I've watched many Carmack videos over the years and he never complained about the team not following him or people working for him being not good enough, he always praised the work done and explained in very fine details why the decisions where taken one way or another.
When he wanted to remove a pebble from his shoe, he talked extensively of the company decisions, in the higher ups, which is more than fair given his role.
He never struck me as a "Steve Jobs of coding" (probably today Elon Musk?).
I also had several encounters with John Romero and talked a bit about the times at id Software and he never ever hinted that Carmack was problematic in any way.
He's also obviously not a very good politician/sellperson (he can't sell what he hasn't already produced or envisioned) and suffers bureaucracy, like every normal person here that is not a bureaucrat.
Anyway.
Regardless of the truthfulness of what you write, Carmack has always been able to deliver, both in time and as of code quality and maintainability, one way or another, Meta hasn't.
The evidence pile up more against FB/Meta management than against Carmack, moreover I think it's easy to attack the person taking responsibility in person than those hiding in the shadows, Linus suffered the same destiny, but he created Linux and brought it where it is now, the attackers didn't, so maybe Linus was simply right.
Check out Lex Fridman and John Carmack interview. Also read Masters of Doom. I think the key with Carmack is that he's a workaholic, and he expects the same from the ones around him.
Their point was that it means something when someone who was badly hurt still praises the person who did it. (“Did it” is shorthand for the full story.)
From the Dallas Observer article quoted by story I linked to (Jan 1999):
"Throughout it all, ION Storm has been hemorrhaging employees; of the approximately 85 people ION employed a year ago, more than half have quit or been let go. Finally, six weeks ago, virtually the entire team working on Daikatana jumped ship and joined Wilson's company."
To think that John Romero has the slightest bit of credibility as a character witness when it comes to such issues is so far from reality it is almost funny.
When he wanted to remove a pebble from his shoe, he talked extensively of the company decisions, in the higher ups, which is more than fair given his role.
He never struck me as a "Steve Jobs of coding" (probably today Elon Musk?).
I also had several encounters with John Romero and talked a bit about the times at id Software and he never ever hinted that Carmack was problematic in any way.
He's also obviously not a very good politician/sellperson (he can't sell what he hasn't already produced or envisioned) and suffers bureaucracy, like every normal person here that is not a bureaucrat.
Anyway.
Regardless of the truthfulness of what you write, Carmack has always been able to deliver, both in time and as of code quality and maintainability, one way or another, Meta hasn't.
The evidence pile up more against FB/Meta management than against Carmack, moreover I think it's easy to attack the person taking responsibility in person than those hiding in the shadows, Linus suffered the same destiny, but he created Linux and brought it where it is now, the attackers didn't, so maybe Linus was simply right.