Search Results
7/12/2025, 2:55:35 AM
>>530850238
>is it actually important to have experience making your own games and having a wide array of skills?
In ANY field, it is very valuable to have a leader who also has at least a general understanding of what exactly their team members all do, and the most basic level of being able to step into the assembly line when things get tough to help them do them. The more wide your skills and experience are, the more readily you can provide solutions and fix problems with your team. This sort of flexibility is a boon to any team, and helps bridge the gap between departments.
>Do people often end up in charge just because ...
It's a mix of good decision making, delegation, time management, and in some cases nepotism or sycophancy. Having skills is helpful to make your team thrive more easily. Others often misjudge their own abilities. You mitigate risk.
Example: I have enough experience to know what can and cannot be done with limited resources (time included). I make executive decisions on what can be assigned within X timeframe, but things still can go wrong.
Recently in crunch, an artist was unable to meet deadline due to his own poor time management/discipline. He crashed after two days awake, and I took his unfinished work and started working on it myself hours before launch along with another teammate. Sadly, this impacted my ability to do critical checks elsewhere before something went live because I had finish to his job, which caused me to miss something I did not find until the next day after it was already shipped. Other work he was late with delayed my other tasks too. Ultimately, any failure falls on your shoulders as leader.
Other times, a programmer runs into a problem and shares it with me. I can't code much, but I understand programming logic enough to explain a solution to him that he can implement.
If your leader has this sort of cross-section of skills, he can fight on the front-lines with his troops. A generalist makes for a good general.
>is it actually important to have experience making your own games and having a wide array of skills?
In ANY field, it is very valuable to have a leader who also has at least a general understanding of what exactly their team members all do, and the most basic level of being able to step into the assembly line when things get tough to help them do them. The more wide your skills and experience are, the more readily you can provide solutions and fix problems with your team. This sort of flexibility is a boon to any team, and helps bridge the gap between departments.
>Do people often end up in charge just because ...
It's a mix of good decision making, delegation, time management, and in some cases nepotism or sycophancy. Having skills is helpful to make your team thrive more easily. Others often misjudge their own abilities. You mitigate risk.
Example: I have enough experience to know what can and cannot be done with limited resources (time included). I make executive decisions on what can be assigned within X timeframe, but things still can go wrong.
Recently in crunch, an artist was unable to meet deadline due to his own poor time management/discipline. He crashed after two days awake, and I took his unfinished work and started working on it myself hours before launch along with another teammate. Sadly, this impacted my ability to do critical checks elsewhere before something went live because I had finish to his job, which caused me to miss something I did not find until the next day after it was already shipped. Other work he was late with delayed my other tasks too. Ultimately, any failure falls on your shoulders as leader.
Other times, a programmer runs into a problem and shares it with me. I can't code much, but I understand programming logic enough to explain a solution to him that he can implement.
If your leader has this sort of cross-section of skills, he can fight on the front-lines with his troops. A generalist makes for a good general.
Page 1