Blizzard Vs Sentura

[Skjalg]

I like how Sentura goes around bashing blizzard and saying they dont make quality games, making an ass of himself in the process because thats basically what Blizzard does best, then tries to save his ass 1 page later by redefing the word quality to mean 'innovation', only to make himself more of an ass since thats basically what every game company strives for, including Blizzard.

I mean, its okay if you don't like Blizzard for some reason (maybe you got ganked too much in diablo 2 multi player?), but saying that they are not innovative and that their games lack quality and that they are all about the money and that everyone who would even consider working there are slaves.... cmon, do you even read what you write?

[Furyo]

Not everybody wants to work on the biggest games and for the biggest companys. Whats so wrong about that?

Stepp you're getting the wrong idea here. Sentura is blasting Blizzard not for its size or the size of its games but for its approach to making games. Size doesn't matter in that argument because you'll find companies of all kinds that fall on both sides of the Sentura Fence .

My own opinion is that Blizzard (since this is the one we are talking about) is among the companies that probably offer some of the very best overall deal for a games dev to work on. Working there you probably have a seemingly safe position, a competitive salary and incentives, some of the world's greatest talent to work with and games to work on that actually are most likely going to ship.

Again, compared to a LOT of companies out there, that I've had the chance NOT to work for, that's a LOT better to me.

[FrieChamp]

retarded faggot ass fucking retard ass fuck fuck

Rick_D and his mouth - never gonna change eh? Despite the blasphemy, please stay nice...please?

On subject: Blizzard designs the most succesful RTS games (Warcraft series and Starcraft), developed the most succesful MMO to date and they made fuckin' Diablo I and II. "Diablo" bro. Think about it.

[sarge mat]

I think a lot of people are just happy to have jobs at the moment tbh. Better to make generic shooter 52 and have it do fine than something new and different that flops. That will change, but at the moment its about staying alive for a lot of places. I would think a few years from now all the new, small studios that have come from the ashes of the places that have closed will bring lots of new, different, great games.

Just my thoughts, not sure if its even on topic

[Duff-e]

Why you make games:

[DaanO]

Since we're talking games i'll assume you mean the bling, right? If you mean the girls that you're welcome to join making some music~~

[Duff-e]

Daano you saucy minx, I'm sure the the only sheet music your women read is made of linen ;D

[Sentura]

they made fuckin' Diablo I and II. "Diablo" bro. Think about it.

that's what i've been trying to say: diablo was definitely one of the best games ever, but those people don't work for blizzard anymore. look at http://www.arena.net/ - those are the same people working on new projects. needless to say, i'm still a huge fan of their progress.

however (and i want to end the debate here, because this is getting ridiculous - i am just repeating myself over and over again), i have come to understand over the course of the debate that the blizzard south studio has some excellent working conditions. i would still never work for blizzard for reasons already stated; and perhaps it's a matter of clashing ideologies more than anything else. also, while this for some may be a question of my passion for creating games, i think it's quite the opposite - reviewing the back catalogue of blizzard, it to me represents something that could have been much better. perhaps not in the sense of polished work, but in the sense of innovation and the creation of new titles (christ, they're a publisher themselves nowadays, even EA decided to let themselves go a bit and release games such as mirror's edge - why do you not see the same thing from activision-blizzard?). Steppenwolf nailed it pretty well i think, in that i just don't consider it a valid career choice.

really. after you spent a fucklong amount of time complaining that L4D2 did not innovate at all and wasn't a worthy sequel.

honestly, i've never understood valve's choice to take in turtle rock studios (makers of l4d, l4d2 along with cs:cz). despite that, i think the atmosphere of the studio, and the passion of the people involved goes much further than what i have seen from blizzard. bearing in mind, this is only from an outsider's perspective.

I like how Sentura goes around bashing blizzard and saying they dont make quality games, making an ass of himself in the process because thats basically what Blizzard does best, then tries to save his ass 1 page later by redefing the word quality to mean 'innovation', only to make himself more of an ass since thats basically what every game company strives for, including Blizzard.

i can see you that you consider this an act of defense, so let me be clear: i never questioned the quality of blizzards products; because they are polished work. what i questioned was the quality of their games. i said from the beginning that these were separate entities in that you can have an excellent product that still does not have good quality as a game. since quality in a game may vary with whatever game mechanics, narrative, objectives/moral and other game elements; i choose to view quality as the sum of these going towards something new, which then becomes innovation. this is the distinction i had hoped people would have caught on to, but maybe i was being too vague.

I mean, its okay if you don't like Blizzard for some reason (maybe you got ganked too much in diablo 2 multi player?), but saying that they are not innovative and that their games lack quality and that they are all about the money and that everyone who would even consider working there are slaves.... cmon, do you even read what you write?

for the comment about diablo, please refer to my first paragraph. for the games are not innovative, please refer above (they aren't). for the rest, it was a direct response to Furyo's comment about having a net of security; which i do think is an insult to game developers in large houses, in that it's a labeling of them as people working only for money. and if people only work in the industry for money, then allow me not to have the same respect for them in comparison for people who work in the industry because of passion.

i think this entire debate has been blown out of proportion, and it's weird seeing all of you respond to this as if it were my proclamation of being the second coming of christ. it's my opinion based on my principles that i will never work for blizzard; i don't see how it has anything to do with you or your beliefs. and honestly, i couldn't care less if you think less of me as a person or potential developer because of this, because it's just the way i am.

[Zeta]

cool thread

[Furyo]

I don't see where thinking about job security is an insult. I would think anyone with a bit of self esteem would obviously consider that among the variables of choosing one company over another.

[Sentura]

I don't see where thinking about job security is an insult. I would think anyone with a bit of self esteem would obviously consider that among the variables of choosing one company over another.

so calling people greedy under the guise of 'job security' isn't an insult? that's how you present it. also, how exactly does this relate to self esteem?

[Jetsetlemming]

I was about to say I could sympathize with Sentura, I'm not sure I would be comfortable working for Blizzard given the types of games they make is almost alien to me, but then I realized that making an MMO environment that millions of people will experience and practically live in seems like it'd be very rewarding, and not nearly so alien as an RTS level or something.

[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.

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!

[2d-chris]

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

[Taylor]

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.