would you feel bad if a game you enjoyed (not necesarily liked) is a result of hostile working condition? (such as crunching)

[zassou]

in the light of various news of crunching from game devs

[XR6]

It depends on the situation.

If the game developers are voluntarily working in those types of environments, then I would not have much of an issue with it. They are the ones who chose to be in that situation.

If they are forced to work in a hostile environment, then I would feel bad about it. I'd leave a negative review and request a refund.

[Bramimond]

Reminds me of the anime industry, where animators suffer similar if not worse conditions (having to sleep in the office, death through overwork, 200h unpaid overtime per month, not even paid minimum wage). Turns out it's easy to exploit people who are passionate about their work.

 

I'm more or less neutral/indifferent about these things. What happens behind the scenes doesn't affect me as a customer and I think Japans recent reaction to Pierre Taki (arrested for drug use) was way overblown. They removed his work from already released games. Moral outrage really has gotten out of hand these days.

 

I won't stop to support my favorite author just because he was involved in some kind of scandal. I don't need moral high ground to feel good about myself.

[Arika]

not really.

 

Games are not the only industry to suffer from this. look at Foxxcon, the company that put together iPhones, they had to put safety measures on their building to stop people from jumping off the roof. similar things happen (or at least happned) at some of Samsung's factories.

 

It might sound harsh, but not purchasing a game or any other material possession  that was created in these work environments will do literally nothing to help these people that's the grim reality of the world these days.

 

If i felt bad for these kinds of things i would not own anything and would likely fall into a deep state of depression.

[Teddy07]

Don't care how my clothes, games, electronics are produced.  Not my problem

[Totallycasual]

They get paid well and from what i understand a lot of companies offer generous bonuses for all of the aggressive hours towards the end.  

[porina]

Happens in a lot of industries not just gaming. The type of wok I do, is salaried for basic hours, with unpaid overtime. I'm not a fan of the system, but it goes with the job. Where I work isn't bad in that area, I generally do the required hours and no more, but occasionally stretch it out as needed. It is simply a case of, if I don't like it, I don't have to be here and can go find something else. I know, that's much easier said than done and it can be a trap to get stuck and not be able to move easily.

[lewdicrous]

If you want to start caring about how your games are made, then I suggest caring about how your electronics and clothes are made.

[jiyeon]

I don't bat and eye as to what happens behind the scenes. If I see a game I like, I'll buy it. I won't not buy it because the company could be running shady business practises.

 

Not to sound heartless, but the last thing I think about when deciding on buying a game - or any other item for that matter - is how the developers made it and what conditions they were in. The product comes first, ethics come after.

 

A few people above mentioned Foxconn, and how dire their working conditions are, but let's be honest, they're one of if not the biggest manufacturers to serve the entire technology industry and they're not about to stop.

 

You sometimes have to set aside the ethics in order to enjoy your own material possessions.

[bradwiggo]

I disagree with the option that it's not their choice, as they may get fired if they refused to work as hard as expected, which is unfair but the harsh truth, so I don't think it's their fault. I disagree that we should refund or leave negative reviews however. If I was a dev who had overworked myself to the detriment of my health to make a game, the last thing I would want would be for the game to sell poorly or for it to get negatively reviewed, that would make me feel even worse. 

[bradwiggo]

13 minutes ago, seoz said:

I don't bat and eye as to what happens behind the scenes. If I see a game I like, I'll buy it. I won't not buy it because the company could be running shady business practises.

 

Not to sound heartless, but the last thing I think about when deciding on buying a game - or any other item for that matter - is how the developers made it and what conditions they were in. The product comes first, ethics come after.

 

A few people above mentioned Foxconn, and how dire their working conditions are, but let's be honest, they're one of if not the biggest manufacturers to serve the entire technology industry and they're not about to stop.

 

You sometimes have to set aside the ethics in order to enjoy your own material possessions.

I agree to a point. Everyone has a point where they have to care more about themselves than others, that's a natural thing, nobody can be completely selfless, it varies person to person where this point is. I would like to think I care a lot about the ethics of buying things, and that I try to make a difference with what I buy, but I'm not entirely sure I do. I also likely wouldn't pass up on buying a game just because the company is bad. 

[wANKER]

3 hours ago, Teddy07 said:

Don't care how my clothes, games, electronics are produced.  Not my problem

Right?

Spoiler

 

 

[Sauron]

Yes, I would feel bad for the developers, but the responsibility rests on the company's shoulders as well as those of the institutions that allow it. Boycotts over things like this are ineffective (especially since a lower revenue usually results in layoffs instead of actual positive changes) and again, it shouldn't be up to the customers to police this sort of behavior. I completely support political action against this sort of behavior; the government should ensure that companies cannot force or even reward their employees for working in unhealthy conditions.

[Sauron]

31 minutes ago, bradwiggo said:

Everyone has a point where they have to care more about themselves than others, that's a natural thing, nobody can be completely selfless, it varies person to person where this point is.

You mean where they'd like to care more about themselves - they never have to.

48 minutes ago, seoz said:

You sometimes have to set aside the ethics in order to enjoy your own material possessions.

We live in a society where you simply cannot avoid buying and using things that at some point in the chain of production where the result of exploitation; that doesn't mean we can't think about the ethics and where the problems lie. As individuals we don't have the power to prevent it, as a society we might - but only if we recognize these problems instead of looking the other way.

 

I don't think you should feel personally guilty for buying a smartphone but I do think we should hold the companies accountable.

4 hours ago, XR6 said:

If the game developers are voluntarily working in those types of environments, then I would not have much of an issue with it. They are the ones who chose to be in that situation.

Hardly. In the real world, nobody goes up to the developers and says something like "you better work at least 90 hours this week or you're fired"; the pressure towards doing that is more subtle but not less coercive. People who work more than is healthy are rewarded with promotions or praise while those who don't are the first to be let go when there's a layoff. Some people are also affected by psychological issues like workaholism - just because they want to work too much doesn't mean it's healthy for them or that they aren't being exploited.

[jiyeon]

1 hour ago, bradwiggo said:

I would like to think I care a lot about the ethics of buying things, and that I try to make a difference with what I buy, but I'm not entirely sure I do. I also likely wouldn't pass up on buying a game just because the company is bad. 

Of course, this is why non-profit organisations like Fairtrade exist, to make sure the raw product from farmers up until the final good's production process as a supermarket consumable is transparent with the consumer, and additionally a cut of that is given back to the original countries.

 

20 minutes ago, Sauron said:

We live in a society where you simply cannot avoid buying and using things that at some point in the chain of production where the result of exploitation; that doesn't mean we can't think about the ethics and where the problems lie. As individuals we don't have the power to prevent it, as a society we might - but only if we recognize these problems instead of looking the other way.

 

I don't think you should feel personally guilty for buying a smartphone but I do think we should hold the companies accountable.

I can't say much as I've not ran into any controversies or underlying issues regarding how companies treat their employees apart from Foxconn, who are too big like I mentioned earlier that as an individual consumer who only wants an iPhone, I unfortuantely don't give too much attention to.

[bradwiggo]

34 minutes ago, Sauron said:

You mean where they'd like to care more about themselves - they never have to.

We live in a society where you simply cannot avoid buying and using things that at some point in the chain of production where the result of exploitation; that doesn't mean we can't think about the ethics and where the problems lie. As individuals we don't have the power to prevent it, as a society we might - but only if we recognize these problems instead of looking the other way.

 

I don't think you should feel personally guilty for buying a smartphone but I do think we should hold the companies accountable.

Hardly. In the real world, nobody goes up to the developers and says something like "you better work at least 90 hours this week or you're fired"; the pressure towards doing that is more subtle but not less coercive. People who work more than is healthy are rewarded with promotions or praise while those who don't are the first to be let go when there's a layoff. Some people are also affected by psychological issues like workaholism - just because they want to work too much doesn't mean it's healthy for them or that they aren't being exploited.

I actually meant "do", I just mistyped. I was meaning that everyone has the point where it is too inconvenient to their own lives for them to be as ethical as they could. 

[Sauron]

5 minutes ago, seoz said:

Of course, this is why non-profit organisations like Fairtrade exist, to make sure the raw product from farmers up until the final good's production process as a supermarket consumable is transparent with the consumer, and additionally a cut of that is given back to the original countries.

Yes, but since those cost more it ends up being a matter of what you can afford rather than what is fair and not everything can be obtained through Fairtrade. If the entire chain of production for all companies had the same standards, the final prices to the end user would be about the same - the corporations would just get a less egregious margin.

5 minutes ago, seoz said:

I can't say much as I've not ran into any controversies or underlying issues regarding how companies treat their employees apart from Foxconn, who are too big like I mentioned earlier that as an individual consumer who only wants an iPhone, I unfortuantely don't give too much attention to.

Foxconn is as big as it is because Apple (and not just Apple, a LOT of consumer electronics companies are Foxconn clients) uses them as a supplier. I would say these companies are as much at fault as Foxconn itself, it's not like Apple would go bankrupt if they made a lower margin on iPhones. It also goes deeper than Foxconn, the materials themselves are often mined in exploitative conditions. But again, you are not the one who should have to police this.

5 minutes ago, bradwiggo said:

I actually meant "do", I just mistyped. I was meaning that everyone has the point where it is too inconvenient to their own lives for them to be as ethical as they could. 

I think it depends on what you mean with "ethical". As I said, these problems can't be solved by individual actions or boycotts; in out current system you'd need a lot of legislation. It's not necessarily more ethical to personally live without things that were made through exploitation because that exploitation will happen anyway. I think the ethical thing to do in this case is to use political means to try and solve the problem.

[WereCatf]

5 hours ago, zassou said:

would you feel bad if a game you enjoyed (not necesarily liked) is a result of hostile working condition. (such as crunching)

To be quite frank, that applies to pretty much all big-budget games. Also, almost anything outside of gaming as well. I'd basically have to go live in woods and only use stuff I've made with my own hands, if I wanted to avoid any unethically-produced stuff. Besides, I'm just a single person and I have zero control over such things -- literally not a single company would notice if I suddenly just vanished into thin air.

[lewdicrous]

4 minutes ago, WereCatf said:

literally not a single company would notice if I suddenly just vanished into thin air.

That's something a lot of people don't understand.

[bradwiggo]

20 minutes ago, Sauron said:

Yes, but since those cost more it ends up being a matter of what you can afford rather than what is fair and not everything can be obtained through Fairtrade. If the entire chain of production for all companies had the same standards, the final prices to the end user would be about the same - the corporations would just get a less egregious margin.

Foxconn is as big as it is because Apple (and not just Apple, a LOT of consumer electronics companies are Foxconn clients) uses them as a supplier. I would say these companies are as much at fault as Foxconn itself, it's not like Apple would go bankrupt if they made a lower margin on iPhones. It also goes deeper than Foxconn, the materials themselves are often mined in exploitative conditions. But again, you are not the one who should have to police this.

I think it depends on what you mean with "ethical". As I said, these problems can't be solved by individual actions or boycotts; in out current system you'd need a lot of legislation. It's not necessarily more ethical to personally live without things that were made through exploitation because that exploitation will happen anyway. I think the ethical thing to do in this case is to use political means to try and solve the problem.

I was just meaning that a lot of people feel bad buying things that they know are made by people working in very bad conditions. 

[bradwiggo]

9 minutes ago, WereCatf said:

To be quite frank, that applies to pretty much all big-budget games. Also, almost anything outside of gaming as well. I'd basically have to go live in woods and only use stuff I've made with my own hands, if I wanted to avoid any unethically-produced stuff. Besides, I'm just a single person and I have zero control over such things -- literally not a single company would notice if I suddenly just vanished into thin air.

A lot of people doing something small can make a difference though, just look at the amount of negative reviews GTA V got when they tried to stop the modding community. 

 

I get what you mean, I just don't think the fact that you as an individual, on your own, can't make a difference doesn't mean you should stop caring or thinking about it when you buy something. 

[Monkey Dust]

I feel the working conditions in the gaming industry are counter productive. How many games have released broken due to tired devs? How much talent has left the industry, either through burnout or because they've started a family?

[Yoinkerman]

I already don't buy the games so I guess there's that

[Crunchy Dragon]

3 hours ago, wANKER said:

Right?

  Reveal hidden contents

 

Jeremy Clarkson is a very fitting person for that image.

 

OP: I would have more of a problem with management doing that. But I don't buy games because of the corporation the game is coming from, I buy games because I think I'll enjoy them. If I end up not enjoying them, I get a refund.

 

I obviously feel bad for the devs and think the management could make better decisions that would also end up with better working conditions for the dev teams.

[Commodus]

I don't get the folks who say "it's their choice, no one is forcing them."  That's not really true in many cases.

 

Companies, and not just in the game industry, frequently have a voluntary-but-not-really approach to overtime.  You're not legally required to put in 80-100 hours, but gee, you'll fall behind the other workers and it'd be a shame if the company had to fire you for that.  It's also not so simple as telling workers to find another job, because that can easily mean relocating across the country in a field like game development.

 

The best thing we can do is to support studios like Respawn, which make it a point of refusing to subject staff to crunch time even if it means that you have to wait longer for a new game or an update.  And if you see development teams take action and refuse to work more than a certain amount of hours, throw your weight behind them.