-
Ever wanted an RSS feed of all your favorite gaming news sites? Go check out our new Gaming Headlines feed! Read more about it here.
-
We have made minor adjustments to how the search bar works on ResetEra. You can read about the changes here.
Waypoint - "We Asked Nintendo, Microsoft, and 12 Other Devs How They Deal With Crunch"
- Thread starter MadLaughter
- Start date
Okay, most people who work on Indies don't own a part of the company - they are employees who are much less job secure, worse working conditions, less pay and less benefits than their AAA counterparts. Indie does not mean working for yourself, it means the company isn't owned by a publisher.
These answers are all interesting but I really would need to see them juxtaposed against lower level employees speaking up. Otherwise "oh we work hard to ensure work life balance" means jack shit. Reggie's strikes me as pribapro the most goneho of the big companies, but also he's not discussing development work
One of the bigger problems is that insane crunch is constantly validated by the fact that Naughty Dog, Rockstar and CDPR titles are among the biggest in the world in terms of hype, acclaim and Game of the Year awards. All 3 of these companies are reportedly very high up when it comes to inhumanly high crunch. Crunch is awful, yet at the same time there is a misconception that it also "works".
These are the people that made Majora's Mask, the game that was an entire metaphor for crunch time lol
Yeah...you see, indies crunch too! Even more, because some of them sold their house to keep chasing their dream.They dont have someone backing them, its just the team.
Then in your opnion, A,AA or AAA, it doesn't matter, gaming should not exist at all.
I think we have 2 main problems with the industry right now, and i have some ideias(not that it would solve anything, but its just my mind on how we could improve it).
First problem- Costumer: yeah, we either dont have the patience to wait for a game or demand a lot of content if we are paying 60 bucks for something. This put pressure on them (publisher/developer), this creates impossible deadlines and people have to work much more to put the max things they can in a short period of time. We HAVE to learn to be patient, we HAVE to learn to not create hype machines and let people do their job the way they can.
2- current gaming model: As much as hurt me to say this, the future open world games should be all Gaas type, not the one we have today.
Let the developers release a game for 60, and continue updating it with side-quests, npcs and etc. They release the game with a decent amount of content (not the huge amount we have today) and let them work on it over time (like a year) this way we can give them time, the development will last longer and can extend deadlines(of course, with the occasional paid dlc).
And Amy is right, single player/story driven games should have or a subscription or be released in a episodic way.
In almost all the industrys , time is money, but if we give the money, they will have time to build and create more for each game they release.
Of course this could have a negative impact as a lot of people releasing barebones games...but we have to vote with our wallet.
Or we cab have the old and "good" price rise, to 70-80 dollars
Super Meat Boy, Rogue Legacy, etc. I guess all level of games deserve to die /eyeroll
Does anyone remember how Keiji Inafune once said that the fact that western developers are always being worked as hard as they can and might be let go at any time makes them more likely to push themselves to succeed and stand out, and in turn, make better games than developers in Japan?
Because this thread reminded me of that and how horrifying it sounded back in the day but also literally everyone fell over themselves to praise him for statements like that. Why did that not set off more warning bells for people?
Because this thread reminded me of that and how horrifying it sounded back in the day but also literally everyone fell over themselves to praise him for statements like that. Why did that not set off more warning bells for people?
Other devs are constantly pitted against them as well; how many times have you seen an argument on Era that basically amounted to "If Naughty Dog/CDPR can do it why can't...."
This is a particular thing of mine. Crunch is not "peak efficiency", it's the opposite.
If you want developers at their most efficient, you should schedule them for between 32 and 40 hours per week. Once you go north of 40, that developer starts becoming increasingly inefficient, doing less work in more time as fatigue sets in.
The reason that companies regard this as "high efficiency" is 1) it sounds good, and 2) they don't have to pay any real price for the extra hours.
If you suddenly changed the labor laws such that developers were not exempt from overtime pay, no one would pay developers for overtime unless they were facing a crisis. Otherwise, the prospect of paying people increased rates for decreased output would make overtime verboten in the field.
Not like you would get a response from them or any japanese company for that matter. But even if Nintendo is one of the best companies to work in Japan and the industry, they'll have it as well in some kind of form. We know it happened in the past, but not how it happens now.
I think people need to make sure to read the whole article and not just the excerpts in the OP, because otherwise you're gonna be missing context and perspective.
These exchanges with Reggie for example:
Does that mean bringing on more employees so that work hours don't become extensive?
Fils-Aimé: That's correct.
And you have examples of doing that recently? That's just the normal strategy?
Fils-Aimé: That's is our course of business. That's the way we operate. And so we're not asking people to go for a couple days without sleep. We're not asking people to ignore their family and friends and their social life. We're not asking people to do things that are unhealthy. That is not our approach.
Do you think that there is as Nintendo, as a platform holder, some ability that... You know, Nintendo can't fix the world, I understand that, but as a platform holder, some ability to attempt to address this industry-wide problem?
Fils-Aimé: Well, again, I believe the best way to lead the is through example. And so what we do is reinforce with the way we encourage our business partners to act with the way that we encourage, if you will, the community that we touch.
And it's not only on work life balance. It's issues like diversity and inclusion. You know, with all of those tough conversations our mentality is that we're going to model the behavior that we want seen. So that's why I have a diverse senior management team. That's why as a black man leading a Japanese company, I feel good about the things that we do to deal with higher order issues and to deal with them in a way that models positive behavior.
Looking at the entire exchange, what initially came across as an indirect answer is now very clearly and directly addressed, and even the general ethos of the company is quite cognizantly elucidated. This is true of some of the other interviewees as well, so I would encourage everyone to read the whole article.
Some of the answers from some of the interviewees were just plain shitty though.
These exchanges with Reggie for example:
Does that mean bringing on more employees so that work hours don't become extensive?
Fils-Aimé: That's correct.
And you have examples of doing that recently? That's just the normal strategy?
Fils-Aimé: That's is our course of business. That's the way we operate. And so we're not asking people to go for a couple days without sleep. We're not asking people to ignore their family and friends and their social life. We're not asking people to do things that are unhealthy. That is not our approach.
Do you think that there is as Nintendo, as a platform holder, some ability that... You know, Nintendo can't fix the world, I understand that, but as a platform holder, some ability to attempt to address this industry-wide problem?
Fils-Aimé: Well, again, I believe the best way to lead the is through example. And so what we do is reinforce with the way we encourage our business partners to act with the way that we encourage, if you will, the community that we touch.
And it's not only on work life balance. It's issues like diversity and inclusion. You know, with all of those tough conversations our mentality is that we're going to model the behavior that we want seen. So that's why I have a diverse senior management team. That's why as a black man leading a Japanese company, I feel good about the things that we do to deal with higher order issues and to deal with them in a way that models positive behavior.
Looking at the entire exchange, what initially came across as an indirect answer is now very clearly and directly addressed, and even the general ethos of the company is quite cognizantly elucidated. This is true of some of the other interviewees as well, so I would encourage everyone to read the whole article.
Some of the answers from some of the interviewees were just plain shitty though.
The thing with the prestigious studio's they are a great place to learn as well. So you pay your dues through crunch or otherwise (for something around 4 years) and then you can always transfers (in additon to a great resume) those skills to somewhere with more manageable hours.
I don't think it's wrong to have a few highly competitive companies in the industry (which tend to have crunch). As it provides an options for those who want to put their career on the fast track. Though this only true, if there are actually alternatives present.
I don't work in the video game industry so this is just speculation based on the financial services industry.
Last edited:
But that's the thing, there's also highly competitive companies in the industry that don't have crunch.
There shouldn't be any excuses for companies still having crunch culture in this era.
Guess that explain the Happy Mask Salesman being a stand-in for Miyamoto. And Aonuma is the Skull Kid, I guess.
Was the Moon supposed to be us consumers ("I... I shall consume. Consume... Consume everything..")?
I somehow have feeling those type studio's trend towards micro transactions, multiplayer focused, and GAAS type games. Basically types of games a significant portion of this forum dislikes (this partially includes myself as well).
All big studios trend toward that because it makes more money.
But Bethesda's studios (Arkane, BGS, etc) aren't particularly known for crunch for example, despite not following those trends at all.
edit: while Naughty Dog has multiplayer modes and microtransactions in their game yet is one of the worst offenders in terms of crunch. CDPR is adding multiplayer in Cyberpunk. Rockstar is known for both crunch and multiplayer + microtransactions, etc.
It's not related.
This is just the nature of game development well far more extreme, crunch isn't something that is exclusive to the gaming industry, I think its gotten a lot better in the past few years as most of these bigger companies at least have done a better job of planning long term and setting up milestones and making sure they have the right amount of staff and resources. It's the indie devs that still go through that extreme crunch.
Even if unions are set up for the big developers/publishers we will still hundreds of indie developers with a handful of employees working stupid hours.
Even if unions are set up for the big developers/publishers we will still hundreds of indie developers with a handful of employees working stupid hours.
We just need to do better then I guess.
The following resonated with me and might have partial solution in there:
Sam Lake: "But I feel it's a really, really important point. My perspective to this that this is a marathon, not a sprint. It might seem, at certain points, that "No, no, we need to push hard for this." Ultimately, looking back to it, three months after, it wasn't that important. We could have just taken it with the normal hours. I think there have been a lot of lessons on that along the way. I think Remedy's approach has really helped."
Walter (total war): "You have to be able to shift and adapt during development. Because things change. We get things running, we see how things play, we want to change it. And you have to able to accommodate those shifts. And the only way to do that is being flexible and able to adapt. I think a lot of studios have a problem with crunch because they've got these hard deadlines and they can't cut features. Not to mention they feel like they can always schedule overtime."
Remedy's and DONTNOD's answers were thankfully great. Not a good look on the ESA, Ubisoft PR (Massive does well due to their local regulations), IOI, and CD Project.
I can't imagine Naughty Dog ever replying to a question of that with an answer that does not contain the word passion somewhere. You just have to look at Cory Barlog's answer on the topic to get a picture of how bad it probably is at ND.
"So, we've been asking about crunching and unionization and... Where are you going?
ND:
I can't imagine Naughty Dog ever replying to a question of that with an answer that does not contain the word passion somewhere. You just have to look at Cory Barlog's answer on the topic to get a picture of how bad it probably is at ND.
"So, we've been asking about crunching and unionization and... Where are you going?
ND:
Shipping a videogame is not what I'd consider "humanity's achievement" and worth dying for.
Naughty Dog specifically does not hire producers or project managers so that there's no real scheduling other than the "work as hard as you can, for as long as you can, until leadership says it's done" and so teams aren't empowered to push back on unreasonable requests.
One of the funnier disconnects between experienced AAA devs and your average "smart" forum-goer gamer is that if you ask the gamer what studios they would want to work for, Naughty Dog is always in the top 5, but if you ask the AAA dev Naughty Dog (or CDPR) is rarely ever mentioned.
I worked on a game as a dev right out of college, and said never again. Not only was crunch terrible, you don't even get paid as much as say, a web dev on an e-commerce site.
Of course then I worked for Amazon, which nearly killed me.
Of course then I worked for Amazon, which nearly killed me.
'Crunch' happens in every software dev vertical with strong deadlines. It's not unique to gaming and acting as such comes off as extremely entitled. From what I can tell most devs in established western studios are paid more than handsomely for their time. I'm a Software Developer by trade and have experienced 'crunch' at nearly every employer I've had. Software Devs make extremely high amounts of money relative to their cost of education and necessary training, so I consider it part of the deal. Software development on complex project is hard as hell, usually involving a LOT of very smart people from multiple disciplines, and yet projects still manage to go sideways half of the time. It just.. part of the job if you have deadlines.
Can someone please give me a cogent reason as to why software development on games should operate differently than software development in any other vertical?
Can someone please give me a cogent reason as to why software development on games should operate differently than software development in any other vertical?
Those terrible working conditions with highly competitive salaries, benefits, and paid vacation!!! We must stand up and fight for these people!
The bolded is actually a significant problem as the game industry has a talent drain problem. It's not that other tech fields necessarily have better work/life balance, but most of them at least pay considerably better.
It's true. game development is maybe the worst paying job a competent programmer can get.
Nope, gonna cut you off there. Software developers (and even software testers) make more money than those in the games industry. Programmers and other developers are not guaranteed overtime pay in this industry either (though I'm gonna be honest idk if software devs do too or not.)
Crunch may not be exclusive to the games industry but it doesn't mean constant crunch doesn't fucking suck.
Its not always about the money, if you can't go to your son birthday, or a funeral during a weekend or after work but they play you enough doesnt make it right.
Games developers don't actually get paid as much as those working in different (software) engineering fields. Additionally, software is only a part of the issue, there are a lot of artists etc, that get paid even less.
As pointed out above, the games industry actually bleeds a lot of talent into other industries. It has trouble retaining experienced employees, I imagine to its own detriment.
Arguably you can say that is how the market for employment should work, but one cannot say it is sustainable for this industry in particular.
Or, you know, we could let developers do whatever they want to do. Nobody is forcing anybody to work on any game, to my knowledge.
I wouldn't take that as gospel. They don't have producers but there's no evidence that's WHY they don't have producers.
https://www.glassdoor.com/Salary/34...pment-Engineer-Salaries-E564375_D_KO15,44.htm
Seems okay to me.
But, even IF this is true, and I'm almost certain that it isn't, there is literally NOTHING stopping said dev from leaving the Video Games vertical and going into said higher paying vertical. Talented engineers are in HUGE demand. It is not difficult to find a high paying job in the slightest, hell, even if you aren't that talented, that's just how crazy in-demand developers are at the moment. I can guarantee doing so won't remove the demand for some 'crunch' though. Complex Engineering + Deadlines = Crunch. It is inevitable.
Valve seems to be like Naughty Dog in having a flat structure. It kind of sounds like a "work when you want to work" company and when something is done then its done. No harsh deadlines etc. At least that's the perception. I wonder with how often people constantly harass them to make more games or whatever if it will push them to into unhealthy work practices (if they aren't already).
Huh, that's pretty interesting had no idea I wonder if the Dice's (not EA's specifically) QA is protected under that Union.
Depends, 343i seems rather crunchprone and we all remember Ensemble Studios
No idea how it is at Turn10 or the Gears studio
Yeah, people should stand up for them. And everyone else in similar (or worse) conditions.
Earning a decent salary is not a good excuse for bad work conditions.
On the other hand, sure, crunch, and similar heavy workload periods, happens everywhere. I doubt anyone is saying it should or could disappear entirely. But it ought to be within reasonable limits that the employees can see themselves in. Game development ( or software development) is hardly some unique productions where people have to suffer eternally because it would somehow be impossible to produce anything otherwise. I bet that has been said about any and all kinds of jobs ever.
Unions certainly can be part of the solution.
Do you really believe this? Do you think people have the luxury to refuse these working conditions and keep their job?
You've sent me one link to one company (which FYI your link doesn't appear to work for me.) Glass door is not an indicator of this, anecdotal as it may be I know plenty of people who moved onto software development because of how much more it pays, literally above your post references talent moving away from games because of the pay.
Naughty Dog are literally notorious for having a ridiculous amount of crunch, where do you get that they just "work when you wanna work"?
You are right, I was mostly talking about salary and benefits. Should have made that clear.
I did interview at Turn 10, they gave the impression of a well tuned machine at this point. I turned them down though because they weren't paying what I was looking for. I interviewed with two different teams at Microsoft for the same role, and the one that wasn't in gaming paid significantly more.
Last edited:
