5 ms·

Been there, done that, got the t-shirt. Once with a 6 months crunch, second time closer to 10 months of 14 hour days. That was enough for me to swear off the en

Been there, done that, got the t-shirt. Once with a 6 months crunch, second time closer to 10 months of 14 hour days. That was enough for me to swear off the entire industry despite working towards it for most of my younger life. Saw it what it did to our team, destroyed multiple relationships, the product suffered for it and overall both titles we're a disaster. It cuts in more than one way, aside from some really rare cases the industry compensation is abysmal compared to traditional software engineering. I basically doubled my take home salary leaving the industry while also having a sane work life balance. Rami Ismail of Nuclear Throne sums is up well[1]: > In these situations we don't even expect everyone to get through unscathed. It's like management calculates the amount of churn, of burnout, of careers, relations, happiness that will be lost and goes "well, that's not too big a sacrifice to undo the damage of our incompetence". Fuck em. They deserve nothing for putting a team through hell like that. Chances are they aren't the ones to pay for the damage their crunch does in the end. [1] https://mobile.twitter.com/tha_rami/status/1335698820970254337 https://mobile.twitter.com/tha_rami/status/13356988209702543...

xwdv 6y ago
Imagine talking an overworked employee out of blowing his own brains out, so he can at least finish the work he has left to do and then you can lay him off. That’s the game industry.
dathinab 6y ago
I did crunch time once. (In my case ironically I was the problem, it was fully unnecessary and no one but me involved). Thinks I learned from it: - It's very daunting. - It's quite bad for your health, especially your mental health. - It's bad for productivity. Which means it's a fatal cycle: you do crunch time => because of stress and exhaustion you are less productive => you need to do even more crunch because you where not productive enough. - It's bad for quality. Sure all your tests pass and the many problem(s) seems fixed, but there is a good chance that you will have to pay extra in the long run due to technical dept or just sub-optimal design. - It's bad for creativity. I could more than one time majorly reduce my work by just reflecting on what is actually needed (in difference to what seems to be needed, is asked for by your team lead (i.e. not your customer)). The chance for this to happen under crunch is continuously decreasing with increasing frequency of crunch. - EDIT: Because of the last 3 points, it's bad for getting things done in time as they will likely take longer on a "work done per hour" scalar.
- musicale 6y ago
  Yeah, I don't know why companies do it because it is so counterproductive and damaging: it reduces quality and increases time to completion while harming employee health. Very brief crunches can maybe push you over a deadline but will (in my experience) result in lower overall productivity per hour (and higher defect rates) for the entire crunch + recovery interval. Which seems to mean do a two week crunch and then fire your developers, but replacing them is usually more costly than recovery time. It probably isn't a coincidence that universities often have two week final exam/final project periods followed by two (or more) weeks of vacation.
Exmoor 6y ago
I did some game testing when I was a teenager (paid in free software). A couple nights playing a game that either sucked or just wasn't my cup of tea was enough to show me that playing games was a lot better than working on games. Anytime I hear a young person say they want to be a game developer I want to grab them by the shoulders and try to shakes some sense into them. If you're smart enough to do game development, you're probably smart enough to go make twice as much to work half as hard somewhere else. You can go work your 8 hour day, and play whatever game you want the rest of the night. Or do something completely different.
ksec 6y ago
Sorry for derailing the discussion a little bit. Is this everyone including Graphics designers? Not just developers? Why are the economics of Gaming so not aligned? The cost of making Games are going up YoY. Revenue and Profits seems to be up too. We have better middleware like Unreal than ever before, and yet the cost keep going up but not salary. And it seems Nintendo doesn't have any of these problem. Someone please explain to me like I am five.
- caenn 6y ago
  Very large of supply of young people who really want to work in games as a thing in of itself. As opposed to the standard software industry where, at least to my experience, most people spend quite some time thinking about the money they'll make.
  - AndrewOMartin 6y ago
    Yep this. It's fundamental supply and demand economics. It happens in any sector that's perceived to be fun or attractive. See also 'work for exposure' in photography and music. It seems to me that the on the opposite end of the scale you have Database administrator. Pretty much all non-trivial software projects need databases, their proper administration is absolutely essential, and it's the least sexy sounding role in a software team. My (completely untested, and semi-serious) career advice is to read a reference manual for a database like PostgreSQL cover to cover.
- meibo 6y ago
  Nintendo is also a very closed company with strongly and carefully regulated PR. We don't really know a lot about their process, but considering a lot of their games are made in Japan and what has been said in the past, there is guaranteed to be crunch there as well. People sleeping in their offices for days on end before shipping a game, etc.
raxxorrax 6y ago
I had a different experience. Worked at a startup, money was tight and the product had to be developed. It was stressful, but it felt great after it was done. Granted, I wouldn't necessarily try it again and not for a large corporation to that level, but I think this is typical for any R&D project, maybe software in particular. It is just difficult to determine how long things will take in the end. I think it is great they did change the release date and not cut corners. We did get a lot of free time in exchange after crunch and I think there has to be appreciation. I am sure developers are looking to a relaxed Christmas in the end.
- mercer 6y ago
  Judging from the game they ended up cutting corners all over the place, to the point where it can be considered a faulty product or at the very least a case of false marketing. It's quite the mess!

xwdv 6y ago

Imagine talking an overworked employee out of blowing his own brains out, so he can at least finish the work he has left to do and then you can lay him off. That’s the game industry.

dathinab 6y ago

I did crunch time once. (In my case ironically I was the problem, it was fully unnecessary and no one but me involved). Thinks I learned from it: - It's very daunting. - It's quite bad for your health, especially your mental health. - It's bad for productivity. Which means it's a fatal cycle: you do crunch time => because of stress and exhaustion you are less productive => you need to do even more crunch because you where not productive enough. - It's bad for quality. Sure all your tests pass and the many problem(s) seems fixed, but there is a good chance that you will have to pay extra in the long run due to technical dept or just sub-optimal design. - It's bad for creativity. I could more than one time majorly reduce my work by just reflecting on what is actually needed (in difference to what seems to be needed, is asked for by your team lead (i.e. not your customer)). The chance for this to happen under crunch is continuously decreasing with increasing frequency of crunch. - EDIT: Because of the last 3 points, it's bad for getting things done in time as they will likely take longer on a "work done per hour" scalar.

musicale 6y ago
Yeah, I don't know why companies do it because it is so counterproductive and damaging: it reduces quality and increases time to completion while harming employee health. Very brief crunches can maybe push you over a deadline but will (in my experience) result in lower overall productivity per hour (and higher defect rates) for the entire crunch + recovery interval. Which seems to mean do a two week crunch and then fire your developers, but replacing them is usually more costly than recovery time. It probably isn't a coincidence that universities often have two week final exam/final project periods followed by two (or more) weeks of vacation.

Exmoor 6y ago

I did some game testing when I was a teenager (paid in free software). A couple nights playing a game that either sucked or just wasn't my cup of tea was enough to show me that playing games was a lot better than working on games. Anytime I hear a young person say they want to be a game developer I want to grab them by the shoulders and try to shakes some sense into them. If you're smart enough to do game development, you're probably smart enough to go make twice as much to work half as hard somewhere else. You can go work your 8 hour day, and play whatever game you want the rest of the night. Or do something completely different.

ksec 6y ago

Sorry for derailing the discussion a little bit. Is this everyone including Graphics designers? Not just developers? Why are the economics of Gaming so not aligned? The cost of making Games are going up YoY. Revenue and Profits seems to be up too. We have better middleware like Unreal than ever before, and yet the cost keep going up but not salary. And it seems Nintendo doesn't have any of these problem. Someone please explain to me like I am five.

caenn 6y ago
Very large of supply of young people who really want to work in games as a thing in of itself. As opposed to the standard software industry where, at least to my experience, most people spend quite some time thinking about the money they'll make.
- AndrewOMartin 6y ago
  Yep this. It's fundamental supply and demand economics. It happens in any sector that's perceived to be fun or attractive. See also 'work for exposure' in photography and music. It seems to me that the on the opposite end of the scale you have Database administrator. Pretty much all non-trivial software projects need databases, their proper administration is absolutely essential, and it's the least sexy sounding role in a software team. My (completely untested, and semi-serious) career advice is to read a reference manual for a database like PostgreSQL cover to cover.
meibo 6y ago
Nintendo is also a very closed company with strongly and carefully regulated PR. We don't really know a lot about their process, but considering a lot of their games are made in Japan and what has been said in the past, there is guaranteed to be crunch there as well. People sleeping in their offices for days on end before shipping a game, etc.

raxxorrax 6y ago

I had a different experience. Worked at a startup, money was tight and the product had to be developed. It was stressful, but it felt great after it was done. Granted, I wouldn't necessarily try it again and not for a large corporation to that level, but I think this is typical for any R&D project, maybe software in particular. It is just difficult to determine how long things will take in the end. I think it is great they did change the release date and not cut corners. We did get a lot of free time in exchange after crunch and I think there has to be appreciation. I am sure developers are looking to a relaxed Christmas in the end.

mercer 6y ago
Judging from the game they ended up cutting corners all over the place, to the point where it can be considered a faulty product or at the very least a case of false marketing. It's quite the mess!