Much seems to be written about the importance of strong publications at a young age in determining a successful academic career.
Time spent in industry is seemingly a detriment in this regard. This makes me wonder if it's folly to hope to enter an academic career without having followed a more established academic career path.
My years in industry weren't helpful in my Ph.D. applications, although from what I can tell they didn't hurt too much either. By the time I was applying for academic jobs I don't think anybody cared much what I had done before grad school.
Different academic fields have very different cultures, and there are some which may value your industry experience. Overall we academics have an annoying habit of not caring about anything that happens outside the walls of the ivory tower, but not all fields are the same, and not all individual departments are the same.
There are multiple definitions of a "successful academic career". If you want a tenure-track job at a research university, then yes, you absolutely need strong publications. If you want a tenure-track job at a more teaching-oriented university or college, then often you need strong publications there as well, but other factors are also very important.
As far as the "age" bit -- there is probably some age discrimination, but in practice "age" means "years since you finished your Ph.D."
There are also non-tenure-track positions. The pay varies from miserable (e.g. adjuncting) to mediocre but livable, and the job is primarily teaching with maybe a little bit of service. Can be a very enjoyable job, but it can be a little bit lonely, you're only a conditional member of the club. You'd probably need at least a Masters degree.
Also beware of the "demographic cliff": fewer students are expected to go to college in the coming years than in the previous ones, which is going to have a big impact on faculty hiring, and which will probably cause a lot of small colleges to go under. So, if you go for an academic career, make sure it's in a field that's expected to grow in popularity.
Bottom line -- difficult but maybe possible. Feel free to ask if you have any questions. Good luck!
If that's the case, you'd definitely get into grad school to do your masters, then your phd. You'd likely have an easy time getting a post doc, but you might have to move (may not be able to be picky on where). Then comes the tough part, getting a tenure-track position. Very tough. And all the way until that point, you're getting paid much less than what you likely make now.
I almost obtained a tenure track position after after 4 years in industry which followed my PhD. No postdoc. I was one of the final 3 candidates to do the whole 2 day interview on campus, pitch a research program, teach a mock class, etc. The first day was 14 hours and the second day was about 10. It was gruelling. Then I waited 4 weeks for the rejection. I was disappointed, but then relieved. I was beaten out by someone who had an existing research program they were brining with them from another institution and grant money that went along with it. It was impossible for me to compete on that front coming from industry.
From personal experience, it's relatively easy to move from industry to academia in a support role(1), but hard to get Principal Investigator/tenured prof roles.
(1)as long as one can accept the salary tradeoffs