Rockstar co-founder Dan Houser has recently gotten flack for a comment he made in a Vulture article, that Rockstar employees worked several “100-hour weeks” during the final leg of development for Red Dead Redemption 2. On social media, this sparked a conversation over the “crunch” period of video game development, where developers are often forced to work long hours without overtime pay to meet a deadline, and also sparked a conversation about American work ethic in general. Houser later clarified in an interview with Kotaku that nobody was forced to work these hours and that it was done voluntarily by only a few senior level employees. In general, this sentiment has been echoed by Rockstar employees on social media.
I have worked so many hours to make #RDR2 possible during many months (75+ hours some weeks) and it has been always as part of the desire of my content to be perfect. We have been encouraged to push harder to meet the deadlines, but I don’t feel forced by #RockstarGames to do it.
— Guillermo Diaz (@GuilleDiazTM) October 18, 2018
I’ve been at #RockstarGames for 11+ years and have the privilege to work with some truly amazing people on some of the most memorable/successful games ever created. I have never been forced to work longer hrs, or sacrifice a work and home life balance in favor of a project…
— JD Solilo (@KingJon_The_Odd) October 18, 2018
As a Rockstar employee of 8 years I’d like to join those in defence of the studio I love. Never felt pressured or forced to work anything close to 100 hrs per week throughout the production of #gtav #rdr2 #reddeadredemption2. Always felt valued and appreciated. #rockstargames.
— Christian Simcock (@BlackShuck72) October 18, 2018
There is a larger conversation to be held around how deadlines and “crunch” work in the video game industry in general. The video game industry is the only entertainment medium I can think of where release dates are set years in advance — and regularly broken. As consumers, we’ve grown accustomed to seeing games delayed, or undergo radical change, far beyond the original deadline. Looking at you Square Enix.
Some companies, like Blizzard, eschew from this problem by releasing games “when they’re done” and not setting a release date ahead of schedule. It’s harder to generate hype and regularly market your game when there is no release date, but a company might eliminate the potential backlash that comes from a delay, or avoid the “crunch” period of several weeks of overtime to meet an arbitrary deadline. On the other hand, a deadline could be seen as necessary motivation.
Does this model need reform, or is it fine as is? Is “crunch” a necessary evil, or a product on an unhealthy work environment?
Silas White 