When you factor in the cost of living you would be better off in the US anyway.

Not necessarily, when compared to the North of England or even Scotland! I've lived on both continents and there are a lot of hidden costs when living in the States - so don't be fooled. The lifstyle over there almost demands a high salary!

I live in Florida having moved out here from England a year ago - most living costs in Florida at least are around the same compared to in England (even after the conversion is done) if you want to have a semi-healthy lifestyle very little is actually cheaper over here outside of video games, junk food and cars (which are dirt cheap new compared to England).

(and don't forget the increased costs involved in heathcare, dentistry etc. - even with insurance you'll find it costing you a fortune - oh and if you've got a pet invest in pet-insurance it cost me over $1,000 when my wifes kitten had to go in for observation overnight because it was being sick ... shocked the heck out of me)

This article is a complete lie.

Designer lowest pay at £23,500? No, try 9-14k.

Designer average pay at £38,750? No way. no way at all. Try £24k-ish

C'mon, April fools day was a couple of weeks ago.

I don't know how this article has come into existence, but its absolute lies and is obvious not based on empirical evidence.

Agree completely with the above post.

In January 2008 you posted the salary averages for UK Game Designers based upon an extensive survey.

Yet the numbers above are far higher- 40 to 50% higher?

Speaking as someone responsible for hiring Game Designers, I can assure you that the average salary in this country is nowhere near £38k.

Either the reporter has invented some facts to create a story, or else the Recruiters you spoke to are telling you lies and exagerrating salaries, in the manner many normally do when posting job adverts.

Suggest if you do not want to be further dismissed as irrelevant by the UK development industry you do some proper research (such as looking at your own published data from 4 months ago) or else retract this "story".

This type of misinformation only makes it harder for UK developers to hire good staff, if they expect wildly unrealistic salaries like these.

I disagree - 75 per cent of the numbers listed here are pretty much in line with the salaries at my studio.
Specifically when it comes to the lower numbers and the averages (the higher numbers aren't that close, but then that's always the same on any salary survey, and any survey - complainers should do their own research first, eh? - because there are less senior people and all earn different amounts based on experience so the results vary etc etc.).

I think it's easy for you all to come on here criticise this story without giving any indication of your identity, as well. If it's not relevant, why are you even bothering to reply? It sounds more like you're embarassed you pay your staff below the average.

Also - who the hell pays a designer £9-sodding-k?

Interesting reading the criticisms of the results - which I hope Develop would be the first to admit aren't to be taken as totally water tight; it actually says that to declare a 'winner' would be a mistake.

But should I feel guilty or smug that I, as a relatively new coder working in the south of England, am actually earning more than the lowest figure given above?

Anyway, if Develop's data has changed between its recent survey and the time MCV did a salary report (that's where the January data comes from - read the original report you besmirch Mr MadeUpStory) or if you think it's inaccurate, then... well, so what? It's a survey, which in its very nature is anecdotal - ESPECIALLY when it comes to such a sensitive topic as what people earn for a living. As I say, I don't see any claims to the contrary, and it's not like this is dedicated research that is being put up for sale the way Game Developer's more official report is.

Hello, me again. Just read the comments on slashdot, which linked to this - over there they are saying that the numbers are TOO LOW, and that this reports is 'propaganda' to keep expectations low amongst the industry. Hilarious! Good luck to the Develop guys - you just can't please anyone, eh? ;)

(PS. It occurs to me: if Develop is 'dismissed as irrelevant' why do you care so much what it says? Why are you worried about what it is reporting? Something smells fishy to me...)

Back again...I speak as a Senior Designer who's worked in the UK industry for the last 8 years at studios which include the likes of Frontier, SCEE and Lionhead.

Mark, if your designers are on an average pay of £38k, can you forward me a contact address please - I'd like a job thanks, as would all the designers here at this studio, and all the friends who I've mentioned this article to.

Infact, if your designers are on an average of £38k, you could probably hire any designer from the entire of the UK from any company at any time you liked.

In my experience, this article is absurd.

Not to mention the fact it cites the scum of the industry (agencies like OPM and Aardvark Swift) as sources.

I'm starting to wonder if the reasons for some of the frustrations with this report comes from each person's respective, and seemingly different, definitions of designer.

I'm defining it in its strictest sense - a senior creative devising and/or driving key gameplay elements in a project. At our studio, based in the south, we have just a few designers and they are key roles on our project(s), working with a counterpart producer and instructing artists and programmers and ensuring they work well with a more junior producer. You saying 'all the designers here' suggests you have more of them in your employ, which would suggest less (on average) seniority, less responsibilities and therefore less pay (apologies if that's incorrect, it's just an assumption based on limited info). And they might be working on more games than us - or at least different ones (perhaps a franchise sequel or licensed title - let's not be precious about it, different projects at different companies mean different pay) and possibly with a role that sits somewhere between producer and designer.

If any of that's true - and as I say, I'm guessing - then of course you'll feel a bit cheated by a report like this, because it generalises. That's what surveys do; I'd say the producer salaries in the story above probably both understate and overstate certain areas of the job - but that's what happens when you collate lots of variables and try to plot a course between them. Which is something us games developers appreciate, right?

Or, alternatively, a few of us are paying WAY too much/overvaluing staff and have upwardly skewed the figures. :D

(And also - there's clearly a difference of opinion when it comes to agencies. I think 'scum' is unfair! My colleagues have had, on the whole, a good experience using those kind of companies. Now, the sneaky sodding headhunters, their the scumbags...)

Ultimately I think there's an inevitable 'we'll have to agree to disagree element to this', but hey I'd gladly take it to email if you wanted. Like everyone else, we're always on the look out for good new staff...

(And for the sake of transparency, I haven't named my company - yet - due to my confidentiality contract. But I'll see if I'm allowed.)

Firstly, my comments refer only to the Game Designer section of this article which with 12 years of professional GD experience at a number of developers I have broad knowledge of- so natually 75% of the results for the other disciplines may be correct.

It seems to me that it is your definition of designer which is wrong- not all Game Designers are Creative Directors or Project Managers- the discipline covers a whole range of roles from junior scripters right up to senior managment.

The article above states, and I quote, "We've collated all the key data from both surveys to see which jobs in which territory pay best."

Meaning the figures from the UK survey conducted in January- which the above article links to.

Yet here are the figures quoted from the January article:

Designer
Junior designer - £18,000 to £21,000 (2007: £15,000 to £21,000)
Regular designer - £20,000 to £28,000 (2007: £18,000 to £26,000)
Senior designer - £25,000 to £35,000 (2007: £25,000 to £32,000)
Lead designer - £38,000 to £55,000 (2007: £30,000 to £40,000)


And here are the "same" figures posted today:

UK
Lowest: £23,500
Highest: £70,000
Average: £38,750

So somehow the lowest Designer salary has increased from £18,000 to £23,500, while the Highest figure has increased from £55,000 to £70,000.

The average figure of £38k is the bottom of the scale for Lead Designers in the original survey. Yet naturally only a small proportion of Designers are Leads. By definition Lead Designers manage a team of less senior staff.

How do you explain this inaccuracy? A mistake perhaps, but one that is unhelpful and inevitably leads us to question the veracity of the story.

There is no agree to disagree here- the facts published by Develop do not match up.

Perhaps the author of this latest article would care to explain this discrepancy?

Finally as Develop is a trade magazine that everyone uses to publicize their companies and products, it would be foolhardy not to remain anonymous in any criticism of their reporting, and these comments encourage anonymity- as they should.

Comments are encouraged on these stories, so I see nothing tragic about questioning the data published. If it is entirely anecdotal then perhaps that should be made clearer?

I'm a designer, and have been for three years, and I'm still on less than £18.5k, which according to the January survey is about the same as a low end junior.

I honestly don't know what to think of these surveys, they do make me seriously consider moving elsewhere. :/

The very reason I left the UK and took an opportunity to work in Vancouver BC.
The lies with regards UK wages within the industry have been rife since I joined, I have over 10years of experience and numerous titles working in art and technical art.
At the peak of my career in the UK i was being ripped off to the tune of 26 grand a year. Unable to get a mortgage and provide for a future for myself and my girlfriend.
Since I have moved to Vancouver my wage has double yes 100% over the UK wages that were offered.
It is safe to conclude that the UK industry consistently underpays its staff whilst a few at the top benefit.
It is also safe to conclude that the UK industry is loosing staff to the US and Canada, and will continue to do so untill the wages become realistic for the living costs in the UK, and staff become as valued as equivilent technical staff in other IT related industries.
In turn its very probable that the article by Develop is paid for in kind by recruitment industry who are loosing the ability to place staff at suitable wages brackets and maintain and income for themselves.
Regardless this article is bunk and its contents worthless as any development staff or new development will see when they move or try to move and see the offers that appear on the table.

I'm a designer. And I do earn close to the average. So, er, there. Funnily enough, the studios I had interviewed at recently, before I moved job and got that hallowed salary had told me that most of the data I'd ever read about salaries in magazines, and the amounts printed in job ads were all lies. They were all based in the Derby/Nottingham area. And they were very, very wrong.

So if you're reading this, don't let the above tight-arsed studio heads put you off!

I work at one on the 'scum of the industry' agencies (Voice of sanity - thanks for the kind words...), I see games industry salary figures on a daily basis and contributed to the initial research.

I feel that the £38,750 quoted for a Designer is high - if I was to put my own figures on it I would say that £31k/£32k was a more realistic average for a designer (juniors around £20k, rising to late £20's with a bit of experience and on from there)

That said, I have seen £70k+ salaries paid at Design/Creative Director level, so I don't think the top-end of the research above is wildly inaccurate, but those jobs are very few and far between!

In all companies (scum of the industry recruitment agencies included), your boss will try to hire you for as little as they think they can - at the end of the day more money in your pocket = less money in theirs (especially in smaller companies), but if you're good at your job and you can justify it, your salary will reflect the market rate for your skills and experience.

Irigby - your salary does seem low compared to your experience, and I'm sure your boss knows this - speak to him/her about it in your next review - get in touch with me if you don't have any joy!!!

You are payed at what you deserve, meaning the lowest of the two:
- how much you worth to the company
- how much you think you worth to the company

I came to the UK, with low expectations, at 37.5K. Which rose to 53.5K + bonuses(payed so far) + benefits + pension + payed overtime within two years time.
So, if you think you earn less than you deserve maybe you should do something about it!
Really, it's pathetic to hear people working their ass of for 8-10 years at the same place and just dreaming about a change. Look around, make it happen!

fu all