I’ve interviewed with many of those listed. They’re not struggling for talent. They all have a very high hiring bar. I’ve seen them reject many people (besides myself) on trivia and whether or not you studied the right set of problems on LC.

For instance, could you regurgitate topological sort out in less than 20 minutes to solve a problem? You forgot the implementation but generally know what it’s used for? Failure. You’re a failure. Even if you know how to solve the problems but get tripped up on some simple parts of the algorithm because you haven’t really studied or used it in years, failure. Same with system design type interviews and other stuff.

The bar is very high for people who will never use any of that work. It’s hazing.

I updated recently my LinkedIn profile, seeing if changing the wording of stuff helps.

https://www.linkedin.com/in/gamedesigner

Your profile lacks clear coding experience.

And your highlighted recent experience as a game designer would just make me disqualify from any engineering role.

Discarding applicants for game dev experience and claiming there's a dev shortage is completely bizarre.

It's like starting a restaurant and banning chefs with baking experience.

From the hiring manager perspective it’s a numbers game of time and risk mitigation. Firing people sucks; managing people out sucks. Not firing people that should be fired sucks. Unless you’re in a big company with centralized hiring and onboarding, having headcount that needs an expensive ramp up period sucks.

If you’ve done a lot of different things because you’re smart and creative, maybe I’ll have to spend more time making sure you’re motivated (so you’d have to be worth the extra time cost). It’s also common to see people with an ungrounded perception of their abilities, and I often see breadth-heavy people suffer from an inflated sense of their own abilities due to lots of small scale, diverse wins.

Most people don’t understand how valuable a hard worker who will agreeably take orders and deliver consistent results is; magnitude doesn’t even matter that much. Unless you’re single handedly driving significant business metrics (e.g., directly saving millions of dollars), from my perspective, my job success is tied to predicting your output. If I succeed, I get to expand the teams or build new ones. If a product release is late or buggy, it’s also wasting tons of other teams’ time or damaging customer relationships besides pushing the eng roadmap back.

We reject a bunch of faang people for having experience we don’t find valuable. If you work at a big tech company, but don’t have an impactful role, you’re potentially not going to succeed in a small startup at the level you’re demanding.

Finally, one bad hire can ruin a team (i.e., one bad hire converts others into bad hires). “Bad” is subjective and can refer to different things. At the end of the day, it’s my job to define it and make sure we’re avoiding it. You can ask about this in an initial phone screen, or in a follow up conversation because it’s not secret, but I can’t talk to you about it after we reject you due to lability.

Designer != dev, right? The top entry on his LI also appears to be a marketing role?

Do you know what a game designer is?

I was a professional game designer (still a designer, but more a hobbyist now) with extensive (>10 years) game, mobile, full stack web and enterprise development experience, and all of that is current, as I'm developing games, including mobile games, in my spare time. It's very possible to do both.

I was one. The role doesn't preclude programming or software engineering experience--it very often includes it.

Satoru Iwata was a notable game designer. He was very much a skilled engineer, but his resume would've been trashed.

You're all over this thread throwing out quick comments, some of them pretty dubious. Can you stop?