The death march: the problem of crunch time in game development

Horror stories are constantly surfacing about the lengths game developers sometimes have to go in order to ship a game on time. The worst involve up to 85-hour work weeks—12 hours a day, seven days a week—which is more than double the century-old 40 hour per week standard. Extended periods of crunch can last up to a year, with sustained 60-hour weeks. This practice has earned a markedly less innocuous name than "crunch time." It's called "the death march."

In some cases it's nearly dehumanizing: the closure of All Points Bulletin developer Real Time Worlds in September of last year left more than 185 employees out of a job. They were welcomed to the end of a particularly long crunch period by pink slips rather than profit sharing and bonuses.

In an industry that is steadfastly focused on fun, it seems counter-intuitive that video gamers should be the ones who have to worry about the sagging quality of life of those who make the games. No kid should ever have to wonder if Santa Claus is cracking the whip too hard on his elves to make the Christmas Eve shipping deadline, but despite widespread outrage over revelations from ex-employees describing poor conditions, the status quo remains largely unchanged and unchallenged.

Bad Santa

On the surface it's simple. Studios push their employees harder to finish projects faster. Less time spent on development means less time employing a full team of artists, programmers, designers, testers etc.

This is one of the principle factors perpetuating the use of crunch by management. The vast majority of employees working in the development of video games are salaried employees and do not receive overtime for additional hours spent at the office. A recent poll of over 350 industry professionals taken by developer-focused website Develop, showed that 98 percent of those polled received no compensation for their overtime work.

Crunch isn't a tool used exclusively for cost saving measures. "When the team rallies behind the idea of an awesome new boss battle that wasn't on the original schedule, and goes the extra mile to make it super rad, that's not the same thing as forcing employees to stay all weekend," said Michael Wilford, CEO of Twisted Pixel games, the studio behind the Xbox Live Arcade titles 'Splosion Man and Comic Jumper.

EA was one of the first companies to be put in the spotlight for quality of life concerns after the infamous EA_spouse essay gained widespread exposure in 2004. The letter alleged, among other things, that employees were being moved to another crunch just as the previous crunch was ending.

Over time it has become part of the corporate culture of making video games. "To me, sometimes it's not even a deadline that propels someone to stay late or come in on the weekends," said Bruce Straley, lead designer on Uncharted 2. "Is it the company's management, or is it the individual? How much is it a 'cultural peer pressure'—the unspoken peer pressure that propels someone to stay longer just to hang out with their friends, or to avoid the feeling of guilt they place on themselves for leaving early?"

Straley was very clear that there are many reasons why a worker might stay after hours, but it was the "cultural peer pressure" comment that was echoed when we spoke with Dr. Shoshana Bennett, a psychologist who practices in the San Francisco Bay Area.

"I've heard from my clients that the competition for [game development] jobs is fierce," said Dr. Bennett. "My clients' husbands and boyfriends feel totally replaceable, and therefore are worried that if they don't perform, they'll lose their jobs. There is definitely a culture of fear that's cultivated in this industry."

This "culture of fear" isn't something overt, but rather is a subversive, almost jock-like attitude found throughout the industry. It's a sense that if you're not working overtime, you're not part of the team. In late 2008, Mike Capps, president of Epic Games (developers of Gears of War 3 and Bulletstorm) madecontroversial comments about crunch on an industry panel, going so far as to say that Epic wouldn't hire prospective employees unless they were willing to work upwards of 60 hours per week.

Why should you care?

You work hard at your job, and you don't always get to go home right when the clock strikes five, either. So why should you take time out of your day to sympathize with game developers? After all, they're adults. If they don't like their situation they can move on, right?

Well, the problem is that it's just not a very effective way to manage a project, and often it's the quality of the games that suffer. This is not a new revelation; as far back as 1909 studies have shown that the 40-hour work week actually provides more output over a long period of time than when employees work longer hours.

In an article published by the International Game Developers Association, 20 year development veteran Evan Robinson notes that studies show that regularly being awake for more than 21 hours impairs the mind as much as having a blood-alcohol concentration of 0.08... that's also the point where it becomes illegal to drive a car.

"It's ironic," Robinson wrote. "Most software companies will fire an employee who routinely shows up drunk for work. But they don't think twice about... people who are impaired to the point of legal drunkenness due to lack of sleep. In fact, they will demand that these people work to the point of legal impairment as a condition of continued employment."

Punch-drunk love

What is worrisome is that some companies are perpetuating debunked and old fashioned ideas about the relationship between hours at work and productive output. The only demonstrable effect of which might be a lowered quality of life for employees, and ultimately a shorter career for some of the greatest designers in the world.

Many crunch-apologists will point to the fact that game developers can more easily work overtime because of their passion for their work. This is true, but the effect is minimal.

"Although loving your job and being stimulated with a particularly creative one might make it possible to work a few hours more than someone who isn't as enthusiastic," said Dr. Bennett "every person has his limit and will eventually burn out and lose effectiveness."

It's also important to remember that not all employees in the game industry are working on projects they are passionate about. It's pretty hard to imagine the entire staff behind the latest Dora the Explorer game being gung-ho about their work every day. Even those who are lucky enough to work on amazing AAA projects often aren't creatively stimulated. If you're the guy who makes different brick textures for the buildings in GTA4, or the guy who programs the way fire behaves when it spreads to different substances, that's not the same as being a top-level designer.

"There are many potential physical and mental health risks from overwork and inadequate sleep in general," said Dr. Bennett. "Focus and concentration will suffer—ironically, making the employee less productive—[accompanied by] lower immune system functioning and depression. You can literally get sick from too much work."

The mental health risks span beyond that. Psychologist Dr. Giles Burch, who also lectures on Human Resources at the University of Auckland Business School, told us that overworking can lead to strain on a marriage, and spending fewer hours at home can cause children to lose attachment to their parents.

A cost too high

This isn't an article meant to make readers recoil in horror at the realities of game development. If that were the case we'd have titled this, "The Gulags of Cyberia" and equated their struggle with mainland Chinese indentured sweatshop workers. But the simple fact is that game developers have to pay a heavy price to work in this business. Why should they?

There is great competition for jobs in game design these days, and many of the lucky few who snare jobs in the industry will be welcomed by unreasonable hours and forced to choose between work and relationships with family and friends.

"Extended crunch ages people in a way that they can't see on the front end," said Dustin Clingman, the chairman of the IGDA Quality of Life branch. "It robs them of years of creative potential."

Heroes Lost

Clingman's warning should be sobering even to those who are adamant that crunch is necessary to create great entertainment. In the past five years we've seen some of the industry's great designers retire at young ages compared to other creators in the film industry. The industry is being molded to fit the needs and abilities of young, energetic people and is incompatible with the needs of older, more experienced designers.

This is an issue our own Ben Kuchera has thought about at length. "I've been told that people who write about the business all want to be developers and make games," he told me. "It couldn't be any less true. We get to tour these studios and see how the people who make the games live. They seem to always be tired, the offices are dimly lit, and people are sleeping on cots." He points out that while many developers have benefits such as gyms and cafeterias onsite, that just drives home the idea that you're never supposed to leave.

Will Wright, Roberta Williams, and Toru Iwatani all retired before the age of 55. This is in stark contrast to some of the legendary directors of film, like Akira Kurosawa who directed and wrote screenplays until he was 85 and an injury physically kept him away. Steven Spielberg (64), Martin Scorsese (67), Francis Ford Coppola (71), Ridley Scott (73) and Clint Eastwood (nearly 81) all continue to write and direct films today, and they show now signs of stopping. The film industry is much better for it.

The message is clear. Either we move game development toward something more sustainable or it will be the gamers who miss out on what could be the greatest works of luminary designers.