4 ms·

This is just capitalism at work; in the game industry there is no guaranteed reward at the end of the development cycle, so you have to keep up the pressure in

This is just capitalism at work; in the game industry there is no guaranteed reward at the end of the development cycle, so you have to keep up the pressure in order to beat out your competitors, and increase your chances of winning. This leads to crunching, 60 hour weeks and mass layoffs when you lose - lookup any of the top AAA game companies on Glassdoor and you will find they are awful places to work (Projekt Red, Rockstar, the now extinct Crytek, EA - consistently voted 'Worst Company', etc).

staticelf 9y ago
Looked up several of the companies you mention and most of them have a pretty high ratings. EA is voted worst company by consumers, not by employees which is pretty misleading. Please stop lying.
- hacker_9 9y ago
  I'm not lying, read the actual reviews and don't just look at the review score. The good reviews come from people who don't mind working 60 hour weeks, being paid lower salaries, and getting overworked.
  - staticelf 9y ago
    I dont have an account so I can only see 1 review for each company. But it is a bit strange to say that only some reviews count and not the others. Of course most people care if you're being overworked for a small amount of compensation. Your statement is a bit ridicolous.
    - hacker_9 9y ago
      I'm not going to argue as I see you're trolling, but it takes 2 seconds to sign in and read the reviews. Most good reviews from Projekt Red for example are from full time employees who say they love working there, but then list cons such as: 'Economically things can get tough due to lower salaries' and 'I would not recommend this company for those who are not ready to push themselves and those who just want a 9 to 17h without any trouble.' etc.
      - staticelf 9y ago
        I'm not trolling but you cant take 1 company and have their reviews as "this is how it is in the entire industry". I don't want to sign in though, since that service offers nothing for me as a non american.
    - fnord123 9y ago
      >Of course most people care if you're being overworked for a small amount of compensation. Your statement is a bit ridicolous. And yet academia.
- dang 9y ago
  > Please stop lying. This breaks the HN guidelines. Please post civilly and substantively, or not at all.
dkersten 9y ago
> in the game industry there is no guaranteed reward at the end of the development cycle The same is true for any product industry. There are things you can do (customer development, short iterations that involve your potential customers, etc) to increase the chances, but if you're not doing work for clients directly, then there is no guarantee. Note that the "doing work for clients directly" exists in game development too, there are many freelance or services companies that do work for other companies, and from what I hear about the game industry, these have much more guaranteed pay, just like outside of games. Its the "build the product, when its done, hope someone buys it" type of work that has no guarantees, but that is in no way unique to game development. The difference is, most other industries don't have such crazy crunch times...
- hacker_9 9y ago
  Yeah I agree, the problem applies to most of the entertainment industry. As a result more investment is put into sequels of successful games, artists, TV shows, movies, books etc. Edit: as for crunch times, I expect this is to do with the interactive element of gaming. There is whole lot more work involved when the client has the ability to break your product.
  - 0xcde4c3db 9y ago
    My understanding is that crunch time (as well as the release of flagrantly buggy games with patches coming later) is driven primarily by marketing schedules/budgets. Ad buys, press releases, interviews etc. are negotiated and coordinated months in advance, and big releases from any given publisher need to be staggered largely so that they don't all demand marketing money at the same time.
  - cma 9y ago
    Publishers give advances, have milestones, etc. It is uncertain whether a game will make money out in the market, but part of a publisher's role is supposed to be to have a portfolio and be able to spread that risk, funding some of the development of both the losers and the winners.
- Retric 9y ago
skocznymroczny 9y ago
EA isn't voted worst company for their working conditions. They're not even that voted for the quality/popularity of their games (games like Battlefront or Battlefield still sell very well). It's just a recognisable brand that people like to criticise, and that makes it an easy target for organized voting. Ubisoft is also in that category.
- bsenftner 9y ago
  I could argue that - years at EA, and their abuse.
  - falcolas 9y ago
    Indeed. The fact that EA was successfully sued for overtime pay for salaried devs speaks volumes, both about their pay and the working conditions.
- BatFastard 9y ago
  That's because game devs don't know what life is like for other programmers. Longer hours and lower pay, but you get to work on what you love (every blue moon or so).

staticelf 9y ago

Looked up several of the companies you mention and most of them have a pretty high ratings. EA is voted worst company by consumers, not by employees which is pretty misleading. Please stop lying.

hacker_9 9y ago
I'm not lying, read the actual reviews and don't just look at the review score. The good reviews come from people who don't mind working 60 hour weeks, being paid lower salaries, and getting overworked.
- staticelf 9y ago
  I dont have an account so I can only see 1 review for each company. But it is a bit strange to say that only some reviews count and not the others. Of course most people care if you're being overworked for a small amount of compensation. Your statement is a bit ridicolous.
  - hacker_9 9y ago
    I'm not going to argue as I see you're trolling, but it takes 2 seconds to sign in and read the reviews. Most good reviews from Projekt Red for example are from full time employees who say they love working there, but then list cons such as: 'Economically things can get tough due to lower salaries' and 'I would not recommend this company for those who are not ready to push themselves and those who just want a 9 to 17h without any trouble.' etc.
    - staticelf 9y ago
      I'm not trolling but you cant take 1 company and have their reviews as "this is how it is in the entire industry". I don't want to sign in though, since that service offers nothing for me as a non american.
  - fnord123 9y ago
    >Of course most people care if you're being overworked for a small amount of compensation. Your statement is a bit ridicolous. And yet academia.
dang 9y ago
> Please stop lying. This breaks the HN guidelines. Please post civilly and substantively, or not at all.

dkersten 9y ago

> in the game industry there is no guaranteed reward at the end of the development cycle The same is true for any product industry. There are things you can do (customer development, short iterations that involve your potential customers, etc) to increase the chances, but if you're not doing work for clients directly, then there is no guarantee. Note that the "doing work for clients directly" exists in game development too, there are many freelance or services companies that do work for other companies, and from what I hear about the game industry, these have much more guaranteed pay, just like outside of games. Its the "build the product, when its done, hope someone buys it" type of work that has no guarantees, but that is in no way unique to game development. The difference is, most other industries don't have such crazy crunch times...

hacker_9 9y ago
Yeah I agree, the problem applies to most of the entertainment industry. As a result more investment is put into sequels of successful games, artists, TV shows, movies, books etc. Edit: as for crunch times, I expect this is to do with the interactive element of gaming. There is whole lot more work involved when the client has the ability to break your product.
- 0xcde4c3db 9y ago
  My understanding is that crunch time (as well as the release of flagrantly buggy games with patches coming later) is driven primarily by marketing schedules/budgets. Ad buys, press releases, interviews etc. are negotiated and coordinated months in advance, and big releases from any given publisher need to be staggered largely so that they don't all demand marketing money at the same time.
- cma 9y ago
  Publishers give advances, have milestones, etc. It is uncertain whether a game will make money out in the market, but part of a publisher's role is supposed to be to have a portfolio and be able to spread that risk, funding some of the development of both the losers and the winners.
Retric 9y ago

skocznymroczny 9y ago

EA isn't voted worst company for their working conditions. They're not even that voted for the quality/popularity of their games (games like Battlefront or Battlefield still sell very well). It's just a recognisable brand that people like to criticise, and that makes it an easy target for organized voting. Ubisoft is also in that category.

bsenftner 9y ago
I could argue that - years at EA, and their abuse.
- falcolas 9y ago
  Indeed. The fact that EA was successfully sued for overtime pay for salaried devs speaks volumes, both about their pay and the working conditions.
BatFastard 9y ago
That's because game devs don't know what life is like for other programmers. Longer hours and lower pay, but you get to work on what you love (every blue moon or so).