I'm a software developer and can do pretty much nothing without an artist
Give https://opengameart.org a quick browse if you need some quick art.
I say "developer" is only for code, "designer" can be any system, level, or character designer (ooh they use spreadsheets!), "artist" is only for drawing things. Marketing douchebags are "marketing douchebags". And since I'm indie, I'm all of those.
But some studios just don't care and have stupid titles; as long as thy get paid it doesn't matter to them. WTF cares what some idiot screaming in a forum says?
Sorry, but you are wrong. Everyone on the team is a game developer. Game developer is a term for those who make games. They develop the game. You can't restrict the term "developer" to those who just write code. A developer in the classic term just someone who develops. Develops is a term to create or construct. Thus a game developer is anyone who creates or constructs a game. This can be an engineer, designer, artist, etc.
I've been in the games industry for a decade and can tell you that this isn't a debate or even up for question for those experienced in the field. It's simply how we give credit to the whole team. A game engineer is one who writes code for the game, a developer is anyone on the team who works toward creating the game. Also, you should learn to respect marketing. Done right and respectfully, it's a powerful way to connect to your audience. Just like a community manager.
Overall don't gatekeep titles. It's not great and would be like if someone came along and challenged you on calling yourself "indie". Overall it's not a good feel or look.
Idk man.. seems like that would make GameDev mean anything and nothing. Just for the record, I have no stakes in this discussion, I really don't care. I just find it weird to blur a word like that. Is the game company's canteen cook also a game dev? The person who plugged in the monitors? The CEO? The HR person? And so on..
I agree tho that this entire discussion feels a little like gatekeeping and would prefer everyone getting some credit for the game development over pedantic hairsplitting.
Ooh, a whole decade! I've been developing games ("developing") since the '80s. You are literally the guy I referred to, in a studio, with a stupid title. If you'd called yourself a developer without being able to write code at some companies I've worked at, you'd have a conversation with HR. As it is, people can get away with it but it's not true. Words have meanings, even when savages from a fallen age misuse them.
Actual customer service/community managers are fine, we need those; working indie that's the worst part, not having them. But I'm with Bill Hicks on marketing douchebags.
I get it! Me, developing a game, but it's just not interactive in any way
I mean sure anybody in a team can have input in what makes a 'game' in a basic sense. But I think there's a difference between I contribute to this process and I do the thing. If programming is muscle/nerves, level design is bones (especially with puzzles) and concept art is skin (or spine when it pertains to the story).
Also IMO solo-game-dev stuff should be elevated even for the simple stuff. It means you got all the keys, even if it takes you a while to find the right ones. (note I'm not even really comfortable with programming so I wouldn't call it a bias, though if I could I most likely would stay solo so maybe it is)
At some point, it become fashionable for programmers to be called "developers" and then everyone wanted the cool title, so it applies to anyone even remotely involved now. There's never a way to turn back the clock and make words more precise again after people have blown them up, so there's not a lot of point in trying to change public sentiment. I've seen this happen to a lot of technical words over the last 30+ years, and I've basically decided that there's no point in trying to fight it. It's not worth the cost, especially since I'm unlikely to win.
I should say that I could see someone who does a decent amount of in-engine work (nodes and their attributes, scenes, importing, handling some technical setup, basic layout/UI stuff, testing, particles/shaders etc) being called a developer/designer even if they aren't a programmer. Though I also think someone like that probably can at least do some very simple code, at least pasting enough together to get something like movement/projectiles/signals etc.
Again, said as someone who is closer to an artist (and hasn't made a game) who has tinkered with some stuff like that.
Yeah but “words evolve” and “language changes!” You can’t just go around asking whether they’re good changes!
Your analogy is a little weird.
I'd say that game dev is the organism and the rest is the clothing, or the shelter, or the food...
What a bunch of elitist horseshit.
As a senior engine developer at a games company, this is how I see it:
- Your shitty flappy bird clone is worth less than the cheeto stain on your t-shirt as a cultural artifact
- I have met countless programmers who have never finished a single game, because they can't design for shit
- I have met countless artists and level designers who have made commercially successful games after learning how to use 10% of a single scripting language
- The word "developer" predates software engineering and has nothing to with tech. We changed the meaning and now 14 year olds on reddit have changed it back. It doesn't matter.
- If you were really some hot shit solo developer you would not need to look for validation in your job title. Seeing thousands of people enjoy something you designed every day would be enough.
I learned this lesson 10 years ago at my first game dev job. The lead artist called himself a game developer and I said "Well I thought developer was a term reserved for engineering." They gave a long passionate explanation about how it devalues the rest of the industry and that game developer is "one who makes a game". To say that engineering is the only person to make the game is completely wrong. As I could not, as an engineer of 15+ years now, 10 of those in games, could not make a game entirely myself with just my engineering skills.
This comic hits home because anyone claiming that game developer is an engineering-only title has never worked on a team project. Anyone who goes in the credits is a game developer. Including random executives to backend developers on the game.
By that same logic, nobody can be a software developer because in order to develop a software project involving 100 people, one needs HR, managers, QA/testing, SREs, sysadmins, architects, finance, ...
Nobody can be a brick layer either because in order to build the Burj Khalifa one needed architects, engineers, glaziers, plumbers, managers, secretaries, fork-lift drivers, truck drivers, etc.
Every team project has is multi-disciplinary. To claim one discipline doesn't exist because in order to complete the project all disciplines are necessary, is willingful misrepresentation of facts.
some electricians who work on office buildings are
kaijusgamedevs(without them, your in-game lamps wouldn't work.)
No, you've reversed my logic. Everyone you named would be a software developer but there is only one team of software engineers. The entire point is that "game developer" isn't a discipline on the team. It's a member of the team. It'd be like arguing the term medical professional only means doctors.
