My first passion is game design, and my favorite field in game design is game balance, so it a matter I hold dearly at heart. I see it this way: when a development team work on 5 options, if one of those options is much better than the rest, it's like tossing away all the hard work that was put in making the 4 other choices, and that's as disrespectful for my development team as it is for the consumers, who are punished for not making "the right choice". So I think that in an ideal world, the game should be well balanced from the start, it shouldn't be an oversight or something you start tweaking only late in the production. But if we can't make it right at first try, well we'll definitely try to re-tweak the balance to avoid any kind of clear exploit. But what I often see in most RPGs is that while doing some game balance adjustment, they nerf something while boosting something else. This is dangerous. Unless there is a clear exploit, I think that only boosting the weaker one up to par without changing the stronger one will result in no one losing their build and more satisfaction with the game overall.omega 616 said:
Activision was just starting out a QA division in Quebec, in fact when I got in we were only 12 employees there. I got the job two weeks after completing a game design degree. I was hoping to use QA as an entry point in the industry to eventually get a job as Game Designer at Beenox, the local Activision game development studio, but that's not what came up. I regret nothing, as I learned a lot of different things and working there was a blast: I loved the people and I loved the job. The only thing is to make sure not to get stuck there. Eventually you stop learning and it becomes routine. Then is a good time to move out, assess what you gained and start looking for the next step in your career. Of course, it is entirely possible to make a career in QA, if you are fit for the role. I'm pretty sure that Vice President of Quality Assurance in a large publishing company is the kind of job you can hardly be ashamed of!holographicman said:
For the skills, you need to have good critical thinking and a varied experience related to games. If you do nothing but play shooters online, you won't impress us. Also, game skills won't impress anyone: when you work on a game 40 hours a week for months, I swear that you get godly at it. So instead, try to find bugs, and not just the graphical kinds. Also, the job isn't just about looking out for bugs: it's also about communicating them to the team. So take into consideration the communication skills required to write comprehensive reports on said bugs. Develop the vocabulary and learn the basics of how a game is made. Inverted normal maps, skyboxes, Z-fighting, First Party Requirements... these are just a few terms we use commonly when testing games. I suggest that you visit gamasutra's sister site, gamecareerguide, to find a few tips on how to land a job in test.
Game Design does not equal programing. It is true that learning how to program a game is a good additional skill for a game designer, but it is far from the most important skill to have. Very bad schools will often create shallow game programming courses and then call it a game design degree, but that's utter bullshit. A game designer's job isn't to write the code, but to build a clear vision of what the game will be and communicate this vision efficiently to the whole team. The game designer is an architect. He makes the blueprints of the game, and then he makes sure that everyone understand these blueprints.dogstile said:
As for how hard it is: It is the hardest field to get in. By far. And in most case, employers make poor choices for their designers, making it all the more frustrating when trying so hard to get in there.
