McNamara: Bad press stopped us getting another deal
But lack of time to plan a follow up deal to L.A. Noire was also factor, says dev
Brendan McNamara has revealed that he believes bad press and being too busy to arrange a new deal were the two contributing factors in Team Bondi's failure to sign another deal after L.A. Noire.
Speaking as part of an extensive interview with Eurogamer, his first since Team Bondi went under, McNamara claims that the studio was too busy to arrange a new deal until the project was finished - by which time bad press had made it impossible.
"Mainly, I'd say because we got a lot of bad press about what it was like to work with us and our conditions," he replied when asked why the studio hadn't been contracted once the Rockstar game was finished.
"That, obviously, didn't come at the right time. To do a deal for a major video game probably takes about a year. We didn't start running around doing that stuff until well after the game was finished. That's the problem when a game is all consuming and you need to get out there and do whatever you need to do to get people to know it and interested."
Team Bondi entered administration not long after L.A. Noire was released, and reports suggested Rockstar would not work with the studio again, citing poor management and lack of vision.
Rumours of 110 hour weeks during a hugely extended crunch period arose, with emails leaked by studio staff confirming poor working conditions.
But in the interview, McNamara insists that those hours are not out of the ordinary for AAA development, and that they were never compulsory.
"Yeah, 110 hour weeks are tough," he agrees, "But not many people worked 110 hour weeks making L.A. Noire, I can tell you that. And it wasn't mandatory.
"It was just, yeah, it was hard, and it was brutal, but I would say, most of those triple-A games, when you aren't sure of what the technology is, and you aren't sure what the process is, it's going to be pretty difficult. Time's a finite thing. You can't extend it forever. We certainly had plenty of time."
McNamara also revealed that he has a new project in the works, a console title which he has been "pitching around for the last couple of weeks", although no further details were forthcoming.
In contrast, we send people home if we feel they are working too many hours as we want our staff to be remain productive.
110h a week is normal? I thought world currently fights with slavery not supports it as "normal".
40h a week is normal, extra 20h if its occasionally needed week or two in a year. Everything above is not acceptable and if employees allow to enforce otherwise then its sad.
Crunch is avoidable
http://www.next-gen.biz/opinion/opinion-...
Sorry Brendan but you brought it all on yourself and you know.
110h work week, means you still get to sleep for 8h a day :p
The rest is all rainbows, as Mr. McNamara makes sure that from time to time water is sprinkled on the employees sitting in their water proof cubicles, causing personal hygiene to be at industry record heights. Nutrition is feed directly into the veins via the Wrist-Rest to Veins (TM) adapter. Spare time, hobbies or entertainment is no longer required, as the brain of Team Bondi employees is too occupied processing the honor of working in the games industry to crave for anything else to begin with.
How could any investor refuse to put money into that? Clearly, the press is at no fault.
I hate to say this kind of thing about anyone, but I actually think it would be better if you don't actually get a development gig ever again, as it would at least show that the sort of working practices you represent are no longer being tolerated by the industry.
After reading the Eurogamer article, im really surprised at how flippant he came across about it. He is obviously a work-a-holic, but forcing(he claims he didn't, but I think he is underestimating the effect of a manger saying "could you work longer?") others to be when its not what they have agreed to is really harsh.
110 hours a week is an utter joke, there are plenty of good books on project management that should prevent this situation occurring.
And it is not good for the reputation of the industry.
I dare say if they had to pay overtime , then the hours would have stayed at reasonable levels.
"Peter Sutcliffe: Arrest by Police ruined my good name"
No remorse at all.
This is why you fail.
Taxi for Brendan McNamara!
I did 660 hours in 6 weeks on one project... Suffered from severe burnout for the next 6 months, almost left the industry entirely after. When you're young and single you think of it as a rite of passage, but as you get older and/or get a family you realize that's it's not worth it. Worker smarter not harder.
There was a blog post the other day that was spot on, I encourage everyone to read it: http://blogs.msdn.com/b/jmeier/archive/2...
It's pretty much proven that a well rested team will be more motivated, creative and productive.
I believe it was Insomniac that said something along the lines of, when you've left the office your brain is still thinking about the game. It's during those times away that you can see the project for what it is and that's when a lot of the best ideas happen. Of course that was a mangling of a quote I'm sure but you get the gist.
Fixed that for you Brendan.
but 110 hour weeks? That's coal mine working conditions.
Good. It's just a shame he has no acknowledgement of what caused the "Bad press".
I imagine you had to work like that back when the skills to properly manage a game project just weren't there, but times have changed. This cycle happens in almost every industry, they learn that workers on average are most efficient at 40 hours and adapt the production cycle to fit, not the work force.
If 110 hours per week was actually more efficient/productive, it would be the standard worldwide. Like EA Spouse, former Team Bondi employees did the right thing by standing up.
Anyone sadistic enough to ask their staff to work 110 hour weeks (The normal working week in the UK being 37.5 hours) not only deserves to be out of work and to be laughed at with every application for a management position, but there should probably be an incident involving their genitals and a desk drawer.
Repeatedly.
For 110 hours.
Every week.
Work schedules like that destroy families, cause clinical depression and ruin lives.
I've done some 80-90 hour weeks, cracked 100 exactly once, but those are still quite rare. If your team needs 80 hours of work out of you, then things are going very badly. 60 hour weeks aren't uncommon, for short periods of crunch, but after a few weeks of that, motivation and effort output really take nosedives.
That being said, I think staunch 40-hours-and-no-more folks are taking an unrealistic view of things. Sometimes things go wrong, buffered time isn't enough, and folks need to work a bit longer to compensate. As long as it's not the norm, and compensation is provided, I don't think it's an unreasonable expectation, in our industry or others.
It really is that simple.
I'd really like to forget that year of my life, can people stop interviewing him now?
The hardest week I worked was 80 hours in 5 days, and that's huge... but it was a one-off for a very important demo. For AAA games, it's common to crunch really hard for something like an E3 demo... as long as it's not happening all the time.
Yes, we worked very hard, and crunched for longer than we should have. But it was either give up, or keep going. We chose to keep going and released a great game... but hey, haters be hatin' ;)
I totally agree; I've read the full interview on Eurogamer and he seems completely un-remorseful and unapologetic. Blaming the press for reporting on these poor business practices is very misguided, and it doesn't sound like he's learnt from any of the mistakes and mismanagement which seemingly went on there.
Not that publishers are necessarily going to see it that way...