Do game-engine creators/coders deserve to be known names?

[Kyriakos]

Inspired by a different thread in some other forum i post at...

In general the question is whether in your view the actual core programmer of a game (ie its engine) can be said to deserve more recognition, given that in the gaming world it seems that almost no individual programmer of this variety is known by name to the overall public. Yet some game-engines were either influential/innovative (eg the first 3d shooter game, iirc Doom?// also Microprose's 'Alone in the Dark') or very refined (eh, not sure if i have an example there... ).

It seems that only when the programmer also is the producer or writer, they can become known. A case of this is the creator of the 1991 hit game by Delphine, 'Another World'. Not that he went on to make many more games, and seemed to mostly try to create a couple of sequels or spin-offs of Another World...


Link to video.

 

[Tahuti]

As a game designer (and programmer and writer) myself: The problem is that many game teams are simply too large to have one person put a significant authoristic stamp on it. The times that designers by definition were also programmers and writers are long gone.

Now the indie world has kinda returned that spirit and indie game creators can become quite famous, but only within the engines. As for the engines, graphics have become too complex for one person to work on it and expect it lives up to the standards of today. Again, this was an early 1990s thing.

 

[Kyriakos]

^Indeed that 'Five nights at Freddie's" creator got rapidly known. The actual 'engine' in that game is very minimal, but the plot is a very cool idea. I hope his next game can be even better, although judging from what happened to the Minecraft people i would not be too sure of that

 

[amadeus]

I don't know much about the game-making process, but if a game is designed and then sent to programmers to be made, do programmers really deserve any kind of special recognition? Unlike the art, sound, and game mechanics, nobody on the consuming end is going to appreciably notice what particular programmers did.

I'm thinking like the grips or the boom mike operators on a movie set. They're certainly valuable, but can you tell the work of one from another?

 

[Tahuti]

Unlike the art, sound, and game mechanics, nobody on the consuming end is going to appreciably notice what particular programmers did.

How about the game itself? Having good programmers allows for good mechanics (provided these are designed well) and occasionally allows the game to be technically innovative. In fact, that's how John Carmack got famous.

 

[downtown]

Sure, it would be nice, but Amadeus probably has a point. It's a multi-person job, and a lot of that is away from the consumer. I'd love for boom-mic guys, video editors, backup musicians and everybody else who makes the show *go* get a little more love, but it's hard to do that and engage the public.

I hope there are good industry-specific awards and ways to promote their excellent work though.

 

[Kozmos]

Coders should only be known if they contribute significantly to their profession. That is, improving an existing language or creating a new one that solves one problem or another. Technically, a lot of games today are just lazy, if you are even slightly familiar with development you will see it everywhere, clipping, broken physics, feet-sliding, jerky animations, unsynced character/item placement in relation to actions being performed, ground attacks that hit air and vice-versa, AI that can't navigate Z, just disgusting stuff that isn't hard to do right, but takes some effort. Not even Japanese developers aren't what they used to be and IMO they used to be the best at QA, graphics, game mechanics and almost everything else. I'm guessing that was a product of their work ethic most likely.

Like others said, games are usually massive projects and have many moving parts. Do you know the guy who designed the air filters on a 747 Boeing? Or the batteries, or even the cockpit? I just know that Bill Nye has a tube on it that he designed and that's because he mentioned in an interview.

 

[Mise]

John Carmack is pretty well known.

 

[warpus]

I don't know much about the game-making process, but if a game is designed and then sent to programmers to be made

That's not really how it works. The team starts with a vision, likely passed down from the top. The programmers then design algorithms and data structures that will make the overall vision of the game possible as well as solving technical issues that are required to be overcome to get there. A programmer is who will actually design a lot of the game, because you need a programming lead to design the basic framework that the game will sit in.

Basically what I'm trying to say is that what comes down from the top is usually just a vision of what needs to be made. The programming team then needs to actually design everything to accommodate that.

Usually there's a programming lead or multiple ones, who actually think about the big picture and send down "build me part A" and "build a tool set B that we need to make parts A through F" to individual programmers, but the programming team as a whole probably usually deserves a lot of the recognition in terms of the things that had to be built and the problems solved to make the game and vision of the game happen.

Not that I think that programmers really need any more recognition that they get - game making is usually a big ask and involves a lot of people.. and with smaller indie games the programmers tend to get the recognition anyway, if the games proves to be successful. So I don't really see it as an issue, but agree with the general attitude that programmers deserve a bit more recognition.. just because I'm one.

 

[Rashiminos]

Not outside a group of curious group of enthusiasts (like people who pay more than a moment's attention to a game's credits).

 

[Perfection]

Why do we need to know their names?

We know actor/actresses names because they're useful in helping us pick out things to watch. We know game producer/writer names because they often have a unique style or vision that we like in games, and that helps us pick what to play.

We know people's names because they're useful to us, what's so useful about knowing programmer's names?

 

[Kyriakos]

Depends on what you are looking for. What's so useful about knowing the name of a bearded weirdo who was depressed and made some hypothesis factoring imaginary numbers?

 

[bhsup]

Deserve? No. They're names are on the credits if you're curious, but they don't deserve some automatic right to have their names advertised and forced down our throats. If they're incredibly talented, maybe they will become well known and have products named after them. Peter Norton (not game programmer, but programmer) can certainly attest to that.

On the general concept of "deserve"...


Link to video.

 

[Perfection]

Depends on what you are looking for.

Sure, everybody's name is useful to someone.

Like, let's say you want to pick up your mom's dry cleaning, well, you'd probably want to know her name! But everyone knowing your mom's name is probably not very useful.

Why should game programmer's names be known to anyone outside a select few?

What's so useful about knowing the name of a bearded weirdo who was depressed and made some hypothesis factoring imaginary numbers?

It might not be useful for many people, but maybe if this person was important to mathematics then those who are interested in the history of mathematics would find said person's name useful. Or perhaps this person lent their name to a formula or theorem or something.

 

[gay_Aleks]

I know only the Clausewitz engine, and only because, oh, almost all of my favourite Paradox games run on it, and because Clausewitz.

 

[Zack]

I know only the Clausewitz engine, and only because, oh, almost all of my favourite Paradox games run on it, and because Clausewitz.

I know the Gamebryo engine because it's total dog [word for poop].

 

[Zelig]

Boom mic operators aren't a good analogy - for well designed software, programmers are more analogous to combined architects and engineers for physical architectural/engineering projects. (Which is why architect/engineer job titles are common in software.)

If you look at the design process at Apple, actual designers (Ive's an exec, not a rank-and-file designer) have less input than at average firms - they excel at design by having it be the responsibility of everyone (i.e. programmers, engineers) who does work, not by having particularly strong design teams.

As a user of software, I don't really care about knowing their names. As a consumer of film/tv media, I don't really care about knowing the names of actors/actresses either, I just need to know the names of their characters.

 

[Leonel]

They forwent their right to be recognized when they made LITHTECH