According to him, my acquaintance's passion was "systematically beaten out of" him by the very people interviewing him. He had plenty of passion during the job, but the interview process in the game industry is "intentionally" demoralizing. As someone who's had his fair share of interviews, I can sympathize with his position, even if I disagree that's the interviewer's intent. Nevertheless, if it is true that the interviewers are the cause of this destruction of passion, it would seen especially cruel for the interviewer to demand the very thing he's destroying.

There are bad studios that are abusive during employment, but to hear it happened during interviewing seems bizarre.

Interviews are short "Hi, tell me about yourself, show me you can do the job" events. Usually a quick phone screening, then an hour, then a 4 hour in depth. If that's enough to destroy someone's passion then it is a shallow passion indeed.

I can understand a preference for passion when selecting candidates, but to insist on a dog-and-pony-dance of passion while mocking the dance smacks less of professional discretion and more of frat-house hazing antics.

There must be a serious communication barrier. I may not have stated it well, or perhaps somewhere else there is something odd here.

Who do you want to work on your car? Someone who is passionate about cars and engines and motors, or someone who said "I've finished school, I'm an adult, I may as well get a job doing something. The auto shop is hiring, so I'll try that out."?

Who do you want to design your airplane? Someone who is passionate about aerodynamics and material strength and engineering, or someone who picked the career out of a list because they opened a college course catalog and it fell open to aeronautics?

Who do you want to be your surgeon? Somebody who is passionate about healthcare and the specific body parts, fascinated with the study of the organs needing care, and reads all the new articles as soon as they came out, or would you want somebody who picked it entirely for being one of the top paying fields?

Who do you want to be your programmer? Somebody who is passionate about software, studies not just the classic algorithms but stays current on the literature, or would you prefer someone who saw a headline that programmers are paid well and that there is a shortage of skilled programmers, so why not do it?

I'm not saying there are no bad places to work. They exist. But they exist for all careers. Choose not to work for one. If you mistakenly get hired at a sweatshop, change employers.

Perhaps your friend worked at one of those terrible places to work. Perhaps your friend worked at a so-so studio but perhaps was more enamored with the thought of making games than the thought of making software. I have no idea, and I'm not your friend nor do I know is mind.

People who love software and work in games tend to have no difficulty working on software in other industries. In addition to working on games I've worked on software in medicine, broadcast television, road traffic control, travel planning and visas, and mass data storage. I love working with software first and foremost. I am more passionate about games software, but I find myself programming any odd device that people hand me. Earlier today I spent 3 hours reprogramming a home security alarm because I had some time to kill and it was an interesting challenge for me. Having a job where I am doing what I love -- programming -- and getting rewarded both financially and emotionally for the work is amazing.

On this forum we occasionally see it, and in real life I've seen it more times than I like, where someone invests heavily in becoming a game developer because they expect it to be the same as playing games. It isn't. Making games and playing games are radically different, like being a stage actor is radically different from enjoying a night at a performance. From what you describe with your friend, I suspect he more closely falls into this case. I suggest that video game development is much like formula one racecar development; it is not enough just to love the field, you must be passionate in order to succeed. A car engine designer might enjoy designing parts be fine building minivan parts but building the highest performing racer needs passion as well as skill. A software developer might enjoy a career building generic business solutions and billing systems, but building high performing video games needs passion and skill both.

Hodgman: Good Lord, that document is like staring into the mind of a psychopath. And he's trying to convince others to follow his lead? If he has been successful, then my acquaintance's experience has been fully explained.

Though I want to reiterate: The places he has finally been hired to have all been to his satisfaction. He stresses it's the places that reject him that are doing so for reasons not related to the requirements of the job that he finds unsatisfactory.

frob: You declare that my acquaintance's passion must be shallow to be "so easily" dissuaded. Let's flip that around - how deep must one's passion be? Must it be infinite? Do you actually expect an applicant to tolerate any roadblock, spend any amount of resources to get a game programming job?

Well, judging from this line:

[background=#fafbfc]But if you've got all that, you are passionate, smart, quick thinking, love making software, and have all the other superpowers, [/background]

All the other superpowers. You not only demand an infinite patience - you demand virtual perfection. With all due respect, who are you - or anyone in this industry - to demand so much? And, from what I hear, return so little for it? Is there no sense of decency in this industry? No sense of reciprocity?

The attitude on display in this sentiment directly leads to rampant exploitation, or in other words:

[background=#fafbfc]To be honest, part of "passion for working in the industry" is also a filter for "we underpay drastically for talent because so many people want to work in this field, so we don't want you to quit for better money/benefits/hours".[/background]

Of all the people here, I'm starting to line up behind Dave Weinstein.

And then we have:

Tom Sloper: I don't think my acquaintance is lying; especially not with what he's shown me and definitely not after reading frob's attitude and DEFINITELY not after reading Hodgman's document!

You state that my acquaintance's story "does not ring true" yet you don't even supply criteria to base this judgement on. What doesn't "ring true"? Why don't you believe him? Are you so blinded by your own experience that you won't at least open your mind to other possibilities? You've done nothing in this thread but declare arbitrary axioms you never justify. Why should I believe you? Perhaps I should turn the tables again and demand that you "look within" to find some humility.

***

After reading all of this, I am starting to wonder less if either of us are cut out for this field, and wonder more if this field is cut out for us. I still have the freedom of choice - thank providence; my young acquaintance is broke, hungry, and on his last month's rent. I can't possibly see how he can switch careers now unless there is one that requires exactly the same skills as a game developer demands - and even then, he won't have the experience of the field that those employers demand. You're watching one of your own (though it's obvious you don't feel any kinship) lose life's struggle and I see no ounce of remorse. I fear that next month I may find him on the sidewalk either begging for change - or worse, heaven forbid - lying in a pool of his own blood under a tall building.

And the only reply I expect to hear from the industry he loved is, "good riddance."

Must it be infinite? Do you actually expect an applicant to tolerate any roadblock, spend any amount of resources to get a game programming job?

That's obviously not possible. It is true that you can take an expectation of "passion" to an extreme (that is, use "we want you to be passionate about game" to mean "we will work you overtime for months without compensation") that is unhealthy. It happens. Just like other bad things happen in the industry. But that doesn't mean that everybody does it. For most people having a desire to work in the industry is simply another one of the many positive aspects of a candidate that they look for when recruiting. It does not need to be a "requirement," just like a degree is not a "requirement" and you can get jobs without it. It is certainly a plus in the favor of the candidate, though, if he or she can demonstrate that they really enjoy and want to make games as a career.

After reading all of this, I am starting to wonder less if either of us are cut out for this field, and wonder more if this field is cut out for us. I still have the freedom of choice - thank providence; my young acquaintance is broke, hungry, and on his last month's rent. I can't possibly see how he can switch careers now unless there is one that requires exactly the same skills as a game developer demands - and even then, he won't have the experience of the field that those employers demand. You're watching one of your own (though it's obvious you don't feel any kinship) lose life's struggle and I see no ounce of remorse. I fear that next month I may find him on the sidewalk either begging for change - or worse, heaven forbid - lying in a pool of his own blood under a tall building.

I'm a little unclear at this point what the aim of this thread is; I feel like we have wandered off on a slight tangent.

What sort of answers are you looking for at this point, and to what questions?

Do you actually expect an applicant to tolerate any roadblock, spend any amount of resources to get a game programming job?

What do you mean by "roadblocks" and "resources?"

I've known coworkers who relocated oversees when the job market for game developers in their home countries started to dry up, rather than go into a different sector of the software industry.
I've known at least one coworker who was vacationing in my country, saw a job posting they found interesting, and moved here from Europe to pursue the opportunity rather than lose it.
I've known multiple coworkers who dropped out of university because they had the opportunity to be a professional game developer, and decided to take it. For people like that, meeting the CS degree requirement that's common in the game industry is the only reason they bothered with university in the first place.

And from experience, just about every one of us dedicates time and sometimes even money to learning in our own time and to side projects. Personally, I'd expect someone who wants to be a game programmer to do lots of programming related to games on their own time. Someone who just went through the motions for school, no matter what their grades, is not going to cut it. It's likely that they won't have the kinds of skillset we look for because many or even most schools don't teach the right skills, or teach the skills but don't spend much teaching time on them. Being self-taught is considered a point in your favour.

The line I would draw as of right now is relocation, especially if I'm not paid for the relocation. My family and friends are all here in the city I've lived in for most of my life, and I'm reluctant to leave it. But if I had a sufficiently interesting opportunity, or the job market here dried up, it's entirely conceivable that I would move.

I also won't work for any company that doesn't allow their employees to have side projects in some form or another. Gamedev was my hobby before it was my career. It's still my hobby. I still learn a lot from things I do on the side. Good employers know this and allow side projects as a way for employees to grow.

You not only demand an infinite patience - you demand virtual perfection. With all due respect, who are you - or anyone in this industry - to demand so much?

Now that you mention it, most game developers I've met are very patient. Working with big complicated systems like video games does take patience. Working with designers, some of whom are reputed to have a tendency to request big changes on a whim, takes patience. I've worked on some big AAA titles that had very poor iteration times. Think an hour to compile the game executable, and many more hours to get the game's data cooked. Impatient people tend to leave circumstances like that.

But none of what frob was saying is at all rare, besides "all the other superpowers." I'm not totally sure what that means. Anyway, I'd say it's rare that a game programmer is not passionate, smart, and quick-thinking. You have to be just to be able to keep up with the pace while dealing with the complexity of some of the systems we maintain. I would say that asking for those traits is not demanding "perfection" by any stretch of the imagination.

Oberon_Command: By "roadblocks" I mean requirements and interview questions not related to the requirements of the job, and by "resources" I am widely inclusive - money, time, and anything else it takes to get a job in this economy. My acquaintance has tried to jump over every "roadblock" only to find obstacles designed to block him alone. He has exhausted every resource he can exhaust and gained nothing but the enmity of his peers.

You mention you expect someone who is a game programmer, who commutes for hours each day AND stays late to make a deadline, to then whittle away even his last minutes developing "side projects" to acceptable in the industry. That hardly seems healthy - only the obsessed would dedicate such a percentage of his time to those pursuits.

As for my acquaintance's talents: I agree that asking for desire, intelligence and speed of thought is reasonable; I believe the problem here is an irrational refusal to acknowledge those talents on display due to personal feeling rather than suitability for the job at hand. I now believe my acquaintance is being discriminated against, pure and simple.

Tom Sloper: As soon as you are challenged, you throw a tantrum and shut off communication - quelle suprise. Nevertheless, the desire to cut ties is mutual.

Josh Petrie: I believe my question have been answered, much to my disapproval. Working at a game programming job may be pleasant, if granted; but the process of getting that job is morass of gamesmanship and abuse not worth any amount of money, no matter the ease of labor. I might accept a game developing job, but I'll never apply for one.

1. I mean requirements and interview questions not related to the requirements of the job,
2. and by "resources" I am widely inclusive - money, time, and anything else it takes to get a job in this economy.

1. Which requirements do you (or your acquaintance) feel have been applied that aren't actually related to the requirements of the job? That would be a little strange, though I've heard of cases where management had a favoured candidate and only opened the door to applicants to prove that they weren't "playing favourites." But I've never encountered such a case, myself.
2. Ah. Well, look at it this way: if you're an employer, aren't you going to prefer the candidate who spent resources to make him/herself more capable, even if he/she didn't really need to?

You mention you expect someone who is a game programmer, who commutes for hours each day AND stays late to make a deadline, to then whittle away even his last minutes developing "side projects" to acceptable in the industry. That hardly seems healthy - only the obsessed would dedicate such a percentage of his time to those pursuits.

You make it out like programming isn't something one can do on one's own time for fun. I have side projects because I have fun working on them. Programming games is hard work, but it is also fun. Sometimes it's not even "work" - it's a kind of play. As long as it's fun, I'm not going to give up my hobby just because I made a career out of it. I'd hardly call that an "obsession."

There have been times where work has burned me out so thoroughly that I haven't had the drive to work on side projects. Or at least programming projects. I also build miniatures and write poetry, and I have other hobbies. I guess you could call those side projects. :P

As for my acquaintance's talents: I agree that asking for desire, intelligence and speed of thought is reasonable; I believe the problem here is an irrational refusal to acknowledge those talents on display due to personal feeling rather than suitability for the job at hand. I now believe my acquaintance is being discriminated against, pure and simple.

IS your acquaintance passionate? If he's not, look at it from the employer's perspective - you have two candidates with equal qualifications. The only difference is that one has obvious passion to the point that it overflows from their being... and the other hasn't. Which one would you hire? This applies to other industries, as well! Would you hire an architect who didn't have a passion for architecture? Or a stage musician who had no passion for music?

A question I like to ask as an interviewer is "which of the projects on your resume did you most enjoy working on, and why?" If your acquaintance is both qualified and can answer that question at some length, and come across as excited about programming, then that is sufficient passion. If on the other hand your acquaintance answers that question with a shrug or "I don't know," and generally comes across as bored by their career, they're not likely to get a job in the game industry. A lot of us aren't just here for the money, we're here because game development is a creative outlet and a form of expression for us. It certainly is for me.

There may also be some soft skill that your acquaintance is missing, or he may come across as personally unappealing somehow. Interviewees coming across as creepy or threatening are not unheard of. Programmers being unable to work well in a team setting is not at all uncommon. Occasionally we run into folks who are good people, but their behaviour alone makes everyone less productive. From the employer's perspective, it's better to catch these early. That applies to any job, really, not just the game industry. Without knowing - or interviewing - this person, it's hard to say what the problem is.

Josh Petrie: I believe my question have been answered, much to my disapproval. Working at a game programming job may be pleasant, if granted; but the process of getting that job is morass of gamesmanship and abuse not worth any amount of money, no matter the ease of labor. I might accept a game developing job, but I'll never apply for one.

If you have the skills or come across as able to learn them quickly, and are actually interested in video games at all, it's actually not that difficult. A lot of game companies are inundated with unqualified applicants. If you can prove your worth, you'd be accepted with open arms somewhere, because you'll be that one person out of 10 who can actually do the job.

Promit: I apologize for not making myself clear. I do not think the industry is "out to get" my acquaintance by himself; I think the industry is making unreasonable demands and otherwise behaving irrationally that affect a whole class of people that my acquaintance happens to be a member of. It's not targeted hate but unchecked callousness (to the point of being bad for business) that I accuse the industry of.

Game development studios are, in my experience, fairly touchy about people "fitting in" and that can make it difficult for people who are capable but come across as unpleasant to work with.

I dare say this is exactly the problem - this irrational "touchiness" and their arbitrary judgement about who is "unpleasant" is precisely what my acquaintance has had a head-on collision with. I have not seen any character flaws in him that would make any rational person hesitate to accept him. He says he has "bent over backwards to please people" and otherwise conform to social norms, and to me it shows; if I had to name a flaw, it is that he might be a little too formal - as the child of British parents (which obviously biases me), I'd say that's the best flaw to have. To accuse him of having "some foundational personality problem that is on display to employers that he is not willing to acknowledge or address" sounds almost as if you are deliberately mocking him about something you know not to be true - though obviously you don't know him at all.

Of course, at this point in order to assert that he has some character flaw, you now have to insist that *I* am lying about his character.

In any case, it seems straightforward - if the industry doesn't want him, he should move on.

He may have no where else to go - his skills are specialized to the game industry (I imagine his passion is in play here); his knowledge of C++ might be transferable, but he has no other experience outside of the ten-odd years in the game development racket. What industry would be willing to accept him without the other skills (his web knowledge is weak, for example) he would need to be hired? Furthermore he is at a point in his life where ageism is a serious problem; I am fortunate enough to be in an industry where the wisdom and experience that comes with age is greatly valued; but even *I* - a babe in the woods, as far as programming is concerned - know that ageism is rampant in all tech industries, save maybe game development.

What field do you recommend a former game developer that has been shoved out of the industry go to?

Oberon_Command:

Well, look at it this way: if you're an employer, aren't you going to prefer the candidate who spent resources to make him/herself more capable, even if he/she didn't really need to?

What if the candidate didn't have the resources to spend? Are you openly saying the poor aren't welcome into the gentleman's club of game development? That would be refreshingly honest, if cravenly callous. I would think the candidate who spent his last dollar might me a more interesting (and, dare I say it, more passionate) employee than someone with tons of resources to spend who throws their gains around freely with no concern of poverty.

You make it out like programming isn't something one can do on one's own time for fun.

This statement is asserting an assumption that is not true in his case - as I implied by stating that he "commutes for hours each day AND stays late to make a deadline," he claims he has no spare time - he claims he is over-obligated to the point that he is shorted sleep most days of the week - and you ask of him even more?

He tells me that he derives great joy from programming games - the reason he went into the industry is because otherwise he'd never have the time to work on them at all. If this is not passion enough for you, I don't understand how you define the word.

Without knowing - or interviewing - this person, it's hard to say what the problem is.

Then interview him. Had he the skills necessary to do my line of work to the level that he does yours, I would find a position in my firm. If I had the power, I would make one - in my professional opinion, he's that good of an investment.

If you have the skills or come across as able to learn them quickly, and are actually interested in video games at all, it's actually not that difficult. A lot of game companies are inundated with unqualified applicants. If you can prove your worth, you'd be accepted with open arms somewhere, because you'll be that one person out of 10 who can actually do the job.

We're both adults here - we both know nothing's ever that simple. People fall through the cracks of otherwise seemingly impenetrable systems all the time. But one thing that separates the professional from the amateur is the refusal to simply accept flaws in those systems, to insist on repairing those flaws, and to save those souls stuck in the cracks. My acquaintance has fallen harder than anyone I've ever personally seen. However, I've not seen even acknowledgement that cracks can exist in the game development industry.

---

One last question I want to pose to everyone in this thread: Is it truly impossible for you to believe that my acquaintance's difficulty getting a job in this industry isn't his fault? Must you insist that despite all of his hard work, poise, determination, and passion that he is still at fault for his own rejection? If you cannot even open your mind to the possibility that the blame for his current state lies outside of him, then there is no point in continuing this conversation.