IGDA Updates 'Game Crediting Policies' In Hopes Of Improving Industry Standards

I work as a software developer. (not games) I never get credited for my work in the software. I do get paid for my work, though. And that is enough for me.

@sanderev It's not the same for arts. Having your name in the credits of a game is huge for your portfolio, especially if you're a smaller fish.

That is good and all but what would happen to the company or corps that violate that policy? They announce the change but not the solution. You need both otherwise publishers and other clients will keep doing it and getting away with it. It's the same thing when law makers announce a change in the law, yes it's nice you announce a change, now what would happen if someone violate that change? Will they get punish or will they get a slap in the wrist?

Would it really be that hard to credit everyone who had directly worked on your game? Seems like it would be a great way to avoid the hassle that might come later down the line when a developer you didn't credit calls you out.

@sanderev

Everybody should be credited for their work. You shouldn't have to maintain a list of contacts for others to verify you worked on something. It should be present in the product documentation itself.

@WhensDinner True, but they don't "own" the games or the copyrights to them. Like I don't own the software I create in name of the company I work for. And I do see software creation as an art form.

And yes as a portfolio I can see it having a function. But you can also get references from the company itself. (Which is how it works with software).

I do have a few "hobby" projects in which I do credit myself, but that's also software that is entirely created and published by myself. And they also count as being part of my portfolio.

@KainXavier I disagree. You should get paid for your work.

I tried looking for the credits of for example Windows 11. I couldn't find them. And I know, from working with software, that there are literally hundreds of awesome programmers that work on it.

Very early versions of Office (95, 97) did have a secret way to get to see the credits. But those have long since been removed. And honestly, they should do the same with games.

My real concern is for lazy staff who piggybacks on the works of their peers/teammates and still gets credited. I've seen it.

@Zyph any job/workplace you usually have at least 1 of those kinds of people, sadly

@Zyph That's a much lesser problem. Would you rather have, for example, everyone who worked their butts of on Metroid Prime have proper credit in the remaster, or worry about that one guy who called in sick for Fifa Legacy edition 90921?

@WhensDinner even if uncredited, you can still put your work in your CV and talk about it in interviews. It's not like not being in the credits blocks you from doing it.

Still since credits in games exist, all people that worked on a game should be properly credited.

@sanderev You’re in software? Explains a lot, honestly.

i still don't get why this is even something to be against it's the most minimum effort gesture ever to take, and it's not like it's taking away from people to be credited. it's like getting mad they named a sidewalk after MLK

Remember back in the Genesis/Mega Drive games when people couldn't even put their real names in the credits for whatever reason? That was weird.

Its just crazy to me that crediting people in games and other media is such of a supposed "controversial" thing. Its not hard to do, just add peoples names to a text file at the end of the game. It doesnt matter how long they were there or if they fulfilled what was needed of them only a portion of the way into the dev cycle and then laid off - they did the work, they should be credited. Simple as. Hopefully this practice changes.

@somebread It’s honestly bizarre. Really strange thing to be opposed to

@SonOfDracula How so?

I still don't get it, its not like the HR will play a game just to verify if your name is on the credits, and most gamers will simply skip the credits.

I just don't care and I don't think mamy do to be fair.

@CielloArc It doesn't matter if most players don't bother to watch the credits and not see who worked on the game. Its the principle that matters here, since often times having names in credits is essential to acquiring jobs in the industry to begin with - "work and be credited on X number of games" is often a requirement to be hired. Crediting matters massively.

@kurtasbestos
That was a Japan policy at the time. I believe they didn't want other companies trying to hire them, so they don't put their real names in the credits to prevent that.

@CielloArc It’s meaningful to acknowledge a person when they do good work.

@sanderev

Compensation is a given. Crediting people for their work should also be. It benefits everyone, and there is no downside. I don't agree with Microsoft's approach. I would love to be able to see who worked on what. The same goes for any other tech company or product.

@ketrac No, I agree. I am merely stating -a- problem. Not discounting the current issue.

@KainXavier Why though?

I know a reason why Microsoft DOESN'T do it. Which is actually a very valid one: privacy. Which is most likely the same for most software companies.

Also software is in constant development. Also the people that work at these companies always change, and parts of the software are often replaced or recreated. Adding everyone to a list for an "application" of millions lines of code including full historical credits... It would be like reading an actual phone book. And asking someone who worked on Windows 3.11 about stuff in Windows 11 could be very problematic. That person might not even work at Microsoft anymore.

Sure “give credit where credit is due” is a nice notion, but personally it doesn’t bother me what they decide to do there.

@MattmanForever So you should be credited for a game you didn't work on to help you get new jobs in the future. Honestly, that's just stupid.

@sanderev

Privacy is a legitimate concern. I would also understand if a person simply doesn't want their name attached to a project. That said, I feel like this choice should be left up to the individual and not the company they work for.

As for large and/or on-going software projects, I think the right thing to do would be to credit everyone involved in the launch of a major release. Each release would have its own set of credits, and these can be archived somewhere for posterity. You could even have fun with it and show off some aspect of your software.