Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
Games IT

More Videogames Developers Consider Unionization - Some Spurred By Changes to Remote Work Policies (aftermath.site) 20

Developers for several top videogames have joined unions under the Communication Workers of America — including Call of Duty, Fallout, Overwatch, Diablo and World of Warcraft. Last month workers on the online game Magic: The Gathering Arena team announced their own CWA union.

The gaming news site Aftermath shares some interesting details: Owner Hasbro and Wizards of the Coast could have voluntarily agreed to the union, but instead the issue is going to an official vote with the National Labor Relations Board in June... [O]ne Arena developer shared on Bluesky that one of the reasons they were inspired to organize was because Wizards changed its remote work policy, requiring them to move across the country or to a more expensive state to remain employed. (Changes to remote work have been one of the big drivers of unionization and union action among video game developers.) If the union is successful, the company wouldn't be able to unilaterally change working conditions like remote work; it would have to negotiate with the union over the decision. There's no guarantee unionized employees would get what they want, but they'd have more of a say, and the opportunity to directly influence their work situation, than they would without a union.

More Videogames Developers Consider Unionization - Some Spurred By Changes to Remote Work Policies

Comments Filter:
  • Which they don't have. Regardless of ones view on this, history suggests this won't end well for the developers.
  • As a person who has a half work from home half "onsite", I can note that WFH only or mostly is a dead end.

    1. You are not even considered a person, just an avatar that shows up on a screen some times.

    2. Your advancement options are severely limited.

    3. Your networking options are severely limited.

    I do like my WFH time, less distractions, my home office is really nice, and most of the time, I'm super productive. But without the in-person time, it wouldn't work anywhere near as well. The networking is

    • Re: WFH again? (Score:4, Insightful)

      by fluffernutter ( 1411889 ) on Sunday May 24, 2026 @09:32AM (#66158282)
      Time to switch to a company that must post all job opportunities and interview for them without bias.
      • Time to switch to a company that must post all job opportunities and interview for them without bias.

        Here's where the disconnect happens. And it comes down to "why should a person network?"

        Let's say you are looking for a person to fill an important position. So you have a number of candidates. Let's say you narrow it down to two.

        One is a person who is an unknown quantity. Technically able, but you aren't able to determine the cultural fit. Might be good, might not. The other is a person who is known how they will fit, also technically competent, because they network with others in the industry.

        Beca

        • People who can only get by with networking are not worth hiring, and a company that only hires though networking is not worth working for. All you did was explain in detail why you are a fool to work there. I work for a company that has some questionable managers, but everyone technical is hired and promoted for their skills. I don't even apply for positions, they just come to me for them.
        • A demonstration of this is how I got my present position. It was known that I perform under pressure. It was known that I have top notch technical skills. It was known that I get along well with people. And that I do not intimidate easily.

          My current position is 100% remote (because I want it to be so; a few of us are 100% WFH, but a majority of the employees are not so).

          All of the things that you mention are known, and observed, about me. Even though I am 100% remote. Known and observed by my current coworkers, those who have left, and by our clients.

          So yes, I have less "schmooze" networking. But plenty of the kind that matters, even though I am "just an avatar" (and would I want to work with people who care about the kind of schmoozing th

    • Not everyone lives to work. If you're saving enough, the life improvements from working from home far outweigh the promotion and networking 'opportunities'.

      If you were fully remote you could have moved to a lower cost of living area, closer to friends/family, or to a part of the country you preferred. The savings from that can drastically reduce the amount of years before retirement or improve your social life with the people you actually care about.

      If your employees can't listen to their boss then they s

  • by Baron_Yam ( 643147 ) on Sunday May 24, 2026 @08:52AM (#66158226)

    For most roles in the process, WFH should be very desirable to an employer, so long as the employee signs an appropriate contract indicating that they're obligated to come to the office should their home setup be inadequate for supporting WFH, including mandatory local installations of whatever communications and collaboration tool you decide to employ.

    Maybe you require them to attend a certain number of in-person meetings or team building exercises (but not 3/week, I'm talking monthly or less).

    It saves on office space and related expenses. Throw up a suitable server farm and have employees remote in - all the horsepower, storage, and data security of a data center, it's potentially more secure than a cubicle farm.

    Forcing RTO is just a way to fire people without having to admit you replaced them with a lower quality but much less expensive AI.

    • >forcing rtoâ¦

      Is really about the real estate. Vacant space is a liability. Sometimes useful as such, sometimes not. In most orgs right now, not that many folks are actually doing the work. CSR, some front end developers. Most of the rest are shuffling papers and having meetings and âoenetworking.â Occupancy and real estate development are largely investment games.

      Weâ(TM)ve known at least since the 1950s that industries like insurance (not the same as utilizing the economics of r

  • by Hodr ( 219920 ) on Sunday May 24, 2026 @08:54AM (#66158230) Homepage

    I would be happy to be incorrect here, but I think this is doomed to fail in the near future. Historically developers have been willing to put up with a lot rather grueling work standards for the prestige of working on a major video game. While some of these measures, like "crunch time" have become high profile enough that pushback has reined in their use, there are still a lot more young developers that want to work in the industry than senior folks with the credentials to demand better treatment. Combined with a lot of major studios eyeing AI for the non-creative work of game development and I don't see where the devs have a strong foundation to negotiate from.

    • by Echoez ( 562950 )

      These are my thoughts as well. With the advent of AI (for developers, for designers, for graphics artists), there's a strong chance that there could be a surplus of labor relative to demand, and they won't have much leverage. In fact, since all of the production of a video game is necessarily digital, these jobs could just be pushed overseas.

      There's also a factor about competition: There have been a number of games over the past few years (Valheim, Vampire Survivors, Megabonk) made by just a few devel

  • For unionization when you've already fired 1/3 of the entire industry. At a certain point you're running it so a bare bones staff that the threat of layoffs no longer really exists unless the company is just completely shutting down. And you can't really offshore anything that you haven't already offshored because at some point you need people to make art that resonates with the locals.

Deliver yesterday, code today, think tomorrow.

Working...