"Self taught" Soon to be past tense?
polycounter lvl 18
I dont know if you guys have been watching developments with the industry at large the past few years via IGDA and other organizations (like the local WSA). There is a push to have employees "certified" to work in particular areas by companies and recruiters. The reason behind this is to cut the amount of money wasted shifting and testing potential candidates to have the people that will fit a particular project. It also will then allow them to make better judgements for pay grades based on not only experience, but how someone rates on these.
Realize it's not only with a certification saying "Bubba knows Y", but also how he well he knows it! In other words, it may play out that even before HR looks at your portfolio, they look at your rating. If the rating is too low even if your portfolio is killer, they will go to the next candidate who might not be as "wow", but is rated higher.
So it sounds like how this will play out with certification tests that will then rate you to a degree of competance for each area. Im sure someone self taught could pass these. But it also sounds like its putting more barriers between the future self taught and those that attend programs that address these areas.
So with this major obstacle with the increasing amount of knowledge someone entering the industry must know beyond "they do killer work". Will this make the self taught person at such a disadvantage, that their chances of knowing all the ins and outs of each certification level difficult at best? Somewhat like someone self studying for a BAR exam without first having attended law school?
I guess it depends on how these "tests" work out. It is something though that I haven't heard discussed here (and it should). More, it seems to being formed by people with no direct relationship to the distintion that the art section needs over other areas.
Realize it's not only with a certification saying "Bubba knows Y", but also how he well he knows it! In other words, it may play out that even before HR looks at your portfolio, they look at your rating. If the rating is too low even if your portfolio is killer, they will go to the next candidate who might not be as "wow", but is rated higher.
So it sounds like how this will play out with certification tests that will then rate you to a degree of competance for each area. Im sure someone self taught could pass these. But it also sounds like its putting more barriers between the future self taught and those that attend programs that address these areas.
So with this major obstacle with the increasing amount of knowledge someone entering the industry must know beyond "they do killer work". Will this make the self taught person at such a disadvantage, that their chances of knowing all the ins and outs of each certification level difficult at best? Somewhat like someone self studying for a BAR exam without first having attended law school?
I guess it depends on how these "tests" work out. It is something though that I haven't heard discussed here (and it should). More, it seems to being formed by people with no direct relationship to the distintion that the art section needs over other areas.
Replies
Yea, im being a little assinine, but why do you think not? Have you spoken to these organizations before? I can tell you many of the big companies take this quite seriously (including M$, Nintendo, and EA for a few)..
I also know for a fact that many of the local educational institutions that work with the industry have been revamping and working with these standards put forth to better make the students ability to complete these more a priority.
Job specialization in the games industry, for Next Gen titles now resembles the specialization within the Hollywood Special Effects community. Some of those guys can't draw, but they have great math skills.
Scott
Personally, I've met a lot of certified/highly educated people who still couldn't function effectively on the job.
Body of work and art tests that reflect an employer's needs will give a company a more accurate assesment than some certificate which may or may not indicate knowledge and functional ability.
accredation is the realm of schools, or the realm of previous employers, companies, or "testing" and Certifying being the realm of recruiters?
[/ QUOTE ]
I think none of the above. More non-profits that specialize in the standards. I give Washington Software Alliance and International Game Developers Association as two examples. Or at least special off-shoots from these.
As per each companies need varied. Thats why there is the talk of it being more than just a check list. Its rated into categories of knowledge/specialization.
Even if only 1/4 of the industry implements standards like these. That would limit someone without these credentials to 3/4 of the potential employment. It would also very likely reduce the chances to work with bleeding/current technologies.
Personally, I've met a lot of certified/highly educated people who still couldn't function effectively on the job.
Body of work and art tests that reflect an employer's needs will give a company a more accurate assesment than some certificate which may or may not indicate knowledge and functional ability.
[/ QUOTE ]
Whether this be true or not. The people who are pushing for these seem to be interested in having some sort of standardization. Many other careers who have gone this route could be said to suffer from this oversite, yet again and again certification to a certain level is required for entrance.
Let us not forget, these are in many cases the HR and executives who are working and pushing for this. So again, whether a art director agrees or not, the HR is the first to make claim in this area. In otherwords, they are the ones paying our checks, so the ability to overule them is gagged to an extent.
if you have a killer portfolio and state that it was all done with let's say max and PS then i can't imagine anyone will care about a certification as proof that you can use those tools.
I think it's a good thing for entry level positions, and students out of schools that have a rather small portfolio.
Seeing how everybody and their dogs wants to get into this industry i welcome any filtering.
I think there has been enough discussions about how some people will work for nothing just for the job, lowering what everybody else is worth, ie. if you dont like it, you're easy to replace by someone who will do it for half the price.
If the industry decides to regulate itself a bit, awesome.
It's unlikely it will solve anything now, but step by step it might get somewhere.
If education is expensive and worth it, it will hopefully make entry level positions more valuable, and cheap rednecks won't be a problem.
Of course, if EA has anything to do with all this, it might just aswell all go the wrong way. They're good at finding ways to exploit people.
*edit. Of course those certificates wont tell if someone can work effectively in a team etc, but art test can't do that either. Interviews help, and they will never go away, but at the end of the day, nothing can tell how someone will perform (unless he does horrible at the interview of course).
HR shouldn't have much to say about who gets hired or not, that's up to the art director (or lead programmer etc), HRs might decide on the salary, but they're not gonna be the ones working with the new employee.
I think it's a good thing for entry level positions,
[/ QUOTE ]
Heh, Why do you think Im brought it up?
It'll never catch on.
[/ QUOTE ]
I agree.
And I'll back that up with 6 years experience, industry knowledge, knoweldge of how the world works, AND with working VERY closely with someone who runs a university game art course.
In fact, some schools hurt applicants if their portfolios are so bad because you expect a certain level of performance from someone that has a degree. It's very embarassing to see these portfolios from people with 4 year degrees that look like Dragonball Z fanart. These usually elicit laughter followed by a toss in the trash.
Of course the best combination is schooling + killer portfolio.
There is something to be said for the filtering you might have to go through, via recruiters/HR, but I've never seen good talent turned away for want of a diploma.
I wouldn't worry about it Oxy, worry about portfolio if you worry about anything.
-Gottfried Helnwein
I find that this quote sums up art and schools pretty well.
The games industry right now is pretty much a curiosity for beeing so open to 'self-taughts' (and that is a huge part of it's charm for many people).
Maybe it will stay that way or maybe not, who knows? But usually curiositys due to new technological brake-throughs tent to vanish after some time.
(says a bitter Biology student who has to endure 5 years Master degree + 3-4 years for the pretty much mandatory PhD of mostly senseless and extremely time wasting university curses and mostly utterly stupid other students
Multiple interviews, art tests, and reference checks are still the best way to hire someone. It's not fast or easy, but it works. The current process is the best way to gauge an artist's talent. I don't think too many ADs will make a choice based off of some certification level; you HAVE to look at their work and you HAVE to interview them to see if they're a good fit. And if HR overrides their decision, HR's gonna be looking for a new Art Director as well. It just doesn't work that way, at least at places I've worked at (not big corps like EA, MS, etc.) and it wont be a practice that's adopted anytime soon.
I think in alot of cases a degree will show an employer that you are able to accomplish goals, wipe your own ass, etc. My job title is "Engineer I" and I'm "self-taught" meaning I didn't go to school for it but I know how to learn. I think it boils down to talent, motivation and perseverence - true of anything whether you have a pedigree or not.
[/ QUOTE ]
Where i live you cant be an engineer without a degree, you can be a technician but you cant sign your own work for final approval. And i think its 100% good practice, since it keeps "tank drivers" (i dont know the term in english) away who would sign anything for money.
But in an art field you cant get anyone killed for not knowing what you do so its a completely different ballpark. And if you manage to build a good portfolio it shows that you know how to "whipe your ass" - you dont just wake up and think "hmm im gonna build a portfolio and apply for an artist position just for kicks".
Talent trumps paper any day of the week.
There is something to be said for the filtering you might have to go through, via recruiters/HR, but I've never seen good talent turned away for want of a diploma.
I wouldn't worry about it Oxy, worry about portfolio if you worry about anything.
[/ QUOTE ]
+1
being able to work in an official capacity is not something you learn in university but something that is learnt on the job.
I second mops first post
I saw two candidates today when I was voting for the IGDA Board of Directors who addressed this as an area that needed to be tackled. Needless to say they did not get my vote.
At the same time, we again cannot just ignore it. Luckily though, it seems to be concentrated to a few of the "big ones". However, will some of these as publishers in turn start arm twisting? *starts Twilight Zone music*
HR Filter: Certification > Shipped Titles > Networking and Talent.
As for Microsoft requiring certs before they hire I can say with certainty that its not a hard and fast rule in the games dept. I know 3 people working there (read: blue badges, not temps) that their education stops at High School and self taught begins. Microsoft does put its employees on continued education plans and expects you to stay current as well as assists you in your on going education but talent and networking have won out three times I know of, maybe more.
I would like to say one thing for being certified, it does factor in when they calculate pay. If you can get certified and it won't put you out, do so it might help decided what pay scale you fall into. I doubt it will ever keep a talented person with the right technical knowledge from ever landing the job. It might keep them on the lower end of the pay scale.
Networking can almost replace talent, but certification can almost never replace talent or networking. Have cert but no talent, sorry no call back.
As for publishers strong arming studios into hiring only "certified talent", I honestly don't think they would take the time to start policing it. Lets say they do start enforcing, most studios would laugh it off. For the ones that don't, does that mean all current employees who are not certified are fired? All employees stop working on their current titles and ignore mile stones in lue of taking an "education break"? Or maybe they require such learning take place off the clock, without assistance? That makes for a happy work force dedicated to making that publisher a good game, schedule their work time and their free time and suck away what the free cash they have. Not like they have the time to spend it anyway...
Bah, this "cert or else business" is just campaign pillow talk.
I would be interested in seeing some the number of employees that walked in cold off the street with certification without any prior experience, that are working on the top end games. I would wager a guess to say less than 5%, if that. If your aim is to work on the top end games, best get started working your way up or put together one hell of a portfolio.
Many students don't have the same passion for learning as those who are self-taught. Perhaps many of them believe it's an easy road into the industry as along as they have a piece of paper, and less focus is placed on a portfolio. If publishers begin pushing for certifications only, I see the standards dropping quickly.
If knowledge of a working environment is what matters, there are many small and independent studios around the country that need talent and hard working individuals. Become part of a team that pushes to meet deadalines, and you have an experience most schools can't teach you.
Besides, someone with an "A" rating, let's say, just might not be a full "A" when it comes to the style a given company is looking for in a game. An amazing character artist for high-tech sci-fi games with lots of armor bits might not be as capable when it comes to pure fantasy or accurate historic costumes.
[ QUOTE ]
It'll never catch on.
[/ QUOTE ]
I agree.
.
[/ QUOTE ]
I do too.
Certification would do exactly what it does for other industries...create another 'keyword filter' that the bigger companies, like EA and recuirters can use. Most of the companies in the business are not that big (and personally, I wouldn't want to work for a bigger one). Either way they'll toss away any portfolio they don't like, certified or not.
Smaller companies probably wouldn't use the keyword filter at all. And if any company, big or not, spots someone truely kickass in art, who looks technically competent, they'll pick him/her up, certification or not.
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
It'll never catch on.
[/ QUOTE ]
I agree.
.
[/ QUOTE ]
I do too.
Certification would do exactly what it does for other industries...create another 'keyword filter' that the bigger companies, like EA and recuirters can use. Most of the companies in the business are not that big (and personally, I wouldn't want to work for a bigger one). Either way they'll toss away any portfolio they don't like, certified or not.
[/ QUOTE ]
I agree with the agreeing of the agreement. I haven't met any one that thinks passing up tallent is worth it because of a grade especially if they are 1. badass and 2. work well in the work place with programs and people alike.
I'm not ignoring it, I'm not just hoping it goes away, I just think that when it comes down to it; if a company wants a quality game, they will hire quiality work equal to the desired quality of the game.
Big places like EA can have their system and pump out NBA super madden alstar boxing every year but I just think a company that wants to make a game that stands out and is interesting then they will put the extra effort in to hiring some on that can do the exact art they are looking for. Grade or no grade.
Maybe I'm wrong though... who knows.
Certification would do exactly what it does for other industries...create another 'keyword filter' that the bigger companies, like EA and recuirters can use. Most of the companies in the business are not that big (and personally, I wouldn't want to work for a bigger one). Either way they'll toss away any portfolio they don't like, certified or not.
Smaller companies probably wouldn't use the keyword filter at all. And if any company, big or not, spots someone truely kickass in art, who looks technically competent, they'll pick him/her up, certification or not.
[/ QUOTE ]
This sums up exactly how I feel about it. While granted I'm on the other side of the coin(programming) and don't have a ton of experience, both of the positions I got were due to the fact that I knew someone at the company or could show that I knew what I was doing.
Anyway, wow, this is kind of a silly thing. Creativity and artistic talent don't have an empirical measurement. You can test technical proficiency and the like, but something as subjective as an aesthetic can only be agreed upon in a broad sense. Studios that do good art/design are usually recognized as such, but I couldn't necessarily tell you what makes one design shop's work more appealing than another (and I have spent a hojillion years in academia learning this stuff, but it's just exceptionally subjective).
In all likelihood, I'd guess this is something conceived of to make life less complicated for people in charge of hiring or whatever. Putting an HR drone with no artistic savvy in front of a stack of resumes and letting him weed people out based on some easily recognized test score or similar is a more efficient process than tracking down talented art directors and having them spend hours browsing through portfolios of no-diploma candidates. Not a better process, but certainly more efficient, and I expect that's the impetus for trying to standardize this kind of thing.
yet colleges and various independent programs offer 'degrees' or 'certificates' in game art... as if that were to replace a portfolio.
[/ QUOTE ]
Wait a second, how did you make THAT leap? I have degrees but I've never been hired without showing someone a portfolio, nor has anyone else I know of. No one is ever going to hire creative people of any kind without seeing their work, that just doesn't make sense.
noooooooooope. i'll bet half of the people on this board have a boss that they could own in a certain aspect of their job (although probably everybody on this board at least thinks so anyway)
Exactly. When I was young and dumb (six years ago), I thought that if having a bachelor's degree was good then having a master's degree would be even better. Today, every prospective client or employer I deal with looks at my resume and says "so, you went to grad school?" before chucking it on the desk and spending the next hour dissecting my portfolio work. If traditional education and degrees have helped me get gigs, I haven't noticed, because it invariably comes down to the work I have to show.
This doesn't mean that formal education has no value, as I learned so much more in school than I could have taught myself, but that value is reflected more in the work I create than the piece of paper they gave me at commencement. I believe the same to be true of virtually every form of degree or certification barring those where it's literally required to practice (medical and legal licenses, etc).
Dustin Clingman. He is on the volunteer Employment Contract Certification Taskforce.. Damned if I can find anymore information than this. I did at one point have some information from another party trying to get this started. WSA (Washington Software Alliance) and I also believe Mary Margaret has mentioned it as well.
Let me email someone I know in the local educational game community who is more up on this to hopefully give you some more concrete answers versus just lil ol me.
EDIT: I found this for you in the UK (given its more at this time to make consistency between colleges programs more effective, however it is showing the direction, especially if you read further into the bullet points). http://www.skillset.org/interactive/creatingthefuture_1.asp
And in specific to help show whom is interested (again this is the UK version).
http://www.skillset.org/games/article_3070_1.asp
I've seen plenty of artists get in with little more then networking and personality.
And I've seen plenty of personality disorders get in.....keep in mind everybody has them.
Hey, the thread is under a month old.....still allowed to post.