Support NeoGAF

[Steve Youngblood]

Alright, so it isn't that way in Europe. But it is that way in the United States and Japan, which, incidentally, are the homes to studios that are far more successful than any European shop.

Is this supposed to be a compelling argument? "How are companies going to meet their sales targets if they have to provide fairer working conditions for their employees?"

 

[Visualante]

Alright, so it isn't that way in Europe. But it is that way in the United States and Japan, which, incidentally, are the homes to studios that are far more successful than any European shop.

Is that so? Last time I checked Rockstar North and SCEE/Relentless (of Singstar/Buzz fame) were based in the UK, and Rovio arebased in Norway. I wouldn't want to guess how much Lego Star Wars has sold, either. Just touching on a handful of the big ones. Then you've got JaGeX and DICE.. lot of big developers in Europe.

Hey pach I build automobiles and they haven't closed my plant.

And closing a video game developer is unheard of. Incidentally 50000 jobs in the UK were lost for a British train contract in the past few weeks as the contract went to Germany.

 

[remnant]

People know that overtime generally isn't paid and understand that there will probably be periods where longer hours will be expected. Some people may debate this, but I'm not. What I'm continuing to suggest is that this matter-of-fact acknowledgment ignores that there are degrees of severity as to what this really entails. "Longer" hours are one thing. 100 hour work weeks are another thing entirely. I think the cavalier "expect crunch times" attitude undermines a potentially legitimate complaint that there is a line that can be crossed. Pachter makes no genuine attempt at empathy for employees in the industry aside from clarifying that he thinks that six months of crunch time in a two-year lifecycle is to be expected.

Is six consecutive months prior to shipping okay? What do we mean by crunch time? Apparently, he's compassionate enough to not condone necessitating sleeping at the office, but how many hours a week would he caution that a fledgling game programmer should expect to work? Apparently, forty is right out. Sixty? Eighty? One hundred? More than that? Where is the line drawn where it becomes okay to suggest that work conditions are too strenuous? Because all I'm gathering are explanations that professionals work until the job is done, and also anecdotes that amount to older generations regaling today's youth that in their day, they walked to school in the snow uphill both ways every day.

Trying to have your cake and eat it too? You've admitted that overtime is expected, and we all know the team Bondi situation is rare so really what is there left to say? No one is saying 100 hours should be the norm, and our "crunch" attitude probably doesn't say as much as the words "What happened at Bondi was wrong" does.


Which is what he said. Does the man have to weep on video to prove his empathy?

We know from this industry and others what normal crunch and overtime looks like, so this whole "Where do we draw the line" is also disingenuous."

 

[Curufinwe]

Is that so? Last time I checked Rockstar North and SCEE/Relentless (of Singstar/Buzz fame) were based in the UK, and Rovio arebased in Norway. I wouldn't want to guess how much Lego Star Wars has sold, either. Just touching on a handful of the big ones. Then you've got JaGeX and DICE.. lot of big developers in Europe.

And there's all the Canadian developers... can anyone tell us if the labour laws there are closer to American labor laws or EU labour laws?

 

[Steve Youngblood]

We know from this industry and others what normal crunch and overtime looks like, so this whole "Where do we draw the line" is also disingenuous."

Why is it disingenuous? All I'm gathering is that the typical attitude is "if you're salary, you work until the job is done and get paid what was agreed to." Okay, that's fine. But the viewer was asking about the situation rumored to be happening at Team Bondi which is not unheard of in this or other industries.

He merely conceded that if true Team Bondi may have crossed a line, but that really seemed to be in the "shrug-of-the-shoulders" sense so as to not appear like a complete monster. It really doesn't sound like he's all that concerned with the possible abuses that may be going on. Why, even at Team Bondi, fear not for them for he suspects that bonuses will be handed out.

His own clarifications here point out his rigorous, 14 hour days. Is that five days or seven days week? Either way, it sounds like Pachter's down with 70 to 98 hour work weeks as the norm. It's what he does as a consummate professional. Is this fair?

If someone comes to me and says things are getting rough at their code shop with 80 hour work weeks, what's the correct response? Because, in so far as I can tell, it sounds like I tell them that that's the biz (that's what I call it because I'm cool, you might say business), and if they weren't prepared to put in that kind of effort as a white-collar professional then perhaps school-teaching would suit them better, because they obviously can't hack the high-demand career that is developing video game entertainment in a rank-and-file capacity.

 

[Goodacre0081]

do they get tips?

 

[Steve Youngblood]

do they get tips?

Tips? No. But most game developers will, at some point in their life, take home a bonus that facilitates a cash purchase of a mansion. And that's why the industry is fair. Because if you roll the dice and choose to buy into the studio pitch thus ensuring that you barely see your friends and family for months on end to make sure a game ships on time, you just might get a sweet, sweet bonus.

And that, my friends, is why nothing needs to change in regards to working conditions at game studios. There's that, and if things did change, why then that would be bad for the studio. You don't want Pachter having to stay even later at the office to type up a report that Studio X missed their target next fiscal quarter, do you?

 

[corporate cheerleader]

Tips? No. But most game developers will, at some point in their life, take home a bonus that facilitates a cash purchase of a mansion. And that's why the industry is fair. Because if you roll the dice and choose to buy into the studio pitch thus ensuring that you barely see your friends and family for months on end to make sure a game ships on time, you just might get a sweet, sweet bonus.

And that, my friends, is why nothing needs to change in regards to working conditions at game studios. There's that, and if things did change, why then that would be bad for the studio. You don't want Pachter having to stay even later at the office to type up a report that Studio X missed their target next fiscal quarter, do you?

You should post more often, GAF would be a better place.

 

[daycru]

The disdain in his voice and face when he tells people to go work at an auto factory... until it shuts down was priceless. Blue ass blood there.

 

[daycru]

And to non Americans: These are the people who make up our "liberal" party.

 

[Version 3.0]

Alright, so it isn't that way in Europe. But it is that way in the United States and Japan, which, incidentally, are the homes to studios that are far more successful than any European shop.

"That's just how it is" is the worst possible justification for anything. Particularly in a corporate environment, where anything but continuous improvement (at least financially) is considered abject failure.

Still, on this topic, I wonder what the norm is in the 3rd big territory, Japan. Particularly Nintendo, whose performance is excellent but doesn't have the best record of meeting deadlines.

 

[Steve Youngblood]

The disdain in his voice and face when he tells people to go work at an auto factory... until it shuts down was priceless. Blue ass blood there.

Come on, Pach's a champion of the people. Didn't you see him sticking up for Brendan McNamara?

 

[TheFightingFish]

As a Microsoft employee (not in games) I actually wonder if these "accepted" factors about game development led to many of the first party Microsoft shops being closed down. Internally they make it pretty easy to move around between teams and levels and promotions all operate on a company wide system. So compared to stand alone game shops it would be way easier to bail if they start killing you with hours. Just go ahead and move to a more reasonable non-games team, keep your level and pay and don't worry about having to change benefits, move your family or anything like that.

 

[Steve Youngblood]

Just go ahead and move to a more reasonable non-games team, keep your level and pay and don't worry about having to change benefits, move your family or anything like that.

That sounds awful. If I was calling the shots, I'd berate them and tell them to get a job as a grease monkey if they couldn't hack it in the professional world.

 

[brucewaynegretzky]

That sounds awful. If I was calling the shots, I'd berate them and tell them to get a job as a grease monkey if they couldn't hack it in the professional world.

You transitioned from principled and reasonable to sarcastic pretty quickly...

 

[remnant]

Why is it disingenuous? All I'm gathering is that the typical attitude is "if you're salary, you work until the job is done and get paid what was agreed to." Okay, that's fine. But the viewer was asking about the situation rumored to be happening at Team Bondi which is not unheard of in this or other industries.

He was asked if what happened in bondi would lead to a union, and what you and everyone else keeping on ignoring, if not on purpose is that 100 hour overtime is not the norm. Hence why using this to push for a union is unlikely to be successful.

Overtime is expected in many industries. Videogames, animation, Special effects, etc etc. 60-80 hour crunch is expected at various times. If you are going to make an argument for a union, make an argument based on the industry averages, not events.

He merely conceded that if true Team Bondi may have crossed a line, but that really seemed to be in the "shrug-of-the-shoulders" sense so as to not appear like a complete monster.

Did he shrug to not appear like a monster or did he shrugs because that what he does. Again is he supposed to weep on camera?

Overtime is common in the industry. Overtime is common everywhere you get salaried positions.

His own clarifications here point out his rigorous, 14 hour days. Is that five days or seven days week?

He said he works weekends. This is a bullshit tactic though. So everyone on GAF know Pach schedule and how hard he works, and thus can determine whther or not he has the right to have an opinion.
No one would be saying this shit if Pach had come on demanded brendan be arrested or whatever. Instead of arguing his position, you are attacking his livelihood.

Either way, it sounds like Pachter's down with 70 to 98 hour work weeks as the norm. It's what he does as a consummate professional. Is this fair?

Only Pach can answer that, and that is the case for everyone in the industry. if you don't like how you are being treated, leave.

If someone comes to me and says things are getting rough at their code shop with 80 hour work weeks, what's the correct response?

Tell them to weigh their options, and if staying there is worse than leaving, tell them to quit. How is this hard? They wouldn't be the first to quit a job or change a career.

Because, in so far as I can tell, it sounds like I tell them that that's the biz (that's what I call it because I'm cool, you might say business), and if they weren't prepared to put in that kind of effort as a white-collar professional then perhaps school-teaching would suit them better, because they obviously can't hack the high-demand career that is developing video game entertainment in a rank-and-file capacity.

This is often said in many industries. I have a friend who works at Digital Domain, and he changed careers after he realized he didn't like the "biz" anymore. He stills animates, now he just does it for himself as a hobby.

If you don't like how the industry works, work outside the industry. If you can't stand crunch, don't even bother.

 

[Steve Youngblood]

You transitioned from principled and reasonable to sarcastic pretty quickly...

The topic slowed down.

He was asked if what happened in bondi would lead to a union, and what you and everyone else keeping on ignoring, if not on purpose is that 100 hour overtime is not the norm. Hence why using this to push for a union is unlikely to be successful.

I'm not ignoring anything he said. As I've argued, I'm not calling him out strictly because he's not pro-union. I'm not even arguing for unions, though I don't discount possible benefits of such an organization. I'm challenging his tone. He really seemed to just show little regard for the fact that the industry may overwork some employees. More time was spent defending Brendan McNamara for having it rough being the guy in charge than offering any sympathy for the rank-and-file employee who apparently should have known what he/she was signing up for. In fact, he has no sympathy for overworked employees, as the industry generally compensates them well he believes.

Did he shrug to not appear like a monster or did he shrugs because that what he does. Again is he supposed to weep on camera?

Why does he need to weep on camera? What I would argue, if I were in his shoes, is that perhaps we need to look at how pervasive these accusations really are and assume that maybe there's something to the accusations as opposed to dismissing the concern with an acknowledgment that unpaid overtime is the norm, and the price one pays for being a self-directed professional.

He said he works weekends. This is a bullshit tactic though. So everyone on GAF know Pach schedule and how hard he works, and thus can determine whther or not he has the right to have an opinion.

I personally do not care how much he works. He, however, volunteered the information as though it was pertinent, so I'll act as though it's pertinent to the discussion.

Only Pach can answer that, and that is the case for everyone in the industry. if you don't like how you are being treated, leave.

Why is that the only recourse? Why can't we have a discussion about the possibility that maybe there's exploitation of these salaried positions. Maybe, at the end of the day, we'll all agree after sober analysis that things aren't really all that bad, and that the Team Bondi's of the world really are outliers. However, I don't understand why the correct position is to just go "long hours? We all work long hours buddy. Don't like it? There's the door."

 

[Neuromancer]

Come on, Pach's a champion of the people. Didn't you see him sticking up for Brendan McNamara?

On an unrelated note, did anyone else notice how hairy McNamara's arms were in the video? I mean, we're talking gorilla levels here. I must say I was caught off guard.

 

[remnant]

Why is that the only recourse? Why can't we have a discussion about the possibility that maybe there's exploitation of these salaried positions. Maybe, at the end of the day, we'll all agree after sober analysis that things aren't really all that bad, and that the Team Bondi's of the world really are outliers. However, I don't understand why the correct position is to just go "long hours? We all work long hours buddy. Don't like it? There's the door."

Everyone has admitted to that, and Pach even mentioned it's being investigated right now. No one is ignoring that. What more is there to say. Bondi was a shitty place to work. L.A. Noire was poorly managed. Welp end of that. What more is there to analyze?

You want to know why people keep saying "leave." It's because that is the best option.

 

[Margalis]

This is what Pachter used to defend McNamara:

The LA Noire project was disrupted, and there were several false promises of finishing the game, and poor Brendan McNamara – who is probably going to be ‘rich Brendan McNamara – was put in the position to get his team to crunch and get it done more than once.

This is like feeling sorry for a slave owner because his arm gets tired from whipping slaves all day. And the person who put McNamara in the awkward position of making people crunch was McNamara!

It's a little silly to claim that crunching workers deserve no sympathy but the guy who is making them crunch does. That is what makes Pachter's arguments so ludicrous. The one guy he has sympathy for is the guy who is getting rich exploiting others.

 

[coopolon]

So what are the other options here? I'm directing this towards those who find the response of "If you don't like the job, don't take it" so repulsive and anathema. So far all I've heard is a lot of sarcastic barbs and mocking of how successful Pachter is.

I guess I'm not really sure what people want out of this situation. Do you want the government to intervene and send the Team Bondi/Rockstar/2K people to jail? Force them to pay wages that were never agreed to before hand?

 

[brucewaynegretzky]

So what are the other options here? I'm directing this towards those who respond to those of us who say "If you don't like the job, don't take it."

I guess I'm not really sure what people want out of this situation. Do you want the government to intervene and send the Team Bondi/Rockstar/2K people to jail? Force them to pay wages that were never agreed to before hand?

Unionization to prevent future problems.....

 

[Steve Youngblood]

Everyone has admitted to that, and Pach even mentioned it's being investigated right now. No one is ignoring that. What more is there to say. Bondi was a shitty place to work. L.A. Noire was poorly managed. Welp end of that. What more is there to analyze?

What more is there to analyze? There's a dialogue out there about just how pervasive this type of thing really is. No, there's not a suggestion that Team Bondi is 100% representative of every other studio out there. However, is it really that isolated. We've heard similar accounts before.

And maybe it's not as bad at other studios, but does that mean the conditions are good?

You want to know why people keep saying "leave." It's because that is the best option.

Yes, I might advise that someone attempt to leave if they can manage to find another job with comparable pay. But why is that the end of the story? I don't understand why it's in our best interest to ignore potential (I italicized the word to indicate that I'm not suggesting that it applies to all workers) worker exploitation just because the currently affected worker might be able to escape the situation. What's wrong with a dialogue about the possibility that too much is expected from professionals? You don't have to agree, but I reject the notion that we should just scoff at the mere suggestion.

 

[coopolon]

Unionization to prevent future problems.....

And whose fault is it that developers haven't unionized? Machael Pachters?

 

[Margalis]

And whose fault is it that developers haven't unionized? Machael Pachters?

It's at least a little bit his fault since he is actively opposed to unions and spreads false information about the supposed negative effects of them.

 

[Steve Youngblood]

And whose fault is it that developers haven't unionized? Machael Pachters?

Why do I need to find him to be the perpetrator of the situation to fault his take on it?

 

[Tellaerin]

You missed the part where I said their wages were likely inflated too, but also its not only about how much work they put in. Its about value of their work to the company. Executives are dealing with bigger stakes. One decision by a guy like Kotick can have a much larger financial fallout for the company. Like I said before, executives are also much shorter in supply. There are obviously cases of executives who are paid too much but to assume based simply on the number they make compared to employee X is a silly metric.

Annual salaries:

President of the United States: $400,000.00
(http://www.senate.gov/reference/resources/pdf/98-53.pdf)

Bobby Kotick (2010): $1,009,673.00 (base salary), $5,597,310.00 (w/derivatives and incentives)
(http://people.forbes.com/profile/robert-a-kotick/1126)


I'd say that the PotUS does more important work than the President of Activision, and his decisions have far more wide-ranging consequences. No matter what metric you want to use, guys like Bobby are overpaid by a ridiculous amount.

 

[coopolon]

Why do I need to find him to be the perpetrator of the situation to fault his take on it?

Of course you don't. I just don't understand what you hope to accomplish by continually mocking his capitalist views with sarcasm and facetiousness. I'd also like to hear your answer to my earlier question about what you think is the right thing to happen now. Should consumers boycott 2K goods? Are you boycotting them? Should the government intervene?

It's at least a little bit his fault since he is actively opposed to unions and spreads false information about the supposed negative effects of them.

What is the false information?

 

[Steve Youngblood]

Of course you don't. I just don't understand what you hope to accomplish by continually mocking his capitalist views with sarcasm and facetiousness.

I meandered about in this thread for many posts being neither sarcastic nor facetious. What's my goal? To engage in a dialogue wherein I argue the position that expecting the workforce to regularly work insane hours to ensure timely completion of a product should not be viewed as the proper status quo for any and all people operating under the banner of "white-collar professional."

 

[brucewaynegretzky]

Annual salaries:

President of the United States: $400,000.00
(http://www.senate.gov/reference/resources/pdf/98-53.pdf)

Bobby Kotick (2010): $1,009,673.00 (base salary), $5,597,310.00 (w/derivatives and incentives)
(http://people.forbes.com/profile/robert-a-kotick/1126)


I'd say that the PotUS does more important work than the President of Activision, and his decisions have far more wide-ranging consequences. No matter what metric you want to use, guys like Bobby are overpaid by a ridiculous amount.

Did you really just compare public and private sector salaries to analyze private salaries? Really? This is why no one should EVER discuss money with other people. Kotick made 6m last year running a billion dollar company. Considering most of it is incentives that are tied to company growth I don't see the absolute problem here. There are obviously other factors to consider, but a person making a lot of money IS NOT IN AND OF ITSELF WRONG.

Also, POTUS doesn't generate money for investors. If Kotick makes his investors billions why wouldn't they want to pay him a small percentage of what he did for them? POTUS doesn't do that. There a million other ways government is different, but this is by far the most relevant.

 

[coopolon]

I meandered about in this thread for many posts being neither sarcastic nor facetious. What's my goal? To engage in a dialogue wherein I argue the position that expecting the workforce to regularly work insane hours to ensure timely completion of a product should not be viewed as the proper status quo for any and all people operating under the banner of "white-collar professional."

Who is disagreeing with you? I haven't watched the video again today, but I thought he said the Team Bondi conditions, if accurately described in the employee complaints that have been reported in the press, are unacceptable. I know you believe he said that disingenuously, but he said it none the less and thus agreed with you.

He just thinks the proper recourse is to quit if you don't like the job. It's not a perfect solution of course, but it is a solution.

only freedom-hating commies unionize. now get back to work or you'll be here all night, you lousy kids!

I'm sorry, I'm not sure I can read through your sarcasm to properly understand the point you are trying to make. I believe you are trying to demonize those who don't think a union is the appropriate situation here. I don't think anyone's said they shouldn't be allowed to form a union though. I personally think if that is what developers want to do they absolutely should do it. As long as they don't threaten violence to people who don't want to join the union. This is not the same as if they obtain support from enough of the desired developers so that they can compel the publishers to only employ union developers.

 

[carbonbased]

Of course you don't. I just don't understand what you hope to accomplish by continually mocking his capitalist views with sarcasm and facetiousness. I'd also like to hear your answer to my earlier question about what you think is the right thing to happen now. Should consumers boycott 2K goods? Are you boycotting them? Should the government intervene?

only freedom-hating commies unionize. now get back to work or you'll be here all night, you lousy kids!

 

[Ooccoo]

I've always wondered, and I've been active on GAF for YEARS, why isn't Michael Pachter banned yet from this forum? In discussions. His opinions don't matter and he is a general prick, this is just another nail in the coffin for me.

 

[Margalis]

What is the false information?

Pachter claims that unionization would drive up costs which would be passed along to the consumer and/or lead to the closure of more studios.

That certainly could happen but it's not in any way certain. A union doesn't even have to do anything directly related to wages. A union could simply force employers to adopt standard crediting procedures. How exactly would that drive up costs? The intern that maintains the list of credited employees gets paid ten thousand an hour?

Personally I believe that many companies are actually losing productivity and costing themselves money with their practices, and if unions forced them to change those practices they might actually save money. But really that's neither here nor there, what exactly a union does is pretty much up the union. You can't make any broad statement about what unionization would or would not do.

 

[remnant]

What more is there to analyze? There's a dialogue out there about just how pervasive this type of thing really is. No, there's not a suggestion that Team Bondi is 100% representative of every other studio out there. However, is it really that isolated. We've heard similar accounts before.

Yeah we've heard similar stories once every year, maybe 2, mostly at Rockstar. Everytime one of these stories pop up we analyze and come to the same endgame. Crunch sucks, it's expected. There are also many studios that manage well. Some places are better than others. etc etc etc

Yes, I might advise that someone attempt to leave if they can manage to find another job with comparable pay. But why is that the end of the story? I don't understand why it's in our best interest to ignore potential (I italicized the word to indicate that I'm not suggesting that it applies to all workers) worker exploitation just because the currently affected worker might be able to escape the situation. What's wrong with a dialogue about the possibility that too much is expected from professionals? You don't have to agree, but I reject the notion that we should just scoff at the mere suggestion.

We've had this conversation. This conversation happens all the time, and people say just as much by what they do as what they say. If they feel like the job is asking to much of them, they leave.

What are you expecting with your 'dialogue" with the industry.

 

[Neuromancer]

I've always wondered, and I've been active on GAF for YEARS, why isn't Michael Pachter banned yet from this forum? In discussions. His opinions don't matter and he is a general prick, this is just another nail in the coffin for me.

Haha what.

Having opinions, even unpopular ones, isn't grounds for banning.

 

[Steve Youngblood]

Who is disagreeing with you? I haven't watched the video again today, but I thought he said the Team Bondi conditions, if accurately described in the employee complaints that have been reported in the press, are unacceptable.

His inarticulate clarification established that professionals work unpaid overtime, and he thinks that six month crunch times are commonplace and, based on his tone, apparently justifiable in his book, as that's how the industry works. No, he didn't condone Team Bondi (although he kind of did by going to bat for the studio head and reminding us what kind of pressure he was under and also reminding us that Team Bondi employees will probably get bonuses for their efforts), but his actual clarified position really wasn't that enviable either.

I don't understand what video you watched that I didn't. It was pretty clear in my mind that he believes that, by and large, the industry is fair and that he doesn't sympathize with complaints about long hours unless conditions are as bad as they were at Team Bondi, where the solution isn't to blame the management apparently but for the employees who couldn't hack it to quit.

 

[Tellaerin]

Did you really just compare public and private sector salaries to analyze private salaries? Really? This is why no one should EVER discuss money with other people. Kotick made 6m last year running a billion dollar company. Considering most of it is incentives that are tied to company growth I don't see the absolute problem here. There are obviously other factors to consider, but a person making a lot of money IS NOT IN AND OF ITSELF WRONG.

Why yes. Yes, I did.

You were the one who brought up the whole 'oh, they deserve more money because their decisions have wide-reaching implications for a lot of people' bugaboo. So I decided to pick a dramatic example to contrast with. I could compare with the salaries of foreign CEO's instead if you prefer, since they make on average about a third of what American CEO's do. Would you like that better? The point remains: These guys are ridiculously overpaid for what they do.

 

[dragonfart28]

Did you really just compare public and private sector salaries to analyze private salaries? Really? This is why no one should EVER discuss money with other people. Kotick made 6m last year running a billion dollar company. Considering most of it is incentives that are tied to company growth I don't see the absolute problem here. There are obviously other factors to consider, but a person making a lot of money IS NOT IN AND OF ITSELF WRONG.

There is granularity to that argument in that it depends on how few have control over how many with the capital that they have.

 

[Steve Youngblood]

What are you expecting with your 'dialogue" with the industry.

I'm engaging in a discussion about industry with forum goers. I expect nothing.

 

[brucewaynegretzky]

Why yes. Yes, I did.

You were the one who brought up the whole 'oh, they deserve more money because their decisions have wide-reaching implications for a lot of people' bugaboo. So I decided to pick a dramatic example to contrast with. I could compare with the salaries of foreign CEO's instead if you prefer, since they make on average about a third of what American CEO's do. Would you like that better? The point remains: These guys are ridiculously overpaid for what they do.

If we're comparing similarly situated executives I have no problem with that, but a blanket statement that they make a third as much isn't really relevant. My point still stands that executive pay cuts aren't going to significantly improve conditions for the average workers who would be unionizing, or prevent potential productivity harms a union could cause by shortening the amount of time employees are working in a week.

Also, my reasoning earlier wasn't solely that the executives are dealing with bigger stakes. They are generating massive revenues and are taking a comparatively small % of that revenue in their compensation. Obviously everyone is involved in that effort, but the executives are the ones who are deciding what direction the company has to go to find those revenues.

Bottom line, some executives are paid too much, but its a case by case example. Their pay isn't significantly related to the workers' rights issues being discussed here that would likely be impacted by unionization.

Again, my point here is I'm all for unionization, but as a consumer I would expect longer development cycles and potentially more expensive games that I would also expect a lot of people advocating for unionization here to bitch about.

 

[okenny]

I don't find anything he said reprehensible :| Many industries work with some level of risk that the workers within said industries buy into when they decide to join. Slinging dirt in the media is manipulative; at the very least, it's a cheap tactic for the weak-willed. Are people seriously for government regulation of the video games industry? I don't work in any Australian industries so they can do what they want there but I hope to god they keep the shit being talked up in this thread out of the states.

 

[Ledsen]

Everyone has admitted to that, and Pach even mentioned it's being investigated right now. No one is ignoring that. What more is there to say. Bondi was a shitty place to work. L.A. Noire was poorly managed. Welp end of that. What more is there to analyze?

You want to know why people keep saying "leave." It's because that is the best option.

This argument comes up again and again, and it's hilariously unrealistic. Some people can't just "leave". They have families, they have responsibilities, and they can't afford to be unemployed for months or longer. Maybe there aren't any jobs in their area, and they can't move where there are jobs because their other half already has a great job where they are right now and can't get a new one that easily either. Maybe they don't have any time to even look for a new job because they are already working 12+ hours a day and have to take care of their family and sleep on what little free time they have. The only people who actually have the freedom to do these things are young, single people, precisely the ones who are less likely to leave because they are prepared to work themselves to death for their dream. The labor market is far from perfect, so why do people keep arguing like it is?

 

[Tellaerin]

Again, my point here is I'm all for unionization, but as a consumer I would expect longer development cycles and potentially more expensive games that I would also expect a lot of people advocating for unionization here to bitch about.

I don't have a problem with longer development cycles. I think it's ironic that the people who'd probably be bitching the loudest here are the ones who have huge backlogs of unplayed games - if you can't find the time to actually play half the stuff that's being released now, a drop in studio output's really not going to affect you much, aside from cutting down the number of unplayed games sitting on your shelves. As far as a price hike goes, well, if that's what we need to shoulder for these guys to have better working conditions, then so be it. I still feel that it's the execs and shareholders that should shoulder the financial burden for that, rather than passing it onto consumers, but realistically I don't think that's likely to happen.

 

[Steve Youngblood]

The labor market is far from perfect, so why do people keep arguing like it is?

Insofar as I can tell, nobody is arguing that it is. However, complaining or for that matter even talking about it is counterproductive. For better or worse, you just shrug your shoulders and concede that it is what it is. After all, nothing gets changed just by talking about it, right?

 

[Freshmaker]

Insofar as I can tell, nobody is arguing that it is. However, complaining or for that matter even talking about it is counterproductive. For better or worse, you just shrug your shoulders and concede that it is what it is. After all, nothing gets changed just by talking about it, right?

Only if nobody ever acts after reading words.

 

[Philthy]

Aw shit, pachter is one of those fucking twats.

I can just completely ignore him now.

My sentiments exactly. Crazy is as crazy does.

 

[coopolon]

His inarticulate clarification established that professionals work unpaid overtime, and he thinks that six month crunch times are commonplace and, based on his tone, apparently justifiable in his book, as that's how the industry works. No, he didn't condone Team Bondi (although he kind of did by going to bat for the studio head and reminding us what kind of pressure he was under and also reminding us that Team Bondi employees will probably get bonuses for their efforts), but his actual clarified position really wasn't that enviable either.

I don't understand what video you watched that I didn't. It was pretty clear in my mind that he believes that, by and large, the industry is fair and that he doesn't sympathize with complaints about long hours unless conditions are as bad as they were at Team Bondi, where the solution isn't to blame the management apparently but for the employees who couldn't hack it to quit.

I guess our disagreement about what he meant in his video stems from our disagreement about what are unacceptable work conditions. I think being expected to work long hours of OT periodically are acceptable as long as it's agreed to in the contract and both employer and individual is free to terminate the contract at any time (within reason.) The individual has to decide if that fits into their life. You seem to think even that is unacceptable despite the individual agreeing to it ahead of time and being free to leave at any time.

This argument comes up again and again, and it's hilariously unrealistic. Some people can't just "leave". They have families, they have responsibilities, and they can't afford to be unemployed for months or longer. Maybe there aren't any jobs in their area, and they can't move where there are jobs because their other half already has a great job where they are right now and can't get a new one that easily either. Maybe they don't have any time to even look for a new job because they are already working 12+ hours a day and have to take care of their family and sleep on what little free time they have. The only people who actually have the freedom to do these things are young, single people, precisely the ones who are less likely to leave because they are prepared to work themselves to death for their dream. The labor market is far from perfect, so why do people keep arguing like it is?

Of course it's not perfect, but it's still the best option. And when people say "leave" I understand them to be saying unionize, leave, start a new company, change careers, etc. Is there a better option that we are unaware of?

 

[Freshmaker]

Of course it's not perfect, but it's still the best option. And when people say "leave" I understand them to be saying unionize, leave, start a new company, change careers, etc. Is there a better option that we are unaware of?

Leaving changes nothing.

 

[Zim]

No sympathy you say??

Say that to/towards the family/friends of two individuals that committed suicide during one project.
It happened at one of my previous jobs. The work hours and environment were so horrendous, that they decided to take their lives.
No, they didn't get paid overtime and, no, their workmanship didn't even get acknowledged with any positive feedback or thank you's.
Working long hours week after week out breaks your will. Couple that with no positive encouragement, it was a double whammy.

So I ask again, no sympathy?!?! FUCK YOU!