Hacker News Reader

Comment by canthonytucci | Hacker News Reader

Why only game workers? Why not software workers/codewriters in general?

I'd prefer something closer to SAG than the auto workers union personally.

The game industry is not just coders, for one thing. Also worth noting this effort doesn’t preclude anyone from organizing a software developer’s union; in fact some people are working on that goal, and it’s also possible to join IWW as a software developer.

But to offer a different answer to “why just games” - this particular effort is newsworthy right now because it was organized to be promoted heavily at GDC, which I believe just ended.

Why not all employees? All humans? :) Sometimes subsets are usefully distinct and are better suited to certain purposes. In this case, it's because game workers are so poorly treated compared to the average worker of a similar tenure in other parts of the software industry.

> All humans?

In a way that's what labor laws and minimum wages are... a gov't mandated union of employees.

The games industry is the one where the abuses are especially bad.

But I see no reason why this couldn't eventually blossom into a "Software Developer's Guild".

Generally software engineers have a better pay(30-50%) and work-life balance than the game industry as a whole.

While the tech is similar the project cycles are usually quite different so I don't know if one-size-fits-all would get splintered by different concerns.

Actually in the UK this is the case Prospect represents all the grades in game dev as it merged with BECTU recently

If the game industry is so rough, then why don’t workers quit and go work in non-game software or design? It’s because they CHOOSE to work on games and there are a lot of people that are willing to take lower pay and tougher conditions because they want to work in gaming.

The implication being made that game devs are some kind of sweatshop slaves is ridiculous.

Wow, lot to unpack there.

The thing is they generally do quit, if you look at Gamasutra's yearly industry survey you'll see a huge bimodal distribution of less than 3 years and 10+ years. The average industry career ends up being about 3 years.

Here's a situation that I saw a lot when I was in the industry:

1. Get a new gig in a different town(usually because the previous studio cratered). Sell your house, move your family and get settled because this studio seems like it's being run sanely.

2. 4-6mo later crunch time hits. Mandated 80hr/week with 6-7 day work weeks. Anyone who takes even half a day off catches a ton of shit. Heck, I get yelled at for leaving the office at 11pm one day.

3. No funds(remember 30-50% less pay) or time to find a new gig and you've got a mortgage/rent/family to support.

4. Game fails/sucks because of crunch or other reasons. Studio closes/layoffs.

5. Repeat step #1.

I would hazard a good 80% of people in gamedev are paycheck-to-paycheck(I know we were). So while it's easy to just claim they should quit that's not as simple in practice.

They force people out who have 15+ years. (eg. It was age 37 for me). Thankfully they asked me to write documentation and train a bevy of testers to take my place before letting me go (once the eight race tracks for the game I was creating were completely designed).

The saddest thing (of this story)? This game, from a major mobile publisher, never even made it out of beta because their monetization component had no traction. As an aside, they also ended up scraping my tracks and replacing them with drone simple turn left/right then jump. Repeat. (because of the amount of work it was going to take to implement...)

That is one of too many stories. Truth is, nearly every/maybe all game development studios is poorly managed.

I wonder why that is. Would you say your company's founder started out with a passion for games or was it more corporate/started for profit?

I have wondered if the high failure rate is a mismatch of three key issues; passion and understanding for the medium in the company culture, management not knowing how to manage technical/artistic creators, and then the fickle nature of the target market.

Great games made by amazing developers can tank because they don't have the business chops. Management can't get a handle on what they are actually managing, because that has proven notoriously hard even when the software product isn't nearly as complicated as a game.

Even in ideal circumstances with a great team, game, and execution, your game can flop because it just wasn't flavor of the month or you released behind a more favored title.

I would love to hear what people think a great studio would look like.

"If the game industry is so rough, then why don’t workers quit and go work in non-game software or design?"

they do, iirc after about 5 years, typically.

I'd guess that unions aren't very effective unless a substantial percentage of the workforce joins, so it makes sense for an organization with limited resources to try to focus on getting wide adoption in a small, specific part of the tech industry rather than trying to get everyone to join all at once.

Maybe the game industry is the best place to start a tech union as a proof-of-concept, given that (if the stereotypes of game studios are true) it has a higher proportion of employees aren't too happy about their relationship with their employer than other parts of the tech industry where the pay and working conditions are better.

Games is a very seasonal industry with a lot of large studios exploiting this by putting ramping up before Christmas and laying off before bonuses in Q2. It also attracts a lot of young people that don't know their rights.

Why do "software workers/codewriters" need a union? It's an employee's market.

In NYC you expected to be at work at most companies for 9-10 hours a day, you are expected to go to all their social events, and you are expected to act like a logic lording startup bro (even when the company is far past the startup stage). Sure, they give you free treats, sure it's not hard to come by a job, but you are still ultimately expected to give up your autonomy to become a startup stooge.

That would give a hiring advantage to companies that don't demand that.

Not everywhere, in most countries it is an employeers market that get to vet who they are willing to take, regardless how much in need they might be.

At least in Europe most countries do have support for developers on their unions. It is up to each one to decide which one they want to join.

Only until the next recession, which will come.

Yeah, seems like agencies or a guilds make more sense.

Most European countries have unions for IT as well.

Not specifically for IT, rather something general like "industrial jobs" for example.

Also in those countries where engineering degrees are regulated, you can also appeal to the Engineers Order if something is going wrong.

Note that it is "game workers" not "game developers" - this seems to be more along the lines of an "industry union" rather than a "craft union" - so this will tend to devalue technological skill.

I would never join or pay into such a union. I'm so happy to be able to make employment agreements freely, and if anyone threatens that, I will criticize them. If developers in the game industry want to take crappy employment agreements because they're infatuated with video games, that is their right. The skillset is portable, and the instability of standard game dev positions is well known, game developers in general have ample opportunity to choose other software work, but opt for game dev work because they like the idea of it.

I think it's unwise (from my armchair) of game companies to build their business on a cycle of crushing the dreams of young people, but it's voluntary, obvious, and well-warned.

Many unions don't interfere with the ability of their members to enter into employment agreements freely. So with that new knowledge in your head, what's your next objection to such a union?

If you're going to criticize anyone who threatens your ability to make employment agreements freely, does that include corporations?

Apple, google, and other companies we're already found working in a cartel to keep software engineer wages down, and those were just the high profile explicit agreements.

I don't get people like you who find it ok for corporations to pool capital and output from all their employees in the negotiation process, but the second employees want to work together to even the playing field it's a deadly sin

The problem for me is that if other software developers decide to join together in a union then the government lets them negotiate on my behalf even though I do not consent.

I feel like that's the wrong view. The union is negotiating with the company and saying, work with only union employees or the union leaves en masse. Why would you have the right to just override the unions deal with the company?

Because it's clearly discrimination to only hire union members. Same as only hiring christians.

It's discrimination to only hire people who will take below x$ an hour. You can make the argument that this is a bad type of discrimination and should be controlled, like discriminating against race/gender/age, but the fact that it's discrimination at all is not a strong argument

You are still free to get a worse contract in the gaming industry without unions, there is nothing preventing you to do that.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com