Hung out a bit with Harvey Smith, who was in town recently with his lovely wife. We got into talking about some of the game industry issues that the IGDA is takling, such as quality of life, credits and business problems. While admitting to the challenges of work/life balance for developers, Harvey put forth the argument that we willingly submit ourselves to these extreme conditions - in part because we are passionate, but also in part because deep down we hope that we’ll make it big (ie, fame and fortune).

True. This is certainly one of the aspects explored in the Quality of Life white paper.

However, I put forth that only a small handful of developers on a project actually have the potential to be rewarded in this manner (eg, lead designer, studio head, lead programmer, etc (if they’re lucky)). Much like in Hollywood, it is really only the “above the line” talent that reap fame and fortune (ie, lead actor/actress, director, writer, etc). All the “below the line” crew do their work and get paid accordingly. And, for the most part, they don’t make crazy sacrifices or jeopardize their home life. They are not in a position to benefit from the big upside.

The same is not true in games. Everyone dives in, full of passion, regardless of their potential to reap success. Managers bank on this enthusiasm and build it into the production schedule and cost estimates. It is the rank and file developers that pave the way for the suits to reap the spoils of their accomplishments.

We also talked a bit about Farenheit 9/11 and the significance of Moore’s statement on how the cost (in terms of sacrifices) of war is disproportionately paid for by lower class citizens, who are first in line to fight for their country (which arguably has done jack to help them)…

A major part of the whole quality of life debate is the fact that “below the line” developers are ready and willing to take a bullet for management… Not that I want to compare games development to the travesty of war, but the analogy works.

Update: Harvey pointed out that it is important to clarify that this is not true of all game studios, nor film productions. For some, making those sacrifices means that they build their street cred and the ability to make more games (ie, attract funding or a publishing deal, etc). But, I’d contend that the same rule applies. Those making such sacrifices are still seeking, and able to reap, the upside of their sacrifices. The tools programmer at big studio x, working 80+ hours a week, not being paid overtime, working weekends, etc, etc, is not likely ever to see this type of upside (other than a gold star on their resume, as Mark notes below)…