<p>i don't think the school matters too much. just as long as you learned something useful is all that matters. no need to be a label-whore.</p>
<p>I mentioned higher ranked schools since they have higher tuition, therefore recent gradates are usually in debt, Yielding them to lean towards any field as long as the salary is good.</p>
<p>
[quote]
Sakky, Would you agree that due to the difficulty behind doing well at engineer programs, that engineering students can usually land well paying gigs in other fields (not only IBanking and Management)?
Examples would be retail management, Sales, and other jobs in the business/economics field.
[/quote]
</p>
<p>I have always said that an engineering bachelor's degree is arguably the most versatile degree you can get and for that reason alone, I recommend getting one despite all its problems (notably the grade deflation and harder work). </p>
<p>But I have also always said that there is a big difference between getting an engineering degree and actually working as an engineer. Just because you have a degree in a particular field doesn't mean that you have to work in that field. Heck, most people in most fields don't take jobs in their field of study. For example, most history majors do not become professional historians. Most sociology majors do not become sociologists. Most poli-sci majors do not become political scientists. Hence, there is no reason to believe that all engineering students will become engineers, nor should all of them.</p>
<p>I have always agreed with sakky on his above point: an engineering degree is one of the most versatile you can get. You can get a decent paying job in all corners of the globe with a bachelors degree or you can go on to study in almost any graduate or professional program. If you can make decent grades, it's worth the work.</p>
<p>
[quote]
there are engineering companies out there that will make their engineers work Ibanking-style hours...but won't pay them Ibanking wages. Silicon Valley software companies are perhaps the most prevalent, with Electronic Arts being one of the most notorious. People figure rationally that if they're going to be working Ibanking hours (as EA apparently made their employees work), then they ought to get paid Ibanking wages.</p>
<p>Video</a> Game News - Video Game Articles - Video Game Information
<a href="http://www.gamasutra.com/php-bin/new...php?story=9051%5B/url%5D%5B/quote%5D">http://www.gamasutra.com/php-bin/new...php?story=9051
[/quote]
</a></p>
<p>Entertainment companies (video-game, media, etc.) are an ABBERATION to the entry-level computer-software industry. You have a cadre of young people who want to work for a game-company because of the 'coolness' factor. They'll step over each other and do anything to work for a game-company, up to and including</p>
<ul>
<li>work as a game-tester (glorified "quality assurance" tester), following a script over and over again everytime a new build/release is compiled. At that point it's not 'playing' a game, but 'grinding' through it.</li>
<li>participate in the 'mod' community for a popular game-title (i.e. create third-party artwork, objects, audio/graphics assets, terrains, etc. for Neverwinter Nights, Sims 2, Morrowind Oblivion, etc.)</li>
<li>mod an existing game (QuakeWars, and the best known one in the past 10-years: CounterStrike), release to community for free, then see what happens</li>
</ul>
<p>The kinds of people willing to do this on their own time, with no promise of a payout, is large enough that companies like EA capitalize on it by skewing the hiring/work policy. A company spokesman even said they changed their product-development flow to increase the # junior (entry-level) programmers at all stages of the project, i.e., overwork them (due to their inexperience and naivety), then fire them after they burn out and hire the next-year's suckers.</p>
<p>And after all that, and that classless 'ea_spouse' expose (in your linked story), there are STILL tons of wannabe game-developers knocking down those entertainment company doors.</p>
<p>Incidentally, NVidia, Broadcom, Marvell are among the 'more challenging' (to put it diplomatically) tech-companies to work for. Early in their lives, Broadcom and Marvell were notorious for their hellish work/life balance. 80+hr weeks were typical, with little break between projects. The lucky few who joined Broadcom at exactly the right-time (relative to its stock price), make out like bandits. Today, a lot of engineers at those companies still put in 50-60hr weeks for up to a few months at a time, but not to past extremes. The startup-mentality is still prevalent, but no longer dominant. (Main reason is stock-compensation has gone out of fashion -- few tech-companies grant more than a pittance amount of stock. and the companies has grown to a size where corporate inertia prevent fast reaction.)</p>
<p>To be honest and realistic, there is a reason why people flock to these "top 10" schools.. even when they have to practically beg to get in, even if the course load is ridiculous and demanding, and even when renting a dinky studio apartment in some of these college towns cost more than paying the mortgage in a spacious 4 bedroom house in Montana. It's an investment, and an investment many people found worth the sacrifice.</p>
<p>But it really boils down to what you want in life. If you want unique opportunities and experiences and if you desire to network with top of the notch talented people in the industry, then I think you will have easier time finding what you want in the top 10 schools. If you just want job security and some guarantees to a comfortable lifestyle, then any engineering schools should suit you in theory. Your PE license will attest that you are a capable and qualified engineer regardless of what school you went to or what GPA you had.</p>
<p>premed_dropout, could you provide article titles? The links don't work.</p>
<p>
[quote]
premed_dropout, could you provide article titles? The links don't work.
[/quote]
</p>
<p>Employees</a> readying class-action lawsuit against EA - News at GameSpot
Gamasutra</a> - Programmers Win EA Overtime Settlement, EA_Spouse Revealed</p>
<p>Sorry, I blindly cut&paste sakky's post, and screwed up his original links.</p>
<p>Thanks!</p>
<p>Frankly, the difference between writing a software game and writing software for other applications isn't great in general terms. No need to kill oneself for game programming.</p>
<p>
[quote]
Entertainment companies (video-game, media, etc.) are an ABBERATION to the entry-level computer-software industry.
[/quote]
</p>
<p>Are they really an aberration in terms of work hours? I'm not sure about that. If you become a developer at Microsoft, you're simply not going to get away with working only 40 hours a week. Not if you want to keep your job. In fact, the joke goes that Microsoft offers a great flextime policy: you can work any 70 hours of the week that you want. Oracle? Same. Apple? Same. Google? Even worse. In fact, that's why so many of these companies have built such nice work facilities, complete with 24-hour cafeterias, concierges, world-class gyms, even dry cleaning and barbers: they never want their employees to have to leave the office. </p>
<p>The truth of the matter is that software development and engineering is usually a rough grind, and it is therefore highly rational for those engineers to want to be paid at a level equivalent to those who work long hours in other jobs. If you're going to be working the hours of an investment banker, it is rational for you to want to be paid like an investment banker. Software companies like Microsoft and Oracle seem to want it both ways: they want their employees to work grueling hours, but without paying them extra.</p>