Assuming one lives in the US, how important do you guys feel current location is to getting hired? All other things being equal (talent, skill, etc) is it important to live in California, if only to be geographically close to the industry, or is relocation a standard enough process that someone in Kentucky could just as likely get hired as someone on the West coast?

Is location discrimination a big concern?

I understand that different studios have different budgets for relocation, and that some of them don't do it at all. I guess I'm just trying to get a pulse for the general attitude, based on your experiences.

Has your location in the US ever been a deal breaker?

All things being equal, I'm sure location will be the dealbreaker.

Unless you're Kite, Peppi, or Slipgate.


Long answer short - Yes. It can be and has been a huge factor. Depends on the studio and your skill level.



I know quite a few studios that will only go outside of their locale only as a last resort. This is likely not the case for many higher end studios, but it's most definitely the case for Many studios.

Only seen it be an issue with non-us peeps applying for a junior position.

I've been wondering a lot about this myself. thanks for bring it up

From the small sample-size I've heard from, it seems to be a pretty big factor. Especially if its a halfway through a project since those situations are typically more time sensitive. My line of thinking is its one of those deals where moving to a relevant area could only help. Pick an area and get out there, I guess. But thats often times much more easier said than done.

And I also have a slightly different question to throw into the mix related to my personal situation. I have plans of relocating to the LA area within the year once my current lease is up. Now should I be applying to places before I get out there with the verbal commitment that I'll be relocating on my own in a few months time? or should I wait til I'm actually settled out west before applying to local places?

The only benefit I can see from applying before the move is that the company may utterly rock and help out a bit with the costs of moving (although extremely doubtful in my case based on my lack of experience). I am fully prepared to wait, but its just a little unnerving to voluntarily leap into unemployment as I'm dropping so much dough in relocation.

I'm sure this has to be a common thought people wrestle with while relocating, so I thought it relevant to this thread.

With *all things being equal anyone will choose the easiest path I would think. The reason you hire someone out of state/city/country is because something about them appeals more to you than the guy sitting living right next to you. Things are rarely always equal though. Just look at how many 'congrats' threads are posted here. Even if you live in the same area, with *all things beings equal you're looking at a coin toss (or less) as to whether you get the job or not. Also.. why California soecifically? Maybe there's somewhere else where the local talent might not be as strong.

rube

I've seen it be a deciding factor in candidates that might not otherwise wow the studio.

"his portfolio isn't awesome, but the dude's local, lets invite him to lunch..." etc.

it can def get your foot in the door.

moving first without having a job lined up sounds pretty reckless - from what I've seen, as long as you're in the US it's fine (ok, maybe Hawaii or Alaska is stretching it).

As far as being geographically close, besides California, you've got big hubs in Washington, Texas and a more spread out cluster in the north east. I've previously had the personal goal of not leaving the US and I've had no trouble finding work, my new goal is to stay in the South and it looks pretty do-able.

hey I may be wrong, I don't think my work is bad-ass-awesome but maybe I do rock :P

Moving to California to be close to the industry sounds pretty disastrous, I would shoot for one of the other hubs where things are so jacked up, but really that's super risky and you should have a pretty big nest egg saved up to float you for 3-6-12mo while you look for work.

It doesn't help that Canada is shelling out massive tax breaks to FX and game companies looking to establish themselves as a new entertainment hub. So a lot of shops are closing down in California because they can't compete or they're moving. So LA, kind of bleak right now for 3D guys...

Lets see...
A bad economy, especially in California with its large focus on entertainment (one of the first things people cut out of their budget when they fall on hard times).
A state that hasn't been able to balance its books in decades.
A mass exodus of all things 3D.
A housing bubble that is insanely bad is driving down the prices of homes and driving rent through the roof.
Instability in state gov doesn't foster the right climate for start-ups.
Lots of out of work extras, lawn care guys and all of Mexico looking for the same low wage job you are just to get by until something better comes along.

Sweet... I hope you're prepared to shank someone for that subway application.

No I'm actually in California, I've lived here for seven years, but I've only really focused on getting in to games the last two years. I'm thinking about moving out of state until I can find work in the industry. Cost of living here is ridiculous. I'm just wondering if I'm hurting my chances by moving - if I should do whatever I have to do to just to stay in CA for the sake of proximity.

It's been my experience that Junior/Entry level position applicants will find it hard to land work without being local. Location does play a large part in being considered for a position. Especially in higher volume areas where developers are able to pull from a large pool of local talent. Obviously, this all relies on company need, as well.

I'm sure it plays a factor.

I was a little dumbstruck, was getting scheduled to fly to Washington for my 3rd interview at a studio only to receive an email saying that they changed their minds and are going with local temporary talent.

I know the temporary part is a big factor, but I'm pretty sure its partially because they didn't want to pay to bring me to Seattle from Illinois.

Kind of a shitty deal, I'm willing to pack up my bags and move across the country, but I kinda want to have something lined up before I take such a leap.

Surely any studio if given the choice between an excellent artist whom is far away, and an average one whom is very near, would always choose the average artists.

Its not even as if the art in games is very exceptional. I mean there is tons of great art on this forum but the art in actual games doesnt really compare. An average game artist who can get the job done adequetely would win over in most cases(especially with money involved).

Originally Posted by Sectaurs

I've seen it be a deciding factor in candidates that might not otherwise wow the studio.

"his portfolio isn't awesome, but the dude's local, lets invite him to lunch..." etc.

it can def get your foot in the door.

Yes, I've seen this happen too first hand, being local is always a plus, and on top of that, being local may even make you more attractive than someone more qualified than you, especially if the company needs to make a hire ASAP.

However, if you're got talent and a highly competitive portfolio, you shouldn't have problems getting work, no matter where you live. The best way to get a job is always: just be fucking awesome at what you do, the rest is secondary.