Nah, nobody is claiming that, you're just putting up windmills to charge at.
They don't need to design the classes, they just need to say "look guys there's untapped potential in this and that market, do what's needed to appeal to it".
I'll refer you to Bobby - "take the fun out of making games" - Kotick.
Edit: CFO = Chief Financial Officer, ie he put the beancounters in charge of the creative department, so much for the hands off approach.Originally Posted by BobbyKotick
Last edited by Roadblock; 2016-04-14 at 03:34 PM.
They didn't.
Activision merged with Vivdendi, which already owned Blizzard, at the end of 2007. Yes, owned. Blizzard was not on its own in 2007 nor was it on its own when they started World of Warcraft. They have no control over what Blizzard does. Having goals != having control. Blizzard is autonomous and makes its own decisions.
Are you seriously arguing that parent company change isn't a major corporate event that can have a significant effect on broader top-level decisions? What you are describing would be a massive liability for Activision-Blizzard. Are you intentionally talking about the activision subdivision rather than the parent company?
Authors I have enjoyed enough to mention here: JRR Tolkein, Poul Anderson,Jack Vance, Gene Wolfe, Glen Cook, Brian Stableford, MAR Barker, Larry Niven and Jerry Pournelle, WM Hodgson, Fredrick Brown, Robert SheckleyJohn Steakley, Joe Abercrombie, Robert Silverberg, the norse sagas, CJ Cherryh, PG Wodehouse, Clark Ashton Smith, Alastair Reynolds, Cordwainer Smith, LE Modesitt, L. Sprague de Camp & Fletcher Pratt, Stephen R Donaldon, and Jack L Chalker.
Not quite right. Activision did not merge with Vivendi. Vivendi Games, a subsidiary of Vivendi, was merged into Activision, and Vivendi (the conglomerate) got a controlling interest in this merged entity.
And of course Activision-Blizzard management has control over Blizzard. There were some restraints in the bylaws that were there to keep Vivendi happy, but those have all now been erased. Blizzard is just a division of Activision-Blizzard now; it's no more independent than Buick is independent of GM.
"There is a pervasive myth that making content hard will induce players to rise to the occasion. We find the opposite. " -- Ghostcrawler
"The bit about hardcore players not always caring about the long term interests of the game is spot on." -- Ghostcrawler
"Do you want a game with no casuals so about 500 players?"
The answer is unmistakably no and why no? because its blizzard themself that ruined it, sure activision gave blizzard tons of idea's to make more money but from a game developing pov its blizzard thats responsible for the way the game turns out.
- Vanilla was legitimately bad; we just didn't know any better at the time - SirCowDog
Authors I have enjoyed enough to mention here: JRR Tolkein, Poul Anderson,Jack Vance, Gene Wolfe, Glen Cook, Brian Stableford, MAR Barker, Larry Niven and Jerry Pournelle, WM Hodgson, Fredrick Brown, Robert SheckleyJohn Steakley, Joe Abercrombie, Robert Silverberg, the norse sagas, CJ Cherryh, PG Wodehouse, Clark Ashton Smith, Alastair Reynolds, Cordwainer Smith, LE Modesitt, L. Sprague de Camp & Fletcher Pratt, Stephen R Donaldon, and Jack L Chalker.
C'mon, do you really believe that a company would merge with another and choose to have no say over it, when whatever happens with that company directly impacts their profits?
That is all fluff on paper to keep the WoW fans happy.
What do you think would have happened if they said 'We [Activision] are absorbing Blizzard. The course of WoW is now under our direction and we will make all decisions pertaining to it'?
I'll tell you what...People would have freaked out.
It is much easier for the masses to take when they come out and say 'We [Activision] are acquiring Blizzard through a merger, but we will let them act like they are still their own business'.
No they didin't. Activision actually doesn't have much control over blizzard themselves.
Blizzard just basically turned into arthas. Once a noble paladin , now a treacherous lich king lusting for power. It's like they wrote their own prophecy
So they don't mandate anything to your company? Can you guys change your company name without their approval? Can you sell your company without their approval?
What I am getting at, is that their is always a 'line' where that parent can and will step in and say 'nuh uh'.
You're fucking idiots if you don't realize that poopy kottick and lessheim sometimes hang out together and throw "suggestions" at each other, moreso kottick.
Ignorant children, wake up to how the real world works.
I suspect we couldn't just change our name, but in anything that is actually important, they don't have a say. I know for a fact that my boss (the CEO), has never had to ask for approval to give people raises, to pursue new clients, to change how we work (we transitioned to a work-from-home company last year), how much of our healthcare is paid by the company, and so on.