5 ms·

I think it is mostly just margins. Sure there are lots of people willing to work for no very little money for game dev but I would say there are tons of people

by agentgt 4mo ago

I think it is mostly just margins. Sure there are lots of people willing to work for no very little money for game dev but I would say there are tons of people willing to work for very little money for FAANG companies because they want that on their resume. In fact since we are on hackernews that is kind of thing people wanting to be entrepreneurs do. Work at recognizable big tech company for a few years. Leave to be a founder of a startup. Investors ... well that guy came from google they must know what they are doing etc (the irony is they probably have less of the skills to start a company going that path).

yCombLinks 4mo ago
They want it on their resume primarily to make more money and have a better career in terms of getting hired, etc. Very different motivation. They'd only work at a FAANG for free long enough to get that bump. Game devs however would work for many years underpaid because they like what they're creating.
- agentgt 4mo ago
  ~~Perhaps now especially since these companies are predominately hiring oversees contractors but circa 2009-2015 when I was around entrepreneurs and startups this was discussed.~~ ~~Ultimately the goal is the same: make more money. So I disagree the motivation is "very different" its just a lot harder now to do a startup.~~ You kept editing your comment so disregard the above. I misread it the first time and then it changed. I left my response thats makes no sense now.
  - yCombLinks 4mo ago
    Sorry, I didn't make the point I was aiming for initially
    - agentgt 4mo ago
      Your new point is excellent btw. I should have considered that. I also hope it doesn't sound like I don't care for these developers who are being taken advantage of. They should be compensated fairly for their work. EDIT I should add why I think it is a great point especially since I make recruiting software. The greatest increases in salary for most people is done by switching companies or jobs. If you don't want to leave the company because you really like what you do it would skew it so that salaries are lower.
- deanCommie 4mo ago
  You're not wrong, but it's also so sad. FAANG used to be the _dream_. Change the world. Work on groundbreaking tech. Solve harder problems than anywhere else. Get Paid incredibly well. Then I guess a generation focused exclusively on that last part flooded the zone. I still believe that The Great Resignation of 2021 did more harm to our industry than COVID or any interest rate or VC changes. It polluted the brains of most of the people in our industry from a missionary mindset to a mercenary, and it decimated big company's established cultural memory all to prop up a bunch of unicorns who will probably all slowly die over the next decade. So now half of the people can't get a job, and the half that can are miserable. This was true BEFORE AI.
  - wahnfrieden 4mo ago
    Interesting choice to blame FAANG demise on its workers
    - zem 4mo ago
      I was going to post a more extended rant but really yeah, this says it all
    - nixon_why69 4mo ago
      Its not like the CEOs unilaterally said "we want to suck now". It's the cumulative effect of many people optimizing for the promotion process within the company and then coaching their mentees to do the same.
      - keybored 4mo ago
        Are not the CEOs responsible for cumulative/emergent effects?
        nixon_why69 4mo ago
        They should be but its very hard. It's a culture and you can't exactly order a chain of command that grew into it and hold all the levers to just he different. I'm not lionizing Sundar Pichai here, just saying the cumulative attitudes of 10k L7/L8 is really what sets the culture.
- tcfhgj 4mo ago
  sounds very much like open source maintainers too
Negitivefrags 4mo ago
People haven’t responded to your very first point, and I want to really stress it because I don’t think most people really get it. Margins. Game development doesn’t pay more because game development companies can’t afford to pay more. Sure, an individual game dev company may make a lot due to the hit driven nature of the field, but the totality of the market simply makes less money per developer than big tech does. In order for that to change, the market has to increase in size by appealing to a more casual audience, or existing gamers have to pay more. Not something I think most gamers would like. And these are the people who the workforce of game developers form from.
- appreciatorBus 4mo ago
  > In order for that to change, the market has to increase in size by appealing to a more casual audience, or existing gamers have to pay more. The fun part of all this is that when union demands start forcing the industry in the opposite direction - higher cost, higher prices, smaller market. In a sane world, we would connect this, but in this world, we will just blame management. The union will forever have an invincible PR shield no matter how crazy the demand.
  - andybak 4mo ago
    In what world are unions never criticised? I'm in the UK and they are often reviled in the press and among people who don't work in a unionised sector. America has an even stronger tradition of anti-union feeling (maybe partly due to historic links between unions and organised crime but also because the US has often had a stronger collectivisation than most European countries - consider that the political centre in the US would be considered into right wing in most Western countries on most issues)
  - Scaled 4mo ago
    While I fundamentally agree with the concern about unions raising costs in a market where most titles cannot absorb them, GTA/Rockstar definitely can. Especially since the union is fighting for basic quality of life like no crunch instead of (for now at least) increased pay. I am generally not prounion but crunch -- especially at studios that are guaranteed to be profitable (GTA) -- needs to be curbed.
fny 4mo ago
You have the causality inverted. People want big tech on their resume because it makes them look qualified. People with top qualifications work at big tech because of pay. If low quality engineers worked in big tech, it wouldn't be a coveted qualification.
- agentgt 4mo ago
  The causality of what? I'm probably missing something obvious here. The cause of people getting paid less in game development I said has to do with margins (although I now think there is more to it than that). > People want big tech on their resume because it makes them look qualified. I think I said that? > People with top qualifications work at big tech because of pay. Actually I am not sure if that is true. I think top qualification people work at these places because of other reasons than just money. I'm talking Carmack working at Facebook for example is because of more possibilities and less the pay. Like FB is we have this really smart team for you and this tech for you and you can make your own products etc. After all there is academia and that mostly pays shit and plenty of qualified people there. > If low quality engineers worked in big tech, it wouldn't be a coveted qualification. And I think that is probably happening more now. The 10x developer was kind of a myth. More people for less money these days particularly with AI is becoming more of the norm.
  - cloverich 4mo ago
    Carmack level folks are the exception. the vast majority of faang interest is money. In fact if youve been in dev long enough, youd see even the makeup of the tyipical eng has changed, there are quite a few normies in the field these days, many of whom im not sure even like coding at all. Its seen as a reliably high paying field worth steering towards regardless of interest. It has lately reminded me of the kinds of people id see in medicine. smart, capable, not particularly interested in the field as such.
cloverich 4mo ago
begs the question why there is a good supply of eng on low margin business though, given the skills transfer cleanly to higher margin businesses.

by agentgt 4mo ago

yCombLinks 4mo ago

They want it on their resume primarily to make more money and have a better career in terms of getting hired, etc. Very different motivation. They'd only work at a FAANG for free long enough to get that bump. Game devs however would work for many years underpaid because they like what they're creating.

agentgt 4mo ago
~~Perhaps now especially since these companies are predominately hiring oversees contractors but circa 2009-2015 when I was around entrepreneurs and startups this was discussed.~~ ~~Ultimately the goal is the same: make more money. So I disagree the motivation is "very different" its just a lot harder now to do a startup.~~ You kept editing your comment so disregard the above. I misread it the first time and then it changed. I left my response thats makes no sense now.
- yCombLinks 4mo ago
  Sorry, I didn't make the point I was aiming for initially
  - agentgt 4mo ago
    Your new point is excellent btw. I should have considered that. I also hope it doesn't sound like I don't care for these developers who are being taken advantage of. They should be compensated fairly for their work. EDIT I should add why I think it is a great point especially since I make recruiting software. The greatest increases in salary for most people is done by switching companies or jobs. If you don't want to leave the company because you really like what you do it would skew it so that salaries are lower.
deanCommie 4mo ago
You're not wrong, but it's also so sad. FAANG used to be the _dream_. Change the world. Work on groundbreaking tech. Solve harder problems than anywhere else. Get Paid incredibly well. Then I guess a generation focused exclusively on that last part flooded the zone. I still believe that The Great Resignation of 2021 did more harm to our industry than COVID or any interest rate or VC changes. It polluted the brains of most of the people in our industry from a missionary mindset to a mercenary, and it decimated big company's established cultural memory all to prop up a bunch of unicorns who will probably all slowly die over the next decade. So now half of the people can't get a job, and the half that can are miserable. This was true BEFORE AI.
- wahnfrieden 4mo ago
  Interesting choice to blame FAANG demise on its workers
  - zem 4mo ago
    I was going to post a more extended rant but really yeah, this says it all
  - nixon_why69 4mo ago
    Its not like the CEOs unilaterally said "we want to suck now". It's the cumulative effect of many people optimizing for the promotion process within the company and then coaching their mentees to do the same.
    - keybored 4mo ago
      Are not the CEOs responsible for cumulative/emergent effects?
      - nixon_why69 4mo ago
        They should be but its very hard. It's a culture and you can't exactly order a chain of command that grew into it and hold all the levers to just he different. I'm not lionizing Sundar Pichai here, just saying the cumulative attitudes of 10k L7/L8 is really what sets the culture.
tcfhgj 4mo ago
sounds very much like open source maintainers too

Negitivefrags 4mo ago

People haven’t responded to your very first point, and I want to really stress it because I don’t think most people really get it. Margins. Game development doesn’t pay more because game development companies can’t afford to pay more. Sure, an individual game dev company may make a lot due to the hit driven nature of the field, but the totality of the market simply makes less money per developer than big tech does. In order for that to change, the market has to increase in size by appealing to a more casual audience, or existing gamers have to pay more. Not something I think most gamers would like. And these are the people who the workforce of game developers form from.

appreciatorBus 4mo ago
> In order for that to change, the market has to increase in size by appealing to a more casual audience, or existing gamers have to pay more. The fun part of all this is that when union demands start forcing the industry in the opposite direction - higher cost, higher prices, smaller market. In a sane world, we would connect this, but in this world, we will just blame management. The union will forever have an invincible PR shield no matter how crazy the demand.
- andybak 4mo ago
  In what world are unions never criticised? I'm in the UK and they are often reviled in the press and among people who don't work in a unionised sector. America has an even stronger tradition of anti-union feeling (maybe partly due to historic links between unions and organised crime but also because the US has often had a stronger collectivisation than most European countries - consider that the political centre in the US would be considered into right wing in most Western countries on most issues)
- Scaled 4mo ago
  While I fundamentally agree with the concern about unions raising costs in a market where most titles cannot absorb them, GTA/Rockstar definitely can. Especially since the union is fighting for basic quality of life like no crunch instead of (for now at least) increased pay. I am generally not prounion but crunch -- especially at studios that are guaranteed to be profitable (GTA) -- needs to be curbed.

fny 4mo ago

You have the causality inverted. People want big tech on their resume because it makes them look qualified. People with top qualifications work at big tech because of pay. If low quality engineers worked in big tech, it wouldn't be a coveted qualification.

agentgt 4mo ago
The causality of what? I'm probably missing something obvious here. The cause of people getting paid less in game development I said has to do with margins (although I now think there is more to it than that). > People want big tech on their resume because it makes them look qualified. I think I said that? > People with top qualifications work at big tech because of pay. Actually I am not sure if that is true. I think top qualification people work at these places because of other reasons than just money. I'm talking Carmack working at Facebook for example is because of more possibilities and less the pay. Like FB is we have this really smart team for you and this tech for you and you can make your own products etc. After all there is academia and that mostly pays shit and plenty of qualified people there. > If low quality engineers worked in big tech, it wouldn't be a coveted qualification. And I think that is probably happening more now. The 10x developer was kind of a myth. More people for less money these days particularly with AI is becoming more of the norm.
- cloverich 4mo ago
  Carmack level folks are the exception. the vast majority of faang interest is money. In fact if youve been in dev long enough, youd see even the makeup of the tyipical eng has changed, there are quite a few normies in the field these days, many of whom im not sure even like coding at all. Its seen as a reliably high paying field worth steering towards regardless of interest. It has lately reminded me of the kinds of people id see in medicine. smart, capable, not particularly interested in the field as such.

cloverich 4mo ago

begs the question why there is a good supply of eng on low margin business though, given the skills transfer cleanly to higher margin businesses.