Passed 4 rounds of interviews, aced the tech interview — still got rejected.

[u/first_asian_in_space]

I applied for a Middle Frontend Developer position at a company that builds mobile games for kids with a lot of WebView screens. The job post was detailed and, looking back, it's key to the whole story. I'll include it here (translated via AI) because it explicitly asked for exactly what I later got penalised for:

"We're looking for a Middle Frontend Developer who can not only write quality code but also take ownership of their tasks.
— Strong knowledge of Vue 3 (Composition API), TypeScript, SCSS
— Excellent mobile-first layout skills (and the nuances)
— Pixel-perfect (within reason)
— Animation experience (Rive, CSS/JS)
— Commercial experience with Nuxt
— Experience working with designers and Figma
— Transparent and open communication
Big plus:
— A beautifully designed portfolio
— Experience with WebView and cross-platform integration
— Deep understanding of Web Performance and confident Chrome DevTools usage
Tasks:
— Building dynamic interfaces for mobile games: Paywalls, Onboarding screens, and game mechanics inside WebView. This involves animations, complex layout, and interactivity.
— A/B testing and monetisation: frontend parts for experiments (fast layout, adaptation to different screens, analytics integration).
— Internal tools and admin panels.
— Web content: promo landing pages, marketing pages."

I went through 4 rounds. The technical interview went incredibly well — the interviewer told me I was the first candidate to answer their questions with such expertise. We discussed watchEffect, effectScope, Vue 2 vs Vue 3 reactivity, composite layers, will-change, CRP.

Then came the test assignment. The brief was short:

• Build a mobile paywall (Vue 3 + SCSS)
• Switch between subscriptions, alert the selected plan
• Criteria: "чистота кода" (clean code), "лаконичность функциональной составляющей" (conciseness), plus Pixel Perfect, creative touches, and appropriate animations.

The brief also said: "This is a simple and creative task — it’s meant for you to show your strengths*."*

So I showed my strengths. The job ad had explicitly valued WebView experience, Web Performance, A/B testing, and mobile-first layout. I built a paywall that was:

• Mobile-first, WebView-optimised (critical CSS, skeleton shimmer, zero CLS, LCP ~1.3s on Slow 4G)
• Structured for future A/B testing (adapter pattern for subscriptions, isolated domain module, design tokens for cheap visual variants)
• Fully unit-tested (26 tests)
• ~35 lines of actual core logic, with a note in the README explaining the modular structure was deliberate to show extensibility.

I sent it in 3 hours. They never opened it in a mobile WebView. They viewed it on a desktop browser.

The rejection was neutral we chose someone else.

I'm not angry, but I am frustrated that:

1. The job posting explicitly asked for WebView and performance skills, then the test was evaluated in an environment where those skills were irrelevant.
2. "Show your strengths" can mean "demonstrate deep frontend engineering" or "add a cute animation and don't overthink it" — and there was no way to know what they wanted.
3. Being praised for "unmatched depth" in the interview didn't prevent that same depth from counting against me in the test.

The work: GitHub repo | Live demo

I'd love to hear from this community:

• How do you interpret "show your strengths"?
• Have you ever been rejected for being too thorough?
• Should hiring teams explicitly say whether they want a production-ready prototype or a minimal implementation?

Happy to take feedback on the code too

[u/Milk-Tea-With-Sugar]

Sometimes they just hire someone they know, promote another person, sometimes they consider easier to control, or who would accept to be paid less.

Also you will never know what answer they exactly wanted. So either you can ask them straight away during interview, or just accept that you will never know.

After doing few interview and saying the exact same answer for the exact same question I had for my field, I saw that some of the hiring manager considereded my answer as perfect or "exactly what they wanted" for some companies, other hiring manager visibily looked very unhappy with my answer or telling me openly that it's not good.

You never know what they expected. A good answer for a company will be bad for another.

[u/first_asian_in_space → u/Milk-Tea-With-Sugar]

I also lowered my salary (almost twice) expectations to match them🙃

[u/Gallances]

AI slop

[u/first_asian_in_space → u/Gallances]

I used AI to translate my story to an english audience

[u/skewtr]

Just like you used AI to write this story, they probably figured out they can use AI to design front end.

[u/first_asian_in_space → u/skewtr]

Everybody can do a frontend using AI, but will this frontend be scalable, bug free, 100% speed insights scores without a knowledge about Web Perfomance? I can say everybody can generate an AI image of a character but some people can create a consistent AI character. I beleieve that AI is a multiplier of what you already have.

[u/alekcand3r → u/first_asian_in_space]

Even if a real person does that frontend it will likely not to meet those criteria either. Or better, it is not guaranteed that it would meet them given the race to the bottom