• Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.

Want AAA Games? Say YES to crunch and NO to unions...

You are just talking. You are basing this off no first hand experience at all. I know if feels good to type and say, but you think the people who make games and manage the process are morons? You can do better? Dude, these are some of the sharpest people in the business. It's simply a very hard problem and it rarely gets easier. Can it be improved? Sure. But saying Crunch isn't needed simply shows a lack of understanding of the process. Which is fine. You may have never worked in games. Not a problem; I get that. But when people in the trenches (be it me or a few others in this thread) tell you that it's not often a management issue (but instead it's a 'building the plane and flying it WHILE designing it' issue) perhaps you could at least consider that we're not lying to you :).

Jaffe
The user above you just said that Japanese Devs don't need crunch time, so what are they doing better and/or more efficient than you?

I don't care if a game out today or in two years time. If it's good, I'll buy it. If the management is good, the game will get finished in time, without having to resort to slave labor.
 
Last edited:

Belmonte

Member
As a subscriber of your channel, I'm always surprised how much you are willing to give your unfiltered opinion Jaffe. I imagine it gets you some problems but it is great to see the issues from a higher point of view.

I find very unfortunate all this crunch situation. Yeah, it gets great results but it burn out the people involved. So many great devs of the past stop making games, resulting in a loss of know-how. I love to play classic games and often I'm intrigued why some mechanics and solutions in general are tossed away in modern games for inferior alternatives.

Some time ago I wished to work in an AAA game, but now I think it is best to make my own humble indie game. My greatest fear is to burnout and lose my passion for videogames, which is very dear to me.

You guys should give a look on Jaffe's channel. It has a PTSD war veteran dog, discussions about mexican cartels and even videogames.
 

Herr Edgy

Member
100 damn percent. Which is why I lose interest in AAA. My NON AAA games have NEVER been as successful as the AAA stuff I got to work on (which prob speaks volumes about my skills as a nuts and bolts designer vs. my writing/world building/tuning skills) BUT even so, I love the gameplay of video games and yeah, if you want the deep, meaty, cool, fresh game play? Best to look towards smaller titles. Not a rule, but almost one.
Success in what sense?
As I get older I notice that I find myself caring less and less about societal approval. Of course a AAA game is more successful than your non AAA titles - AAA means playing it safe (mostly). You put in a whole ton of money into production values and marketing, the general gaming public will eat it up to varying degrees. Is that what success looks like, however? Isn't it more of an application of rule that almost guarantees a money rain? How is it success if you are going the safe route?

Are we making games to make money or because we love the medium? Under that perspective, I'd consider a game which lets your studio stay afloat (money is important, after all) and that lets you do something new, intruiging, fun, innovative for both developers and gamers a much bigger success than another good looking boring AAA game that makes a lot more money than your 'unsuccessful' title.
 

bitbydeath

Member
I don’t mind crunch but you have to have a passion for what you do. I’ve done crunch in the past for software development and it can be brutal but the enjoyment of the outcome can outweigh the brutality.

Right now I’m not doing ‘work’ crunch but I’m pushing myself, I get up at 5am to get kids ready for school, work til 4pm, then we I get home I play/homework with kids etc and after I get them to bed I watch a show with the wife and then work on my novel til I fall asleep, often between 10pm and 12pm, then I wake up and do it all over again because I want to reflect on my life as having done something with it.

Crunch doesn’t have to be the ‘work’ side, how many stay on GAF at some ungodly hour? It’s all about where your interests lie and what you want to achieve.
 

mcz117chief

Member
I'd be willing to take a slight "quality" hit if I knew the game was made by people and not corporate machine. Most AAA games are all the same anyway, all sauce no steak. The most charming, memorable and fun games are not AAA (EDF series, Fumito Udea's games, Journey, Fire Emblem Three Houses etc.)
 
Unions don't give a shit about their members. You have to pay to be part of a union. That's what the union cares about. Occasionally they will larp and and people think unions are doing something. Unions are shit. End of story.
Lol wut. I have no idea what I read except possibly an exert from the Amazon training video.
 

GHG

Gold Member
Question: why don't they do that already then? If they can sell massive numbers of a product that's easier/quicker/cheaper to make, why are they spending massive amounts of bank climbing the AAA mountain?

What you're basically saying amounts to telling a bunch of creatives not to create.

Most people don't get into these types of industries just to churn out the same thing over and over and over again just for a paycheck, it's disheartening and demoralising. Yeh, they could probably build AA or indie titles and be creative as they want to be, but some people get a huge kick out of chasing the opus magnum. It's the nature of the beast.

Despite what some people might want to tell you, some people are happy and willing to put a crunch in if it means the product they are passionate about and believe in gets shipped. And sometimes it's not just about shipping a product, it's ensuring you ship a high quality product. Sometimes that means a delay, sometimes that means crunch, and sometimes it means both.
 

Lanrutcon

Member
What you're basically saying amounts to telling a bunch of creatives not to create.

Yeah, but the creatives aren't the one making those decisions, as I understand it. If the creatives were the ones to call the shots we'd have less Call of Modern Honor and more Okami.

I sincerely doubt that the next Assassin's Creed got bankrolled because someone went "wow we could really do some innovative stuff here". It got greenlit because they can reuse 90% of the past 2 games and make a ton of cash. Maybe artist #35 is really excited to reskin that tower for the nth time...but I doubt it.
 

sunnysideup

Banned
Young people are lazy, they don't want to work hard but expect to be paid. If you get into a specific industry where long hours and hard work is the norm. Then do not complain because you have to work. Stop being a lazy

Why even get paid? Work hard and pay your employer. Stop being lazy.
 
Last edited:
D

Deleted member 775630

Unconfirmed Member
Isn't the problem that video games are too cheap? The reason why there is crunch is purely a business, money reason. If you don't crunch, you won't finish the game on time, if the game isn't finished on time, well then we don't have the money to pay everyone. So just increase game prices, and give the developers a break.
 

GHG

Gold Member
Or just delay them?

Sometimes a delay happens because more crunch is needed.

In a lot of cases deadlines exist purely to draw a line under a product, if not the vast majority of software developers out there will continue working on a project deep into the realm of diminishing returns, especially if it is a project they care about.

You will never hear a software dev say they shipped the "perfect" product. They will know about all the flaws that got covered up in clever and creative ways, they will know about all the features that had to be cut for time/budget purposes, they will know about all (well, not all but most of the) the bugs that the project shipped with.

What it boils down to is the fact that everyone who makes these things has a different definition of "good enough". As an example in the gaming industry, there's the Bethesda Game Studios "good enough" and then there's the CDPR "good enough".
 
Last edited:
I work from 8am to 5pm generally. And I work long hours when a project is nearing completion. Long hours is just part of engineering. I knew what I was getting myself into.
But why? Even if I work on a project that I really love, I'd still wouldn't do long hours, because it's not my company, in the end you're working for some company.
I prefer my sanity and family over some false sense of acomplishment. In the end, you didn't achieve anything and it's not yours, it's the company's you work for.
But maybe we're just different.
 
Last edited:

GHG

Gold Member
Long hours are generally an American thing.

They really aren't.

PaulsChart.png
 
D

Deleted member 775630

Unconfirmed Member
But why? Even if I work on a project that I really love, I'd still wouldn't do long hours, because it's not my company, in the end you're working for some company.
I prefer my sanity and family over some false sense of accomplishment. In the end, you didn't achieve anything and it's not yours, it's the company's you work for.
But maybe we're just different.
Why do you call it a false sense of accomplishment? If the product or service you have created really has an impact, then you've actually accomplished something. The fact that it's the name of the company associated to the accomplishment and not your own is more of a vanity issue on your end. If you and the people around you know that it's you that helped build it, then isn't that accomplishment enough?

But I do agree that this is different for everyone, if you don't really care about what you are doing or the impact it might have, well then there's no reason to do long hours if you can spent time with family & friends.
 

GHG

Gold Member
But why? Even if I work on a project that I really love, I'd still wouldn't do long hours, because it's not my company, in the end you're working for some company.
I prefer my sanity and family over some false sense of acomplishment. In the end, you didn't achieve anything and it's not yours, it's the company's you work for.
But maybe we're just different.

If it's a project that you love then you just do it. If you love a project you also wouldn't see it as a "false sense of accomplishment", it would matter to you a lot more than that.

I get where you're coming from and that's why I stopped working for other people and went out there on my own. But you shouldn't underestimate the number of people out there who can be really passionate about the work that they do, even if they technically have no legal right to it.
 

KiNeMz

Banned
I work in IT and have been involved in a lot of large enterprise scale projects in the past. Even in IT with a set project and PM team, all the preparation and planning in the world doesn't get the project across the line when planned. There are always unforeseen circumstances even when the best of the best are involved. Now on top of that I always have to work that extra amount after hours all night to get some system back online before start of business or due to some huge critical failure. Thats the perseverance I place in my job. Its what I strive for and love and makes me tick. I for sure could say nope at 5pm I clock.But I know the amount of experience and knowledge I have learnt has excelled me in my career and m expertise.

Now i cant imagine throwing in the aspect of creativity into the mix of a project. Thats just throws expected deadlines out the window. You can plan all you want but if something doesn't work and it has to be changed, modified that can be hugely expensive in cost, time,hours. Now add that to a triple A studio who re now managing over 500 employees. You have big ship to turn, money is burning, management needs to be adjusted, expectations changed. This takes time. It makes sense to push this kind of work across the globe so it follows the daylight. You can now have people working 24 hours a day on it across the globe as the sun sets.

Im sure management of this kind of work will improve as the skill sets improve across the globe, but at the end of the day you want your best people involved at some stage and they may need to sacrifice. great things come from sacrifice. Agree with you Mr Jaffe. Its not for everyone but let people who want to do do it. Unionization will just raise the cost of games by 30-40 %, make them take an extra 40% longer and send majority of studios out of business.

You just gained a SUB sir.
 
Last edited:

DunDunDunpachi

Patient MembeR
I think there's an argument to be had in favor of unionizing, but the ones doing the arguing obviously just want the power and influence. No coincidence that the same journos who push this modern ideology stuff and pushed the gamergate boogeyman want to transition into roles as union reps and union-friendly reporters. Watch it happen just like the shills mysteriously found their way into marketing and community positions at Microsoft and Sony...
 

nkarafo

Member
They really aren't.

PaulsChart.png
As a Greek myself i can confirm this. It's the worst country in Europe to work in. And for giving up your personal life you only get like 3 or 4 euros/hour wage.

I also love the irony in this list, with Germany being at the bottom of the list and their press being the one that created the "Greeks are lazy" meme.
 
Last edited:
Young people are lazy, they don't want to work hard but expect to be paid. If you get into a specific industry where long hours and hard work is the norm. Then do not complain because you have to work. Stop being a lazy

Utter nonsense mate. You do realize that there aren't enough decent jobs anymore, and that the few ones there are are pretty shit? This has nothing to do with being "lazy". Young people have enough problems to deal with; there is a housing shortage, as well as debt lots of em have to deal with because of their studies. Being young in this day and age is not the same thing I grew up as i.e. having less things to worry about.

You can thank the neoliberal economic system for disgruntled young people, a system where people need to keep their heads above the water to stay alive.
 

saber45

Neo Member
Do you think the people doing the overtime should be paid Dave? Right now all the people I know in the industry (including myself) don't get paid anything for overtime/crunch.

You can argue that the hours are needed but I cant see how the hell you can argue that people shouldn't be properly remunerated for their work.
 

dDoc

Member
Young people are lazy, they don't want to work hard but expect to be paid. If you get into a specific industry where long hours and hard work is the norm. Then do not complain because you have to work. Stop being a lazy

We have been told that devs at the lower end of the ladder are made to put in extra hours without the due reward. If this is correct, how is this fair for these devs? How many millions did the bros working at Rockstar receive for shipping RDR2? And the guys at the bottom of the food chain got zilch? Small bonus? Cant the peeps in charge who make bank distribute the wealth a bit better?
 

dDoc

Member
Most people don't get into these types of industries just to churn out the same thing over and over and over again just for a paycheck, it's disheartening and demoralising.

Ass Creed, COD and many other AAA titles say hi
 

davidjaffe

The Fucking MAN.
Do you think the people doing the overtime should be paid Dave? Right now all the people I know in the industry (including myself) don't get paid anything for overtime/crunch.

You can argue that the hours are needed but I cant see how the hell you can argue that people shouldn't be properly remunerated for their work.


SHOULD they? That would be great. But SHOULD? I THINK if you make under 36K USD then you MUST get overtime even if you are salaried. Beyond that?

I mean, at that point, only if you entered the job as a salaried employee and they promised you more money if you went beyond X hours/week. But if you are salaried (and make beyond the $ threshold) it is not your employers obligation to pay overtime.

Is it the moral thing to do? Man, that's hard to say because the salary is guaranteed, it comes w/benefits and- ideally- a bonus(es) if the products do well. I am not saying that is acceptable to you (or anyone else) but that's the agreement you enter into when you are salaried and join a company (and you ((within reason)) should- based on your own due diligence- know if the game dev you've joined is a crunchy one). It's certainly shittyif you don't get OT if you are salaried and ideally there's a solve but if you enter into the agreement of your own free will, it's hard to act as if your employer is in the wrong. It DOES suck tho if you find yourself working well beyond 9 to 5 and you don't feel- in at least SOME way- that it's worth it to you.
 
Last edited:

davidjaffe

The Fucking MAN.
We have been told that devs at the lower end of the ladder are made to put in extra hours without the due reward. If this is correct, how is this fair for these devs? How many millions did the bros working at Rockstar receive for shipping RDR2? And the guys at the bottom of the food chain got zilch? Small bonus? Cant the peeps in charge who make bank distribute the wealth a bit better?

Could they? Sure.

And some do. Sony was always VERY generous with us. But I worked with lots of people who- before they came to Sony- never made a DIME even tho they were key players on hit games. And that is shit.

But those companies are not obligated- in most cases- to share the wealth (beyond your agreed upon salary,etc.)

Nice thing there is: paying out real bonus cash based on success and merit is a great way to compete with other companies who are trying to attract the best in the biz. A company that can show they actually share the wealth is very attractive to people trying to decide which game company to join.
 

saber45

Neo Member
SHOULD they? That would be great. But SHOULD? I THINK if you make under 36K USD then you MUST get overtime even if you are salaried. Beyond that?

I mean, at that point, only if you entered the job as a salaried employee and they promised you more money if you went beyond X hours/week. But if you are salaried (and make beyond the $ threshold) it is not your employers obligation to pay overtime.

Is it the moral thing to do? Man, that's hard to say because the salary is guaranteed, it comes w/benefits and- ideally- a bonus(es) if the products do well. I am not saying that is acceptable to you (or anyone else) but that's the agreement you enter into when you are salaried and join a company (and you ((within reason)) should- based on your own due diligence- know if the game dev you've joined is a crunchy one). It's certainly shittyif you don't get OT if you are salaried and ideally there's a solve but if you enter into the agreement of your own free will, it's hard to act as if your employer is in the wrong. It DOES suck tho if you find yourself working well beyond 9 to 5 and you don't feel- in at least SOME way- that it's worth it to you.

The trouble is that when you really want in to the industry then you'll accept these conditions (no OT pay etc) and not think about it until later. Theres no protection right now to stop companies exploiting less experienced members of staff by making them crunch because that was the only job they got a response from HR for so they weren't able to pick between a position with crunch and one without.
 

dDoc

Member
And some do. Sony was always VERY generous with us. But I worked with lots of people who- before they came to Sony- never made a DIME even tho they were key players on hit games. And that is shit.

Sony for the win :)

So my point stands, devs at the lower end of the food chain can be expected to put in long hours without due compensation. This is one of the issues of crunch.
 
Last edited:
Top Bottom