Angry Bird’s “overnight success” only took 8 years.

Re:Angry Bird’s “overnight success” only took 8 years. by jakegottlieb on Friday March 11, 2011 @02:59PM (#2314656)

Overnight success generally takes around ten years. First the person must become an expert. When you first start practicing a new skill set like playing the piano, you may be able to play, but you have definitely not reached your potential. Within a couple of years you are more competent but there are clearly people better then you. At about the 8-10 year mark, you are then an expert. There may be people better than you, but there shouldn't be a huge difference (of course this depends on the person).

Taking ten years to make it as a performer or a even a craftsman is pretty common. Rovio clearly earned their success.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Angry Bird’s “overnight success” only took 8 years. by jarek on Friday March 11, 2011 @06:41PM (#2315387)

I feel it's worth pointing out that this paraphrases poorly researched and anecdotally supported arguments from Malcolm Gladwell.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Angry Bird’s “overnight success” only took 8 years. by gyom on Friday March 11, 2011 @07:08PM (#2315473)

And adding to that, it seems to me like the main idea here is that "eventually you'll get lucky, but it'll take time" and not really the expertise required.

If the moral of the story was about expertise, you'd expect that any game developer with 20 years of experience could write huge successes like "Angry Birds" in 3 month, on demand.

Now, true, they're getting better at it over the years, but I don't think that this story belongs the "10 000 hours" category.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Angry Bird’s “overnight success” only took 8 years. by ThomPete on Saturday March 12, 2011 @05:53AM (#2316592)

Mastering your field does not mean mastering your market.

[ Parent | on HN ]