.

[quote name='Reuben']
1. Well, Art I still do enjoy and I am fairly good at... I like to write stories and such, ... would skills in these sort of areas be something that would put me at an advantage
2. or would they be completely superfluous, thus should I spend less time focusing on them and more on learning libraries like SDL? ...
3. The American system (particularly with Ivy League colleges) seems to put a huge emphasis on not only academic ability but extra curricular activity. Would making programs and games using C++ and SDL be sufficient for this
4. or should I fly to Africa every friday and build shelters/take steroids and become a 6'11 world class basketballer?
5. Also, how much does it cost per college application
6. are the subjects I've chosen at A level appropriate,
7. or should I switch one(or some or all) of them to something different? Or, am I aiming too high and should I instead go to my local college and seek out a part time intern-ship at Starbucks?

1. Questions about what "would" put you at an advantage are superfluous! You should pursue stuff you enjoy doing, simply because you enjoy them.
2. Do not give up your passions and take up pastimes you don't enjoy, and don't try to avoid learning anything.
3. Questions about what's "sufficient" are superfluous! Read this forum's FAQs (section on bad questions) and see the FAQ on the bad question "is it enough?"
4. Stop being silly. Ask not what your passions should be, and accept that they are what they are. Your passions are what you are, what you enjoy, what you should do.
5. You'll have to ask that of the schools you apply to.
6. Another bad question (actually, the same one yet again). Pursue your interests and stop worrying. You are unique -- stop asking to get cookie-cuttered.
7. See the FAQ, there's an FAQ on how to make decisions.
[/quote]


1. I guess using the word 'advantage' was poor phrasing, I point I was trying to convey was more - would my non-programming skills be useful in a AI programming position at a large studio, or only relevant in, perhaps, a small indie team.
2. I wasn't considering giving up anything and I didn't mention anything I don't enjoy, I was simply saying that if, hypothetically, I enjoyed learning SDL, art and writing in equal amounts, however I have been practising writing and drawing since I was 5 however I have never been formally taught C++ in my life, surely I should prioritise increasing my skills in C++ when considering a Computer science degree.
3. Okay, I guess my phrasing was bad again. I was looking more for insight on the sorts of extra curricular activities the US system seek out. I'd have thought that making a game single handedly (displaying aptitude in multiple disciplines) would be the perfect way to express where my talent lies, or maybe I underestimated the calibre of student these sort of Universities expect (hence question 4.). A one size fits all FAQ doesn't really give me any insight into whether this would be an appropriate approach for an application in a system that I (due to location) have not been versed in, not minimal and solitary as is suggested by the title 'is it enough?'.
5. Yeah, true that was a pretty lazy question.
6. Looking for insight and experiences of people who have experienced something you hope to is not (in my book) a bad question. I was asking if my choices were well-suited for reaching my goal. Although the interest pursuing philosophy is nice, sometimes you have to close one door in order to open another. I'm not asking to be cookie-cuttered, I'm a lump of cookie mixture trying to arrange myself in a way that means that when the giant cookie-cutter of the education system and society comes down on me, I become the best cookie my unique mixture can make.
7. Thank you, It seems like a good way to break down a decision you are struggling with into undeniable logic.

Thanks for both of your replies by the way, any sort of feedback is useful.

I know this thread is a bit old, but I thought I'd offer some advice.

First, you seem like a very well qualified individual for any of the universities you mentioned. I don't really know how UK credentials convert on US applications, but all of your grades and courses seem top notch. I wouldn't be worried about which "AP" classes you take right now. Things that get you into college will not be relevant when you are looking for a career after college. Just take whatever you enjoy, and can get credit for.

Second, I definitely think learning SDL (or similar) is a better time investment than pursuing Art or History. It may not be as "horizon-expanding" or "enlightening", but it will give you real experience developing games, and eventually develop into a personal portfolio. I don't think any Universities are going to expect you to build refugee homes in Africa for extra curricular activities. The best thing you can do is develop a personal portfolio of programs and games. It will help you get into a better University, and it will eventually help you get a job. While in University, you should join some extra curricular activities, and, more importantly, be active in them! Having a leadership position in 1 activity is better than just being "a member of" several. These are the kind of things that separate "good candidates" from "great candidates" on resumes. You definitely seem to have the desire and aptitude to do this.

Finally, though you probably have the credentials for any University you desire, if they really DO expect you to have a fluency in fine art, and an encyclopedia of history memorized, you probably should consider a non-ivy league university. There are many great American public(and private) schools focused on engineering and sciences. There are even schools devoted to game development (though the quality of education here is hit-or-miss). A Computer Science degree from Carnegie Mellon, Cal Tech, or Michigan is considered highly valuable.

You have checked how much these places cost, right?

US universities are not like UK ones -- they don't charge "9k a year which is really a subsidised loan".

Princeton charges $36,000 tuition. Harvard punts 2k more onto that. Stanford nearly $40,000. Princeton, on their website, says "The estimated cost of attendance for 2011-12 is $52,670" -- they're including dining fees and room rentals in that.

Having had a quick wander through their financial information, I'd suggest that applying for financial aid from overseas is going to be scary -- they want to see (amongst other things) your parents Federal Tax return.. which they won't have...

"Firstly, until recently, I haven't been much of a mathematician. It was only after I took an interest in and started learning C++ that I started using and enjoying Maths."

Cambridge, certainly, has a tendency to turn science subjects into maths primarily and a specialist subject later if at all. The UK has some perfectly good modern "plate-glass" universities which are rather more computer and bit less science and which dish out an entirely reasonable and useful compsci BSc.

Cambridge, certainly, has a tendency to turn science subjects into maths primarily and a specialist subject later if at all. The UK has some perfectly good modern "plate-glass" universities which are rather more computer and bit less science and which dish out an entirely reasonable and useful compsci BSc.

I think that it's more important to compare computer science departments and their research activity than to look at how prestigious the University is overall - good tech employers know these things. (Not either that Oxford or Cambridge is a bad choice in this regard)

I'd like to point out that Computer Science and Game Programming are two different (though not unrelated) things.

A pure Computer Science curriculum is heavily theoretical. You're studying information science and the fundamentals of computation. Different schools will be more or less heavy on the theory side vs the practical side. Almost all will teach you C++ or Java (or maybe C# these days, not sure), but many of them will not teach you how to become a good programmer (though you might know what an NP-Complete problem is, and what a universal turning machine is).

To be a good game programmer, you have to be a good programmer. Being a good programmer doesn't require knowing much about Computer Science. Will a Computer Science theoretical background help you be a good programmer? Maybe. But I've worked with CS professors who were amazing in their fields but weren't particularly good programmers.

You say you want to be an AI programmer. Probably 10% of the AI material you might choose to learn while earning your CS degree will be applicable to your job as an AI programmer. It really depends on the game and the company, but lots of videogame AI programmers spend their time writing pathing algorithms and scripting interfaces rather than implementing knowledgebases or genuine learning algorithms.

Think of Computer Science as being an architect, while game programming is building a house. You may think you'll like Computer Science, but many people don't.

I mention all that just as an FYI. I'm not saying a highly theoretical CS degree (as one from an ivy league school is likely to be) isn't worth it. I'm happy I got one, but you should do it for the love of it. If you're not interested in all that theory and just want to make games, then you should look for some other kind of degree (Software Engineering, etc). The fact that you say you're "enjoying Math" tells me that you might be suited for a CS degree.

Regarding the Art and History. Take it if it interests you. I know that right now becoming a game programmer sounds like the coolest thing you could possibly do. But when you actually get there, you'll be a much more happy person if you have other things that interest you. You'll realize that it's really just a job -- one that you love, hopefully, but still just a job. My favorite courses in school were Intro to Hinduism and Intro to Philosophy, neither of which has anything to do with my work.

.