View Full Version : Credits controversy

08-29-2008, 03:18 PM
Apparently, in the upcoming Warhammer Online game the only people that are going to be in the credits are the people that are still at the company when the game ships and that is pissing off a bunch of people. This is a pretty old controversy and I believe I have even blogged about it before.

The problem, which is true of many controversies, is that they are both essentially correct in their position. On one hand, the people that stayed through to the end deserve more credit, but on the other hand the other people that worked hard on the game for years also deserve credit. If you only put people in the credits that were there at the end you piss off the second group. If you put everyones name in that touched the game ever, you completely dilute the contributions of the people that did most of the work and/or did the hard work at the end. So either way, you are kind of screwed.

Ideally, what credits should do is give credit where credit is due. It should emphasize the people that did a majority of the work, but still include those that helped but weren't as critical. Neither of the above
methods does both of these things.

Some credit lists do try to fix this by splitting sections into multiple pieces like having lead programmer, programming, and additional programming sections. This is a decent start.

I'm actually thinking about doing credits for our future games differently. In Depths of Peril, everyone that had contributions in the game was listed, but the only emphasis was the different sections and Vas got bumped to lead artist. I'm thinking in our future products I might split it into more sections and ordering the list of names in each section by decreasing amount of contributions. So basically the more important people would be listed first (important to that project). Everyone that has contributions in the game would still be listed though.

10-26-2008, 08:55 AM
That's how they list ingredients on food packages. By how much is in it.

Seems reasonable.