Slashdot Mirror
IGDA Quality Of Life Survey Analyzes Game Developer Crunch
Thanks to the IGDA for its survey details discussing the problems videogame developers face trying to balance work crunch and family/relationships. A survey commissioned by the IGDA revealed "34.3% of developers expect to leave the industry within 5 years, and 51.2% within 10 years", and also noted: "Crunch time is omnipresent, during which respondents work 65 to 80 hours a week (35.2%). The average crunch work week exceeds 80 hours 13% of the time. Overtime is often uncompensated (46.8%)." The IGDA's Jason Della Rocca is quoted as suggesting: "While game development is a stimulating and rewarding career, the work conditions are often taxing, making it hard to sustain a balanced lifestyle and leading many senior developers to leave the industry before they've done their best work... it is not just the community that is affected - these issues also impact the quality of games produced." Are insane hours just part and parcel of working in games, or is there another way?
I worked at a well known, shovelware game dev studio. I won't say exactly where, to protect the innocent/guilty. But lets say it was a number one title around 97-99 timeframe.
The main cycle for this unsaid company was in shovel ware, low budget, 'value priced" (such a bastardization of the word 'value'), and equally low timeframe to build these games.
They'd produce about 8-10 of these crappy games a year, each game being alloted 2-3 months on average. So crunch-time was all the time, it wasn't uncommon to see their best and lead programmer working 80+ hours a week, sleeping under his cubicle desk.
Once in a rare while this is alright, but all the time got old. I left quickly and decided "This isn't for me" the pay is alright, but money is worthless if you don't have time to spend/enjoy it.
At the end of it all, it was just a nice way to get the bug out of my system. I always wanted to design games for a living, got my foot in the door and got it right back out. Fulfilled the dream, went on to do other things.
I enjoyed it more when it was just myself, hacking away at early games like Doom and Duke3D. No pressures, just fun like the games themselves.
Soon as yo umake your hobby your career, the pracitce often starts to taste sour and eventually bitter.
Games have become so complex: That is why developers need to work so hard, for so long, while spending so much money, to get games today finished. With so much complexity involved, many developers won't be able to keep up.
Some people look at movies and say "Well, games are only now becoming just as complex as movies!" Not true. Games have technologiclally advanced far enough to be compared to movies: however, they are far more complex than movies. With today's games, you have the complexity of a movie combined with complete interaction by the consumer: You interact with the environment, the characters: In some cases, your actions as the character partially determine the plot.
It's quite obvious: The increasing complexity of games will, unless someone takes a stand, kill off all companies except the huge ones: I can think of only eleven companies which have the money to be able to continue to survive: Nintendo, Sony, Microsoft, Konami, Sega (maybe), Namco, Capcom, Square Enix, EA, THQ (not sure about them, though), and Take Two. All other companies will eventually be dispersed, or will be engulfed by one of the big eleven.
While this focuses on Games, it's a common occurrence in nearly all deadline driven development activities.
(The production of many term papers seems to parallel this "crunch mode" as well.)
Non-game projects also make developers, QA people, etc. work long hours as well.
Ant(Dude) @ Quality Foraged Links (AQFL.net) & The Ant Farm (antfarm.ma.cx / antfarm.home.dhs.org).
When you *do* decide leave the industry, do you find it easier to get jobs elsewhere because people think video game programmers are gods who are willing to put up with long hours, or do you find it harder because people (suits) think video game programmers sit around and play games all day, so you must be a slacker?
An open question...
This has been the norm for at least a decade, probably more. Maybe this is the first time someone did a survey, but I've heard the horror stories for years.
The trouble is, programming games is "cool" and "fun". People dream about playing and writing games all day, and getting paid for it. So, the development companies have a huge pool of people they can recruit from. If you dont like your working conditions, they'll just hire someone else who will put up with it longer. Thats also why they can pay less on average for young programmers, they have plenty to choose from.
Sure there is another way: sustained, long-term open source game development. A number of very successful games have been developed that way.
You get different games that way from the commercial stuff, of course: because these kinds of games are developed over many years, they only survive if they are replayable. Because developers are also players, the games get improved and problems get eliminated over time.
Oh, and, of course, it's not a career choice. Open source games are for fun, both fun playing them and fun developing them.
Sounds like the entertainment industry in general. When I was working on a small animated 3d feature film a few years back, I averaged over 80 hours a week for over a month. I peaked at over 100. My average week off peak was about 60. Crunch time kills. I know people that quickly quit the industry afterwards because it just isn't worth it.
The primary reason it happens is sliding deadlines, misunderstood goals and ill-prepared schedules. That and people being overly picky about parts of a project too early in the game.
I swore to myself that I was done with it. But I love the industry and got myself into a non-production role where I only work 50 hours a week. I am a much happier man now.
-Tim
-I just work here... how am I supposed to know?
Being one of the aforementioned poeple whose lifelong dream is to make games for a living, this issue is one of my biggest concerns. Much as I'd love to design and/or code games for a living, I'd also like to see my family more than once a month. Maybe its not realistic of me, but I'd like to think that much of this problem can be eliminated through a combination of more realistic scheduling and careful design, stressing re-use of components. There are starting to be some impressive third-party game development libraries out there (Havok comes to mind) - between libraries like that, and well-designed, re-usable in-house components like GUIs, factories, event systems, and other such suitably generic components, much of the development time can be cut down, at least after the first game to use them is developed.
... it's stories like these that I've heard over the past couple of years, when I was nearing graduation and thinking of what industry to go into, that made me abandon my lifelong dream of developing games. If you search the net, there's many more horror stories, not only about long hours. From what I understand, basically it's just not FUN 99% of the time.
I'm glad I've decided not to pursue my dream. I now work as a programmer in a financial industry, I love what I do, and I couldn't be happier.
I worked in a research chemistry lab at one of the most well-known schools out there. 70-80 hours a week was EXPECTED in my group, not "crunch time." While it's true that people look on grad school as only a passing moment, a stepping stone to bigger and better things, the truth is that 70-80 hours a week was for pretty much 5 years..
I couldn't take it, so I quit; however, there are plenty of people still there that I know that work these hours all the time, getting paid significantly less... so stop crying about your poor, precious "crunch month" hours.. it's not that bad
How is this different than any other software industry. Bads management, unrealistic goals, development schedules dictated by marketing... this is true in every aspect of software development. Part of it is the nature of the work, software development is still very new on the industrial time-scale, people haven't reduced it to a science or even an art yet. Look at Microsoft (or any other company), who is incapable of doing anything, no matter how advanced or sophisticated without glaring bugs and obvious flaws. What other industry is like this? Cars have problems, but not like software... and they've had 100 years to figure out how to build them and the product is cheaper, works better, safer and more reliable than even 20 years ago. Software is more powerful, but is it more reliable? Cheaper? Safer? Or is the software industry driving the hardware industry, which in turn drives the software industry, forcing us to upgrade endlessly depsite the fact that we all own supercomputers by the standards of the 1980's. For games this is understandable, but for word processing?
The other issue, which sets games apart is just that... unless word processing, or spreadsheets or browsers or any of the other 95% of things that computers are used for, pushing the technological boundaries isn't necessary and in fact causes as many problems as it solves. With games, pushing the limits is integral to the experience. How do you think id has stayed in business releasing the same game over and over for 15 years, because each new release pushes the technology in new ways and makes the experience more intense and immersive. Can you really say the same need exists for word processing. As a casual user, I could do anything I would ever want to do with a WP program 10 years ago or more.
Anyhow, I guess I've rambled long enough. I love games and would be a hell of a game designer, because it's been an interest of mine since I was designing war games with graph paper and dymo labels for counters in middle school, and I've dabbled in rewriting one of the older roguelikes, but I wouldn't want to be in this industry... I'd rather have a life. And even though I wor in other software fields, about once every three months I swear I'm going to chuck it all and become a teacher.
Maybe the "crunch time" is a little more extreme in game development, but I don't think it is unique and it certainly isn't necessary. It's just how business works. If we knew how to do it better, our society would be much more advanced than it is now... and in another few generations, it probably will be.
You are in a maze of twisty little passages, all alike.
Since the 80's developers hasn't come with good ideas all of the games I've seen are copycats of each other you don't know who copied who, developers nowadays rely to much on prefabricated engines which lack documentation and there is where the long developing times come to play.
Games today are just eye candy, yeah terrific graphics but lack of content and substance.
And developers are not stupid they keep those projects runining as long as the money last, sure they don't get paid for extra hours but sure the cash more in the long run and stay emloyed longer.
Is funny you know, with the experience much of this developers are supposed to have they don't develop a game in months but in years, golden were the years when an activision developer was one army man and developed more addictive games than the ones you find today.
Games like pacman, mario bros will be forever the rest will be forgotten.
When the game industry bubbles burst is gonna be goo all over, it happened to the board games and will happen to video games.
Peace.
- Approaching holiday - Christmas brings about the hottest season in retail, and publishers want to capitalize on this by releasing new titles in time for this. The Christmas push is less pressing for smaller studios that distribute outside of retail.
- Media event - E3 is when all the gaming companies and all the gaming press come together and pretty much stand around in a competition to see who can avoid having a seizure (flash/audio). Or, such was my take on it. There's a huge PR incentive to have content prepared for this event; more eyeballs translates into more potential sales.
- Publisher-imposed milestone - Publishers can withhold payment or cancel projects outright if a team misses milestones; if you're nearing such a deadline, the extra hours may be the difference between a happy publisher and a cranky one.
- Competition - You might have a solid first-person shooter, but if it's released concurrent with Doom III or Half-Life 2, there's a good chance it'll be overlooked. If you own the UHF DVD, you'll hear Al Yankovic lament that his movie went up against Batman, Indiana Jones, Lethal Weapon II, among others. You may also have your favorite game that was underrated due to poor timing. (Fortunately, there's always the possibility of a sequel.)
- Budgetary constraints - Especially crucial if a development house is self-funding a title. If a generous publisher sees a promising project go over-budget, they might extend it. If an independent studio runs out of money for going over schedule, it must secure more financing.
- Loss of staff - This can be devastating at project-end. There's no time to train new staff; existing members must take up the slack.
Game development is a wonderful vocation, but as with anything, too much of a crunch (the death-march) results in burnout. There must be ways we can mitigate some of the above causes. Less reliance on outside investment is one, but maybe that's wishful thinking my part.We're indie. We're working on our 14th game.
Crunch time is just a fact of life at most development houses. It's due to MANY factors, some justified and some not.
Factors involved:
- Poor management (of assets/time/staff)
- Poor schedule planning
- Poor funding
- Too much publisher influence (resulting in developer companies cutting budgets too low yet needing to keep quality too high, at the publisher's mercy)
- AND TOO MANY "GREEN" STAFF
Yesm consider this: So much of the industry is dominated by young inexperienced newbies. They're fresh out of school, enthusiastic, but they lack the experience needed to be disciplined and productive. This is exasperated by most game company's overall "relax and have fun" attitudes. Yeah, it's cool to work at a company that lets you play with toys, has a pool table in the meeting room, etc, etc but it's not really conducive to the kind of discipline required to produce content consistently.
Faceit, it's very easy to end up working a 14 hour day when you spent 4 hours of that day chasing each other with Nerf guns or taking 2 hour lunches.
I'm currently in my 14th hour at work. E3 is next week.
Working on a triple-AAA title requires that effort. The guys who made the LOTR movies put insane hours in as well. When you're making outstanding triple-AAA quality entertainment based media, be it movies, games, televisions shows, etc, you've got put the effort in to make it as good as it can be.
There are horror stories about publishers fucking developers with unreasonable deadlines. Fortunately, I work for a publisher that doesn't do that--the extended effort is for quality, not just for making the deadline. I count myself lucky, and I hope guys who did get fucked can find themselves working for a developer who has a good relationship with a publisher.
For me, I'm still here because I want to make the best game I can.
/// Zoid.
Wasn't Half-Life the only number one title around 97-99 timeframe? It held that title for god knows how many years.
Triple-AAA? Would that be AAAAAAAAA? A^9?
Every time I see a story like this I post the same thing.
Form a union. You should be paid for the hours you work. Anything else is the theft of your time and money by your employer. You say legislation allows employers to legally ask you to work overtime without pay? Vote for people who support your right to be paid for time worked.
Union. Vote.
Michael.
Linux : Mac
My intent all through college was to get a job making games, until I actually talked to people who were in the industry. Game companies consistently offered the lowest salaries, least room for advancement, and worst benefits. After a lot of soul searching, I chose a job which payed almost 50% more than the best game company offer. And although I still regret not doing something sexier for a living, I've consistently been rewarded proportionally to how well I do my job.
The meek shall inherit the earth, in 3 by 6 plots. - Lazerus Long
sit on your ass for 14 hours a day. boohoo. try being a chef in a 3 star restaurant.
34.3% of developers expect to leave the industry within 5 years, and 51.2% within 10 years
Sounds like a great way to build up knowledge and experience in the industry so game development advances like all other industries. Just another example of short-term, slap-a-label-on-it thinking, brought to you by middle management.
Crunch time is omnipresent,
Poor, overpaid, underqualified, incompetent management.
The average crunch work week exceeds 80 hours 13% of the time.
Omnipresent 80 hour work weeks. Sounds like about half the proper work force hasn't been hired yet. Probably because of arrogant, incompetent, cynical management.
Overtime is often uncompensated (46.8%)
Even though the video game industry makes profits in the billions.
While game development is a stimulating and rewarding career
Sure it is. From this description it sounds like a wailing shithole.
he work conditions are often taxing, making it hard to sustain a balanced lifestyle and leading many senior developers to leave the industry before they've done their best work... it is not just the community that is affected - these issues also impact the quality of games produced
No shit?
Are insane hours just part and parcel of working in games, or is there another way?
Yes. Standardize the tools. No more graphics engines for 10 years. Period. Half of all development budgets should be spent on games that haven't EVER been developed yet (no sequels, no clones, no remakes, no licensed characters). One fourth of development budgets should be used to hire independent developers. One tenth of all development budgets should fund games written by one developer.
The adventure genre should be re-invented from the ground up. Interactive fiction should be marketed again. Prices for games should be cut by 30% across the board. Electronic distribution should be standard for all games, including consoles.
Publishers should invest long-term to build a true renaissance for video and computer games. Create-your-own-game tools should be developed and marketed for all genres. Standardized artwork, engines and tools should be made available to all amateur developers.
Arcade, console and computer classics should be marketed in binary form as products by genre with properly licensed emulators. All such products should include documented source for each game with reference to the available tools so amateur developers can build their own versions of each game type. Game designs and theory should be documented as well.
The result would be decades of windfall profits for the game industry and entire libraries of new games for players, amateur developers and the mod community alike.
Oh, and it wouldn't require 80-hour uncompensated work weeks so we can have another sequel of a remake of a clone of a boring game.
Business isn't willing to pay for products, innovation and careers, so we get brands, mortgage commercials and layoffs.
If they look at the reality, they will see why 93% of America's workforce says no to Unions:
Unions typically force members to join; the workers have no choice
Unions then force the workers to give money to the Democratic Party. This is fine if you are a Democrat, but not all union members are.
Unions actually excellerate downsizing, outsourcing, etc. By declaring open warfare on management, and pushing wages way above their real level, they do everything they can to encourage the company to do without these union jobs.
Techies thinking of forming a union should visit Gary, Indiana or Flint, Michigan and look at all the empty rusty factories. This is a result of union demands which had no connection to economic reality. Now imagine Silicon Valley like this.
I've worked on AAA games for about 6 years now, and experienced more 100 hour weeks than I care to remember.
... just put in a good solid 9-10 hours a day, and then get the hell out of there. I'm not so linked into the social world at work, but why would I want to be? I've made a better world for myself outside of work. The thing that sucks is that I know when crunch hits, I'm going to be there like everyone else PICKING UP THE SLACK for all the fuckaroundery that people are committing now. And that blows ass.
I love how the fingers go flying whenever this topic comes up, but no one ever points it at the developers themselves. The fact of the matter is that a lot of developers choose (subconsciously or otherwise) to be at work for 12-14 hours a day and on the weekends because work is also their social outlet. You take a bunch of slightly socially retarded people who all love gaming, with not much else going on in their lives, and put them in an office together - why WOULD they want to go home? I mean I've been there. The showing up to work at 10-11am, the long lunches, the wandering the halls socializing, the occasional mid-day gaming sessions, the half-hour chats about what happened in Everquest the night before, the "i don't know how/i'm too lazy to cook for myself, let's all go out" dinners, the friday night gaming marathons in lieu of anything else that might enrich your life, social or otherwise. No one ever seems to mention that a good chunk of thost 12-14 hour days are spent completely and utterly jerking off. There's a total lack of discipline and professionalism in this industry. And everyone suffers from it. I've learned my lesson; I want a life outside work, so I come in at 9am, put my nose to the grindstone, never read the web, only read work email, don't get caught up in stupid everquest discussions, eat lunch at my desk
Anyway, these observations come from experience at many companies, from both myself and friends. Game development is more than just a job for a lot of people in the industry, it's part of their life, so why wouldn't it take up so much time?
Do we see Hollywood rushing unfinished movies to market?
"Sorry, Jackson old bean. You've run a bit long, so we're just going to throw up the credits in the middle of the battle on Mt. Doom. By the time the audience sees it, we'll already have their $9.00, and haha on them."
Unfortunately, this is all too often what happens with games.
How does Hollywood acheive the awesome feat of actually finishing products before they're released?
By making reasonable estimates of the actual time to compleat the project, and by keeping the production pipeline full. Sometimes they will even, (gasp!) keep a finished movie on the shelf for a few months before releasing it. So there is a bit of flexibility, should a project go long.
What were you expecting?
I stopped doing overtime after several events in my project that made me question the reasons I had for doing them. Was my best decision ever!
When I leave work it is still light outside, I can relax at home, sleep well, forget about the problems for a while, and continue work the next morning with fresh energy.
There is absolutely no reason to do it, if the game is not near completion and in testing. And then I don't have a problem putting in the extra time.
Crunch time as we have it now is a perversion of what originally made the industry great.
In the olden days of game development, you had people that were genuinely passionate about their project. These people were willing to go the extra mile to make the game great. That often included working insane amount of hours to put as much quality into the game as possible.
Somewhere along the lines, management decided this seemed to be the norm, so why not schedule for it? Just assume that game developers will work 60-80 hour weeks, and you can save a lot of money. So, "crunch" time went from being something developers did as a sign of pride in their work to something that managers just scheduled for.
Unfortunately, this change makes all the difference. If you don't care about the game you're working on and you're still expected to make 16 hour days for the next few months, then you're going to burn out quickly. Of course, there's a seemingly endless supply of fresh college grads willing to take the job, especially with the current economic conditions.
This is one of the main reasons why I started my own company. I wanted to feel passionate about the games I worked on, and I wanted my long hours to directly contribute to my own well-being. For the record, I work on the game Meridian 59.
My point of view,
Brian "Psychochild" Green
MMO developer's blog
Most commonly, unions force workers to pay union dues against their will. Corporations do not have anyone pay dues.
"A union diverts an enormous amount of money going to a very few people and distributes it equitably among those who are actually performing the work."
You mean like the millionaire fatcat union leaders that the workers are forced to pay? No, none of what you said is true.
"How much is your CEO making? Go here and find out"
CEO's tend to be paid the real value of the work, as the wage is set by the free market.
"That's why we need permanent unions."
No, we need to greatly reduce their power. Unions are already too powerful, as at least 30% of the members don't even want to be in unions.
No, they are not. The individuals can simply choose to work elsewhere. With forced unionization (no "right to work"), however, workers lose power, as they are forced to join political orgnaizations that have nothing to do with the job.