Transforming the Games Industry into a Well-Oiled Machine:

Smarts, More Questions than Answers, and Change through Choices - Part 6

Go To Part 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5 - 6

This is part 6 of 6 in my response to the Gamasutra.com opinion piece entitled “Making the Game Industry an Attractive Place to Work,” and written by Electronic Arts' current head of European talent acquisition, Matthew Jeffery.  Click HERE to read the original article.

December 10, 2008

By Eric M. Scharf

Smarts

It is easy to become fascinated with candidates of higher learning who represent enormous potential, and whom Matthew and others are keen to collect from major, internationally-known universities, through which the games industry can become more “accredited.”

It is also easy to become discouraged that these book smart people, otherwise known as academics, will continue to largely bypass the games industry in favor of far more established-mature-and-stable businesses (e.g. aerospace, engineering, law, healthcare, medicine, science, etc.).  Academics are as interested in great-and-fun jobs as much as anyone else; they simply have a more rigid, functional standard of great-and-fun.

Academics, however, have not always had the greatest of success translating their formal education and formatted communication into the informal world of game development, specifically and most often with programming.  Academics, generally, expect to go from a fixed school experience into an equally safe-and-laser-focused profession, just as an aerospace engineering major would go to Rockwell.

Two of my long-time colleagues, in fact, did just that, on separate occasions, only to discover that freedom awaited them in the form of higher-paying positions within the games industry.  Said positions did not require them to deliver air-tight, incredibly-focused, microcode on a daily basis, and they made the tantalizing choice to become game developers, which seemed fantastic, at first glance.  Soon after, however, they both began to struggle mightily with policing themselves and delivering on their responsibilities.

Ultimately, neither of them succeeded in breaking from their learned routine of intensely-focused code wrapped in almost suffocating supervision, back at Rockwell.  And where did they end up?  Both colleagues were initially rejected as “tainted and unworthy” by Rockwell in their bids to return to familiar, comfortable territory.  One eventually was forgiven for “dumbing down his work product for money and fame,” while the other made it into a similar company that was actually thrilled to have a newly-formed hybrid in its midst.

My colleagues are but two people out of hundreds, maybe even thousands of academics who may, indeed, be capable of making a smooth transition into game development:  from book smart to street smart.  Additionally, people who embody the ultimate combination of brilliant thought and social savvy are oh-so-rare and, naturally, in extremely high-and-costly demand.

The fixation with graduates of higher education as enhancements to the current games industry talent pool is understandable.  The moral of the recruitment story, however, remains the same for any responsible recruitment manager:  you owe it to your company and your development team(s) to choose wisely the next “shiny thing” or valuable team member and perform reasonably-meticulous due diligence on both the candidate and your own operation for a mutually-beneficial match.

“Gimme the sparkly! I gotta’ have the sparkly!” – Dom DeLuise as Jeremy in the “Secret of NIMH.”

More Questions than Answers

While Matthew makes a genuine plea for everyone to rise up and make corrective efforts towards games industry infrastructure (for studio operations and product development), so that the games industry is, indeed, a more attractive place to work, at the very best, his message only encourages more questions.  Matthew, from his perch as EA's head of European talent acquisition, is empowered to recommend and even install solutions to the problems he has detailed.

A former Chicago-based Creative Director of mine has been known to say to his teams, “I have a lot of problem finders, but I do not have any problem solvers.”

I have been known to say and will continue to tell my product development teammates, “You will receive encouragement from me to find development and production problems, wherever they appear, and you will receive gratitude from me and your teammates for offering up possible enhancements and solutions to those problems, but to mention one without the other is simply a non-starter, unless the problem is something no one has ever seen in the history of product development.”

There are millions of people (from misunderstood high school dropouts to pre-packaged-and-focused college graduates) who all have a voracious appetite for video games, and many of whom would donate an important internal organ for the chance to work in the games industry, even with all of its procedural warts.  An eager-and-willing work force, however untrained, has never been an issue.  The issue, specifically, involves how the games industry advertises its opportunities to this work force.

It is false and irresponsible to advertise how “great and fun” games industry employment can be without also explaining how much regular, team-oriented, multi-disciplined hard work is included.  Real, capable candidates will step forward upon learning that not even game testers spend their days sitting in the middle of a large shag carpet, surrounded by their favorite beverages and snacks, in front of a 50-inch flat screen with surround sound speakers, disco lights flashing above, and playing the latest-and-greatest video games of all time.

If you want real candidates, you need to provide real-and-up-front facts about what is involved in real game development, which, refreshingly, some companies have begun to do with detailed-and-exacting job descriptions (e.g. “If your background does not meet these specific requirements, we will be unable to consider you for this position”).  Do not wave the latest eye-popping games industry sales figures at them with one hand and tell them not to look behind the red development curtain (that supports those figures) with the other hand.

In the vein of “I am so passionate about game development,” if you really want the best resources and you really want to keep them for a long period of time, you will, at minimum, provide reasonable transparency and substance, making clear their passion will be put to the test on a regular basis.  The well-suited will respond to such a well-defined mission statement with the same amount of passion the games industry seeks in its employees.  The ill-equipped will fade away from a shockingly unexpected reality . . . or be allowed to latch on in a way that does not directly, immediately, or negatively impact your company.  They can be encouraged to start small and put their passion to the test - very much like so many game designers and producers who began their careers in QA.

Change through Choices

The topsoil workforce issues brought up by Matthew and further analyzed by me should not come as a complete surprise for those familiar with the humble beginnings of the games industry.  When you choose to create a business model with a meager scope, from a hobby that was never meant to become the worldwide industry it is today, and that business model has been knowingly held together with decades of band-aids, the problems detailed in Matthew’s article and my response are to be expected.

I am certain it is not lost on anyone that most businesses have historically attempted to break the tiniest eggs in order to make the most gigantic omelets.  It is a company's right to install and utilize whichever legal, operational business practices and standards they want, to hire any manager they want, to sign any project deals they want, and on and on, even if it may be a company's moral obligation to not extinguish the potential of their long-term planning, workforce capability, and product line quality for short-term gains.

While it is, indeed, the right of a business to fail, through the worst, most uninformed choices and the most uninspired development of its products, it is also the right of a business to succeed, through the most timely, well-conceived choices, from the most supportive managers, that inspire the most devoted and talented employees towards developing some of the best products on the market.

It must be stated, understood, and remembered that, with the choices you do make, regardless of your rung on the business ladder, you, on some level, have a professional and personal obligation to yourself, your teammates, your employees-and-their-dependents, your products, your company, your shareholders, and your future, because there is an incredible domino effect always waiting to happen, whether in game development or any other industry.

If you are an employer aiming to make the best products with the best employees, you need to be prepared with a legitimate business plan, and you need to be realistic about the personal sacrifice and financial investment you will have to regularly make to attract-and-keep the best resources for your company.  If you are an employee, pumped up on adrenalin, who thinks “I can do it better,” setting off with a handful of talented-and-trusted colleagues to form an exciting new start-up, you have the very same challenges and responsibilities as your former employer.

Your collective future, suddenly unburdened by a manager’s choices, is now completely in your hands.  Your results will leave you looking like, or no better than, an astute business person, your former boss, or someone who should never be allowed to run any business.  With no entitlements and no guarantees, the business of making games is still a business-hatched-from-a-plan, first, and what you make of it, second.

I remain a participant in game development, after nearly 18 years in the industry, choosing to think outside the box from within the current business model (which is the only thing you can do until you have been empowered, or have empowered yourself, to invoke bigger solutions) in order to enhance studio operations and product development experiences for me and my teammates, wherever I have been, wherever I am, and wherever I may go in the future.

My motto is “respect the project by respecting your teammates,” as the project only exists on paper without a team, and your teammates cannot accomplish their goals without careful-and-willing collaboration with management and each other.

Our past choices, by employer and employee alike, have all contributed to the current state of the games industry.  We still have the opportunity to make good on our lip service through better choices that transform the industry into a much more stable place in which to do successful business, and a more attractive, long-term place in which to work, for not only the best-and-brightest future candidates, but the existing workforce as well.

The choice is yours to make.