EA's bright and shiny new corporate trademark is "Challenge Everything." Where this applies is not exactly clear. Churning out one licensed football game after another doesn't sound like challenging much of anything to me; it sounds like a money farm. To any EA executive that happens to read this, I have a good challenge for you: how about safe and sane labor practices for the people on whose backs you walk for your millions?
I am retaining some anonymity here because I have no illusions about what the consequences would be for my family if I was explicit. However, I also feel no impetus to shy away from sharing our story, because I know that it is too common to stick out among those of the thousands of engineers, artists, and designers that EA employs.
Our adventures with Electronic Arts began less than a year ago. The small game studio that my partner worked for collapsed as a result of foul play on the part of a big publisher -- another common story. Electronic Arts offered a job, the salary was right and the benefits were good, so my SO took it. I remember that they asked him in one of the interviews: "how do you feel about working long hours?" It's just a part of the game industry -- few studios can avoid a crunch as deadlines loom, so we thought nothing of it. When asked for specifics about what "working long hours" meant, the interviewers coughed and glossed on to the next question; now we know why.
Within weeks production had accelerated into a 'mild' crunch: eight hours six days a week. Not bad. Months remained until any real crunch would start, and the team was told that this "pre-crunch" was to prevent a big crunch toward the end; at this point any other need for a crunch seemed unlikely, as the project was dead on schedule. I don't know how many of the developers bought EA's explanation for the extended hours; we were new and naive so we did. The producers even set a deadline; they gave a specific date for the end of the crunch, which was still months away from the title's shipping date, so it seemed safe. That date came and went. And went, and went. When the next news came it was not about a reprieve; it was another acceleration: twelve hours six days a week, 9am to 10pm.
Weeks passed. Again the producers had given a termination date on this crunch that again they failed. Throughout this period the project remained on schedule. The long hours started to take its toll on the team; people grew irritable and some started to get ill. People dropped out in droves for a couple of days at a time, but then the team seemed to reach equilibrium again and they plowed ahead. The managers stopped even talking about a day when the hours would go back to normal.
Now, it seems, is the "real" crunch, the one that the producers of this title so wisely prepared their team for by running them into the ground ahead of time. The current mandatory hours are 9am to 10pm -- seven days a week -- with the occasional Saturday evening off for good behavior (at 6:30pm). This averages out to an eighty-five hour work week. Complaints that these once more extended hours combined with the team's existing fatigue would result in a greater number of mistakes made and an even greater amount of wasted energy were ignored.
The stress is taking its toll. After a certain number of hours spent working the eyes start to lose focus; after a certain number of weeks with only one day off fatigue starts to accrue and accumulate exponentially. There is a reason why there are two days in a weekend -- bad things happen to one's physical, emotional, and mental health if these days are cut short. The team is rapidly beginning to introduce as many flaws as they are removing.
And the kicker: for the honor of this treatment EA salaried employees receive a) no overtime; b) no compensation time! ('comp' time is the equalization of time off for overtime -- any hours spent during a crunch accrue into days off after the product has shipped); c) no additional sick or vacation leave. The time just goes away. Additionally, EA recently announced that, although in the past they have offered essentially a type of comp time in the form of a few weeks off at the end of a project, they no longer wish to do this, and employees shouldn't expect it. Further, since the production of various games is scattered, there was a concern on the part of the employees that developers would leave one crunch only to join another. EA's response was that they would attempt to minimize this, but would make no guarantees. This is unthinkable; they are pushing the team to individual physical health limits, and literally giving them nothing for it. Comp time is a staple in this industry, but EA as a corporation wishes to "minimize" this reprieve. One would think that the proper way to minimize comp time is to avoid crunch, but this brutal crunch has been on for months, and nary a whisper about any compensation leave, nor indeed of any end of this treatment.
This crunch also differs from crunch time in a smaller studio in that it was not an emergency effort to save a project from failure. Every step of the way, the project remained on schedule. Crunching neither accelerated this nor slowed it down; its effect on the actual product was not measurable. The extended hours were deliberate and planned; the management knew what they were doing as they did it. The love of my life comes home late at night complaining of a headache that will not go away and a chronically upset stomach, and my happy supportive smile is running out.
No one works in the game industry unless they love what they do. No one on that team is interested in producing an inferior product. My heart bleeds for this team precisely BECAUSE they are brilliant, talented individuals out to create something great. They are and were more than willing to work hard for the success of the title. But that good will has only been met with abuse. Amazingly, Electronic Arts was listed #91 on Fortune magazine's "100 Best Companies to Work For" in 2003.
EA's attitude toward this -- which is actually a part of company policy, it now appears -- has been (in an anonymous quotation that I've heard repeated by multiple managers), "If they don't like it, they can work someplace else." Put up or shut up and leave: this is the core of EA's Human Resources policy. The concept of ethics or compassion or even intelligence with regard to getting the most out of one's workforce never enters the equation: if they don't want to sacrifice their lives and their health and their talent so that a multibillion dollar corporation can continue its Godzilla-stomp through the game industry, they can work someplace else.
But can they?
The EA Mambo, paired with other giants such as Vivendi, Sony, and Microsoft, is rapidly either crushing or absorbing the vast majority of the business in game development. A few standalone studios that made their fortunes in previous eras -- Blizzard, Bioware, and Id come to mind -- manage to still survive, but 2004 saw the collapse of dozens of small game studios, no longer able to acquire contracts in the face of rapid and massive consolidation of game publishing companies. This is an epidemic hardly unfamiliar to anyone working in the industry. Though, of course, it is always the option of talent to go outside the industry, perhaps venturing into the booming commercial software development arena. (Read my tired attempt at sarcasm.)
To put some of this in perspective, I myself consider some figures. If EA truly believes that it needs to push its employees this hard -- I actually believe that they don't, and that it is a skewed operations perspective alone that results in the severity of their crunching, coupled with a certain expected amount of the inefficiency involved in running an enterprise as large as theirs -- the solution therefore should be to hire more engineers, or artists, or designers, as the case may be. Never should it be an option to punish one's workforce with ninety hour weeks; in any other industry the company in question would find itself sued out of business so fast its stock wouldn't even have time to tank. In its first weekend, Madden 2005 grossed $65 million. EA's annual revenue is approximately $2.5 billion. This company is not strapped for cash; their labor practices are inexcusable.
The interesting thing about this is an assumption that most of the employees seem to be operating under. Whenever the subject of hours come up, inevitably, it seems, someone mentions 'exemption'. They refer to a California law that supposedly exempts businesses from having to pay overtime to certain 'specialty' employees, including software programmers. This is Senate Bill 88. However, Senate Bill 88 specifically does not apply to the entertainment industry -- television, motion picture, and theater industries are specifically mentioned. Further, even in software, there is a pay minimum on the exemption: those exempt must be paid at least $90,000 annually. I can assure you that the majority of EA employees are in fact not in this pay bracket; ergo, these practices are not only unethical, they are illegal.
I look at our situation and I ask 'us': why do you stay? And the answer is that in all likelihood we won't; and in all likelihood if we had known that this would be the result of working for EA, we would have stayed far away in the first place. But all along the way there were deceptions, there were promises, there were assurances -- there was a big fancy office building with an expensive fish tank -- all of which in the end look like an elaborate scheme to keep a crop of employees on the project just long enough to get it shipped. And then if they need to, they hire in a new batch, fresh and ready to hear more promises that will not be kept; EA's turnover rate in engineering is approximately 50%. This is how EA works. So now we know, now we can move on, right? That seems to be what happens to everyone else. But it's not enough. Because in the end, regardless of what happens with our particular situation, this kind of "business" isn't right, and people need to know about it, which is why I write this today.
If I could get EA CEO Larry Probst on the phone, there are a few things I would ask him. "What's your salary?" would be merely a point of curiosity. The main thing I want to know is, Larry: you do realize what you're doing to your people, right? And you do realize that they ARE people, with physical limits, emotional lives, and families, right? Voices and talents and senses of humor and all that? That when you keep our husbands and wives and children in the office for ninety hours a week, sending them home exhausted and numb and frustrated with their lives, it's not just them you're hurting, but everyone around them, everyone who loves them? When you make your profit calculations and your cost analyses, you know that a great measure of that cost is being paid in raw human dignity, right?
Right?
===
This article is offered under the Creative Commons deed. Please feel free to redistribute/link.
← Ctrl ← Alt
Ctrl → Alt →
Sounds like EA
Anonymous
November 10 2004, 08:55:40 UTC 16 years ago
Re: Sounds like EA
Anonymous
November 11 2004, 00:32:48 UTC 16 years ago
Re: Sounds like EA
Anonymous
16 years ago
HOW TO COPE -- I used to work at Maxis
16 years ago
Re: HOW TO COPE -- I used to work at Maxis
Anonymous
16 years ago
Re: HOW TO COPE
Anonymous
16 years ago
Re: HOW TO COPE
Anonymous
16 years ago
Re: HOW TO COPE
13 years ago
Re: HOW TO COPE
Anonymous
16 years ago
Re: HOW TO COPE
Anonymous
16 years ago
Re: HOW TO COPE
Anonymous
16 years ago
Re: HOW TO COPE
13 years ago
Re: HOW TO COPE -- I used to work at Maxis
Anonymous
16 years ago
Re: HOW TO COPE -- I used to work at Maxis
Anonymous
16 years ago
Re: HOW TO COPE -- I used to work at Maxis
Anonymous
16 years ago
Re: HOW TO COPE -- I used to work at Maxis
Anonymous
16 years ago
Re: HOW TO COPE -- I used to work at Maxis
Anonymous
16 years ago
Re: HOW TO COPE -- I used to work at Maxis
14 years ago
Re: HOW TO COPE -- I used to work at Maxis
Anonymous
16 years ago
Re: EA
Anonymous
16 years ago
Re: HOW TO COPE -- I used to work at Maxis
Anonymous
16 years ago
Re: HOW TO COPE -- I used to work at Maxis
Anonymous
16 years ago
Re: HOW TO COPE -- I used to work at Maxis
Anonymous
16 years ago
Re: HOW TO COPE -- I work in Paris;) for EA
Anonymous
16 years ago
Re: HOW TO COPE -- I work in Paris;) for EA
Anonymous
16 years ago
You're out of your mind
Anonymous
16 years ago
NO MY MAN you are out of your mind!!!!
Anonymous
16 years ago
Re: HOW TO COPE -- I work in Paris;) for EA
Anonymous
16 years ago
Re: HOW TO COPE -- I used to work at Maxis
Anonymous
15 years ago
Re: HOW TO COPE -- I used to work at Maxis
Anonymous
16 years ago
Re: HOW TO COPE -- I used to work at Maxis
Anonymous
16 years ago
Deleted comment
Re: HOW TO COPE -- I used to work at Maxis
Anonymous
16 years ago
Re: HOW TO COPE -- I used to work at Maxis
16 years ago
Re: HOW TO COPE -- I used to work at Maxis
Anonymous
15 years ago
Re: HOW TO COPE -- I used to work at Maxis
Anonymous
15 years ago
Re: HOW TO COPE -- I used to work at Maxis
Anonymous
14 years ago
Re: HOW TO COPE -- I used to work at Maxis
Anonymous
12 years ago
Re: Sounds like EA
11 years ago
Re: Sounds like EA
Anonymous
16 years ago
Sounds like EA
Anonymous
16 years ago
Re: Sounds like EA
Anonymous
16 years ago
Deleted comment
Re: Two things...
November 10 2004, 19:27:15 UTC 16 years ago
Re: Two things...
16 years ago
Re: Two things...
16 years ago
Re: Two things...
16 years ago
Re: Two things...
16 years ago
Re: Two things...
16 years ago
Re: Two things...
16 years ago
Re: Two things...
Anonymous
16 years ago
Re: Two things...
16 years ago
Re: Two things...
16 years ago
Re: Two things...
Anonymous
16 years ago
Re: Two things...
Anonymous
16 years ago
Re: Two things...
15 years ago
Re: Two things...
16 years ago
Re: Two things...
Anonymous
16 years ago
Re: Two things...
16 years ago
Re: Two things...
16 years ago
Re: Two things...
16 years ago
Re: Two things...
Anonymous
16 years ago
Re: Two things...
Anonymous
16 years ago
Re: Two things...
Anonymous
16 years ago
Re: Two things...
16 years ago
Re: Two things...
16 years ago
Re: Two things...
Anonymous
16 years ago
Re: Two things...
Anonymous
16 years ago
Re: Two things...
Anonymous
16 years ago
Re: Two things...
Anonymous
15 years ago
Re: Two things...
Anonymous
16 years ago
Re: Two things...
16 years ago
Re: Two things...
10 years ago
Re: Two things...
16 years ago
Anonymous
November 10 2004, 10:26:58 UTC 16 years ago
EA isn't the only company to do this kind of practice but it's certainly the most extreme case I've ever heard of.
Where I sit, it seems Sony have similar ideas about how to treat employees but I 'only' did about 50-60 hour weeks for 4-6 weeks (I can't remember exactly how many weeks it was - they all blurred into one another at the time). That was horrific but still not even close to what you've been put through.
I'm headed for a smaller company and hoping that the publisher doesn't screw it over. :/
Doubtless, there'll be another fresh-faced newbie to replace me when I'm gone.
Yep
November 10 2004, 13:20:24 UTC 16 years ago
There's another problem here that hasn't been mentioned, and that is how you get into the industry in the first place. Small companies (quite reasonably) don't feel they can afford the risk of taking on someone without significant experience. That means young programmers who want to get into games pretty much have to go through the giants in order to have a chance to get that 2-3 years and 2-3 titles. That's certainly why I was at Sony.
Re: Yep
16 years ago
Re: Yep
16 years ago
Re: Yep
Anonymous
16 years ago
Re: Yep
16 years ago
Re: Yep
Anonymous
16 years ago
Re: Yep
16 years ago
Re: Yep
Anonymous
15 years ago
lucky
Anonymous
16 years ago
November 10 2004, 11:01:03 UTC 16 years ago
For example, if everybody checked their legal rights and stuck to them, and if necessary sued for unfair dismissal, EA would find themselves in deep trouble. I don't think that a company can make you sign away your legal rights: you may sign, but it's not binding. Part of the trouble is that nobody wants to be the person who lets the team down by refusing to work silly hours, and that's what EA makes their money on. They don't have to manage projects better or hire more people, because they can trick their employees into breaking themselves while they take up the slack.
Form a union, folks. Or modern equivalent. Go see a lawyer or the Citizens Advice Bureau or an industrial tribunal or something: get advice on how what your rights are and the best way of getting them. Be prepared to stand up for yourself.
November 10 2004, 16:15:13 UTC 16 years ago
The problems stated are fairly common in the industry, although it seems that EA is pushing it to extremes. And yes, these practices are completely illegal. Most of the time, the requests to stay longer hours are done orally, so that there are no paper trails and when the employees do their time sheets, they are asked to put down only 40 hours, again destroying any kind of proof. If the employee complains, the company claims that they never asked and that the employee was doing it out of his own violition.
Hard to proove something when you have no physical proofs...
And, btw, EA is doing the same thing at its newly opened studio in Montreal...
16 years ago
16 years ago
16 years ago
Anonymous
16 years ago
16 years ago
Anonymous
16 years ago
Anonymous
16 years ago
Anonymous
16 years ago
EA Vancouver
Anonymous
16 years ago
Re: EA Vancouver
Anonymous
16 years ago
There is a class action against EA already
Anonymous
16 years ago
16 years ago
16 years ago
November 10 2004, 11:04:57 UTC 16 years ago
Good luck to you and your partner - I hope things get better for them or they find a good replacement for their life, because 85 hrs a week is their life.
November 10 2004, 21:41:30 UTC 16 years ago
Thank you for the well wishes, and for the comment. =) And be assured that it's EA that will be replaced and not his life, and not just for my sake. It's a tough decision because there are some extremely talented people working there right now, and my SO is of the type that just soaks up that experience and loves to learn, but everyone has limits...
moving from games to film
Anonymous
16 years ago
http://www.joinourteam.espn.com/
Anonymous
16 years ago
Re: http://www.joinourteam.espn.com/
16 years ago
Anonymous
16 years ago
November 10 2004, 12:34:17 UTC 16 years ago
I was in the semi-fortunate position of being on a temporary contract, and ahead of schedule. I figured I didn't really have a lot to lose by telling them "no". To do that, you need a certain inflexibility and pigheadedness. They can apply a lot of pressure. In my case, it lead to an uncomfortable discussion, but I was never given the impression that they would even consider getting rid of me. I would encourage your SO to make a stand, and simply go home at a sensible time, but I realise this may not be viable.
EA are being idiots. It's a bad policy. It just doesn't work. Software development isn't manual labour. Productivity plummets after a certain point. You end up spending more time putting in mistakes and glitches than improving things. And the next day everyone's stil tired. Nobody's enjoying the work. Everything starts to drag behind.
That said - late nights are sometimes worthwhile. I'll only stay late of there is somethign specific that needs to be done. In the past I have spend hours solving a single problem, and refused to leave until I've fixed it. This is something I refuse to make a habit of, and will not work more than an hour of overtime two nights in a row.
November 10 2004, 21:44:44 UTC 16 years ago
16 years ago
What's ironic though . . .
12 years ago
Re: What's ironic though . . .
12 years ago
Anonymous
9 years ago
9 years ago
16 years ago
16 years ago
Anonymous
16 years ago
Deleted comment
Re: According to the labor commission
November 10 2004, 16:15:55 UTC 16 years ago
Deleted comment
Re: According to the labor commission
16 years ago
Re: According to the labor commission
Anonymous
16 years ago
Re: According to the labor commission
16 years ago
Re: According to the labor commission
Anonymous
16 years ago
Re: According to the labor commission
16 years ago
Re: According to the labor commission
Anonymous
16 years ago
Re: According to the labor commission
Anonymous
16 years ago
Re: According to the labor commission
16 years ago
Re: According to the labor commission
16 years ago
Re: According to the labor commission
16 years ago
Re: According to the labor commission
Anonymous
16 years ago
Re: According to the labor commission
Anonymous
16 years ago
Re: According to the labor commission
Anonymous
16 years ago
Re: According to the labor commission
Anonymous
16 years ago
Re: According to the labor commission
16 years ago
work hard, play hard p.r. line
Anonymous
16 years ago
Re: According to the labor commission
16 years ago
Re: According to the labor commission
16 years ago
Anonymous
November 10 2004, 16:07:58 UTC 16 years ago
Here's to hoping you and your family find a way out.
November 10 2004, 16:10:37 UTC 16 years ago
Thank you for your kind words, and good luck to you both as well.
16 years ago
16 years ago
16 years ago
16 years ago
16 years ago
16 years ago
16 years ago
16 years ago
16 years ago
Anonymous
16 years ago
16 years ago
16 years ago
16 years ago
16 years ago
16 years ago
16 years ago
It ain't just game companies either
Anonymous
16 years ago
Re: It ain't just game companies either
16 years ago
Anonymous
16 years ago
Anonymous
16 years ago
November 10 2004, 16:58:27 UTC 16 years ago
November 10 2004, 17:19:54 UTC 16 years ago
16 years ago
Salary Information
Anonymous
November 10 2004, 16:58:28 UTC 16 years ago
http://finance.yahoo.com/q/pr?s=ERTS
Lawrence Probst, III, 54
Chairman, Chief Exec. Officer
Pay: $ 1.45M
Exercised Options: $ 22.78M
I sympathize completely, and as a relatively new hire to EA, I worry that the same thing will happen to me. Time will tell.
Re: Salary Information
Anonymous
November 11 2004, 17:38:54 UTC 16 years ago
Lawrence F. (Larry) Probst III, Age 54
Salary by year:
2004: $672,759 salary, $781,000 bonus
2003: $696,535 salary, $1,100,000 bonus
2002: $611,023 salary, $985,000 bonus
2001: $594,535 salary, $212,885 bonus
Re: Salary Information
Anonymous
16 years ago
Anonymous
November 10 2004, 17:57:01 UTC 16 years ago
Does it surprise anyone that EA dropped off of Fortune magazine's "100 Best Companies to Work For" in 2004 after it debuted at #91 in 2003? I was shocked they even made it on the list in the first place.
How much money did EA spend erecting that labyrinth on its main lawn? If they'd taken that money and, instead of wasting it on superficial gestures, used it to improve the lives of EA employees in a tangible way, wouldn't that have gone much further towards being "the #1 people company?"
But there's a reason why EA didn't. It's because EA doesn't really care about being "the #1 people company." They just want to give the appearance of being "the #1 people company." And the most tragic thing about it is I suspect they've swallowed their own bullshit enough not even to be cognizant of that fact anymore. It's a shame.
they circumvented this one
Anonymous
November 11 2004, 15:28:04 UTC 16 years ago
They changed "the #1 people company" to "the #1 people company for high performance individuals and teams" a couple of years back.
I took that as "if we treat you like crap it's because we don't think you're working hard enough."
Wild horse couldn't drag me back there.
- Five year veteran.
Re: they circumvented this one
Anonymous
16 years ago
Re: they circumvented this one
16 years ago
Greedy Self Serving Corporate Executives
Anonymous
16 years ago
To the person who posted the above
16 years ago
Re: To the person who posted the above
16 years ago
Re: To the person who posted the above
16 years ago
Re: To the person who posted the above
15 years ago
Used to work there, wised up and left.
Anonymous
November 10 2004, 18:33:17 UTC 16 years ago
I worked for EA for over 10 years. I saw crunch time go from 3 weeks to starting the instant a project was announced until it shipped. We were told that 'the executives have complete confidence that we can do this'. The atmosphere inside is very cult-like with a lot of 'you dont want to let us down, we are family'. I almost quit the industry, but checked around and am now working at Ubisoft where I have been part of their self examination on their work processes. The difference between the two companies could be greater on this topic. Ubi has recoginized a problem and is working to reduce it (it aint perfect yet), but EA has a firm policy of "there's dozens more dying to get your job" and seems to be getting worse and worse (so I hear from my old friends). I believe there is a legal challenge on behalf of many artists going on, but of course there is no press coverage of it.
I have my life back, in the industry I love. Was very depressed, am very happy now. I am sure my buddies back at EA know exactly who I am, but I will not give the sharks in the legal dept (their own logo) any identity to sting me. Hi guys! Call me!!! :)
Re: Used to work there, wised up and left.
November 10 2004, 19:15:39 UTC 16 years ago
Thank you for your comment, it helps distinctly to have the opinion of someone who has been with EA for this long. It was part of my question, actually, in general... do you believe EA has been on a steady downward trend, or is this behavior something that's likely to bottom out and improve? Either way, I doubt we will stick around to see it, but we both wondered.
Re: Used to work there, wised up and left.
16 years ago
Re: Used to work there, wised up and left.
16 years ago
Re: Used to work there, wised up and left.
16 years ago
Re: Used to work there, wised up and left.
Anonymous
16 years ago
Re: Used to work there, wised up and left.
16 years ago
Re: Used to work there, wised up and left.
16 years ago
Re: Used to work there, wised up and left.
Anonymous
16 years ago
Re: Used to work there, wised up and left.
16 years ago
Re: Used to work there, wised up and left.
Anonymous
16 years ago
Re: Used to work there, wised up and left.
Anonymous
16 years ago
Re: Used to work there, wised up and left.
Anonymous
16 years ago
Anonymous
November 10 2004, 19:09:18 UTC 16 years ago
Though, to borrow a phrase from our most recent presidential candidate, "Help is on the way."
Trust me on this one.
November 10 2004, 20:48:18 UTC 16 years ago
16 years ago
16 years ago
16 years ago
Not so bad as all that
16 years ago
Re: Not so bad as all that
16 years ago
16 years ago
November 10 2004, 19:18:17 UTC 16 years ago
We really do need some sort of union in this industry. When those in charge are getting christmas bonuses larger than my annual pay (and working less than half the hours), something is seriously wrong. My christmas "bonus" last year was $40. (This was also the bonus they promised me to keep me from walking out.) I could have made that much begging for change instead of coming to work on a Saturday.
union
November 13 2004, 16:39:08 UTC 16 years ago
My name is Josh Pastreich. I am a union organizer and I am helping with the class action lawsuit against EA for overtime. If you are serious about forming a union in the games industry or if you are not being paid overtime please drop me a line at unionjosh@hotmail.com.
Josh
Re: union
16 years ago
Re: union
Anonymous
16 years ago
Seriously.
Anonymous
16 years ago
Trade Guild
Anonymous
16 years ago
Re: Trade Guild
16 years ago
White collar slavery is alive and well in the games industry.
Anonymous
November 10 2004, 19:45:13 UTC 16 years ago
Re: White collar slavery is alive and well in the games industry.
November 10 2004, 21:47:25 UTC 16 years ago
Re: White collar slavery is alive and well in the games industry.
16 years ago
Re: White collar slavery is alive and well in the games industry.
16 years ago
Re: White collar slavery is alive and well in the games industry.
Anonymous
16 years ago
Re: White collar slavery is alive and well in the games industry.
16 years ago
Re: White collar slavery is alive and well in the games industry.
16 years ago
← Ctrl ← Alt
Ctrl → Alt →