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?
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).
None of this stuff is unique to the gaming industry. It's spread throughout almost all technology fields. I have working conditions/expectations/exploitations similar (and probably worse) than those listed in this report - but I don't have the luck of being in the video game industry and instead have to deal with boring stuff like writing code for a popular application server for enterpises.
Not to suggest that being able to make videogames is any less difficult - but people in the gaming industry are far more likely to be extremely interested in and excited by their particular job than someone in most other tech fields. I sure know I'd rather be designing or writing videogames than designing and writing app servers!
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.
- 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.
Disclaimer: I work for a publisher.
What you say makes no sense. Why would a publisher want a title to fail? The publisher has invested money in development. If they can't recoup that investment, they've lost money, so it's in their interest to make the developer succeed.
I know that we work pretty hard to try to make a developer successful once we've signed them. Sometimes titles get cancelled because they're running off the rails. Sometimes they fail after release for all the various reasons that can happen. Sometimes the causes of those things are the developers' fault, sometimes the publisher's fault. But I've never, ever, encountered a situation where we deliberately set up a developer to fail. In fact, I get dinged pretty heavily if projects I'm working on fail.
Bonuses and royalties are never unconditional promises. They're based on performance of the title in the marketplace, which is a metric the publisher is interested in optimizing for just as much as the developer is.
When you sign a developer with "an idea" you are funding the development of that idea. Sometimes that development just doesn't work out and the title is cancelled. But the publisher is taking all the risk in that situation - in most deals the developer only pays back the advances if the title is placed with another publisher.
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.
By driving employees to the point of exhaustion? Its inefficient and a poor way to build an industry. Structural engineers don't work 14 hours a day building suspension bridges. Auto workers don't work 80 hour weeks. Why must game developers work ridiculous schedules to earn their paychecks? (Hint: It has to do with management and the value of a "really cool job.")
Business isn't willing to pay for products, innovation and careers, so we get brands, mortgage commercials and layoffs.
That is exactly what makes it unique to the gaming industry. I was in the video game industry from the gameboy through the PlayStation, and usually we put in the extra uncompensated hours because we loved the game. We WANTED to make the game better. I'm glad I'm on my own now, and wouldn't want to go back to those conditions, but at the same time I'm glad for all those years. It builds character!
Yeah, everybody in tech fields has deadlines. It's just easier to be exploited if you're working on something fun.
yo.
Bullshit to that. Working in a lab is like working anywhere. It's work. Period. Studying is different, but work is still work whether you're preparing bacteria samples or coding something. In fact, coding can probably be significantly more fun than the repetitive lab tasks which a grad student will often be required to perform (because no one else will do them).
Daniel
Carpe Diem
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.
Indeed. And conversely: It's very easy to spend 4 hours of the day chasing each other with Nerf guns or taking 2 hour lunches when you're working 14 hour days.
When workdays get longer, so do breaks, and people still need to do their chores: Get the car worked on, go to the bank, pick up the dry cleaning, and whatnot. And they do, only it's now a protracted interruption in their 14 hour day rather than something they do after work.
A disciplined worker's focused 8 hours can best the productivity of the tired, frazzled worker working 14 hours, but nobody wants their manager to not see them pulling with the team. It takes a strong manager and a disciplined worker to keep the work day from consuming one's life.
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?
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