4 ms·

Two weeks ago, the BBC had an article about the shortage of mathematicians and physicists who persue teaching ( http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/education/7433339.stm

by xirium 18y ago

Two weeks ago, the BBC had an article about the shortage of mathematicians and physicists who persue teaching ( http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/education/7433339.stm http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/education/7433339.stm ). Would you want the best mathematicians and physicists writing games or teaching the next generation of students? Currently, there's a shortfall in both cases and the reason is quite simple: the pay and conditions are atrocious.

oqtol 18y ago
Had to up xirium, he’s dead on. In this day those skill sets lend themselves too many opportunities, particularly those that offer great (current/future) payouts + benefits. The sheer cost of game development now lends to larger teams, less individualism... (note: I’m not a game developer, if I’m dead wrong on this matter please call me out)
- xirium 18y ago
  > those skill sets lend themselves too many opportunities If you're in the UK and you've got fair qualifications in maths, computing and physics then your choices are as follows: - Finance - 60,000 pounds per year. Insane hours. Very little job satisfaction. - Consulting - 50,000 pounds per year. Long hours. Moderate job satisfication. - Film post processing - 40,000 pounds per year. Long hours. See your own work at the cinema. - Application programmer - 30,000 pounds per year. - Teacher - One year training course, possibility of 40,000 pounds in five years if you can handle unruly kids. (Many don't make it.) - Games programmer - Insane hours. Project may require porting code or using a legacy engine. Awful third party libraries licensed to shorten development cycle. Pay depends on previous success. May require beginning as a game tester at minimum wage. - Startup Programmer - Theorectical average salary of 100,000 pounds per year. Large control of project specification. Good chance of recognition and job satisfaction. > game development now lends to larger teams, less individualism... In the summer of 1996, I got some work experience testing a game at Bullfrog. In 1996, Bullfrog games were taking between 20-22 man years to develop. As a lead programmer, the latter phase of the project would consist of 12-15 hour days of bug fixes and build failures. In the subsequent 12 years, I haven't had the inclination to apply for a job in the games industry.
  - Tichy 18y ago
    Startup programmers really make that much? I thought only the established "big" industries can afford the really high wages (like banks, telco, insurance...).
    - ovi256 18y ago
      Yeah, that seems fishy to me too. Altough i can see an argument about how the high salary is needed to compensate for the lack of job stability.
    - xirium 18y ago
      Its a theorectical average salary. You've got a very large chance of earning nothing or almost nothing and a very small change of being a zillionaire. You get one or more attempts at getting a good outcome. The average outcome would be approximately 100,000 pounds.
      - Tichy 18y ago
        Any foundation for that statistic, or is it a wild guess?
  - gaius 18y ago
    Your numbers for finance, consulting and application programming are far too low (in London at least). With C++ and experience of derivatives you could clear 6 figures + bonus on top of that. As a consultant/contractor, you could certainly get close to 6 figures (tho' with no benefits/bonus).
gaius 18y ago
If there is a genuine shortage in any industry it's easy to tell: it's reflected in salary, signing/retention bonuses, people getting away with acting like rockstars, etc. If there is a lot of whining about a shortage but that isn't showing up in cold hard cash then all we have is a management class trying to drive down the wages of the workers.
- narag 18y ago
  One of the ways to do that is asking the government to ease the inmigration policies for programmers.
  - gaius 18y ago
    I'm not sure that will help at all, since the only mechanism the government has to evaluate a programmer is whether or not they already have a job with a local company, and if they do then the company will sort their visa anyway. To be truly meritocratic, we'd need a means to not only allow but attract engineers (of all sorts) based on talent. At the moment a mediocre engineer from a country that has historical ties with us will find it easier to immigrate than an excellent engineer from a country that doesn't. Which seems a bit counterproductive to me.

by xirium 18y ago

oqtol 18y ago

Had to up xirium, he’s dead on. In this day those skill sets lend themselves too many opportunities, particularly those that offer great (current/future) payouts + benefits. The sheer cost of game development now lends to larger teams, less individualism... (note: I’m not a game developer, if I’m dead wrong on this matter please call me out)

xirium 18y ago
> those skill sets lend themselves too many opportunities If you're in the UK and you've got fair qualifications in maths, computing and physics then your choices are as follows: - Finance - 60,000 pounds per year. Insane hours. Very little job satisfaction. - Consulting - 50,000 pounds per year. Long hours. Moderate job satisfication. - Film post processing - 40,000 pounds per year. Long hours. See your own work at the cinema. - Application programmer - 30,000 pounds per year. - Teacher - One year training course, possibility of 40,000 pounds in five years if you can handle unruly kids. (Many don't make it.) - Games programmer - Insane hours. Project may require porting code or using a legacy engine. Awful third party libraries licensed to shorten development cycle. Pay depends on previous success. May require beginning as a game tester at minimum wage. - Startup Programmer - Theorectical average salary of 100,000 pounds per year. Large control of project specification. Good chance of recognition and job satisfaction. > game development now lends to larger teams, less individualism... In the summer of 1996, I got some work experience testing a game at Bullfrog. In 1996, Bullfrog games were taking between 20-22 man years to develop. As a lead programmer, the latter phase of the project would consist of 12-15 hour days of bug fixes and build failures. In the subsequent 12 years, I haven't had the inclination to apply for a job in the games industry.
- Tichy 18y ago
  Startup programmers really make that much? I thought only the established "big" industries can afford the really high wages (like banks, telco, insurance...).
  - ovi256 18y ago
    Yeah, that seems fishy to me too. Altough i can see an argument about how the high salary is needed to compensate for the lack of job stability.
  - xirium 18y ago
    Its a theorectical average salary. You've got a very large chance of earning nothing or almost nothing and a very small change of being a zillionaire. You get one or more attempts at getting a good outcome. The average outcome would be approximately 100,000 pounds.
    - Tichy 18y ago
      Any foundation for that statistic, or is it a wild guess?
- gaius 18y ago
  Your numbers for finance, consulting and application programming are far too low (in London at least). With C++ and experience of derivatives you could clear 6 figures + bonus on top of that. As a consultant/contractor, you could certainly get close to 6 figures (tho' with no benefits/bonus).

gaius 18y ago

If there is a genuine shortage in any industry it's easy to tell: it's reflected in salary, signing/retention bonuses, people getting away with acting like rockstars, etc. If there is a lot of whining about a shortage but that isn't showing up in cold hard cash then all we have is a management class trying to drive down the wages of the workers.

narag 18y ago
One of the ways to do that is asking the government to ease the inmigration policies for programmers.
- gaius 18y ago
  I'm not sure that will help at all, since the only mechanism the government has to evaluate a programmer is whether or not they already have a job with a local company, and if they do then the company will sort their visa anyway. To be truly meritocratic, we'd need a means to not only allow but attract engineers (of all sorts) based on talent. At the moment a mediocre engineer from a country that has historical ties with us will find it easier to immigrate than an excellent engineer from a country that doesn't. Which seems a bit counterproductive to me.