PetriP-TNT
Member
Sucks for New Vegas devs
-
Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.
Irrational hiring design manager w/ metacritic req, [Up: Irrational removes req]
- Thread starter Nirolak
- Start date
Wow. Really sad that a person's personal talent is now being judged by the team that they were a part of previously. And here I thought it was bad when bonuses and success were soley based on Metacritic.
Time to burn the majors in this industry to the ground and let the indies take over and we'll see if they can do better.
GOLD5
Neo Member
No one seems to think that metacritic scores can be faked. Not to get a job but in general. They have viral marketing companies that go onto metacritic and pretend to like their bosses games and hate on the competitors. So I personally think that all the scores there are skewed big time.. A totally meaningless requirement. And no, there's no film field related jobs which require a person to have worked on a movie with a certain rotten tomatoes score. Having a portfolio is not the same thing at all.
Skellig Gra
Member
No surprise, Ken Levine always rubbed me the wrong way whenever doing media presentations.
Really? He's always struck me as a brilliant yet very down to Earth "dude."
1. Yes. You gotta experience quality to create quality. (TM)
2. Based on interviews with Mr. Levine over time, I'd be guessing it won't include full campaign co-op.
funkystudent
Member
On the plus side if you worked on Resistance 2 you can get this job.
Man ..... using Metacritic for hiring purposes is just fucked. The system isn't that reliable and is mostly just a judgment on how good your release hype was rather then how good you game was.
I would be ok if it was just on the list of pluses but as a requirement its stupid.
Mr. Poolman
Member
Also, they should add:
Credit on at least one game with 2 million sales on the first month.
Credit on at least one game with 2 sequels and/or franchise options.
Credit on at least one game with visceral action.
Credit on at least one game with 2 million sales on the first month.
Credit on at least one game with 2 sequels and/or franchise options.
Credit on at least one game with visceral action.
j0hnny_385
Member
How sweet, another example of Metacritic's power and influence. I'm really fucking sick of it. This industry allows such bullshit (I don't see Rotten Tomatoes scores impacting the film industry or Allmusic scores the music industry).
But fine, if people want to work this way, I give up.
I personally give a middle finger to point-based reviews, the whole industry that supports it and especially to those douchebag firms that allow that to influence their employee's bonuses and lives (Hi there, Bethesda, EA, ATVI...)
But fine, if people want to work this way, I give up.
I personally give a middle finger to point-based reviews, the whole industry that supports it and especially to those douchebag firms that allow that to influence their employee's bonuses and lives (Hi there, Bethesda, EA, ATVI...)
yea, I *really* hate the review system and especially Metacritic and it's influence
The idea that a bunch of high school grade reviews can have real, long term consequences for people with jobs or looking for ones is really perplexing. I honestly just wish review outlets had the balls to quit the scoring bullshit, it makes this entire industry look so goddamn childish.
Mr. Poolman
Member
What is a low score to you sir?
Yes. It doesn't matter whether it was competence or incompetence that led to the high score. The score doesn't reflect a game's quality, it reflects the amount of free PR the gaming press will muster. It's a matter of staying cost-effective. If this variable can be determined, the in-house ad budget can be extrapolated more easily.
I think it's pretty stupid, since most of my favorite games this gen don't have really high metacritic rankings nor do I follow that as a baseline when I want to purchase a game... I think a lot of metacritic rankings are only that way due to insane levels of marketing budget, PR, and easily-digestable gameplay.
Then again, I don't really care that much, since I doubt I'll pick up anything made by the company anyways. They can do whatever they want.
Then again, I don't really care that much, since I doubt I'll pick up anything made by the company anyways. They can do whatever they want.
ding ding ding ding
Dark Octave
Banned
Reminds me of how jobs are looking at credit scores when hiring. Stuff like this makes being indie so much sweeter. I didn't have any regrets before and if this is the future, I REALLY don't have any regrets now.
MagicWithEarvin
Member
http://www.gamasutra.com/view/news/174829/Ask_Gamasutra_84_Metacritic_need_not_apply.php
Here's what one of the Gamasutra editors had to say about this, which I thought made sense in regards to the requirement from Irrational:
Here's what one of the Gamasutra editors had to say about this, which I thought made sense in regards to the requirement from Irrational:
So here's the question now...did they remove the requirement because they really don't want to have it as a requirement OR because of PR reasons and it's still an unspecified requirement and they'll simply look you up on Metacritic.
Doom 2 is only 83 what the fuck
Doctor Decimate
Member
i think we're making too much of this. it's probably just a way to thin out the possible applicants; i imagine if you worked on Fallout: New Vegas they're not going to say "oh, that didn't break 85 did it? hm, shame. get out." i mean, what else are they going to say to get the same result? "had to have worked on a good game"?
Why would that be a requirement at all? Plenty of talented people get stuck making bad games due to the company they're with. If you can demonstrate telent, it shouldn't matter what you did before and that's what portfolios are for.
If you are the best programmer in the world but you worked on a game that was shitty other than the impeccable programming, Irrational doesn't want you? It doesn't make sense and it's not an appropriate way to weed out applicants in my opinion.
Doctor Decimate
Member
do you have a better idea? because "must demonstrate talent" isn't it
DangerousDave
Member
Not the best example, because the inherent difference between the scoring on movies and videogames.
Also, is very important the kind of job. We're not talking here about animators or programmers (that, of course, is not directly related with the metacritics score), but we're talking about lead game designer. His job has a much direct relationship with the metacritic score.
Probably they want to limit the number of people that go for the place. Usually most works ask with people with X years of experience in current gen consoles. This job ask for someone that worked in a very well reputated game (to get a +85 in metacritics in a non-AAA game the design has to be amazing) or worked in a AAA production that got also the support of the critics.
Doctor Decimate
Member
that does nothing to thin out the number of applicants, which is the goal here
Doctor Decimate
Member
your suggestion is just to get a more qualified person to go over the applicants instead of anything that will actually reduce the number. i imagine that Irrational gets SWAMPED whenever they have a job opening
Well, they already have other requirements to narrow it down. They can drop this one and still have a narrower field. I don't believe this is designed to simply narrow the field down though. I think it's a way for people with no knowledge of the fields to find someone who is qualified for the job which it doesn't do at all. You could be a terrible programmer and still have worked on an 85+ metacritic game.
It's not a good metric in any context for a job application. I understand they want someone with experience so asking you to have worked for a good number of years and shipped a good number of games is reasonable to thin the herd a bit.
If they still want to narrow it down, they should have an experienced programmer go over the application until he has found a comfortable number of applicants to then move into the interview phase. They don't have to review every single application although that's best if possible but they can get a nice pool going either way. They aren't going to have 3,000 people with 6 years of experience and 3 start to shipped titles and 4 years managing direct reports and that worked on FPS titles and that worked 6 years as a Senior/Lead Designer and worked on Unreal games and that worked in level design on FPS games.
Wat?
*looks up on metacritic*
oh no. What a joke. It's like the GTA IV metacritic rating. How did they manage to get 87?
Haunted
Member
That was my immediate reaction. But surely, there must be ways to communicate that without referencing metacritic.
edit: I mean, they almost immediately realised they made a boo-boo and removed it. I just hope they (and other companies working under such assumptions) really removed it and didn't just move the requirement behind closed doors.
pharmboy044
Member
Mostly due to the awesome MP.
Doctor Decimate
Member
do you really think it's more likely that a terrible programmer worked on a "great" game than a great programmer worked on a "great" game? it's an easy way to weed out the bad ones AND reduce the number of applicants, whether you agree with it or not. none of your suggestions do the same. asking for general experience is not the same as asking for experience on a "great" game; you can easily have shipped 5 games over several years for one of those companies that doles out the Wii shovelware
Doctor Decimate
Member
i doubt it's the only way. but i can't come up with a better idea
I don't know if I should applaud him for doing the work and looking up shit Metacritic got wrong, or shame him for implying that anything below 84 "didn't do so well with reviewers". 8-10 scale in full effect.
Also, Sonic & Sega All Star Racing was awesome.
He's being sarcastic.
DangerousDave
Member
For what?
Is their job conditions, they can ask any kind of working experience requisite.
Then they should've kept it and not wuss into the pressure like they did?
Neuromancer
Member
Totally deserved. Doom 1 was the better game by a good country mile. Only good thing about 2 was the double barrelled shotguns, the level design was worse and the whole game was brown.
Open Source
Banned
Patrick Miller said:
With 6 total 85+ Metacritic games spanning 10 years, it turns out that I'm basically a living legend. That's right. Ahead of Peter Molyneux and Will Wright and 2 behind Sid Meier.
Hey, maybe Metacritic isn't as idiotic as I thought!
Exactly and the person who requested this on the requirements is a class A donkey. Yes, if you're reading I said donkey and you know it too.
Don't play with my emotions, man.
Treemonkeys
Member
Not only is it stupid, but they are admitting their own incompetence: they can't spot talent when they see it, they need metacritic to tell them.