On 4/6/2019 at 5:33 AM, Johnlarry said:
Since the start, everyone said it's the worst career in CS I could choose, because the pay is the lowest and the the work-life balance is horrible too.
There are some true horror stories.
First, the supply side.
At the junior level there are TONS of people who play games and think they want to make games. Some go to overpriced private schools to get a trade degree that focuses specifically on games, rather than a broad education and a traditional degree. There are typically a flood of applications when junior positions are available, and many of them could not do the job.
Many others can do the job, but are so enamored with the thought of working on games that they'll take any job and any wage just so they can be in the field. Rather than knowing the appropriate wage for the field and negotiating wages, they'll accept the first lowball offer from any company that makes a job offer.
Then the demand side.
There are studios out there who prey on people who are desperate to work on games. They love both of those groups because they can abuse them easily. They higher large numbers of eager developers, many with insufficient skill, and pay them low rates. They'll work those individuals with absurd (and sometimes illegal) work schedules and extensive hours.
There are also studios who have a more balanced approach to hiring workers. These tend to have slow growth, careful hiring practices to ensure only highly skilled workers are hired. They also have good pay and benefits, far above national averages and also above game industry averages.
Because so many people get scooped up in the first group, and then get churned and burned, they rightly develop a reputation for terrible work life balance and low pay as you describe.
As Hodgman wrote, crunch time is typically a management failure. Normally you can screen for that at interviews, ask about how their management deals with feature creep, how they deal with deadlines, and understand their financial situation. Sometimes it is a management failure by not firing people who are slowing the team down. Sometimes it is a management failure by picking up a project larger than they would be able to create, or not matching the scope of the project with the calendar and budget. Usually it is something you can see approaching from a distance, and it's a good reason to update your resume if you find a project heading that route. Bad management rarely improves, companies that crunch will continue to do it as long as people are willing to tolerate it, so don't tolerate it.
Usually as you gain experience you can be more picky about where you work, and you'll be less willing to put up with all the garbage in the workforce. You've also got to do your part. Bosses know when someone is actually working all the time when they walk through the office and see people actually working, and people streaming videos or looking at web sites. When someone is in the office every morning, they're working all day, and they leave the office promptly at the end of the work day, it is difficult for bosses to object when the worker refuses to work extra hours during an end-of-project crunch. That person has clearly shown they are doing the job reliably. However, a worker who is surfing the net all day easily convinced to work 10 or 12 hour work days at the end of the project with the simple prompt, "All those hours you spent watching videos have caught up to you, you still haven't done your assigned work."
For wages and individual roles, programmers make far more money than average workers, but less money than industries like investment banking. Artists make fair wages and also above national average wages, they could be earning more in some industrial graphic designs and high-power marketing firms, less money working in marketing and advertising at smaller companies, but about what is common in most media companies. Animators tend to have fewer industries demanding their services, mostly marketing companies, the pay is also relatively good.
So yes, there are situations that are bad. Most of them can be avoided assuming you're willing to do your part during interviews, and are willing to be a little picky about where you work.
There are also many employers that are great. They have low turnover and slow growth meaning the job openings are less common, but they exist and are wonderful, well paying jobs. Not "investment banking" or "Internet Startup" paying, but still well paying.