Re: Where to study?
Thanks Ninjamedia, you bring up some good points, but a most of these are also half-truths and misconceptions. Let me explain:
> One thing that has stood out as common amongst these interviews is that papers are nice, but experience kicks arse! Some of these guys have blatantly stated that they don't even pay any mind to the qualifications simply because there are too many different ones from too many places of study that each devise their own curriculum of 'what constitutes a game oriented course'.
Firstly, you are absolutely right - if you look at the game developer/programmer positions available out there (internationally), most of them actually do NOT require a degree, in fact a lot of places do not even say "degree preferred". They want people who can do specific jobs, and if your portfolio shows that you can do what they need for a particular position they are keen to hire you.
So, where am I coming from then? Basically, there is WAY more to having a degree than simply getting hired:
Firstly, it's great that "they" are willing to hire you based on a good portfolio, but where is this company? In the UK? Germany? Australia? USA? These all require a visa to get into the country (and often a secondary evaluation to get permanent residence later) - there is no tick box on a skilled work visa application for "awesome portfolio". Obviously, if you have inherited citizenship from elsewhere this is not a problem, but in SA the employment situation is as grim as it has always been.
Secondly, what about compensation? If you have a degree, you have more opportunity to move into the games industry (as I mentioned, most but not /all/ game positions require degrees). These jobs are open to you as well as the ones that aren't sticklers for degrees. More importantly though, if you have a degree the company is in competition for you with all the other companies that may hire you (i.e., all the banks, engineering firms, software development houses, Hudsucker Industries, etc.). Even with a degree, game companies are less than competitive, because they exploit the fact that people "want" to work on games providing a large supply (in the economic sense) - without a degree you can expect to be paid often considerably less.
Thirdly, leading from my second point, what happens if you need to find a different type of job? Perhaps you get retrenched during a recession, perhaps you just get tired of the games industry after 10 years - let's say the 80 hours a week crunchtimes doesn't mix well with your new marriage and kids. At this point, if you want to move on to something that is more 9-5 or pays more, you have a problem - a lot of experience, but no formal qualifications. Obviously, the experience counts for something, but the harsh reality is that without the right "paper", your resume is most likely going to land up at the bottom of the pile (or bin). Effectively, a degree is a good backup plan.
> They stated that what really sells them on looking at someone is a person's ability to demonstrate that they are passionate about what they do and then, what sells them on giving them a chance is their portfolio (usually on a website that they can view at their own leasure).
People are often very flippant about a degree as a piece of "paper". A focused program that teaches you the basic scientific and engineering principles that you will need in life is invaluable when building that great portfolio you mention. There is a lot of hopping about in the game industry (local and international) about "portfolio, portfolio, portfolio". I certainly don't disagree with this, but something that really is important to get is this: a portfolio is not just worthless, but it actually hurts your chances if it looks like crap. It is far more important to set the bar to what someone hiring you would consider "good" and hopefully "impressive", and then shoot for that - even if your portfolio only consists of one good piece, that is all you really need. If you are a backend programmer, you want to show off your 3D skills, your pathfinding, AI, physics, integrated scripting, pipeline integration and automation, etc. A degree really helps a LOT with this. If you are shooting to be a gameplay only programmer, these will obviously be less important, but having other skills is more far more likely to get your hired (and even then you don't want a portfolio looks and plays like an Atari 2600 tribute).
> So from what I have surmised from these interviews is that there is no substitute for experience.
About this whole degree vs. experience thing: All things being equal, gaining a degree rather than experience puts one on a higher slope of growth per unit time. This has been established time and time again. For example, using this as a basis, the USA equates 1 year of study with 3 years of experience when considering VISA applications.
> Working on demos at home and showing you are capable with no papers is worth more than a doctorate with no viewable samples...
Actually, no. To achieve a doctorate you have to familliarize yourself with the entire body of cutting edge research in a particular field, then over a period of several years you have conceive of, implement and evaluate one or more new and significant technique(s) in that field, and then publish them in peer reviewed conference proceedings or journals and produce a thesis. If this work is done in a field related to game technology (rendering, AI, physics, parallel algorithms, presence/immersion, etc.) such an individual would be incredibly useful and high in demand for any game company wanting to stay on the cutting edge of technology. For the most part, PhDs join companies (even game companies) as "senior developers" and "specialists", right out of university.
whew.
> One thing that has stood out as common amongst these interviews is that papers are nice, but experience kicks arse! Some of these guys have blatantly stated that they don't even pay any mind to the qualifications simply because there are too many different ones from too many places of study that each devise their own curriculum of 'what constitutes a game oriented course'.
Firstly, you are absolutely right - if you look at the game developer/programmer positions available out there (internationally), most of them actually do NOT require a degree, in fact a lot of places do not even say "degree preferred". They want people who can do specific jobs, and if your portfolio shows that you can do what they need for a particular position they are keen to hire you.
So, where am I coming from then? Basically, there is WAY more to having a degree than simply getting hired:
Firstly, it's great that "they" are willing to hire you based on a good portfolio, but where is this company? In the UK? Germany? Australia? USA? These all require a visa to get into the country (and often a secondary evaluation to get permanent residence later) - there is no tick box on a skilled work visa application for "awesome portfolio". Obviously, if you have inherited citizenship from elsewhere this is not a problem, but in SA the employment situation is as grim as it has always been.
Secondly, what about compensation? If you have a degree, you have more opportunity to move into the games industry (as I mentioned, most but not /all/ game positions require degrees). These jobs are open to you as well as the ones that aren't sticklers for degrees. More importantly though, if you have a degree the company is in competition for you with all the other companies that may hire you (i.e., all the banks, engineering firms, software development houses, Hudsucker Industries, etc.). Even with a degree, game companies are less than competitive, because they exploit the fact that people "want" to work on games providing a large supply (in the economic sense) - without a degree you can expect to be paid often considerably less.
Thirdly, leading from my second point, what happens if you need to find a different type of job? Perhaps you get retrenched during a recession, perhaps you just get tired of the games industry after 10 years - let's say the 80 hours a week crunchtimes doesn't mix well with your new marriage and kids. At this point, if you want to move on to something that is more 9-5 or pays more, you have a problem - a lot of experience, but no formal qualifications. Obviously, the experience counts for something, but the harsh reality is that without the right "paper", your resume is most likely going to land up at the bottom of the pile (or bin). Effectively, a degree is a good backup plan.
> They stated that what really sells them on looking at someone is a person's ability to demonstrate that they are passionate about what they do and then, what sells them on giving them a chance is their portfolio (usually on a website that they can view at their own leasure).
People are often very flippant about a degree as a piece of "paper". A focused program that teaches you the basic scientific and engineering principles that you will need in life is invaluable when building that great portfolio you mention. There is a lot of hopping about in the game industry (local and international) about "portfolio, portfolio, portfolio". I certainly don't disagree with this, but something that really is important to get is this: a portfolio is not just worthless, but it actually hurts your chances if it looks like crap. It is far more important to set the bar to what someone hiring you would consider "good" and hopefully "impressive", and then shoot for that - even if your portfolio only consists of one good piece, that is all you really need. If you are a backend programmer, you want to show off your 3D skills, your pathfinding, AI, physics, integrated scripting, pipeline integration and automation, etc. A degree really helps a LOT with this. If you are shooting to be a gameplay only programmer, these will obviously be less important, but having other skills is more far more likely to get your hired (and even then you don't want a portfolio looks and plays like an Atari 2600 tribute).
> So from what I have surmised from these interviews is that there is no substitute for experience.
About this whole degree vs. experience thing: All things being equal, gaining a degree rather than experience puts one on a higher slope of growth per unit time. This has been established time and time again. For example, using this as a basis, the USA equates 1 year of study with 3 years of experience when considering VISA applications.
> Working on demos at home and showing you are capable with no papers is worth more than a doctorate with no viewable samples...
Actually, no. To achieve a doctorate you have to familliarize yourself with the entire body of cutting edge research in a particular field, then over a period of several years you have conceive of, implement and evaluate one or more new and significant technique(s) in that field, and then publish them in peer reviewed conference proceedings or journals and produce a thesis. If this work is done in a field related to game technology (rendering, AI, physics, parallel algorithms, presence/immersion, etc.) such an individual would be incredibly useful and high in demand for any game company wanting to stay on the cutting edge of technology. For the most part, PhDs join companies (even game companies) as "senior developers" and "specialists", right out of university.
whew.