Bonus, Bonus; Read all about it!

 How much to get the 'basic human decency' package?

Here's a really sad story from a long while back, one which I only recently became aware of due to a  Lego podcast that did the rounds through the news stratosphere. (Although the event itself is actually further than 20 years ago and the story broke around 8 years ago, so nothing was explicitly new.) Do you know why publishers are so sought after? I mean besides from the cold obvious fact that they can pay for the thing you want to make, I'm talking about the all encompassing reason. It's all about security, having some one behind you that can cover you in the various issues that may arise, whether that be funding, marketing or, if you're really unluckily, the odd managerial dispute. However, back in 1997 when Lego Island was released after two years of work, game development was a lot less established and a lot more 'wild west', if you catch my meaning. I'd like to think that's the only reason why Mindscape's old managers managed to get away with what they did.

You see, by some good grace of the heavens the Mindscape staff managed to get ahold of the Lego brand and were working on bringing out Lego Island; a game which might be seen as a progenitor to TT's incredible crossbrand Lego series. Development appeared to have gone rather well as the team spoke about being certain of the success of the title, something they predicted well because the game was indeed a hit. I even know someone who used to play it as a kid, it really did rock those ever-important day one sales. So where does the 'sad' come into it? Well simple; you see the team were due royalties and bonuses for reaching certain milestones, but rather than cough up what was due, the managerial staff took the nuclear option and fired everyone before collapsing the company. Truly despicable and, might I say, pretty darn indefensible. You'd wonder how they ever got away with not being sued into oblivion, but I suppose it's hard to say what really went down without having been there ourselves.

But what this story did independently grant me was a touch of insight into the fact that there's a lot talk of developers and having sales incentives withdrawn in disproportionate punishment. I mean, ideally I think one would expect that bonuses upon completion would be a standard across the industry, but in retrospect it's hardly a secret that people tend to get squirrelly whenever money is involved, so shenanigans and 'technically's is an inevitability. Of course I have an example in mind, you know I do. (Heck, if you know me well enough you already know exactly what my example is.) Because you see, this brings me back to the time when 'Fallout: New Vegas' was turned around by Obsidian in a, frankly, unbelievably quick amount of time with a level of quality that easily outshone anything that the Fallout series had done before and has done since. (Of course, the toss-up for that rush was a pretty buggy release) The bugs managed to drag down the average critic score to 1 point below the threshold that Obsidian needed to secure their bonus from Bethesda. And although Obsidian will, to this day, claim that there's no ill-will harboured over the situation; I still harbour ill-will. New Vegas was the best darn Fallout game ever made and it deserves the respect that it never gets!

Another high-profile bonus dispute was with Borderlands and Gearbox, although that story does seem a little more nuanced due to the way that the sides actually actively refute each other, as opposed to the others wherein everyone is oddly upfront about the situation. What I know is that Gearbox had a system in place wherein the success of the games/company would result in higher bonuses, implying that this wasn't a fixed rate. For Borderlands 2 the game was such a success that some recounted tails of employees buying second houses and the like. (Which as a rule I find distasteful, but hey it's your money; screw the local housing market with it as you please.) Borderlands 3 however, didn't do as well with sales? I question because- well, that seems questionable. To be clear, I'll talking about proportionate success, so whereas Borderlands 3 sold more than Borderlands 2, apparently the development/marketing costs weren't surpassed to as great an extent as Gearbox had hoped.

As I said, there's inherently a 'he said, my data said' slant to that story which makes it a tad unpalatable, but the lo-down is thus; Borderlands 3 Devs didn't get the bonuses they were hoping for. Which isn't to say that they didn't get paid at all, but that things weren't apparently nearly as good as when Borderlands 2 released, which doesn't really make sense when you consider the exponential growth of the gaming market and the way that Borderlands 3 sold 50% more than 2 did, and just the natural rule about how sequels tend to mean bigger and better. You've got to wonder just how much Gearbox sunk into their cringey marketing campaigns (because we all know how the big parts of the budget always goes to the misguided marketing attempts) in order to hobble the company profits so hardily. Or is something a tad more nefarious going on? I couldn't say. Or rather, I wouldn't. Ol' mister Randy Pitchford is like to throw a hissy fit whenever challenged. 

Then there was another conversation about bonuses just a few months back, although this time around it seemed like a concerted effort to get ahead of the news. Of course, I'm talking about CDPR and the whole situation with them bungling the launch of Cyberpunk 2077 so badly that rumours are it'll take around 6 months of patches until it begins to actually resemble their development vision. (Though that is by their estimation, so it could be closer to a year) Following the launch it was soon revealed that the developers who has worked themselves silly just to have management undermine everything with lies and an underbaked launch, we're told that they would be getting their promised bonuses. (How magnanimous) It's never really a good sign when you have to be implicitly told that what should be the minimum will, in fact, occur. I mean are we supposed to clap CD for not being scumbags? I guess so...

Creating video games, movies and long form entertainment in general is a daunting proposition that demands a lot out of the folk involved, at every level. Yet, more often than not, it's the backbone holding everything together that find themselves the most in danger in situations like these when money takes precedent over basic morals. Now, of course, by their very nature a 'bonus' shouldn't be a sole source of income to depend upon, (trust me, I've tried living on that sort of life. Isn't worth the stress) but nor should it be a matter of contention once earned. Give people the rewards that they deserve, is there anything wrong with saying that? Nintendo have been said to operate their employee's with a ethos that 'happy and secure people make better games, because you need to be happy to make people happy', and darn it; maybe we all need to take a leaf out of their book every once and a while.

But, look at me, talking about things far above my ken; such as actually having money. Is should probably wrap out before I step out of my knowledge base. But before I do I should reiterate that this is a matter of respect over artists and the value proposition they bring to a project. Whether we're talking about artists wielding brushes or keyboards, these are the people who do everything that those men and their monies couldn't with all the capital in the world, so it makes sense to respect them. Future Lego Island sequels with other contractors never could live up to what that original team produced, and that should be a cautionary tale in it's own. But now I'm literally weighing into drama that's literally almost as old as I am, so that's about it. I'm done.