Support NeoGAF

[Demon_Knight]

Unions to me sound like just another way for people's problems to get trivialized and drowned in impersonal paperwork.

If I have a problem at my workplace, I'll go and talk directly to my boss. If he doesn't seem willing to make an effort to improve my working conditions, then I'll simply walk out of there.

There are plenty of jobs available these days (especially if you don't force yourself to stay in a specific city/state/country), and working your ass off for someone who doesn't appreciate it just isn't worth it.

Still, if you go through a few jobs in the same industry and your conditions still don't improve, then you can always start looking for something else. Life is way too short, and I'd sooner change my career into something entirely different than wait for a union to solve my problems.

For the record, I'm a programmer working for a medium-sized games company. Any overtime I (choose to) do gets accumulated, and after a while, I usually just take a small holiday to balance things out again. In the 3 years I've been working there, I haven't had any noteworthy problems with them.

 

[MaddenNFL64]

They were trying to keep from paying writer's for content delivered on "new media" such as the internet. Pretty fucked up if you ask me, and well worth a strike.

Think of how many people access programming via netflix streaming, hulu, and similar sites.

I forgot it was about "new media" reimbursement. Yea, it was worth it for them.

 

[element]

That programmer either needs a better agent or a better lawyer, because he sucks at contract negotiations.

It doesn't work like that. You can't really negotiate individual royalties.

Ultimately, I think there shouldn't be unions. There should be better law. And everybody would simply have to comply. Health = 40 hours a week max. 12 hours a day max. It's been "proven" through many health researchs and supported by many other health researchs we can link on the subject. When you're doing more than that, you should have money compensation for your body strain. It should be basic, common, fundamental rights.

Laws will never happen in the US, perhaps at State level like in California. The other problem is scheduling in games isn't really done that well. So you are always going to have crunch to some degree. What typically ends up happening is publishers and developers tell their staff to push through crunch for the payout at the end, but that doesn't happen. So you have people working 70 hour weeks for months on end pretty much being paid $10/hr for the amount of time they are working.

Like I said, the 'workers' working on the game need some level of representation to protect their possible royalties are protected from other groups that have better representation, such as Publishers and other union (SAG and such).

Developers typical do a lot in terms of perks, but I'd be livid if a mocap actor got more royalties or have them paid out faster then I did on a game.

 

[DangerousDave]

I think that we accept the conditions because we like our work.

People that don't like it (or that like it but get burn because keeping that conditions too much time) go for another kind of works, without overtime, but maybe less artistically rewarding. I won't change my work for a 9 to 5 job as a "regular programmer" in a office, with the same salary.

Our job require overtime and rush, like a lot of other works that are rewarding by themselves, like corresponders, movies cameramen, surgeons, firemen, etc. All that people can find works without overtime, but they love their current work.

A surgeon accept that he can't go out from an operation because he already worked 8 hours, and we accept that sometimes we have to make an effort to avoid a game to be delayed. It's not like our work is life or death (well, sometimes it seems ) but we accept that we have to pay for working in what we love with a little of overtime.

 

[Kaltagesta]

Very unlikely. The issues that unions would be likely to push for in an industry like game development would be largely intangibles -- sane work weeks, more vacation, etc. Most of these would contribute less to increased costs and more to a longer overall schedule (although not as much as it seems like it would -- it's widely documented that crunch time is extremely unproductive and it's generally much more cost-effective to simply budget enough time)

I'm confused about why you're referring to time and money as if they aren't the same thing. If a company has to pay for its employees salaries, its office space, its backroom staff and its software licensing for three years rather than two, where is that short fall going to be made up, if not in higher prices? They still only get one game to sell.

 

[cpp_is_king]

I'd be interested to hear what benefits and perks you receive that you believe you wouldn't if you were in a union. I certainly don't have any, and I don't see why you wouldn't get them otherwise.

About the only thing you get from being in a union is job security (it's hard to fire people) and better benefits (medical/dental/etc).

If you're terrible, you also get a higher salary than you would have otherwise.

However, this is an industry with some REALLY FUCKING SKILLED people. We're not blue collar workers, most of us like the fact that we get paid based on merit. If you're a super boss programmer, you'll make $150k / year + bonuses. Will you make that with a union? Absolutely not. But all those terrible people who the rest of us would just assume not work with in the first place will get paid more than they deserve. Oh, and you can't fire them either since it takes an act of God to fire a unioned employee. Great for Mr. Terribad, but bad for everyone who has to work with him, not to mention the company as a whole.

Since the really skilled people are then underpaid, they'll just go work somewhere else - google, intel, maybe even a hedge fund, and make a real salary. Not to mention they probably won't like their jobs as much anymore as a result.

The industry works exactly like it is supposed to work. They get the cream of the crop, and everyone strives to grow and they get rewarded for it.


to answer your original question with more specifics, you asked what benefits I may receive if I'm non-unionized that I would not be able to receive if I were unionized. Here's a few off the top of my head:

1) Stock [big companies only]
2) Yearly bonus
3) Bonus when a game ships, depending on how well it does
4) Strictly Merit-based pay
5) Potential to get rich [startups only]


I can think of at least 3 small companies that were either recently bought out by much larger companies for HUGE sums of money, or shipped a massively successful game and everyone got multiple years worth of salary as a bonus. Every single employee there got a piece of that. Maybe the programmers only got $750k compared to the CEO who got $30 million, but I don't think they're complaining. Do you think they would have seen a piece of that if the industry were unionized? The company might not have even been worth buying if they were unionized, because they wouldn't have looked as appealing to the purchaser in terms of how much they're worth.

 

[Oozinator]

Is there any studio that provides a guaranteed hot girlfriend as a benefit to game programmers ?

 

[MaddenNFL64]

Nothing is stopping a company, and a union from having merit based pay raises in their CBA. Or stock options, and bonuses. The fuck.

 

[bluemax]

You get paid over time for working over 40 hours a week. Unless you are on Salary, then you are likely screwed by something in your contract.

Who in the industry gets paid over time? It's not common practice at all.

No one I've worked with had any desire to unionize. Despite terrible hours and conditions.

 

[cpp_is_king]

Who in the industry gets paid over time? It's not common practice at all.

No one I've worked with had any desire to unionize. Despite terrible hours and conditions.

Some companies now are starting to pay hourly exempt. Meaning you still get paid for hours over 40 / week, but not at the overtime rate. Big companies too, you might be surprised.

 

[Zoe]

Who in the industry gets paid over time? It's not common practice at all.

QA

 

[element]

I can think of at least 3 small companies that were either recently bought out by much larger companies for HUGE sums of money, or shipped a massively successful game and everyone got multiple years worth of salary as a bonus. Every single employee there got a piece of that. Maybe the programmers only got $750k compared to the CEO who got $30 million, but I don't think they're complaining.

That is becoming very rare now. Also I'm guessing many of those buyouts were Facebook game developers. I know people at Playfish got stupid bonuses when they were bought, and many people at Zynga are stupid wealthy now (yet still work there because their stock will void if they leave).

I'd say for every developer you are listing, there are 10 that don't get even completion bonus.

I think people looking way too into salary and other items. Game developers are well paid, because it is a specialized skillset especially if you are good at what you do. Representation needs to happen in places to protect from other entities that want to take YOUR cut of the pie, because they have better representation.

Some companies now are starting to pay hourly exempt. Meaning you still get paid for hours over 40 / week, but not at the overtime rate. Big companies too, you might be surprised.

The problem with some of those jobs is they sometimes don't get the same perks. Either health insurance, completion bonus, royalties, and such. You get OT, you get enough.

 

[cpp_is_king]

That is becoming very rare now. Also I'm guessing many of those buyouts were Facebook game developers. I know people at Playfish got stupid bonuses when they were bought, and many people at Zynga are stupid wealthy now (yet still work there because their stock will void if they leave).

I'd say for every developer you are listing, there are 10 that don't get even completion bonus.

I agree, but just saying it happens. And I don't think it's necessarily becoming more rare, it's always been rare and will always be rare, but some people love startups and go out of their way to find startups to work at for exactly that reason.

Even without that, the stock, the merit-based pay, the bonuses, will all be gone under a union. So I mean I think unions are a benefit for people who can't hold their own, and a detriment for everyone else.

 

[VVIS]

If you're unhappy crunching at a mega company, then quit and start your own "indie". You will work even harder, but you might find that it is worth it. Or, you could find that comparatively, working at a big company offers a lot of benefits that simply don't exist at small studios.

Once you have your own company, you'll wake up at random times during the night in a cold sweat, wondering what the hell you've done, scared to tell the person lying next to you in bed that no, this house payment is not going to be sustainable once your company fails, and the other studios in town don't want anything to do with your tainted, backwater approach to gamedev that got you in hot water and your investors (mom and dad) lost their nuts in a pyramid scheme (but we're making the next farmville!) and during those random sleepness nights, as you pass slowly into your 30's, and your brain becomes overloaded with "real life", you'll pine for the days when all you had to do was sit at a console and type, or argue whose star wars figures look teh best at 1am with a mountain dew in your gullet.

 

[element]

Even without that, the stock, the merit-based pay, the bonuses, will all be gone under a union. So I mean I think unions are a benefit for people who can't hold their own, and a detriment for everyone else.

That is why my stance on unions has little to do with employees salary, because those vary greatly based on studio, state, and so on. What I think needs to happen is protection from other groups that are better represented. With games starting to use more talent from groups that do have STRONG established representation. It is only a matter of time that before the profits potentially going to developers who worked on the game end up in the pocket of other parties.

 

[TestMonkey]

QA

QA pretty much always gets OT. It's the only thing that sustains us. That and trampling on hopes and dreams of programmers.

 

[cuyahoga]

Alternative: Education for Rockstar/EA/et al brass about normative managerial practices as to avoid these impractical, absurd conditions/crunch/QoL/whatever. Reduce nonessential managerial bloat of these organization for increased efficiency and cost savings. Employees don't stay late hoping to find inspiration and leave work at a normal time, and if they find a solution or genius idea write a note on their iPhone or piece of paper or something so you don't forget the next day.

 

[ban25]

Speaking as someone who has worked in the industry for several years, it's a fun place to be and the pay is competitive. You could make more working in the financial industry, sure, but it wouldn't be as fun. As for the hours, what you've heard is overblown. The big publishers have more resources and crunch is not as severe compared to smaller independent studios. But anywhere you go in software, you are going to find people working long hours -- they crunch at Google, Microsoft, Oracle, insert-tech-startup-company-here, you name it. And the pay and benefits generally reflect that.

 

[ban25]

Even without that, the stock, the merit-based pay, the bonuses, will all be gone under a union. So I mean I think unions are a benefit for people who can't hold their own, and a detriment for everyone else.

Agreed. This is the central tenet of collective bargaining -- ransoming the best talent to protect the mediocre.

 

[charlequin]

I dunno, we just had to bail out GM and the private union there bled it dry. The steel companies in the US certainly aren't able to compete with foreign steel makers and unionization has a part in that. And we only need to look at the NFL for yet another ongoing example.

Unions were at best a very minor part of GM's collapse. The NFL lockout is pretty much the league's fault. These are generic (and inaccurate) anti-labor talking points, not legitimate critiques.

That programmer either needs a better agent or a better lawyer, because he sucks at contract negotiations. He also needs to work on increasing his star power so he'll be more in demand next time around.

Almost nobody on the development end of the game industry gets points on sales, no matter how much "star power" they have, even though people quite a bit lower on the totem pole do in voice acting and other professions thanks to union terms. If you think developers can individually negotiate residuals, you really don't have any clue what you're talking about.

I'm confused about why you're referring to time and money as if they aren't the same thing.

Because they're not the same thing, at least in this context. Actual employee time is far and away the greatest expense of software development. If spreading the same paid hours over more days makes a project unprofitable from the cost of keeping the lights on, they were already overleveraged.

(If, on the other hand, a project costs more without crunch time because the company is planning for crunch time and then not actually paying for the extra labor in overtime/bonuses/flextime, then they're operating on a policy of purposely and consistently lying to employees about compensation.)

There are plenty of jobs available these days

Fuckin' lol.

 

[charlequin]

Agreed. This is the central tenet of collective bargaining -- ransoming the best talent to protect the mediocre.

That certainly explains why Peyton Manning and Colts third-string free safety Al Afalava take home the same salary!

 

[zombieshavebrains]

Unions were at best a very minor part of GM's collapse. The NFL lockout is pretty much the league's fault. These are generic (and inaccurate) anti-labor talking points, not legitimate critiques.

Any proof of these claims? I realize the league asked for more games and get paid by the TV stations no matter if the players play or not but they still lose some money. To say a lock-out like this is "pretty much" one parties' fault is just wrong.

Unions are a really good fantasy like socialism. The people who run the unions get paid, a lot more than the people they represent, no matter the results, kinda like an investment banker, and try to justify themselves by fighting for your rights. But people have been able to bargain for their "rights for hundreds of years. You always have the "right" to walk away too.

 

[mclem]

Still, if you go through a few jobs in the same industry and your conditions still don't improve, then you can always start looking for something else. Life is way too short, and I'd sooner change my career into something entirely different than wait for a union to solve my problems.

In retrospect, I'm really grateful about having been laid off from a games company about this time last year; I'm now earning more, eating better, getting more sunlight and working shorter hours.

I do kinda miss the games industry in general, but I joined it straight out of university, and I just didn't know what a career *should* be. Now, I understand just how much I was taken advantage of, and just how utterly drained of any motivation I had become by the end.

To be fair, I've been reading cpp_is_king's posts, and it's quite possible that I was just unfortunate, and there are other companies in the industry with a much better means of treating their employees; all I can really say with any confidence is that that wasn't mine.

(I should also add: They were definitely making some significant attempts to improve in the last few years. It was too late for me, but hopefully things are brighter there now.)

 

[remnant]

So, if the work force had bargaining power with their employers, costs would go up what, 66%?

How can the movie industry, with it's unioned set designers, camera operators, gaffers, construction, writers, actors, and other staff pull this shit off, and have big budget movies?

A lot of them don't. Most of the hollywood unions are actually guilds who do more to protect intellectual rights, credits, etc etc than determine pay. It's common for movies to move production to areas with tax credits to lower the price of the film or avoid using union staff.

There is so much bullshit surrounding the reality of unions, and if often comes from people defending them. It's bizarre.

Unions will not catch on in the tech industry, much less in game devlopment. Capital and labor is far to fluid compared to the auto industry that was confined to certain areas, or Hollywood which was also confined to one area until recently. if the Hollywood of today existed, where production can happen anywhere, and distribution can grow on almost an annual basis, I highly doubt film and t.v. production would be as "unionized" as they are today.

 

[jamesinclair]

Why so much assumption that employers are evil and only want to abuse their workers? .

The goal of a corporation is to maximize return to stockholders.

Full stop.

That means spending as little as possible on the raw materials, which labor is one of.

And seriously, the union hate is completely illogical.

Working people forming a group so they can better bargain against an enormous corporation who's only goal is to maximize profit?

How evil of them!

And of course the "if you dont like it, quit" argument. How lovely. If you were in charge, workers comp, vacations etc woudlnt exist. After all, if you dont want to lose your hand in the saw mill, than quit.

"But we have laws to prevent evil stuff like that!"

Yeah, thanks to unions. If the unions disband, suddenly the politicians who are corporate shills start chipping away at those laws in favor of "the free market".

How can we compete with china if we require a minimum wage? They will yell. And if there's no union to fight back, all those protections go away.

And of course, the anti-worker rhetoric is a lie. Look at germany. Highly unionized...and a major manufacturing and economic power.

 

[remnant]

The goal of a corporation is to maximize return to stockholders.

Full stop.

That means spending as little as possible on the raw materials, which labor is one of.

And seriously, the union hate is completely illogical.

Working people forming a group so they can better bargain against an enormous corporation who's only goal is to maximize profit?

How evil of them!

And of course the "if you dont like it, quit" argument. How lovely. If you were in charge, workers comp, vacations etc woudlnt exist. After all, if you dont want to lose your hand in the saw mill, than quit.

"But we have laws to prevent evil stuff like that!"

Yeah, thanks to unions. If the unions disband, suddenly the politicians who are corporate shills start chipping away at those laws in favor of "the free market".

How can we compete with china if we require a minimum wage? They will yell. And if there's no union to fight back, all those protections go away.

And of course, the anti-worker rhetoric is a lie. Look at germany. Highly unionized...and a major manufacturing and economic power.

If a companies sole purpose is to keep labor as low as possible to turn a profit, why are game developers paid more than 10 dollars a hour?

 

[polyh3dron]

I work a union job in the TV/Film industry and work 12 hour days.

 

[DangerousDave]

If a companies sole purpose is to keep labor as low as possible, why are game developers paid more than 10 dollars a hour?

Because is difficult to find people with enough experience that wants to work by less. It's not like they can get a random homeless and make him program a game for a bowl of soup.

 

[remnant]

Because is difficult to find people with enough experience that wants to work by less. It's not like they can get a random homeless and make them program a game for a bowl of soup.

bingo.

It doesn't matter what germany or other countries do with unions. At the end of the day your pay is closely tied to expertise and rarity. This doesn't change with the game industry, as the market grows and becomes more and more advanced, the pay scale is going to stretch vertically. If you don't like it, leave becuase honestly expecting a union to come in flatten it isn't likely to happen.

The old rigid unions of the past don't work with the tech industry in today's america. I'm sorry but that's just reality.

 

[DangerousDave]

bingo.

It doesn't matter what germany or other countries do with unions. At the end of the day your pay is closely tied to expertise and rarity. This doesn't change with the game industry, as the market grows and becomes more and more advanced, the pay scale is going to stretch vertically. If you don't like it, leave becuase honestly expecting a union to come in flatten it isn't likely to happen.

The old rigid unions of the past don't work with the tech industry in today's america. I'm sorry but that's just reality.

But this doesn't affect the truth that the companies try to keep the labor as cheap as possible. Externalizing QA or porting to China, keeping the salary as low as possible and rising up only when they realize that they can lose people that is difficult to replace, etc.

 

[yurinka]

I work in a (medium? we're like 400 around the world) succesful company developing "small" games for social networks and mobile phones with some millions of users and some dozens of prizes and top 1 games.

In our studio we work 40 hours per week, with competent management. We only work some extra hours maybe twice or so yearly, something normal in every work outside gaming industry. We have low salaries but we're happy.

I think what we need is more GDC like conventions, maybe a lot of smaller ones spreaded around the world to share best practices, and talks / lectures about tech, game design, production, project management, art, sound, legal stuff, etc.

I can't afford to go to US just to assist GDC, but I think it would be cool to do a smaller one in my country or my city. I think we can help some near studios who are in worst position, and that we can from everybody.

 

[remnant]

But this doesn't affect the truth that the companies try to keep the labor as cheap as possible. Externalizing QA or porting to China, keeping the salary as low as possible and rising up only when they realize that they can lose people that is difficult to replace, etc.

keeping the labor as cheap as possible doesn't mean you aren't getting paid well or automatically being put in bad situations. The tech industry is competitive, the game segment moreso and those in it are paid well for the result.

It just seems ridiculous to me to act as if these animators and designers, programmers, etc etc are being treated like the utilities at a restaurant.

 

[Kalnos]

keeping the labor as cheap as possible doesn't mean you aren't getting paid well or automatically being put in bad situations. The tech industry is competitive, the game segment moreso and those in it are paid well for the result.

You're misinformed.

 

[JayDubya]

Self-respect or dignity maybe? Talent?

The recognition that you're not just some replaceable codemonkey automaton doing x units of work and you can negotiate for yourself based on your own merit like most other people?

I dunno. One or more or all of those things?

 

[remnant]

You're misinformed.

It's hard to believe no one is paid well when they are people in thread saying they are okay with where they are at in this industry.

 

[MikeOfTheLivingDead]

You're misinformed.

Working conditions aside a lot of people in the industry are overpaid for the "skill" and "talent" level they are at.

 

[MaddenNFL64]

You're misinformed.

Looking it up, seems to range from 50k to 110k for programmers, artists/designers average 60k. They are payed pretty well, but the hours put in, and the difficulty of their jobs compared to similar sector jobs, it just doesn't add up. All i'm saying is, the folks who make our games should use themselves to secure their rightful slice.

Also, if people like the cutthroat nature of the biz, that's cool. Just wanted to start a discussion. Good to see varied opinions within the industry itself. Not everyone feels the same way about it.

 

[FLEABttn]

and you can negotiate for yourself based on your own merit like most other people?

It's cute you think that. It's a part of why people think libertarians are so out there. Personal experience with the opposite of this.

artists/designers average 60k. They are payed pretty well, but the hours put in, and the difficulty of their jobs compared to similar sector jobs, it just doesn't add up.

$60k if you're working 50 hour weeks and 3 months of crunch is terrible money. That people think they're doing okay show how little they value themselves.

 

[cpp_is_king]

You're misinformed.

Like I said before, if you're at the entry level the pay is horrible. If you're senior level, the pay is very very competitive. I'm saying this from experience.

Looking it up, seems to range from 50k to 110k for programmers, artists/designers average 60k. They are payed pretty well, but the hours put in, and the difficulty of their jobs compared to similar sector jobs, it just doesn't add up. All i'm saying is, the folks who make our games should use themselves to secure their rightful slice.

Depending on where you work, it's very possible to go much higher than that 110k. And that still doesn't include stock, bonuses, or any other financial perks.

 

[DangerousDave]

keeping the labor as cheap as possible doesn't mean you aren't getting paid well or automatically being put in bad situations. The tech industry is competitive, the game segment moreso and those in it are paid well for the result.

Not really. The salary of the devs is not tied to the results. Is tied about how expendable you are, and when the company gains millions you can gain, as much, a fixed (never percentage of benefits) bonus.

You can make, for example, Just Dance, and make your company gain a lot of millions. But getting fired the next week because:

- The company don't need so many devs to make the sequel than to make the first iteration.
- There are a lot of fresh new devs that are able to do your work for less, because you don't need to be Carmack to program Just Dance.
- They can use all that money that you helped to gain to pay the unjustified firing compensation.

No, I didn't worked in Just Dance, and I don't know if anyone of Just Dance got fired or not, is a fiction example.

Or, to use a real example, you can work in any iteration Tony Hawk, in any iteration of Guitar Hero (after the second one), helped to make the company gain tons of money with all those games, and then get fired because they decided to overmilk the franchise.

 

[remnant]

Not really. The salary of the devs is not tied to the results. Is tied about how expendable you are, and when the company gains millions you can gain, as much, a fixed (never percentage of benefits) bonus.

You can make, for example, Just Dance, and make your company gain a lot of millions. But getting fired the next week because:

- The company don't need so many devs to make the sequel than to make the first iteration.
- There are a lot of fresh new devs that are able to do your work for less, because you don't need to be Carmack to program Just Dance.
- They can use all that money that you helped to gain to pay the unjustified firing compensation.

No, I didn't worked in Just Dance, and I don't know if anyone of Just Dance got fired or not, is a fiction example.

Or, to use a real example, you can work in any iteration Tony Hawk, in any iteration of Guitar Hero (after the second one), helped to make the company gain tons of money with all those games, and then get fired because they decided to overmilk the franchise.

That no different from unionized crews in Hollywood, unionized animators or special effect artists. Unless you agree to a contract that clearly states you should receive a gross of a products profit, you shouldn't expect to get it.

Same goes for sequels. Looking to unionized Hollywood again, many people are let go after a film is done. There were plenty of freelance and contracted people who worked on Iron man 1 and not on Iron man 2.

$60k if you're working 50 hour weeks and 3 months of crunch is terrible money. That people think they're doing okay show how little they value themselves.

60K for 3 months of crunch time. What a tragedy.

 

[thcsquad]

Overtime pay only legally works for manual labor (in the US). Desk jobs don't get this benefit. There might be state that does do this, but I don't think so.

Those states probably wouldn't have many game developers.

 

[FLEABttn]

60K for 3 months of crunch time. What a tragedy.

I'll try and remember this type of logic when you lose your job, so my comment can be "well at least you don't have cancer, go cry about it."

"At least you don't have it worse" it a pretty shitty retort.

 

[element]

remnant brings up a great point about unions vs guilds. Gaming needs something more along the lines of a guild for representation.

Protect IP.
Standardized Credits.
Protect possible royalties against other represented groups.

I've been lucky enough to be credited on every game I have worked on, but sadly TONS of people don't or are added to 'Special Thanks' with no title associated.

Film is pretty straight forward. You do the work, you get a credit. If that is one day or one year.

Things like work/life balance and salary balance aren't a big issue to me, because that is drastically dependent on who YOU decide to work for.

 

[~Devil Trigger~]

Wow, people here have absolutely no idea how unions work or how diverse they are in each profession.

People are making BLANKET assumptions about an imagined Gaming union cuz of the worst shit they hear about different unions and such.

anyways, no time to get in the politics deep now, but there are Unions and Guilds in the entertainment and art industries for years, and these industries survived and many are thriving with them, stop the "OMG UNION DOOM" bs.

if there's a Union in the Gaming industry, it should be form not just to stop or negotiate any sort of abuse, worker right ect..., it must also be to insure the survival of the their industry, so there's no way they'd be "$100 games" blah blah, contrary to what you hear or what some past well publicized union decision, Thats what a Union should be about and what most unions do.

 

[beat]

Ideology aside, what does a private institution do when faced with high labor costs for a product that has close substitute in markets with lesser labor costs?

[...]

Now, unless you believe that you and your co-worker's work is unrivaled elsewhere(In which case why are you forming a union?), whats to stop the company dumping the entire operation and moving to a Right-To-Work state, or even out of country?

This same argument is still true without unions. For the next 30+ years, at least, labour will be considerably cheaper in China and India and the Philippines and Vietnam and all sorts of other places.

I am more than a little appalled at the idea that, without any experience in the industry or knowledge of what's involved in making a commercially viable game, people can start throwing around the idea that they know what the effects of cutting working time by such a huge percentage would have on the industry and still be taken seriously.

I want to see crunch done away with. In my experience there have been a couple of studios that barely required OT at all and a few that mandated death march style crunch. And that isn't productive "working time" at all. It's a lot of faffing about and fatigued work.

(Consider also that that super-impressive Hawken project was done in 9 months, with 9 people... with no crunch.)

and it's fairly easy to see that unionizing would only make that ratio worse.

You know, you sound like you firmly believe the quality of a game is linearly proportional to the amount of person-hours spent on it. (so what's all that stuff about being paid by merit downthread doing then?)

I don't get why people keep trying to compare the industries, they are completely different from top to bottom.

Because the Hollywood example is the easiest counter to the bullshit idea that art is antithetical to organized labor.

About the only thing you get from being in a union is job security (it's hard to fire people) and better benefits (medical/dental/etc).

And working conditions, and a more standard approach to credits. Your list of stuff you get that you couldn't in an organized labor scenario is completely invalidated by, yes, the Hollywood example and it's kinda telling your response to that is "but we're not Hollywood!". Stars - actors, writers, directors - can get royalties, they can be owners and get cut in on major strike-it-rich moments. And they're paid by merit; Hollywood guilds establish a floor, not a ceiling.

Basically your whole argument in this thread is based on FUD.

 

[MikeOfTheLivingDead]

Film is pretty straight forward. You do the work, you get a credit. If that is one day or one year.

I'm guessing you've never worked in film. The distributor or producer or whoever is footing the bill for the film determines how many credits there will be and how they a alocated. In most modern big budget films, you'll have a handful of different production, sound, vfx, and post houses working on the film, and the production company will tell them as part of their contract "You can have x credits." A lot of times these companies will have a couple dozen people or more working on the film and only be allowed a half dozen or so credits. Sure anyone can go to IMDB and add themselves to a film's credits, but if you actually watch the movie not everyone gets credited. I've worked on several movies that I was not officially credited for. The last film I did which was nominated for an academy award, I worked in the RandD group for the studio for 18 months, provided tech crucial to the process of getting the film done, and was not credited.

 

[cpp_is_king]

You know, you sound like you firmly believe the quality of a game is linearly proportional to the amount of person-hours spent on it. (so what's all that stuff about being paid by merit downthread doing then?)

It's a pretty simple concept, I'm surprised you're having difficult with it. Content takes hours to produce. Less hours worked = less content.

I want to see crunch done away with. In my experience there have been a couple of studios that barely required OT at all and a few that mandated death march style crunch. And that isn't productive "working time" at all. It's a lot of faffing about and fatigued work.

Here's a novel idea. Find a new job if it bothers you? Supply and demand my friend, if people didn't put up with it they'd have to make changes now wouldn't they? But people are lining up for those jobs, this is the free market at work. Nobody's forcing you into that job. Don't give me some bullshit about how people have bills to pay blah blah, for every job I accept there are 10 more I just turned down. If you have the right skillset you will be in demand. If you don't have the right skillset, then idk, find a new line of work?

Because the Hollywood example is the easiest counter to the bullshit idea that art is antithetical to organized labor.

Except for that part about how the Hollywood example has nothing to do with the gaming example, since they are completely different. Also, I don't classify game development as art. Especially not as a programmer.

And working conditions, and a more standard approach to credits. Your list of stuff you get that you couldn't in an organized labor scenario is completely invalidated by, yes, the Hollywood example and it's kinda telling your response to that is "but we're not Hollywood!". Stars - actors, writers, directors - can get royalties, they can be owners and get cut in on major strike-it-rich moments. And they're paid by merit; Hollywood guilds establish a floor, not a ceiling.

So are you talking about guilds, or unions? Because they are totally different things, and I'm not nearly as opposed to guilds as I am to unions. But as soon as you start talking about bringing a union in to do collective bargaining for the financial aspect of my job, count me the fuck out because I can do way better on my own. Let the terrible people find jobs elsewhere.

Basically your whole argument in this thread is based on FUD.

Actually it's based on experience. Is yours?

 

[Mooreberg]

Unless you are the president or figurehead of a particular development studio, there are probably a thousand people who would be more than willing the usurp your role and duties. A lot of people studied comp. sci. before everything started getting outsourced. Do Apple, Google, Microsoft, Oracle, etc. have employee unions?

 

[Warm Machine]

...and a well-understood production process that lets them schedule films years in advance and provide wide buffers to allow for hiccups in production.

This is really the key component as to why movies can get made so quickly and within budget and on schedule. A typical movie only goes forward if script is in order, the director is chosen, the budget, schedule and production estimates are done and there is a cast and crew ready to go.

We are talking about preproduction that accounts for 2 dozen people tops before it balloons to 500. Games, because of full time staff assemble the team in advance of prepro and that cost pushes the game to start before it is ready.

A movie is also a far less democratic process because when your hours cost 10k there isn't time to fuck around. The director runs what needs to be shot and how. You also must live with your early choices and follow through with them to the end. Rarely is it that an actor is replaced or a scene is changed throughout production but that happens in games ALL the damn time constantly and everywhere. Rarely is the idea for a game at all what comes out the back end.

I have seen games though where there is one year left to go and suddenly people take it seriously and every decision is followed through to the best possible execution given the time and by the end of it there is a complete game, take it or leave it. Funny how push comes to shove and it gets made. That is something that never happens in casual production with the same people under casual circumstances.