Poll: "Sweatshop" Developers

[Rjak]

There's a certain A-List game that I've been waiting for for *SO LONG*, and I'm excited as hell that it's just about here. Recently I heard from an ex-employee who claimed that the developer works its teams *TO THE BONE*, don't pay all that well and end up turning talented, driven people into jaded "why should I care" drones. I've gotta say that's really tarnished my excitement.

Knowing that EA's sweatshop policies actually destroyed families and careers has soured my already low opinion of sweatshop developers. I find a game way more enjoyable if in the back of my mind I'm thinking "This must've been a blast to work on." If I'm thinking the effort that went into a game prevented someone from seeing their kid's first steps or squeezed someone really talented so hard they left the game industry, it diminishes the experience.

I'm lucky to work for a *GREAT* developer that has found a nice balance between life and work, so my opinion is really slanted.

What do you think? Am I just a bleeding heart (hypocritical because even if I feel bad about the game that doesn't prevent me from buying it!!)? Does anyone else care? Should people care?

 

[Katana314]

Fully agree that they suck. The company sucks, and normally the games suck. I love Valve though...everyone there is pretty much free to do what they want, when they want, or so I've heard.
One dev team I've started to get suspicious about is Crytek. You hear Cevat say "Early on people were like "no, you can't have destructible trees. That's ludicrous." But we kept pushing what people could do and I think the result looks really good."
I'm willing to bet that the programmers were very pissed to work with a "I don't care how, get it done" personality. And often it seems like Cevat takes a bit too much pride. He threw dual pistols into the game simply because he thought they were cool, and proudly places his own name into the trailer for the game (and no one else's) You know what Valve does? Gabe Newell has his name in HL2's opening credits, but it doesn't get a special spot at the start or end; it's placed vaguely in the middle, just in a queue with the other developers.

 

[Girlysprite]

I agree with you. well, its easy for me to avoid these games since I dont buy EA anyways, simply because Im not into their kind of games.

But being also in the industry, I know that when devvers get some room, it really is great for the product. Of course, there is overowkr at times, especially as a game nears the finish line (at that time, can run to a few months even) but at least its not constant or most of the time. I do think bits of overwork is part of the inductry. I mean, 'crunchtime' is quite a well known term. I guess that's for a reason.

 

[dnv2]

EA make a lot of their games based around a specific time of year, usually the holidays. That's probably why they push their employee's so hard.

Other games that have been put back from the release date usually come out better for the experience.

I'd hate to think that some poor guy or girl had to miss out on an important family event or their partner or kids birthday, just so I could enjoy a game.

 

[Frederf]

Thankfully games made under oppressive conditions are usually uninspired and awful, so I get to be indignant and well-entertained.