Shakeup at Blizzard!

[Wapptor]

I think you may be very mistaken Occhi,

In all articles (non-gaming sites) that I have read about this, the articles say that Blizzard is the "crown jewel" of Vivendi's gaming empire. And the Diablo series is it's heart, they showed many pictures/screenshots and mentioned it frequently: " The Blizzard North unit was responsible for creating the 'Diablo' franchise, one of the most successful games in the industry's history.

Blizzard is the crown jewel in Viviendi's gaming empire. But analysts say it may not be worth as much today as it was last week."

Also, doesn't anyone wonder what this means?

Roper said, "We made a very difficult decision. We love everyone at Blizzard... at the San Mateo office and at Blizzard in Irvine." And in addition to this personal well-wishing, he did reveal other reasons for wanting to see Blizzard North continue on, and said, "I want to play Diablo."

Perhaps DIII is already in the making. My hope, although idealistic, is that these four got fed up with the Americanization and corruption of Blizzard and have left to once again make truly great games. Maybe it'll happen. They did say they wanted to form a new company and grab some old "loyal" Blizzard employees. I'll keep my hopes up and keep watching the fansites.

-Wapptor

[Quark]

My hope, although idealistic, is that these four got fed up with the Americanization and corruption of Blizzard and have left to once again make truly great games.  Maybe it'll happen.  They did say they wanted to form a new company and grab some old "loyal" Blizzard employees.  I'll keep my hopes up and keep watching the fansites.

-Wapptor

I read this and laugh. Why? Because if what Roper says is true, then Vivendi was a big part of the problem. Kind of hard to get upset with Americanization when you're an American company working for the French.

[Arutha]

Vivendi may be a French company, but it got where it got because its former CEO, J.M. Messier tried to model it after the major US groups, and actually be more "American" than Americans themselves.

For a long time, business methods and ethics were very different in France.
But nowadays, the major French groups are even "more American" than their US counterparts. France resisted ultra-liberalism (or "neo-capitalism" - I'm not 100% sure that the word "liberal" when applied to economy means the same in English and in French) for a long time, but now French managers have embraced it.

A main US periodical recently had on its frontpage the title "Aren't their ashamed ?", referring to some US managers who paid themselves astronomical salaries when their groups faced difficulties.
Well, in France it's become the outrageous norm: groups lay off personnel, show losses instead of profits, but their CEOs keep increasing their income.

"American" in John Doe's mind, when applied to business, means "ultra-liberal" or "neo-capitalistic".
It has little to do with reality where the US government actually heavily helps US firms and where you'll see CEOs whose firm hasn't shown a profit resign or get a symbolic 1$ salary.

"Americanization" in that context simply means: "more concerned about making profits than making good products".
It is one of the myths of a capitalistic or "liberal" economy: the better the product, the better the service, the larger the profit.
Neo-capitalism doesn't bother with such a myth. They know that quality is but one factor, and more often than not, a very minor one.

[bschultz]

blizzard does their own beta testing and whatnot so I dont think thats what happened. besides I doubt tehy would quit over a stupid patch. it had to have been something bigger. a project they wanted greenlighted maybe, perhaps more funding for their two unannounced projects... who knows. but i find it pretty unlikely that it was because of 1.10

[Whiggles]

Folks over at Dii.net posted an update with a statement from Mike Morhaime, president and co-founder of Blizzard Entertainment:

"I speak for everyone in our company when I say how grateful we are to have had the opportunity to work closely with this group of individuals. Each one of them has made valuable contributions to many of our games, and we would like to thank them for all of their hard work over the years. We wish them nothing but the best and are confident that they will be successful in their future endeavors. At the same time, we want to convey that Blizzard's success has never been attributable to any one person or small group of individuals, and I am confident that we have the teams in place to continue creating some of the best games in the world."

I'm particularly intrigued by the last sentence.  Final jab at the departing crew?

That's the same statement, more or less, that they made back in 1998 when the designer of Starcraft, James Phinney, quite Blizzard, taking with him the webmaster (Jeff Vaughan) and several programmers. More or less the standard corporate mantra -- "Individuals don't make the company". To be honest I've never bought this in Blizzard's case. I find it hard to believe that everyone at Blizzard just throws in their ideas and they come out with an end product. Diablo II sure looks a bit like that, but all their other games have a reasonably unified feel, suggesting that there was some sort of a mastermind behind each one, deciding which ideas stayed and which went.

[kandrathe]

I'll have to disagree with Mike Morhaime. IMO, it is creative and inspirational leaders that make good software. Many things can make a game bad, but it takes the right kind of visionaries to get it all right. You need amoungst other things, good artists, good play concepts, good game theory, good software, and good testing. Now, just try to make a profit. I think like many things in the software world, the business people believe that you can just turn a crank and lots of good stuff will pour out of your development groups. To them, it's like printing money. All you sell is the same intellectual property, over and over , and over. If you read Vivendi's corporate documents to the SEC, etc., you see that they are trying to sell the idea that the conglomeration of music, movies, and software makes sense. I think they probably wanted Blizzard North to do some schlocky game based on a Universal movie title (i.e. Jurassic Park - Operation Genesis).

It is quite a different view from the trenches. The developers fall in love with their work, they internalize it, and it becomes a part of their lives. Intuitively these high performance teams begin to exist in harmony with the market and know what the game buying public wants. The live it, they love it, they play it daily. Most of the great projects (and profitable ones) I've worked on began in one of these high performance teams as a beloved skunk works project that eventually was revealed, polished up, and then marketed. There are very few successful companies that allow leadership from the bottom, and I suspect that Vivendi is not one of them. No, I think it was probably a mandate from the top for another game like Rock-n-Roll racing, or Lost Vikings that sent those guys running from the building. I'm thinking we should probably get ready for an exodus of the sensible developers from BN, and then the announcement of their next big project, a big stinky flop.

[Occhidiangela]

I sincerely hope that your prediction of Diablo III being in work and likely to be announced soon is right, but I sincerely doubt it. Can you explain to me the logic of running two MMORPG's at once, and basically competing with yourself in the same genre? I'd be very interested is seeing how that makes sense. However, if Diablo III were to be built as a follow on bnet game, where monthly fees are not an issue, then you may be on to something.

Diablo was the crown jewel of Blizzard North, and Blizzard. Well, for a time. However, Pong was once Atari's crown jewel. As channel1 points out, there is a shelf life for most any game, insofar as profitability.

Now, about that drink:

Blizzard is and was, always, an American company. Where did you pull this one out of ?

   is that these four got fed up with the Americanization and corruption of Blizzard and have left to once again make truly great games. Maybe it'll happen.

Blizzard was not started by Vivendi, it got absorbed by them, though originally by Havas, IIRC, then Vivendi, I don't remember their corporate relationships at the moment.

The alleged corruption of Blizzard was certainly an evolution that they had some control over, being in the top management rungs, however, once Blizzard went from small company to part of a corporate empire, the influence of "the suits" was going to be difficult to fend of indefinitely.

Why did I suggest that Diablo III aint ever coming out? For one th ing, the huge profits from Diablo simply aren't there to attract new investment, and a new profit center, game if you will, needs to be part of the incentive for anyone to pick up Blizzard and expect to make money. Name brand benifits fade over time if you don't come up with new products that do well in the market place. The American auto industry is full of examples over the past 60 years.

[Whiggles]

Interview here with Roper, in which he says that the reason they left was because they felt they weren't getting enough of a say in the direction the company was taking, and that Vivendi wasn't giving them that opportunity. Pretty much sums up what I expected.

[Brista]

Well it's all speculation but it sounds to me like the most likely explanation is that they were told firmly after things had been left hanging for quite some time that Blizzard was not going to do a third Diablo game

That seems to me to be the sort of thing that would make people jack in the 9 to 5 and start their own company

There actually aren't many things in working life that make people jack their job in - despite Dilbert it isn't usually over keys to the executive loos

Note too the oblique reference to pinching a few of Blizzard North's staff

So where does that leave us?

Well Roper et al will make something as close to Diablo 3 as Alpha Centauri was to Civ

They'll also get it out reasonably fast - they can't pay the bills until it hits the shelves

Meanwhile Blizzard, if all this is true, may meanwhile be attempting to turn the talents of their people at Blizzard North to something else - Lost Vikings type stuff, maybe console games. (And of course this might be encouraging Mr Roper to believe he can lure people away). However, Blizzard might feel stung enough to do Diablo 3 as a spoiler as well as cashing in on the name but it might turn out to be a bit of a turkey, especially if they lose more key people. It's funny how management has an awful lot of playground level mentality running through it, especially at times like this

I also think it's likely that if Blizzard North gets sold off then the buyer will commission Diablo 3 - the main reason for buying Blizzard North would be for that product line

So we should get a diablo-like game from the executives who left plus what I think is an increased chance of an official Diablo 3 from Blizzard North

Hope it all works out for the people whose careers and incomes are on the line here

And, at least our friend Isolde, whether stepping up to management or being poached for fat $$$$, should end up getting paid more :)

[Roland]

Notice the word, clearly stated THROUGHOUT the post, "contract"? As in, "When is our contract up for renewal?" Lol. I can actually FEEL the wind rushing over your head. ;)

channel1 was making a humorous parody of the 1.10 Diablo II patch, replacing the D2 part with "contract", as in "When are we going to get renewed so we can keep working here?". I, personally, found it quite amusing. Very original, too. :) Two thumbs up!

[TaiDaishar]

Well it's all speculation but it sounds to me like the most likely explanation is that they were told firmly after things had been left hanging for quite some time that Blizzard was not going to do a third Diablo game

lol, if anything it would be that they were told firmly that they ARE going to do a third Diablo, Diablo 2 has been such a success and has a very very long shelves life with an incredible fan base (that will grow tremendously when/if 1.10 will be released), announcing Diablo 3 a few months after the patch was released (when most things were revealed and the excitment has been lowered a little about the patch) will probably make big money to Blizzard/Vivendi so I don't see any reason why Vivendi wouldn't want to continue with the Diablo series while IIRC Roper and friends said after the D2X that the world of Diablo pretty much consumed itself.

[Wapptor]

Not drinking, smoking, and it's called Narlant weed! :P

What I am suggesting however is not another MMORPG but a game, in 3d, very similar to the other two games. All Blizzard needs is a plot (how hard can it be, Diablo is unleashed, you must destroy him!?) and some tech guys and they can make this game without too much trouble. They have a huge fan-base already, tons of people will buy it, guaranteed! This "Americanization" I speak of is the drive for profit over quality. If they did like I said above, they would be part of this "Americanization". They may not have the cash, but I am pretty sure they'd make up for it. Diablo 1 was very popular for its time. Diablo 2 was huge! All the players from both games will surely buy a Diablo 3 if it ever comes out.

Talk to Gheed for the Narlant weed...

-Wapptor

[Guest]

Sony is doing it now and Mythic will be doing it when Imperator arrives.

The key is bundleing - like subscribing to a game service rather to a game. It has 2 adavanatges. It gets people trying your new mmorp with out forcing them to abandon your old one. And it lets you continue to pull some profit in on older games.

At the moment Sony has Everquest(very little pvp with a long exp grind) and Planetside(all pvp and fast lvling). Both are very different and it allows players to get multiple gaming expseriences while your one company gets all the money.
They are currently $20 a monyh together. When EQ2 comes out it wont raise your subscrription price to play all 3.

I think in 5 years any mmorp company that isnt offering bundled games will be out of the loop. Of course in the case of D3 it might be too much like WoW.

Pure speculation - maybe the higher ups killed D3 because it would be too much like WoW ?

[jms]

Ghostiger,

Bundling mmo's in an overall "service" is a great point--I hadn't thought about that. For Blizzard, I see a significant problem with this plan, though. Obviously, Battle.net already offers a service for Blizzard's games, and we already know that WoW will carry some form of recurring payment, setting it apart from good 'ole free bnet. So, if Blizzard were to release D3 in an mmo atmosphere and package it with WoW, they would have to simultaneously maintain two very conflicting online gaming services.

However, there is a situation I can imagine where it would work out. In your examples above, older mmo's were being packaged with newer mmo's so as to extend the life of older, technologically obselete games. IF Blizzard were to churn out an mmo D3 long after WoW's release and discontinue using Battle.net for their multiplayer games in between, they could phase out bnet as a legacy service for only their older games, and setup a new pay-package for their newer mmo-themed games.

Anyways, there's still hope that D3 is currently in development. According to Roper in the interview on HomeLan:

...Blizzard North currently has two unannounced projects in development but that he expects that the studio responsible for the hugely successful Diablo game franchise will continue to make great games.

[jms]

Somehow, I'm not certain granting Gamespot permission to publish the company cell phone number was a good idea.

Top 10 Most Annoying Spam Calls on the Company Phone

10. Can you send me the sourcecode for D2?

9. Want to play Quake sometime?

8. Hey Debbie...remember me? You gave me your number last night..want to get together sometime?

7. Are you gonna call your new company 'SNOWSTORM' to compete with 'BLIZZARD'?

6. Hey, ya, I'll have the 2 mediums with 2 toppings special for-wait, is that only on Tuesdays? Hello, Pizza Hut...hello?!

5. Guys, if you're not too busy, could you come to our LAN party? We're running C&C, Age of Empires, and Dungeon Siege!

4. Hello, we're interested in producing a Mario clone--think you're up for it?

3. Hi, um, I'm only 13, but I'd like to manage your new website??

2. Hi Bill, it's Sirian. Would you forward Max a copy of my newly revised thesis on PK's and other anti-social behavior types? Thanks!

1. Hey, since you guys left, can I have your D2 accounts?

[LiquidDamage]

At the moment Sony has Everquest(very little pvp with a long exp grind) and Planetside(all pvp and fast lvling). Both are very different and it allows players to get multiple gaming expseriences while your one company gets all the money.

Don't forget Star Wars Galaxies. I'm playing that right now. So far I have only minor complaints, but I haven't been playing long.

Edit: Ah, I see you weren't just listing all the sony MMORPGs, you were listing bundled ones. Anyway, it just further supports the idea that people are producing multiple MMORPGs if they appeal to different people.

Would you believe that so far they have fixed something new EVERY DAY? That's right, DAILY patches. It's incredible. AC2 would force you to deal with bugs and imbalances for a month or more, and they'd break as much as they fixed (rather like D2, in that respect).

Not to hijack the thread or anything, but SWG has some pretty amusing features. There is an in-game email system, and an in-game alert system-- so you can set an alert to remind yourself when to get off, or when to meet someone in the game.

[bschultz]

hehe thats funny.

[bschultz]

heres another article that goes into alot more detail.

http://money.cnn.com/2003/07/01/commentary...aming/index.htm

The pending sale of the gaming division was a major factor in the decision to leave Blizzard and Vivendi, Roper told me Tuesday morning. The quartet was seeking a higher level of involvement with Vivendi, but grew frustrated with the lack of response.


Bill Roper
"If we know that something's going to be happening, we want to have a direct pipeline to talk to someone who's above Blizzard," said Roper. "We wanted to be able to have that level of participation and communication with Vivendi (V: Research, Estimates) and to be able to offer some insight and some knowledge in what they're thinking about in terms of a sale, particularly with Blizzard. And for the four of us, that opportunity wasn't going to be made available."

now that makes more sence to me then "OMG its teh patch!!!"

[Occhidiangela]

Can take your 'Americanization' garbage and stuff it.

I am not sure how long you have been alive, but the profit-shareholder pile driver, and its influence in both international business and multinational corporations, has been growing as a force for congolmerates growing into insane sizes since about the early 1980's.

What screwed a great deal of the "expectations" of any shareholder group was the returns of internet/tech bubble investments of the 1990's. You want to blame something for the nutso profit focus? Blame tech.

Now, insofar as CEO compensation? Don't get me started, it is broken here in the US, has been for over a decade, but the habit of pursuing aristocratic life styles by capitalists was invented in Europe, not the U.S. About 150 years ago.

You want to call it anything, call it 'aristocrization' and you may actually have metaphor that fits.

[Guest]

It is a joint effort between EA and SOE I think.

It doesnt fit in the model because its not being bundled. I think The deal with it is - someone was going to make a StarWars MMORP no matter what and it was going to be large, so SOE would have foolish to not get a piece of it.