Blizzard Vs Sentura

    true, a good product does not necessarily equal a high quality game. A good product by this logic is something that sells well. There are some high quality games (at least critically acclaimed) that were terrible products, like Beyond Good and Evil. I think this is an old discussion and a lot of have had it before on these boards. So Sentura, your point is heard loud and clear and I agree.

    As for innovation, I think Blizzard was hugely innovative with WoW from the beginning, but then it turned into this giant juggernaut of a game. Its innovation had to become subtle given they can't reinvent the game top to bottom with every major expansion or patch. If it ain't broke don't fix it, just maintain it and listen to what the customer wants. Will that strategy lead to WoW's eventual FAIL? Eh, perhaps. But Blizzard wants their next game to eat WoW rather than a competitor. Oy, I digress...must...make logical...arguments!

    WoW was not innovative, some mechanics where original and helped its success but the formular was done before, there is an Everquest documentary where all the top dogs at Blizzard admit this and said without Everquest they would not of made the game, thats not to take anything away from WoW's success though it was perfect execution on all fronts. Almost everything that you saw in WoW was done in Everquest many years before, 60 man raids included.

    The first to _really_ innovate usually suffer, given enough time and knowledge others benifit from those innovations and it becomes a standard. Two completely different things, innovation and what sells well. That being said Everquest sold very well 18 expansions and 10 years later later it's still going strong

    Quote from Izuno

    true, a good product does not necessarily equal a high quality game. A good product by this logic is something that sells well. There are some high quality games (at least critically acclaimed) that were terrible products, like Beyond Good and Evil. I think this is an old discussion and a lot of have had it before on these boards. So Sentura, your point is heard loud and clear and I agree.

    There isn't a single person on this board who thinks otherwise. But Blizzard have never been about making 'products,' and even if they were (which they are not, remember) it's not the most tactful response to Peris getting a job there.

    I'm going to go ahead and admit that I've not really played many of Blizzard's games, but I was under the impression an enormous number of people love their games and they sell like hot cakes. Is supplying what people demand actually that contemptible?

    As far as leaning on their own established IPs goes, they seem about on par with any other developer from what I can tell. There really aren't that many developers consistently churning out original IPs, and fewer still have successfully launched as many as Blizzard.

    Originality isn't analogous to fun or satisfaction. Game companies regularly experiment with new ideas internally but a lot of them simply don't turn as fun. In any case, Bliz is clearly a company that cares a lot about the quality of the product, which translates to giving their devs the time and money to do the best they can. Plus from an artist point of view all of their current IP's offer substantial amount of freedom and incredibly rich worlds. It's not like you'll be stuck recreating suburbs or modelling Toyota's.

    Again, people are mixing different things. Izuno we all agree and Taylor said it best in his reply.

    Sentura, no I never presented it that way or meant it that way at least. I talked about the OVERALL deal you would get working at Blizzard or the likes, and said it was among the very best deals you could get in the industry. I find it hard to believe anyone would dispute that. Everyone here would love to make their own Shadow of the Colossus and Beyond Good and Evil games. When they sell what they have sold and you end up losing your job over it, I'd hardly call that a good choice in the long run and mixing it with a little bit more of a run of the mill shooter every once in a while might have been a better plan.

    So again, looking at different variables in the "Equation of Finding the Perfect Job", I would value things like (in no order)

    - money

    - job security

    - lifestyle offered in that location

    - family life

    - projects to work on

    - Career evolution

    and some others I'm sure others will find. I do believe Blizzard lists very high for a lot of people out there on some of these variables at least, so yes they do amount to one of the very best deals you can get in the industry. Obviously you have your own multipliers in front of each of these variables much like everyone else, but even with those I'm sure you can find a list as long as your arm filled with companies that are a LOT worse.

    Quote from Steppenwolf

    Same for me but i can totaly understand why some people want to work on big stuff while others rather want to work on small stuff. It all comes down to things like how career driven you are, how much creeative freedom you want etc.

    It's all good and well wanting to make something totally unique and original (the chances of making something that is totally new are so rare thanks to just about everything already being done, someone will draw a comparison somewhere ;D), but if you want to have the chance to make something after that you have to be willing to take on board criticism, and be prepared to aim certain parts of your game towards an area that is likely to a) get your title noticed, and b) get your title sold.

    If this is cutting that introspective dream sequence where you spend 5 minutes watching a cockroach climb a wall, or simply adding in objective markers to your tacticool shooter then they are things that should be considered in order to allow you to have the backing to make more games.

    I can see Sentura being the kind of person who would have a potentially great idea in his head, but not have a way of making it fit into the space a videogame has to occupy; and refusing to back down on his ideas. Consequently being a horrible person to work with, let alone for.

    Quote from Rick_D

    I can see Sentura being the kind of person who would have a potentially great idea in his head, but not have a way of making it fit into the space a videogame has to occupy; and refusing to back down on his ideas. Consequently being a horrible person to work with, let alone for.

    the value of an idea is nothing if you cannot put it into a frame; and i think that's a valued rule in design of any media. this is also confirmed further in pretty much every "making of" book or video clip i've ever watched. there are tons of ideas that are scrapped for each game, because they couldn't under the given circumstances be implemented. of course it's sad to see it go in this way, but at least you know that you're on the path of making a better game.

    also, i like how you basically made up an assumption and then derived it to make a pseudo logical argument.

    Quote

    a potentially great idea in his head, but not have a way of making it fit into the space a videogame has to occupy

    Could that really be considered a great idea then? People are starving all over the world, I have a great idea, lets feed them! Oh...

    Quote from Rick_D

    I can see Sentura being the kind of person who would have a potentially great idea in his head, but not have a way of making it fit into the space a videogame has to occupy; and refusing to back down on his ideas. Consequently being a horrible person to work with, let alone for.

    Hey man, you're just thinking of it the wrong way, you don't gotta shrink the idea, you just gotta expand the videogame!!

    I like Bram Eulaers' early work like de_plaka and some of the stuff he did on Bionic Commando but man did he sell out when he signed at a major studio in the States.

Participate now!

Don’t have an account yet? Register yourself now and be a part of our community!

Register Yourself Login