies perpetuate the problem.

It's a real "creative freak versus skilled professional" issue. The sort of person who can come up with a half-dozen cool ideas before noon is (much more often than not) uninterested in spending a couple of years learning the set of skills that lets someone convert a lot of ideas into one working game. On the other hand, the folks who went to college and learned the programming skills to let them make the software work are often mentally skewed into "let's do the same thing as before, but we'll make the main character yellow" mindset.

The secondary issue is the large number of people who have basically been taught "add up a bunch of random things = creative." The remix culture in music is an extension of this: I know far too many "musicians" whose entire skill set consists of taking other people's music and adding some unaltered drum tracks and synth riffs from bootlegged music software.

Games are the same way - I've met too many "designers" whose entire process is "take Game X apart, reuse the internals, and change the art style by adding random pieces." It's a great way to learn how the internal programming of games works, but it's not creative. It's learning the tools to be creative.

Game creation (not just in computers - board and live-action games have much the same set of issues) is a weird mix of creativity and structure.

...and no, there really aren't too many people who have managed to capture both aspects in one person. Nowadays, it's either a creative person who can manage and talk to programmers, or a programmer who knows how to manage the freaky creative folks.
 
Displayed 50 of 85 comments

First | « | 1 | 2 | » | Last | Show all

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »






Report