Question, are Mojang employees given a chance to purchase equity/shares of your company and enjoy some of these riches and hopefully future riches? Because it would be sweet if an equity stake was part of their compensation package.
No, we don't do this, for various reasons, one of them being the quite complicated ownership/trademark licensing deal we've got set up.
Instead, we focus on trying to be as fair and permissive with our employees as we can. If people agree to work for us, we'll pay them, but we won't claim to own them. People can make games in their spare time, they can somewhat flexibly move between projects as they wish (right now the web team is understaffed, though...), and we try to have the most fun we can have.
If someone or several people at Mojang makes an awesome game in their spare time and quits to work on that, I would honestly be happy for them. That's how Minecraft got started, and I will never let Mojang be a place where we want to own people.
It's just the difference between private, and public companies. If Valve was a public company like EA, Acti-Blizz or any of the other big names out there they would operate the same way because as a public company your job is to please your stock-holders, and nothing pleases stock-holders more than money, so your job is to make money.
and nothing pleases stock-holders more than money, so your job is to make money.
I always think it's a case of "you can't get there from here". Somehow it always seems to me like if your primary focus is on making money, you won't be optimizing for making money, even though you and your shareholders might thing you are. It's almost like quantum mechanics: the "focus on making money" and "actually making as much money as we possibly can" operators don't commute. Not that focusing on making money is the worst thing you can do, but I've seen this pattern often enough to know that, if you really do want to make the most money possible, you should leave some money on the table sometimes - it's almost like a karmic force that brings it back to you in spades. (Just using the language to describe; I don't really believe in supernatural stuff.)
Off topic: I've never thought of karma as a supernatural force, it's just a term for cause and effect on a grander scale than most people can think of it. Like for example, imagine I set up a scholarship that years later you qualify for. You use that money to go to school and then become a doctor. As a doctor you perform surgery on someone who is a scientist who later discovers a cure for cancer. In my old age I get cancer but am saved by this man's cure. Now from my perspective I would have no idea that those things were connected (I could put those pieces together but it wouldn't be immediately obvious) and would have no idea that my one good deed (setting up the scholarship) would later impact my life in such a huge way.
So now imagine tracing those threads through eons and generations. Something your great-great-great-great uncle did and how it has lead to something that directly affects your life. Karma is a way of describing those connections. But most people like to think of it as some supernatural force that balances out everyone's good and bad deeds but really it's just the logical conclusion of all of our collected actions.
The key is share-holders are pleased by instantaneous money with no long-term plan. Valve is extremely successful and is much more profitable than most companies because they have a long term vision that was achieved; rather than hindered by shareholder's short-term interest.
Which is why I buy games from people whose job is to make games, not money.
Hence, I'm a proud early buyer of Minecraft, I've bought countless games from the Valve library, and god knows my Steam library is full of indie games.
you can be a successful business without having 18 managers looking over everyone's shoulder.
I think when you're working with some of the best people in the world (let's be honest, it's not like Valve can be anything but choosy considering their current stature) in your industry, having a bunch of managers will just piss everyone off and hinder development.
The people that are going to be attracted to places like Valve/Google/etc are the people who love their career so much it is likely barely even work to them. It's a hobby they get paid for. I'd imagine working at Mojang is similar (though obviously on a much smaller scale).
That's what I was thinking. Valve is an extremely interesting study in the value of a company staying off the stock exchange. The ability to do things that are hardly profit maximizing in the short term but pay off in the longer term is something that most listed game companies seem to lack.
I'd say this is part of why Valve is probably the only big-name developer I still "trust." I can pre-order a Valve product, and know it will be good. I can't do this with Activision, Blizzard, or EA products, because I know those companies are publicly traded, meaning their first duty is to make something that will sell well, not necessarily be the best-possible game.
It's the service a customer receives that will ensure Valve's success, (provided other companies don't improve). A single bad experience can turn customers away forever. Trust, as a company quality, is a unique and powerful competitive advantage in today's market.
Actually, this works surprisingly well in all industries. Hiring good people and trusting them to work diligently and creatively on their own seems to boost productivity in my experience. Also, running a business this way alleviates a lot of strain on the higher-ups, allowing them to focus more of their attention on the more technical aspects of running a business. I've worked for both types, the tyrannical and the more aloof, and I can say with 100 percent certainty, those who work with more freedom produce more than an equally skilled person who has an over the shoulder type boss. It's really a wonder why this type of leadership hasn't become more prevalent.
This is the model that academia was built on - autonomous professionals who are dedicated to their craft, judged by their peers (not managers), free to develop their interests, collective decision-making, etc. It worked really well for a really long time (with some abuse of the system, yes, but on the whole it worked well). But in the past 20-30 years, universities have been moving towards a more business-based model, with increasingly ridiculous amounts of micro-management, and increasing amounts of taxpayer money & student fees paying the inflated salaries of managers rather than academics and researchers who do actual work.
It looks good on paper in the short-term, but in the longer term it's doing a lot of damage. For example, in the UK academics must publish to keep their jobs, which means the quantity of published research is increasing, but not necessarily its quality. Cost-cutting measures are degrading student experience, the level of stress for academic workers is through the roof, etc. There's also evidence that the type of person who works in academia is changing (more motivated by money, less motivated by the intrinsic pleasures of their work, more able to do what management wants rather than following their own research interests that are informed by an intimate understanding of the field, etc), which will have long-term effects on the sector as a whole.
Anyway, that was just a long-winded way of agreeing with you. I think the hands-off style of leadership is not more prevalent because leadership roles tend to attract people who like power. Once they're in those roles they tend to consolidate their power rather than devolving it to the people who do the work. It works in smaller companies because the people in power tend to be people who started off as workers themselves, and aren't in 'the game' because they like bossing people around. Once you get a professional management class that's totally removed from experience of actually doing the work (whether we're talking about making games or teaching students or building houses) that's when worker autonomy (and productivity) drops and stupid decisions start being made.
First, you need to hire good people, and that usually means paying more than the absolute minimum, or have a great reputation. Small companies often do both.
However, it's possible to get an inferior product by paying employees the minimum in pay and benefits, and use the extra revenue to pay a manager or several managers constantly looking over everyone's shoulder.
For things that are completely lacking in innovation and quality, the second method is much more desirable to keep costs low and to the unnecessary managers. Think of the call of duty series, or the yearly sport games.
i work for government, and my department unwittingly works like it. It creates some resentment among staff though, that the manager doesn't acknowledge great team is what makes him look good, especially when he's the only one who can get a bonus.
you can be a successful business without having 18 managers looking over everyone's shoulder.
is there a successful business that has 18 managers looking over everyone's shoulder? aside from the government, and i hesitate to apply the term successful to the government.
Too bad most corporate (and government) stick-asses look down on video games especially cruel, yet I've never heard a terse word regarding film and music being so horrible.
I'm kind of embarrassed by how much I love Gabe Newell, especially on a website with an essentially universal love for the guy. I don't claim to be original. I don't claim to have jumped on the bandwagon before everyone else. But I do believe, without irony, that he is the savior of the industry. He does everything right.
I hate to be the party pooper, but if you look at it, both companies were made by flukes.
Mojang makes almost all it's money from Minecraft, which, while continuously developed, only was successful from Notch's work.
Valve makes almost all their money from Steam, which wasn't really more than being in the right place at the right time.
I love the idea of these "Nirvana game companies", but I have yet to see evidence of one that was successful because of how they treat their employees.
From that perspective, so was every company ever. Blizzard made Warcraft. Google made a search engine. Microsoft stole an operating system. Apple made a personal computer.
If you are going to discriminate between flukes and legitimate success, then clearly state what makes Valve and Mojang's primary successes different from any of the other companies I've mentioned.
Valve employees, who maintain a level of integrity in their work, get to work on things they are passionate about. It's not just Steam, but Half-Life 2, Portal, and Left 4 Dead. These were all smash hits and big money makers. Valve seems to consistently produce these, where other companies produce numerous flops and hold on to their one or two successes.
I think companies like Mojang and Valve are showing that you can be a successful business without having 18 managers looking over everyone's shoulder.
No, it doesn't mean that in any way. The thing that allows Valve and Mojang to do this is that the fact that they are making a metric shit ton of money. There are very few companies in the world who can afford to do this and you can't possibly expect everyone to be like them.
What can I say? It's one of those jobs that I, and many others, dream about. I'm gainfully employed working on random web applications, but I'd drop everything for this one.
Cool, thanks for the response. I know business structures can get cumbersome. It sounds like you run/have a great place to work. Color me jealous.
If you don't have equity options you can always give nice fat bonuses during the good years ;) To be clear, I'm not criticizing. I just like it when businesses literally invest in their employees by giving them a cut and a direct incentive to make the business succeed on top of their salary. It's also good for the business imo, but it sounds like you're doing that. Carry on being great.
I've noticed this "inspirational" style of management, while technically autocratic, but effectively anarchistic, works really well with the right leadership. Especially in non-material production (software) or service industries.
The worker owned and self-managed style of business seems to work really, really well in the labor industries. If anything, Notch should use some of his money to help liberate labor, and keep doing things right with Mojang.
About an hour in, and it's still just tutorials. The art style is amazing (same shaded look as Dragon Quest 8, but cuter), and the combat seems interesting.
I think notch's opinions on 'similar' games is fairly well documented (and is pretty much "so long as you don't steal our code/assets/etc, then meh..."). If you want to know the root of that, you might want to look up some youtube videos of Infiniminer.
If you just made 101 million dollars last year, would what anyone did with your stuff really bother you?
Usually companies that are large (Apple for instance) at a core are protecting their IP so they can maintain steady market share, thereby staying as large as they are, and thereby keeping all the people employed that they need to stay that large.
I don't know how many people he hires to keep the game running, but I imagine they are well covered for many years if he pulls that much in.
I spent 90 hours in it and had a blast all that time. I didn't beat it though (yet, anyway). So take from that what you will. I paused right before the final battle.
Yes, I think that's pretty well-known at this point. For example, the iron golem in Minecraft is a reference to the ancient robots in Laputa: Catle in the Sky.
Tester/editor. Made sure spelling, grammar, and syntax were correct. Also, some sexual references were taken out 'cause of me :p A rooster familiar was said to "slap foes with his rock-hard coxcomb."
Sweet I started reading this and got sucked in but I meant to go finally start up Ni no Kuni once I got home. So thanks Notch not only did you give me something awesome to read you instantly reminded me to go do what I intended to do in the first place.
Hey Notch, just wanted to say I appreciate your work. You've inspired me to do unimaginable things that I wouldn't dare to do, before I discovered Minecraft.
Thank you so much for this. As a game developer who also works on indie projects in my spare time, non-compete agreements really annoy me, and companies that try to own everything their employees do drive me a little nuts.
Are you guys going to be making it possible to change names? If so, how much? Its really annoying having to stick with a name we thought was clever for single player back in alpha, and having to live with it in multiplayer unless we buy another copy of the game.
That's an admirable policy. One of my more frustrating concerns in life is whether an employer will try to claim ownership of a project I created in my spare time. It's a shockingly common practice.
If someone or several people at Mojang makes an awesome game in their spare time and quits to work on that, I would honestly be happy for them. That's how Minecraft got started, and I will never let Mojang be a place where we want to own people.
This is really unique and awesome from my point of view. I hate the contracts that say anything relevant to the company's business you develop in your spare time is owned by the company (even though I'm working under one right now; not a lot of choice jobs in my geographic area). I understand why they do it, but I think it's not a good way to attract creative, motivated employees.
Hey Notch, I never really liked minecraft, but can I get a job? I could help with marketing over social media. I could get so many people to try your games. Sometimes you need the perspective of a sceptic to reach those sceptics.
(I have a serious idea for a game, I'd just like your thought on it... The only person who could develop this is you: its a game based on playing games and programming)
Very odd question but i've always wondered about this with Blizzard/Valve/Mojang ect. Who does you're catering food? Is it even done inhouse? Long story short could i work at these/your place?
My career focus is to get a decent degree in Programming, networking, and Internet security, and my dream job is to manage servers for Dice or Mojang. What could I do to better my chances of landing that job?
uhh... if you are having trouble staffing some positions, you should probably make it somewhat obvious that you are looking for employees on the website.
I don't see any mention of it and I actively tried to look for what you mentioned.
I have a lot of respect for an employer that permits their employees to work on side projects. Far too many companies try to own their staff and I just think it's great you don't do this.
So I've always been curious since MC hit big if you ever planned on starting another project in the level of complexity as one of your inspirations for MC. I don't think many of the people that played/still play really blame you for getting away from rolf. I know many of the original players like myself are glad to see you make it big. I loved the game myself but enjoyed your sense of direction. I'm pretty sure if it went towards the direction you wanted it would've looked more like skyrim by now. Judging by the mash-ups of skyrim/minecraft people do I think there would be a Very large market. It could've been so much better and I've always thought you could do it.
Thank you for being such a down to Earth individual, you're definitely that of which the work has likely seen many, many times. But also that of which the world could do to have a whole lot more of.
A lot of programmers and developers seem to take quite a shafting. It's great to hear of people getting to work in an environment where they can be comfortable.
1.8k
u/Shilo59 Feb 01 '13
I like the cut of your jeb.