Hi, I want to pose this question to you out there.. are artists positions too portfolio driven these days? I think a portfolio is essential and is a good measure of talent but I don't think it is everything and in my experience their are many types of artists which are essential to making up a good development team.
Let's be honest when a portfolio comes in that is standout you immediately want to hire them without judging their personality and work ethic. To me I would even put Work Ethic, Personality, and the Ability to Work well in a Team environment ABOVE sheer talent. It also depends on the type of game you are making.. If you are making a train game.. you don't need sheer artistic talent for this type of game.. in fact it can be a waste.
I want to give some examples of people I have worked with to help explain my point. Currently I work on a high profile game and we have a range of artists like always. One guy has fantastic conceptual/painting skills, as well as modelling skills.. But he is very slow, not a good work ethic and doesn't gell well with the team. When you look at what he brings to the table he is not as solid as some other artists on the team who do not have fantastic concept/painting skills but are good modellers with solid texturing skills with a fantastic work ethic and great people skills. Another aspect is also the problem solving and intelligence of the artist, this is hard to gauge in an interview situation I think.
My point is that when companies are hiring people they should look past the portfolio and judge how the person will fit in to the team.. work ethic is imperitive.. in my opinion if they are just coming 9 - 5 and taking too long to do tasks I couldn't care less how talented they are. I think an approach would be to have a couple of artists who are solid traditional guys that give inspiration to those that aren't, ideally it would be great to have someone who has everything.. but this does not exist, sadly. In my 10 years of working in the industry I have never come across an artist who has the whole package.. maybe you have.. it would be interesting to get your opinions on this topic.astroboy2007-08-06 11:58:17
JohnN:
I think it's a common misconception that being young equates to making more bad decisions, thats a pretty big generalization.
Many younger people often make for fantastic leaders and are often more willing to take an educated risk on someone; to gain power at a young age probably meant someone did the same for them.
While I would never doubt experience being a massively valuable commodity its only worthwhile if the person is any good, no matter how you bundle it up 10 years of crap work is 10 years of crap work.
I have met many people with years of experience in the games industry (and other fields) that I would never hire, having a bad habit as a junior is easily mended by a good mentor, a senior with years of bad habits is a lot harder to correct.
Anyway, thats off topic ..back to the original post.
I would hope that anyone, no matter there age or experience would use a portfolio only as a snapshot of the skill, creativity and to some degree commitment of a future employee.
You shouldn't hire based on it alone however and even the most brilliant of artists needs to gel with other workers, the project and even just fit the ethos of the company.
An interview is paramount, preferably in person.
[QUOTE=astroboy]Currently I work on a high profile game and we have a range of artists like always. One guy has fantastic conceptual/painting skills, as well as modelling skills.. But he is very slow, not a good work ethic and doesn't gell well with the team. When you look at what he brings to the table he is not as solid as some other artists on the team who do not have fantastic concept/painting skills but are good modellers with solid texturing skills with a fantastic work ethic and great people skills. Another aspect is also the problem solving and intelligence of the artist, this is hard to gauge in an interview situation I think.[/QUOTE]
Companies do a few things to avoid things like this happening, and it's understandable that they do since having a problem like you've mentioned is costly to them. Some run a probation period of a few months for new employees, or they do tests as part of the interview process to check if you really are capable.
I wonder if a test really shows much? They are interesting to see how someone can cope to do something in a short span of time with pressure but let's be honest in development this is not necessary as you have a decent amount of time to do the task properly.. it's more a case of how well you do it within a decent time frame etc..
I think you are right that an interview in person is paramount, probation period is very important as it gives both sides time to see what they think about each other. I think companies should take chances with individuals and give them the opportunity to prove themselves through probation. It's possible they might screw up the test because they were nervous etc.. or the same for the interview. My pet peeve is when you get cockiness and ego by the interviewer or by the person being interviewed. I have found this exists in this industry like the plague..
On the issue of experience.. I think experience is critical and should be respected. 10 years of any experience in the game industry, crap or not is still better than someone coming straight out of school. It's true some bad habits can arise from crap experience and worse of all it's bitterness that creeps in with experience. Most people I meet who have had a lot of experience have Baggage from past games that have been difficult to work on etc.. Someone straight from school is fresh and eager, with a bright outlook. The downside of someone straight from school is that they will find it hard to cope when the going gets tough late in the project, also they don't have any experience to draw from when it comes to solving certain tasks. Plus in general they wouldn't be able to take on a lot of responsibility and be a leader.. usually this is given to someone with experience.
[QUOTE=astroboy] I wonder if a test really shows much? They are interesting to see how someone can cope to do something in a short span of time with pressure but let's be honest in development this is not necessary as you have a decent amount of time to do the task properly.. it's more a case of how well you do it within a decent time frame etc..
I think you are right that an interview in person is paramount, probation period is very important as it gives both sides time to see what they think about each other. I think companies should take chances with individuals and give them the opportunity to prove themselves through probation. It's possible they might screw up the test because they were nervous etc.. or the same for the interview. My pet peeve is when you get cockiness and ego by the interviewer or by the person being interviewed. I have found this exists in this industry like the plague..
[/QUOTE]
Tests can be hit and miss, it can be good if there discrepancies in there reel you are worried about but if someone is working full time or studying etc it's really hard to always get the best out of them in a test.
[QUOTE=astroboy]
On the issue of experience.. I think experience is critical and should be respected. 10 years of any experience in the game industry, crap or not is still better than someone coming straight out of school. It's true some bad habits can arise from crap experience and worse of all it's bitterness that creeps in with experience. Most people I meet who have had a lot of experience have Baggage from past games that have been difficult to work on etc..
[/QUOTE]
I totally agree experience is a valuable commodity and one we should respect.
I think I may have worded myself badly as you seem to have missed my point though.
I didn't mean bad experiences as in fired from a job, working in a bad team or a project folding, every ounce of that is a helpful step forward, we generally learn more from the bad than the good anyway.
What I meant was just as hiring on skill alone is a bad idea so is hiring on experience alone.
Being in the industry 10 years but being crap at what you do is no better than being talented and a right pain to work with.
Far too many people in every field get positions based soley on how many years they sat in a seat.
Many have never actually done the hard yards, just eeked there way through, we all know these people, they come in everyday, don't rock the boat but do little to contribute either, there work is sub par but isn't quite bad enough for them to be let go and anyway no one important sees it because usually one of the hard more skilled workers will always fix it before it gets in game.
Skip 5 years into the future and who gets the promotion?
"Hey Bob's a good bloke, he's been here for ages, he must know his sh*t! Lets give him the job....."
...no developed practical skills just the same lazy bad habits, no real knowledge of pipelines just excuses as to how it wasn't there fault, no idea how to mentor just bullying and a bucket load of fear of failure ..... bang power trip!
Now obviously thats the worst case scenario but we all know it happens.
[QUOTE=astroboy]
Someone straight from school is fresh and eager, with a bright outlook. The downside of someone straight from school is that they will find it hard to cope when the going gets tough late in the project, also they don't have any experience to draw from when it comes to solving certain tasks.
[/QUOTE]
Sorry but I feel thats a gross generalisation, one thats easy to say and almost impossible to prove.
I have 2 juniors right now on my team and they hold there own as well as anyone else, they are both so skilled it's scary, they're passionate, both cope excellent even when the days not going well, find fixes for things even the seniors such as myself miss, in fact they are 2 of the best guys I've ever worked with. Youth plays very little part, I think you have mistaken it with maturity and age doesn't always bless you with that either. :)
[QUOTE=astroboy]
Plus in general they wouldn't be able to take on a lot of responsibility and be a leader.. usually this is given to someone with experience.
[/QUOTE]
Actually you'd give it to the person who has matched all the key qualifications, they aren't always the most experienced people, they are simply the best people.
All I'm saying is everything needs to be done n a balanced way.
Don't hire or promote on skills or years alone.Malus2007-08-09 05:44:11
ya i do agree about those type of people you talk about who don't really contribute to a game and just sit in the background and rack up the years, eventually getting the promotion.. ya this is sad.
On the issue of juniors, It is possible to get some good ones.. I guess it's hit or miss, I have noticed the standard of juniors coming from school have got a lot better in the last few years. I have seen juniors move quickly up the ranks because they have proven themselves fast and gained the respect of the people around them. I think the type of experience that someone has had is important.. it's interesting say you were going for a job against the two juniors that you work with and they got it over you.. you might feel a bit pissed because you are more experienced right? as you said in some ways they are better than senior guys... but you are a lead and you have a lot of experience so I would hire you over them.. if that was my choice.
It's an interesting issue because their are a lot of juniors with great portfolios they have had the time to craft going around and their are many senior artists around with experience that have skill sets that are slightly dated. Yes they have experience , but just in current-gen, they could apply that to nextgen but this junior has already got a lot of experience with next-gen tools like mudbox and zbrush etc... and his salary is half the price?
I think that GOOD interviewers still do look past the portfolio and ultimately hire a candidate on having suitable (not necessarily the best even) experience, knowledge and personality. The portfolio and resume are only the first hurdle in the process.
Are there good interviewers out there in the game industry? I don't know... I think in the graphics and illustration industry (where I work at the moment) there are, but there are also some average ones, but I don't think that balance has changed in recent years.
I do have a theory (admittedly unresearched and probably poorly thoughtout) that the games industry in Australia is young and attracts younger people to it in relation to other creative industries (ie TV, film and the likes). Consequently the average age of people in positions of power are younger and in comparison to people in equivalent position of the other industries are less experienced. The up shot of this that more poor decisions are probably made by these people - such as hiring on the strength of a portfolio.