The final piece contributing to the decline of AAA gaming as the dominant industrial form has been a growing recognition that these studios engage in unhealthy work practices, driving many developers to seek employment elsewhere and to develop new studios that give them control over their work and schedules. The video game industry’s structure and work
104
practices, particularly in AAA studios, emphasize post-industrial trends, being flexible and project based. Game development is characterized by a system of uneven working hours, just-in- time production, and jobs based on contracts rather than full term employment (Dyer-Witheford and de Peuter, 2006; Deuze et al., 2007; Huntemann, 2010a). Because of this, careers are
inherently uncertain, with studios hiring or firing in line with the number of projects they currently have in progress and the particular skill sets needed for the different steps of each development cycle (Deuze et al., 2007; Huntemann, 2010a). Production also frequently relies on a system of “crunch time”, where the time period just before a game’s release can see employees facing work weeks of eighty hours or more, to iron out final bugs and problems (Deuze et al., 2007; Huntemann, 2010a). While crunch time is supposed to be a temporary measure used to speed up projects that may have fallen behind, voices from within the industry have indicated that it has become a normal tool to take advantage of employees, with companies putting them on a crunch-time schedule for extended periods of time even when projects have consistently been meeting deadlines (Hoffman, 2004; Rockstar Spouse, 2010).
On top of this, games are a passion-based industry, full of people who grew up playing games, loving them, and wanting to take part in their production. This same passion can unfortunately trap developers into unhealthy relationships with work, where they are at times taken advantage of by employers. Passion leads to a greater supply of employees than demand, making it easy for companies to replace workers, decrease salaries, and increase competition for positions. Those workers who do manage to get jobs, especially at large studios, may consider themselves lucky to be employed, limiting their ability to resist unrealistic demands. “Because of their passion for games, developers are often willing to overlook working conditions that are less than ideal, profit models that benefit those that sell and market games rather than those that
105
create them, and contracts that stifle creativity in favor of less risky clones and more profitable sequels” (Whitson, 2013, p. 122).
In 2004, a blog post by a woman calling herself “EA Spouse” criticized the working practices of Electronic Arts, one of the largest video game development studios in the world. Erin Hoffman, the author of the post, believed that EA was overexerting their employees, using crunch time in situations where projects were on schedule, and under-compensating workers for overtime (Hoffman, 2004). She argued that a consistent environment of long hours and little pay was negatively affecting the physical, mental, and emotional health of the company employees, but that the overall response to any complaint about this treatment was, “‘If they don't like it, they can work someplace else.’ Put up or shut up and leave: this is the core of EA's Human Resources policy” (Hoffman, 2004). This attitude reflects the high supply of potential workers; while experience is valued, the ability to put in long hours and not complain about them seems to be valued even more highly (Dyer-Witheford & de Peuter, 2006; Deuze et al., 2007; Huntemann, 2010a). Therefore, employees have little recourse against unrealistic company expectations.
This is further obvious in that, although Hoffman’s letter helped lead to a series of class- action lawsuits allowing employees to collect on unpaid overtime, the problems she raised in 2004 have not entirely subsided. In 2010, a group of spouses whose partners worked for
Rockstar San Diego, another AAA studio, crafted a similar letter and published it on Gamasutra, the online branch of Game Developers Magazine (Rockstar Spouse, 2010). Again, the spouses claimed that intense, extended periods of crunch time were affecting the mental and physical health of Rockstar employees, and even went so far as to claim that employees who sought medical help on Saturdays were treated as “a hindrance” for being out of the office. This letter closely followed a class-action lawsuit over unpaid overtime that had been filed against Rockstar
106
in 2009 and was settled out of court in 2010 (Gilbert, 2010), indicating that problems were persisting throughout the organization. More recent updates show similar issues, as layoffs and unstable conditions continue for workers (Sinclair, 2012; Schreier, 2014; Schreier, 2015).
Employees also have few possible avenues for addressing issues other than public complaints and class-action lawsuits. In their 2014 Quality of Life survey, the International Game Developers Association (IGDA) found that most employees were only able to raise concerns “directly to their managers. Just over one-quarter of the survey respondents felt comfortable with this approach” (Edwards et al., 2014, p. 31). Over 40% stated that they would rather have the ability to approach issues as part of a collective, through a union or professional organization (p. 31). Furthermore, they appear to prefer the idea of an industry-wide union, like the Writer’s Guild of America or the Screen Actors Guild, to individual workplace unions, which many seemed to think would not effectively address their problems. When asked about the possibility of forming a union within their individual workplaces, “Just over one-third said that they would vote for the union, 20% said they would vote against the union and 10% said they would not vote at all” (Edwards et al., 2014, p. 31). The remaining responses were divided between “not applicable” and “prefer not to say”. More developers supported the possibility of an industry-wide union. “Over 55% said they would vote in favor of an industry-wide union, 14% said they would vote against, 9% would not vote at all” (Edwards et al., 2014, p. 32).
This contrast between workplace unions and industry-wide unions could be a result of the industry’s current flexibility, where employees move between companies frequently as projects change. An industry-wide union would help them address issues as they move through positions, rather than having to deal with employers on a case-by-case basis. Despite support for potential unionization, though, little serious discussion around the possibility occurs within the industry,
107
due to industry norms and the surplus of workers. Because crunch time, for instance, is the norm at many studios, employees who want to speak out against long, unrealistic hours fear that their company will see them as lazy or replace them with another worker who does not complain (Sinclair, 2012). While employees recognize the potential benefits of unions, they see significant barriers to actually creating one. But without collective organization or changes to the industry, working practices remain the same.
Unpaid overtime, flexible contracts and unending crunch time are somewhat normal for a creative, post-industrial industry, and do respond to the ebb and flow of the production cycle to the benefit of the development companies. However, they also deeply affect the industry’s appeal for potential and current workers. “As reports of crunch increase, and creative autonomy decreases in favor of risk management strategies imposed by publishers, developers are realizing that their own work has been effectively instrumentalized. Most developers burn out quickly and abandon the industry within five to ten years” (Whitson, 2013, p. 124). The IGDA’s updated survey in 2014 shows similar timelines. Although surveyed developers’ average time in the industry was nine years, the researchers realized that a few long-term employees skewed this number. The mode, or most commonly reported time in the industry, was only three years, and the median was six. Therefore, evidence still shows that many employees exit the industry quickly (Edwards et al., 2014, p. 17). Furthermore, when surveyed employees were asked why they left or wanted to leave the industry, the top response was “I want a better quality of life” and one of the secondary responses was “burned out” (p. 18). Overall, the working practices of the industry are unsustainable for many employees despite their passion for games.
Because AAA studios have been at the heart of past problems and have been slow to make requested changes, some former AAA developers have moved to or created their own
108
independent studios, to work in smaller environments where they have more control over their hours or product (Hiscott, 2014; Lipkin, 2013; Martin and Deuze, 2009; Whitson, 2013). For example, “[2011’s] Bastion was made by former EA Los Angeles developers; Kickstarter project République is being built by Seattle devs, including some Halo 4 vets; none other than gaming luminary Peter Molyneux left Microsoft in March to start 22Cans, which he hopes can be more nimble than large developers. The list goes on and on” (Polygon, 2012d). The indie scene,
although funded and distributed in different ways, often shares core characteristics with the AAA industry, such as slang, past experience playing games, and a passion for their creation.
However, this path allows developers to take greater control over their work and avoid feeling like a “cog” in a larger machine (Whitson, 2013, p. 124). They are taking greater personal risks, due to the challenges inherent in finding their own funding and in self-marketing, but they have greater input over the final product and what happens to it. When crunch does have to occur, it occurs within self-imposed limits, rather than being forced (Lipkin, 2013, p. 11). “The desire for more authentic and autonomous creation, the feeling of an impossibility of upward mobility (within the company’s hierarchical organization of work), and a discontent regarding accreditation and top-down management are common complaints found in the reasons
developers give for leaving their (relatively) more stable jobs for indie game production” (Martin and Deuze, 2009, p. 287). With this flight from traditional studios, combined with the success some indie studios have achieved, game workers are seeing more alternatives to AAA work, potentially threatening the plentiful labor source that has allowed it to thrive in the past.