No, it's actually a good one because it's the closest model to what we should expect from an actual drive to unionize game development. Like film there's not going to be a single union for "game developers" there will be separate ones for artists, for programmers, for designers, for sound people, etc. They already deal with the voice actors, writers, and so on that also work in Hollywood.
In film, this "works" because it's ingrained into the system at this point, and there's still a shit load of so-called unskilled physical manual labor being done. Building sets, setting up lighting, powering everything, and so on. You wouldn't really have this in game development, everyone's a "skilled" worker who will always have the out of just going off and starting their own company. You can increasingly do this in film of all things, so gaming doesn't even have a shot.
Rather than thinking that unionizing is a panacea, they should look to building up their own team culture in which they self police themselves and can unify on projects temporarily. People always got confused about Valve's management style stories and took the wrong lessons from it, the main thing was everyone feeling like they had buy in to developing the culture even if they weren't making the final decisions.
There's also a huge unspoken problem. Look at Star Citizen. Read the Schreier stories about BioWare and EA or Destiny. There isn't some nebulous upper management that's causing the problems. It's the direct project managers and producers, who are also designers and many other things on the project. These people are both management and labor. The paradigm doesn't fit. When the dude for Anthem just fucked off from BioWare and the project fell apart for two years before some other dude finally said "fuck this, we need to make decisions, this is in, this is out, etc." that was a management problem. But those people were BioWare labor too, not EA management. (EA management didn't help, but part of that was also that BioWare had zip to show them to know what the project was even supposed to be.)
You can't have the antagonism from collective bargaining because they're all effectively negotiating with themselves. And then negotiating at entire other levels with a separate management layer. How is the artist guild going to halt a project if the project lead is also the head artist? Why are other studios around the world going to support the artists in this action, especially when all the other guilds want their projects to not be held hostage by their artists?
And when we start looking at other companies. UbiSoft is the most obvious. They'll have six studios in six separate countries all working on the same game. If an office shuts down work completely due to one section within it, it's the same effect as EA got when Visceral and BioWare Montreal imploded at the same time and fell into Jade Raymond's Black Hole at Motive. There's no need to keep these expensive offices at that point.
This is why the international proletariat had to rise up, piecemealing it just allows the capitalists to play the proletariat against themselves rather than their becoming aware of their class consciousness that crosses all borders and unifies all the workers.
