Hi aspiring engineers,
I am just coming here to help inform people of the experience of Google recruiting for New Grads. I wanted not to jump the gun and wait until I had all the information. I got rejected a week ago but I took some time to talk with the recruiter and collect all the info I could. I will start with the objective information and feedback. Then I will follow it up with my opinions. The interviews:

1. Googlyness- your a typical behavioral interview
2. Technical interview- Graph question (question was similar to path finding/shortest path)
3. Technical interview- Intervals question (it was essentially p1 check if intervals overlap then p2 find maximum number of overlapping intervals)
4. Technical interview- Dynamic programming :'( (dp similar to coin game or somewhat like robbers where the goal was to get the best sum)

The feedback I got was very non-descript/unspecific. A fair criticism I got was I could talk more about the corner cases. The other piece of feedback I got was I needed hints and that was not a positive indicator(I will go into more detail on this later). This was quite literally all the information I got from my feedback.

My take on the interviews at the time:

1. Googlyness- Hire
2. Technical 1- Hire/Strong Hire: it was a 2 parter and I verbally expressed the optimal solution almost instantly with no help in addiditon to listing of some corner cases(but not all)
3. Technical 2- Hire: Again it was kind of a 2 parter, and again I practically immediately came up with a solution but some cases were not behaving exactly as I thought. I got one minor hint about changing the way I sorted the intervals and then everything clicked into place and immediately got the optimal solution.(there was an optimization that I would consider to be gimmicky where there is a specific feature of a specific sort that makes it more optimal than merge sort or quicksort on average that generally I would expect a select few to actually know going into a blind interview) again I listed some corner cases but not all.
4. Final Interview- No Hire/Lean Hire: DP is the bane of everyones existence I'm sure. I immediately recognized it was a DP problem but my mistake was jumping right into the DP implementation rather than breaking it down fundamental structure and attempting a brute force solution then optimizing. About 10-12 minutes of implementing the DP solution I got stuck and the interviewer recognized it and recommended I try to do the brute force approach instead. Towards the last quarter I hit a road bump and I needed another minor hint that reminded me to keep track of optimal solution through a global variable. I went down this path and at the end I was 99% of the way to the solution but I couldn't quite finish writing it and had no time to list any corner cases. At the very end I was asked to describe the time and memory complexity.

Now is where my opinion comes in post feedback. I got my feedback literally the day after they said the interview period ended. So I'm assuming there was not much deliberation over my profile and it was an easy rejection. This came as a suprise to me because I thought I did pretty well aside from the one outlier. So I'm going to breakdown the interviews post feedback:

1. It went about as well as a behavioral could go. I was well spoken, prepared and thoughtful about my answers but nothing would have stood out about this interview.
2. In my opinion it was my best interview and compared to all my previous interview experiences I killed it on this one. I needed no help and in my opinion I performed like a perfect on paper candidate.
3. I was killing this interview until I needed the dreaded "hint" which put a red flag on my profile.(I don't think the sorting gimmick came into play in the ultimate decision only the sorting hint)
4. I guess the interviewer considered the one piece of non-descript advice a hint and the minor hint added to 2 additional red flags on my feedback. I am sure I described to complexities correct because I based them off similar problems.

This part is going to make me sound angry and childish no matter how I write it but I'm writing it anyways. Ultimately if I am correct in my assumption based on the feedback and this was how my feedback looked then I feel like this was incredibly nitpicky for either the interviewer or the recruiter to flag me for rejection based off these minor mistakes. It makes me think they only allow perfect candidates. I also got extremely unlucky getting an interview with a DP question for a new grad interview. All around an unfortunate go at what could have been a much better experience and outcome of the DP interview question really held me back in my opinion. Back to that earlier feedback about "positive indicators" I will say that I know that recruiters are very specific about their language and he made very sure not to say negative feedback and only say not enough positive feedback. That made me think two things hes being very intelligent with his verbiage so as the not say certain things to send a bad signal to candidates or my feedback was realistically not that bad and maybe I'll get lucky next time around.