More Than Just a List of Names
You’ve just defeated the final boss, the world is saved, and as the epic music swells, a long list of names starts to scroll up your screen. What do you do? If you’re like most people, you probably hit a button to skip right past it. But that list, the game’s credits, is more than just a formality-it’s a battleground for recognition, respect, and career progression in the video game industry.
The issue of who gets their name in the credits is not new. It’s a conversation that has been happening for as long as games have been made. Time and again, developers find themselves left off the very projects they poured months or even years of their lives into. It’s a practice that’s frustrating, demoralizing, and frankly, needs to stop.
The Unspoken Rule of Recognition
Here’s the thing: in most places, there’s no law that says a company has to credit everyone who worked on a game. But just because it’s not illegal doesn’t make it right. It’s a fundamental matter of professional courtesy. Adding a name to a list costs a studio virtually nothing, but for a developer, that credit is everything.
Think of it as a public resume. Having your name listed on a successful title is proof of your experience. It’s what you show to future employers to get your next job. For producers, artists, programmers, and QA testers, credits are a crucial part of building a career. When a studio leaves someone out, they are not just withholding recognition; they are actively hindering that person’s ability to find future work.
Where Do You Draw the Line?
The arguments from studios for omitting names often come down to arbitrary rules. Some companies have policies that you must be employed at the time the game ships to be included. Left the company a month before release after working on the game for three years? Too bad. This kind of policy punishes people for moving on and creates a culture of fear.
Other studios have minimum time-on-project requirements. The International Game Developers Association (IGDA) has guidelines suggesting anyone who contributed for at least 30 days should be credited. Yet, some studios set their own bar, like requiring six months of work. Even then, these rules are not always applied fairly. We’ve seen cases where entire teams, like the recent situation with Ridgeline Games working on the next Battlefield, were either left out or pushed to a vague “special thanks” section after their studio was shut down.
The Invisible Contributors
The problem gets even murkier when you consider the massive web of external teams involved in modern game development. AAA games are rarely built entirely in-house. They rely on contractors, freelancers, and large outsourcing studios for everything from art assets to coding and QA testing.
Unfortunately, these external contributors are often the first to be left off the credit roll. Some publishers have policies against crediting external workers at all. This is a huge disservice. These teams perform essential work that the core team either doesn’t have the time or the expertise to do. Denying them credit is denying their role in the game’s creation.
Then there’s the argument over work that didn’t make the final cut. An artist might create concept designs that were later iterated on, or a programmer might write code that was eventually rewritten. Does their contribution not count? Of course, it does. Game development is an iterative process. Every step, even the ones that don’t end up in the final product, informs the journey. That work has value and the person who did it deserves to be acknowledged.
Conclusion: It’s Time for a Change
A game’s credits should be a complete and accurate record of every single person who helped bring it to life. From the lead designer to the intern who was there for a month, from the in-house team to the external contractors. It doesn’t matter if they left before the game shipped or if their work was changed along the way. If they contributed, their name belongs on the list.
Making a video game is an incredibly difficult and collaborative task. Creating a comprehensive list of contributors is, by comparison, simple. Refusing to do so for petty political reasons or because of arbitrary rules is inexcusable. It’s time for studios to treat crediting not as a privilege, but as a fundamental right for every developer.
FAQs about Game Credits
1. Is it a legal requirement to credit game developers?
Generally, no. There isn’t a specific law that mandates crediting in most countries. It’s considered a standard of professional ethics and courtesy rather than a legal obligation, unless specified in a contract.
2. Why are game credits so important for developers?
Credits serve as a public record of a developer’s work experience. They are essential for building a portfolio and are often used to verify employment history when applying for new jobs in the industry.
3. What are the standard industry guidelines for game credits?
The International Game Developers Association (IGDA) suggests that anyone who contributed for at least 30 days or 5% of the total project development time should be credited. However, these are just guidelines, and many studios have their own internal policies.
4. Do people who leave a project before it’s finished get credited?
It depends entirely on the studio’s policy. Unfortunately, many studios have a rule that an employee must be on staff when the game ships to receive credit, meaning those who leave or are laid off beforehand are often omitted.
5. What about contractors or outsourced teams?
Contractors and outsourcing partners are frequently left out of the credits. Some publishers have policies against crediting external teams, though this is widely seen as an unfair practice by the development community.
6. Why are some game credit lists so long?
Modern AAA games are massive undertakings involving hundreds or even thousands of people. The credits often include the entire studio staff (including non-development roles like HR and accounting), plus external partners, contractors, voice actors, and localization teams. A long credit list is a more accurate reflection of the immense effort required to make a modern game.