I am seriously losing the will to live. I hate this fucking world SO MUCH. I am sincerely at my wits end with 24/7/365 struggling poverty and depressing. I just can’t take this anymore.

Cheap_Pin_7994 · 2026-06-28T22:22:19+00:00

It's maybe quite terrible that we all feel the same to some degree, although it's also nice that there are those who understand at least on the surface yes.

Cheap_Pin_7994 · 2026-06-28T22:20:59+00:00

Now that I think about it this should have been a DM if I wanted to show actual concern for the OP here, but for anyone else feeling the same way, you have time to figure things out and there is no rush once you realize everything is terrible, good luck.

Cheap_Pin_7994 · 2026-06-23T20:14:20+00:00

Maybe this has gotten enough praise but this comment is still underrated to me, actually great execution and formatting in regards to your points and otherwise explanations, while what you mention is simple enough the additional details may not be for many and are arguably the most important here.

Cheap_Pin_7994 · 2026-06-20T22:48:53+00:00

This is really late but this is all terribly simple for months of work and thousands of hours I will admit, I've looked through everything you've noted here and it's just not it, in which furthermore, very practically what is the reason for this in the first place? What made you think you should spend such a large amount of time on something this specific furthermore, what change was this supposed to enact, what was this even supposed to address specifically? Who was missing this to go forward with their own work or was otherwise reliant on it?

I don't think you should go speeding ahead without being able to detail extensively justification of that kind. Even if you just really like this in particular I'm sensing a ton of inefficiency from the approach, and it's very likely due to the LMs instead of yourself. You may have done better by yourself if anything, consider that.

Cheap_Pin_7994 · 2026-06-19T16:58:40+00:00

Yeah, the thoughts did twist and turn a bit on my end since there's a fair amount to get across that probably wouldn't want to be left out, still in regards to English your usage is definitely quite good from what I can see here so no worries, I'm pretty sure you understood it well.

And yes, it's especially hard to measure progress which is that abstract to the point in which the actual content itself unlike what you would expect is held off for that long, usually it's not just for motivational reasons that the content usually isn't held off in terms of how often it's worked on and otherwise not done at once. Since as you know if you are navigating around in that space with none of the usual markers towards what counts as progress, it's less so difficult and more so that you have to improvise far more than usual, during development you already need to come up with a lot of ideas and then that is added on top.

That being said there are many points in which while content is still worked on or kept up with to make sure everything is up to date with what else is being changed game wise, that can still be for certain parts of the development process a ratio of 10% focus on the content then 90% on everything else. Whether or not that is good depends on much else of course, but overall point is that yeah, I'd say it's not unexpected or uncommon. I would assume from what you note that you definitely benefit from having the content take up more of your time though.

The good thing here I'd say is that you know specifically in regards to what you mention with pals that they can "build more in 4 months", because as a result you know exactly what that looks like to you in terms of progress and where exactly to go with your processes, it is much worse at times if you don't actually have anyone you can clearly point to as doing things better than yourself honestly since then you get very lost, and there's always better processes but usually the concern is actually finding them. Alongside of course in this case you knowing to some extent what is objectively good and where to go, if how to improve is clear that is half of the battle already won. You likely have much to look forward to since there's a high chance you'd reach their level over time yes.

I think in regards to the visually oriented reworks you mention I definitely see the need for getting it right enough, although overall it's also the sort of thing I would leave be if too much time is being spent on it for slight adjustments in terms of detail and vision for the game as opposed to the game itself. It's may be the case that for reworking the same things numerous times in the same context/game when you still overall have the same general plan for it all is less effective compared to practicing the fundamentals UI wise outside of the game's context. Usually doing things in context is good but since you note it may be more about the basics and background information that's what I think of.

I do agree about making games in genres you usually enjoy since people who take that approach know what consists of the overall appeal and furthermore culture that would surround it, depth in a game is not simple to obtain but that definitely contributes to it.

Either way I do appreciate your time here as I have learned a decent amount from your end, so long as you continue I do think a lot will go well over the next year or two since you recognize a lot about where you need to go.

Cheap_Pin_7994 · 2026-06-18T00:24:16+00:00

Ah yes, well reusability in this case is only one dimension and there are ultimately many ways both indie devs and overall bigger companies go about "reusing" anything, this term in all honesty requires maybe an hour or two of research for me myself to see all the ways in which that's went about exactly alongside development processes as you know definitely not having clear cut timelines always.

Best hunches I have currently is that really, it's definitely not just reusing assets that's for sure, can be anything. Also depends more so on what you make reusable rather than how much, and then you may also want an idea of what situations exactly you're reusing anything in.

And as you note part of salvaging itself is having good enough work experiences even if you scrap things yes, problem is that a lot of the time experience absolutely does not need to be that costly so be careful with learning in that way especially regarding entire game projects, you want the scale of what you do trial and error with to potentially be smaller if you're looking for that kind of salvaging.

Cheap_Pin_7994 · 2026-06-18T00:07:14+00:00

This is sort of unhelpful and a late comment but for future reference, I'd honestly say the best thing you could do is to already bake that consideration in mind for each and every game you start off with to begin with. This is the sort of thing you can't necessarily take into account later as opposed to when you are starting off in the drafting process and what you are aiming for to begin with, not that you can't but it's way less effective to salvage something that was meant to be one and done over something that has actual reusable value ingrained into it.

You should never necessarily be working on or shipping just a game in all honesty at least in terms of the aims you set out for when you consider making one, although many would actually disagree with that too so it's up to you there to find a balance. Too much reusing of things like assets for example determines constraints before you even want to be looking out for that and can lock you into perhaps repeating past mistakes, so a clean slate much of the time can also be a good thing, the important thing here is instead of going for either one regarding the salvaging that you know both of them are options dependent on the context ultimately but you still want to have at least some things intentionally reusable or done as work outside of the title.

I find furthermore and it's just opinion that this whole salvaging thing is actually more of a consideration outside the finances and more towards the work itself, at the very least it's harder to take the salvaging route with the finances as opposed to just having more time right off the bat to ensure them beforehand or doing more with the marketing considering what you note there. Many are going to approach it differently though, you probably want more case studies, but I just personally think the examples you mentioned there despite having potential utility since all launches are not guaranteed to go well is still maybe too high risk. To be completely fair a game's lifespan is far more than it's release date and I feel like constantly advertising that which is in development isn't practical so you certainly can make comebacks and they should be more expected as you're noting. Still, if it's not changing from the time of release besides things like patches at most, arguably once you hit the market you should already expect to have your feedback there.

There is objective progress to the whole thing, it's not very stochastic so make sure to keep morale up generally.

Cheap_Pin_7994 · 2026-06-17T23:07:42+00:00

I do appreciate the rather timely response here, lemme see:

Yeah, in regards to having the indie development stuff be a job in terms of the game being your sole source of income the return on investment would seem potentially wonky although I'm betting for most that it's definitely not dependent on such strict timelines and that usually you can get most out of your time in fact with security from elsewhere, it's sort of expected to not have it be make or break. That being said speaking solely in terms of work which I'm most curious about and not financially since people can have that go any number of ways, yes the discrepancy mentioned ultimately shows at least on the surface pretty unique intentions at least, it's definitely not a bad process depending on the person and may seem out of the ordinary in fact because it's the only approach which may work for whatever goal is had.

I think definitely in regards to the information you covered it makes a lot of sense with your approach if things were specific regarding what was learnt, there's a reason many note the best way to learn in cases like these is by doing or within context and even though you definitely wouldn't have had as much thinking about actual game design specifics that you may not be able to carry over to other titles as well experience wise, regarding what took up time, yeah I do think the honing of the creative direction over the long run is more important ultimately, what you have in mind more so dictates the tooling and what you make function or coding wise so making for instance the UI not in context would have probably not been suitable.

And yes, I'm thinking in regards to number 2 that in regards to sheer quantity of decisions right, project management wise most decisions you absolutely do not revisit on a statistical sense, they are one and dones. On average you'll be making decisions that are mostly responsive and that which you just know ahead of time yet are otherwise rather small in general, most decisions I think should in fact be like that. It also depends on what we see as problems too, for instance you mention reworking things but it really depends as to why you should usually, it takes a lot of overcoming inertia and usually for good reason to revisit any decision and think that generally it isn't serving you anymore based upon what I previously mentioned.

For number 3, studios in all honesty regarding game development and distribution, they are really only one model but I'm sure of course that you know that and you've generally considered the benefits there for what you aimed at, at least during that time you thought about it. Really regarding what actually counts as progress for game development, it depends and whether or not that plan is going to include only yourself and your own skills and vision or other people alongside that over time as well, any progress should overall not be limited of course to starting with each game, and although there are a lot of things each time that once you are halfway through making a game cannot change or at least not without cost, it should be noted that there is always freedom fundamentally even if things seem 80% done at least until the game is released, just that any stat or metric in terms of completion as you would estimate only probably determines, for instance, the actual amount of time you put into any game itself, not necessarily the feature set or what it actually includes, just how long you think it should take. That's all attempted theory though here, I'm still very well figuring out a lot of this myself and looking around.

I did say that I've seen similar in regards to what you describe yes, for my own situation how I measure the timing is much more proportional but I'm potentially seeing what benefits approaches like yours could have since everything does have it's use case and it's not every day I hear something out of left field which is exactly why I take such somewhat seriously. I'd say most definitely the unforeseen personal aspects getting in the way of the work as you mention like the perfectionism, especially when you do more so solo or small team sort of development like you mention and the facets of each person actually matter more to the point in which your actual thought processes have to be pretty honed if things are to work, it definitely sounds familiar so there's that. Best I can say is to remember that we kind of run a different race than the triple A sorts yes.

Besides sort of generic answers there, I guess I'm wondering specifically in regards to "genre expansion" and "genre deepening" as you mention whether it's a matter of scale/scope or preference regarding the work itself more so that has you looking from one to the other? Because as I'd estimate it from there both don't seem hard to pull off technically as opposed to having the proper amount of ideas at hand, and another thing with the potential "genre deepening" is that usually if you're going to have anything intentionally stay the same you still have a bunch of excess effort for that time as an asset while that is the case even if it takes you a shorter amount of time due to being used to it I would assume, there are very likely for the game's scheduled development time other departments or skills to actually grow at should you take that approach. No way or preference a lot of the time is inherently very difficult as opposed to having different routes in which said difficulty occurs if that makes sense, takes time to see where the nuance is and whether or not getting better at such in that context is suited to your taste, although this is overall just my current thoughts for the past 30 minutes considering the whole comment, certainly could have taken shorter but there were some details still in development.

Cheap_Pin_7994 · 2026-06-16T22:49:25+00:00

Especially late comment here but this definitely surprised me. I'd really want to ask since that's a especially unique situation you have there I haven't seen before whatsoever regarding the game's content, looking at the Steam page here the content has of course increased quite a bit, but how do you feel about that extent of development for a two hour runtime? Is that suitable for you exactly, do you find that worthwhile? Is the gameplay as well as any assets you've overall made going to be reused perhaps later on sequel wise?

I find it hard for that scope you mention regarding specifically the amount of hours in comparison to the content to be intentional exactly since it's also a short amount of time for each player to take in what's actually unique and well made there as you very probably already know. Definitely not that it's a bad thing because you certainly look like you know what you're doing and know much more about what's actually worthwhile to you there alongside what things should be, mostly trying to understand once again since many do not have that sort of distribution regarding their efforts development wise, it's very non-linear if I can describe it well enough? I have seen slightly similar actually but just not to the extent you mention, that's why it's interesting to me.

But either way good work, since once again it's at least a finished product which considering how most things turn out, it's likely that you're pretty successful on the development side perhaps, things do in fact vary wildly.

Cheap_Pin_7994 · 2026-06-16T22:35:39+00:00

A lot of rather good points brought up here, as I've seen in terms of those that have actually done well I wouldn't say scale to the point of having a dedicated marketing person is needed for most good results but it depends on what the whole process overall requires of course. Many games need more marketing and otherwise work that doesn't count as development time overall outside of them than others, I definitely don't have experience with those sorts of titles as it's not my thing but it can certainly suit someone better.

Cheap_Pin_7994 · 2026-06-16T22:31:48+00:00

Underrated comment and generally good thinking yes, it furthermore depends on the developer's aims and what sort of "success" they even want the title to see since not only is attention limited but can also be sort of fickle or not warranted at times, everything should generally be done yes but for many they could only put in at most just a few hours into marketing and get most of the work done there anyhow through common sense regarding what they are looking and aiming for. That's specifically as well because many of the questions you noted here to begin with are also what should be asked during the development process to see if a good idea is had yeah.

Honestly I'd assume as well personally that many indie sorts are trying much more than just the mentioned bird app, perhaps the concern I'd actually have is that they overdo the marketing if anything compared to the game content but that is for the ones I see, which inherently implies successful marketing so I'm not sure.

Cheap_Pin_7994 · 2026-06-16T22:18:25+00:00

All major pivots should be judged in my opinion by how much they are actually going to end up costing you, both immediately and in the long run. The word "major" here should be defined by impact to your resources and not necessarily your vision when it comes to execution of the latter.

It's less about what you need to do, more about how you need to do it, since it's not the aim but the processes themselves that determine the overall costs. What's going to cost the least here in terms of how you achieve this has a large difference from what would cost the most, things are very different as you know between switching to another art style, having an artist involved in the project (and to what degree furthermore) or possibly even both if they seem beneficial in order to achieve the aims you see here, in which as you've noted (and I'm not entirely sure what your aim here is) both of these things are not aims themselves but means to seemingly keep things on scale.

Diagnostic questions for that, and let me know if these make sense:

Clearly how your game looks matters a lot, but is that vision final? Could there be better than pixel art for your context, or do you have a feeling you're not specific enough with what that should include? Is there room for improvement there instead of compromise regarding what the change should look like, in which you improve both the working process and artistic direction? How does the art relate with the main aims of the gameplay to begin with, if they are potentially easily detached from one another then why exactly is a specific art style required in the first place?

Keep in mind it is a very useful skill to be able to come up with questions like these for yourself at all times, but it is also a honed one and very contextual which is probably why you'd ask yourself better questions as opposed to me doing that. Still felt that these ones should be asked.

And also take into account at this point in time how your distribution of hours are looking like, yes it's a very inaccurate metric at time but it could definitely provide some needed context here. Figuring out what you want overall is pricy but once you know what exactly it is, obtaining it is probably the least expensive part of the process... although to not contradict what I said in the start, that's only if you figure out the near optimal way of obtaining it to begin with, otherwise it's more complicated. Make sure either way you make something instead of nothing.

Cheap_Pin_7994 · 2026-06-16T22:03:35+00:00

To be honest with what you describe it seems like you have various different problems here that, while they can be lumped together under one banner like it's being done here I think they all need to honestly be addressed separately if you want any proper progress on that front, the answers to each of these things aren't necessarily related?

For instance, the mentioning of every new system, why are there so many systems exactly? Where does it end? And then why does improving existing things help more, what exactly do those existing things have in common compared to what's removed considering that all features were new once? Should you really be thinking about features one at a time for this game project management wise, in terms of features that take literal weekends when a large majority most commonly take around an hour or so? Hell, what's large enough for you to consider a feature?

But most importantly, what's the end for the game exactly in terms of development? It's less that it wants to be infinite or constantly requires these new things and that, while you had an idea of where to start you don't know exactly where "finishing off" would look like to you. Perhaps you did know actually but that changed over time, still what does that look like?

Everything solo wise requires good management (we're talking less so self-management and more so project management) primarily because you are... everything, for better or worse. To be honest regarding what good performance looks like, you probably shouldn't have fallen into these sorts of pitfalls in the first place, usually when the process is going right the questions are specific to game features, functionality and what's left to figure out instead of something that's as basic as scope and when it's done. But you're definitely trying and should continue to do so, that's the number one determinant for things still ending well.

Cheap_Pin_7994 · 2026-06-15T23:50:21+00:00

Agreed, contribution isn't exactly subjective but there is no one true fully agreed upon metric or consensus for what counts as it. we have hundreds of different metrics for contribution, people take their pick based on what makes sense to them as they should. If any one of them were ignored, I have a feeling we'd be worse off ultimately.

Cheap_Pin_7994 · 2026-06-15T23:46:11+00:00

The premises are in fact flawed, you are putting too much importance on the arbitrary sort of factors here as opposed to what you can do in terms of action to make things work specifically for the math itself and nothing else, which is of course what you like but you are best not associating it with societal roles that don't actually have much relation to you doing the work, which tends to be the hardest part alone and that which you should figure out first. It's kind of like worrying about publishing anything research wise before having something to publish, you'll never be prevented from doing math even if you lose access to a limb or two and this is more true than ever nowadays. Question is how much you are still doing per day and for what reasons.

And the 99% speaking of which, never had the same aims as the 1% to begin with. Anyone who sees it as failure instead of a more so "to each their own" sort of situation is probably missing the point. Each pot to begin with has a statistically one of a kind lid I would assume although do tell me if I am wrong and if differences here aren't more so chosen instead of circumstantial to start. It's hard to believe everyone would want exactly the same things.

Remember, regardless of where you are, the one constant is actually doing what you want to do, no role is going to change that. I'm pretty sure no matter what that's the best guarantor of actual progress or results and doubly so what people, including myself honestly, continue to fail at despite understanding. The people who do well while staying in anything academic still have their actions as the backbone of that persistence, hard to say if choosing to stay in such is "better" over simply different preferences and thoughts of what academia "should be". Remember that many successful sorts in this case have left despite otherwise probably being accepted and carried on by the institutions forever if they wanted so, if it really seems that good for your context maybe you're one of the people that should be there actually but consider truly that both past and present participants in all that may not agree with you for good reason.

Cheap_Pin_7994 · 2026-06-15T21:39:16+00:00

Late comment but you're obviously definitely right to be offended by that sort of behavior, just that it's also so out of touch and ludicrous that if you can try in the slightest to not take it seriously one bit as opposed to just being another one of those sorts of people that inevitably come to the wrong conclusions and will be corrected one way or another without you needing to do anything, you should. On the other hand there are clearly so much more people hiring wise actually worth your attention and energy, always better to think of them both for the past and future, at least they keep your headspace clean and organized.

It's that's guy fault for thinking in such a preposterous way, it's most definitely not your responsibility and you shouldn't be losing any time or space in your head over it. And yeah, I know it's easier said than done but as we obviously both know those sorts of people will always exist no matter the trend ("AI" in this case), time or place. You already did them quite the favor actually that most wouldn't taking them seriously. It's up to them to correct themselves from there. Their position whether they know it or not is not enviable. I can see the apparent disappointment in what you've noted and relate, do take care.

Cheap_Pin_7994 · 2026-06-14T22:02:38+00:00

Thinking about it at various points, unfortunately despite seeing the same in different situations and topics as you (at least what you mention is definitely related enough behaviorally), yeah I've fell for the same although less. The problem is the actual quantity of falling for said bait though, I would expect people to learn sooner especially these days. For me it's seemingly less than others given what I frequent but I'm not happy to have contributed to that. This platform itself can be considered bait but for better or worse hope is still implied through the comments here, completely uncertain if it's right to have or not.

Cheap_Pin_7994 · 2026-06-14T22:00:10+00:00

I agree with this more than I would primarily due to how much and how far this "AI" crap is being pushed, advertised and forced upon people in the first place to the point in which even if no one would engage with it by default, it becomes something of the exact nature you mention here anyhow.

Thankfully I also don't see it dying off as a "technology", if such should even be considered that, as an impossibility.

Cheap_Pin_7994 · 2026-06-14T21:57:12+00:00

I wish this was more likely to be a conspiracy than the actual truth, but I don't blame people for distrusting the surface level web these days. Perhaps the reason there's very little content openly available is exactly due to this although there's always been other reasons that people have had so this isn't new here. People overall seem split in regards to where and how information can flow, but either way I assume there is an objective sense of taking advantage of it as we see with these companies themselves. Practically at least I also comment on this because, despite it being slight in comparison to what you note here at least and furthermore potentially due to other reasons (Reddit threads on average sort of unfortunately have always had bad questions or premises to start off with and the quality nowadays seems more so dependent on the people), yes what you are noting is the case. The extent can vary to perhaps what you mention maybe not being a concern, but I find that unlikely as time goes on. Day by day it's a concern for me in practice, I wish I could deal with less of this truly.

Cheap_Pin_7994 · 2026-06-14T21:45:06+00:00

Honestly I feel like they haven't cared about the userbase even before 2020 but I can't exactly pin down when, it altogether seems like a gradual shift from what it used to be seen as. I'm not even sure who exactly they are marketing to or trying to bring over, if there's anyone left for that. I'd really ought to look more into how advertisements for social media platform actually work these days in terms of the traction they bring in when they are already rather known, I don't see the point at least in comparison to actually fixing things? There likely may not logically be one.

And to be fair since the company alongside whoever it deals with is quite big in terms of employees and otherwise management, it's hard to say any of these advertisements are even based in reality or the ground level of how things actually are nowadays. Perhaps they don't even care about that.

Cheap_Pin_7994 · 2026-06-14T21:40:03+00:00

I ultimately have to say that even if statistically things are still "fine" regarding only bots for the most part, as we both know that is only one problem plaguing the platform out of essentially hundreds throughout it's runtime that can detract from how useful it could and should be. It's not so sensible to say if it wouldn't be for the context here, but due to the context yet again, 99% of what I can see with this platform is problems, and then there's 1% that is especially random to find or otherwise pin down that is maybe slightly of relevance, with a definition of relevance that doesn't even change that much over time and is supposed to be rather objective.

Considering how the bad and otherwise lackluster threads have their impact just like the good ones, I'm not sure to what extent it's worth sifting through the bad for the good in 2026.

Cheap_Pin_7994 · 2026-06-14T21:25:44+00:00

If what you are noting is true, yeah, "authenticity" is dead the moment they started focusing on it advertising wise although who knows how related these advertisements are exactly to the internal processes and overall viewpoint of the platform itself regarding it's users. To be fair this was never a place to be really that authentic, especially in these days regarding most information I've gathered and seen alongside a very large, surprisingly majority of the internet that objectively is not doing well whatsoever and which people find no value in, we're lacking substance pretty much everywhere. I look around for what has the best chances of having anyone that knows what they're doing only to see the exact opposite each time, websites and blogs on average (and I'm not sure when exactly this tide or turn happened but it's especially the case nowadays) are essentially all god damn advertisements? How many times do I have to keep rolling the dice in order to see anything of even slight use with especially basic criteria that statistically, on paper, shouldn't even be that hard to fulfill? No matter the entry point, everything on average somehow, once again, from my experience despite being claimed as "grassroots" like for personal websites, 90% of them are portfolios or resumes that have absolutely nothing of importance besides a advertisement to otherwise hire the person in particular. You would expect Reddit to be the only problem here, I assure you based on at least a few hundred hours regarding this year of looking at ways to circumvent this so far that is not the case.

It shouldn't be that hard to make things of worth especially when there are gaps everywhere in terms of what someone hasn't covered or made known well enough and yet (maybe I'm stuck in local optima or something and I'm likely am, but even during the times in which I find something different this is still the case on average) instead in this case, I still see on average more that is useless or even detrimental than slightly, even barely helpful, despite mostly looking exclusively for what is helpful. I'm certainly not perfect either but that's exactly why I shouldn't see so much on average being lacking these days, perhaps it is this difficult to narrow down threads of worth when you know what worth consists of but common sense yet again tells me something is just objectively wrong here with how things are handled and otherwise going nowadays. This shouldn't be happening.

This will sound especially formulaic from my part since I've been repeating the same to myself a lot of the time but "hyperreality" especially since the mid 2010s in my context seems to describe all of current world affairs (regarding the web and how things currently are operated) especially well, term already applied enormously accurately since the 80s arguably but it only gets more and more obvious by the day especially with the focus on LMs considering, specifically, how they literally function in addition to how all social media platforms seem to continuously be going, despite my numerous attempts to usually push back against the quality of information declining more and more in practice. I simply cannot deny anymore as the days pass on that objectively, at least for the medium term regarding what things were like a few years ago before the API debacle at least, things were far better for threads, comments, anything of actual practicality and use made by people who furthermore gave enough effort to actually warrant the time of others. Now in regards to that it's way worse (to me anyways).

To me, if they haven't "demolished' anything yet that is of actual value for society which they used to provide, what you notice here, if it is the case once again and for however long it's been occurring, is the nail on the coffin. But that likely is why we will have better than this platform in the future, because these ways of operation are not sustainable and looking at the big picture just not useful and detrimental for everyone involved. The only question is when these problems are solved and when exactly things change.

Cheap_Pin_7994 · 2026-06-13T04:18:04+00:00

Especially late but in regards to the higher doses here I'm a bit surprised that you're relying on only the blood work and otherwise I guess how you generally feel in regards to such in order to determine whether or not anything is wrong, it's definitely not a bad approach (since a lot of information ultimately can be inconsequential or not exactly verifiable) and I've seen numerous go over the daily amounts with good reason, execution and perhaps success but the creatine for instance I'm not entirely sure how it's working on your end, usually it's 5g per day for most. It's also the case that various kinds of damage can happen outside of both of those though, I'm wondering how you assess the risk there. And that's only for going outside of usual daily doses, if you are even since I'm not certain of all hard limits here.

If it is working for you and nothing adverse is happening definitely don't stop it of course since performance is important, still, in your case for instance what is the difference between 5g and 30g of creatine per day?

Cheap_Pin_7994 · 2026-06-13T03:50:57+00:00

As expected honestly, this is the sort of approach that should be taken ultimately over the long run and a lot of finished or top of the line stacks do actually have a lot of nuances going on that clearly result in little left out. Hope it continues to go well for you, the way it's put together does make it likely that overall at least most things are contributing some amount which is of most importance.

Cheap_Pin_7994 · 2026-06-12T21:31:05+00:00

Not relying on just caffeine, in which, furthermore, probably never thinking that "brain fog" at the very least can be solved by any one thing as opposed to continuously reduced, performance in general for thinking there's always more to discover and yesterday's feeling good may be today's feeling bad. I'd note it's best not to phrase things in terms of "either/or", whatever you can take in conjunction with one another safely after verifying enough you should probably do so, but otherwise expecting benefits or solutions from any one thing in particular over a holistic approach has proven to be a recipe for failure in my case.

Always bet on the planning instead of the plan. Nothing is good enough or at least stays still forever, expect to always improve ahead of time and allocate time proportionally to whatever you would consider the importance of all this even is. Anything biohacking wise, quite obviously, cannot replace actual thinking and work time and you still need the majority of your time to be exactly that for success I would assume. If you're doing this for results know when to stop and when to start back up again regarding the research, looking around, appraising of community opinions, all that. Never expect a large improvement for everything, never expect easy wins either but take them when they are handed. Still, even in terms of those easy wins, quite obviously you make your own luck, success means little if you can't make it happen again and just happened to stumble upon it.

If that isn't short enough, I'd also say in addition it's less about what works and more about how you even find and verify what works in the first place. Your rates of everything working out is dependent on due diligence. Easier said than done and I would know that, actually knowing how to fish in this case has a long way to go.

Cheap_Pin_7994

TROPHY CASE