The Metroid Dread Credits debate is sadly common


Samus Dread Credits
Image: Nintendo / MercurySteam

The conversations around Metroid Dread They have been mostly positive since its release, but a recent topic that has caused much debate and criticism from developer MercurySteam relates to the game’s credits. Various contributors to the game have raised the fact that they are not credited, and the developer has responded to clarify its internal policy. His statement is below.

Studio policy requires everyone to work on the project. [for] at least 25% of the total game development will appear in the end credits … exceptions are sometimes made when making exceptional contributions.

There are problems with this policy, so let’s briefly describe a couple of perspectives. Two collaborators to present their case online have set their terms with the company at 8 and 11 months, so the latter is presumably lost due to the project being around four years or more in development.

The problem with a threshold like “25% of total development” is how vague and open to abuse it is: when does a development project start? Was it when MercurySteam first discussed Dread with Nintendo, or perhaps when they took the initiative to produce a presentation platform? Or maybe it’s out of date when the nitty-gritty begins to conceptualize and plan the game. The point is, they are all possibly “starting points” and can have a big impact on defining your developmental period.

The other problem is that you could work 11 months on a project when it is at full throttle, in its most productive phase, contributing a lot of content to the overall game and, by this metric, not getting credited. It is also a very common practice in game development to hire new employees and contractors on fixed and short-term contracts. Temporary staffing is a factor in all areas of work life, of course, but in the production of major games, the size of a studio can dramatically increase over a relatively short period to boost it, and then those contracts expire and many workers they are looking for the next opportunity. We don’t know if that was the case here, but it is common.

See also  Almost all new MMORPGs in 2021 have failed and we gamers are partly to blame
Rockstar credits
Image: Rockstar Games has been criticized for this issue in the past.

As it stands out in The Eurogamer article On this subject, this has happened in several companies, so it would be incorrect to portray MercurySteam as a lone criminal in this sense; In many ways, the company follows its own form of industry standards. It’s not just in the retail / triple-A space either; Kate Gray and I on the National League team have worked on the independent game development and publishing scene in the past and discussed the issue of credit earlier in the year. Even in very small teams there are discussions around these acknowledgments, and those that perform multiple functions or contribute but then move on are sometimes ignored or included in the generic “Special Thanks” section. Discussing a credit title can be as difficult as having a name listed in the first place.

Why does this matter? Well, for one thing, not being properly credited is possibly detrimental to someone’s career. For anyone who works in the industry, every job, every contract, contributes to a portfolio that helps advance that career. It seems unfair that someone could say that you worked on a game for almost a year, only to have potential employers then look at the credits and not see your name. To find a match in the website space, it would be as if my articles from my first season on Nintendo Life had their signature removed when I moved into publishing for 3 years. That would be unfair (and it didn’t happen, of course!).

See also  Diablo Immortal: New content should come "in the next few weeks".

The problem is how common it has become for game publishers and developers of all sizes to ignore or downplay contributions to their games. This happens in other creative industries (film, music, books, the same debates also appear in those areas), but it is arguably worse in games because it is still a young and somewhat immature industry. There are unions and representative bodies trying to defend creators of all kinds in other industries, but in the game we are still in the stage of relying primarily on organizations that provide advocacy and awareness, but little solid influence. There is no real oversight or universal standards on how taxpayer credits work, so all businesses do it effectively. The problem with that is that not all industry leaders tend to have fair policies.

Scary cool shot
Image: Nintendo / Nintendo Life

What is the solution? In the absence of industry standards, we get stuck in relying on company owners and project leaders to ‘do the right thing’. As we’ve highlighted above, MercurySteam’s policy (as an example, certainly not the worst out there) is too vague and potentially unfair. A fixed window should ultimately suffice, in the same way that probation works when you start a new job. Should it be 3 months or 6 months? Is that enough time for someone to definitely make a contribution that deserves all the credit?

I think so, but I also think you should discuss it with some developers and project leaders and learn from their experience. Either way, a fixed time frame, and not vague policies, seems fairer to creators of all kinds. Whether it’s working on scripts, editing, coding, concept art production, you name it, there are too many contributors to the games we love that get overlooked.

See also  HBO Max premieres in January 2022: all the new series, films and documentaries

At the end of the day, it is a concern for the entire industry. To be sure, there are game developers and publishers who give people credit appropriately too, so the industry should learn from them. Everyone is trying to create and enjoy amazing video games, it is a passion and a way of life. When someone contributes to this wonderful medium, they deserve to be recognized.




www.nintendolife.com