New Games Suck... Or Is It Just Me?

Soon you will get used.

Then you will start to like.

Then, start to love.

And finally, start to desire

They took pity on us and released a trailer to make up for the delay. Which, there will probably be a second delay. I doubt it comes out in May.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kXX9n62N72s

Very detailed video.
Switch 2 is 25% as powerful as a 3060 RTX, but is 7x more powerful than the original switch.

From when AC was good

We wus Viking!

The inability to pass screening interviews is the reason they wouldn't get to the short list and even if they did they still need to pass the interview, meaning they need to communicate. Companies are now extremely sensitive to the "bad hire", the person who is going to say or do something that will cause the company a lawsuit. The more you have to lose the more you need to practice risk management to not lose it.

We had something like this happen a year ago, one of our DB developers was entitled and not performing well. The manager worked with them for improvement but they didn't really see the need for it. Then one Friday an email went out from said developer announcing they were leaving and then accusing the manager of sexual harassments. Yes the developer was female. Thankfully the manager had copious amounts of CYA including never being in any room or office alone with said developer and lots of emails and communications about the poor performance. In a similar note one of our other people ended up making very inappropriate comments in a meeting one day without realizing it, they were gone less then two weeks later.

On the whole degree thing, absolutely NOBODY cares in IT. The only reason it's even on the hiring rec is because we do not want to spend political capital with HR getting a position approved for a higher level then they think it deserves. HR seems to think anything without a degree is a "junior" position and will downgrade the pay range into the floor. Getting over that generally requires the approval of the HR Director and that's political capital that can be better spent elsewhere. So instead we put down "four year degree/etc.." inside the education field, then at the bottom we write in "or equivalent work experience". This lets us get a decent salary range on the position while not having to fight some HR worker with a gender studies degree.

But IT doesn't do the hireing.

Everywhere I've ever worked, the IT/dev/engineers/whatever give a yes or no post-interview, then HR will almost always follow that guidance. The only time it really goes south is if there's some issue where they can't agree on benefits or salary.

I've done a lot of hiring and I've never seen HR or anyone else veto hiring someone their engineers approved of b/c they didn't have a certain type of degree. I'm sure it happens, but it's not really common IME.

OTOH being filtered from the initial interview might, but with sufficient work experience (>a few years anyway), that doesn't seem to happen much either.

I do believe it is largely dependent on the age of the company, older company more strict rules around degree holding.

Probably depends what sector of the industry you work in, also. Most of the work I've done doesn't really have an A to B path through academia, so either you went to school for something unrelated to graduate and figured it out on your own - or you went to school for a relevant degree and still spent time on your own figuring it out. The latter seem to sometimes be too burned out to do it and the former have to hurdle to get over the base knowledge.

I have never had an issue getting an interview or offer b/c of my dumb degree, but I also think this gets easier as you get more work experience. I just ended up buying a bunch of textbooks after the fact and doing stuff on my own, which was probably better considering the CS program where I went was trash, they teach C and I met a Sr in the program who didn't know what malloc was.

Like Saevel said, they kinda get around it with the whole "...or equiv work experience" thing. I don't even have it listed on my resume, I have one line about going to college at the very end and that's it. Aside from being an object of curiosity and jokes, no one really cares.

The only time it really was an issue was when I interviewed with a place attached to an academic org, they offered me the job but my pay would be severely diminished without getting more degrees. They seemed like good folks I would've liked working with, but there was no way I was taking a 65% pay cut so I could sit in a classroom to try and get paid correctly.

Yes they do.

This is how it works. First you have what's called a Hiring Manager, this is the person who is directly responsible for the position being hired into. They write the hiring requirements, job description, proposed salary and so forth. The director of that department gives their approval and takes it to whichever SVP the position is part of, this is usually an executive director or C-suite depending on organization. After all those departmental approvals are made, it's sent over to HR to become what's called a Hiring Requisition, which then kick starts that whole head hunting process. Depending on company, either your HR department themselves or some outside talent agency will start scouting candidates and send them to HR to collect and organizate.

Now comes the fun part, when the HM wrote up the position they used key words that HR will then turn into a weighting system. Each resume that comes in will get a score based on how much it matches those key words and the top ones will get contacted by HR to schedule a quick screening interview. Usually the HM will do this and boil down the list down to a handful for technical interviews, this is called the short list. When a candidates interview is done the interviewers will fill out an evaluation form and send that over to the HM to be forwarded to HR (this is important and a big CYA). Eventually you get someone who's good for the position and the HM will then tell HR they want to hire candidate A and kicks off the negotiating phase. Sometimes this results in an agreed upon salary and offer letter, other times the candidate wants outside of the approved range and the HM has to go with another candidate. Ultimately it's the Hiring Manager that selects the candidate to be hired.

I have been very much involved in selecting more candidates then I ever want to remember in the past couple of years.


Nope, nobody cares and it's not even a thing. At least in the USA and Canada, I can't comment about Europe. Marxist and Socialist systems tend to put more emphasis on pedigree then ability.

Yes I think Universities and their ilk are the only ones that even remotely care about education qualifications, to their detriment. I guess they didn't want tenured professors getting envious of someone without a PhD.

Maybe in "developer land" not "Engineer" land, I can't speak for all companies but for the 2 I have been at the pick pay for my degree as it is a requirement for an engineering position.

Maybe it is a sexist thing but I rarely believe that as a deciding factor in anything.

At any rate different fields/industries different requirements.

You are wrong on this. If you go through an interview process at Intel and Google you will see the stark contrast between the two. I've interviewed and interned at a bunch of them. The older companies (AMD, Intel etc) are definitely still hooked on degrees, GPAs etc.

I gather "traditional" engineering careers like mechanical, electrical, civil, nuclear, etc are still heavily degree focused for the most part. I had one mechanical engineer explain to me that the reason for this is that the degree programs focus on not just practical application, but the physics behind it also. Again though it probably depends on the industry, I've worked with folks that were in heavy EE roles without an EE degree. At the same time I doubt you'll get a job working as a civil or mechanical engineer without relevant degrees. Some of these also have various certification/licensing paths you need a degree to obtain or you won't get hired.

I think this is where CS programs think you need an absurd amount of math that most people will rarely, if ever use in any capacity. The CS professors I have met over the years and queried on this seem to think you still get some kind of baseline from it, but I've never met anyone that was outside academia and found that accurate - unless you were writing academic papers. I've seen the code they write (the papers, for that matter, too) - they'd have been a lot better off spending time understanding architecture concepts as opposed to taking 6 levels of calculus. The really weird part being that most of them aren't teaching low level or native languages. They're gonna make you take a shitload of math "to build foundation" but then teaching...Java? The issue for me is that these programs don't seem to teach good background/fundamentals or practical application, which I gather is in contrast to other traditional engineering degree programs.

Also I think the difference is there isn't necessarily as much structure needed to learn these subjects. Most people can setup a CS lab freely and easily especially these days, mistakes are easy to spot and overcome. It's an issue of motivation most of the time and willingness to do it, which applies to people with and without degrees, but also applies to more than what you'd consider your traditional development roles as well.

My industry is kinda weird and niche, though, I'll admit because there aren't really good degree programs and CS just kinda puts you a little closer to where you should be. Everything else is on your own and everything is constantly changing. Most of the industry sucks too, so it's easy to stand out, you just need to be the shiniest turd in the toilet, which isn't hard if you care even a little bit and have a tiny bit of motivation.

In IT they do not care, like at all. It's all provable work experience.


This makes me thing recent grad with very little else. If someone has near zero applicable work experience and a degree applying for a junior position, then yeah that's all they got to work with.

I can not stress this enough, it's about work experience and being able to comfortably describe how you would tackle future challenges. I'm speaking about this as someone who not only turned down an senior engineering position at AWS but now is in a lead position that interviews and hires people. Your degree (in IT) is like your shoe collection, good for you, but is irrelevant to making the company money. Everyone I know working in IT who has degree's have them in non-IT related fields, and the highest compensated people never finished.

There are careers that require education, EE's, ME's and CE's. Medical, legal and science professions like chemist, physicist and so forth. They need years of foundational theory before they can even start to obtain mastery. Information Technology changes at such a ridiculous pace that any course curriculum is outdated before it's even certified. The good judgement and competence acquired through experience and practice are what provides value.


Yes my position is strictly within Information Technology.

Does degree-less resume even pass the initial resume filtering system and get to interview phase lol? Many resume filtering aren't even done by human, they are automatic and it will filter out unqualified resume so no human will even read it.

It doesn't matter if some degree-less coding genius can impress every manager in the world in the interview. They need to get a chance to interview first.

Edit: Assuming the said degree-less resume also don't have other renowned company work experience on the resume to give them bonus point in the filter system that is.

Obviously if your resume has years of work experience in renowned companies degree become less relevant.

Entirely degree-less? No probably not. I've worked with people that had no degree at all but they were few and far between. The only batch of folks I'd say really are exempted from this would be if you spent time in the military - but they seem to be more in managerial/PM type roles or application technical roles, not so much research or dev type roles unless they went to school after. Typically these folks got their foot in the door with knowing people typically unless they had a reputation for some reason. College is still, for whatever reason, still seen as some sort of rite of passage whether it was worthwhile or not, trying to get in without any degree at all would be a lot more challenging, but not impossible.

I went to college but got a useless degree that was just to graduate and move on, for a lot of reasons (mostly non-academic). The only time I had issues getting interviews was the first job I applied for, I got around that kinda by taking a ton of certification programs my last year. The HR filters could be annoying here and there, but they never really posed much of a problem after the first job I had, work experience and the skills I focused on were of more interest. The subject of my degree would rarely come up, they saw I went to college and that's all they cared about that, even with the HR folks. They were more interested in verifying my work experience for the most part.

Again, this is not true. I'm speaking as someone who has interviewed and interned in these companies. 10 experience in software engineering.

Intel, AMD and Qualcomm still asked me about my GPA, projects I had worked on. Intel even asked me about how well I did in compilers. Wouldn't even give me a shot before I joined one of the top USA universities.

I've heard all my life "grades don't matter", "grades don't define you", "a degree means nothing", until I joined a top university, maintained a high GPA and now I get contacted before I even apply to jobs.

Strangely but I heard the opposite, all through college they would tell me that you can't escape your GPA, grades are all that matter, etc, then after I graduated no one cared. This is probably partially due to my unrelated degree but it rarely came up and I've interviewed / received offers at places you'd expect would care about that sort of thing.

I can understand asking about projects and maybe specific subject matters, I've asked those questions before, but I can't possibly imagine caring what someones GPA was 10 years after the fact. Not saying it doesn't happen, it just seems like a really bizarre, weird thing to focus on when you have verifiable or demonstrable work experience that long after the fact.

Some of the worst people I've worked with or interviewed had a list of degrees up to and including PhDs from well regarded institutions, they couldn't do anything. The first time I interviewed a PhD I went and spent a bunch of my own time creating different exercises/questions to be more engaging, but when I showed my peer he told me to bring it back to a kindergarten level, which blew my mind, but he was right and that's been the experience I've had with most academics since. They struggle to tie application to practicality even in roles you'd expect academics to excel in, like kernel development. I've worked with similar types who were very good, but they could tie all those years in class with practical application they did on their own.

If you lack experience degrees matter to get you in the door or at least an interview.

For experienced workers, what you have done at work matters more than a degree you did X years ago.

Again, untrue. The reason why I went back to school, especially to a top USA university is because companies wouldn't even look at my resume.

In my current university, said companies, especially Saevel's AWS, visit twice a semester. You can just walk by their desk and drop your resume, get a job interview.

My GPA, letter of recommendation from my advisor, papers I had published, and, again, even how well I did in compilers mattered a lot more than my work experience.

(I'm talking about PhD level btw).

edit: I'm trying to find an older application where there was even a min required GPA of 3.2 lol. I think it was Qualcomm.

Speaking from first hand experience. Your country may well be different.

Getting an interview and getting the job are different things. Percentage of hires from uni fairs is a rounding error, won't even show up as 1%.

If you are currently at uni for a degree you are considered to not have any relevant experience. Which is why you are being advised to finish your degree and apply.

This is not a chicken-egg argument. You and Saevel seem to find yourselves in circular argument all the time.

Degrees and GPAs matter for some positions. If you want to land a job as a GPU compiler researcher at, say, NVIDIA, the university, the degree and your GPA matter. I am also speaking from experience since I have interviewed and interned at the aforementioned companies. I was asked not once what my GPA was and having a B in compilers definitely put me in a tough situation since the conversation went into "what did you struggle with in your compiler class? Were you overloaded?". I was able to overcome it because I had a paper deadline during finals.

I'm currently actively interviewing with FAANG companies and, while the GPA and the degree won't land you a job, you being able to say "I'm graduating with high GPA, papers published at top conferences etc" has helped.


eidt: I wish this Elon Musk vision of the world was actually true, but it isn't. Tesla sending out opportunity emails to my university speaks volumes.

Yes, if you lack experience, you will be asked about grades.

Last time I was asked about grades was... when I was a new graduate.

Did you miss the part that I said I had experience but I had to go back to a top school for recognition?

Also, isn't the original argument that degree and GPA don't matter? Seems like even according to your own argument, you got the experience because you had the grade. That's my point. It matters.

Okay, going in circles.

New games suck balls. New graduates can't make them.