There’s a moment in every game developer’s journey when you stare at a chunk of code you’ve been working on for days—maybe even weeks—and a little voice in your head whispers, “This just isn’t working.” But then another, louder voice chimes in, reminding you of all the hours you’ve poured into this code. You’ve tweaked, refactored, and fought through bugs, and it feels like giving up would be a waste. This, my friends, is the Sunk Time Fallacy at work, and it’s a sneaky beast!

What Is the Sunk Time Fallacy?

The Sunk Time Fallacy is the idea that once you’ve invested time, effort, or resources into something, it’s harder to abandon it—even when it’s clear that moving on would be the better choice. It’s a trap that’s easy to fall into because it’s human nature to want to see our investments pay off. But in reality, holding on to something just because you’ve already spent time on it can lead to even bigger problems down the road.

In the context of game development with Godot, this fallacy can manifest in several ways. Maybe you’ve built a system that seemed like a good idea at first, but it’s becoming increasingly fragile as your project grows. Or perhaps you’ve spent days fine-tuning a particular feature, only to realize that it’s not adding as much value to your game as you thought it would. Despite these red flags, you hesitate to delete the code because it feels like throwing away all that time and effort.

Recognizing the Fallacy in Your Workflow

Godot is an incredibly flexible engine, which is one of its biggest strengths. But this flexibility can also be a double-edged sword. Because Godot makes it so easy to experiment, you might find yourself going down rabbit holes—building out complex systems or features that you later realize don’t quite fit the game you’re creating.

The key to avoiding the Sunk Time Fallacy is learning to recognize when you’ve hit a dead end and having the courage to backtrack. This doesn’t mean you’ve failed; it means you’re willing to do what’s necessary to make your game the best it can be. Sometimes, that means scrapping code and starting fresh, even if it hurts a little (or a lot).

I’ve been there—I’ve written systems that I was convinced would be the backbone of my game, only to find out later that they were more trouble than they were worth. And yes, it’s painful to hit delete on something you’ve spent so much time crafting. But here’s the thing: the longer you let fragile code stick around, the more it weaves itself into the fabric of your project, increasing your technical debt.

The True Cost of Technical Debt

Technical debt is like borrowing time from your future self. You might get something working now by cutting corners or making compromises, but you’ll pay for it later when those decisions come back to haunt you. And trust me, they will.

When you allow fragile, over-complicated, or poorly thought-out code to stay in your project, it doesn’t just sit there quietly. It starts to propagate. As your project grows, other systems begin to rely on that shaky foundation, making it harder and harder to change things without causing new bugs or breaking existing features. This is how projects become unwieldy, how developers end up spending more time fixing issues than actually building new content.

In Godot, where so much of your game is interconnected—nodes talking to other nodes, scripts depending on signals, scenes referencing other scenes—technical debt can quickly spiral out of control. If you let one bad piece of code stick around, it can create a ripple effect that impacts your entire project.

Sometimes, It’s Better to Start Over

Here’s the tough love: sometimes, the best thing you can do for your project is to delete that problematic code and start over. It feels counterintuitive because we’re so conditioned to believe that progress is linear—that every line of code we write should bring us closer to the finish line. But real progress isn’t about moving forward at all costs; it’s about moving forward in the right direction.

Starting over doesn’t mean you’re erasing all your hard work. Think of it as taking what you’ve learned from the first attempt and applying it to a new, better solution. You’re not starting from scratch; you’re starting from experience. And with that experience, you can build something more robust, something that won’t buckle under pressure or cause headaches down the road.

In Godot, this might mean rethinking how you’ve structured your nodes, revisiting the way you handle input, or even scrapping an entire feature that just isn’t working. It’s about having the foresight to see that while it may take some extra time now, you’ll save yourself a lot of grief later.

The Power of Iteration

One of the most beautiful things about working in Godot is how it encourages iteration. The engine’s design makes it easy to prototype, test, and iterate quickly, which is exactly what you need to combat the Sunk Time Fallacy. Instead of clinging to the first version of a system or feature, embrace the idea that your game is a living, evolving project.

Iteration is all about making small improvements, testing them, and then refining further. It’s a cycle that allows you to explore different approaches without getting too attached to any one solution. If something doesn’t work, no big deal—scrap it and try again. Each iteration gets you closer to a system that is not only functional but also elegant and maintainable.

In Godot, this could mean creating small, self-contained prototypes of a feature before fully integrating it into your game. By keeping things modular and testing as you go, you reduce the risk of letting fragile code slip into your main project. And if you find that a prototype isn’t working out, it’s much easier to toss it and start fresh without feeling like you’ve wasted time.

“Hands Off” Code: Why Avoidance Isn’t the Answer

Now, let’s talk about a common mindset that can lead to the propagation of technical debt: the dreaded “I don’t want to touch that again.” This phrase is often born out of frustration after wrestling with a particularly stubborn piece of code. The temptation is to leave it as is, hoping it will hold together long enough to avoid further scrutiny.

But here’s the thing: when you avoid touching code because it’s fragile or because you’re afraid of breaking something, you’re essentially admitting that the code is flawed—and you’re choosing to let that flaw persist. This is how technical debt accumulates, and it’s how small issues turn into big problems down the line. If the thought of touching a piece of code fills you with dread, that’s a sign that it needs to be rewritten, not ignored.

Embrace the idea that no part of your codebase is untouchable. If something’s not working as it should or is becoming a source of anxiety, take the time to fix it properly. Yes, it might be uncomfortable, and yes, it might take longer than you’d like, but in the long run, you’ll thank yourself for it. Your future self—and your project—deserve a clean, maintainable codebase that you’re not afraid to work on.

The Freedom to Let Go

Ultimately, overcoming the Sunk Time Fallacy is about giving yourself the freedom to let go. It’s about recognizing that your time and energy are valuable, and sometimes the best way to honor that value is by cutting your losses and moving on.

Godot’s flexibility and ease of use make it a fantastic tool for exploring different ideas, but it also requires a certain level of discipline. You need to be willing to make tough decisions, to delete code that isn’t serving you or your game, and to start over when necessary.

So, the next time you find yourself holding on to a piece of code because you’ve already invested so much time into it, take a step back and ask yourself: is this really the best path forward? If the answer is no, don’t be afraid to hit that delete key. Your future self—and your game—will thank you for it.