Support NeoGAF

[Forsythia]

Is it CDPR in particular? I'm not too sure about that, because he has called out several devs and the AAA industry at large. ND and CDPR are among the biggest fishes around.
Also CDPR has officially announced to change their practices regarding crunch and they seem to have failed. That's worth mentioning in my opinion.

IIRC CDPR said they'd try to avoid crunch. That's a bit different than actually promising no crunch at all I'd say.

 

[Ogbert]

The problem with Schreier, putting aside the obvious fact that he’s a complete cunt, is that he’s desperate to be a genuine journalist. He’s attempting to elevate ‘games journalism’ to something worthy of a Pulitzer, when it’s demonstrably not that important.

The CDPR stuff is cringeworthy. Crunch is not a story. It’s a couple of weeks of long hours. No different to any other industry where intelligent, grown-up adults ply their trade.

 

[Azurro]

The problem with Schreier, putting aside the obvious fact that he’s a complete cunt, is that he’s desperate to be a genuine journalist. He’s attempting to elevate ‘games journalism’ to something worthy of a Pulitzer, when it’s demonstrably not that important.

The CDPR stuff is cringeworthy. Crunch is not a story. It’s a couple of weeks of long hours. No different to any other industry where intelligent, grown-up adults ply their trade.

I don't know why this has become politicised, but crunch is actually a story when it goes on for months on end and affects the personal lives of the workers in many ways. It's not just a couple of weeks when it comes to the games industry. Of course, in the case of CDPR and this game, it doesn't sound that bad, just a final sprint of 3 or 4 weeks.

 

[B-universe]

Absolute nonsense. Jason make the news by having the EMAIL cdpr employees provided to proof a mandatory crunch.

Yes, your post is mostly nonsense.
I agree.

As I've said before, you've decided to take Badowski's word for it when he apologized to employees. Why aren't you taking his word when the says the vast majority of developers agreed with the decision to enforce crunch?

Jason is now suggesting Badowski isn't telling the truth. Jason says he's now contacted "a couple" of people specifically about whether or not developers preferred to crunch over delaying the game for the third time. Could it be, gosh, not all 400 people were personally asked by Badowski?

What a thought.

Jason did not provide any evidence of the alleged 12 exchanges he had with CDPR employees and around which he based his articles. Neither did GI. Deal with it.

The email he showed means he got access to it. Doesn't prove he had 12 exchanges with devs,

I have no doubt that some developers are unhappy. Again, from a principled perspective it's immaterial whether 1% or 100% are ok with crunch, because as head of Warsaw studio Badowski has the right to look out for the best interests of the company and of the Warsaw studio and that certainly includes organizing production so that a third delay does not happen and schedules are met.

If developers are unhappy about it, they can try to persuade him, they can go on strike, or they can quit.

They can, as you should, deal with it.

Then another interview withe studio head himself making those claims, then another EMAIL of apology letter from the head for mandatory crunch.

If I remember correctly, that letter predates mandatory crunch. The letter is from June. Mandatory crunch stared late September/early October.

When this was revealed, cdpr were not able to refute his claims at all.

CDPR is under no obligation to go out of their way and refute Jason's claims. The fact they didn't issue a statement is not evidence a statement couldn't have been issued.

Read my lips: It's immaterial to me. The people in charge and with the legitimacy to make decisions decided. You don't like it. Go work somewhere else.

What does GI provide, simply their own claim that they have interviewed some cdpr people, without any paper trail or evidence,

Just like Jason. I haven't seen any evidence. Again, I have no problem believing Jason did interview 12 people out of more than 400, less than 3% of all the employees working on CP2077, just like I have no problem believing GI emailed X number of employees. It would be a miracle if in such a large company like CDPR developers didn't have different takes on how the company is managed.

What I don't do is believe Badowski when it suits my narrative and dismiss him when it doesn't, without the evidence in the two situations being any different.

all their own words.
GI claim that cdpr employees were asked whether they preferred crunch or delay and said a majority preferred crunch... based on what??

Don't be obtuse. Based on the exchanges they had with CDPR employees.
Evidently, Jason is the only person on the planet that is able to send and receive emails, the only person on planet Earth with access to CDPR employees.

The probable reason why neither Jason not GI aren't presenting evidence is because that would compromise the anonymity of their sources, a no no in journalism.

I don't have a problem believing both Jason and GI contacted CDPR developers. It just so happens those developers have different opinions. Big deal.

Furthermore, two CDPR developers publicly disavowed Jason's take. They cannot be discarded by people looking for the truth.

Jason then around to look for proof on whether there was a poll or question that asked them of this preference, but there was none, and GI were not able to provide any evidence of that too.

Yes, Jason claims that his sources told him so. Yes, GI claims that their sources told them so.

All you had was their words and only their words.
The prejudice that you have against this particular journalist is so obvious even in the face of evidence provided.

Again, don't be obtuse.
I have already told you I don't have a problem believing all the 12 devs he contacted are upset with crunch. I grant him all that.

My position remains completely unchanged after granting him that, because my position does not hinge on whether the decision to enforce crunch is popular or not.

Journalists report facts, full stop. Activists want to further a political cause, such as so-called labour rights, unionization, etc. Both endeavours are legitimate but they are not compatible with each other.

In this case Jason can act as a trade unionist if he wants to. If and when he does so, he's not being a journalist, though.

 

[Ogbert]

I don't know why this has become politicised, but crunch is actually a story when it goes on for months on end and affects the personal lives of the workers in many ways. It's not just a couple of weeks when it comes to the games industry.

Perhaps it’s a story, but it’s not an interesting one. Long hours are standard in any well paid and/or desirable position. Anyone who wants to work in video games knows this.

 

[Azurro]

Perhaps it’s a story, but it’s not an interesting one. Long hours are standard in any well paid and/or desirable position. Anyone who wants to work in video games knows this.

Not at all, that's a fallacy. My job is well paid and a desirable position, and whenever I do have to put in extra hours, I am paid extra time or I can compensate by working a shorter day the next day. It's more of an American mentality to work until you drop.

 

[cormack12]

luffie Mate, you are an embarassment lol. What do you do for a living? What environment do you work in? Not the place or location, just an outline of what you do?

So much nonsense in this post.

Did cdpr boss came to him and make that promise of no mandatory crunch? Yes.

Was this promise made before or after the COVID pandemic which completely changed everyone's working patterns?
Was this after the studio attempted to avoid a period of overtime by delaying the game twice?

Did he has the letters of mandatory crunch and cdpr boss' apologies on mandatory crunch? Yes.

This is incorrect. What you've done is read an email, interpreted it to fit your case then blurted out the above. Here is the email below:

Where does it actually and specifically mention 'crunch'? It thanks employees for their hard work and acknowledges it is a grind. You, and the 'journalist' have seized on some wording and decided to twist it to fit your narrative. As far as I'm concerned, it is an undefined statement, that could mean anything from mandatory overtime to self imposed overtime in the name of shipping. So here's the thing - that email will be dated. There will be records at the company of salaries and wage slips - the anonymous sources can quite quickly clear this up by providing them. Personal information can be redacted an the dates married up. Where are they? You treat this as a mic drop moment, when in fact it just raises the question as to why such easy records to prove the case are missing.

I have an email from our CIO thanking us for our hard work, dedication and mandatory overtime during COVID (system rollouts and upgrades). These are corporate 'love' messages and standard fluff. If anything it shows CDPR in a good light in the fact they are engaging with their employees and handling it sensitively, making their employees feel valued.

Did he report exactly those? Yes.

I assume you were running out of points this time, realised and tried to pad it out with non-consequential statements.

And you believe GI claims with 0 evidence? Your prejudice is so visible a mile away. GI claims that everyone was asked whether they prefer crunch over delay and majority chose crunch? Based on what? Nothing that's right, only their words.
Jason then went on to asked whther there was a poll or question that cdpr really did ask this but there was none. And GI provide none either.

Have I said either is the unequivocal truth? I've pointed out that once again, the headline does not match the reality and once again within a few days a contrary viewpoint emerges. See the Rockstar quote for the disparity previously.

But go on, stick with that woke prejudice because it's Jason and cdpr. By your own delusional criteria, there's no journalist that does any reporting.

There are actual investigative journlists that do provide receipts for their world reporting. The problem is you'll find them in the actual world of journalism. They use cables, forensics, intelligence, audit trails etc. that's why their anonymous sources are believed, because they are evidenced in the unravelling of the story.

I'll let you get back to your healthy breakfast now bro

 

[Dick Jones]

Does anyone have the text for Jason's article? I'm not giving Bloomberg one red cent. I want to know what examples of crunch did he give, what the Polish labour are (i doubt many outside Poland are au fait with it) and how CDPR broke it. If his article says crunch and doesn't go into specifics then yeah, its pointless as mandatory working for the weekend prior to release is not the same as regularly working 80 hours a week and both could be defined as crunch (not dismissing his allegation here, just looking for examples of abuse by CDPR). If its paid optional overtime, it is never crunch.

 

[Ogbert]

Not at all, that's a fallacy. My job is well paid and a desirable position, and whenever I do have to put in extra hours, I am paid extra time or I can compensate by working a shorter day the next day. It's more of an American mentality to work until you drop.

Any corporate position that is client driven means long hours. Banking, accountancy, legal, management consultancy. As a lawyer, I spent a good decade working 65-70 hour weeks.

 

[Redlight]

Any corporate position that is client driven means long hours. Banking, accountancy, legal, management consultancy. As a lawyer, I spent a good decade working 65-70 hour weeks.

People working in their own businesses or making very large salaries may be working those kinds of hours. There's a direct reward for effort in those cases. However, it should never be expected, or demanded, from an employee without a quid pro quo.

 

[Azurro]

Any corporate position that is client driven means long hours. Banking, accountancy, legal, management consultancy. As a lawyer, I spent a good decade working 65-70 hour weeks.

I mean, if you don't have anything else going on in your life or have a set of different priorities and the amount you work has a linear correlation with how much money you make, then I can see it and good for you. Some fields definitely like to enslave people, especially law related ones. However not all fields are like this. Furthermore, when people talk about crunch as if it was nothing, they forget devs are usually salaried and most of these companies do not pay them a compensation for their extra 4 or 5 hours per day of working.

I usually find the position of "just deal with it, slave away and give me my game" a little off putting and entitled.

 

[Ogbert]

I usually find the position of "just deal with it, slave away and give me my game" a little off putting and entitled.

You don’t have to deal with it. You can leave. Just like I chose to effectively halve my wage, but went in house and got my life back.

People have to choose their priorities.

 

[Azurro]

You don’t have to deal with it. You can leave. Just like I chose to effectively halve my wage, but went in house and got my life back.

People have to choose their priorities.

That position is too extreme I find, because it does not allow for introspection in the field.

Besides, it puts you in a very tricky situation. Should you be punished for having a family life or being involved in the life of your children?

Of course, if someone works more, that person should be awarded more, but not to the degree of pushing anyone out that doesn't want to live to work to the detriment of everything else imo.

This is theoretical of course, since I actually never pursued the videogame development sector, as I saw bad salaries plus many hours of crunch and instability as deal breakers.

At the end of the day, game dev is a meat grinder and I guess my question is, should meat grinders exist?

 

[B-universe]

That position is too extreme I find, because it does not allow for introspection in the field.

Introspection, you say?

Besides, it puts you in a very tricky situation.

Choices.
That which makes us adults.

Should you be punished for having a family life or being involved in the life of your children?

That's not an accurate description.
No one is punishing workers for attending to the needs of their families.

But it would be deeply unfair to reward those who deliver and those who do not the same way. It would be deeply unfair not to reward those who choose to put in the hours and potentially sacrifice others aspects of their lives in order to deliver a great product or service above and beyond what the rest gets.

It would also be deeply unfair to pay those who do 60 hours a week just the same as those who stick to 40. You can't have it both ways. You can't complain about unpaid overtime and then call out the fact that those who do overtime naturally earn more.

Of course, if someone works more, that person should be awarded more, but not to the degree of pushing anyone out that doesn't want to live to work to the detriment of everything else imo.

What's required is to get back to core principles. You don't get to manage other people's companies. That's principle #1. It's not yours. Therefore, you don't manage it. It's quite simple.

Management has the right to stipulate the following: "Listen up developers, I am willing to hire you under condition X, Y and Z".

Developers have the right to stipulate the following: "Listen up, owners and management, I am willing to work for you under conditions A, B and C".

The two reach an agreement, or not, possibly involving concessions from both parties and the voluntary deal is signed. What seems to be the problem, again?

I would assume the possibility of Crunch is already inscribed in those contracts. Otherwise there might be legal grounds for suing. By the time Witcher 4 leaves pre-production the new batch of developers working at CDPR should know by then what's the Modus Operandi of the company because it is clearly written down. Don't like Crunch? Don't apply for a position at CDPR.

At the end of the day, game dev is a meat grinder and I guess my question is, should meat grinders exist?

As long as it's the product of voluntary relationships, it none of my or your business - politically speaking, that is.
It's up to the parties to decide.

 

[#Phonepunk#]

Game devs have a choice. That’s what all the anti crunchers seem to be ignoring. If a company is making you crunch and its bad you GO WORK FOR A DIFFERENT ONE. Your skills are extremely valuable and you will not have trouble finding a new job.

Do you have a family? Is your work interfering with it? This is not an issue only devs with crunch must face. It’s about personal priorities.

LOL @ “should meat grinders exist?“ These are not “meat grinders.“ Staying late to type on a computer is not “a meat grinder”. Ffs. Feel like every post has to get more and more hyperbolic.

Like in China there are literal meat grinders, as in they are harvesting prisoners for body organs. I’m sorry some Cali dev making 70k a year working a few extra hours (probably from home) is not some humanitarian crisis.

 

[DunDunDunpachi]

The anti-crunch narrative is just one part of the overall Consooooomer Religion, giving people a hollow sense of morality and virtue based on the chinese-built gadgets they purchase, and the TV shows they watch and quote on Twitter, and the t-shirt logos they decide to wear to their environmentally-friendly coffeeshops.

 

[butane bob]

He should have called him a lot more than just that.

 

[Wrath of the Toomics]

Just checking in to see* if Jason has been cancelled yet.

*Hoping

 

[MaddMatt]

I could be out of the loop, but this all just seems like GAF is mad that Jason called out a beloved Dev. What am I missing here?

 

[Peggies]

Say what you want about Schreier, but Calandra seems like a whiny attention whore. A dozen tweets full of vague accusations about "gatekeeping" and other cancel culture buzzwords, and going on and on about how "I JUST COULDN'T BE SILENT ANYMORE" and "DON'T CALL ME A HERO FOR THIS". Nobody cares about your petty journo twitter bitchfights. Don't these people have any actual work to do?

 

[TriSuit666]

Any corporate position that is client driven means long hours. Banking, accountancy, legal, management consultancy. As a lawyer, I spent a good decade working 65-70 hour weeks.

Depends which part of the legal industry you are in. Some parts, like Clerks or Admin in the back office function pay very little for the volume of work they handle.

If of course, you're talking about a self-employed lawyer practice, depending on which side of the bar you sit, those 65-70 hours a week would be fucking coining it in.

On topic though, as a Journalist of 20+ years, Schrier is a goddamned low-ball hack. Stop giving this turd airtime.