rokkerkory
Member
Lets think about the employees :/
Of course. I edited my post after you replied to clarify, but my point is that a personal boycott will not really affect any change. It's going to take something bigger, and the more awareness of the issues and awareness that there are ways to solve them there is, the better, I agree. So we should keep talking about it, but I just want to be clear that it doesn't end at boycotts.
I honestly don't know and don't care. If i think about the animals that died every time i eat food I'd starve to death.
Are they boycotting work? You can find yourself in situation where it is difficult to switch jobs, regardless of the legality of noncompete clauses. Here are a few: high cost of housing left you without an emergency fund, new child, other dependents in family, whatever.Now I'm not comparing the devs to animals, but life is biased and work is shitty for a lot of us. They could do better and they could do a lot worse than working at rockstar, trust me. If i were in their place i'd behave like a grown up, check my financial situation and then decide whether i needed to switch jobs or not. I certainly wouldn't boycott work and expect things to become magically better
The only way this changes is through unions or laws. Period.
Personally boycotting something is fine, but if you really want to change things, then support unionization or organizations that are trying to strengthen labor rights.
My philosophy is that you have free will to choose where you work and if the employees involved decided that long hours are the cost of getting a AAA studio and game on your resume and feel it worth it then that's fine. If Rockstar was truly insufferable they would never finish their projects or their quality would greatly suffer due to high turnover. It costs more to attract a new employee and get them up to speed than to retain them.
I manage people in a non gaming company and let me tell you this, people get stressed out and they get divorced, etc. That's life. I can barely get people to do their damn job 40 hours a week because they don't show up to work, don't have great work ethic, and can't handle the job. Companies can't put you on blast on a website like "Rick was an asshole that constantly took long breaks, flaked out 3-4 times a month, and he bitched about everything without the ability to apply constructive criticism.
I'm not saying that they are innocent. There very well may be some management issues there. But as a manager of people I take it with a grain of salt. My ex employee blasted me on Facebook last week saying "Someone tell my old boss I still think he's a bitch ass ni**a". One of my current employees let me know so I went and commented "Miss you too". Didn't say a damn thing offensive back to me because they knew they were wrong. They didn't say how many chances I gave them. How they went 100 hours over their unexused time, how their performance was terrible. Sometimes ex employees vent because they can't face their own failures.
Totally agree. But I think the boycott got this conversation pretty far. There's at least a few more people aware now, but becuase of the talk of the boycott, not the act itself. So in a small way it's more than just one drop in the bucket. Every time people talk about it, the industry gets a millimeter closer to changing. That's pretty good. People within the industry need to keep speaking out. Not feel like GAF will minimize their concerns because of *insert worse thing here*
Unfortunately there are just too many aspiring game designers for that to happen anyway. I imagine the number of people willing to go through hell just to work at R* is pretty fucking high and all of them would be skipping across that line with a shit eating grin on their faces.
My philosophy is that you have free will to choose where you work and if the employees involved decided that long hours are the cost of getting a AAA studio and game on your resume and feel it worth it then that's fine. If Rockstar was truly insufferable they would never finish their projects or their quality would greatly suffer due to high turnover. It costs more to attract a new employee and get them up to speed than to retain them.
That's kind of wholly irrelevant though. That could all be true, and the working conditions could nonetheless still be terrible and we should fight for better. Even if employees are willing to put up with it, that doesn't make it right. Using that logic, the workers' rights movement would have never happened to begin with. How many people are willing to put up with those kind of conditions and suck them up has absolutely nothing to do with whether they're terrible or not and whether or not the situation should be improved.I'm sorry, I just don't have sympathy for people who choose to endure such "terrible working conditions". If you're working for Rockstar, you clearly are talented, it shouldn't be hard to find other work. Other studios are always actively looking for talent.
Either the money is fantastic, or they are really passionate about the project -- could be both.
This whole notion of not buying the game is kind of silly to me. They are choosing to be there. Stop fighting the fight for people who don't care. Play the damn game, enjoy and appreciate their hard work.
If its for a better and healthier enviromnent for the workersThere is a lot of people here saying that devs should unionize. Let me ask you, would you be willing to pay more money for a game, and have longer wait times between game releases? Also, do you think the market would properly adjust to said changes or would it push back?
This is a great pointThere is a lot of people here saying that devs should unionize. Let me ask you, would you be willing to pay more money for a game, and have longer wait times between game releases? Also, do you think the market would properly adjust to said changes or would it push back?
This is why I try to buy these $60 games when they go on sale.
Yes and yes.There is a lot of people here saying that devs should unionize. Let me ask you, would you be willing to pay more money for a game, and have longer wait times between game releases?
There is a lot of people here saying that devs should unionize. Let me ask you, would you be willing to pay more money for a game, and have longer wait times between game releases? Also, do you think the market would properly adjust to said changes or would it push back?
I appreciate your cause and I support it. You've definitely raised my awareness on the issue and no doubt many others reading this thread. I was already on the "will not buy" side anyway because (1)I still haven't played the first one and (2)my backlog won't let me.As a game developer, I wont be supporting such blatant examples of abuse in a company that should be a leading example on how to treat their employees. Maybe after reading this you will still buy their game, but at least now you know the real cost.
It's exploitative. Full stop. When I visit a university to speak, I always ask a show of hands of who went into CS to make games, and 2/3rds of them shoot up. I then spend a few minutes explaining that if everyone wants the same job, the industry has all the leverage. You can make games, but you'll do so on shitty terms that'll chew you up and spit you out.
Or you could just make boring normal software and enter one of the most prosperous classes of non-inherited wealth in the history of humankind, guarded against almost all the macroeconomic forces threatening your cohort generation.
While boycotts would be effective if they were widespread, I'm not sure it'd be as easy (given the ratio of devs to users) as convincing 20-something dudes that gamedev jobs are a suckers game and boycotting their employment so that the market balances out and decent terms are feasible. (Also won't happen because naive 20-year-old men are a renewable resource.)
disagree, it's not like these people are being paid sweat shop wages, they get paid very well and choose to work there
The fact that some of us are defending this is just mindblowing. These kind of people would be the first ones who would betray you in a war.
It's a video game. There is no ethical spending under capitalism. Support what you want, doesn't matter because ultimately you'll be supporting something awful. You're either typing on a smartphone or a computer which likely is made from material gathered via exploitation. What do you expect people to do? Live in the forest and poop in the woods?
But nah, this means we'll betray you in a war? What?
Supporting R* actions and trying to justify it only proves my point. I dont blame you that you dont see it.
No one should be defending these kind inhumane actions.
Im not saying dont buy their games but stop sweet talking this.
I never said those kind of conditions are okay, I'm simply saying if the company isn't doing anything to make it better, then it's entirely on you at that point. We can sit here and complain and maybe a few copies less will sell, but this has clearly been a problem for a very long time, nothing is changing.That's kind of wholly irrelevant though. That could all be true, and the working conditions could nonetheless still be terrible and we should fight for better. Even if employees are willing to put up with it, that doesn't make it right. Using that logic, the workers' rights movement would have never happened to begin with. How many people are willing to put up with those kind of conditions and suck them up has absolutely nothing to do with whether they're terrible or not and whether or not the situation should be improved.
And who says they don't care? Just because you work at such a company doesn't mean you're alright with those conditions or wish they weren't improved. There are any number of reasons a person might choose to stick with it no matter how bad the conditions are. That's absolutely no reason to keep things the same or not fight to improve them. You could justify some rather heinous shit using that logic, assuming that they deserve it or don't mind simply because they don't just walk away. Whether they do or don't, work conditions like that aren't alright and we should strive to improve them regardless.
So, do we think R* is the only company doing this