Developers drag Rockstar over 100-hour weeks on Red Dead Redemption 2

Where studio management sees dedication, creators from across the AAA and indie spectrum see mismanagement, abuse

Sometimes, knowledge of workplace abuse and employee mistreatment come from thoroughly reported exposés, as was the case with Riot Games and Telltale Games scandals from earlier this year. Other times it comes from the people responsible for the problems in the first place.

Such was the case with Rockstar Games yesterday, as a Vulture feature on the making of Red Dead Redemption 2 featured studio co-founder Dan Houser saying that the development team had worked 100-hour weeks several times this year as they hurried to get the game out for its launch later this month. He also compared the effort put into making Red Dead Redemption 2 compared to the studio's previous efforts, which were already known for notoriously harsh work working conditions.

"That was shit," Houser said. "This was the hardest."

Since the publication of that story, scores of developers across Twitter have been criticizing Rockstar and the Housers for their crunch practices. Houser issued a clarification, but one that would only address a fraction of the concerns people expressed. For many of those weighing in, the topic was clearly personal in nature.

Bungie senior PvP designer Andrew Weldon created a thread to talk about some of the absurd lengths he's gone to during his time in development, among them working 36 hours straight over a weekend during a crunch stretch that already saw him pulling 80-hour, seven-day work weeks for several months.

"My sleep schedule didn't recover for 5 years," Weldon said. "One of our teammates who pushed himself further went on 6 months medical leave."

He added, "The most sinister thing about all three of these: it was never asked for or mandated. I did it to myself, because it was my 'dream job' and I was 'just so passionate.'

"I went to a party with some members of one of the studios mentioned above after I no longer worked there, and I met one of their young new hires. We chatted a bit and I remember vividly the look in his eyes when he said, and I quote, 'I can't wait for my first death march!' We have allowed a culture to grow around our work that treats this uncritically as the work of passion and energy and excitement when really it's just people destroying themselves and their families, whether it's mandated, implied via peer pressure, or entirely voluntary.

A number of developers shared similar stories of the medical consequences of over-work. High Tea Frog co-director Tommy Millar said he nearly died, working 13-hour days at a AAA studio until his weight dropped to 84 pounds and his organs began to fail. Death Ray Manta developer Rob Fearon worked 12-to-14-hour days for years before exhaustion and burn out caught up with him, an experience he's still not completely recovered from.

"To have this inflicted upon people as a condition of their employment is cruelty and exploitation - nothing short of that," Fearon said. "For it to be in service of making videogames is a waste."

Criterion designer Allen Frank seemed similarly fed up by Rockstar's attitude, saying, "This is not a people first approach to making games and to me just highlights a complete failure in planning and scoping. Killing your team so you don't drop features... or move your ship date isn't acceptable. Crunching needs to stop."

Some saw this as just the latest manifestation of a poisonous crunch culture deeply entrenched in gaming.

"If someone cares so little about your health that they're happy to force you into 100-hour work weeks, think about how little they'll care about you in other ways," said Insomniac character artist Xavier Coelho-Kostolny. "We're not just talking about overwork. This shows a lack of empathy which often leads to many other types of abuse. Anyone who thinks you should work 100-hour weeks to ship a *game* is going to have no problems with crossing other lines they shouldn't."

Red Thread Games' designer Ragnar Tørnquist was particularly galled at the amount of work being offered as a positive thing.

"This is not a number anyone should be proud of," Tørnquist said. "And using it as a metric of the team's commitment is unhealthy and unethical."

One common criticism levelled against Houser was that excessive crunch was evidence of mismanagement.

"Crunch means management failed to plan and scope their product," Phoenix Labs art director Katie De Sousa said. "I don't understand why this is something people brag about. 'Haha look at how shitty we are at estimating work! 100 hr weeks because we don't know what we're doing and don't care about our employees! Buy our game!'"

Bithell Games' Mike Bithell was likewise unimpressed, saying, "If I ever boast about my team having to do overtime because I can't manage them properly, and actually use that as a selling point, please screencap this tweet and send it to me hundreds of times until I depart this godforsaken website in shame."

Night in the Woods co-creator Scott Benson took that a step further, taking exception to the way the excessive work hours were framed in the original story.

"Telling that the obscene number of hours is listed alongside how many animations, hours of play, and lines of dialogue there are," Benson said. "The exploitation is a back of the box bullet point."

Benson added that he's done 100+ hour work weeks both when he was employed and when he was self-employed, which touched on another common thread in the response to Houser's comments. Many of the developers quoted already weren't technically required to work absurd hours, but did so for a variety of reasons, from passion to peer pressure. Houser's follow-up statement acknowledged senior people may have worked excessively long weeks out of passion, but, "No one, senior or junior, is ever forced to work hard."

Perhaps understanding that, some developers called on their own to consider how their work practices can pressure co-workers. Among those was Emily Grace Buck, a narrative designer who worked at Telltale Games for several years before the studio's collapse last month.

"Crunch is bad," Buck said. "Working nights and weekends if you're already working weekdays is bad. Even if it's because you're passionate, you're setting a standard for others at your company. The games industry needs to start forbidding crunch practices, even voluntary ones."

Wonderstruck artist Jess Hyland was slightly more direct, saying, "Unpopular opinion time: if you *are* the kind of person who will voluntarily work 100+ hour weeks, you are causing harm to your colleagues and peers by normalising it and making it acceptable. You're hurting the rest of us. Go home."

As bad as the message Rockstar's comment might send to developers is, it sends an equally dangerous message to other employers.

As Splash Damage creative director Andreas Gschwari explained, "Sadly some developers will see the success of RDR2 and conclude that what it takes to make a game successful is 100 hour work weeks, and that in the end the results are all that matter. But the damage done by working people this hard will be ignored."

The criticism of Rockstar even gained traction outside of gaming, in neighboring tech circles. Ruby on Rails creator David Heinemeier Hansson took Houser to task, saying, "Imagine bragging about pushing your workers to 100h+ weeks while also claiming to be proud of how sensible your work practices are. 😱 Especially on a sequel to an original game that brought the families of workers to plead with management for leniency.

"The game industry's abusive work practices are predicated on exploiting how 'passionate and dedicated' the earnest people who work to create this genre of entertainment are. No wonder the word 'passion' is being rendered toxic (which is a shame)."

One point of some debate in the developer reaction was whether or not people should boycott the game as a way of protesting Rockstar's treatment of its developers. Obviously views on that front differed, but Vlambeer designer Jan Willem Nijman offered an alternative course of action, creating a thread for developers to promote games that were created without crunch, starting with his latest game, Minit.

More stories

Remote Control Productions opens Dundee outpost

Production house appoints Rockstar Lincoln veteran Mark Lloyd as managing director

By Rebekah Valentine

Ubisoft is restructuring its editorial team

Publisher expands, reorganizes Paris-based group in an effort to make its games stand out

By Rebekah Valentine

Latest comments (8)

davidicus AR/VR UX, RYOT LabsA year ago
Fire the people responsible for project management. Today. Start at the top. Then consider firing the people that hired them.
6Sign inorRegisterto rate and reply
Klaus Preisinger Freelance Writing A year ago
So that is why you do not hear from Rockstar spouses anymore. People are now married to their work, problem solved.

The only way to get more hours of work out of people, is probably buying an old military base and have everybody eat and sleep on premise. The Rockstar Arcology megabase project.
4Sign inorRegisterto rate and reply
Veronica Game Designer, Satsuma DroidA year ago
So, yes, 100+ hour work weeks is entirely unacceptable and is a big problem in the game industry (and others) but I feel that in the case of the gaming industry blaming this entirely on project management is a fairly big over simplification. Yes, there is a failing in management at play but it's not just those at the top, this trickles down to every individual team lead (of which a massive game like RDR2 likely has many) and even in some cases individual team members.

When a project starts features & goals, the ambition or scope of the project will be set. From there time estimations start to be made. In some cases these might just come from the project leads but in many cases each individual team will look at what is being asked from them and estimate how long it will take themselves. Those estimations are what project management will use to plan the entire project.

Now I ask, if I ask you how long you need to do something and you end up taking longer than you estimated did I fail or did you? I'm not saying the situation is this cut and dry either, just trying to illustrate that those types of conditions can come from a failing at many levels, not just the top.

Now, one other thing. That Twitter thread about games that didn't crunch is ridiculous. Most of the games mentioned there are fairly simple games with very small teams. Trying to compare their project to a massive production like RDR2 is laughable. That's like some young, mostly unknown artist walking up to DaVinci in the Sistine Chapel and saying, "This took you 4 years? I painted this last weekend," holds up a small painting of their cat, "you suck, bro."

The dev that started that thread (to promote their own game BTW) proudly proclaimed they made their game "leisurely". Does that mean at a leisurely pace or in their leisure time? The first sounds a lot like somebody who is on the other end of the poor time management spectrum while the second would be the definition of crunch. If you have a day job and you build a game in your free time every single hour of that project is essentially crunch, work that happens outside of normal working hours.
5Sign inorRegisterto rate and reply
Show all comments (8)
Kostas Zarifis Managing Director, Kinesthetic GamesA year ago
@Veronica: Well done for being brave enough to present a very well argued counter point in this climate of “Spontaneous Outrage”.
0Sign inorRegisterto rate and reply
Daniel Trezub QA Analyst, LudiaA year ago
To get crushed by the industry for putting 100-hour weeks or to get death threats from fans for not delivering the game in time? It's a tough call...

(please notice the irony)
0Sign inorRegisterto rate and reply
Alex Barnfield Lead Engineer, 17-BITA year ago
The issue isn't getting the original estimate wrong, if that's all a project manager had to do then they'd just be hired as contractors before the project commences - is how they deal with the inevitable slippage. Long term long hours is not a solution.

I've seen both work environments, and those doing more hours get less done, it's never the ones sticking to their core hours slipping behind schedule. The 40 hour work week was not arrived at for employees benefit, it was for the benefit of employers ensuring they were getting the most productivity from their employees.

There's nothing more frustrating than an overtired employee putting in extra hours at the weekend and introducing game breaking bugs which the rest of the team has to spend all of Monday fixing, bringing everyone else behind schedule. Even those that don't, their own productivity declines progressively over time; they may not realise it but the quantity and quality of the output from someone doing massive overtime is always far lower.

Schedules slip, part of being a project manager is being aware of this fact and building in a buffer into your schedule, encourage your team to build in padding because even if everyone perfectly estimated their hours as the game develops design details will change. Inevitably that buffer may not be adequate at which point dates and/or features must be re-evaluated.

As for the final point; a stress free 40 hour week feels leisurely in this industry, that doesn't mean it should be interpreted as a failure. I have however worked on atleast one project where management actually significantly underestimated the progress and stripped out features unnecessarily; that was equally frustrating as we knew the project quality was suffering whilst we sat around with nothing to do at the end of the project.
In that case the project manager wasn't one who saw the benefit in infrastructural changes and expected development to slow down, rather than speed up towards the end of the project; he even banned us putting time into reducing the rebuild - once the project had ended it took all of 2 man hours to bring it down to a quarter of what it had been. You'd be surprised how much bad project management can contribute to wasted man hours.

Edited 2 times. Last edit by Alex Barnfield on 17th October 2018 12:44am

3Sign inorRegisterto rate and reply
Chase H. Utility Operator, Blume IndustriesA year ago
Absolutely on point article about this crunch topic. Sadly i am one to think that it will be ignored and it will be a practice that wont go away anytime soon with the demand schedules that are placed. But the idea in the end there is a great start.
0Sign inorRegisterto rate and reply
Tommy Millar Company Director, High Tea Frog LtdA year ago
Seems I was featured in this topic!

The issues are far more complex than a repeated sequence of simple "stay late or dont" ultimatums.

In a Stockholm's syndrome-like, gradual way, these "great big happy families" will encourage camaraderie through guilt, with comments like:
"i know you don't want to let us down";
"if we don't make meta bonus we all suffer for it";
"I know you're not one of those 'bare minimum types",;
"we all need to be here to fix this, just in case - take responsibility just like the rest of us";
"I know a hundred people that'd KILL to be in your job";
"won't it all be worth it when the job reviews come around?"
"We noticed you taking quite a bit of time off in a row, maybe you'd be happier in a less strenuous [lower-paid] position?"

The list goes on, and it's constant, with teams starting to believe that the extra, very-often unpaid overtime is the norm and that doing a 9-5 is seen as being lazy or undeserving of the post.

As with myself, this is potentially a death sentence to progress-driven or compulsive individuals, who insist upon doing a little bit more, helping anyone that requires it, or obliging to assist with all those "favours" I now know to be improper milestones being stretched. Thankfully I've now broken out of over a decade of AAA, despite now having long-term disabilities, to start my own studio with some other ex-AAA devs.

I'm always here (And on twitter @TotoMimo) if anyone wants to discuss it further.
0Sign inorRegisterto rate and reply

Sign in to contribute

Need an account? Register now.