So I was recently hired by a game company. I'm an intern and am not being paid currently. I've passed the first cut. It's been about a month. I'm concerned about some things which seem like red flags to me. There is no set/decided upon coding style for the project. We've been told we can each use our own coding style. Design documents aren't really a thing with this company. They will make them but so far in working here when things change the design documents are not updated and we're told to just do whatever works and never mind the design docs.

I got thoroughly confused for the first few weeks because I was trying to get my assignment to look like the design docs but the development build looked completely different. All the interns were given design docs and told to read over them. I was told to provide a report on the status of the part of the project I was assigned; where it was left off and the steps needed to finish it. I thought that would be easy enough. Look were the dev build is on the design docs we were given and come up with the steps needed to finish it. I soon felt like I was dropped off in the woods with a map that was useless and I was supposed to go to a unknown destination. I brought my concerns of how the build doesn't match up with the design docs. Someone from the design team and then my team lead told me we were no longer holding to the design docs and to just make it work. I tried asking more questions related to what they wanted the user interface to look like and where they wanted certain buttons. A producer explained one feature they wanted. I asked a follow up question because the button they were referring to was on the wrong screen. I was responded to with silence by the producer. My team lead told me to just do the task. What am I making if we are no longer following the design docs? I wanted the design team to look over the current state of the UI and give a yea or nay and also take down any suggestions they had. The word from those on high was the design team is not allowed to see what we're working on…. OK. This confused me some more because the design team is the one that came up with the design docs for the UI I'm currently working on that we are no longer adhering to.

Later someone from the design team said they thought it would be cool if this new feature no one ever talked about was added. And now all of a sudden it's an official part of the game. And another programmer said they will start working on that right away. How about we get what is already planned to work first? Anybody? No? And later that button I had asked follow up questions to one of the producers was found to be in the wrong screen, just like I pointed out. I hadn't done anything with it because from what I understood previously it was were it was because the producer wanted it there. But after a lengthy discussion if was determined we should move it to where I suggested it go days earlier when I brought it up with the producer, SIGH.

The game we're working on doesn't have a playable demo yet and this company has been working on this one game for over 5 years. In previous projects I've worked on by myself I've always created a draft/design doc on how the UI is going to look and some pseudo code/notes and then created the UI with no code attached to it, and then coded the project and attached code to the UI. I've always stuck to the design docs. I've asked if I could see a rough draft of how the entire UI flows from one screen to another and in general what they want. They respond with silence.

This isn't my project, it's this company's project. I can't read their minds and know what they want THEIR project to look like when it's finished. I would hope they have some finished from in mind. But maybe not. After a lot of questions the team lead got in a personal chat with me but first he had to get permission from the CEO to talk to me about the UI this company already told me they want me to build for them. The reason I was asking questions is they told me to never mind the design docs. I don't understand why this has to be so difficult. It's like I'm pulling their teeth out.

Can anyone who has experience working on a AAA game title or a successful enterprises project, verify or debunk my concerns? At this point I'm thinking I should tell the company, “thanks for the opportunity but I've decided to move in a different direction.”

If this is how all the big entities do AAA games that answers the question why AAA game companies release buggy games.

darth.me said:
Later someone from the design team said they thought it would be cool if this new feature no one ever talked about was added. And now all of a sudden it's an official part of the game. And another programmer said they will start working on that right away. How about we get what is already planned to work first? Anybody? No?

This is not uncommon, unfortunately. You say this is a triple-A company working on a triple-A game? Ask yourself:

1. Are you learning anything? Not to feed you “the” answer, but in my opinion, you are learning a LOT.
2. Are you making good contacts, meaning are you developing any good relationships that might benefit you in the future?
3. Think the internship might turn into a real job?
4. How does this internship look on your resume/CV? (Does this company have a good name, does the game have a recognizable title?)
5. What will you do if you quit? Got a plan?

I worked for a company that had a godawful terrible corporate structure with a bad reputation for not paying its external developers. I learned SO MUCH on that job, and it made me a much better producer for it.

Good luck making your decision!

P.S. Another question to consider: How long is your term of internship? If it is supposed to go for another 5 months, that's one thing, but if it's supposed to go only 2 months, I'd definitely stick it out.

darth.me said:
…verify or debunk my concerns?

Generally speaking, that's how real it gets… the exception is gold;

darth.me said:
I don't understand why this has to be so difficult.

because the Design Doc is like the U.S. Constitution, once you write it, amendments become territorial wars -lol-

But in reality, nothing says Design Docs can never change, if you think about it and skip all the jargons about it, it is just a consensus means to get software done - but changes can occur on the way -

If your Producer was being difficult just for the sake of it, then fair enough, that's not productive; otherwise, in his mind, he/she is probably thinking in terms of “what-ifs”, that means, yes we have a design doc, but what if the button was on a different screen to achieve Feature X, etc…

Some people like to stick with design docs, others don't (and the reason some people don't stick with it is because of iterations: things you didn't foresee that creep up later when you're in full swing Dev or Test mode. Those later changes mean that the Design Doc has to change and be updated then the poor Dev guy has to recheck or rewrite his code against the new Design Doc and the vicious cycle goes on…)

If your team agreed with your Producer that the button was not on the wrong screen, you'd have to rewrite the part of the Doc, rewrite code, etc… that's frustrating too, time consuming, and costly;

Some people see Design Doc as a "guide" prone to changes;

If the button was on the wrong screen (let's say by mistake, it made it through Design), will the end product cope with this or not? Good software can still manage but this is not always true for all wrong designs, right ?

So yes, it's good to have “stickability” in Design doc writing, like you seem to have, and yes when challenged, you confronted them about it, that's also good, you stood your ground; but you must understand that Design doc is actually not U.S. Constitution, if it can be changed, try and reason with the changes until when the person who wants that change realises that this change is not a good amendment. Some changes are good. No more guns would be great for the whole world ?

Don't think of a change as a difficult thing just because your Design “appears” really good. Some changes can be better.

Lastly, about your internship, I would suggest to stay until the end of the entire project and then review your position, feelings, thoughts and do some self-retrospective and see if you feel that you have been part of something that was achieved or not; what was good, bad, longed for, etc… if in general, it is OK then stay if not then you can either decide to leave or see how far you'd go on the next project;

Disagreements will happen, but running off too soon could be the wrong move;

All the best ?

darth.me said:
So I was recently hired by a game company. I'm an intern and am not being paid currently.

This by far is the biggest red flag for me. In many countries this is illegal. In the US the rules about unpaid internships have a long list of requirements in order to be legal. Even companies where they are working with schools and following the checklists often err on the side of caution by paying minimum wage.

darth.me said:
Can anyone who has experience working on a AAA game title or a successful enterprises project, verify or debunk my concerns?

Some of the items look like issues of perspective, and some look like potential issues.

Recognize that you have extremely limited information. First, you're new to the company, and things may have been discussed with the team before your arrival. Next, others there have been together for quite some time. Some of them may have known each other for years, maybe even from previous companies. Finally, know that you're not present in all the meetings, and things that they knew could easily have been discussed in a different setting, in a different meeting, or even outside of work like the people being together over lunch or in a game session.

Design documents are best when they are living documents, constantly maintained and kept consistent with the work, either as a goal for the work or a reflection of a live product's state. However, those intentions don't always meet reality. Usually the better managed the project, the better aligned the documentation remains; the worse the project, the worse the documentation. But also be aware of the nature of the documents, as not all documents are design documents, and many documents are designed for one-time use and are stale immediately.

Designs themselves change constantly based on what people can actually create. Designers have a difficult job of predicting what the code systems can provide, predicting what artists and modelers and animators can create, and then iterating based on feedback from every discipline. Modelers suggest a change for polygon count. Animators talk of changes to simplify their lives or reuse animations. Tech artists impose limits to what their systems can do. Programmers make tweaks (large and small) to better fit the existing engine. This part is normal, and good companies find their own ways embrace the dynamic nature. Every company is different, every team is different, every project works different.

The order that things get worked on can be complex. There are dependency chains where certain things MUST be worked on in certain orders, and there are often team members who work on non-ordered tasks, and there are are also often team members who immediately run with experimental features to get the frameworks in place immediately. Sometimes these are formally described, other times they are informal and based on experience. As an intern it is quite likely you missed some cues there, or missed a meeting, where priority and ordering were discussed.

If the position really is meant as an educational internship (which it better be, as it is unpaid) then you should politely ask your mentor about what you missed. You didn't see it, how did the team decide priority? You didn't catch the difference, what should be written up versus what can be based on description? If you are being asked to “just do a task” your mentor should be able to demonstrate it once or twice to teach you how it is done (record it to make everyone's life easier), and the mentor should be available to ask questions as you go. If you need more information it is your responsibility to ask for it.

darth.me said:
At this point I'm thinking I should tell the company, “thanks for the opportunity but I've decided to move in a different direction.”

Pay attention to your gut. If you aren't happy there, you absolutely should look at moving on, but do it intelligently.

Don't abandon the opportunity you have right now, if you want to look for a job then start sending out resumes but do it on your own time. Your internship won't last forever, and in theory the end date should have been known in advance such as the end of the academic term. If you find yourself with interviews for a professional job earlier, that's wonderful. If you don't, then you've already advanced your job search.

Don't burn bridges with the people who are there. The industry is small and you will almost certainly work with some of them again. If you get a job elsewhere you can diffuse the tension somewhat through tactfulness; reminding them the internship was a stepping stone to a professional job, that it has an end date, and that the opportunity for a paid job should all be more than enough. Absolutely don't make it personal against people at the company, and thank them for what you have learned.

I don't have AAA experience, but Some of these do sound like red flags.

Especially the one where your boss needs Clearance from the CEO to talk to you about the feature.

What do your fellow interns say?

Are they experiencing the same issues?

These issues sound like an opportunity for you to potentially display some leadership?

Anyone can jump ship when things aren't going well But it takes a principled individual to turn things around.

5-6 years ago I decided to move to Texas for a nonprofit job. It was a disaster. I constantly hat the thought that I was being underutilized, They didn't feel the need to give me a job description before I got there. And when they did give it to me, it looked like a laundry list of responsibilities that anyone could have done. I was given few tasks, and my days began to drag on. The Grant that I was told that would cover me for 4 years, didn't even have my position on it. So I felt I had ben lied to. 6 months in we established a relationship with a minor league baseball team, and we coordinated a fundraiser. This was the turning point, and I was able to pad my resume with this event. I was also Interviewed on ESPN as a result of this.

Things sometimes turn around, but you have to be the change.

GeneralJist said:
I don't have AAA experience, but Some of these do sound like red flags. Especially the one where your boss needs Clearance from the CEO to talk to you about the feature.

That's not a “red flag.” Interns can leak sensitive marketing information. Experienced pros understand that the publisher of a game is the only party permitted to release information about a game before the game is released. In that kind of environment, it's not surprising that newbies at a development studio have to be shielded from information about features that haven't been announced yet to the public.

Going even further, unpaid interns done legally are just students who are being shown the ropes but they are not employees. They are guests who are students being granted an insider's view.

Paid interns are employees and face all the regular employment rules.

The distinction for unpaid internships is huge. They are not employees, they cannot do substantial work that benefits the company (see the link I posted earlier in the thread), they don't get any benefits other then educational experience, usually in conjunction with their college or university.

If the company's contract limits what can be said to non-employees, that applies to unpaid interns who legally are not employees.

Tom Sloper said:

GeneralJist said:
I don't have AAA experience, but Some of these do sound like red flags. Especially the one where your boss needs Clearance from the CEO to talk to you about the feature.

That's not a “red flag.” Interns can leak sensitive marketing information. Experienced pros understand that the publisher of a game is the only party permitted to release information about a game before the game is released. In that kind of environment, it's not surprising that newbies at a development studio have to be shielded from information about features that haven't been announced yet to the public.

Getting authorization isn't the issue, I just thought it was weird that it had to come from the cEO, there are typically lower level people for that. Unless the OP is working for a start up, which it doesn't sound like he is.

GeneralJist said:
I just thought it was weird that it had to come from the cEO

Development companies have fairly flat org charts. Not that much distance between the company head and those individuals who oversee interns.