So a portfolio is much better than an education? If so... thats great
I''ve taken VB and java at my highschool, one more semester of java next year (grd 12) then off to college or something, but if a portfolio is better i''d much rather make a program/game myself/teach myself than go to college.
I can teach myself much faster/better than anyone else could teach me... give me a basic help file, and some very basic knowledge and ill figure the rest out myself - in a resonable amount of time aswell.
My programming teacher thinks i copy all my code because "i havn''t taught you how to do that!" ... its really annoying
So, my question really is, if i make a few games, show the person what i can do/how fast i can learn... it''s better than/equal to having an education?
Thanks, blake
schools the right thing?
When people say "portfolio", they usually mean "professional portfolio".
An education is still necessary. If you have a degree in *SOMETHING* (not necessarily computer science), you''ll automatically have a better chance of getting a job than if you didn''t.
Sure, if you make some amazing demo and show it to a development house, they may very well hire you - but there''s no guarantee on that.
You want to bring as much to the table as possible to get the job.
There''s no reason why you can''t get an education AND create some demos.
One without the other is fairly meaningless.
An education is still necessary. If you have a degree in *SOMETHING* (not necessarily computer science), you''ll automatically have a better chance of getting a job than if you didn''t.
Sure, if you make some amazing demo and show it to a development house, they may very well hire you - but there''s no guarantee on that.
You want to bring as much to the table as possible to get the job.
There''s no reason why you can''t get an education AND create some demos.
One without the other is fairly meaningless.
I understand that this view is controversial, but please bare with me on this post. I would be interested to hear what people have to say about these thoughts, both positive and negative.
Assume for a moment that getting an education at a university is not the only form of education, and that someone could gain a comparable education through reading books and independant study.
Oftentimes, employers will filter out the applications of those applicants who do not have a degree. The candidates with the highest degrees from the most pretigious schools are those who are given highest priority. There is rarely any form of true knowledge testing wherein an employer might discover that an applicant was able to accumulate knowledge from some source outside of a university. Nor do employers push an effort for such a knowledge test to be created and standardized for the industry as a whole.
It seems to me that this forms a sort of class system. The wealthy are able to afford to send their children to the most prestigious schools for the longest amounts of times. Therefore, their children are able to get the highest paying jobs. Therefore, the wealth is kept with the wealthy, and some others, regardless of actual knowledge, may be kept out of this loop.
I understand that there are exceptions to this example, but on average the net effect is that employers use the quick and easy way to filter their job candidates rather than evaluating true knowledge, the wealth is kept with the wealthy, and a "tuition tax" is applied to the whole industry.
[edited by - EvilSteve on May 30, 2004 5:00:04 PM]
Assume for a moment that getting an education at a university is not the only form of education, and that someone could gain a comparable education through reading books and independant study.
Oftentimes, employers will filter out the applications of those applicants who do not have a degree. The candidates with the highest degrees from the most pretigious schools are those who are given highest priority. There is rarely any form of true knowledge testing wherein an employer might discover that an applicant was able to accumulate knowledge from some source outside of a university. Nor do employers push an effort for such a knowledge test to be created and standardized for the industry as a whole.
It seems to me that this forms a sort of class system. The wealthy are able to afford to send their children to the most prestigious schools for the longest amounts of times. Therefore, their children are able to get the highest paying jobs. Therefore, the wealth is kept with the wealthy, and some others, regardless of actual knowledge, may be kept out of this loop.
I understand that there are exceptions to this example, but on average the net effect is that employers use the quick and easy way to filter their job candidates rather than evaluating true knowledge, the wealth is kept with the wealthy, and a "tuition tax" is applied to the whole industry.
[edited by - EvilSteve on May 30, 2004 5:00:04 PM]
quote:Original post by Anonymous Poster
I can teach myself much faster/better than anyone else could teach me... give me a basic help file, and some very basic knowledge and ill figure the rest out myself - in a resonable amount of time aswell.
So, my question really is, if i make a few games, show the person what i can do/how fast i can learn... it''s better than/equal to having an education?
Thanks, blake
Theres no shortcuts, and theres NO reason why you should feel you have to choose just one of the other. You sound like you are looking for an excuse to skip college.
Pay your dues: finish HS with a decent GPA (its not hard man, just put in the EFFORT). Go to college and have fun, its a great experience. Meet people that share your interests and work with them. Things will start to come together. Work on game stuff in your free time, and pay attention in school.
Amen to that... don''t forget that most good schools have connections with companies that help you get your foot in the door.
I work for a game company whose titles you have probably seen. FWIW, our resume screeners don''t even hand over resumes that don''t have an appropriate degree. Why? Because we get about 200 resumes for every opening.
quote:
Assume for a moment that getting an education at a university is not the only form of education, and that someone could gain a comparable education through reading books and independant study.
I already assume this. You can.
The problem is that there''s no standard way of measuring your aptitude, and a degree at least ensures that you know some of the basics.
Going to college is a possibility for anyone in a major industrialized nation. You might need to get loans, you might need to (*gasp*) get a job, and you may not get much sleep - but you can certainly do it.
Sorry Etnu, I was replying to no one in particular. I understand that you can put yourself into debt and work your ass off in order to pay for college, and that in order to be guaranteed a good job in today's society, you really have no other choice. My point is simply that it seems a shame that a person should have to pay a university tens of thousands of dollars just to prove to society that they are a knowledgeable individual.
[edited by - EvilSteve on May 31, 2004 4:21:17 PM]
[edited by - EvilSteve on May 31, 2004 4:21:17 PM]
Whats wrong with going the independent route? I dont see why you are forced to automatically assign your life to working for someone else who is making the decisions and getting much better payed then you.
Another option not mentioned here is starting your OWN game development buisness, online. E-Commerce. Shareware can be lucrative if you are careful and do some market research, and plan accordingly. Puzzle games, for example, sell well, are not difficult to create, and are easy to extend. Bejewelled, anyone?
People mention job security.. How can you lose your job running your own buisness once it`s set up properly and things are going OK? You would need massive amounts of bad luck for it to actually happen, since your revenue is coming in small shots from lots of places.
Another benefit is complete creative control. Of course, watch what you make (you DO have a target audience, remember), and the rest is up to you and maybe client suggestions.
Lets say in the end, every goes bad, and you lose your buisness. So what? When you apply to a company, you`ll have a HUGE lead on almost every other guy. So, they got good demos? You dont have demos; you have REAL finished products done in the REAL world, with REAL success behind them; you show your employers your ability to lead, understand how the industry works, and, most importantly, how to make games that are fun, and sell.
Understand that its not an easy route to fame. Most companies fail due to a number of factors, including:
1 - No Plan
2 - No Market Research
3 - No Marketing
4 - Ugly Web Pages
The list goes on and on, and can include pretty much hundreds of points. Most of it is common sense, some of it is experience: Take your time.
You would also need some sort of bobo job to help support you while working on your game. And once the game is DONE, you need to sell it, which is a whole other beast. You`ll need to make a web page, market it all over the place, deal with payments and credit card, create an image for the company, setup a system for tech-support and customer care.
Its alot of work, but in the end, is completly worth it, in my opinion.
Another option not mentioned here is starting your OWN game development buisness, online. E-Commerce. Shareware can be lucrative if you are careful and do some market research, and plan accordingly. Puzzle games, for example, sell well, are not difficult to create, and are easy to extend. Bejewelled, anyone?
People mention job security.. How can you lose your job running your own buisness once it`s set up properly and things are going OK? You would need massive amounts of bad luck for it to actually happen, since your revenue is coming in small shots from lots of places.
Another benefit is complete creative control. Of course, watch what you make (you DO have a target audience, remember), and the rest is up to you and maybe client suggestions.
Lets say in the end, every goes bad, and you lose your buisness. So what? When you apply to a company, you`ll have a HUGE lead on almost every other guy. So, they got good demos? You dont have demos; you have REAL finished products done in the REAL world, with REAL success behind them; you show your employers your ability to lead, understand how the industry works, and, most importantly, how to make games that are fun, and sell.
Understand that its not an easy route to fame. Most companies fail due to a number of factors, including:
1 - No Plan
2 - No Market Research
3 - No Marketing
4 - Ugly Web Pages
The list goes on and on, and can include pretty much hundreds of points. Most of it is common sense, some of it is experience: Take your time.
You would also need some sort of bobo job to help support you while working on your game. And once the game is DONE, you need to sell it, which is a whole other beast. You`ll need to make a web page, market it all over the place, deal with payments and credit card, create an image for the company, setup a system for tech-support and customer care.
Its alot of work, but in the end, is completly worth it, in my opinion.
On the track of Available Schools to go to, im going to Add UAT to the list, its really prety good (a bit expensive at 6k per semester) But anyway what other people have said is true, you could probly make it with just a CS degree but there are those of us who get bored writing out flow charts for a java app, that would take 15 seconds to code, for a teacher that follows the old/new proverb: those who can do, those who cant teach. Anyway the nice thing about a Game school is that all of your classes are set up for a Game programmer, eg. instead of taking US history you take a class on Mythology, or somthing that is more game oriented.
This topic is closed to new replies.
Advertisement
Popular Topics
Advertisement
