Professionals?

Just wondering how many PROFESSIONALS here? Only those holding an actual certifcates from university or college? in software Delevopment or Engineering.

 

What do you mean by professionals? Just because you hold a degree doesn't make you a professional anything. I consider myself a professional game developer even though I don't hold a degree.

Are you talking about registered PS developers? I am not a PS developer, but I do make games for a living.

Jeff.

 

Well Webjeff,

Sound like I may have offend you? sorry if I did ,or anyone else for that matter.

What I find with hobbist is that there education or knowledge if you will, has alot of holes in it ie fragmented, and these types if you will don't have, or may not have the connection to fine what there looking for technically speaking. Being register is a good point cause it means they been approved to the stardards excepted by corporations .

Many hobbist can say there dev professionals but they would not get too far in an interview with a company or corporation cause the corporation going want to see the paper ie college or university certificate, and thats my point. The certifcate is poof of a starard being met thats is excepted by corporations which I deem important.

 

Wildcat,

No offense is taken. While I understand what you are saying, I would agree partially. In the fact that without anything else to view, yes, a degree satisfies the first questions (is this person competent). They have completed something and they are looking to better themselves.

Accomplished work would be the more sought after materials in my mind. Demo's, published games, other related software development. Real world examples that I wouldn't have to babysit you through each task you are required to do.

Don't get me wrong, I'm not taking anything away from the guy who earns a standard 4 year degree and goes onto a job. I'm just saying I would look at the person's current technical knowledge regardless of his background.

I'm still not too certain what your really trying to ask. If degree's are worth it? or how many registered dev's there are browsing these forums?

Jeff.

 

I've seen the same argument given in the reverse. Is the guy who was spoon fed all the standard solutions a better choice than the guy who had to do the work to seek them all out for himself to achieve his goals on his own? Which is more likely to come up with creative solutions? I've found many of the self-taught to be far better at being able to find and create solutions.

The argument from either side is kind of rediculous IMO. A degree is merely one path it does not mean that it is the only way to learn or the most effective way for everyone. Nor, does having a degree mean the student didn't necessarily seek out knowledge beyond the cirriculum. But, If you want someone who produces great work. Judge them by their work.

If neither party has work to show is a degree better? Sure, why not?. But, if neither has work to show you're really scraping the bottom of the barrel anyway.

I do have a software engineering degree of sorts. Though my education was far from typical and I've worked for several developers some extreamly well-known and successful and they've all tended to maintain a more-or-less neutral stance on this.

Having a degree doesn't hurt (particularly if you ever plan on working outside games), and I'd never discourage someone from it, but it really has nothing at all to do with wether or not you're a professional though.

 

I hold a EECS degree and I can assure you it means nothing. It hasn't found me a decent job regardless of how qualified I am. My peers literally knew nothing, and my professors couldn't hold a candle to the higher tier of hobbyists I know, granted most of them went to school.

People can't be taught aptitude.

 

From Ron Gilberts blogg

 

I will be, in 2 and a bit years time (Electrical and Electronic Engineering). Hobbyists do know absolutely shed loads more than me though!

 

I personally would say 'Professional' implies that you work in the realm of games and games hardware, but not sales.

Otherwise you'll end up with Game employees bombing it around in Capris.

 

to be a professional means to

a) do something as a profession

b) get remuneration for it; and

c) accept liability in case you fuck up


The requirments for being a professional varry from field to field naturally, but you can't be a professional Nuclear Scientist without the proper degree, nor can you be a professional Lawyer without the proper certificates of recognition.

 

Well people,

Some nice input here so far,

I think I made a good point when I said hobbist will have holes in there knowledge, hows anyone goinging to be sure they know what there talking about if they have no poof? meaning there is no guarantee that the worker really knows all they need to know in the field needed. The corporation trains there workers once there in, which give the worker an edge and this edge is specialy imporant when deal with proprietor products. Yes being able to apply ones education is extremely important specialy during the interview process. This is were some students fail miserable and there dream maybe shattered. Once your in, one will have to show some salt and thats were the rubber meets the road if you have no salt you won't get in the door or you won't be there very long at all and won't get the training, that everyone else doesn't have. I guess I'd have to ask how one would get an interview without the certificate cause I know a human resource officer would be looking for it, given the amount money involved ie wages,training and other benfits. A certifcate is suppose to provide a guarantee and of course testing can too which most like a corporation going to give. You can't just put a person on a computer and say lets see what you got. It doesn't work that way. The corporation is trying to make money and they want something for there doller, and there going get it, I guarantee that.

 

Why? You could say the same thing about university grads. I've heard many a story from coworkers that interviewed university grads that had never touched a debugger before, and figured they'd just pick it up on the job because someone would train them. Some were only taught Java and figured they'd just pick up C++. Then they wondered why they didn't get hired. Yikes!

The problem is paper proves nothing. I don't know what they taught you at university X if anything. What the courses covered, how much you had to do yourself. More so, I don't know how much if any of it sank in. Or if any of it was relevant. The reality is that school standards and curriculums aren't well regulated. And even if they were there would still be an enormous range in acquired knowledge from the graduates of the program. Its up to you to figure out how to learn for yourself. These programs are supposed to be tools for you as a student not for the employer.

I don't think I've ever really seen a game company actively train employees. Maybe its true in a lot of other industries but, certainly not ours by in large. You're really expected to be able to teach yourself by that point. If you can't you're not going to last very long. So I'd hope to find someone who can show me that they have that skill before they're thrown into the fire. Having worked elsewhere for a reasonable length of time is looked upon positively merely because it shows that you were able to work within that type of role not because of any sort of special training you potential would have gotten.

Being able to apply your knowledge is very important during an interview but, its far more important that you've been applying it before hand and over a long period. You generate your own proof personally. You should be coming to an interview with material that you can use to prove what you personally are capable of. Those that fail bring little or nothing but a piece of paper.

If you want to go somewhere very large first. HR departments do filter and sometimes filter blindly. And in those cases it may play more of a factor. But, there's so many people in games that don't have degrees or have non-typical backgrounds that I think its pretty unusual to discard someone for that point alone. If you had no other experience at other companies perhaps. But, its by and far about what you can do for them. People typically care a lot more about programmer tests and portfolios. (if you're a programmer expect both) (if they didn't I'd argue their company probably wouldn't be nearly as successful as it could be)

I'm not discouraging degrees by any means to clarify. The point is that they are only tools. And you shouldn't dismiss other ways of learning and backgrounds. They are all perfectly valid.

 

Webjeff,

I'am asking how many members hold a college or university degree in software dev or electrial engineering.

Thanks!

 

Wildcat,

I would guess more so in electrical engineering than in software dev.

Jeff.

 

wildcat: what would you need an electrical engineer for? anything in mind?

 

Well Pit,

Hardware design of course. A person with an engineering degree who actual know how to apply what they learned can do alot ie explain technical interworking or at least have a good ideal whats happening inside propprietor products like the ps2 for example, that hobbists would just fumble with.

Amlicon,

As I said in my post a person with a university or college degree who can apply what they have learned will be able first secure a good paying job, with benfits. Be able to communicate in technical language to there supervsior or co-workers on the job about quite complex matters that relate about there part of the project, to co-workers or supervisors that are involved with the said project. In software & hardward companies or corporation there are many, many, people working on different parts of the project.It isn't just one person working on the project, hence the need to have a clear understanding about the technical subject and the need for a gurantee of that knowledge. You can't say as a member of the project wait I just have to run down to to the library and start reading a book about that. There are dead lines to be met cause of the large investment that has been made and the hope for a return on that investment. Anyone who has a degree and can not apply that knowledge won't last very long or won't even get in the door for that matter.

Calpis,

Thanks for your input. Nice to see you aquired the said certifcate. It helps alot as long as you know how to apply it.

 

With that line of thinking, no one could ever work on a project outside of their knowledge domain. You have to be willing to admit when there is something that you don't know (be it development or subject area), and then go look it up.

In academia, there are plenty of students who will do the minimum to get by. That is, they will memorize only what is required of them and nothing more. On the other hand, there are plenty of students who will explore the subject matter, sometimes becoming more proficient or knowledgeable than the instructor. The exact same thing happens with professionals: some will do just enough to keep their jobs, and others will do whatever they can and then some.

As I have heard others say, it is good to have a degree in order to get the interview, but then it is up to the person to get (and keep) the job.

 

Well Mairsil,

If a student just does the minimum they are taken grave risks cause the HR officer may decide to probe there knowledge during there interview and fined there not quite cutout for the job cause of other canidates who were more movtivated and will be like me and snap out those answers really quick. As for the person who just does the minimum on the job they may only last so long. When it comes to layoff time there'll be thinking of him not anyone else, thats for sure!

 

Sadly, that is not how most work environments function from my experience. HR generally does not have the working knowledge of a particular job and usually is relegated to looking for only certain qualifications on resumes, such as degrees, certifications and X years of experience. Motivation and personal knowledge are great, if you can get to the interview.

 

Indeed. For technical positions, the main interview is typically done by technical staff & the function of the interview is to demonstrate both current technical skill & ability to expand beyond one's current level of experience. It is not uncommon to be asked to resolve some problem that the interviewers either know to be beyond/stretching your experience, or that does not have a text-book solution - they want to see how you handle this. An academic qualification gives you a foundation in knowledge & the hopefully, the training to learn more, but it's the not the only route to possessing such skills & on it's own does not prove your worth on the job. It's still up to the individual to actually go out and make things happen (and show that they can).