Man this guy thinks alot!

Shabadage

Yaaaaay, sue, lets pull the unions in, then when a company thats making bad games decides they want more money, the whole industry can go on strike and we can be gameless for a season.

Oh yeah, I support this idea.

Jayl3w

Holy shit, this guy "thinks" a lot.

AuthenticM

I'm not quite sure how this "Hollywood model" is different from what developers are doing now.

As for unions, I think they would hurt far more than help.

EmeraldDragon

Actually, misread what the model constitutes.

In the sense he means, I think it's a given. Large teams of freelancers will simply become unsustainable.

Gitaroo_Dude

Meh, gonna have to disagree.

I think Malstrom nailed it by pointing out that Nintendo is applying the television model to the WIi, and reaping unprecedented success from it.

The television model is what the 360 and PS3 had been striving for, and the ideas they represent have been thoroughly trounced by Nintendo.

Gitaroo_Dude

He's from an era where a single person could write code, do sound and create graphics. Not saying that's a good or bad thing he just has a broad perspective of the industry. I don't know if unions would help game designers or not. There obviously is still issues within the industry just looking at "Team Ninja" for example.

Pornosaur

Ron shows in this interview that his ability to grasp the big labor picture in games is roughly equivalent to his ability to create a commercially successful game.

MarionBarryHussein

Well, we cannot pursue a "hollywood" model because videogames are not movies. What I could possibly see is the remainder of large studios, but the freelancers will dissappear. And unions? If they cover benefits and other shit, I am all for it. But the profit pie is not to be sliced with residuals or percentages.

MOP88

unions are not going to get anything done, only make them worse. there has to be a consequence to making a bad game, unions are not going to get that.

vega480

It just doesn't seem to add up, unless technology is constantly imrpoving in large ways then people won't invest in the new technology. Why buy the PS4 if it's practically the same as the PS3? Then things would stagnate when people get bored of that generation of consoles and we'd release new ones which is just the same.

I agree devs spend a lot of time looking at new tech but console life spans are expanding at the moment so that sorts out the problem of exploring new tech. They explore it (for say the first 3 years) and then have a good 4 or 5 to carry on making games for it.

Llost

I think some of these comments aren't quite understanding what he means by the Hollywood model (and he's not super clear on it himself).

In Hollywood there are the big six film companies and a lot of small companies. Almost every movie you see is released by one of the big six, but not all of the movies are actually made by them. There are a lot of different ways to get a movie made, but all of them have one crucial difference from the videogame industry.

Let's say Warner Brothers wants to make a new Batman movie. They talk to production companies, they talk to actors, they talk to directors, and they assemble a team. Usually one person is the key ingredient (Chris Nolan in the case of the last two Batmans), and then he, with their money, makes the movie with a team he hires.

In the videogame industry, let's say EA wants to make a game they have a good idea for. Well they either have a subsidiary company make it or they hire a company, but that's it. The smallest unit is the company hired. Sure that company may hire new designers and lots of people, but they're not gonna form a new team for every game. Of course there are exceptions. You might hire Will Wright or someone big like that based on name, but for the most part it's a company model and not a talent model.

I think I've over-simplified things, and I don't even know if I agree with Gilbert's point, but I think this is the distinction he's talking about. Hiring talent on a game by game basis and also differentiating blockbuster projects from budget projects in a more productive way (ie, finding a scale in between Halo and Bejeweled).

Siguy

Once again, as soon as anything vaguely political is mentioned on the site, the right-wingers are the first ones there to bitch.

Those of you who hate unions should consider the fate of all the workers at Lucasarts who were laid off as soon as they finished a high-profile game for the company. How many times have you seen a new property and said, "I'll take a chance on this because it's from the same team who did another game I liked"?

With the new model, "teams" no longer have any real meaning. If everyone's freelance, nobody really has to worry about the quality of their games or their company's reputation. Historically these have been the ONLY way to get consistently good games. Companies with lots of turnover rarely produce high-quality games.

Obviously nobody needs a union if all companies treat workers well, but many in the industry have recently stopped doing so. The movie and television industries have both been unionized pretty much throughout, and it hasn't hurt the quality of the output at all. (The public's horrible taste and desire for sequels has.)

Finally, those of you who are still in high school and haven't ever actually had a real job (union or not) should remember: unions are the folks who brought you the weekend.

sxp151, the happy-headed nose

oh my goodness it's maniac mansion 1 :) sweetness :D

Playstation

blah blah blah to whatever he said.

just remake or do another maniac mansion game.

FrankxThexTank

i personally admire Ron Gilbert's work.. hes a video game veteran and it sucked when he left Lucas Arts.

i really believe in him, after all (imo) if theres anyone that can say where the industry came from and where its going from is him.

xzero

For some reason when I was younger Maniac Mansion scared the crap outta me. I would say it was on par with the first time I played Resident Evil on PS1. Perhaps it was the fact that when you were discovered the scientist would kidnap you and throw you in the basement...

gr8asianman

@DiscipleofJamzy: "because *you* pretty much said"

DiscipleofJamzy

@sxp151, the happy-headed nose: I now have nothing to add here because pretty much said it all perfectly.

DiscipleofJamzy

"...I think unions bring a lot of bad things to gaming..."

Fuck off, Ron! Unions fight for better rights & wages for their members. It's no different from gaming than in any other industry. Nothing wrong with that. Unless you're management. /contempt

Rest of the interview was interesting, but that pull quote really stuck in my craw...

freakout

@FrankxThexTank: I figured I was the only one saying that.....HELLO NINTENDO DS WOULD BE PERFECT FOR THIS!

Cornerb0y

That Gilbert is an interesting guy. I think I might check out this "deathspank" game when it comes out.

Unions certainly do fight for better rights and wages for their members, which is something the games industry could seriously use, but I think history makes it quite plain the ways in which they can be a double-edged sword... I still think it'd be a good step overall for the games industry, but I don't think it's prudent to totally discount what Ron Gilbert said.

tim333

@freakout: I think Ron's remembering a by-gone era when anyone with the passion could make games.

The gaming union is inevitable but when it happens it will succumb further to profit margins, a Hollywood style management system and we the consumer will feel the lack of originality and spark.

It will make it harder for the industry to create a floor 13, hunter or zac mckracken

You know, a genuinely original modern game that management don't think "hang on, we can make a new Fifa and slap a number on the end."

drmcscott

@Omatic:

Correction: 3 paragraphs.

Omatic

Interesting read, and I agree. I'm going to be joining either this industry or one similar pretty soon, so I'll be glad if there's less ad-hoc and more infrastructure.

Trivia: The phrase "I think" was used 10 times in these 3 sentences.

Omatic

LOL, unionizing gaming as part of the industry's progress? You're going to end up with all those stupid union rules that exist entirely to make sure that it takes twice as many people to do something as it ought to, for the sake of their members job security. Unionizing would actually entrench the current job structure and resist the sort of technological and management innovations that might allow for smaller and more flexible teams to produce more content.

And when the games developers union strikes and we have no games for six months, and end up paying $10 more per game to pay for their inflated wages, see how you like it then. It's not like this is a coal mine where workers are dying because there aren't enough job safety rules, then I could understand it.

rexdart007

@drmcscott: True. I may have misread it...

@rexdart007: Workers may not be dying in the game industry, but many are being exploited. Case in point: [www.gamasutra.com]

Do you honestly think that's the only case of a big gaming company overworking their staff? It's an industry-wide issue. Desperate spouses shouldn't be having to beg companies for better working conditions. If they don't provide it, then unions will be an inevitable result.

So yeah, you may have to pay more for games. Or a far beter (but far more unlikely idea): the industry executives could drop a couple of million from their bonus packages. They are the ones your anger should be directed at, not the bottom-of-the-ladder plebs who just want to see their families at least once anually...

freakout

Hear, hear. As a person that's worked in the movie industry and the games industry, I've got to say that Unions are very important to the quality of life. You have to love the games industry to work in it, because you have to give up an incredible amount to be involved in it. But, you can love the movie industry and work in it without giving up 2/3's of your potential finances. I love the games industry, but despise its business ethos. It's like working in Hollywood in the late 30's. And, never, in any medium I've ever worked in (including retail) have I ever felt as expendable as I do in the games industry.

masterdingo

Ron, if you read this: Maniac Mansion was legendary awesome!
One of the early PC games that stuck into my psychie since today. Classic

Gutter_Trash

I'm kind of surprised at the bad impression a lot of Americans have of unions. Why in the world should workers not get together and negotiate with companies as one?

In 99% of all jobs, each individual human is easy to replace. So companies have the upper hand when negotiating things like work hours, wages, holidays and (in the US) health care. It makes sense for workers to stand up for each other; in fact, you've got to be an idiot not to do it.

@rexdart007: I have no problem at all paying 10 bucks more per game if that money actually goes to currently underpaid, overworked developers. I don't particularly want my favourite hobby to come at the cost of other people's misery.

L_K_M

I'm ALL for unionization. 100%.

I've seen many, many, MANY, devs get exploited by their companies with no one fighting for their rights. The burn out rate for devs is enormous. There is practically no one past the age of 40 who works in the industry because they know it's a fool's game if your not management and you will really not have too much of a life.

"And when the games developers union strikes and we have no games for six months,"

Wow, that's a pretty selfish consumer for you. Screw the people who make the game if their lives suck, just get me more. No wonder companies currently have the upper hand, most consumers don't give a crap how the game gets into their hands.

..."and end up paying $10 more per game to pay for their inflated wages, see how you like it then. It's not like this is a coal mine where workers are dying because there aren't enough job safety rules, then I could understand it."

Inflated wages? Really? You're not living in my world, son that's for sure. Doesn't exist.

You know, 80 hour weeks for a year. Guess what? That will screw up your health, family, pretty much your life in any context. Black lung or heart disease, hypertension, and depression. Still dead too early.

BTW, unions are in pretty much all of entertainment EXCEPT video games. Why do you think the profits are so high for the corporations and everyone wants to jump in.

Unions are for:

Movies
TV
Sports
Animation

I don't see the quality suffering for those now, do you besides the tastes of the masses?

And don't give me the "it's a different industry/model" guff. If it's content that is made by a group of people for a specific platform that is commercialized it's in the same group.

I know that unions can be a double-edged sword. No question. But I would rather take the "new bad" with the "better good", instead of the "mostly bad no matter what" that the situation was before.

JohnnyLA