[bkq]

Archived link: https://archive.is/xzPtR

The article says that there are similarities between the two industries, I see these similarities too between how the workforces are treated. Whereby Hollywood VFX workers are overworked and underpaid, and some even end up going under, and the Academy is always there to stomp out their protest during the few minutes they get at the Oscars [1]. Much like with game development, where waves of contractors are hired, then subsequently fired [2], or being just subjected to endless crunch [3]. I think it's fair to say that game dev companies are the sweatshops of the tech industry, and I feel for anyone who wants to break into what otherwise could be a creative industry.

[1] - https://www.latimes.com/entertainment/envelope/la-xpm-2013-f...

[2] - https://www.washingtonpost.com/video-games/2021/12/03/raven-...

[3] - https://www.polygon.com/2019/4/23/18507750/fortnite-work-cru...

[hutzlibu]

"and the Academy is always there to stomp out their protest during the few minutes they get at the Oscars"

Hm, I have no knowledge or connection to the events, but "stomping out protests" made me expect a bit more dramatic events, than stopping someones speech, after his time was up.

"But Westenhofer’s speech was cut off mid-sentence after he used up his allotted time"

[bkq]

It's something the Academy has always engaged in, is with cutting of the microphone of the VFX artists. Other people are not treated like this.

[germinalphrase]

They may be harsher with VFX people, but speakers are routinely “played off” the stage with music before cutting mics.

[tough]

Fuck the academy

[StrangeATractor]

They lost all sense of credibility when Peter O'Toole was snubbed for Lawrence of Arabia, and then for the rest of his career.

It's just an industry meat parade designed to get you to watch their bullshit.

[JohnFen]

Did they ever have credibility?

The academy awards are literally nothing more than any other industry group awards: it's just people in the industry telling each other how awesome they are.

They are, and always have been, utterly meaningless.

[StrangeATractor]

No they didn't but giving Gregory Peck an Oscar over Peter O'Toole should have destroyed any notion of credibility.

[indigochill]

I'm not sure that game dev as a gig economy would be the worst thing. Make a thing, get paid, move on. Especially since a traditional game (not MMO or "game as a service") has a natural beginning, middle, and end of development.

Plus I assume if you're an independent contractor (not working in an outsourced sweatshop) you have more leverage to stand your ground against nonsense like crunch. But I'm fantasizing that because I've never done contract work so I don't know if that's really the case.

[whitemary]

Your assumption is 100% wrong and I couldn't imagine what on Earth gives you that idea. In fact, I am not convinced you actually believe that yourself. I don't believe you've thought about this at all.

[jasondigitized]

Are you going to provide your reasoning besides saying “you’re wrong?”

[illiarian]

Literally every single example we have of gig economy results in lower wages and less worker protections.

[Jensson]

Being able to earn money whenever you want so you don't have to build your life around your work would be huge even if it makes you earn a bit less. Developers earn a lot already, many would take that trade.

Edit: That would make game development much more palatable, since gig work implies no overtime unless you want it. Just do some game development and earn money rather than doing it for free on a hobby project. And since it is just a gig you can easily try it out and do something else if you don't like it.

[illiarian]

> Being able to earn money whenever you want so you don't have to build your life around your work

And yet, every instance of gig economy pushes wages way down, pushes all the externalities (like health insurance, travel, equipment etc.) onto workers and makes their life revolve around work.

> That would make game development much more palatable, since gig work implies no overtime unless you want it.

As others already mentioned: then you'll be out of the job, because there will always be people willing to work overtime for the same money.

And since it's "just a gig", you can be let go even faster than it is now for workers in the US.

[Ralfp]

How would gig economy not result in game dev being more exploitative than it is now? Oh, you dont want to do overtime making those car models? No problem. We have contact to 10 other people just waiting to do it in your place. And we will pay them less than we pay you, and then we will pay even less to those who will replace them.

Keep system running for decade or two and you have another area where people work to don't die from hunger. Because thats how gig economy worked for every other market.

And what is your retirement plan? Keep working until your health prevents you from working anymore and then die on streets?

[kabouseng]

That's capitalism for you...

[kayodelycaon]

Independent contractors would have no leverage because there are too many people who will do the job. Also, companies won't like someone paying per hour when they can push 80+ hour workweeks on salaried employees.

[ozim]

Are there?

Even for Amazon warehouses they churned through people faster than they could find new ones and that were jobs where you basically have to be healthy enough to carry things so not requiring much.

Development or working on game requires quite some knowledge of specialized tools. Then that toolset in game industry varies a lot.

I don’t think there are that many Unity developers one can hire on the spot.

[tcmart14]

There is a lot of domain specific knowledge for sure. There is a huge difference between, "I made a flappy bird clone/shitty side scroller in Unity" vs someone who actually knows how to make a triple-A level game. The former requires, can you spend 4 hours watching youtube videos on a saturday night and literally just mimicking the video. And there are people who become the latter developer starting as the former. But there is a lot that has to happen in between.

[WeylandYutani]

I think that movies and videogames industry need to get the hell out of America. Wages are too high. Making a triple A game takes a staff of 500 these days.

[bkq]

This is something they do, Marvel rely on outsourcing and using ununionised labour [1], and it shows in the recent films and TV shows they've made. There's a drop in the quality of the VFX. Wages for VFX artists aren't too high, as I've said, they are some of the most underpaid workers in the industry, and their protest against this is always stomped out. For a VFX worker it must be highly frustrating working in an industry where other workers are unionised, but they aren't.

[1] - https://www.cnet.com/culture/entertainment/marvels-vfx-artis...

[ChrisMarshallNY]

Some of the Bollywood VFX is amazing. The movies may not be my cup of tea, but they do good CGI.

[flerchin]

Can you point me to a clip on YouTube that you would consider to be good Bollywood VFX? I've mostly been exposed to the most comically bad Bollywood VFX.

[illiarian]

They are not exactly bad, they are mostly over the top, and that could be a cultural thing.

RRR wouldn't be out of place in a Hollywood blockbuster.

[lenocinor]

As someone who watches and loves a lot of Bollywood, I’ve never seen a Bollywood movie with good VFX.

[ChrisMarshallNY]

I can try and find a couple of the movies. Like I said, I don't watch them, so I've basically only seen the sizzle reels.

I'll bet there's some folks here, that actually watch the movies, and could point to better stuff.

[godzillabrennus]

RRR on Netflix was my first Bollywood experience and I quite liked it. The cgi was pretty bad though.

[lenocinor]

RRR is not Bollywood technically, it’s Tollywood.

[aprdm]

VFX artists can definitely make a good living. Their salaries are comparable to tech if you remove the stock portion. They also work crazy OT and are paid hourly which means big money. That's true if you're more senior of course.

[hackernewds]

Read the credits at the end of any CGI heavy movie from Disney, or AAA game like GoW and notice how many Indian names show up. It is a highly outsourced biz model, and most of the grunt work is humans doing repetitive tasks over and over for $1 to return $1.01

[sporkl]

I cannot speak for videogames, but I have a family member who was in the movie industry doing CG stuff, and it is already heavily outsourced to other countries than the U.S., particularly Canada, India, and Australia. I’ve been told that the movie industry is essentially dead in the U.S., besides having rights holders/production managers/etc.

[beauzero]

Not so in the Atlanta area. Mostly thanks to Tyler Perry. https://www.wsbtv.com/news/local/douglas-county/lionsgate-in...

[bearmode]

Oh no, paying people what they're worth instead of exploiting those in poorer countries, how terrible

[elif]

Is it exploitation to pay someone above the average salary in their country?

I would posit that it is more akin to exploitation to keep rich nations rich and poor nations poor.

[godzillabrennus]

Labor being a global commodity peeves many in the business of solidarity.

[PaulDavisThe1st]

Actually, the peeve is that capital (and profit) is now permitted to be mobile, while labor is generally not. The EU trade zone is the one, shining notable exception.

That is: we move our money into whatever markets we want, we withdraw our profits as we choose, but heaven forbid that labor should be allowed to move as it pleases.

[drewcoo]

Somehow paying someone relatively well in a low-paying country does keep the rich rich(er) and at the same time creates a larger pool of poor people.

It's possible to be the worker who's paid relatively well and still be exploited. That worker then becomes complicit in the exploitation.

Pitting one workforce against another is an old trick used to control them all.

[ta8645]

> Pitting one workforce against another is an old trick used to control them all.

It's not a trick, it's the same as you choosing the cheapest product on a shelf between two competing brands. It's the foundation of a competitive market that puts high incentives to produce products the most efficiently and most cost effectively. Which is a huge boon to consumers and has lead to us all having a better standard of living than anyone else in history.

[PaulDavisThe1st]

Sigh.

Being in country A and able to choose products made in country B is the result of specific political and legal choices made by the power structures of both countries.

Historically, there was nothing inevitable about the free movement of capital, goods and profit, but over the last half century or more, this has come to be seen as "normal".

Your argument is the classic one in favor of removing restrictions on the movement of capital, goods and profit (not labor!), and has been the justification for almost every free trade agreement over the last 75 years.

The evidence of it being a net benefit to everyone is now starting to skew against that claim. The distribution of negative environmental externalities to poor countries in particular argues against it (i.e. country X can make your widgets cheaper because they have less regulation about waste and pollution).

We're all consumers, it is true. But we're all citizens and employees too, and we spend more of our lives in those roles. Global free trade may be a boon to our lives as consumers, but it's been fucking over our lives as citizens and employees for too long alread.

[LawTalkingGuy]

> at the same time creates a larger pool of poor people.

Paying people so they can lessen infant mortality and such does produce a baby boom.

[danbolt]

I never thought I’d write this sort of comment, but, the username checks out!

[3pt14159]

Well that may be true, but they get to work on stuff that is legitimately cool.

I know a guy that worked on StarTrek for years as a VR architect and general 3D modelling type of work. He worked longer hours than your average Torontonian, but nothing absolutely crazy. I've worked longer weeks.

He loved his job.

I'm not saying it is this way for everyone, but part of life is deciding if you want to work hard, have impact on things that matter, work on cool stuff, earn a lot of money, etc.

There are places where it truly gets exploitative, but in my humble opinion that's usually places where the people involved have almost no options other than to move to another town or country. I'm not against industries or companies where the up front expectation is hard work. Some people want that, at least some of the time.

[bkq]

>I'm not saying it is this way for everyone, but part of life is deciding if you want to work hard, have impact on things that matter, work on cool stuff, earn a lot of money, etc.

VFX people in Hollywoord are some of the most underpaid workers in the industry. Sure, it's cool that you can be a part of a team that helps make a movie. No doubt it must be pretty cool to see your work on the big screen, or even the small screen, and know that you played a part in bringing it there. But I think something the workers would also value is having some autonomy over their work, and being paid for it.

I'm not easily convinced by the argument of, "you get to work on cool stuff", working on cool stuff doesn't make up for risking povery, debt, or unemployment when you're underpaid. Furthermore, there's a difference between hard work, and exhausting working. And being put under crunch is exhausting work, not hard work.

[jollofricepeas]

Exactly.

Screw cool. I’m an adult.

Working on “cool stuff” is for people in their 20s or the perpetually naive…

The perpetually naive usually come to their senses when they’re old and recognize they don’t have any savings, don’t have a home to live in and can’t retire.

I’ll take a fair wage, health insurance, and balanced work hours every time. I can find cool things to do on my own time when not putting in 16 hours a day.

[3pt14159]

Ok great good for you! You're (presumably) in the West and can choose what you value, and you value a life with balanced work hours and, well, you call it fair, but in global standards it is high.

Either way, for people with the skills to choose between working for Google and making $400k a year or working for Hollywood and making $70k a year, then they go and work for Hollywood and complain about the hours and pay, I just don't really know what else to say other than it's a choice.

You get to see your work on the big screen, hang out at cooler parties, etc. Google people, generally speaking, do not get the same thing in life. Unions have their place, of course, especially with monopsonies or mining towns, but when it comes to a whole industry I just think some things naturally come out that way due to the motivations and dynamics.

[jnovek]

I didn't realize that Google is paying nearly half a million dollars a year for VFX artists these days.

[vanderZwan]

> Well that may be true, but they get to work on stuff that is legitimately cool.

So? How does that justify being exploited and treated badly?

I've seen the same arguments made against teachers, nurses and other people who get to do "meaningful" work whenever they want fairer wages, and I do not see the logic. Do they need to be punished for doing a job where the result of their hard work doesn't make them hate themselves?

I see the reverse logic: pay jobs that nobody wants to do well to make them attractive. But the need for carrots does not imply the need for sticks.

[unclad5968]

Nobody is being punished. It's simple supply and demand. If you don't want to work on marvel movies there are millions of young men and women that would do it for pennies. Why is Disney going to pay them more if they don't have to?

[onion2k]

they get to work on stuff that is legitimately cool

Like most things, working on the cutting-edge, successful, top-tier stuff is cool, but most people in the industry aren't doing that. If you look at something like https://steamdb.info/upcoming/ you'll see a small number of "Yeah, it'd be cool to make that" games, and a lot of "Who the hell buys this crap?" games. Most people employed to build games are working on the second type of game.

[Dalewyn]

>part of life is deciding if you want to work hard, have impact on things that matter, work on cool stuff, earn a lot of money, etc.

One man's happiness is another man's hell, and so forth.

The question of happiness is a very subjective one, with everyone having a different answer.

[ocimbote]

It's alright and quite frankly understandable to be motivated to work on a "big project with big cash and big name".

The problem is when the producers use it in an exploitative way to have people work insanely longer hours than billed, or to lower the costs of labour so that the workers can have the "pride" of writing "big name" on their resume.

Unfortunately, this is common practice.

[JohnFen]

> Well that may be true, but they get to work on stuff that is legitimately cool.

In other parts of the software industry, you can also work on legitimately cool stuff without having to kill yourself.