3 ms·
Games companies aren’t ignoring this, many companies have no crunch policies and try to make work-life balance a priority. I’ve done zero crunch in the last dec
by meheleventyone 5y ago
Games companies aren’t ignoring this, many companies have no crunch policies and try to make work-life balance a priority. I’ve done zero crunch in the last decade working in games.
There are still people that don’t approach things rationally though. And there are ignorant people who get funding that run their teams extremely badly. There are also “evil” people who think crunch is necessary (forged through adversity etc) to make a good product.
I’ve heard more stories of long working weeks from tech startups than I have games recently. Loads of people posting here seem to regularly clock in long working weeks when the topic comes up.
- eru 5y agoOK. But why haven't the 'good' companies out-competed the 'bad' ones yet, if as fao_ says the benefits are so enormous?
- fao_ 5y agoExisting games companies were founded early in the industry and have the money and existing capital to leverage on PR, tooling, staff, etc. They also have a constantly influx of non-burned-out people, mostly interns, who want a Big Company on their CV. Whereas smaller companies are able to create good games, but can't throw people at problems in the same way. Worth noting that it's mostly only specific teams of developers that get treated as disposable, and not the marketing staff, HR, or other executive branches.
- meheleventyone 5y agoI've not seen any study that shows what's happening so the answer to that is that I don't even know that they aren't outcompeting the bad ones. There is simply no information about that I've seen. I'd think though that the factors affecting the success of a company is very complex and to boil it down to one point is insufficient when talking about competition within the multiple markets that comprise 'games'.