Support NeoGAF

[Aaronrules380]

LOL at this

It is true that there ARE certain design decisions which are made that do in fact hinge on maximizing VALUE (not profits) - but in reality in my experience those design decisions usually boil down to the dev team looking at it from the standpoint of [return on investment] - does it make sense to put X number of developers and Y numbers of dollars towards a feature or a piece of content that you can reliably predict won’t generate adequate revenue to warrant that investment?

". Which basically is worse than profit in the eyes of consumers, since it means that even if something would be profitable, what's important is that it's seen as profitable enough to justify not putting the resources into something else (in other words, it's about whether the opportunity cost is worth it). So it's still about making as much money as possible. In fact, it's about generating the maximum profit possible, rather than just trying to come up in the black

To clarify: I still don't believe all choices are about profit, just that the way they put it was awful. Many choices really won't affect the profit either way, or at least not in a predictable way

 

[Alebrije]

Well, I must say I don't really care what happens with the people on the other side. I have enough to deal with all the buggy, unfinished and users exploitable games here.
Sorry for giving developers not enough love.

Specially since we pay for those games.

 

[LegendofLex]

I think the "game developers are lazy" sentiment is less a commentary on how much time developers actually put into the games they work on (or the conditions in which they work...) and more a commentary on how well-spent the time is (e.g. if your game can't perform well with the crowd AI, then maybe crowd AI shouldn't have been a priority for your game). Still a somewhat misguided sentiment, but I don't think the negative response to the final products is misplaced per se.

I'm not a big fan of the thrust behind the "casual games" comment. It's comparing several different platforms and "cultural influence" and not the contribution "casual gamers" have to the very (and continued) existence of a market for game platforms (besides just mobile) in the first place.

As for the comment about players not knowing what's best for a game:

“If we [listened] to the public and the general feedback [from players] Assasin’s Creed would have [had] dragons and monsters…and nobody would die in Game of Thrones,” Patrice Désilets, creator of Assassin’s Creed, joked in an email.

You can't point to successful things as evidence of people not knowing what's best. You have to point to unsuccessful things, because they show that someone tried to apply what people wanted to something and it failed. The fact of the matter is that likely some player, somewhere, has a great idea for how to improve a game or genre. We know this because all the game designers are also players, and before we had "professional game designers" we had simply players who tried to make games.

It's, of course, true that very few people can tell you what's best for the game. But the sentiment I'm seeing here is that "the market is wrong" when in reality it's the developer's job to recognize what the market wants without having to be told. People really didn't want dragons in Assassin's Creed because in hindsight it's clear that what they wanted was historical fiction; people really do want characters to die in Game of Thrones because otherwise they wouldn't need to be vocal about not wanting their favorite character to be killed (which begins from an implicit interest in there actually being stakes in their stories).

 

[Pathfinder]

Im glad that this thread is falling right into what they said. Great work.

It's funny how that works sometimes.

Q.E.D. at its finest.

 

[SonicMegaDrive]

People think game developers are lazy? The people I know who work in the industry are practically treated like slaves.

 

[JordanN]

Are you asking why are publishers OK with paying low wages and overworking their employees? Take a wild guess.

It's still bizarre to me because I don't understand why pick the game industry to include these practices.

Are games seen as some hyper profitable beast that they completely disregard human lives over it?

 

[Marty Chinn]

That could have been worded better but I've also never understood this. If you're starting a company why locate in one of the most expensive places possible?

Because that's where people want to be. That's where options are if things go south. That's where you're going to find the people you want. It costs more here because people want to be here. Sure you could set u p shop in Idaho, but you're going to be severely limited with who you're going to find.

I always love the argument of "just move." If only things were so simple.

Yep. I hate this argument. They're pretty much telling me to drop my family, drop my friends, take away my kids from their cousins, friends and family. Uprooting myself is something that is anything but easy with a ton of sacrifice.

 

[Alebrije]

People think game developers are lazy? The people I know who work in the industry are practically treated like slaves.

Lazy or incompetents , the final product is the same : a broken game.

I bet most of pleople refers as developer the company that release the game ( EA, UBI ) and not the guys that programmed the game, the slaves you refer.

 

[DragonKnight]

Cant fucking stand when people here cite devs for being lazy

 

[NullPointer]

People think game developers are lazy? The people I know who work in the industry are practically treated like slaves.

Of all the myths or misunderstandings the lazy devs one is probably the worst. Its hard to fathom just how much time and effort and passion and tough decisions that go into these things, whether its the small team trying to get their indie darling out in the world or a large multi-studio project that employs hundreds of people across several years.

 

[Aaronrules380]

As for the other points, they're really obvious and dumb things. "realistic art isn't better than unrealistic art" is even dumber, since that's ultimately a completely subjective statement which means whether it's true or not is up for each individual to decide. I prefer stylistic art most of the time, and I think art style should be chosen based on what you're going for with your game. But if someone prefers realistic art 100% of the time they aren't really wrong, since that's just a preference

 

[adampa1006]

Terrible article.

There is no excuse for releasing broken games.

We are the consumer, we pay and have rights.

 

[Pathfinder]

Terrible article.

There is no excuse for releasing broken games.

We are the consumer, we pay and have rights.

So, developers don't have the right to have lives and families?

 

[PdotMichael]

So, developers don't have the right to have lives and families?

Pretty sure that software engineers can find jobs everywhere. Car companies are looking for people with visual computing skills all the time.

 

[Gentleman Jack]

Game Developers Are Lazy

Game Development Is Easy

Game Developers Don’t Care About Bugs

“Casual” Games Don’t Matter

I have been at some point in my life guilty of each of these since I started shaving my face, in the interests of full disclosure. It took years of actually working in software to have them all dispelled. To one degree or another I probably still fall into easy traps regarding these beliefs from time to time. It's sometimes hard to comprehend the thought process behind a complex project that's the product of years of collaboration between often very large teams, so it's more convenient to conclude that people are just dumb/lazy/inattentive.

To the extent that they're a little bit broad (I mean, "Game Development Is Easy" should really be "Consumers underestimate the cost of implementing your pet feature") I can see that the article would generate the reactions that it does but that doesn't mean there's nothing to discuss here. I remember the heat that some mobile games (Flappy Bird, Angry Birds) got for being cheap/lazy/worthless games for meaningless casuals, the 'hardcore vs the world' siege mentality still finds a way into threads that are increasingly cynical about publisher output in the mobile space, and a profound misunderstanding of QA in a production cycle still comes through every time someone posts 'how did they miss that bug omg!'

Yes it's easy to believe that at face value, 'devs are lazy' isn't common in that nobody says it that specific way. But the belief behind such a statement is extremely common.

 

[Aaronrules380]

Lazy devs myth is mostly just ignorance on how decision making in games actually happens, as well as a lack of understanding on the nature of resource allocation. Usually, any thing that seems lazy or incomplete is more on the publishers for strict deadlines or low budgets (in terms of money, staff, technology, etc.), or tasks simply being much harder than initially anticipated. Even when it is on the devs, it's probably due to incompetence more than laziness

 

[NullPointer]

There is no excuse for releasing broken games.

There isn't, but that seems to be a function of making the release date, and I've never really understood who is ultimately to blame for that. Did the devs overpromise and mismanage the project? Did the publisher put the squeeze to them, adding new features or unrealistic or unaccounted for demands?

Ultimately I guess its the publisher's call whether a game is delayed or not, but I can see how it could really depend in terms of who dropped the ball in the first place.

 

[GhaleonEB]

People think game developers are lazy? The people I know who work in the industry are practically treated like slaves.

This is the one that I find most bothersome, and goes hand in hand with the 'development is hard' one. It's particularly frustrating in an industry that is notorious for such brutal development crunches to make ship that the notion of lazy developers gets tossed around; I see it pretty often when bugs are found or random things someone wants to be in the game is missing.

 

[Lanrutcon]

Let's say I started with 1 million sympathy points.

Let's say I lost a point every time I encountered a blatantly rushed, unfinished or deceitfully marketing game.

Let's say I lost a point every time I encountered overpriced DLC or devs charging for things that used to be free.

Let's say I lost a point every time a product stays in a shitty state long after release, but yet more DLC and/or a sequel is announced.

Let's say I lost a point every time I encountered a remarkably stupid design decision which is implemented purely to slow down the rate at which I consume the content, or just because the devs have a blatant disconnect with their audience.

Oops. Ran out of sympathy points sometime last gen. Too bad, mister developer.

 

[Ravidrath]

This is a good reply, though.

As soon as I can, I'm moving my operation out of California. Fuck our rates.

I don't think this is a good reply at all.

Developer salaries do NOT scale with cost of living, even remotely.

Someone in LA makes pretty close to the same as someone in SF or in Austin. Just in Austin the cost of living is much lower.

The idea that devs should live somewhere else to save some people some money is ridiculous. Developers are in their area because of other jobs they got, and they stay because they have work, family and friends there.

They make sacrifices on cost of living to stay near those things.

This is the one that I find most bothersome, and goes hand in hand with the 'development is hard' one. It's particularly frustrating in an industry that is notorious for such brutal development crunches to make ship that the notion of lazy developers gets tossed around; I see it pretty often when bugs are found or random things someone wants to be in the game is missing.

Also related to this, games and software in general are getting so big that it's not really possible to catch every bug.

People want bigger and bigger games, which means more places where things can go wrong. Big AAA games get tons of testing, but nothing will ever compare to the amount of time put into a game once it's released to the public.

 

[Pathfinder]

Pretty sure that software engineers can find jobs everywhere. Car companies are looking for people with visual computing skills all the time.

Just like they can also find other places to live, right?

 

[Aaronrules380]

Pretty sure that software engineers can find jobs everywhere. Car companies are looking for people with visual computing skills all the time.

It's usually not the developer's fault as much as it is the publisher. Even when it is, it's usually because something came up in development that wasn't anticipated, which is pretty much impossible to avoid to some extent when making such a complex product, and only happens midway through a process, so after a lot of time and money have already been devoted to a project

 

[PdotMichael]

Just like they can also find other places to live, right?

eh yes?

It's usually not the developer's fault as much as it is the publisher. Even when it is, it's usually because something came up in development that wasn't anticipated, which is pretty much impossible to avoid to some extent when making such a complex product, and only happens midway through a process, so after a lot of time and money have already been devoted to a project

If we working conditions are shit then just move to something else. Software engineers are in the lucky position that are pretty flexible in their skills. But if you want to make games because you are some kind of idealist... whatever, should I buy some DLCs more for you?

 

[Dryk]

It's still bizarre to me because I don't understand why pick the game industry to include these practices.

Are games seen as some hyper profitable beast that they completely disregard human lives over it?

The reality of the situation is that every industry would do this if they could get away with it. It just so happens that people in the games industry are the ones that put up with it.

 

[Tal Shiar Agent]

There has been so much ignorance (on GAF too) about DLC especially concerning Star Wars: Battlefront. Uninformed bullshit like "they cut content to sell as DLC!" nonsense. This article should be required reading.

 

[Aaronrules380]

Let's say I started with 1 million sympathy points.

Let's say I lost a point every time I encountered a blatantly rushed, unfinished or deceitfully marketing game.

Let's say I lost a point every time I encountered overpriced DLC or devs charging for things that used to be free.

Let's say I lost a point every time a product stays in a shitty state long after release, but yet more DLC and/or a sequel is announced.

Let's say I lost a point every time I encountered a remarkably stupid design decision which is implemented purely to slow down the rate at which I consume the content, or just because the devs have a blatant disconnect with their audience.

Oops. Ran out of sympathy points sometime last gen. Too bad, mister developer.

Most of these aren't calls made by developers. They're usually forced on them by the publisher, or otherwise the publisher's fault for how they allocated resources and deadlines

 

[bomma_man]

I don't know about you, but that sounds pretty great

Proving his point

 

[Lionel Richie]

Excellent article. This should really be required reading to be able to post on NeoGAF, IMO.

I have been lurking in NeoGAF for a few years even before I created my account, I think I've seen the "DLC is Evil" one and maybe a few cases of people saying the dev was lazy when talking about universally panned games (THPS5 or so).

 

[Aaronrules380]

Proving his point

Not really in this case. It would only prove his point if he had evidence that doing so would actually harm the game for the wider audience and hurt sales or something. Otherwise it's a completely subjective matter whether that would actually hurt the game, because we'd be going into a discussion of quality. A better example would be something that the audience thinks would be fun, but would actually be super tedious (perhaps something often suggested that they actually tested at one point) or something a specific vocal audience wants that they have evidence most don't.

 

[nicanica]

More like '1/100,000 scotsmen are ill-informed idiots, but let's make a big deal of their ramblings'

Does anyone really think Game Development Is Easy?

So easy that its common to dismiss their work as "Lazy"

 

[IcyStorm]

Gosh, it must be easy to uproot your life and move somewhere at the drop of a hat! /s

And this article obviously isn't meant for people who read GAF. I don't know how people can think that everyone already knows stuff like this; the fact is that probably most people who play games don't. Most consumers of video games don't actually keep up with industry news and they aren't aware of what game development is like. You can tell from the comments here and on Kotaku and pretty much all game-related websites that even the people who "should" know this stuff don't actually know this stuff.

Well, I must say I don't really care what happens with the people on the other side. I have enough to deal with all the buggy, unfinished and users exploitable games here.
Sorry for giving developers not enough love.

Oh, I imagine playing some video games that are a bit buggy is so terrible that you don't have the time to even feel a bit of empathy and express understanding for developers who are often overworked and sometimes underpaid and cannot make the decisions that impact a game's quality.

 

[NullPointer]

... Uninformed bullshit like "they cut content to sell as DLC!" nonsense. This article should be required reading.

If anything this article states that sometimes content is cut from the core game for DLC, or that at the very least that sometimes DLC comes at the detriment to the core game development.

As consumers, there's no way for us to know for certain one way or the other, so it'll always be guesswork.

 

[Lanrutcon]

Most of these aren't calls made by developers. They're usually forced on them by the publisher, or otherwise the publisher's fault for how they allocated resources and deadlines

That isn't an excuse.

If my project manager nails me to the wall and tells me I have 2 days to code 5 day's worth of functionality and I cut corners to earn my paycheck, then I'm part of the problem. 'But my boss said I had to" doesn't cut it.

 

[Prime crotch]

That isn't an excuse.

If my project manager nails me to the wall and tells me I have 2 days to code 5 day's worth of functionality and I cut corners to earn my paycheck, then I'm part of the problem. 'But my boss said I had to" doesn't cut it.

Yeaaaaah, I don't think you ever worked in a environment like that, it's either the boot or suck it up. Or grab a shotgun and go postal

 

[ScatheZombie]

That isn't an excuse.

If my project manager nails me to the wall and tells me I have 2 days to code 5 day's worth of functionality and I cut corners to earn my paycheck, then I'm part of the problem. 'But my boss said I had to" doesn't cut it.

I'm literally fucking dying over here. This is some of the funniest shit I've read in a long time. Bravo.

 

[Famassu]

They might not take away from the core game, but I miss the days where games had unlockable costumes or other secret/extra's, for free. These days, that stuff is mostly day 1 DLC or pre-order DLC. If you want all the costumes and optional items, you'd have to pre-order at five different shops and buy the regular edition, the special edition, the limited edition and the collector's edition. And maybe even a webshop exclusive edition.

This only splits that content, making it almost impossible to get all of it.

The thing is, making new costumes, skins & even completely different character models can be far more expensive nowadays than making something similar in a PS1 game or something. Modelling let's say a few alternative vehicles takes how many months nowadays? Vs. someone being able to do it in a matter of days or weeks in the past. At that point it can be difficult to justify tons of unlockables that most people probably won't ever unlock due to their requirements (finding collectibles, grinding for money, playing through the game on a certain difficulty level/in a certain way/with a certain character). Of course that doesn't apply to selling in-game currency or unlocking non-DLC content such that could be done via cheat codes in the past.

 

[PdotMichael]

Oh, I imagine playing some video games that are a bit buggy is so terrible that you don't have the time to even feel a bit of empathy for the developers who are overworked and sometimes underpaid and cannot make the decisions that impact a game's quality.

Exactly. If my car mechanics makes a shitty job I don't say it's okay because your work is hard.
I'm the guy who pays a lot of money for something and then I should feel even bad that I bought shit? I have only empathy for coffee farmers in the third world who are really working like slaves not for people who think that making games is their destiny.

 

[Dead Man Typing]

That isn't an excuse.

If my project manager nails me to the wall and tells me I have 2 days to code 5 day's worth of functionality and I cut corners to earn my paycheck, then I'm part of the problem. 'But my boss said I had to" doesn't cut it.

What should the coder do in your scenario? Quit his job? Or somehow complete the task in an impossible timeframe?

 

[Weltall Zero]

It's still bizarre to me because I don't understand why pick the game industry to include these practices.

Are games seen as some hyper profitable beast that they completely disregard human lives over it?

They pick game industry because a lot of people want to work on it no matter the cost. Companies will always pay wages as low and make hours a long as they can get away with (i.e. just enough to ensure their workers don't walk away, and sometimes not even that). Capitalism 101.

 

[packy34]

The tweet near the end that says it's a misconception that "offensive content = creative freedom" is something I disagree with. What's offensive to a person is inherently subjective, and I don't want anything censored just to make a group of people feel better. Not everything has to be carefully tailored to appease everyone. Don't like something? Don't consume it.

 

[LegendofLex]

That isn't an excuse.

If my project manager nails me to the wall and tells me I have 2 days to code 5 day's worth of functionality and I cut corners to earn my paycheck, then I'm part of the problem. 'But my boss said I had to" doesn't cut it.

Having to meet an unreasonable deadline for an entertainment product so you can earn your paycheck isn't a moral decision, regardless of how badly the final product suffers. If a deadline is unreasonable for the level of quality you ought to deliver, that doesn't change regardless of whether you choose to keep your job or not.

 

[Aaronrules380]

That isn't an excuse.

If my project manager nails me to the wall and tells me I have 2 days to code 5 day's worth of functionality and I cut corners to earn my paycheck, then I'm part of the problem. 'But my boss said I had to" doesn't cut it.

To an extent, but if every game developer refused every time an unreasonable demand was made on them by higher ups, we probably wouldn't have a game industry at all. It's nice to be idealistic, but people still need to eat. If I was a game developer, and I was in a position where I either cut corners or get fired, I'd cut corners. And most likely so would you. Because earning income so you can sustain yourself and your family is way more important than mildly inconveniencing a few gamers. The only time I'd put this sort of ethical issue over my job is if it would legitimately put people in harm or danger. Disappointing a bunch of people sucks, but it's better than losing any chance of making an income and surviving

 

[PeakPointMatrix]

Most of these seem pretty obvious and any rational thinking person would already know all this.

You underestimate how many stupid people there are. Case in point..

That isn't an excuse.

If my project manager nails me to the wall and tells me I have 2 days to code 5 day's worth of functionality and I cut corners to earn my paycheck, then I'm part of the problem. 'But my boss said I had to" doesn't cut it.

Here are your options.

You challenge your superior and refuse to meet the deadline = you're fired

You take way longer to complete all tasks, causing a domino effect of missed deadlines, fucking over the rest of the pipeline's schedule causing quality to suffer across the board, culminating to missing a hard ship date tied to millions in manufacturing deals = you're fired, game is fucked, developers fucked

You review and prioritize the tasks at hand that are completable within the feasible remaining time = complete a portion of the work, staying on schedule without ebbing into the valuable limited time of the departments ahead.


There are literally not enough hours in the day. The process has always been a game of compromises with a range of varying success. However, I don't expect any understanding from you since it's clear you've never worked in any kind of studio, and no matter what we tell you, you will blame the teams for being "part of the problem". Surprise me.

I have been lurking in NeoGAF for a few years even before I created my account, I think I've seen the "DLC is Evil" one and maybe a few cases of people saying the dev was lazy when talking about universally panned games (THPS5 or so).

Either you don't visit very often, or you've been very lucky with the threads you pick. Lazy devs/DLC is evil absolutely plagues their announcements or discovery of cut or missing content.

 

[Marty Chinn]

That isn't an excuse.

If my project manager nails me to the wall and tells me I have 2 days to code 5 day's worth of functionality and I cut corners to earn my paycheck, then I'm part of the problem. 'But my boss said I had to" doesn't cut it.

So you quit or get fired?

 

[Prime crotch]

Exactly. If my car mechanics makes a shitty job I don't say it's okay because your work is hard.
I'm the guy who pays a lot of money for something and then I should feel even bad that I bought shit? I have only empathy for coffee farmers in the third world who are really working like slaves.

Maybe when they start getting paid less and work even more hours, then they can be legit slaves? I'm sorry if working unpaid overtime, and sleeping on the office isn't enough subversive behaviour

 

[Primethius]

"Devs are lazy" is an absolutely toxic mentality.

Hate it.

 

[Scientist Supreme!]

That isn't an excuse.

If my project manager nails me to the wall and tells me I have 2 days to code 5 day's worth of functionality and I cut corners to earn my paycheck, then I'm part of the problem. 'But my boss said I had to" doesn't cut it.

I don't believe you and this shows me how people don't know anything about game development.

 

[Pathfinder]

Exactly. If my car mechanics makes a shitty job I don't say it's okay because your work is hard.
I'm the guy who pays a lot of money for something and then I should feel even bad that I bought shit? I have only empathy for coffee farmers in the third world who are really working like slaves not for people who think that making games is their destiny.

I believe you are single-handedly proving the article's relevancy and legitimacy.

 

[Clear]

Never forget: If game prices at retail had risen in lockstep with the man-hours taken to create them over the last 3 decades, they would cost a fortune by now.

 

[Interficium]

Horse race between Pdotmichael and Lanrutcon right now!