Or are these worries
unnecessary, and they're just human beings who can work perfectly well
together?
Frank Rogan:
Make software tools and pipelines a priority. Usually when an artist
says the coders "don't speak the same language," it means
the artist couldn't get the coder to do what he wanted him to do, and
the coder couldn't explain to the artist why that would be difficult
or time-consuming or distracting or solved through some other means
the artist didn't think of. Screw that. Solve the problem once and for
all by providing the artists with the tools they need to do their jobs
the way they want to do them. And then reward the hell out of the coder
that provided the tool (or the new feature, or the right bug fix) and
make damn sure everyone knows what happened and why you, the producer,
think that's just the bee's knees.
Amer Ajami:
Peter, Ben, and Frank all hit on what I believe is the key to improved
communication, not just between artists and engineers, but across all
disciplines: collocation. Yeah, you need a team that speaks the same
language and has great chemistry, and yeah you need guys on your team
who will walk over to an engineer or an artist and solve problems on
their own, without any oversight. But nothing knocks down the barriers
of communication easier and moves development along faster than putting
all your key guys in a room together and letting them run wild.
We have a physical setup at our studio
that's not entirely conducive to a productive environment that promotes
a lot of communication. The guys at Ubisoft Montreal did it right --
they basically sit in a giant warehouse with little to no walls separating
a majority of the team. It's similar to the floor of any newsroom, for
example. The energy level at their studio always seems high, and productivity
doesn't seem to be a problem.
Amer Ajami served as associate producer on EA's Battle for Middle Earth 2
Our team here at EALA, on the other
hand, sits in cubicles with 5 foot walls, and key people are often spread
across the entire floor, sometimes separated by literally hundreds of
feet. Obviously, not the ideal setup for making a game. The way we get
around this communication barrier is to collocate certain members of
the team (including engineers and artists) into a single space during
key inflection points of the development cycle. We jokingly
refer to these as "rooms of pain", but they're actually incredibly
productive, and quite fun.
Having key engineers sitting literally
face-to-face with key artists, with clear access to each others' monitors,
cuts down on ambiguity, confusion, and miscommunication. These "rooms"
only run for 1-2 weeks at a time, and are focused on hitting a specific
milestone or delivering on a certain feature of the game, all while
minimizing the impact on the rest of the team, which is ostensibly still
doing its thing on the main floor.
If many of us had our druthers, our
entire floor setup would be configured in a completely open space. But
failing that, these "rooms of pain" are a great way to cut
down the barriers to communication between all disciplines and drive
the project forward at important times during development.
The opinions expressed by
these producers are their own and do not necessarily reflect the opinions,
plans or positions of the companies where they work at. If you are interested
in being added to the interviewees for Producer Of The Round Table,
please contact GameProducer.net.
I guess it's not too surprising that open spaces are still advocated as the way to go. I guess this is possible if the only known alternative is individual cubicles. However there's a third way, and I concur with the authors of the book "Peopleware" it's the most beneficial: team-sized rooms, where a team is defined as a unit of 5 to 7 people. It's the middle-ground between a distracting and noisy open space and a lonely and constricted cubicle. It costs more than an open space but the added costs are more than made up with the increased productivity. Communication can always be a problem for one person or another. Somebody needs privacy somebody needs social contact. And we all need both at one point or another. One size-fits-all solutions rarely work, but if you have to go for one, at least choose the middle-ground, not the extremes.