So who's better off, an ok artist with a lot of connections... or an excellent artist who knows nobody? My opinion is the excellent artist has a better chance. But it really depends on the studio.. if you know the entire dev team of dora the explorer and you can push some polys around to make something that slightly resembles a body... you may be able to get in there. AAA teams I think have a bit more preference to the excellent portfolio more than the QA lead's sister's boyfriends cousin. Now, if you're excellent AND have connections.. then you're set. A lil time on a message board like polycount with some really good skills will get you the cred to get noticed.
@coop510: Programming is not too hard. I got my foot in the door by having a top student game at the independent games festival. That gets you noticed really fast.
The thing I've noticed with artists though is that great artists in the games industry aren't exactly what most people would expect. The best artists I've worked with are very very very good and making high quality art, under very restrictive requirements(poly count, texture size, etc), and have a moderate working knowledge of scripting/programming.
Programmers that draw, are not necessarily programmers that create final art. Not enough time for that. They already don't sleep all that much, asking them to do art would just be absurd. A lot of programmers do make some of their own art when prototyping stuff, but that usually by no means looks good.
Getting in the game industry is simple: just tell them you're willing and able to work OT. As for getting a game degree, the biggest risk is that you will leave the game industry and will have a useless education. I don't remember where I read it, but most people do not make a long term career out of making games, so don't count on being there until you retire.
In-breeding is absolutely a must. I started my career based almost entirely on a few good recommendations. The skills/talent was just a plus. Now I've moved on to another company through long-time friends. I've got to say that 75% of the people hired here at Blizzard are either long time friends, chumps with a few in-house recommendations, or family. The same could probably be said for a few other major developers, not sure, but this has been my experience thus far.
Artistic nerds? There's a mix that doesn't happen often in nature. I'm not saying they don't exist but if that's what the industry needs to advance then I would say there's going to be a select couple of guys who are working their butts off.
Nerds are generally characterised as having excessive knowledge of esoteric trivia, an obsession with detail and dressing funny.
Unless, of course, you're talking exclusively about IT knowledge - in which case, seeing as how most commercial art is firmly planted in the digital by now (pick up a copy of ImagineFX sometime) makes perfect sense. What kind of artists doesn't know his or her tools inside and out?
@Fergie24: An intersting perspective considering the game industry birthed out of small garage sized groups of people who were multi-talented in both programming and art/design. In 1995 DigiPen was only one of four schools in the world, the only in the North American side of the world that offered game dev education. Before that the standard was pretty much having a computer science degree with art skills. Now it's more specialized as the industry, budgets, and dev teams grow larger. Gabe is more or less reflecting on the old school standards of an industry that is clearly changing.
You know what? He's wrong. For AAA titles, you absolutely are going to have specialization. It's the only way to keep costs down. As we start seeing more and more middleware (engines) and the base technology becomes standardized, the way to differentiate will be on the margins. And it takes specialists to push the envelope on the margins.
Even among the directors you see specialization. Scorsese isn't making Pixar films. All of Spielberg's films are about the main character being lost and found.
Sure, you'll still have auteurs, just as you do in filmmaking, where you have jacks of all trades - but you'll need to be really good at something. Hell, Gabe says that *in the same interview*: you need to "hav[e] demonstrated excellence in a specific domain".
@Sachin Agarwal: You're looking at it the wrong way, though I agree. Specialization in filmmaking isn't about what kind of director you are. It's about, are you a Grip, or a Lighting Technician? Hair or Make-up? Props or Art Department?
That's specialization. And that's exactly the reason that films even get made on a large scale.
Heh, reading that actually felt awkward. Every one of Perry's questions was sprinkled with a bit of zany, and I can just picture Newell sitting there, straight as an arrow, completely unamused. :)
This is an interesting interview, albeit very surface. I find it funny that people struggle so hard to break into game development, as if they need a giant team of 20 people and such to make a game. Start small, work with 1 or 2 other people and just make little things that you and other people would love to play.
11/09/08
With programming... I have not a clue.
11/09/08
The thing I've noticed with artists though is that great artists in the games industry aren't exactly what most people would expect. The best artists I've worked with are very very very good and making high quality art, under very restrictive requirements(poly count, texture size, etc), and have a moderate working knowledge of scripting/programming.
Programmers that draw, are not necessarily programmers that create final art. Not enough time for that. They already don't sleep all that much, asking them to do art would just be absurd. A lot of programmers do make some of their own art when prototyping stuff, but that usually by no means looks good.
11/09/08
11/09/08
but yeah, turnover in the industry is high
11/09/08
11/09/08
11/09/08
Artistic nerds?
There's a mix that doesn't happen often in nature.
I'm not saying they don't exist but if that's what the industry needs to advance then I would say there's going to be a select couple of guys who are working their butts off.
11/09/08
11/09/08
The best artists are nerds.
Nerds are generally characterised as having excessive knowledge of esoteric trivia, an obsession with detail and dressing funny.
Unless, of course, you're talking exclusively about IT knowledge - in which case, seeing as how most commercial art is firmly planted in the digital by now (pick up a copy of ImagineFX sometime) makes perfect sense. What kind of artists doesn't know his or her tools inside and out?
11/09/08
11/10/08
11/09/08
Even among the directors you see specialization. Scorsese isn't making Pixar films. All of Spielberg's films are about the main character being lost and found.
Sure, you'll still have auteurs, just as you do in filmmaking, where you have jacks of all trades - but you'll need to be really good at something. Hell, Gabe says that *in the same interview*: you need to "hav[e] demonstrated excellence in a specific domain".
11/09/08
That's specialization. And that's exactly the reason that films even get made on a large scale.
I'm a Lighting Technician, by the way.
11/09/08
11/09/08
11/09/08
20 people isn't a giant team. 20 people is what you had on a SNES game.
11/09/08
i hope comair didn't pay gabe. dude sounds like a walking advertisement.
11/09/08