The state of the industry

This is where you can deliberate anything relating to videogames - past, present and future
Post Reply
User avatar
Craig
Member
Posts: 576
Joined: October 25th, 2015, 1:04 pm

The state of the industry

Post by Craig »

People making games have not had such a great time recently.

*Armchair pundit warning*

The long and short - many of the people who make the games we love are being treated like garbage. There have been several high profile stories the details of which have been echoed in many others throughout the last decade.

Last week we had Rockstar boasting about hundred hour weeks, followed by a hasty clarification that this was all voluntary and nobody was forced into it. Even if we're being charitable and accept this line of thinking unquestioned, none of the comments were really all that surprising. Crunch is well documented. I've read stories of developers scheduling crunch at the beginning of a project, which just feels like poor planning.

Just prior to that we had the sudden closure of a game studio which appeared to be doing fine with many projects planned, Telltale. People very abruptly lost their jobs some of which had only started at the company the previous week. While this was a surprise, sudden studio closures is also unfortunately not uncommon. Many studios are shuttered and teams disbanded shortly after a big game is released. You work hard on something, put in ridiculous hours, and then suddenly as you feel the elation of a big project finished, you have to scramble to find a new job maybe relocating halfway across the country (and hope the company doesn't get shuttered weeks after you arrive.)

Most of the horror stories we hear are of US companies due to the large concentration of studios there. Studios in Japan at least seem to give a lot more stability but if you do something to tick off the management it sounds like they can send you to a broom closet somewhere to think about what you've done for a five to ten years. I also wouldn't expect a short working day from a Japanese company.


But I mean, why should you care?

Well, first from a moral point of view, I'd prefer to support an industry which allowed people to have a comfortable and stable life. Games range from a nice release of stress to pieces of art, but I'd prefer if no-one broke their back trying to entertain me. I can deal.

But otherwise, this will cause the industry to lose talent and voices. Not wanting to work hundred hour weeks does not mean you are not dedicated or passionate about making games. Not wanting to relocate at short notice every 3 to 4 years does not make you any less dedicated or passionate about making games. But a lot of these people will be pushed out of the industry. For example, if you start a new family, your priorities can change. You might want to make a game, but moreso you want to make sure your kid is healthy and happy. Pretty soon a job with a steady wage and shorter hours is going to suit your lifestyle better, whether it be in the games industry or not.

Recently we've had an influx of Dad games, likely due to many folk making games becoming fathers themselves. It's nice to have a variety of voices and styles of games, and I can't see how the current climate doesn't really welcome anyone who isn't flexible.



But what can we do?

Honestly, I don't really know.

Poor working practices don't really seem to impact the sales of a game. Even though many stories about Red Dead Redemption 2 have came out recently, it's unlikely many folk who were going to buy it will be deterred. Even when boycotts are organised, gamers are generally awful at following through if the game is good. It's easy to boycott some trash you were never going to play anyway.

Indie games with small teams seem to be a nicer situation, but many of these games will unlikely recoup costs or be the breakout hits they're aiming to be. There is also an unhelpful fetishization of sacrifice in the press when it comes to these releases, with stories about mortgaging houses being told as a heroic gamble (but usually only when that gamble has paid off.)



So where do we go from here? How can we make the industry better and more sustainable for those who make the games we love?
User avatar
KSubzero1000
Member
Posts: 3365
Joined: August 26th, 2015, 9:56 pm
Location: Germany

Re: The state of the industry

Post by KSubzero1000 »

Craig wrote: October 22nd, 2018, 3:28 pm Well, first from a moral point of view, I'd prefer to support an industry which allowed people to have a comfortable and stable life. Games range from a nice release of stress to pieces of art, but I'd prefer if no-one broke their back trying to entertain me. I can deal.
I think crunch is gross and I agree with the above. Developers are human beings and shouldn't be treated like expendable commodities by publishers, to be squeezed dry and carelessly discarded afterwards. Alas, that's more or less how capitalism works.

Craig wrote: October 22nd, 2018, 3:28 pm So where do we go from here? How can we make the industry better and more sustainable for those who make the games we love?
There are two solutions I can think of. One on the side of the industry, the other on the side of the customers:

The first one is global developer unionization. Why this isn't already a thing, I'm not sure. Although I suppose that american work culture may play a large part into this.

The second would be to have an impartial platform dedicated to expose the abusive inner workings of individual studios and hope that the consumers would vote with their wallet as a result thereof. The problem with this is that people are lazy and mostly just follow the path of least resistance. The shady aspects of the music, movie, textile, agriculture and tech industries are extremely well-documented, and yet all these companies continue to make money hand over fist at the heavy expense of their most vulnerable elements. I wouldn't expect the video game consumers to be the glorious exception in that regard. Bad news come and go and very rarely affect sales in any meaningful way. Apathy and selfishness reign supreme. A well-written PR move at the opportune time works wonders on the "whatever"-crowd.

Craig wrote: October 22nd, 2018, 3:28 pm Even when boycotts are organised, gamers are generally awful at following through if the game is good. It's easy to boycott some trash you were never going to play anyway.
This is also true. I'll admit that while it's easy for me to "boycott", say, Naughty Dog or Quantic Dream considering I don't like their products all that much, I would probably find it difficult to swear off buying DMC5 in the event of unsavory news coming out of Capcom in the next few months, for example. Taking hardline moral stances is easier said than done in a capitalistic society, especially because it so often feels like individual efforts aren't leading to any tangible result.

So basically, you can try your best to vote with your wallet to the best of your knowledge / ability as an individual, while keeping in mind that your actions may very well end up hurting the wrong people in the short term and with the understanding that the vast majority of consumers will probably never follow suit. It may not be the most satisfying answer, but I think it's the most realistic one.

Depressing stuff all around.
User avatar
Suits
Member
Posts: 3174
Joined: October 28th, 2015, 3:25 pm
Location: Chelmsford, UK

Re: The state of the industry

Post by Suits »

Wonderful post. The larger scale of this has been in my mind for a while now.

There’s been a big call for a union for the industry, something that would help with guidelines and support workers.

It would also help companies set out certain things regards how they support and employ their workers.

It wouldn’t fix thing overnight or be the fix for everything but I certainly think it would be a big step in the right direction.
User avatar
DomsBeard
Member
Posts: 3689
Joined: September 2nd, 2012, 5:03 pm
Location: Doms Chin

Re: The state of the industry

Post by DomsBeard »

I was wondering in particular about Rockstar as surely as being in the UK they must have to follow UK rules and Regs with HR?.

I run my own small business and employ 7 staff. All of them have to sign to say that they are happy to work more than 48 hours a week they are by law able to not sign this documentation and work 48 hours Maximum a week. I would be liable to fines if I made them sign or made them work over 48 if they didnt want to. I would need to manage my team or employ someone else to share the work load. Surely Rockstar have to abide by this too?.

I was thinking about this the other day and with better management this 100 hours should not exist.

I reckon if they halved the no doubt obscene advertising budget would that have helped?. Every time I open Facebook/Instagram/Twitter I am bombarded with RDR2. I was in London last weekend and yep there it was on those famous digital advertising boards at Picadilly.

I think there are no doubt worse in the world (smart phones/China) but like there until a serious incident happens nothing will improve
User avatar
Flabyo
Member
Posts: 3576
Joined: August 8th, 2013, 8:46 am
Location: Guildford

Re: The state of the industry

Post by Flabyo »

Rockstar are not just in the UK. Most of the dev for RDR2 was in their US studios (and the main culprit appears to be their primary QA department).

What you’re referring to is the EU working time directive. It’s part of a group of EU rules that define things like how much paid holiday employees should get, how long notice periods need to be, and what constitutes illegal dismissal.

The working time directive is right at the top of the Tory list of ‘Eu rules we’ll get rid of as soon as Brexit is done’. For a section of the conservative electorate, getting out of the EU is only about being able to remove worker protections.
User avatar
Craig
Member
Posts: 576
Joined: October 25th, 2015, 1:04 pm

Re: The state of the industry

Post by Craig »

KSubzero1000 wrote: October 22nd, 2018, 4:00 pm
The first one is global developer unionization. Why this isn't already a thing, I'm not sure. Although I suppose that american work culture may play a large part into this.
I think this would be a good first step, though I think the big first step would be getting the message out there to as many consumers as possible - This is a way to protect the people behind the games. The bosses are unlikely to welcome unions with open arms, but if you can get the folk buying the games on your side you'll have a much easier time.

If they can talk to the right people, I think they could do it well. Right now there are a few big industry commentators whose bread and butter is essentially an us versus them narrative against big publishers. Obviously this relationship is a little more complex than "evil publisher abuses saintly developers" but there are at least publishers sympathetic to the cause.

However, if there's anything consumers hate more than a delayed game it's "lazy" developers. If there's any industrial action, it'll be a hard sell without first establishing the background first. And large publishers hoping to squash union efforts can easily control the PR explaining that a game is behind schedule because of strike action.
DomsBeard wrote: October 22nd, 2018, 11:34 pm
I run my own small business and employ 7 staff. All of them have to sign to say that they are happy to work more than 48 hours a week they are by law able to not sign this documentation and work 48 hours Maximum a week. I would be liable to fines if I made them sign or made them work over 48 if they didnt want to. I would need to manage my team or employ someone else to share the work load. Surely Rockstar have to abide by this too?.
There are many ways in which something on paper is voluntary is essentially compulsory, most of which is down to the company culture. Sure you could go home on time, but when the whole team is staying until 11PM, do you really want to be the one that lets the team down? Your boss is going to remember that. You won't get fired, but you're certainly not getting looked at for promotion at the other team members who are dedicated and passionate. If you're on a fixed term contract, maybe the company will feel that you're just not really a fit and it's time to part ways amicably. And well, you're working on one of the biggest games of this generation, you want it to be good don't you? Now time is ticking down, and we have to smooth over one or two things, we all need to pitch in together.

There are also times where working conditions are just plain illegal. But, well, you have a job. You want to keep it. Are you going to risk your job? In this economy?

Just to be clear, I'm not saying these scenarios happened exactly like this at Rockstar, but personally I've worked at none game related companies which have both employed voluntary training sessions and have also banked on people not understanding their legal rights.
User avatar
Simonsloth
Member
Posts: 1639
Joined: November 22nd, 2017, 7:17 am
Location: London
Contact:

Re: The state of the industry

Post by Simonsloth »

Flabyo wrote: October 23rd, 2018, 9:32 am Rockstar are not just in the UK. Most of the dev for RDR2 was in their US studios (and the main culprit appears to be their primary QA department).

What you’re referring to is the EU working time directive. It’s part of a group of EU rules that define things like how much paid holiday employees should get, how long notice periods need to be, and what constitutes illegal dismissal.

The working time directive is right at the top of the Tory list of ‘Eu rules we’ll get rid of as soon as Brexit is done’. For a section of the conservative electorate, getting out of the EU is only about being able to remove worker protections.
There are ways around the EU working time directive. In the NHS (my employer) I used to have 100 hour weeks then suddenly be given random zero hour days/weeks. These weeks i was “at work” but actually at home in my pants playing games. The zero weeks turned the 100 hour weeks into 50 hour weeks overall so to the EU it’s all above board. Cheeky!

From my perspective as long as these guys/gals signed on to this and get their overtime I’m happy for them. It seems horrific if you haven’t done it yourself but when I was working those hours it was the norm. You sort of get on with it. Obviously If they didn’t agree to overtime and conditions are substandard then obviously I’m not on board.

On the subject of developers working within their limits I kickstarted a game 4 years ago which is yet to see the light of day. Not because it has been abandoned but because the guys making it are working at their speed to make the game they want in the manner that’s good for them. I’m happy with that too.

I’m not trying to be edgy but certain working patterns aren’t always bad as long as those concerned are consenting.
User avatar
Flabyo
Member
Posts: 3576
Joined: August 8th, 2013, 8:46 am
Location: Guildford

Re: The state of the industry

Post by Flabyo »

It’s very rare to actually get paid any extra for doing overtime in games though, I certainly never have been.

And while it’s easy for a studio to say ‘you don’t have to do it”, the career and peer pressure you get if you don’t can cause real issues between staff members, and tends to be a fast track to ‘next time we have to make redundancies, these people go first’ lists.

As long as some people do it, and then turn everyone who doesn’t do it into pariahs, then saying ‘you don’t have to do it” is an empty gesture.
User avatar
Craig
Member
Posts: 576
Joined: October 25th, 2015, 1:04 pm

Re: The state of the industry

Post by Craig »

Simonsloth wrote: October 23rd, 2018, 9:24 pm
From my perspective as long as these guys/gals signed on to this and get their overtime I’m happy for them. It seems horrific if you haven’t done it yourself but when I was working those hours it was the norm. You sort of get on with it. Obviously If they didn’t agree to overtime and conditions are substandard then obviously I’m not on board.


I’m not trying to be edgy but certain working patterns aren’t always bad as long as those concerned are consenting.
The problem arises that when it’s an industry wide norm, the choice is “work many hours of overtime” or “don’t make games.” This is limiting the industry and taking advantage of people’s love of games.

Take the NHS for example. By the nature of hospital work, there are some necessary unsociable hours with night shift and the like, but due to mismanagement doctors and nurses are understaffed meaning many are working dangerous amounts of overtime.

When you’re in that situation, it’s easy to feel the need to get the job done. Everyone’s in the same boat and you just need to get on with it, but if there were more staff this wouldn’t need to happen. People with a desire and passion to help others have to make difficult decisions about whether they can do the hours expected, sacrificing their own personal life, or go into a different industry.

Now the NHS is a difficult situation. The management and funding is a direct result of the whims of the government and politics, and the demand put upon it is twenty four hour and often unpredictable.

Games are not like this. It can be different.

“Do you want to make a game” and “Do you want to work many hours of overtime” should be unconnected questions. At the moment, they are not. It’s kind of expected that if you want to work on a big project you’re going to have to make big sacrifices.

You mentioned the kickstarter guys taking their time with it, and that’s great. But I’d like to see that kind of working culture influencing bigger game companies.
User avatar
hazeredmist
Member
Posts: 1709
Joined: June 25th, 2013, 12:45 pm
Location: The DMZ
Contact:

Re: The state of the industry

Post by hazeredmist »

This isn't exclusive to game development. At all.

I work in the private sector for an IT company in a management role and I am salaried, I work significantly more than my contracted hours without overtime payments and there is definitely a culture of this in management in particular - however I do it absolutely by choice to push for the goals of the business and my own career goals, and I feel rewarded for it. I'm motivated to do it. Any achievements with my name on them help flesh out my CV and I'm renumerated when it comes to pay reviews / progression. The day that stops, or if I feel aggreived, I'll seek something else. If the hours bother me, I'll seek out a less stressful role, working fewer hours, and with it I imagine, fewer rewards. And that'll be OK.

That would be my advice to anyone in a situation where they feel exploited or stressed with their working lives. Life's too short to be unhappy.
User avatar
Suits
Member
Posts: 3174
Joined: October 28th, 2015, 3:25 pm
Location: Chelmsford, UK

Re: The state of the industry

Post by Suits »

I’m a salaried senior manager within my company also - I don’t get paid for any over time.

Any overtime I do tends to be for business performance, self satisfaction or the bigger picture.

There is certainly a danger of falling into a culture of first to arrive last to leave and the smugness that that brings.

As mentioned, it’s about being in control of that and keeping it sensible. Be comfortable, confidant and smart about ten hours you do.

I have a wife and a young child and I’ll be dammed if I let my occupation or career get in the way of enjoying that - I have the benefit of falling back on a contract if things ever get hairy that clearly state my working hours, I also have a union specific to my profession that can help me with things if needed.

Its a shame that the industry doesn’t have any sort of overarching support and I appreciate that most instances will be down to individual In house HR departments and personal relationships - which is very tricky - the sooner something comes in the better.
User avatar
Simonsloth
Member
Posts: 1639
Joined: November 22nd, 2017, 7:17 am
Location: London
Contact:

Re: The state of the industry

Post by Simonsloth »

Suits wrote: October 24th, 2018, 9:42 am I have a wife and a young child and I’ll be dammed if I let my occupation or career get in the way of enjoying that - I have the benefit of falling back on a contract if things ever get hairy that clearly state my working hours, I also have a union specific to my profession that can help me with things if needed.
My then girlfriend, now wife essentially gave me an ultimatum when I was working ridiculous hours and said she couldn’t marry someone who was absent more than he was present.

I still work 13-14 hour days but I only do 4 of them. If I didn’t have the choice to alter my career path within the healthcare sector then my family of 4 probably wouldn’t exist.

Its wrong that the industry views these working patterns as the norm as I feel going above and beyond should be rewarded rather than assumed.

However if I applied for a job working for the top company in any profession I would expect to be working harder and longer hours than elsewhere. It would be nice for there to be a variation in working practice.
User avatar
JaySevenZero
Admin
Posts: 2643
Joined: August 27th, 2012, 4:28 pm
Location: Liverpool, Europe, Earth
Contact:

Re: The state of the industry

Post by JaySevenZero »

Flabyo wrote: October 23rd, 2018, 9:32 am Rockstar are not just in the UK. Most of the dev for RDR2 was in their US studios (and the main culprit appears to be their primary QA department).
Their primary QA department being Rockstar Lincoln

The working time directive is pretty much pointless in reality as the 48 hour a week max is averaged over 17 weeks and so long as the hours can be divided over that period it doesn't make much difference to those having to work them. And Rockstar were very careful to juggle the hours so that they don't fall foul to that particular directive.
Joshihatsumitsu

Re: The state of the industry

Post by Joshihatsumitsu »

It's a bit shitty when the only action I can really take as a consumer is to not purchase. I can't force my morality on others, and I wouldn't want to either, so others would have to decide for themselves.

And the juggernaut games are going to sell a shit-ton anyway. No quick and easy answers or solutions, just patiently pushing for cultural change, and keeping up that fight.

Work-wise I'm in a union (university, non-gaming industry), and while unions themselves are far from saints, not having them fight for your rights would result in a far worse outcomes. It's ridiculous that even in my relatively safe industry you still have to keep on top of basic rights, like keeping pay relative to inflation, etc.
Post Reply