Vous pouvez ajouter des informations de localisation à vos Tweets, comme votre ville ou votre localisation précise, depuis le Web et via des applications tierces. Vous avez toujours la possibilité de supprimer l'historique de localisation de vos Tweets. En savoir plus
In my recent GDC talk, I mentioned climbing the stairs of game dev career progression and encouraged people to think about what truly makes them happy. Rising to creative director does mean more decision-making... but at the high price of almost never creating things yourself.
That's often overlooked by designers eager for more control, more say in a game's direction, more opportunity to mentor other designers, and of course higher salary. Being creative director means at best 15-20% of your daily work involves YOU creating something. Even ideas.
Become design director for a studio, and that drops to almost zero, especially for the shipping game. Your creative works, if any, will go toward marketing, sales, partner meetings. There are a few small companies who expect CDs and DDs to do daily creative work but that's rare.
There's a good reason for this even beyond the fact CDs and DDs are already overbooked with management and oversight responsibilities: Having a CD or DD who tries to keep an active hand on real tasks for a shipping game is THE WORST.
One good reason it's terrible to have a CD/DD own actual creative tasks to ship a game is that it guts your role entirely. You become immersed in the project day-to-day so it's hard to have true "oversight", and now you're also a contributor so you can no longer be objective.
Even worse, you creating actual shipping items for a game while CD means someone on your team isn't creating those items. They're building less, seeing less, learning less, doing less. And you're doing less of your actual CD work too.
Being a CD means letting go of even your favorite creative tasks and letting someone else do them... even when they don't do it quite as well. It means never, ever snatching control away from someone else but instead letting them make mistakes, learn and grow.
Being a studio design director is the same but with whole teams. You need to give them room to own the game completely. If you're sitting in more than a few creative meetings per week per team as a DD, you're not giving teams enough ownership.
So if you see Future You as a CD or DD, think about what that really means for your day-to-day work. You won't be making things. You'll be talking to other people about the things they make.
The exception is on very small teams and in very small companies. If your path to happiness is being the primary design decision-maker while also helping hands-on to build things for the game, then aim small and perhaps even indie.
Do you think a lack of leadership ambition can make a developer seem uninterested in a company or career? I'm happiest in a much more creative role, and I think about this tradeoff a lot.
It’s a tough line to walk. I think it’s great when companies have independent but equally rewarded paths for individual contributors and managers. After all, they are two valuable skill sets, not on a single path.
Twitter est peut-être en surcapacité ou rencontre momentanément un incident. Réessayez ou rendez-vous sur la page Twitter Status pour plus d'informations.
