Yup shrinking games down is a good solution.
Also, longer development cycles for games with the scope of something like BOTW.
There are studios out there that have put AAA games to market without crunch and proved that it is not a necessary component to great AAA games
Crunch isn't some magical issue that only occurs in AAA development... it's just that it is brought to peoples attention with big titles where their development is far more in the public eye.
His point of why unions will never work in video games is because most devs are easily replaceable by outsourcing their work overseas (he says he's pro-union and anti-crunch in the video). I wonder if that's actually true, and whether you can get the same quality from overseas (especially when it comes to stuff like writing for big dev like Naughty Dog or CDPR who are known to crunch).
Indies are top notch so no big loss IMO
And I'm ok with this too. Some of my best games aren't AAA, though I appreciate the God of Wars, and TLOU stuff. I have games I come back to over and over that are indie, and small, maybe even considered ugly graphically.
How do we kill AAA games, though? Look at the sales of some of Sony's AAA games this generation... They aren't going away. As long as there is demand and as long as the games keep selling the way that they do, devs will go through hell and back for the accolades and the rewards.
I love AAA games, and I'd gladly give them up if the people who made them could go home to their families instead of being away 4 months at a time - I just don't see it happening. How many of the people buying these games actually know what goes into making them? I'd argue not even 5 %, and it's fucking sad.
I don't have the solution, and I'd be happy if the game industry somehow unionizes, but how do we actually get there?
Edit: I don't want to sound like a defeatist, I am genuinely asking, how do we make it happen?
Exactly, if this is the only way then fuck it.I'd rather people not kill themselves to entertain me. Thanks.
I've been saying the AAA market is unsustainable for a while but people won't listen because "wow red dead redemption 2 is so purty u guize"
From my experience, Swedish AAA studios crunch just as much as American ones.It also depends on the country the studio is based on and the regulations and laws applying there. Eg Sweden has different working conditions than USA, not just in video games.
I'd say indie devs have an even tougher time. But the reward is greater on the back of success (and risk greater on the back of failure).Indie games it is then. Entertainment isn't worth ruined lives.
You also need to convince the creative leads that they no longer have free reign to iterate and try stuff as much as they like, and how it's a good thing that their freedom is being limited.All you need is better project management. There needs to be better training practices within studios to build better management skills for leads. It's absolutely doable to run a company without crunch, but most studios aren't willing to invest in the resources required to train and end up with team leads and managers that lack the proper skills to efficiently run their projects.
From my experience, Swedish AAA studios crunch just as much as American ones.
But Indies crunch too. AAA games can be made without crunch and I don't think we even need unions(I am still in favour of them) for that.
What has to change is the work culture of the entire studio managment included. DICE and Insomniac have apparently little to no crunch
and I wish, we would get more articles focussing on how these and maybe other studios achived that.
Doesn't affect crunch really. Unless you have a kid. And US AAA studios have very generous benefits usually.Swedish system is more generous with maternity leaves, health insurance and overall benefits that can make a difference
All you need is better project management. There needs to be better training practices within studios to build better management skills for leads. It's absolutely doable to run a company without crunch, but most studios aren't willing to invest in the resources required to train and end up with team leads and managers that lack the proper skills to efficiently run their projects.
It doesn't happen because of bad management. It happens because they know they can get away with it. Unions are absolutely necessary.All you need is better project management. There needs to be better training practices within studios to build better management skills for leads. It's absolutely doable to run a company without crunch, but most studios aren't willing to invest in the resources required to train and end up with team leads and managers that lack the proper skills to efficiently run their projects.
I realize this is a video game forum and so this is topical, but I don't feel like I see this same emphasis on workers' rights in other areas of my life and I wonder why that is.
I'm thinking about people like roofers, construction workers, and carpet installers who work long hours and suffer debilitating injuries later in life.
By all means I want game developers to have happy lives and good working conditions but I can't help but feel like they're getting a disproportionate amount of attention. It's not a zero sum game, but I hope we all consider other workers we encounter in our lives and not just game developers.
Unions won't change the fact that it's hard to make a new game, figure out the fun, iterate on the design, all the while building cutting-edge tech. It's not something that's easy to plan, it doesn't matter how trained or awesome the team leads or managers are. Completely gutting what the creative leadership can do to a game, just for the sake of protecting the schedule and planning, will result in games that aren't fun and will turn out unsuccessful. Or very predictable me-too games that don't innovate. Both cases have the potential to bankrupt a studio and then unions won't help either.It doesn't happen because of bad management. It happens because they know they can get away with it. Unions are absolutely necessary.
Unions won't change the fact that it's hard to make a new game, figure out the fun, iterate on the design, all the while building cutting-edge tech. It's not something that's easy to plan, it doesn't matter how trained or awesome the team leads or managers are. Completely gutting what the creative leadership can do to a game, just for the sake of protecting the schedule and planning, will result in games that aren't fun and will turn out unsuccessful. Or very predictable me-too games that don't innovate. Both cases have the potential to bankrupt a studio and then unions won't help either.
This could be said for any product that has a long development cycle and involves design risks and cutting edge tech. In other industries unions put pressure on companies to factor in those issues and plan the budget accordingly. Crunch in a small indie studio might be an unfortunate side effect, but in a big AAA studio it's a form of systemic exploitation planned for and taken for granted at the very start of a project.Unions won't change the fact that it's hard to make a new game, figure out the fun, iterate on the design, all the while building cutting-edge tech. It's not something that's easy to plan, it doesn't matter how trained or awesome the team leads or managers are. Completely gutting what the creative leadership can do to a game, just for the sake of protecting the schedule and planning, will result in games that aren't fun and will turn out unsuccessful. Or very predictable me-too games that don't innovate. Both cases have the potential to bankrupt a studio and then unions won't help either.
I'm really curious to read Keighly's Final Hours on HLA. If that game was actually made by 50 people with little to no crunch, that's nuts.
How would you factor in this risk into the budget of a game? If you want to eliminate crunch, the risk has to be "budgeted" by potentially having extremely long dev cycles. Even with crunch, major AAA cycles are pushing 4-5 years. If you want 6-7 year cycles, not only will the cost be unsustainable, but you also run the very real risk that the game is so aged by the time it comes out that it looks/plays like yesterday's news, or other, faster devs will steal your lunch by finishing a competing game earlier.This could be said for any product that has a long development cycle and involves design risks and cutting edge tech. In other industries unions put pressure on companies to factor in those issues and plan the budget accordingly. Crunch in a small indie studio might be an unfortunate side effect, but in a big AAA studio it's a form of systemic exploitation planned for and taken for granted at the very start of a project.
The allure of the grift is too strong.How did this guy go from creating Twisted Metal and God of War to being one of those streamers that rants in front of a wall of hideous cheap nerd-toys?
Unions won't change the fact that it's hard to make a new game, figure out the fun, iterate on the design, all the while building cutting-edge tech. It's not something that's easy to plan, it doesn't matter how trained or awesome the team leads or managers are. Completely gutting what the creative leadership can do to a game, just for the sake of protecting the schedule and planning, will result in games that aren't fun and will turn out unsuccessful. Or very predictable me-too games that don't innovate. Both cases have the potential to bankrupt a studio and then unions won't help either.