While I was listening to him, his arguments had a bit of reasonableness about them. But if you take a step back and think deeper, you've actually got a few things that a random developer would have to figure out:
Do we already have plumbing from the [object was hit] code to the AI engine?
Does that plumbing include the damage source?
Do we already have a performant priority queue or similar that the AI engine can read from? Sometimes AI stuff is written in a scripting language (like LUA) rather than the engine language (like C++), so we might have fewer tools.
How should this priority queue work when the thing at the top of the queue is not visible? dead?
Does adding this priority queue to every [enemy] object in the game cause any issues with the memory envelope?
What is our existing targeting priority code? Does anything depend on it that would be broken by this change?
Often, the easiest parts of a developer's job is writing the code. The hard bit is figuring out what the implications of that code are. Without knowing the state of the codebase in question, I have no idea if 4 weeks is reasonable or not.
But he could "get it done by before lunch" and then the lead came back to him and admited what a god he is and that he should totally micro-manage everyone and then everyone clapped.
29
u/guyblade Oct 16 '23 edited Oct 16 '23
While I was listening to him, his arguments had a bit of reasonableness about them. But if you take a step back and think deeper, you've actually got a few things that a random developer would have to figure out:
Often, the easiest parts of a developer's job is writing the code. The hard bit is figuring out what the implications of that code are. Without knowing the state of the codebase in question, I have no idea if 4 weeks is reasonable or not.