As a senior environmental artist with over a decade of experience, I've had the privilege of working with some of the most talented people in the game development industry. My journey has been shaped by leading large-scale projects, mentoring junior artists, and fostering innovation. However, one practice that I believe is not only outdated but also counterproductive is the use of art tests in the hiring process.
The improper use of artistic tests
In theory, artistic tests are intended to evaluate an artist's abilities and suitability for a role. However, in practice, they often serve as a preliminary screening tool, filtering out candidates before their resumes are even reviewed. Some companies, for example, use art tests as an initial hurdle, particularly for junior and mid-level artists. These candidates often invest a lot of time in completing an art test, believing it to be a step forward in the interview process, only to be dismissed without their resume truly being considered. This approach is not only discouraging but also exploitative, especially when there is no clear deadline, further causing candidates to spend too much time on a task that may go nowhere.
Additionally, some organizations consider artistic testing a mandatory step, regardless of the candidate's portfolio or experience. Even when a candidate's existing work aligns perfectly with the job requirements, they may still be asked to complete an art test simply because it is part of a standardized process. This rigid adherence to process not only underestimates candidate time, but also risks losing highly qualified talent who may opt out of the process.
Art tests and DEI concerns
While arts testing poses several problems, one of the most significant is its negative impact on diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI). The significant time commitment these tests require disproportionately affects individuals from underrepresented groups, including those with family responsibilities or limited free time. When opportunities are tied to availability rather than skills or experience, it undermines the very principles of DEI that our industry strives to uphold.
It's troubling to consider that a young artist with less responsibility might have an advantage over someone with more experience but less time. If the game development industry truly values diversity, we need to reconsider how artistic testing contributes to maintaining inequality.
Artistic tests do not reflect actual studio conditions
Another problem with art tests is that they rarely replicate the real-world studio environment. The conditions under which these tests are completed are very different from the fast-paced, collaborative nature of game development. Because of this, tests can be manipulated or manipulated, which can lead to a distorted view of a candidate's true abilities.
In contrast, a complete portfolio and resume showing years of experience offer a much more accurate picture of an artist's potential. The ability to work well with others, communicate effectively, and adapt to changing circumstances – crucial skills in game development – cannot be accurately measured in a vacuum.
The risk of exploitation
Unfortunately, there have been cases where artistic testing contributions have been used by companies without compensating or acknowledging the artist. This unethical practice is not only wrong but also illegal. No artist should have to worry about their work being exploited, and companies need to be held accountable for respecting the work of potential hires.
When artistic testing might be appropriate
Despite these concerns, there are cases where artistic testing might be justified. For example, when dealing with junior artists who have a limited portfolio or when there is a specific skills gap that needs to be filled, a targeted art test may be appropriate. For example, if after an interview there are questions about a candidate's ability to work within a certain artistic style or technical framework, a small, focused art test might be the final step before making a job offer. Ideally, such tests should be paid for, but if they lead directly to employment, compensation becomes less of a pressing issue.
Additionally, some companies administer art tests more carefully by allowing applicants to submit existing work that meets the test criteria. This approach respects the candidate's time while still guaranteeing the necessary skills.
Conclusion
As currently implemented, artistic tests fail to capture the full extent of an artist's abilities and often cause more harm than good. While they may be appropriate in certain limited circumstances, the industry needs to reconsider how these tests are used. By focusing on portfolios, interviews and more personalized approaches, we can create a more fair, inclusive and effective hiring process that respects the time and talents of all candidates.
It's time for the game developer industry to evolve and adopt hiring practices that truly reflect the collaborative nature of our work.