Why do companies keep refreshing advertisements for positions that aren't available for employment
polycounter
I've noticed this trend in several advertisements for game dev jobs on glassdoor, indeed, linkedin, neuvoo where a game dev job advertised keeps refreshing in availability and ends up on the top of the trending lists for a full year, even though it sometimes doesn't exist on the company site and you're unlikely to ever get a timely response.
Just wondering if this is because those sites do this by default until an employer is proactive enough to disable it.
Considering companies receive like 100's of applications a week, are these applications collected and later reviewed in bulk when there is an actual opening?
In one instance I had a application to a prominent AAA company wait in the new stage for 1 1/2 years, which I guess is okay, though I am unable to update it with new information since the old application cannot be redacted/resent. I tried to contact their recruiter but received no reply.
This is also a problem when using smart recruiters, and I'm wondering if this system is really an effective way to acquire talent since it gets flooded by so many applications from people with different skill and experience levels, having a recruiter to have to cherry pick through literally thousands of applications. (If that is indeed what they are doing)
I find the better companies actually have recruiters looking actively for talent and contacting them, encouraging them to apply, and the candidate atleast gets to the interview stage provided he hits most of what is listed in the advertisement and has a portfolio to match (though there is usually an art test to better gauge their skill level.)
Guessing its just not done across the board or only applies to people with actual game industry experience in most cases?
I mean Its all great to keep improving on the portfolio and trying again while you wait for an opportunity (which for many artists would be their first) and maybe pick up some freelance work to get by.
But if the actual in studio environment operates as a team where you do some of the work and a lot of it is outsourced. and your job responsibilities change from project to project, does your industry experience really matter in the grand scheme of things, or is it just a matter of some companies not being as accommodating as others?
What about life experience and varied career backgrounds?
Is all industry experience judged the same way, or is it more a box to tick off when reviewing applicants, then discussing that at an interview should an applicant be given that opportunity.
To illustrate an example, one of my friends does QA testing and regularly gets offers for QA analyst positions, though he has no skills for the same which they then find out after a phone interview.
There is nothing to suggest in his linkedin that he has the skills a QA analyst requires and for a time I wondered if they were willing to train him into that role, though they seemed to assume he had the skill since he was working for a popular AAA company.
Though eventually they had no willingness to accommodate him at the end and it seemed to be a waste of his time. (and theirs I think)
Makes me wonder if this is done as a requirement of being in HR, like you are required to approach a candidate that may fit a certain profile that is more assumed than actually true.
In most other industries, where having prior experience is certainly encouraged, applicants after interview can be accommodated through a salary negotiation more suited to their profile and role in the company.
Unless the role has very strict and specific requirements which is clearly listed in an advertisement, most applicants do get to the interview stage.
its very rare that they are dismissed without due consideration or ghosted.
I was told that recruiters try to poach from other companies prior to hiring fresh talent (though what constitutes fresh is as debatable as cans of cat food) There is however no way to ascertain if this is actually beneficial to the company in every case.
Do you feel that there ought to be more transparency in this regard, like I know that companies are under no obligation to be accommodating, but wouldn't it be nice if they could take a step back from the corporate machinery, so artists don't need to pick at straws to figure out what went wrong?
If so, how would it be best to bring about this change in an industry that is only getting more and more competitive, with game dev schools pumping out hundreds of game artists year after year into the market. (not counting the self taught ones)
Just wondering if this is because those sites do this by default until an employer is proactive enough to disable it.
Considering companies receive like 100's of applications a week, are these applications collected and later reviewed in bulk when there is an actual opening?
In one instance I had a application to a prominent AAA company wait in the new stage for 1 1/2 years, which I guess is okay, though I am unable to update it with new information since the old application cannot be redacted/resent. I tried to contact their recruiter but received no reply.
This is also a problem when using smart recruiters, and I'm wondering if this system is really an effective way to acquire talent since it gets flooded by so many applications from people with different skill and experience levels, having a recruiter to have to cherry pick through literally thousands of applications. (If that is indeed what they are doing)
I find the better companies actually have recruiters looking actively for talent and contacting them, encouraging them to apply, and the candidate atleast gets to the interview stage provided he hits most of what is listed in the advertisement and has a portfolio to match (though there is usually an art test to better gauge their skill level.)
Guessing its just not done across the board or only applies to people with actual game industry experience in most cases?
I mean Its all great to keep improving on the portfolio and trying again while you wait for an opportunity (which for many artists would be their first) and maybe pick up some freelance work to get by.
But if the actual in studio environment operates as a team where you do some of the work and a lot of it is outsourced. and your job responsibilities change from project to project, does your industry experience really matter in the grand scheme of things, or is it just a matter of some companies not being as accommodating as others?
What about life experience and varied career backgrounds?
Is all industry experience judged the same way, or is it more a box to tick off when reviewing applicants, then discussing that at an interview should an applicant be given that opportunity.
To illustrate an example, one of my friends does QA testing and regularly gets offers for QA analyst positions, though he has no skills for the same which they then find out after a phone interview.
There is nothing to suggest in his linkedin that he has the skills a QA analyst requires and for a time I wondered if they were willing to train him into that role, though they seemed to assume he had the skill since he was working for a popular AAA company.
Though eventually they had no willingness to accommodate him at the end and it seemed to be a waste of his time. (and theirs I think)
Makes me wonder if this is done as a requirement of being in HR, like you are required to approach a candidate that may fit a certain profile that is more assumed than actually true.
In most other industries, where having prior experience is certainly encouraged, applicants after interview can be accommodated through a salary negotiation more suited to their profile and role in the company.
Unless the role has very strict and specific requirements which is clearly listed in an advertisement, most applicants do get to the interview stage.
its very rare that they are dismissed without due consideration or ghosted.
I was told that recruiters try to poach from other companies prior to hiring fresh talent (though what constitutes fresh is as debatable as cans of cat food) There is however no way to ascertain if this is actually beneficial to the company in every case.
Do you feel that there ought to be more transparency in this regard, like I know that companies are under no obligation to be accommodating, but wouldn't it be nice if they could take a step back from the corporate machinery, so artists don't need to pick at straws to figure out what went wrong?
If so, how would it be best to bring about this change in an industry that is only getting more and more competitive, with game dev schools pumping out hundreds of game artists year after year into the market. (not counting the self taught ones)
Replies
In this respect recruitment can be like any other shady sales industry.
However..
There are legitimate specialist recruiters that deal directly with studios and actively try to place the right people in the right jobs.
Finding the agencies with a decent reputation isn't difficult and I would recommend contacting them directly and engaging in a proper dialogue so they have a decent idea of where and how to place you.
The same goes for studios with their own recruitment staff.
Transparency comes from actually communicating with the recruiter - if you are rejected, email back and ask if they wouldn't mind explaining why. If you haven't heard back for a couple of weeks, email and ask why. They will not volunteer this information without being prompted because it takes time and money to do so.
Recruitment is expensive - this is why the filtering process is merciless. Even a 30 minute Skype interview will cost more than most graduates earn in a week and the total cost of a hire is more like 6 months salary
Experience means you can be relatively autonomous in a production environment - if it's required in a job advert its because they don't have the time or resources to train a graduate. Games are made to a release schedule - time is more important than saving a couple of thousand on salary.
And finally, I don't believe the onus is on the industry to change. I want to employ people who are willing to push themselves and work hard to get a result.
Sorry, that was long and garbled because typing on a phone upsets me..
A good example would be all those ads and website posts from big companies that has been up for years, it's not that they haven't found artists for those roles, they have probably filled them over and over again, they are just fishing for talent, it's a scale able industry so if they can find someone that fits the job and seems to be able to hit the ground running without much mentoring they might just as well hire that artist as well.
As for recruiters, Linkedin is just a minefield, even though it can sometimes seem like recruiters are working for the actual company they are mostly not, and they do their best to make you misunderstand that. They are just randomly throwing recruitment messages around to anyone that ticks a box hoping to get a referral fee from companies. Worst in my experience is probably Netease, I think at most I got like 20 messages in a day, but there is official recruiters out there as well, I would say on average I get one real recruiter for every 100 recruiter emails. But if you want to find work through a recruiter I suggest contacting a serious company/recruiter yourself.
It is far more saturated for art positions than others I've found.
I do email back, I do understand the time it takes to reply, usually any additional correspondence does include additional work or experienced gained to show that I've been proactive. However I've never received any feedback for past applications. Its usually we don't respond to those sort of requests.
So I then try to contact artists within a company and get feedback that way, improving as I go along and then reapply should the position opens again. This might work at some point.
In the case of experience, I'm not a graduate, I do have experience mostly freelance and in studio, though I haven't had the opportunity to work for a AAA game studio while the people I'm competing against for jobs do, and that's expected in a competitive market.
I just feel that at some point the deciding factor, especially if the job doesn't require an artist the level of Naughty dog senior character artist, should be an interview, but the applications don't even come up for review.
Mind you this is through smart recruiters.etc, not directly though a company recruiter where I do receive a response at some point, but not always an interview or an art test to actually meet with them and prove myself in doing what they want me to do.
It does help to meet with them personally which I feel would definitely give more insight into what I can do for them.
I understand that the onus isn't on the industry, but maybe there can be a better way so that every capable graduate gets a chance to atleast see what the fuss is about especially when it comes to AAA. And that does happen no doubt, but its erratic and I wish it were more streamlined and purely based on the ability talent and work ethic of a potential employee.
If their application never comes up in the system for review, how would the company know?
The onus certainly is on the artist however to keep bettering themselves despite the circumstances.
And that's no problem, thank you for your response! Where do you work if you don't mind my asking?
That is what I feel should change. I totally understand the pace at which the industry blitzkrieg's through, and the idea of a permanent job and insolvency seem to be totally up in the air on both sides.
Maybe if things slowed down things would be different. But this would have to change across the board.
The ones that take the advertisments literally are new graduates, many of whom apply with portfolios that aren't up to the mark. The only alternative to avoid this sea of applications would be to improve ones art and get noticed, so that a given.
I still feel like the fishing and poaching should remain in the seafood industry lol. But I understand the competitiveness is the cause of this. The industry is more popular than its ever been.
I've seen those messages fishing for talent, sometimes I feel that if the companies gave feedback to applicants and invested in graduates it would possibly benefit them in the long term.
Maybe they do this for some applicants for reasons that aren't clear to the rest of us.
Oh totally, its all I can do besides networking where I can and creating more quality work.
I'd like to believe that it does ultimately come down to the quality of their art, and of course this is crucial if they are to do their job at a company well, and most artists applying are usually qualified for the job they are applying to, its when they are compared with each other and especially to artists with seniority, thats where things get complicated.
The industry also seems to operate under a veil of secrecy which makes it exceedingly difficult to understand what is wanted.
Again this hasn't been my complete experience, I have worked with recruiters that are great to work with.
One way for individual artists to earn their keep without being at the mercy of job application processes is the current trend towards branding yourself, producing tutorial content and marketing yourself to a niche audience and creating art collectives.
On another note,
There's also this kickstarter for a AAA quality erotic game that crossed 2 million $ and has had little to no initial press coverage possibly owing to the nature of its content. They weren't allowed to present at GDC either.
And the artist is pretty well known in our circles for his work and art tools/plugins
https://www.kickstarter.com/projects/990500595/subverse
(company site is totally NSFW, think lara croft with horse)
Despite its smashing funding record it isn't even a kickstarter "project we love."
One way to earn your keep I suppose. Its actually quite commendable!
Will check it out! Self promotion is important for every artist, I do believe that while getting work in the industry is important it shouldn't be the only means to validate ones ability.
Unionization might help with this, or possibly legislation. Both are unlikely.
So you're stuck a bit I'm afraid.
What you can do is make your artwork stand up to the highest quality, develop and work your contacts, and get lucky with your timing.
Like of course every artist needs the skills to do the job, but looking over hire's I can't say that there is a definitive bar that each candidate is required to reach. I mean they need to be able to use the programs but are recruiters at companies unanimous on whether a blood orc character is better than Future soldier which is not as good as say a sexy dragon slayer, I don't really know anymore. (but will likely do them all at some point lol)
Of course having art tests does help a lot in this assessment, and once within a studio people do work as a team so there's several factors in selecting candidates. I know a lot of people have opposing views about art tests, especially unpaid ones, but I still feel that that's the best assessment of what a candidate is capable of provided a company is totally transparent in the process of conducting them.
That said I still feel that more attention ought to be given to managing advertisements for positions.
Like I routinely see companies advertising for "Rockstars", but it isn't always entirely clear if these rockstars need years of experience and are required to currently be in another studio where they're supposed to be poached from or the company is actual accepting a variety of skill levels like the advert says it is.
I'm sure its annoying to be set aside or ghosted and then see the same ad pop up a week later still looking for "Rockstars",
I mean maybe some artists genuinely don't yet have the right beats, but wouldn't it be better to give some insight rather than let them figure it out on their own?
This might actually help the companies in the long term since sometimes I wonder if they need artists as quickly as they say they do or if they have a whole year to figure that out (since the ads just sit there getting refreshed over and over)
And its difficult to understand if the evaluation is just an artists work or their whole profile since in many cases there hasn't been an interview or an art test.
Many artists are just left to rot and figure all this out on their own. Its been pretty daunting to see so many good artists give up out of sheer frustration
None the less as an artist is important to keep making art, I just feel that the current system of hiring is letting a lot of good capable people with interesting backgrounds slip through the cracks. Something ought to be done to change that at some point, and established artists who are working need to be more realistic about how they motivate others who want to join.
Having a stellar portfolio seems in many ways be a subjective thing, it might not always guarantee work, and you will likely need to make considerable sacrifices to get what you want.
Personally I'm okay with that but I still do feel that there's a better way.
Nikhil, your portfolio is getting closer, but it's not there yet. Are you interested in feedback? The Zhou Yu character got some helpful feedback, but your reply seemed defensive, and you haven't posted any updates.
Maybe you're sick of working on it, maybe you consider it done, but it does need more work. It's the best quality of your realistic characters, but does have a couple key issues that would push it to the next level, with a bit more effort.
Don't get upset at those doing the hiring... get even, by working your ass off on your art.
Like I am finding freelance work, its only that some of the AAA industry in Montreal and Toronto has been pretty challenging to even get in touch with and I was wondering if that was not only because of my portfolio (which I've been improving over time) but because of the system they use to receive applications and the market they operate in.
Like I've had company recruiters contact me, and in this case most of the time they do know what they want. If the discussion goes forward I usually get an art test and we go forward from there. Its a nice transparent well organised process.
The issue I was mainly having is I have applications I made for positions to some major AAA companies that have been languishing for almost a year and a half. I can't retract, update them or reapply with new information. Like I've moved province and my information on their site still says Toronto Ontario. I can't update them on my website or any other details.
I even tried using a different email but it matches my information with a previous application and stops me, so I'd have to literally be a different person to apply again lol.
I wrote to the company recruiters on linkedin and got no response, so for these companies what more can I do expect keep bettering my work and hope that someday they'll look at it. I don't think it would be right to call these companies out publicly I mean I don't have anything personal against them.
There is a job fair here in November and though I haven't had much luck with the ones over the previous years, maybe this time things will be different.
With the Zhou Yu model, I wasn't meaning to be defensive so apologies if that's how it came across.
As for the critique I'm looking at the best way to do cloth with motion, the shading issue was I think my using incorrect parameters for subsurface scattering, I'm also thinking of supplementing additional detailing work with decals so I take advantage of some procedural workflows in unreal 4 directly. Fair bit of learning curve there.
The client was happy with the model for their purposes so it was a successful submission in that right.
One good thing coming out of it, is getting some recognition for my ability to capture faces quickly from a small number of references. And I definitely feel I can push that ability further.
I'm also having to balance this with some freelance work, but its good that there are some companies that are looking at the work and seeing what they need from it.
So its not simply lets ghost him since he isn't the worlds greatest character modeler yet lol in every case (which I'm pretty sure isn't the only reason I'm not hearing back)
The system isn't perfect, and I keep trying to improve my work but I wonder sometimes that given that there are cases of companies accommodating people that aren't sure why they're being accommodated, am I very far from where they stand and what do they have that I don't yet? Honestly sometimes its better not to think about it I feel and just make more art.
So while everything's speculative at this point, there are many different reasons why a company might swing towards hiring a particular candidate.
Like In Montreal being bilingual is a big plus to being hired, and though most jobs mention this as "English required and French would be a plus," majority of the french speakers in company's aren't comfortable speaking English.
Different companies handle this in different ways depending on their requirements.
A company I was working for is more programmer oriented and has french tutors for their english speaking programmers, and would likely extend that to their artist if they were focused on hiring more artists.
Larger companies have more resources for this, then it really depends on the candidate. For my part I'm learning french through free classes and self training, its more a revision of what I learned in high school, so just a matter of time.
Getting freelance where I step in for a short time, do the work and go, hasn't been too much of an issue, especially where my french language skills are concerned. In this case my work is more important.
Who knows maybe I'll have to move again like one of those travelling circuses lol.
https://polycount.com/discussion/210040/character-art-zhou-yu-battle-of-red-cliff-2008