This is going to sound a bit abrasive, but absolute adherence to auteur theory as a guiding principle just seems like denial of reality at this point. Even moving past the troubling existential implication that forces/entities outside the already-dubious idea of an “absolute individual” can’t heavily or entirely influence said individual, there’s a more material denial of labor and contribution at play there.
Like, I get the stigma of design-by-committee, but that stigma doesn’t exist because collective decisions in art somehow inherently dilute its ability to “be innovative” (an intensely ideological yet vague and arbitrary judgement of merit by nature, but I digress), that stigma exists because it’s a term that’s been used by a lot of consumer advocate reviewer types (like Ben Crosshaw or Jim Sterling, if we’re sticking to games here) that still believe in status quo hierarchy, and blame lapses in “quality products” on people doing hierarchy wrong, rather than hierarchy doing people wrong.
Case-in-point, design-by-committee is bad when it’s done by an opaque upper echelon overriding creative decisions of any and all actual laborers seen as “below” them (even those with “lead” in their title) with little to no input taken seriously from the majority of said laborers actually putting together a piece, and when that upper echelon is comprised of people distanced from the realities of creativity and the labor it comes with, they’re incentivized to be more interested in extracting value than supporting the work or the workers.
Another example is development hell that makes a production change hands a lot, Thief 2014’s guiding design was technically a collected work of a lot of different people, but it was made in a linear sequence of uncommunicative hierarchies that at one point made animators animate “Cinemax-level sex scenes” they were uncomfortable making, basically meaning they had to endure sexual discomfort (to a degree we’ll never know because of contract NDAs and unspoken career threats) for however long they had to animate sexual writhing to keep their job because a lead told them to do it, and like many other productions in dev hell they could have still gotten their name rearranged in credits to diminish their contribution out of spite, because that can happen on a lead’s whim in most game productions with no repercussions.
These two examples are just examples, there’s a bunch of other combinations and further ways that workers can be exploited without recourse that are incentivized by a hierarchical structure and/or individualist auteur-worshiping behavior, and part of that can include the appropriation of the idea of collective decision-making by inherently right-wing boards of publishers and/or executives that get to lord their power over the people who actually work on projects.
Anarcho-syndicalism is also, like most other reasonable & practical forms of anarchism, an elimination of all unjustified forms of hierarchy, not all existing forms of hierarchy altogether. A lot of laborers want or need people to tell them where to go and what to do for the jobs they’ve chosen, they just get direct democratic input on project & management decisions they care about regardless of position, rather than needing to convince someone with arbitrary power over them to maybe decide to give their input up the chain and only get to know if it’s even been considered if they get a gracious response. On a wider scale, this still means representatives would likely be necessary, but those reps wouldn’t get to pick and choose who’s/what input they represent or to what degree, and would likely be rotated without elections on a regular basis, with direct appeals available if any worker(s) feel inappropriately represented.
There is still probably someone akin to a “lead designer” on Dead Cells, there’s probably someone who singularly came up with a cool idea for a game and pitched it to others at the company, and very well could still be steering the overriding themes, motives and design of the game, but it’s because all other laborers are able to continually consent to that deference and can have their input weighed if they are uncomfortable with a decision made by that directorial figure. Even if this is the case, and even in hierarchically-produced media, no singular directorial figure invalidates the input of other laborers, they all influence huge amounts of what the final piece says and does and functions as, even when they aren’t technically the first to pen design ideas in an empty Google Doc.
Film also has a problem with this, by the by, it may be more mature but it still has really toxic ideas about how it’s made woven into public perception (and will never be “fully” matured, same as any other cultural medium). Think about how many times a cinematographer and lighting crew set up impactful shots to deliver the theme of a script beat written by a screenwriter, and then on the critical/consumer end it’s all attributed to the director. The amount of times is: all of the time, and there’s ongoing attempts to get more people to recognize that disparity, and critics to change and deepen their vocabulary in regards to labor in the film industry.