Re. CDPR and mandatory crunch, I'm always very surprised to read the argument "All great things come at a cost" pop up in the conversation. I mean, I think it's a pile of bullcrap, but suppose for one second it's true. Why does this cost always have to be paid by workers?

CDPR could have hired more people - they can obviously afford to. They could have postponed the game - they already did twice & their fan base is so strong a third time would barely hurt them. They could have cut features or content months ago - their games are too long anyways.

Those three measures would barely have hurt anyone. On the other hand, mandatory crunch not only is a proof of poor management and production planning skills, it also is a blatant abuse of an uneven power dynamic between studio leadership and studio workforce.

And it has a cost, a huge one. People get sick from overworking. Families get destroyed. By saying "All great things come with a cost", you imply you're OK with this as long as... it allows you to play a video game a few months sooner? That's not ethical, and not acceptable.

This being said, we must reflect on the leverage we have to make AAA studios stop paying this "unavoidable cost" with a resource that isn't theirs to dispose of. Consumer ethics, unionization, tighter social legislation, conditioned public subsidization are all valid options.

Maybe there are more. If you can think of other approaches to this topic, you're more than welcome to share them.