I thought it was infamously overworked and underpaid - because so many (many more than there are jobs) are game fans and will put up with it for the thrill of work being games too.
I think GP must mean indie game development, i.e. yes you get 100% of game sales (minus costs and partners' share if applicable of course), which isn't really worth distinguishing from advice for start-ups? That's just a start-up that makes games isn't it?
Profit share? In AAA, yes. In Indie, no. (At least not usually)
High risk as in, most people are "gamers" or love games, unaware that they either hate or are bad at making them, aka wasting about 5 years of their lives learning how to. You really have to love making them, the constant interation will kill you otherwise.
Salary wise, from someone who has worked in Indie and now works in AAA as a Technical Narrative Designer and absolutely loves it, game dev salary is about 60% of a regular UX/UI Designer salary for traditional tech companies. This is the same for Engineers or Programmers. So still a lot, but just not life changing money like some of the salaries in Silicon Valley.
Riot and Valve pay best by far, they're the FAANG equivalent. (Excluding the mobile and web3 market)
This is indeed what I meant. I wasn’t clear. Entertainment products in general have a strong Power Law Curve to their relative revenues. Games are expensive to produce and have a high variance on their returns.
So, the rewards for a profitable game for most game employees is that the studio doesn’t shut down! Though I have heard of rare cases where people on a team hit a truly large royalty check from a game they worked on. Usually, the profit from a successful game goes into the war chest to cover the next failure.
I think GP must mean indie game development, i.e. yes you get 100% of game sales (minus costs and partners' share if applicable of course), which isn't really worth distinguishing from advice for start-ups? That's just a start-up that makes games isn't it?