5 minutes ago, Lactose said:

You still write code in Unity, Unreal Engine, CryEngine and other game engines.

But you not changing exisitng code. You assemblig somesthing from existing component, but you not changing a engine components that implemented in universal way for its field of responsebility.

1 minute ago, Fulcrum.013 said:

But you not changing exisitng code. You assemblig somesthing from existing component, but you not changing a engine components that implemented in universal way for its field of responsebility.

That means nothing to this discussion. There is a massive difference between:

A) Using an existing game engine/framework/library in order to leverage them when adding your custom code.

B) Making every single game use the 100% identical code, with all changes between all games being "data".

In your silly chess war MMO example (where your "2 abstract moves" is just plain wrong, by the way), if the game could change completely to a clone of Braid, or a clone of Dark Souls just with some data/parameter tweaks, the programmers have massively over-engineered absolutely everything they were supposed to be doing to create the silly chess war MMO game. They would have a budget a million times larger than they would have needed, they would have needed a lot longer time to get the game to market, and they would be beaten to market by other companies who just coded what they needed in 1/10000th of the time. They would be complete failures, and stupid.

26 minutes ago, Lactose said:

Using an existing game engine/framework/library in order to leverage them when adding your custom code.

It really massive difference betwin extending something and refactoring something. Realy it just opened for extensions but closed for modification. 

26 minutes ago, Lactose said:

where your "2 abstract moves" is just plain wrong, by the way

is really? King, Knight and Pawn have a fixed mask of fields where it can move relative to it current positions, other pieces have a set of vectors  on wich it can move until reach a block.

26 minutes ago, Lactose said:

if the game could change completely to a clone

For chess game they have to code a chess game but make points of extensions following to a bext practicles of ingeeniring that applicable for any fields, not just a software engineering field. Fortunately OOP makes a whole code a one big point of extensions. Also "chess-like" and "shooter" is sound little bit different. Chess-like is a something like alternate chess rules like spherical chess or chess with extended set of pieces etc.

If it required a dark soul thay can extend apropriate set of existing components if it already exists. It just called reuse of code that AGILE/SCRUM comlpete neogate.

Guess what... I give up. I had spending a few hours typing almost 10 paragraphs .... and then I thought "screw it.".

I think, @Fulcrum.013 might have a very different experience than many of us here in this thread. That's why he has quite a different perspective than many of us (he mentioned that he was a senior software engineer 20 years ago. things has changed since then.). Also what he mean 'spec' might not be the same as many others here think. It's probably something else entirely.

That said, I'm not saying that I am wrong and you are right, or vice versa). What I am saying is different experiences lead to different thoughts and finally different conclusions. I appreciate what he brought here. There are some perspective that I have never seen before. I even brought this thread up to some Agile people I know.

However, I think ... majority of this discussion is actually off-topic. I guess, @cmpt, if you want to know more about SCRUM and stuffs, it's probably better to open another separate thread (or, better, I'd ask an admin to branch this topic out). 

But personally, I don't see any value in further discussion. So I'd like to sign off from this thread here.  I wish you all well. 

Thanks.

N.

58 minutes ago, Fulcrum.013 said:

is really? King, Knight and Pawn have a fixed mask of fields where it can move relative to it current positions, other pieces have a set of vectors  on wich it can move until reach a block.

Easiest example -- some moves involve more than a single piece.

1 hour ago, Fulcrum.013 said:

For chess game they have to code a chess game but make points of extensions following to a bext practicles of ingeeniring that applicable for any fields, not just a software engineering field.

Do you think that every racing game ever made should use 100% identical code, no custom code per game, and have all unique features be data driven?

7 minutes ago, Lactose said:

Do you think that every racing game ever made should use 100% identical code

Of course not every. Some of them have some components from shooter, like some shooters have a some components of racing games.  Also it produced by different companies on different engines so have different, but very similar code base.  But of cource you can reuse a any component of for example Need For Speed, replace data pack and add some component for shooting to make from it something like Death Track. For example what  difference betwin DOOM II and Heretiс? Thay just repleced datapack and add a inventory component.

1 hour ago, Fulcrum.013 said:

But you not changing exisitng code. You assemblig somesthing from existing component, but you not changing a engine components that implemented in universal way for its field of responsebility.

Some teams do change Unreal itself for their project, though, and not just for bug fixes. Remember, Unreal is open-source, and being open for customization is one of the major arguments for open-source software. Some engines actually list this ability to customize as a feature of the engine. Taking an existing engine and rewriting chunks of it is a thing game developers will do.

In fact, I remember some of my coworkers griping about Unity not being open-source, because as a result of it being closed-source there wasn't much they could do to optimize the game's rendering. They did eventually hit their performance targets, but they had to do some really weird stuff to work around the engine's architecture. Hitting their framerate target would have been substantially easier if they had been able to rewrite parts of the engine's rendering pipeline to suit their needs.

"One size fits all" engines in the video game world are a fallacy. Every game (that isn't a clone) is unique. Studios only put up with the quirks of other people's engines because writing their own would cost too much and other people's engines are "good enough."

There are also developers who specifically avoid engines - even open-source engines - because they worry that using those engines will cause their game to "feel" like every other game made with those engines. There are players out there who can tell that a game was made with Unreal by how the lighting in that game looks because they've seen the same techniques used in loads of other low-budget Unreal games!

7 minutes ago, Oberon_Command said:

Some teams do change

Thay do extensions.

9 minutes ago, Fulcrum.013 said:

Thay do extensions.

Some people change the source code of the Unreal Engine. Not just extending it with gameplay scripts, etc. Directly modifying it, to create stuff which goes against what is possible to do without altering the source code directly. One of my own upcoming projects will most likely have to do some of this in order to be possible to create in Unreal Engine.

23 minutes ago, Fulcrum.013 said:

For example what  difference betwin DOOM II and Heretiс? Thay just repleced datapack and add a inventory component.

This is simply not correct. There were more changes to Heretic than simply adding "an inventory component" and some new data.

You seem to live in a more theoretical world, where designers never change their mind, where specifications never change, and where single issue is known up-front. A world where the entire game can be designed from the start, without ever having to have huge sweeping alterations.

This is not what game development is like.

4 minutes ago, Fulcrum.013 said:

Thay do extensions.

Not just extensions.

Not just Unreal, either. The Godot engine is designed in such a way that makes it simple to rewrite chunks of the engine for one's own purposes. I've actually poked around in the code a bunch and was considering porting its rendering system to D3D11 (from OpenGL ES) as a side project.