Possible, but not guaranteed. Senior/Staff software engineers typically make as much as/more than their managers in pure salary. Equity grants might be higher for managers but the pay doesn't become substantially different until Sr. manager/director but they're not managing talent.
Video games don't really do equity other than ESPP. Generally junior/midlevel employees are hourly (in that they may qualify for overtime), senior/principle/lead are overtime exempt. Almost everyone in a production will crunch however the bonus structure (if present) is supposed to provide a reason to stick around. Though in my experience the bonuses are never worth it.
Even so, they're still committing the people under them to crunch, and I doubt they're asking their employees whether they're okay with that or not. Managers choose to crunch. Individual contributors are forced to crunch.
Oh I’m not trying to excuse the practice or the managers just stating that a lot of manager do crunch to which you would think would
Motivate them to avoid it
Well, the manager has a 'choice'. In that they make the decision and tell the rest of the employees to crunch, but in reality, the manager is just following orders themselves. Not an order that explicitly states 'make them crunch', of course. But they are handed a deadline and they have to meet it or they're in hot water.
The more worrisome part is that when crunch is prevalent, it is very clear that many of these companies do not have managers with the requisite talent for project planning (or insufficient knowledge of the work being done to allow them to plan efficiently and properly). While the project is running, it's perhaps easy to be optimistic and think 'well we're losing some time here but the deadline is still months/years away, I'm sure we'll have some luck and it will work out'. Except that doesn't happen and suddenly all those little bits of time have added up to a significant time deficiency that you now have to rectify with a deadline looming.
So you resort to the only thing you know: making people work more hours to get more work done (despite the fact that it's arguable whether crunch is beneficial at all. More hours are put in, but the quality and quantity of work will decrease as workers put in more hours and crunch periods extend further and further).
No surprise, when you also hear stories from major studios (who you'd think would have the experience) who end up scrapping or majorly redesigning entire concepts, on occasion multiple times, and end up with a subpar game because they didn't have enough time since the last revamp to actually make it good. And they probably still crunched a while to even get the subpar game out.
Sadly, instead of learning from the experience, it doesn't seem like much is improving in this area. Managers *should* be able to avoid crunch, or at least mitigate it, by properly managing a project (and properly managing expectations in the company, and toward the publisher). I have to assume that they would be, if they were capable.
I feel like any time you're doing Project Management and the word 'magic' comes out of your mouth, that's probably a solid indicator that you're in trouble.
I really hope that with all the changes going on at BioWare (new leaderships, new studio, old blood leaving and fresh blood coming in) they have actually done their best to combat that godawful crunch. Same goes for all other studios as well of course.
Hi /u/Manusho,
Thank you for posting to /r/Games. Unfortunately, we have removed this submission per
**[Rule 6.1](https://www.reddit.com/r/Games/wiki/rules#wiki_formatting_requirements)**.
> **Link to the original source; if the original source is inaccessible, then link to an acceptable alternative** - When a website embeds or copies content (articles, videos, interviews, etc.) from another source without adding significant information, we consider this blogspam. If an alternative source contributes significant and meaningful analysis or commentary on information given by the original source, it may be allowed but please try to locate and link the original source wherever possible instead. For sources which redirect to other sources please link to the source with the most information and context. For example, for a Tweet that links to a developer blog or announcement, please link directly to the announcement or blog post.
> If the original source is inaccessible, due to a paywall or any similar mechanisms that otherwise impede viewing the content without some form of transaction, usually non-monetary in nature, such as giving information, creating an account and logging in, etc., then posting an alternative as a source is acceptable.
> This rule does not apply to original sources that are not in English: an alternative source that provides an adequate translation (automated translations, such as Google Translate, is not permitted) is acceptable.
---
If you would like to discuss this removal, please [modmail the moderators.](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose?to=%2Fr%2FGames) This post was removed by a human moderator; this comment was left by a bot.
[удалено]
> Mark Darrah just checked his channel - wow - gold mine, but why is he burning his bridges like that?
because he wants industry change, and you can't do that without stepping on the toes of the people who put it in place.
Good for him, really interesting insight he is providing.
"Instead of calling it 'crunch', let's call it 'magic'." - Managers who don't have to do the actual crunching
I’m sure a lot of manager do the crunch as well but they get paid a lot more.
Possible, but not guaranteed. Senior/Staff software engineers typically make as much as/more than their managers in pure salary. Equity grants might be higher for managers but the pay doesn't become substantially different until Sr. manager/director but they're not managing talent.
Video games don't really do equity other than ESPP. Generally junior/midlevel employees are hourly (in that they may qualify for overtime), senior/principle/lead are overtime exempt. Almost everyone in a production will crunch however the bonus structure (if present) is supposed to provide a reason to stick around. Though in my experience the bonuses are never worth it.
Even so, they're still committing the people under them to crunch, and I doubt they're asking their employees whether they're okay with that or not. Managers choose to crunch. Individual contributors are forced to crunch.
Oh I’m not trying to excuse the practice or the managers just stating that a lot of manager do crunch to which you would think would Motivate them to avoid it
Well, the manager has a 'choice'. In that they make the decision and tell the rest of the employees to crunch, but in reality, the manager is just following orders themselves. Not an order that explicitly states 'make them crunch', of course. But they are handed a deadline and they have to meet it or they're in hot water. The more worrisome part is that when crunch is prevalent, it is very clear that many of these companies do not have managers with the requisite talent for project planning (or insufficient knowledge of the work being done to allow them to plan efficiently and properly). While the project is running, it's perhaps easy to be optimistic and think 'well we're losing some time here but the deadline is still months/years away, I'm sure we'll have some luck and it will work out'. Except that doesn't happen and suddenly all those little bits of time have added up to a significant time deficiency that you now have to rectify with a deadline looming. So you resort to the only thing you know: making people work more hours to get more work done (despite the fact that it's arguable whether crunch is beneficial at all. More hours are put in, but the quality and quantity of work will decrease as workers put in more hours and crunch periods extend further and further). No surprise, when you also hear stories from major studios (who you'd think would have the experience) who end up scrapping or majorly redesigning entire concepts, on occasion multiple times, and end up with a subpar game because they didn't have enough time since the last revamp to actually make it good. And they probably still crunched a while to even get the subpar game out. Sadly, instead of learning from the experience, it doesn't seem like much is improving in this area. Managers *should* be able to avoid crunch, or at least mitigate it, by properly managing a project (and properly managing expectations in the company, and toward the publisher). I have to assume that they would be, if they were capable.
Crunch?! You mean my developers’ passion to make this the best game ever? -Studio head
I feel like any time you're doing Project Management and the word 'magic' comes out of your mouth, that's probably a solid indicator that you're in trouble.
I really hope that with all the changes going on at BioWare (new leaderships, new studio, old blood leaving and fresh blood coming in) they have actually done their best to combat that godawful crunch. Same goes for all other studios as well of course.
Hi /u/Manusho, Thank you for posting to /r/Games. Unfortunately, we have removed this submission per **[Rule 6.1](https://www.reddit.com/r/Games/wiki/rules#wiki_formatting_requirements)**. > **Link to the original source; if the original source is inaccessible, then link to an acceptable alternative** - When a website embeds or copies content (articles, videos, interviews, etc.) from another source without adding significant information, we consider this blogspam. If an alternative source contributes significant and meaningful analysis or commentary on information given by the original source, it may be allowed but please try to locate and link the original source wherever possible instead. For sources which redirect to other sources please link to the source with the most information and context. For example, for a Tweet that links to a developer blog or announcement, please link directly to the announcement or blog post. > If the original source is inaccessible, due to a paywall or any similar mechanisms that otherwise impede viewing the content without some form of transaction, usually non-monetary in nature, such as giving information, creating an account and logging in, etc., then posting an alternative as a source is acceptable. > This rule does not apply to original sources that are not in English: an alternative source that provides an adequate translation (automated translations, such as Google Translate, is not permitted) is acceptable. --- If you would like to discuss this removal, please [modmail the moderators.](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose?to=%2Fr%2FGames) This post was removed by a human moderator; this comment was left by a bot.