Something went wrong. Try again later

Giant Bomb News

180 Comments

Guest Column: It's Time to Talk About Labor in the Games Industry

Guest Contributor Ian Williams makes the case for why we need to care about labor conditions in the game industry as much as we care about the games we love.

No Caption Provided

Whether inside or outside, you can look at the video game industry and see what looks to be a borderless boomtown. It makes millions, when taken as a whole, and it’s cool, or at least cool enough for ESPN to broadcast. But the industry is a weird place, where wealth lives on a knife’s edge. Where a wrong decision can send a studio into a death spiral, costing jobs and well-being, but a slight break the other way catapults a game into the stratosphere. It’s the edge of the tech sector, where the money available seems always on the verge of granting stability for everyone but never quite grasping that goal with any lasting firmness.

Here are the facts, in raw form. A video game worker averages 2.7 employers every five years. 48% of those unemployed are over a year looking for a job. Figures from 2014 show a layoff rate twice the national average. 62% of workers still crunch, with 17% of those working over 70 hours a week. 36% of those who work over 40 hours a week receive no extra compensation. And 44% of those who don’t crunch work well over 40 hours a week; they don’t even know that they’re crunching.

These facts do not change. They are there, year after year. We shake our heads. We tsk and say, “what a shame” and then forget. And then the next article comes out, with the same figures, a percentage change here and there. We reboot, reset our disappointment at the state of things, rekindle it, and then get lost in the next listicle or big title.

But the numbers above are those of a crisis. I know that it doesn’t really feel like a crisis, either inside the industry or out. It’s so big and loud and modern, with neon conventions and smiling producers rattling off marketing speak about how their next project is even bigger, louder, and more modern than ever before. How can this silly, garish thing we all love so much crush the people who create it?

Every time I write an article about games and labor, I get messages from people inside the industry stating how sick they are of it. How they want it—no, need it—to change. Every time. And my answer is always the same: I’m just a writer. These are the figures. Awareness is all I can contribute to.

I’ve become increasingly dissatisfied with that answer. Because, at this point, every media outlet has the same article quoting the same figures. It’s a semi-annual ritual for them (for us) to put up the results of the IGDA surveys, as I did at the outset of this article. We’re all aware now. It hasn’t helped.

So that’s what this article series is about. On a (hopefully) regular basis, I’ll pull a thread from the fraying fabric of the gaming industry. Some months it will be data driven, others a cultural analysis. We’ll see what unravels. And, hopefully, potential solutions will be mooted and discussed by the people in whose hands changing the industry lies: The folks actually making the games.

No Caption Provided

Here’s the thing. One of the common questions I’ve received over the past two years since I started writing about the industry and its labor practices is “how can I fix this?”

The answer, glib as it is, is that you—the singular you, the singular I—cannot fix it. But the plural you? The we? That group of people can definitely change it. That can take a lot of forms, forms this series will discuss at a thousand word a time clip, and I’m not coming into this with any preconceived notion of what the “right” form is. But I am sure as anything that it won’t be hoping it gets better through sheer dint of rugged individualism.

So why should you, the Giant Bomb reader, care? Well, because you love video games. And I love video games. Jeff and Austin and Alex and Vinny and everyone else at Giant Bomb love video games.

Loving video games should mean more than just enjoying playing them. We should take an interest in and care about the welfare of those who make them. Because it’s a lot of people. We still have this idea that games are Will Wright in a garage with three buddies coding SimCity, but that’s not what it is. Where it was once a handful of people crunching, it’s now hundreds, thousands when teased out over the entire industry. It is industry. That’s not just a cute word. Video games are industrial in scale and scope.

That means caring about the QA guy and the IT lady doing the grunt work, not just Ken Levine. It means that even if the writing team can work from home, we still care about the coders pounding out just one more line at 1am on a Tuesday. It means that, when we see a presentation given by a game CEO at PAX, we look past that lone figure and see the toil and love of the dozens who made the platform he or she stands on.

We should also care because video games are increasingly influential. What happens in the video game industry, from the actual game content to work practices, filter out into the world at large. That ideas about creation and about the shape of the workplace that diffuse out into other industries should be the best of the gaming, not the worst. You don’t want to go into the insurance office where you work to find out your benefits have been cut, but hey, you have a new foosball table, believe me.

Worse, the industry (and games themselves) are increasingly hamstrung by burnout. If you’re still of the mindset that it’s the Levines and Kojimas who matter most, that’s fine. You should want to find the next Levine or Kojima. And he or she is not going to waltz through the door with full blown ideas ready to go. Those people are working in the trenches, doing 70 hour weeks, getting laid off over and over and over. The next Will Wrights have probably already burned out, sucked dry by the industry. They wanted to see their kids or spouses. They wanted to settle down and not move every four years. They wanted to know what their paychecks were, when they were, and know they weren’t on the chopping block anytime the stock ticked down half a percent.

No Caption Provided

The potential for a voice actors’ strike currently looms in the background. While it deserves longer treatment, it is enough to briefly say that reactions to this labor action have been mixed. If SAG-AFTRA strikes, it will almost certainly not be perfect. But if we wait for the perfect strike for the perfect demands by the perfect union, we will never stop waiting. The perfect cannot be the enemy of the good, as they say. The voice actors are not competition for other industry worker contracts; they’re pointing a possible way forward toward a better future for the rank and file of the industry. If even half their demands are met—and they will be—then a saner, more stable work life is there for the grasping by the coders, writers, and developers who make up most of the industry.

It’s good for everyone—workers, fans, and finance people, alike—if the next auteur doesn’t burn out. We want the best people sticking around. And we want a range of voices from across ages and experiences, something which the industry, so tightly tailored for single men aged 30 or younger, has a hard time providing in its current form.

So this is where we’re at. It’s time to discuss how things are actually changed. Let’s contextualize those numbers and talk about moving forward. I’m positive that what I think is best will not always be what you, the reader, think is best. That’s fine; this is how practical ideas come about. But change has to happen or we’ll be left with an industry and form of entertainment which none of us will be happy with.

It’s time.

Ian Williams is a freelance writer and author based in Raleigh, North Carolina. His work has been featured in Jacobin, The Guardian, Paste, and Vice. You can find him on Twitter at @Brock_toon. You can listen to Austin chat with Ian on the most recent episode of Giant Bomb Presents.

180 Comments

Avatar image for grumpymoose
GrumpyMoose

58

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 1

User Lists: 0

We as a consumer are to blame for this not the industry. All the comments on here lament the working conditions described however, remain the root cause of the problem. Everytime a game is delayed people complain and whine with the i want it now attitude and expect it to be perfect. Its not unreasonable to expect greatness but those strict guidelines of released always on time and perfect create this atmosphere. Companies respond to their customers and most gamers insatiable need drives them to behave this way.

Unions are never the answer no matter what your marxist professors will have you believe. Unions seek special protection for their employees regardless of performance and simply screw other workers in the industry or consumers. The teachers unions or auto unions are perfect examples of this. Poor public education and rising education costs due to teachers that cant be held accountable. American auto workers and their greed have destroyed our big three makers and the quality of their cars.

Vote with your wallet thats how you are heard and thats how change is made.

Avatar image for saucysala
SaucySala

381

Forum Posts

1883

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 3

User Lists: 3

Well said!

Avatar image for crazylittle
crazylittle

25

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

I did testing for two majors and they are the reason I said "fuck working in games" and went on to do something else.

Avatar image for plan6
plan6

420

Forum Posts

20

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

@billyok said:
@flippyandnod said:

I would prefer Giant Bomb cover games and leave the politics aside.

I don't mean to be rude when I say this, but it's clear you didn't even bother to read the article if you equate this to not covering games and the effects the current industry has on the new class of visionaries. And that's fine if you want to ignore it. Not every piece of content is here for your consumption. But don't be that person who tells others not to write about something just because you don't care enough to see the connection and how it affects you.

Well, you managed to be rude anyway.

I did read the article. I said I would prefer they cover games. By that I mean exclusively, not the politics.

I wasn't the person who told others what not to write about. I spoke about what I preferred. You however, are being that person who is telling others (me) what not to write about.

Yes, I don't care enough about this to hear of it. I'm not looking for another political site, I've got plenty of places to go to for that.

I would prefer Giant Bomb covered games. It's why I come here. I stated that pretty simply and cleanly. Perhaps not every piece of (comment) content is here for your consumption?

You have just provided the solution to your problem. Don't read the article. And by saying you would prefer GB cover games and leave "politics aside" you are, in fact, ask them not to host this article. You would prefer it not be here.

Avatar image for noblenerf
noblenerf

983

Forum Posts

196

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

@technicallyartistic:Powerful words, duder. I dunno what the solution is, but I hope you find it!

@ian_williams: Great stuff; looking forward to your future articles!

Ian, I'm wondering what your thoughts on gamification of the workplace are--like at the Armello developer League of Geeks. (Here's an article describing how it works.) Basically, do you think an alternate wage schemes might be part of a solution (since unions seem decades off)? Personally, I think it will only further the problems devs have with work/life balance, not to mention what a disaster it would be for flop games. In spite of my thoughts, I am curious about your take.

Avatar image for flippyandnod
flippyandnod

758

Forum Posts

2

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

@plan6:

You're moving the goalposts.

Yes, I would prefer the article not be here. I expressed that. But what I didn't do is tell Giant Bomb what to write and not what to write.

I'm a paying customer. Some companies like to get feedback from their customers. So I gave some.

I didn't say they have to heed it, i.e. to tell them not to write this. It's up to them. In the end they're only going to respond to customers in aggregate. It doesn't mean a feedback by all customers will produce a change by GB. They weight it all and decide what to do.

Yes, I read the article. How would I know my position on the article if I had not read it? After doing reading it, I indicated I would rather not see this kind of article here. I don't really see what's wrong with that.

Avatar image for ominousbedroom
ominousbedroom

563

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 2

Edited By ominousbedroom

I want video games but I don't care about the working conditions of people who make them, wahhh! Jk. I understand the cycle of new, fresh workers who are willing to do the crunch, feeding the exploitative labor loop in question (in fact I'm doing unpaid, non-location game-related work right now). but maybe there is comfort in the fact that a lot of people my age and younger are waking up to this sort of thing. in the age of an ever-growing internet and access to information, a lot of barriers to entry are being lowered and creating a niche for yourself (and jumping from one to the other) is not as hard as it used to be.

interesting and sobering article. it reminded me of what to be aware of as a growing professional, and what kind of career advice to pass on to other people in general.

Avatar image for ian_williams
ian_williams

33

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

@noblenerf: I'm not a fan of gamification most things. Keeping it brief, I think it places more and more onus on the individual worker, which then creates a pretty easily exploitable feedback cycle as you mention. I'll get into this just a bit in the next article, but a fundamental misunderstanding I think we have when we talk about getting "more" as workers is that there are power dynamics at play which we've slowly decided aren't important. Gamification of wages tend to reinforce the notion that the individual you can address those power imbalances between worker and boss by maintaining the status quo.

On unions being decades off: I don't see why that has to be the case. I think they feel further off than they practically are because we've simply decided as a culture that they can't be done. That's not to say that unionization is easy, but it is to say that I think we make relatively straightforward things seem impossible or decades off when they're not. Within living memory, we've seen nationalized health care in Europe, Social Security and unions in the Wild West capitalism of the US, etc. So given the enormity of those things happening in my grandparents' day, I don't see any reason why unionization in games would be decades off.

Avatar image for meganralph
meganralph

34

Forum Posts

23

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

@benjo_t said:

I still recall the horrendous working conditions imposed on the hundreds of staff at Team Bondi while they were developing L.A. Noire - a game I subsequently will not play and cannot ever support by buying. At some point the industry has to stop exploiting its most passionate contributors.

As a dev who worked on that game, this hurts far more than my time at TB. In fact, I loved and miss working with those guys, the team and management. I'm not saying that was everyone's experience but that was mine.

Avatar image for meganralph
meganralph

34

Forum Posts

23

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

@forderz said:

I'm also seeing some talk around here of game development being a better job than Walmart or McDonald's. This is true, but saying that others have it worse is a failed argument from the start, as those same wage slaves have better lives than Malaysian factory workers or Indonesian garbage pickers. That sort of talk encourages a race to the bottom, which is the opposite of what we all want and deserve.

Well said

Avatar image for dhiatensor
DHIATENSOR

131

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 1

User Lists: 0

@mikethered82: Thanks a lot for the response. Glad to hear that conditions are better in the Netherlands.

Avatar image for stevekap_iatse
SteveKap_IATSE

3

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

I'll respecfully disagree with the commenter GrumpyMoose and say that a union can address the issue. I'd love to talk to anyone about how.

Avatar image for scott_squires
scott_squires

1

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

The games community should certainly consider creating a union or being an offshoot of an existing union. There's at least some misinformation here regarding unions. Even though they set minimums, you can negotiate for higher amounts and even better deals.

Look at the film industry. Writers, directors, cast and crew are all union (with exception these days of visual effects). That means they're all protected from companies and studios trying to short change them or taking advantage of them. (unpaid OT, etc) Director or asst camera person can negotiate what they want and usually do (with or without an agent)

As individuals you have little pushback on unpaid OT and other factors. You can talk to management and then up to you to quit and move on to another place that will likely be similarly, since the companies tend to operate similarly. But as an organized group you have power to make sure labor laws are upheld and misclassification (such as having everyone be a contractor)

The film industry is made entirely of freelancers who move from project to project. So being in the union they have a consistent health and retirement plan. This is not the auto industry union nor is there a union hall. It's up to workers to find their jobs but the guidelines and minimums are clearly spelled out and monitored so you don't have to.

Avatar image for benjo_t
benjo_t

322

Forum Posts

2814

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 1

User Lists: 3

Edited By benjo_t

@meganralph: Sorry you feel that way, but I just can't support the things I read about even if they weren't a universal experience for everyone at the company. I don't think I would even be able to get into the game knowing what I do about how management supposedly went on. It was a huge issue for me with the new Metal Gear, too.

Avatar image for jared
Jared

670

Forum Posts

12

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 1

User Lists: 1

That is a very informative article, thank you Ian. As a long time GiantBomb member I think this is a great feature to the site.

Has there every been an attempt for those working on games, the programmers, animators, etc to form their own union in hope of being treated better?

Avatar image for stevekap_iatse
SteveKap_IATSE

3

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

Avatar image for thephantomstranger
ThePhantomStranger

569

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

I'm glad that this issue is getting a spotlight especially if this will possibly be a mainstay and allow for a more thorough look at possible solutions.

I've always wondered, for instance, if the improvement of art asset generation would be helpful or not. 3D scans to generate assets and textures for realistic art styles would that help reduce workload or would that simply have the effect of jobs being cut instead of crunch time? Like would anything that isn't a fundamental change to how computer engineering for the entertainment sector is treated on a systemic level have any effect?

Avatar image for thedrinkinggeek
thedrinkinggeek

62

Forum Posts

28

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 3

Thinking about it, I would say a union would be the most likely solution to this problem. It is not always ideal but it seems to be the only real solution out there.

What about having a large publisher/develop set an example for its peers by establishing a better environment for its workers start a trend? Do you think that is something that would/could ever happen without the establishment of a union?

Avatar image for stevekap_iatse
SteveKap_IATSE

3

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

Edited By SteveKap_IATSE

In all honesty, no. Treating employees better, providing them with better working conditions and benefits, allowing them to have a say in how the workplace is handled, is rarely something employers do on their own volition. Typically it's an economic decision as it's cheaper to withhold those things.

That's not to say there aren't employers who make those commitments on their own. Costco comes to mind as it's been used recently in memes in Facebook. However, when faced with working for an employer that hasn't made that choice, the decision to act then becomes the responsibility of the worker to change the situation for themselves. Federal law provides for that, by forming a union and bargaining for a better workplace.

That doesn't mean that union agreements are so costly as to be detrimental to business. There is a lot of flexibility when it comes to what gets bargained into the contract. Basic needs don't always have to be a cost item. However, things like overtime, a health insurance plan, a retirement savings plan do cost.

Avatar image for wellspokenman
wellspokenman

23

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 1

User Lists: 0

Thank you Ian, for a well written and thoughtful piece. Perhaps I'm falling into the trap of trying to come up with a solution before I fully understand the problem, but the price of games has seemed a little off for as long as I can remember. NES games were $100 in Australia, and modern games are still at about that same price. I looked into where that extra money went and as far as I can tell it does not go to the developers (australia being a special case, as they have their own wouldyoujustkeeloverandfuckigndiealreadyyoumiserablecunts-ratings bureau - who clearly deserve their slice of the pie). I guess the idea was, why not charge more for games, and improve conditions on the code floor. But I fear it's too late for that now. The industry has already learned what they can get away with; both at the expense of employees (constant crunch, zero security) and consumers (digital preorders, review embargoes, day1 DLC, pay2win microtransactions etc etc). I fear that even if we make games cost $150 those practices will persist, serving not to improve conditions on the floor, but rather to pad NYSE indices and golden parachutes. I've heard from quite a few developers who've just had it with that system - going indie as an alternative. That, however, seems more like the beginning of another cycle that will herald the return of mid-tier developers.

Look forward to reading more from you on this topic - I clearly don't have any answers to offer.

Avatar image for dovah
dovah

705

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

Isn't a huge problem with the industry that independent studios get bought by publicly held companies with duties to shareholders that put immense pressure on the company to deliver at a certain cost?

Of course everyone should demand decent working conditions and a fair wage. Maybe there needs to be an expose along the lines of the Kotaku piece on Destiny (which seems fraught with poor decision making) that hits the main stream level.

Maybe Unions aren't the perfect answer but they seem to have helped protect workers in the movie industry which seems the closest to game production.

Avatar image for thatdudeguy
thatdudeguy

337

Forum Posts

213

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

Great article Ian, glad to see another fresh voice on Giantbomb.

How do we balance the need for real change in the industry's labor standards with the seemingly endless glorification of the indie auteur? We know crunch must go away and overturn reduced, but at the same time we revel at the idea someone like Jonathon Blow can put 100% of his being into creating The Witness. What do we do to get away from the idea that everyone in game development must be wholly devoted to video games?

I also loved the article, Ian!

With regards to Mr. Blow, I believe that we can both celebrate passionate (in non-cynical hiring terms) game developers as well as robust-but-ethical developers.

To bring in a movie analogy, Boyhood is an amazing movie, requiring unprecedented dedication and miracles to create. But Mr. Linklater took on that risk specifically to produce something so unusual and exploratory. The Marvel superhero franchise requires wrangling a mind-boggling amount of risk as well, but I would expect each professional working on those movies to be compensated according to market standards for their expertise (though I could be wrong.)

Unions aren't great, but in many industries they're far better than unions not existing.

Avatar image for lindmar
Lindmar

2

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

Edited By Lindmar

GrumpyMoose couldn't be more wrong... The poor state of public education is not 100% on teacher unions, consider that 10700$ a year (us average) gets spent per child in a school year. In a class of 27 (us average) that is 288,900$ of which the teacher is getting about 45,000 (us average rounded up) which is less than 16%. Yes overly strong unions can at times protect people that should get fired but those over exaggerated videos you see are the train wreck and not the norm.

I am a member of a pipefitter union and have to say that garbage workers get fired quickly unless there is such a dire need for a person that they have to wait till a replacement comes along before they fire them. I don't pretend to know the gaming industry well enough to say that a union is the best thing for them but I will say that from what I know they sound an awful lot like how non-union pipefitters are treated.

My union doesn't "screw over employers" in fact it is the opposite where intel regularly has meetings with my union leaders to discuss what training and specialty skills they want the people to have before getting hired. I couldn't imagine how we screw over consumers, yes union labor costs more in the short term but every non-union job I have seen goes over budget, misses deadlines, and costs so much extra money that by the end they cost more. Intel 2008 the non-union side got fired after making so many mistakes that the union labor had to come in to fix it all. In fact my union has a work recovery fund where we PAY employers to make their bids on jobs lower, that fund is made up of union dues which I pay. Quickly on dues, they are 5% which makes my 36$/hr pay turn into 34.2$/hr which is still better than 28$/hr that non-union get paid.

I am in no way an extremist, I agree with right-to-work as it causes unions to compete harder. But to say that the best course of action is to simply vote with your purchases would be ignoring a wider reality and deeper truth. Feel free to look into the triangle shirtwaist factory and other examples of how workers were treated before unions came along. Unions not only made the work place better for their members but continue to make work conditions better for non-union. In 1989 when work was slow my union voted on a 5$/hr pay reduction to make employers have an easier time of starting projects, non-union contractors simply started paying their guys 5$/hr less with no vote or say so on the labor side. You think these guys could quit or put up much of any fuss when the majority of people live pay check to pay check?

A union is in no way a Marxist idea, we live in a capitalist society where contracts are typical. A union is simply workers joining together to negotiate for a common base level contract and individual members can and in mine do negotiate for better terms for themselves. To say that it is Marxist that non-union workers can not work in a union shop is insane, the shop had to sign a union contract to get union workers and part of that contract was to only have union workers. For the government to come in and negate a part of a contract to say all workers have to be allowed sounds more Marxist to me.

Man this turned long... But I have to add how funny it is that people so often point out some unions that are seen in a negative light but rarely point out the firefighter unions and police unions.

Avatar image for bschneider30
BSchneider30

64

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 1

Edited By BSchneider30

Thank you for the article Ian. As a union worker in heavy industry, labor issues in non traditionally union businesses are super interesting and important to me. I look forward to the rest of the series and the conversation that it starts.

Avatar image for quantris
Quantris

1524

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

Edited By Quantris

So what is stopping games workers from unionizing?

I appreciate the information in the article, but I don't really get what it has to do with people who aren't working in the games industry (meaning, consumers of games, like myself). Am I misreading something or is there an undertone that these workers need *our* help? I definitely got an "evangelical" feel from this article.

I'll worry about labour rights in my own field, thanks. Working in "games" doesn't make someone special or more deserving of support -- it's often said that it's a "unique" industry but guess what, most information-age industries are "unique".

How many unions started because the workers took it upon themselves to fight for their rights, and how many were started because consumers decided to play nanny? IMHO if it's the latter then I don't see how such a union could be effective in any way.