[Production consultant Keith Fuller analyzes the growing trend of companies hiring temporary and contract developers, and its effects on the industry, in this #altdevblogaday-reprinted opinion piece.]
Wait…what? Break out? Isn’t that the wrong direction? I’d say that depends on your experience, but that’s really for a different article. This one is actually about the ways in which game employment seems to be changing, and the ways in which it perhaps should be changing but isn’t.
As a consultant, I’m always looking for new clients. That means I keep checking places like gamejobhunter.com and #gamejobs and the like. I’ve probably been checking these locations more often than most – or at least for more consecutive months than most – and I’ve started to notice a few interesting trends.
It used to be that if you needed an artist, you put out an ad for “artist”. As the employer, the understanding was that you needed an artist for the current project so you’d hire one. Then, after the project started to wind down, you’d probably look for ways to trim headcount, and that new artist is back looking for work again.
Or maybe she turned out to be a superstar and that other artist – you know, the one who’d been slow to pick up Z-brush and complained about crunch – that guy is out on the street. Nowadays, though, you might very well see positions such as “Artist (Temporary)” or “Contract Artist”. What do these job descriptions say to you?
On the one hand, this could be misconstrued as somewhat demeaning. If you view games as art, and any contributing developer is on par with classical composers and Renaissance painters, then a temporary role for an existing project could be taken as undervaluing your work. “Hey, Michelangelo. We’ve got Vasari over here working on a painting but he’s not going to get it done on time. Could you take care of the bottom left corner for him?”
On the other hand, you could view these positions as refreshingly forthright. “We have 8 weeks of work for you, likely to be just assembly line stuff like poly reduction or downsampling spec maps, then you’re gone. This won’t be a career for you.” At least you know where you stand, right? Isn’t that better than applying for “artist” only to find out 8 weeks later that they only intended to keep you for a short period of time?
The next question I’d like you to ponder is this: if every employer were perfectly transparent about every position they’re hiring for, what percentage of game job openings would say “temporary”?
As I start to see “contract” and “temporary” show up more often, I’m led to wonder a few more things. If you only cast off the least desirable employee at the end of the project (like that artist who didn’t learn Z-brush quickly enough), what kind of an overall pool of contract employees are you generating for your next project and the rest of the industry?
What’s the likelihood of any of the “we should form Hollywood-style guilds” discussions ever coming to fruition if the folks encouraged to do contract work are then also enticed to stay on at the end while someone else hits the bricks? What makes a “contract artist” more appealing than an outsourcer? Is the only difference that you have to find a desk for one of them?
Keep in mind that this topic doesn’t just apply to artists. All of the programmers and animators and level designers out there who think you’re safe, what if a “temporary” gets hired next month who – at the end of the project – turns out to be better than you?
Admittedly, this idea of employee churn is really more of an issue for the bigger organizations. In fact, this is likely a key contributor to the upsurge in social and mobile mini-companies that are springing up all over the place. In the “5-person team” space, your job is more secure because you’re not 1 of 30 fx artists, you are the fx artist. And the audio guy and UI expert.
Maybe this is hastening the downfall of A/AA/AAA projects, broadening the gap between stereotypical Facebook production values and AAAA Call of Duty games.
Although I firmly believe everything’s cyclical and we’ll someday see a resurgence of 40-person teams on 18-month dev cycles, I think that day will keep getting pushed out as long as our industry keeps struggling to determine the value of an employee.
[This piece was reprinted from #AltDevBlogADay, a shared blog initiative started by @mike_acton devoted to giving game developers of all disciplines a place to motivate each other to write regularly about their personal game development passions.]
I would add that a contractor should then make sure it is written into the contract that they are credited appropriately (i.e. credited at all) so that at least the contractor/temp can justify job insecurity somewhat by building a credible portfolio of work.
Additionally contract work generally pays higher hourly rates than full time. As long as you can keep a flow of moving from one gig to the next with little downtime, it could make a lot of sense financially.
As you point out this is really more of an observation than a suggestion, Keith. Since I've been going to GDC for the last 5 years I've seen the trend too: there's fewer AAA game developers giving talks. That's because there's fewer of them.
AAA games are a nearly impossible market to enter right now. People that have done it well will continue to do it so long as they don't mess up too much or oversaturate their market (I'm looking at you Kotick and Guitar Hero). They are becoming an endangered species.
On that note (one of social Darwinism) there's a lot of people that think it's survival of the fittest: that is the biggest, strongest, healthiest. Well, just like natural selection in the business world we find that it is more a function of the most adaptable being the most survivable.
It's strange to me that our industry is one that most people require a high amount of business savvy just to get by. But maybe that's more a sign of the times than anything. The job market is too competitive with unemployment being stubbornly higher than most of us are used to.
Only a small note on inflation, but are we really required to start talking about Quadrupal A titles now? Like razors on a stubly chin, will we end up with AAAAA games, AAAAAA titles, a lubricating integrated Twitter strip…
An interesting discussion, but I would like to put forward an alternative perspective from the UK. I am a programmer by the way.
Firstly I am one of those 'mature' - considerably mature ion fact. I have no kids but am married and own my own property. The difficulty for me in permanent posts is that I am expected to move house every few years for a new job; incuring significant selling costs and disrupting me wife's career. Therefore I prefer the idea of temporary and contract work, so I can retain a physical base but also leverage tax benefits on costs to allow me to move around the country and teh world for work. And like Michaelangelo I crave variety fro my creativity, I am also reasonably financially secure, I don't mind downtime - indeed I relish the chance to travel. In terms of fringe beenfits I would rather see the cash on my bottom line, so I can decide how I will spend it.
But I am personally finding quite the opposite attitude prevails. For senior posts companies strongly want to tie me in for an indefinite and extended period. I have heard arguments that at a senior level I would be in the inner core of a company and more than just a programmer, and therefore long term committment is expected. I'm sure that would suit many but in my experience my personal attitude is viewed as odd.
My only real conclusion is that different working arrangements make sense for different people. I crave flexibility over security. My wish is only that companies would be more honest and realistic about the role of their workers and recognise that different individuals suit different employment models.
I would add that a contractor should then make sure it is written into the contract that they are credited appropriately (i.e. credited at all) so that at least the contractor/temp can justify job insecurity somewhat by building a credible portfolio of work.
Additionally contract work generally pays higher hourly rates than full time. As long as you can keep a flow of moving from one gig to the next with little downtime, it could make a lot of sense financially.
AAA games are a nearly impossible market to enter right now. People that have done it well will continue to do it so long as they don't mess up too much or oversaturate their market (I'm looking at you Kotick and Guitar Hero). They are becoming an endangered species.
On that note (one of social Darwinism) there's a lot of people that think it's survival of the fittest: that is the biggest, strongest, healthiest. Well, just like natural selection in the business world we find that it is more a function of the most adaptable being the most survivable.
It's strange to me that our industry is one that most people require a high amount of business savvy just to get by. But maybe that's more a sign of the times than anything. The job market is too competitive with unemployment being stubbornly higher than most of us are used to.
Firstly I am one of those 'mature' - considerably mature ion fact. I have no kids but am married and own my own property. The difficulty for me in permanent posts is that I am expected to move house every few years for a new job; incuring significant selling costs and disrupting me wife's career. Therefore I prefer the idea of temporary and contract work, so I can retain a physical base but also leverage tax benefits on costs to allow me to move around the country and teh world for work. And like Michaelangelo I crave variety fro my creativity, I am also reasonably financially secure, I don't mind downtime - indeed I relish the chance to travel. In terms of fringe beenfits I would rather see the cash on my bottom line, so I can decide how I will spend it.
But I am personally finding quite the opposite attitude prevails. For senior posts companies strongly want to tie me in for an indefinite and extended period. I have heard arguments that at a senior level I would be in the inner core of a company and more than just a programmer, and therefore long term committment is expected. I'm sure that would suit many but in my experience my personal attitude is viewed as odd.
My only real conclusion is that different working arrangements make sense for different people. I crave flexibility over security. My wish is only that companies would be more honest and realistic about the role of their workers and recognise that different individuals suit different employment models.