As a Senior Environment Artist with over a decade of experience, I’ve had the privilege of working with some of the most talented individuals 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 However, one practice that I believe is not only outdated but also counterproductive is the use of art tests in the hiring process.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 Misuse of Art Tests
In theory, art tests are intended to evaluate an artist’s capabilities and fit 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 instance, use art tests as an initial hurdle, particularly for junior and mid-level artists. These candidates often invest significant time into completing an art test, believing it to be a step forward in the interview process, only to be dismissed without having their resumes genuinely considered. This approach is not only discouraging but also exploitative, especially when there’s no clear deadline, further misleading candidates into dedicating excessive time to a task that may lead nowhere.
Furthermore, some organizations treat art tests as a mandatory step, regardless of the candidate’s portfolio or experience. Even when an applicant’s existing work aligns perfectly with the job’s requirements, they may still be required to complete an art test simply because it’s part of a standardized process. This rigid adherence to procedure not only undervalues the candidate’s time but also risks losing highly qualified talent who might opt out of the process.
Art Tests and DEI Concerns
While art tests pose several issues, one of the most significant is their negative impact on diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI). The substantial time commitment these tests require disproportionately affects individuals from underrepresented groups, including those with family responsibilities or limited free time. When opportunity is tied to one’s availability rather than their skill 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 fewer responsibilities might have an advantage over someone with more experience but less time. If the game dev industry truly values diversity, we need to reconsider how art tests contribute to maintaining inequality.
Art Tests Don’t Reflect Real 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 vastly different from the collaborative, fast-paced nature of game development. Because of this, tests can be manipulated or gamed, which can lead to a distorted view of a candidate’s true abilities.
In contrast, a comprehensive portfolio and a resume that showcases years of experience offer a far more accurate picture of an artist’s potential. The ability to work well with others, communicate effectively, and adapt to changing circumstances—skills that are crucial in game development—cannot be accurately gauged in a vacuum.
The Risk of Exploitation
Unfortunately, there have been cases where art test submissions were 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 must be held accountable for respecting the work of potential hires.
When Art Tests Might Be Appropriate
Despite these concerns, there are instances where art tests might be justified. For instance, when dealing with junior artists who have a limited portfolio, or when there’s a specific skill gap that needs to be addressed, a targeted art test could be appropriate. For example, if after an interview there are questions about a candidate’s ability to work within a certain art 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, but if they directly lead to employment, compensation becomes less of a pressing issue.
Additionally, some companies handle art tests more thoughtfully by allowing candidates to submit existing work that fulfills the test’s criteria. This approach respects the candidate’s time while still ensuring they have the necessary skills.
Conclusion
As currently implemented, art tests fail to capture the full scope of an artist’s capabilities and often do more harm than good. While they might be appropriate in certain, limited circumstances, the industry needs to rethink how these tests are used. By focusing on portfolios, interviews, and more tailored approaches, we can create a fairer, more inclusive, and effective hiring process that respects the time and talent of all candidates.
It’s time for the game dev industry to evolve and adopt hiring practices that truly reflect the collaborative nature of our work.
