That's rough for those guys. Would you even put Aliens CM on your resume? It's not the artist fault for how that game came to be, but with such a black cloud over it I'd hate to think it could hurt someone in their job search. Hopefully everything works out for those artists.
That's rough for those guys. Would you even put Aliens CM on your resume? It's not the artist fault for how that game came to be, but with such a black cloud over it I'd hate to think it could hurt someone in their job search. Hopefully everything works out for those artists.
when I am looking at artist portfolios im looking at the art not how shitty the gameplay is, everyone should be proud to put a released title on there resume good or bad.
but its up to the artist to make sure they go above and beyond to make it look good no matter how shitty or awesome the game ends up being thats out of your hands.
when I am looking at artist portfolios im looking at the art not how shitty the gameplay is, everyone should be proud to put a released title on there resume good or bad.
but its up to the artist to make sure they go above and beyond to make it look good no matter how shitty or awesome the game ends up being thats out of your hands.
i hope everyone lands on there feet!
Part of the problem with listing A:CM, from what I heard from another TimeGate artist, is that pretty much all of their stuff was stripped out of the final product.
Most of their work was the stuff we saw in the E3 demo.
Yep, it's bad there right now. A lot of my friends were let go.
And no, I'm not ashamed of what I did on ACM. The art team and Timegate in general, did a good job with the limitations we were under. Our work was what people were interested in. The demos from E3 and Destination Playstation - that's our stuff. What Gearbox did to it after the fact was a shame.
Part of the problem with listing A:CM, from what I heard from another TimeGate artist, is that pretty much all of their stuff was stripped out of the final product.
Most of their work was the stuff we saw in the E3 demo.
Woah, hold the phone! A few GearBox artists said they stripped out the TimeGate assets because TimeGate had ripped out their assets before hand which were the E3 Demo assets in the first place.
So Gear > Time > Gear/Time.
Is this not the case? Holy balls this is getting confusing.
Anybody who's been in the industry for a while can tell you that there's a lot more to games than just the art. I'd say if you've worked on one hit title in your career, you're in the minority and very lucky. I've known some people who've been in the industry for over 10 years and not had a shipped title.
As for the finger pointing, I think it's better to just let it go, what's done is done. If you got some good stuff for your portfolio, all the better.
Anyway, sorry to hear the news, I hope everybody affected lands on their feet.
Part of the problem with listing A:CM, from what I heard from another TimeGate artist, is that pretty much all of their stuff was stripped out of the final product.
Most of their work was the stuff we saw in the E3 demo.
You're getting it backwards, no? I thought the demo was Gearbox's work, then what we ended up with was Timegate; then Gearbox had to salvage what they could when they got it back, sans sexy lighting, particles and atmospherics (and much more). Least that's how I heard it.
EDIT: Yes, just saw Ace's post. This is what I heard too. Think you've been misinformed there Garage.
The demo was Timegate Andreas you are the one mis informed how do I know? Me and Josh worked on the demo. Whats you ended up with was what Gearbox left you with after stripping the game down to make room for their drop in drop out system like Borderlands. Thus causing the graphics to be pulled back. Was Timegate the hero no.. we had some big performance issues on our end too but it still played and looked a shit ton better.
*cough* And Ace Angel, and the rest of the internet, journalists like Jim Sterling, etc. By all means educate people on what actually happened instead of 'going quiet' like Gearbox and Timegate decided to do, or even worse, deleting entire threads, but don't single just one person out. It's not that persons fault if he is misinformed if Gearbox and Timegate won't put their hands up and say 'so this is how we fucked up'.
If this keeps up how long do you think it will be till 3D assets are entirely outsourced? The way I see it is that you're setting yourselves up and all too content with being tools, I don't see any reason why you should be proud of the quality of your art in a bad game, all the more if you're actually in house.
I'm knowingly disregarding the way things work and the studio politics but I consider this something that needs to change, I don't want to see people that are ok to ship bad games because thats doing the industry on the whole a disservice, why can't people step up and make themselves into something that isn't so disposable.
If this keeps up how long do you think it will be till 3D assets are entirely outsourced? The way I see it is that you're setting yourselves up and all too content with being tools, I don't see any reason why you should be proud of the quality of your art in a bad game, all the more if you're actually in house.
Considering how consuming next-gen production is likely to be, I can see art directors training up art managers and then sending them out to work in these outsourcing centres in china or wherever. That way you have someone actually clued up fully on your game in the studio working on the assets. There would be less nasty surprises then, if the art manager was doing regular reviews.
The demo was Timegate Andreas you are the one mis informed how do I know? Me and Josh worked on the demo. Whats you ended up with was what Gearbox left you with after stripping the game down to make room for their drop in drop out system like Borderlands. Thus causing the graphics to be pulled back. Was Timegate the hero no.. we had some big performance issues on our end too but it still played and looked a shit ton better.
I hope that whatever you created you are proud of regardless of the messy politics and weird industry infighting that has managed to overshadow the title. I personally don't care what people work on as long as what they make is good art.
Andreas & others: an employee saying anything could land them in hot water, professionally and possibly legally. The stress of getting laid off is ranked up there with losing a family member (look it up), getting subjected to arm-chair analyst pull totally inaccurate theories out of their asses is just pouring salt on the wound.
I know how it feels guys, stay strong and if you're going to GDC resist the urge to punch out any idiots you meet who claim they "know how things went down". It will pass eventually.
If this keeps up how long do you think it will be till 3D assets are entirely outsourced? The way I see it is that you're setting yourselves up and all too content with being tools, I don't see any reason why you should be proud of the quality of your art in a bad game, all the more if you're actually in house.
I'm knowingly disregarding the way things work and the studio politics but I consider this something that needs to change, I don't want to see people that are ok to ship bad games because thats doing the industry on the whole a disservice, why can't people step up and make themselves into something that isn't so disposable.
Make games, not just art for games.
Wow, what an insensitive dick. Sorry, this just..wow.
Andreas & others: an employee saying anything could land them in hot water, professionally and possibly legally. The stress of getting laid off is ranked up there with losing a family member (look it up), getting subjected to arm-chair analyst pull totally inaccurate theories out of their asses is just pouring salt on the wound.
Couldn't agree more. You diminish what actually happened by creating animosity between people/studios, when it was probably a combination of factors that led to this. Unless you actually worked at that studio, I'd hold off on making accusations, because at the end of the day, a lot of good artist lost their jobs, the last thing they want is someone coming along and saying it was their fault, someone who has no idea what actually happened.
Best of luck to all those that got let go, hopefully they all get picked up quickly.
Jackwhat: you do the best you can as an artists - don't worry about outsourcing, I've seen studios that tried to outsource their entire art staff, it didn't work out that great.
Argh! I wish we all could do more than say paraphrased responses like " good luck and land on your feet to all effected". It seems so insincere even though the person (including me), may have meant well.
Now we have two studios..
I guess what I am saying... does anyone have any positions open they can post? Haven't seen any thus far in this thread? I always find those the most constructive responses for these threads.
man will this ever stop? After these massive corporations took over smaller developers this is all we hear of. If these keep up our industry will be gone
If this keeps up how long do you think it will be till 3D assets are entirely outsourced? The way I see it is that you're setting yourselves up and all too content with being tools, I don't see any reason why you should be proud of the quality of your art in a bad game, all the more if you're actually in house.
I'm knowingly disregarding the way things work and the studio politics but I consider this something that needs to change, I don't want to see people that are ok to ship bad games because thats doing the industry on the whole a disservice, why can't people step up and make themselves into something that isn't so disposable.
Content with being tools? Seriously man?
What would you suggest, refusing to do work because I think the game sucks? Or because I'm nothing more than an "asset" to the studio? You're nothing more than a "tool" to ANY COMPANY you work for, period. Full time or not.
Honestly, I don't see future in gaming with full-time artists. Jon Jones got this right years ago - it's heading towards contract-only. Mostly all of Microsoft is already like that. Hell, even a lot of their leads are "vendors" - contractors with no definitive end date, but can be fired at any time for any reason. It's crazy.
And why should I not be happy with the art I made, just because the game sucked? I'm happy with the work I did, even if it ended up getting chopped up in the end. I did my work and did it well. Shit, look at Crysis 3. It got a 7.5 compared to Crysis 1&2's 8.5 and 9.0 reviews. Should the artists at Crytek be ashamed of their work, too?
It doesn't surprise me that Jon Jones called it and it seems to make sense for the industry to go that way given the soon to be crazy demands when it comes to art assets.
I'm not sure how to best word it, i think it to be stranger that you would have a disconnect between your art and the project it was associated with than to have my stance. If you're not interested in the quality of the end product why pick this industry over any other you can put your 3d skills towards? It feels self centered and almost akin to masterbation if you're only consumed with your small contribution toward a project - i don't mean that to sound quite so derogatory - the way you word it is that you punch your card and you've done your bit, if it flops it doesn't matter because you tried!
Are you honestly not frustrated to work on bad games? If its a paycheck that drives some people then why pick a creative industry at all, it's such a waste to have the talent contributing to projects that don't deserve them.
I feel as though you can draw similarities between this and the crunch issue, whereby artists aren't being respected because they're readily replacable with new blood. As for suggestions, I guess it'll have to go the way of contract only with someone making an abundance of props to fill the densly detailed environments that we are going to end up having. It just seems like a huge fucking shame and i dont think you can even call that working on games anymore, it'd be like saying work submitted to turbosquid is you working in the industry.
Out of curiosity, why should artists be content with making art for bad games? Why do you think thats acceptable use of an artists time? It's not like you're completely detached as you'd obviously prefer to work on good games.
In my dreamworld I feel people like you should be given more freedom, it's not like people want to make shit games, thats a given. But when you seem happy regardless of the end result that change can never come. This complacency seems more stupid than any pipedream I can type up.
- Edit; a thought about suggestions
I seem to remember the story for the original pitch of Dead space to be quite inspiring, a once shovelware company wants to do something and end up getting the go ahead. If people as a unit can come together and do that and break free of their shackles to make the games they want once, why not more often. Granted, its quite amusing that they've now ended up pumping out sequels in such a way but as artists it shows that you can assert dominance and change your fate given the drive. Perhaps I completely get this story wrong, you can tell me.
It doesn't surprise me that Jon Jones called it and it seems to make sense for the industry to go that way given the soon to be crazy demands when it comes to art assets.
I'm not sure how to best word it, i think it to be stranger that you would have a disconnect between your art and the project it was associated with than to have my stance. If you're not interested in the quality of the end product why pick this industry over any other you can put your 3d skills towards? It feels self centered and almost akin to masterbation if you're only consumed with your small contribution toward a project - i don't mean that to sound quite so derogatory - the way you word it is that you punch your card and you've done your bit, if it flops it doesn't matter because you tried!
Are you honestly not frustrated to work on bad games? If its a paycheck that drives some people then why pick a creative industry at all, it's such a waste to have the talent contributing to projects that don't deserve them.
I feel as though you can draw similarities between this and the crunch issue, whereby artists aren't being respected because they're readily replacable with new blood. As for suggestions, I guess it'll have to go the way of contract only with someone making an abundance of props to fill the densly detailed environments that we are going to end up having. It just seems like a huge fucking shame and i dont think you can even call that working on games anymore, it'd be like saying work submitted to turbosquid is you working in the industry.
Out of curiosity, why should artists be content with making art for bad games? Why do you think thats acceptable use of an artists time? It's not like you're completely detached as you'd obviously prefer to work on good games.
In my dreamworld I feel people like you should be given more freedom, it's not like people want to make shit games, thats a given. But when you seem happy regardless of the end result that change can never come. This complacency seems more stupid than any pipedream I can type up.
Artists are not content with making crappy games, but there are limitations to what you can actually do as a single artist. All you can do it take pride in your work and hope that other artists do the same thing.
If you have a team of a few hundred people all trying to change everything in a game it would never get made, which is of course why there are different areas of art production and you have lead artists etc. A few people will always control those aspects so that there can be some cohesion to drive into a unified direction.
But yea, having the Mona Lisa displayed in a shitty gallery doesnt make the piece any less great because the walls need painting.
Are you honestly not frustrated to work on bad games? If its a paycheck that drives some people then why pick a creative industry at all, it's such a waste to have the talent contributing to projects that don't deserve them.
Good art can come from anywhere and doesn't need to be tied to a big title.
Some of my favorite "game art" doesn't exist in any game, it comes from challenges or something someone did in their spare time.
Artists have to start somewhere.
Do your best and build your portfolio, if you can find a place that pays you to do that, take it, if you have to build your portfolio outside of work, do it. Don't turn your nose up at some place willing to hire you because you want to be starving artists who only works for the best of the best. You might be that good and the timing isn't right. If its one thing you can count on its companies bursting like bottle rockets so don't be afraid to take a chance on one that someone just lit the fuse on, trust your instincts and if something smells fishy back out, but don't be a snob, just be a douchey artist.
A title is tied to you, not the art.
Are you your khakis or are you proud of what you do? What do you put first? Your ego or your art? Does your sense of satisfaction come from making good art or just being associated with something that was popular? If you can get your good art in a good game, thats a win, if not, make the best art you can.
If someone shits on good art because of what game it was in, even though the art stands on its own, then they're a prick with a monumental ego and puts value in the wrong things. If what they say actually has merit, take it for what it is and try to do better, but don't let a critique of stuff you didn't work on or a meta-critic score have any control over your art.
I think it says more about an artist if they can get someone to say "this... came from THAT game? nice!"
Good art in good title isn't all that surprising. To me, good art in a bad game, makes an impression that they care about the craft not the glory of having their name tied to a title. Good art stands on its own and anyone who has to splash a title over their art to make it more palatable, could probably do better.
I work at a small studio that rewards its people well, I'm going on my 4th year in my current roll and 6th year with the company. I own my own home, I have 2 new cars in the drive way. My daughter has had the same bedroom and friends since she was born. I have a great life, this stability isn't trivial. I turned down jobs that worked on higher end titles that would have been more grunt work, less creative freedom, less pay and I would have been looking for work 2-3-4 times. I'm not a nameless meat sack that is going to be laid off, my input and output matter and contribute significantly to the overall game. When I improve it gets noticed in ways that just wouldn't happen at another studios. I can pitch ideas to our design team and if they hold up to scrutiny they go in. I can talk frankly with our CEO about our games and things change.
Let me be clear, I don't think I've arrived or that I'm awesome, I have a long way to go before I get where I want. I'm probably one of the oldest noobs around polycount with the farthest to go. I'm not happy with where I am and I keep pushing to do better but getting paid to improve and working for a stable company that appreciates what I have to offer and wants to see me grow, is a fan-fucking-tastic thing to have. Being a snob and turning that down it just makes life harder than it needs to be.
I guess if you're trying to get artists to stop being doormats and stand up for themselves, I can support that but I think your approach is off no one wants to work with conceded assholes with over inflated egos that have trouble taking direction because they are "just that awesome". I admire your tenacity and passion, but I think humility mixed with a titanium spine is probably much more desirable end result for artists.
You pretty much hit my thoughts perfectly Mark, specifically this line:
"Don't turn your nose up at some place willing to hire you because you want to be starving artists who only works for the best of the best."
If you go into art, whether it's VFX, games, simulation, commercial, etc, you can not be so naive to think that you are only going to be able to pick and choose and work on projects that YOU want to work on.
Replies
when I am looking at artist portfolios im looking at the art not how shitty the gameplay is, everyone should be proud to put a released title on there resume good or bad.
but its up to the artist to make sure they go above and beyond to make it look good no matter how shitty or awesome the game ends up being thats out of your hands.
i hope everyone lands on there feet!
Part of the problem with listing A:CM, from what I heard from another TimeGate artist, is that pretty much all of their stuff was stripped out of the final product.
Most of their work was the stuff we saw in the E3 demo.
And no, I'm not ashamed of what I did on ACM. The art team and Timegate in general, did a good job with the limitations we were under. Our work was what people were interested in. The demos from E3 and Destination Playstation - that's our stuff. What Gearbox did to it after the fact was a shame.
So Gear > Time > Gear/Time.
Is this not the case? Holy balls this is getting confusing.
Either way, good luck to those affected.
J
As for the finger pointing, I think it's better to just let it go, what's done is done. If you got some good stuff for your portfolio, all the better.
Anyway, sorry to hear the news, I hope everybody affected lands on their feet.
You're getting it backwards, no? I thought the demo was Gearbox's work, then what we ended up with was Timegate; then Gearbox had to salvage what they could when they got it back, sans sexy lighting, particles and atmospherics (and much more). Least that's how I heard it.
EDIT: Yes, just saw Ace's post. This is what I heard too. Think you've been misinformed there Garage.
*cough* And Ace Angel, and the rest of the internet, journalists like Jim Sterling, etc. By all means educate people on what actually happened instead of 'going quiet' like Gearbox and Timegate decided to do, or even worse, deleting entire threads, but don't single just one person out. It's not that persons fault if he is misinformed if Gearbox and Timegate won't put their hands up and say 'so this is how we fucked up'.
People lost their jobs, and that blows. Good luck to the dudes looking for work.
If this keeps up how long do you think it will be till 3D assets are entirely outsourced? The way I see it is that you're setting yourselves up and all too content with being tools, I don't see any reason why you should be proud of the quality of your art in a bad game, all the more if you're actually in house.
I'm knowingly disregarding the way things work and the studio politics but I consider this something that needs to change, I don't want to see people that are ok to ship bad games because thats doing the industry on the whole a disservice, why can't people step up and make themselves into something that isn't so disposable.
Make games, not just art for games.
Considering how consuming next-gen production is likely to be, I can see art directors training up art managers and then sending them out to work in these outsourcing centres in china or wherever. That way you have someone actually clued up fully on your game in the studio working on the assets. There would be less nasty surprises then, if the art manager was doing regular reviews.
This here.
I hope that whatever you created you are proud of regardless of the messy politics and weird industry infighting that has managed to overshadow the title. I personally don't care what people work on as long as what they make is good art.
I know how it feels guys, stay strong and if you're going to GDC resist the urge to punch out any idiots you meet who claim they "know how things went down". It will pass eventually.
Wow, what an insensitive dick. Sorry, this just..wow.
I disagree. I think it was an honest question, and something we, as a community and an industry, need to think about going forward, as things change.
I don't think it was meant negatively. Not at all.
He's right. With so many jobs being outsourced, we need to find ways to be irreplaceable.
Couldn't agree more. You diminish what actually happened by creating animosity between people/studios, when it was probably a combination of factors that led to this. Unless you actually worked at that studio, I'd hold off on making accusations, because at the end of the day, a lot of good artist lost their jobs, the last thing they want is someone coming along and saying it was their fault, someone who has no idea what actually happened.
Best of luck to all those that got let go, hopefully they all get picked up quickly.
Argh! I wish we all could do more than say paraphrased responses like " good luck and land on your feet to all effected". It seems so insincere even though the person (including me), may have meant well.
Now we have two studios..
I guess what I am saying... does anyone have any positions open they can post? Haven't seen any thus far in this thread? I always find those the most constructive responses for these threads.
So why are we talking about that in a thread about people losing their jobs? I'll bet he's a riot at funerals, too. Manners...
https://careers.microsoft.com/search.aspx#&&p5=all&p4=US&p0=halo&p3=1003&p1=6%2c18%2c17%2c3%2c19&p2=all&page=0
http://www.kingsisle.com/jobs
Good luck to all affected.
Content with being tools? Seriously man?
What would you suggest, refusing to do work because I think the game sucks? Or because I'm nothing more than an "asset" to the studio? You're nothing more than a "tool" to ANY COMPANY you work for, period. Full time or not.
Honestly, I don't see future in gaming with full-time artists. Jon Jones got this right years ago - it's heading towards contract-only. Mostly all of Microsoft is already like that. Hell, even a lot of their leads are "vendors" - contractors with no definitive end date, but can be fired at any time for any reason. It's crazy.
And why should I not be happy with the art I made, just because the game sucked? I'm happy with the work I did, even if it ended up getting chopped up in the end. I did my work and did it well. Shit, look at Crysis 3. It got a 7.5 compared to Crysis 1&2's 8.5 and 9.0 reviews. Should the artists at Crytek be ashamed of their work, too?
I'm not sure how to best word it, i think it to be stranger that you would have a disconnect between your art and the project it was associated with than to have my stance. If you're not interested in the quality of the end product why pick this industry over any other you can put your 3d skills towards? It feels self centered and almost akin to masterbation if you're only consumed with your small contribution toward a project - i don't mean that to sound quite so derogatory - the way you word it is that you punch your card and you've done your bit, if it flops it doesn't matter because you tried!
Are you honestly not frustrated to work on bad games? If its a paycheck that drives some people then why pick a creative industry at all, it's such a waste to have the talent contributing to projects that don't deserve them.
I feel as though you can draw similarities between this and the crunch issue, whereby artists aren't being respected because they're readily replacable with new blood. As for suggestions, I guess it'll have to go the way of contract only with someone making an abundance of props to fill the densly detailed environments that we are going to end up having. It just seems like a huge fucking shame and i dont think you can even call that working on games anymore, it'd be like saying work submitted to turbosquid is you working in the industry.
Out of curiosity, why should artists be content with making art for bad games? Why do you think thats acceptable use of an artists time? It's not like you're completely detached as you'd obviously prefer to work on good games.
In my dreamworld I feel people like you should be given more freedom, it's not like people want to make shit games, thats a given. But when you seem happy regardless of the end result that change can never come. This complacency seems more stupid than any pipedream I can type up.
- Edit; a thought about suggestions
I seem to remember the story for the original pitch of Dead space to be quite inspiring, a once shovelware company wants to do something and end up getting the go ahead. If people as a unit can come together and do that and break free of their shackles to make the games they want once, why not more often. Granted, its quite amusing that they've now ended up pumping out sequels in such a way but as artists it shows that you can assert dominance and change your fate given the drive. Perhaps I completely get this story wrong, you can tell me.
If you have a team of a few hundred people all trying to change everything in a game it would never get made, which is of course why there are different areas of art production and you have lead artists etc. A few people will always control those aspects so that there can be some cohesion to drive into a unified direction.
But yea, having the Mona Lisa displayed in a shitty gallery doesnt make the piece any less great because the walls need painting.
Good art can come from anywhere and doesn't need to be tied to a big title.
Some of my favorite "game art" doesn't exist in any game, it comes from challenges or something someone did in their spare time.
Artists have to start somewhere.
Do your best and build your portfolio, if you can find a place that pays you to do that, take it, if you have to build your portfolio outside of work, do it. Don't turn your nose up at some place willing to hire you because you want to be starving artists who only works for the best of the best. You might be that good and the timing isn't right. If its one thing you can count on its companies bursting like bottle rockets so don't be afraid to take a chance on one that someone just lit the fuse on, trust your instincts and if something smells fishy back out, but don't be a snob, just be a douchey artist.
A title is tied to you, not the art.
Are you your khakis or are you proud of what you do? What do you put first? Your ego or your art? Does your sense of satisfaction come from making good art or just being associated with something that was popular? If you can get your good art in a good game, thats a win, if not, make the best art you can.
If someone shits on good art because of what game it was in, even though the art stands on its own, then they're a prick with a monumental ego and puts value in the wrong things. If what they say actually has merit, take it for what it is and try to do better, but don't let a critique of stuff you didn't work on or a meta-critic score have any control over your art.
I think it says more about an artist if they can get someone to say "this... came from THAT game? nice!"
Good art in good title isn't all that surprising. To me, good art in a bad game, makes an impression that they care about the craft not the glory of having their name tied to a title. Good art stands on its own and anyone who has to splash a title over their art to make it more palatable, could probably do better.
I work at a small studio that rewards its people well, I'm going on my 4th year in my current roll and 6th year with the company. I own my own home, I have 2 new cars in the drive way. My daughter has had the same bedroom and friends since she was born. I have a great life, this stability isn't trivial. I turned down jobs that worked on higher end titles that would have been more grunt work, less creative freedom, less pay and I would have been looking for work 2-3-4 times. I'm not a nameless meat sack that is going to be laid off, my input and output matter and contribute significantly to the overall game. When I improve it gets noticed in ways that just wouldn't happen at another studios. I can pitch ideas to our design team and if they hold up to scrutiny they go in. I can talk frankly with our CEO about our games and things change.
Let me be clear, I don't think I've arrived or that I'm awesome, I have a long way to go before I get where I want. I'm probably one of the oldest noobs around polycount with the farthest to go. I'm not happy with where I am and I keep pushing to do better but getting paid to improve and working for a stable company that appreciates what I have to offer and wants to see me grow, is a fan-fucking-tastic thing to have. Being a snob and turning that down it just makes life harder than it needs to be.
I guess if you're trying to get artists to stop being doormats and stand up for themselves, I can support that but I think your approach is off no one wants to work with conceded assholes with over inflated egos that have trouble taking direction because they are "just that awesome". I admire your tenacity and passion, but I think humility mixed with a titanium spine is probably much more desirable end result for artists.
"Don't turn your nose up at some place willing to hire you because you want to be starving artists who only works for the best of the best."
If you go into art, whether it's VFX, games, simulation, commercial, etc, you can not be so naive to think that you are only going to be able to pick and choose and work on projects that YOU want to work on.
But I digress. This discussion should be another thread.