So while the PD is managing up, the Leads are managing down. With big projects, that means managing the "sub-leads"... those in charge of the individual sections of their department. It'd be unmanageable otherwise, and the bigger the project the more of these there are going to be. - ThreadSky

davidgaider.bsky.social • 187 days ago

So while the PD is managing up, the Leads are managing down. With big projects, that means managing the "sub-leads"... those in charge of the individual sections of their department. It'd be unmanageable otherwise, and the bigger the project the more of these there are going to be.

Comments

dracuella.bsky.social•186 days ago

As a general software developer, albeit on a much smaller scale, I'm both surprised and not really by the fact that it follows the structure of 'ordinary' software development so closely. Obviously, departments differ but on the whole it is very similar. I never would have guessed but it makes sense

nickjong.bsky.social•186 days ago

I had the exact same reaction!

corbin.dev•186 days ago

Indeed. I went to a uni that forced me to take management courses, and this is a common generalized org structure. You'd call this a "functional structure" academically, though software companies obviously employ it on a per-product level, instead of company-wide, if they have >1 one product.

yuwoor.bsky.social•186 days ago

Genuinely was looking at this with a scrum, SDLC mindset

davidgaider.bsky.social•187 days ago

What does this mean? Well, let's look at the way BioWare broke up Design (as of 8 years ago, anyhow). Design consisted of Narrative Design, Level Design, Systems Design, Gameplay Design, and Cinematic Design (who worked in tandem with Cinematic Animation, which actually fell under the Art Lead).

davidgaider.bsky.social•187 days ago

The sub-leads are handed their goals by the lead, and work out how they're going to produce their particular corner of the game and also, more importantly, how they're going to work with each other. Conflicts between sub-leads are handled by the lead, as are ANY conflicts with other departments.

davidgaider.bsky.social•187 days ago

What conflicts could there be, you ask? Dependencies, for one. "I can't do X until Y is done, but Y is someone else's job". Or scope. "We need 20 doodads but the sub-lead said they only have time to make 10, what now?". Even outright differences in vision. Big projects means room for a LOT of egos.

casuallychaotic.bsky.social•186 days ago

Such as the Art and Design teams not being able to work on character models until the Engineering team have the skeletal frameworks up and running, so that the limits of the game engine are known..?

davidgaider.bsky.social•187 days ago

If you think this is easier with a smaller (or indie) project, the answer is "yes, but not really". The roles are still necessary but often get combined into one person. Or outsourced, and someone still needs to manage the outsourcing. Things fall off over-full plates. It's a different kind of hard.

davidgaider.bsky.social•187 days ago

Anyhow, the point of all this is: the further you go down the chain, the smaller the box you can play in is. The less you have actual say over, and even then that say is subject to being overridden by ANYONE above... and must still play nicely with the needs and goals of the other departments.

davidgaider.bsky.social•187 days ago

You also need to keep in mind that projects are constantly in flux. Problems that were thought solved need re-solving. The team falls behind schedule and scope needs to change. You are constantly in a dance, within your tiny box, trying to figure out sub-optimal solutions that cause the least pain.

itskioh.bsky.social•186 days ago

Fascinating read, thank you

Comments

Posting Rules

Reply