School Success Rate
polycounter lvl 18
I'm interested in opening a discussion on how successful schools have been (or not) in getting students jobs in the industry. I'd like to hear from all sides so it's not limited to just students or graduates. Also I would like to keep the focus on art specifically and not animation or programming though technical artists would be good.
Note: I realize things are a bit of a wild card lately with the economy, studio closings, etc...
So far what I've read on most forums, including here, is focus on the portfolio. Just having the degree is not enough or sometimes not needed at all. I agree with this. I was self taught and continue to do so. Polycount has been an incredible source. I think sites like Polycount should be included resources in teaching. Where better to draw knowledge then those in the trenches. Teachers should have students involved in the community.
I've done some research on courses offered by schools and for some like Cogswell the focus is too general. I know a couple of students who have come out and done well like Tumerboy (Hi Nick) but I think a student coming out of school at best will have a good understanding of a bunch of things but not a focus in an area that will land them a job working on a particular field. Most student portfolios reflect this.
If a student is not sure of what route they want to take in the industry I can see the benefit of more generalized studies initially but once a path has been chosen specilization needs to happen. Also having basic foundation knowledge (ie. color theory) should be a staple of any education.
I believe things can be greatly improved on. I'd like to see students given the tools to come out to be more successful and not waste time and money. For now I think a lot of these schools are running with blinders on.
Mark
Note: I realize things are a bit of a wild card lately with the economy, studio closings, etc...
So far what I've read on most forums, including here, is focus on the portfolio. Just having the degree is not enough or sometimes not needed at all. I agree with this. I was self taught and continue to do so. Polycount has been an incredible source. I think sites like Polycount should be included resources in teaching. Where better to draw knowledge then those in the trenches. Teachers should have students involved in the community.
I've done some research on courses offered by schools and for some like Cogswell the focus is too general. I know a couple of students who have come out and done well like Tumerboy (Hi Nick) but I think a student coming out of school at best will have a good understanding of a bunch of things but not a focus in an area that will land them a job working on a particular field. Most student portfolios reflect this.
If a student is not sure of what route they want to take in the industry I can see the benefit of more generalized studies initially but once a path has been chosen specilization needs to happen. Also having basic foundation knowledge (ie. color theory) should be a staple of any education.
I believe things can be greatly improved on. I'd like to see students given the tools to come out to be more successful and not waste time and money. For now I think a lot of these schools are running with blinders on.
Mark
Replies
Most schools 'job placement' program would include "Kinko's" because it's in the graphics field. There are a few that excel, but those schools are few and far between.
Graduated last year from a game design course, most current techniques werent really "taught"/recommended by the lecturers. A few lectures were spent on the Zbrush UI and using the projection master, but the use of zbrush wasn't mandatory (and so, most people didn't bother learning it).
I don't recall anyone mentioning anything about normal maps/xnormal/crazybump/ao maps/RTT in the lectures, and 80% of the practical work in the course involved modelling for film/tv instead of games (and it was meant to be a games course).
There was only 1 module in the whole course that involved making something targeted for some game engine specs.
However it was a relatively new course, like all game design courses and I heard 1 guy over at game artist.net saying that game courses have been improving this year (yep, just the 1 guy
After I left there had been some new courses designed to teach people Zbrush/more relevant skills but I haven't seen it myself so can't say how good they are.
Anyway like Dekard said, its not the schools "getting people in the industry", its the individuals...
Game design courses are there just to give you all the time in the world to practice with no pressure of anything else, possibly make a few friends and of course take your money.
Generally, by the time approval is given for new tech to be put into the curriculum, the industry has already shed its skin and started anew. The general consensus is typically "go to a traditional art school, learn the tech on the internets." I think you'd be very hard pressed to find any Game Art program that really allows you to specialize. For most programs, the idea is to introduce you to the basics of a wide variety of paths. It's typically up to you to really go down that path.
On the flip side, I graduated from AiP, and I was able to find work rather quickly. However, that's rare, and I spent most of my time at Polycount and the such. A motivated person will find their way into the industry with or without an overpriced piece of paper.
By the way, Animation = Art.
Best of luck!
edit: I should also mention that I refused any help from the "job placement" department when I graduated. I find that it's always best for you to represent yourself. Additionally, most schools will count a retail position at Gamestop as "placement in industry".
Has anyone approached a teacher or their school and asked them why they weren't being taught recent tech? Things they've seen on boards here for example or portfolios of artists working in the industry. Are the schools being lazy, don't know, don't care, instructors out of the loop,etc...?
I'm going to say a lot of artists here could lay out a good curriculum to at least give students a running start. I do agree it comes down to the individual but it shouldn't be an excuse to not offer better courses.
Because of this there is no time for advanced topics. You learn the basics of everything and the advanced methods of nothing, which probrably teaches you what you like and what you hate, but that's about it. Most kids go into the program not even knowing what they want to focus on, which is part of the problem really. They take all these classes and believe they are figuring out their focus, but I believe by the 3rd quarter or so most people have figured that much out and are looking to find some focus.
We complained about this when we were in school, quite loudly. The industry moves more and more towards specialization, but schools and their class structure do nothing but force students to take classes they don't need for the area they want to focus in, and waste their time.
Towards the end of getting my degree, spending my time rigging and animating characters, writing design docs, compositing video, and putting 2d animation together while trying to put together my environment art portfolio was MADDENING. I put in a tremendous amount of work to be able to do the basics of everything even slightly well, but nothing was good enough for a "real job", because I couldn't focus on any one thing. The same goes for everyone, whether you are trying to become an animator, character artist, designer, or whatever.
So at the end of the day my experience was they don't give you all the education you need to get a job. You have to resolve what your focus is going to be and learn the necessary skills to bring yourself up to par in that field, on your own. As a result, most kids don't take the initiative and don't end up getting job placement, or at least not for a long while.
I currently go to AI SD and have a totally different outlook on this "ridiculous burden" of classes they are forcing you to take.
Now while i agree there are some classes that really have nothing to do with Game Art at all and are only there for accreditation I couldn't disagree with you more on the classes you listed as not focused for your degree.
The biggest problem with schools is they accept anyone and there are only a few people who actually take full advantage of the classes and outside learning environments like PC. These are the people who get jobs. I don't see how Architecture classes wouldn't benefit someone when working on environments and buildings. Although game buildings arnt built like they are in the real world thought and logic goes into the creation of them. 4 walls, a roof and some random support beams here and there don't make for a believable environment, or a good portfolio.
Character design, and other design classes have one commonality in them all, Design. This is what these classes are teaching you. Sure you might not care about designing a character but its the process and the steps you learn from those classes that you can apply to the designs of your own projects. If you can only model and texture off a given piece of concept art or ref image I don't see what use you really are to a company when you cant come up with some of your own designs that would fit in with the style and tone of a game lvl/world. You wont be given a concept art/ref sheet of everything you will have to model.
I think for the average joe student who wont make it into the industry these classes will all seem pretty useless but to those who know how to take advantage of the information and use them in a way to help them are going to have a better shot at getting into the industry.
(please don't take this as a shot at you cman2k, this is just my impression from a good deal of students at my school who don't take classes that arnt modeling only as useless)
As far as school goes it really depends on the school but most of all the teachers. The school I go too has 3 amazing game art teachers. One of them has been around since the beginning and has a wide knowledge of all things texturing painting and the advantages of learning those "old school" skills. We have an amazing concept artist who pushes those of us that want to learn how to create better art, and not just some random assortment of props. And a teacher who pretty much fails you if you cant come close to what industry standards are.
We have classes like Zbrush and other industry standards that are required classes. We have a class where you work in a simulated game pipeline with SOE for 6 months. I guess I just got lucky and happen to go to the best AI at the time when the best teachers were there.
But when it comes down to it, it hinges on 4 things, good school, good teacher and students who put forther effort and know that school is just half of the learning experience to get in the industry.
Now I am not in the industry yet as I graduate in the fall but myself and 3 others took all 4 of SOE's summer internships so I think our school must be doing something right. Due to good teachers, up to date teaching on industry standards, willingness to learn outside of class and a great group of friends who have all helped push each other to be better has help me get my foot in the door with my internship and hopefully all the way in this fall when I graduate.
You sound like you've gotten the chance to do just that. Zbrush classes? a 6 month game pipeline? That's a lot more focus than we ever had the advantage of having. We were jerked between a lot of different disciplines, right up until the very end.
Don't get me wrong. I feel as if I a have been very lucky to take the path I have, because I've been lucky enough to benefit greatly from it. I worked hard in and outside of my classes. I have an extremely broad understanding of disciplines that majority of the people I meet in the industry just don't have. It helps me in my everyday work tremendously, and is probrably pretty key to my personal success thus far.
I've been lucky enough to benefit in the long-run, but I don't believe it's the best course for students. I think there should be a foundation set of courses, and a specialization set of courses.
Everyone talks about how "If you work outside of classes really hard" you will be successful. I know this is true, because I did just that, but I feel like schools should be helping you out a little more than that.
If you want to be a character artist they should at least be helping you develop an accurate idea of the skillset you need to be a character artist and what tools you should be learning. They should give you enough freedom, especially towards the end of your education, to focus on that and bring your skills up to a decent standard. They should not force you to do a million other things that don't relate to that focus at all.
Again, this was my personal experience. It's been a few years, and I didn't go to school in California (Which is really a whole different standard, honestly). My experience was too much broad focus and not enough specialization. I'm certain there is a balance there, and that's what I feel is needed. I'm not saying all one or the other, I'm saying there needs to be a balance.
Overall, I think Ai San Diego is a very promising school for a Game art degree. Its constantly changing and becoming a way better degree. Hell, I wish I could of been in some of the classes they are teaching now.
But I must say, it wasn't the class projects - or the Career Services Department that really helped me become successful. It was the personal projects I did on the side, and all the help and knowledge I absorbed here at Polycount.
cman2k is a good example of schools giving an unfocused education. It forces those who really want to succeed to essentially have a second self-taught education during their time in school, post-graduation or on the job. I have a friend who worked at Sony Bend who had to train artists Photoshop who graduated from Digipen.
On one hand I can understand having a lot of general 3d classes to some degree, since some people head to these schools not knowing about jobs such as riggers, lighting artists, etc. I would imagine our school was like any art school that teaches 3d. You had students that just took the classes and that was it, and you had the students that got online, learned everything they could outside of school as well, helped each other, and had portfolios that consisted mainly of personal projects, not just school assignments.
As far as career placement, AI Houston has a career service rep that REALLY busts her ass to get kids jobs when they get out, tailored to what they want to do. I was surprised at how even kids coming out with mediocre portfolios were able to get jobs doing oil and gas animation, or architechural 3d. Houston doesn't have much of a game development community outside of Pi studios and Timegate, but when those places weren't hiring, she got me in touch with a company that does simulation software and games (so basically I'm doing game stuff, just for the military) and I've been happy here for 2 years.
I know a lot of people disregard school for this type of work, and I would imagine that would've been my stance if I knew anything about this industry prior to going to college. But for someone like me that when he got out of high school didn't know anything about 3d or animation, AI was a great step to get my foot in the door, and learn enough to take it further myself.
I still talk to some instructors and the career service lady at AI Houston, and they've asked me on numerous occasions what they could be teaching that would help the students find jobs. I know some friends of mine that work in game studios in Texas have been asked the same thing. And not just the game field, but they do that with other companies here in town that do everything from industrial and oil and gas animation, courtroom animation, commercial work, etc.
I know that theres a long process to change the curriculum, but 2 of the instructors in particular have made great strides to move away from what AI is known for.
Defiantly agree that schools need more specialization and be constantly updating there knowledge base on all types of topics.
Still there for sure is a lot I think schools don't even try to cover like Hard Surface modeling and edge control. If it wasn't for the videos Sathe posted here on PC a while ago I wouldn't even be able to begin to imagin how the people at like Epic do the work Kevin has shown off.
Don't believe him. He "taught" me for 6 years in his basement. I only managed to escape when I stabbed him in the leg with a wacom pen.
then again, thats like saying my big toe has more hairs than you big toe
One other I thought I have and I think Ubisoft might be doing this already is to have studios like Epic or Crytek offer some formalized education. Obviously it would be bias towards their respective tech but you would be learning the best from the best and what is most relevant in the industry. Probably hella expensive though.
I dont think the game industry has any problems with how things are with schools right now, there is plenty of artistic talent out there that are suitable for their needs, whether the talent graduated from a university or not is irrelevant.
@ danr, Staffordshire.