when thinking about building products, I am now super suspicious if I have an idea that takes more than a few days (even hours!) to ship

anything more ambitious than that probably has a set of "stepping-stone" features that act as intermediate for validation and user acquisition

e.g. @clankfun started as a web page that nicely rendered the output of one Dune API call. launching this got enough attention that validated working on a bump feed, which got enough attention to build in trading, and so on and so on. each step reinforced the value for existing users whilst gaining a new set of users.  I was shipping nearly every day in the first few months, from day 1

mostly reading and building. 
prev: @clankfun, improbable, github, amazon. https://ntik.me

I agree with this so much. And I think this comes with experience in building products. You realize how fast you can validate with something simple and extrapolate from there.

I just want us to have fun | Cofounder @ Resolve (YC) - spatial tech for construction. FC tinkering: @livecaster @harmonybot /bot-or-not | /orange-dao

yeah it's just scary thinking you could be working on something for a week and then turns out you were totally wrong about how you modelled the value you're delivering and have to throw it all away and start again. I'm too jaded from experiencing this play out too many times.

yeah it's especially hard in AA+ games where the polish is part of the things that makes the game fun. need really experienced studio leads to be able to take massive bets on concepts.

Feels especially common in 3D, games, VR, etc. 

Most of my friends who built successful indie games validated the core loop early on and it's extremely simple. The rest is polish.

Source: we've both been there 😅