Critcal Choice Mk. II

Yet another topic that has to be repeated. I'll be quite honest, there's not much more I can add in terms of opinion as I haven't experienced what it's like to work at a game company. This is probably going to end up being a revised version of the original post.

"Some game companies want highly trained graduate artists and programmers. Some claim they really prefer creative individuals with a good Liberal Arts background." Which is more important? There is no definite answer to this situation as different companies have different design and management philosophies. Of course it's important that the person you are about to employ has the necessary skills in order to an adequate job at what their working on, but in some cases it may be more favourable to get a hold of someone who really shows to have a really creative ability to generate interesting work.

If every game company shared the same mentality and simply hired all the 'creative' individuals then there would be no point in courses like mine. The fact courses and schools, that teaches potential employees the basic skills that is required in order to work effectively in a company, exist means there is a demand for the trained graduate. In an ideal world a game company would like to employ an artist/programmer who is technically skilled and capable of generating and contribute creative ideas. Unfortunately the reality is that not many people are both creative and technically skilled and often employers are forced to make fairly tough decisions when selecting potential employees.

That's not to say the those creative individuals can't have a fair chance at getting employed. I guess it's just a matter of balance, and besides if they end up getting hired despite lacking the know-how in order to produce the work needed the company may be prepared to teach those certain individuals. Whether the company can afford to do that is an entirely different matter, the point is if a individual shows talent and skill there is no real harm in employing them, even if they require a bit of training so the keep up with the rest of the company.

So where does this leave me? As a student who may graduate with three years worth of training will I look favourable as an employee? Somehow I think there's more to done in order to get employed. Sure I may have the skills but the way I present myself and my work is pretty damn important. Not only that I have to prove I'm a hard worker, which is an interesting point to bring up. The 'creative' individuals will have a harder time proving they can produce things in an working environment. That is the advantage that students have since they are trained to get used to the working environment mentality and being to cope in that situation is pretty important.