CEOs should realize that firing and paying a settlement to bad apples is cheaper than letting them pollute the atmosphere
They know. A pretty basic part of any sort of management course I’ve ever encountered is getting to know everyone is expendable. It’s simply down to a matter of cost. What you do with that information, however, is very individual.
That being said, and this is me talking about something I don’t know too much about, but hasn’t part of the many Blizzard controversies been that their CEO himself is sort of what you describe as a bad apple?
I was a huge Overwatch fan. Seeing them stop development on it and announcing Overwatch 2 as a whole new game was what made me leave the game. The promise of Overwatch 2 was a story mode, a skills system, more maps and more heroes. Now after years of development and selling the game with future promises to millions of fans, all they have is cancelling PvE and skills system, and one or two heroes and maps. This is not…
Kotick didn't go to Harvard, doesn't have an MBA, and in fact dropped out of university. It's not about MBA vs not. He's just shit.
True, but this is just nitpicking over something that's not really the point being made. The argument behind the OP still stands... the decisions being made by the company aren't ultimately being made by gamers or gamedevs (the workers who make the product / customers who use the product). So everything just turns to shit from a product standpoint...
* Announce Overwatch 2 * Stop all updates for 3 years - including balance updates * Announce this is necessary for PvE rewrite * Release Overwatch 2 without PvE with f2p Battlepass monetization model - change to 5v5 instead of 6v6 * Shut down all Overwatch 1 servers with the release of OW2 * Announce PvE is cancelled
What even is the point of balance updates?
For balance updates the problem is that if balance swings too wildly out of whack, it effectively removes content from the game as it gets too underpowered. Especially in a team game like Overwatch, where peer pressure and sometimes outright harrassment will be deployed by your team mates if you pick an underpowered, or perceived to be underpowered, option
The title should be changed, it's Activision Blizzard not Blizzard CEO.
This is not just a pedantic argument, Blizzard CEO on its own will lead to a significant number of people assuming a different person, Mike Ybarra, Blizzard's President.
I was a huge Overwatch fan. Seeing them stop development on it and announcing Overwatch 2 as a whole new game was what made me leave the game. The promise of Overwatch 2 was a story mode, a skills system, more maps and more heroes. Now after years of development and selling the game with future promises to millions of fans, all they have is cancelling PvE and skills system, and one or two heroes and maps. This is not…
> but is run by Harvard MBA types who aren’t gamers This is going to piss people off, but that's because people who sink huge portions of their spare time and energy into video games do not become CEOs. "Getting high on your own supply" doesn't set you up for professional exceptionalism.
I'm pretty sure the Gullemot brothers still play their own games, heard that Yves played some rainbow 6 siege or something, and while I hate Ubisoft games quality and only ever bought one, he seems way more professional than whoever the Blizzard CEO is.
I was a huge Overwatch fan. Seeing them stop development on it and announcing Overwatch 2 as a whole new game was what made me leave the game. The promise of Overwatch 2 was a story mode, a skills system, more maps and more heroes. Now after years of development and selling the game with future promises to millions of fans, all they have is cancelling PvE and skills system, and one or two heroes and maps. This is not…
Kotick didn't go to Harvard, doesn't have an MBA, and in fact dropped out of university. It's not about MBA vs not. He's just shit.
I said “Harvard MBA types” not “Harvard MBAs” since you’re nitpicking
CEOs should realize that firing and paying a settlement to bad apples is cheaper than letting them pollute the atmosphere
Bad attitudes are way more contagious than a lot of people realize. Just having one person with a bad attitude and resentment to their employer can spread to 5-10 people if they're influential enough.
When a company breeds those baditudes faster than they cycle out, they are doomed. From my discussions with people at large tech companies, most of the big players are sitting on a huge toxic morass that they won't be able to escape. MBAs have taken over at all the large tech companies.
It's to note that Michael Morhaime, one of the founder of the company who was CEO for decades isnt involved with the company anymore. He was one of the geniuses that made blizzard what blizzard was.
For good or ill. Morhaime was also head of the company when a lot of the harassment went down.