i'm a guy and i don't enjoy video games any more. I just feel i've grown out of that phase when I was 15. I'd rather go swimming, hiking, and try out different restaurants/bars.
>The founders themselves often started programming as kids
i'm not sure where you get this conclusion that those who enjoy extracurricular programming often started as kids.
Usually those who started as a kid means they were fortunate enough to have parents who were programmers. Even if they're parents weren't that case, then usually its the case of just doing html/css on myspace
I'm almost sure that most hardcore gamers actually never become part of the CS/SWE crowd because of video game addiction. Gaming and software development are two very different domains. Hardcore gamers usually are not motivated, accomplish very little, and lack in career development.
I think it depends on your definition of "hardcore", but there are alot of good software people who game well above average even if it is below the level many would consider "obsessive".
The best computer games have alot in common with software design as far as thinking about how a system works, planning for edge cases that could lead to problems/opportunities, and developing the patience to find which strategies pay off over a long period of time.
More than that, I often find that the most addicted hardcore gamers are people who are using that to replace the sense of purpose that work gives them, which means they're pretty hard working once they find a career they enjoy. Of course, then they might turn into a workaholic instead...
This a little bit of overlap, but I don't think there's significant overlap between gamers and software developers.
Writing code and playing a video are two very different experiences. Sure, you'll need to test the game, but testing games is not a fun time contrary to popular belief. And more important, the vast majority of software developers do not actually work in the video game industry. Most either work in systems development or make CRUD apps.
One thing that I'm observing in software engineering students that I have seen over the years is that in the most skilled range (ones who are quite capable of doing all kinds of tasks and also have enough market leverage to get hired for whichever kind of role they'd prefer) wind up on quite different career paths depending on gender.
In particular, the skilled male students went on in all kinds of roles, roughly matching everything that the industry demands, but the skilled female students (with very few exceptions, I've seen two IIRC), as a rule, all chose from the subset of roles that are more, how to say, people focused. Despite having excellent technical skills as well (which I have seen and compared with their male peers), they have chosen not to do the core hands-on technical work and go on to related careers in e.g. system analysis, project management, testing, on-site consulting, technical sales, etc - even if they'd be paid more as a straightforward individual technical contributor.
I've seen them decline "poaching" offers to such positions with superior pay because they prefer what they're doing now and, unlike some (not all, but a large portion) of the men they've understood that they just won't be happy spending almost all of their day fighting code problems, and since they're good and can choose their conditions, they choose something that's more rewarding for them - knowing full well that it limits their salary. Sure, it's anecdotal experience, but it's many anecdotes so the patterns seem visible.
and why would men at Google ask for raises while women at Google would not?
Obviously, both groups have competitive skills in the industry. I'm sure you will bring up the studies that men are more likely to negotiate. However, that applies for a more general population who work at middle tier roles at middle tier companies. People who work at Google have more bargaining power than the general population.
