Video Game Developers Are Leaving The Industry And Doing Something, Anything Else : games

[–] NuXCOM_90Percent@lemmy.zip 89 points 1 month ago (1 children)

Yeah. Rebecca Ford (Creative Director of Warframe at Digital Extremes) recently did a follow up interview with NoClip where she outright said she was done with video games once Warframe was over. It has basically been her entire adult life to work at DE but she is under no illusions over how messed up the industry is and is basically just sticking on because she loves what she makes and who she makes it with.

And from talking to a few friends who went the game dev route after college? That is more or less where they are at. Layoffs are inevitable and you can look forward to endless abuse if you get noticed before that. So the ones who still love the games they are making put up with it. The rest either already left or are actively putting out feelers for other jobs. Because it isn't like any of them are getting paid what they are worth.

[+] ampersandrew@lemmy.world -28 points 1 month ago (2 children)

And quite frankly, there are (or were, before layoffs), too many developers making games for how many releases the market can bear.

[–] Katana314@lemmy.world 2 points 1 month ago

I’m going to agree with you, but only in the sense they hired more people than they should’ve, not that they should be firing people.

I really blame Telltale Games as one studio that demonstrated this issue in a microcosm. They had some successful games. Then they hired enough extra hands that they MUST make excellent games. Their next few games were not excellent. Then, everybody gets fired.

[+] NuXCOM_90Percent@lemmy.zip -34 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago) (3 children)

Quick query to chatgpt says that video games generated 187.7 billion USD in 2023 vs film which was 87.4.

And the vast majority of companies doing mass layoffs (like Microsoft) are still turning profits. They just want to turn larger profits or throw some labor on the sword to protect whoever thought it was a good idea to make Marathon of all IPs into an extraction shooter.

And the rest? It is studios like Strange Scaffold who are actually doing everything right (complete games at launch, no DLC, innovative gameplay, cool narrative and art style) but can't secure any publisher funding and are basically constantly on the verge of ruin.

There are going to be massive knock on effects when the only major releases are the massive tentpole games and everything else is "janky indie games". At which point we'll have even more Gamers talking about how we should fire anyone who worked on The Last Of Us 3 and spend more money making those quirky B games like HiFi Rush.

But hey. Tell me more about how all these mass layoffs are actually a good thing.

[–] RightHandOfIkaros@lemmy.world 53 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago) (1 children)

Quick query to chatgpt says [...]

This guy really thinks chatgpt is an authoritative source on anything. I am completely disregarding the entire comment.

[–] Windex007@lemmy.world 22 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago)

Chatgpt told me 188 but then admitted it was 120 after I bullied it and then landed on 95

Edit:

Great news gamers, chatgpt just explained why despite a net loss in 2023 the industry is expected to turn a profit by 2029

[–] linearchaos@lemmy.world 12 points 1 month ago (1 children)

Yeah you can't tell anybody on this site that you pulled some data from AI. Even if you followed the link and found the actual report and the numbers matched up you'll still get down voted into oblivion.

The mass layoffs are definitely pure greed. At one point they served a purpose of ebb and flow and separating the wheat from the chaff, but things aren't that healthy anymore.

Crunch time was great when it came with the bonuses and liberal vacation.

But now, anything that's worth a damn gets bought up into large public companies who need to satisfy shareholders. Even the private stuff is still subject to the whims of the executives. There are still some good places to land out there but they're slowly getting trashed over time.

[–] NuXCOM_90Percent@lemmy.zip -1 points 1 month ago (1 children)

Meh. I would rather trick people into showing their asses over the most trivial of things. Bonus points for actually pseudo-sourcing data.

And yeah. Just depressing that everyone becomes an 80s movie caricature the moment someone is criticizing THE VIDEO GAMEZ!!!! Fuck labor if it gets us The Last Of Us 3, right?

[–] linearchaos@lemmy.world 1 points 1 month ago

Ehh, still mostly beats the hell out of working enterprise health insurance. At least game developer unions are slowly becoming a thing.

[–] ampersandrew@lemmy.world 2 points 1 month ago (1 children)

How many releases is a very different number than how much profit. Only a few of Microsoft's releases likely account for a sizable percentage of the entire industry's profits in a given year. The fact is that investors saw dollar signs, and the industry expanded to a level that the market doesn't actually sustain. How many metroidvanias do you want to play in a given year? And given that Animal Well and Prince of Persia: The Lost Crown came out this year, how likely are you to play Tales of Kenzera: Zau after you've bought and played those? Mass layoffs are not a good thing, but it's a mathematical consequence of how much companies are permitted to expand relative to what people actually buy.

[–] NuXCOM_90Percent@lemmy.zip 0 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago) (1 children)

So because a studio's first game didn't outperform the latest in a 30-ish year old franchise that came out to rave reviews, everyone should be fired? Keeping in mind that Kenzera Zau had an EXCELLENT showing in press events (sad game about losing a father from a popular actor) and basically every major outlet said "This is fine but nothing special. But I would love to see what they make next".

That is exactly how so many of the major publishers got into this mess. It used to be that we could get something very much "this exists" like Sly Cooper and Infamous that eventually leads to a critical and sales darling like Ghost of Tsushima. Now? Infamous didn't outsell GTA5? Hope you mother fuckers like soup lines.

Or Naughty Dog. I mean, Crash 1 is kind of a bad game with a LOT of jank. It wasn't until Crash 2 (and especially 3) where they were actually fun to play. And that studio eventually became the folk who made Uncharted and The Last Of Us.

Yes, there are studios that have consistently underperformed for publishers that are struggling and, while it sucks... we get it. But most of what we have seen are major publishers/platform holders just wanting to juice up some Q3 numbers by doing mass firings or the giant mess that was Embracer where they just overspent and never let any studios finish making anything. And then you have bullshit like Phil Spencer having the gall to talk about how Microsoft needs to make more games like Hi-Fi Rush the week they fucking shut down the studio that made it.

But hey, you took ECON 101 so you obviously know better.

[–] ampersandrew@lemmy.world 1 points 1 month ago (1 children)

If people don't buy your game, you don't have money to pay people. Ideally, Surgent Studios would have developed their game inexpensively enough and with enough of a war chest that they wouldn't have to lay people off after their first product didn't sell enough copies, but that's clearly not how they were funded. It sounds like the studio still exists, so maybe a smaller version of that team gets to take a crack at that second game, but you can't pay people with money you don't have, and we as the consumers have been well served by so many other games that it's not much of a mystery why people didn't turn up for this one.

[–] NuXCOM_90Percent@lemmy.zip 0 points 1 month ago (1 children)

The point of a publisher is to have a whole company. It doesn't matter if Game A sold because Game B sold. EA used to live on this where games like Mirror's Edge could be "experimental" because The Sims and Madden made CoD money every year.

The problem is what we saw with stuff like (Let's say it is "THQ". My brain can't remember the specific publisher I was thinking of and the name has probably been reused a dozen times by Embracer et al). Where they are over-leveraging themselves by wanting to make multiple AA or even AAA games and going under because critically acclaimed games just didn't sell well enough.

But, again, that is not what has been happening for the past year or two (aside from Embracer which is a different kind of evil). It is not "Oh, you made bad games and we need to fire you to save the company". It isn't even "Profits are down all over". It is "Well, we are actually doing great. But you finished your game and don't have one immediately in the pipeline and the shareholders want to see bigger profits for Q3 so... get fucked?"

Which is why I once again cite fucking Phil Spencer talking about what a great game Hi-Fi Rush is the week Microsoft fucking canned Tango. That was not even "Look, everyone loved The Evil Within but didn't buy it so...". That was "Everyone loved Hi-Fi and it sold okay even with the Gamepass hit and our other games sold well but..."

But apparently you are in full bootstraps mode where you think like a CEO who wants to buy an extra porsche so...

[–] ampersandrew@lemmy.world 1 points 1 month ago

I don't know how you got from A to B on the Porsche. Embracer was funded largely by debt that they were expecting to get bailed out of by an investment that didn't happen; the classic leveraged investment gone wrong. Microsoft absolutely could stomach whatever losses they face, especially since that was the whole idea a few years back when they started Game Pass, so them deciding to not follow through on that and tighten their belts now is a situation unique to them. At large, across the industry, are tons of companies making big bets like Suicide Squad or Concord or Warhaven that follow a live service template that's been tapped out of customers and don't work out, and even smaller companies following the traditional publisher model like Mimimi are so exhausted hunting for funding for their next game, just barely making it by on copies sold, that they decide instead to close up shop. That'll happen when customer dollars are spread out around more games.

[–] Cenotaph@mander.xyz 46 points 1 month ago

I mean, yeah. It's an industry that has a near-unlimited supply of starry-eyed fresh college grads to throw into the meat grinder, and the executives of these companies absolutely love to take advantage of that. Maybe if enough devs leave the industry they might finally have to start respecting the people who work for them out of necessity.

[–] Carighan@lemmy.world 32 points 1 month ago (1 children)

24 years ago, I decided that instead of going into video game development like I had always dreamt of in school, I'll go into business software because at the time there was only one nearby game studio (Blue Byte), they weren't looking to hire in the next few years and I wasn't really willing to move very far at the time.

Looking back, that decision was one of the best branching-path decisions I've ever made in my life.

Thanks, Blue Byte! Indirectly you got me an amazing job! 🥂

[–] I_Clean_Here@lemmy.world 3 points 1 month ago

Mainzer wissen Bescheid.

[–] Draconic_NEO@lemmy.world 30 points 1 month ago (1 children)

Ah I remember when people would tell me that working in the video game industry is a dream, then those same people would complain to me about working long hours for no extra pay (crunch) to finish a game before the deadline.

Yeah that totally sounds like a dream job, it's so great you have to sleep in the office and you don't get paid for that extra work /s

[–] RamblingPanda@lemmynsfw.com 22 points 1 month ago (1 children)

Nightmares are still dreams

[–] Draconic_NEO@lemmy.world 4 points 1 month ago

True, I guess one could say that in a way they were correct in that it is technically still a dream to work at a company like EA, just a very bad, very hellish dream. Possibly made much worse by the self-gaslighting (and regular gaslighting) making them think it's actually a good dream, makes it even worse because you don't try to escape it because you convince yourself and are convinced by others you have it good when in reality, you don't.

[–] Wotan@lemmy.world 24 points 1 month ago (1 children)

This has a side effect of the people who went through the full game development cycle and can help to improve the process of developing of future games with actions based on their experience do not stay in the industry and thus the industry is bound to repeat the same mistakes again and again. I mean, I started working in the gaming 22 years ago, worked there for 7 years, then took 12 years of break elsewhere and now I am back for 3 years. After I returned I was surprised how almost nothing changed. It is still the demo-to-demo sprinting without proper planning or building the technical layers in advance. So the publishers/management is getting more or less faked demos and are always surprised that at some point they get a very badly made piece of software full of bugs and architectural flaws.

[–] Valmond@lemmy.world 35 points 1 month ago (1 children)

Me:

Shows a demo function just to show how it could be done.

Manager: (looking in his manager book)

-"So it's already implemented!"

Me: no it needs to be programmed first

Manager: but it already is, i can see it on screen!

Me: it has to be implemented correctly.

Manager (looking in book again)

-"How much time if you implement quickly as quick as possible?"

Me: it will take X time.

Manager: Starts to call tech-lead and chief boot-licker to "convince" me it doesn't need that much time.

After 3 hours of painful meeting I say okay okay okay and pushes 'best I could do' to production in the same evening. Reinforcing the idea that I'm a lying bad programmer and that Manager, tech-lead and chief boot-licker are correct.

Source: 10 years of gamedev

[–] captainWhatsHisName@lemm.ee 10 points 1 month ago

This is familiar to all devs, not just game devs

[–] jjjalljs@ttrpg.network 22 points 1 month ago (1 children)

Guy I know worked for a pretty big video game studio or two. (You've definitely heard of some games he worked on). Then he realized it sucked. Took a job in FinTech, made like double the money for half the work.

[–] EatATaco@lemm.ee 2 points 1 month ago

When I was leaving college a quarter of a century ago I briefly considered going into game dev...even back then everyone said it was low paid and gruelling work, so I passed.

It's shocking that people still go into it.

[–] TechSquidTV@lemmy.world 18 points 1 month ago (1 children)

It's wildly underpaid and the developers are highly highly skilled devs. They work in game dev because they want to, but the money isn't there. Most game developers are working at tiny studios hoping for a break.

[–] EncryptKeeper@lemmy.world 6 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago)

The shame of it is this kinda the way she goes for passion jobs like game dev. Similarly, EMS is a chronically underpaid career. Not for lack of difficulty or skills required, but because people want to do it. That desire to help others only translates into an ability to underpay people for the privilege. There’s a nobility to wanting to dedicate your life to helping people despite the lack of pay. A nobility that is happily exploited by private equity.

[–] bizzle@lemmy.world 14 points 1 month ago

Quit your job, start gardening.

[+] SnotFlickerman@lemmy.blahaj.zone -32 points 1 month ago (3 children)

Personal opinion: This is actually excellent because we could actually use developers who have worked these jobs and thus are familiar with how they work, and then they can develop actually useful code for small businesses.

For example: restaurants often have the ability to order online, but they have zero rate limiting, so you can end up with 30 different orders made within 30 seconds of each other and all those people will expect their orders ready at the same time and in the meantime you've got exactly three cooks and each meal takes at least five to seven minutes to get out. Someone could design a rate limiter, no one has. Because there aren't developers working those jobs realizing that workers are being worked to the bone because of businesses refusing to add limits to how much demand can come through their door.

[–] NuXCOM_90Percent@lemmy.zip 38 points 1 month ago

Yeah... that is nonsense.

Also, the good online ordering software DO provide those features. Restaraunt owners just tend to license the cheapest one (or pay their girlfriend's kid to write an even cheaper one) for obvious reasons.

[–] Goronmon@lemmy.world 22 points 1 month ago (1 children)

Because there aren’t developers working those jobs realizing that workers are being worked to the bone because of businesses refusing to add limits to how much demand can come through their door.

I'm not sure why you believe game developers would be better suited to this than people who actually do business software development. And it's less about what the developers want to do with software than it is about what the people to are buying the software want to do with that software.

[–] SnotFlickerman@lemmy.blahaj.zone -5 points 1 month ago (2 children)

I guess Open Source doesn't exist?

[–] Goronmon@lemmy.world 17 points 1 month ago (1 children)

Restaurant owners don't care about Open Source.

[–] Blaster_M@lemmy.world 3 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago) (1 children)

Restaurant owners would care about open source, if the offerings weren't expensive to implement. See my comment on the same level.

[–] Goronmon@lemmy.world 6 points 1 month ago (1 children)

I meant more that a restaurant owner isn't going to see or really get any value from an open source solution vs closed source specifically. They are just choosing a platform at a price point that works for them.

[–] Blaster_M@lemmy.world 2 points 1 month ago

And my point being they absolutely would use something FOSS if it worked, because for a restaurant, the less money spent on overhead the better.

[–] Blaster_M@lemmy.world 6 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago) (1 children)

Open Source exists, but it is janky, lacking in features, and literally every single one is used to upsell the expensive proprietary software by the same company that has the features lacking in the open source release.

[–] makingStuffForFun@lemmy.ml 1 points 1 month ago

The paywall in open source business apps is infuriating. I'd rather they just go full commercial.

[–] mundane@feddit.nu 8 points 1 month ago

That's due to decisions by the money bags (or lack of funds) and not the competence of the engineers.

Games

Weekly Threads:

Rules: