We’ve all seen LinkedIn; often a digital swamp teeming with buzzword-laden self-promotion, thinly veiled sales pitches, and recruiters who wouldn't know a dev kit from a doorstop. Yet, every now and then, a genuine conversation breaks through the noise. Recently, a critical discussion involving senior developers from titans like **Remedy**, **Ubisoft**, and **Naughty Dog** has ignited, pulling back the curtain on the industry's most persistent and insidious problem: crunch. Our analysis confirms what many veteran gamers and developers have known for decades: crunch is not a badge of honor for the "passionate"; it's a systemic failure demanding structural solutions, not just lip service.
This isn't just another GDC warm-up act. Spearheaded by **Novaquark Technical Director John Walther**, a former senior technical artist at Ubisoft, the dialogue cuts through the typical industry jargon, though we do wonder if someone should finally pen the definitive history of "pipelines" in software development. Walther's assertion is both hopeful and stark: “the big reason it's so important for every studio to improve their pipelines and processes right now is because of the industry trending away from crunch.” He posits that while crunch has built blockbusters, it's “universally rejected” as unsustainable. Yet, in a brutal dose of reality, he admits that “many companies are turning back to crunch as it's the only way they know to find success,” fueled by publishers “tightening their grip.” This short-term fix, he correctly argues, is a dangerous path, contrasting it with the long-term imperative of robust pipelines.
Beyond the Process: The Human Element of Overwork
While improving pipelines and processes is non-negotiable, the conversation goes deeper. **Robert Krekel**, former Naughty Dog audio director, now at Atomic Arcade, injects a critical, often-unspoken factor: **ego**. We’ve seen it play out time and again. Krekel argues, “When you put a large number of high performers on the same team, there’s often an unspoken pressure to define what the 'industry standard' is in your specific discipline not because it’s required to ship the product, but because individuals want to be seen as the best at what they do by their peers.” This resonates particularly with studios like Naughty Dog, renowned for their intense culture – a reputation underscored by recent headlines regarding required extended hours for *Intergalactic: The Heretic Prophet* leading up to Christmas. Krekel’s insight points to a critical need for studios to not just fix broken processes, but to actively cultivate a healthier culture from recruitment onward, balancing autonomy with guardrails to protect developers from their own ambition.
Crunch: An Institutional Problem, Not a Scope Issue
**Josh DiCarlo**, former Insomniac Games principal character technical director and now creative technology director at Persona AI, unequivocally states: “crunch is not a SCOPE problem, it's - at its core - an institutional problem and it's almost entirely avoidable.” Having worked in film, DiCarlo highlights a stark contrast: “I've worked on films from beginning to end that had virtually no overtime - I have never heard of a modern AAA title that didn't have a soul crushing crunch period.” This isn't just anecdotal; it highlights a fundamental flaw in our industry's operational DNA. Solving crunch, he explains, demands:
- **Universal Buy-in:** Investment at ALL levels, not just verbal commitments.
- **Holistic Automation:** Streamlined, automated pipelines for asset publishing, versioning, and review, reducing reliance on manual, error-prone processes.
- **Standardized Reviews:** Regular, enforced buy-offs and approvals.
- **Project-Centric Tracking:** Meticulous development tracking focused on projects and assets, not just individual tickets.
- **Financial Consequences:** Instituting proper overtime compensation, shifting crunch from a "free labor" buffer to a tangible cost.
The Scathing Truth: Management Failure
Perhaps the snappiest, and most damning, indictment comes from **Remedy Principal Audio Designer Ville Petteri Sorsa**: “Crunch is the easiest workaround for failures in management and project planning.” He nails it perfectly; it's the convenient escape hatch when financial pressures mount and deadlines, often unrealistic from the outset, loom large. Our own experience, spanning two decades in and around this industry, validates this. We’ve crunched, not out of "passion" for the grind, but due to inadequate project structure, insufficient resources, and the self-imposed pressure to deliver when leadership has fallen short.
Our Take: The Path Forward
This LinkedIn discussion is more than just a chinwag among seasoned devs; it's a vital, long-overdue professional audit. It signals a shift from the old, tired excuses about "passion" driving burnout to a clear-eyed recognition of crunch as a structural, institutional, and often ego-driven phenomenon. The implications for the future of game development are massive. For players, this means not just better working conditions for the talent behind the games we love, but potentially more refined, less rushed products – a win-win.
We’ve seen the industry mature in countless ways, from graphics to gameplay loops, but its approach to human resources often feels stuck in the stone age. The solutions presented here – from automated pipelines to acknowledging the insidious role of ego, and crucially, holding management accountable – are not revolutionary. They are fundamental, practical steps towards a sustainable, humane industry. As the People Make Games investigation in 2021 exposed, even studios aiming to avoid crunch internally can still outsource the problem, highlighting that vigilance and a global perspective are paramount.
It's time for every studio, every publisher, and every developer to heed these insights. Crunch is not an inevitability; it's a choice. And it's a choice our industry, finally, seems ready to reckon with.