Blizzard can't create good games anymore

[Gorsameth]

To be fair, what studio is putting out good games? The whole multiplayer gaming genre is just rehashes and remasters. Hell that goes for single player games too. The gaming industry as a whole needs a shakeup.

AAA games have gotten so expensive to make that very few, if any, developers are willing to be risky with it when they can churn out 'safe' stuff instead.
That is why all the innovates comes from smaller studio's.

[Potatowizard]

It's Activision now. Blizzard is pretty much gone. To OP's point, this is a company that started with a bunch of dudes who wanted to create games. Had crazy ideas and put them out for the world to see. And it literally exploded. The company that owns these games now is just riding that initial development from 30-40 years ago. Nothing new is going to come out.

Overwatch was a step in the right direction. But they immediately tried to make it bigger than it was with a massive competitive scene and pro league. Now look at it. Game is still fun, but the unfolding story has been so slow to come out. New characters are often enough. But slow maps, slow game modes, slow story. Not a tons really to do in the game.

[Captain Proton]

exactly when was that time where developer made sp story driven games?
because in the '80s there was a plethora of arcade games with stupid difficulty to spend more coins, '90 was full of copy pasted platforms everywhere with dumb expansions to recycle the same game, '00 fps and mmos with subscriptions, p2w and introduction of dlcs, '10 mobas and the lastman standing shooters with their esthetic gambling

It was during the times you listed, you just provided a incredibly simplified and modified recap of those eras of gaming.

[rhorle]

The last games that were really good for me are Witcher III, Bioshock series and Dark Souls. Had also read somewhere that many small game industries have been bought up over the time by big companies and shareholders and are now just a money printing machine more or less. The smaller the studio, the more passionate the development in my opinion. Game development nowadays equals a marketing concept, which is very bad for the overall game experience.

It has always been a way to make money though. Thats why we had the fancy box art, the guides, the manuals, etc even "back in the day". It was all ways to make money off of the game. Passionate developers exist the same now as they do before even with the bigger companies.

- - - Updated - - -

Overwatch was a step in the right direction. But they immediately tried to make it bigger than it was with a massive competitive scene and pro league. Now look at it. Game is still fun, but the unfolding story has been so slow to come out. New characters are often enough. But slow maps, slow game modes, slow story. Not a tons really to do in the game.

It is amusing that you say nothing new is going to come out but Blizzard has released more New IP's since Activision Blizzard bought ownership from Vivendi (2013). HotS, OW, HS were all new games and not sequels. Overwatch was is a victim of the slow pace that Blizzard has always done things. It has nothing to do with trying to have a massive competitive scene and being "bigger then it was". That competitive scene was one of the goals Blizzard had with the title.

[pahbi]

With the mass of old games being remastered to feed the hungry nostalgic player and the criticism that blizzard receives for almost everything that has been released recently, I am not surprised. Blizzard simply lacks developers with a feeling for that certain something, developers who are children themselves and like to develop games, real games.

Games are simply no longer developed out of passion or because developers obviously enjoy doing them, but only so that they don't end up in the red at the end of the year. How can you develop games without much effort to keep the player on the hook, this is what 99% of all game industries are pursuing today. And don't get me wrong, that's fine too. But with the amount with which players are just getting f*cked over it no longer funny.

I also think it is not because blizzard doesn't want to create good games with effort anymore, they just can't. It feels like their games are currently being developed by lawyers and tax advisors instead of real developers with a burning passion for it.

Just wanted to get rid of.

Cheers

I tend to agree. Blizz (Activision) is a giant corporation with shareholders to keep happy.

Obviously a business has to profit, but I believe there is a line where more focus is put on money than on fun. And I think Blizz has definitely crossed that line.

[Seranthor]

Game development nowadays equals a marketing concept, which is very bad for the overall game experience.

Sounds like a tailor made situation for a 'Good' developer to get in on and make a killing making 'good' games. Are you that 'good' developer?

[Deadmedic]

Im waiting to see what Tom Chilton is working on. That will ultimately decide for me if blizz can still make great games.

[oplawlz]

Sounds like a tailor made situation for a 'Good' developer to get in on and make a killing making 'good' games. Are you that 'good' developer?

You seem to be implying that isn't true, but games like stardew valley, jedi fallen order, and witcher 3 (RIP CDPR) are proof that it is. Cyberpunk is an example of what happens when those good, passionate developers are no longer in charge of a studio.
We don't have to be game developers to see the issues with game development. By that logic you should never vote if you're not a politician.

[rhorle]

You seem to be implying that isn't true, but games like stardew valley, jedi fallen order, and witcher 3 (RIP CDPR) are proof that it is. Cyberpunk is an example of what happens when those good, passionate developers are no longer in charge of a studio.

And yet you have no idea if it was passion or money that motivated the "good games". It isn't an either or situation. You can be motivated by both and create good games. This is just romanticizing things for no real purpose. When a studio has a hit they are passionate. When they have a dud they are suddenly money grubbing losers.

Passion can help develop a game but it isn't something that is required or something that even every successful game has. Or something that every dud lacks as well. NMS was full of passion but was a dud on launch. That passion also still has it getting free updates even now and turned the game around. Could it have been money that blinded them? Maybe.

Game development isn't as two sided as many people try to make it out to be.

[oplawlz]

And yet you have no idea if it was passion or money that motivated the "good games". It isn't an either or situation. You can be motivated by both and create good games. This is just romanticizing things for no real purpose. When a studio has a hit they are passionate. When they have a dud they are suddenly money grubbing losers.

Passion can help develop a game but it isn't something that is required or something that even every successful game has. Or something that every dud lacks as well. NMS was full of passion but was a dud on launch. That passion also still has it getting free updates even now and turned the game around. Could it have been money that blinded them? Maybe.

Game development isn't as two sided as many people try to make it out to be.

I never meant to say it's either/or, although I disagree with your assertion that good games have created with someone who is just in it for the money in charge. I certainly can't think of any examples. Popular games, maybe, but good?
My point was that the market has been starved of good games by the more egregious efforts to milk the customer, and there are several good developers/studios who took advantage of this and have been wildly successful.
Of course the studio still needs to make money, and having someone to reign in feature creep is a net positive for development studios. The issue lies in letting pure accounting dictate game design.

[rhorle]

I never meant to say it's either/or, although I disagree with your assertion that good games have created with someone who is just in it for the money in charge. I certainly can't think of any examples. Popular games, maybe, but good?

Jedi Fallen Order was created so EA can make more money. Also Respawn had a clash of clans type mobile game that was shut down after a year. And a "mixed or average" Medal of Honor game that released last year. That is the problem when you create these mystical qualities of game developers or specific studios. The market hasn't been starved of good games in order to milk the customer. Good games exist regardless of the money scheme attached to them.

The Witcher 3 wasn't good just because it lacked micro-transactions and gave out free DLC. It was a good game. Just like Mass Effect 3 was a good game even though it had loot boxes attached to its multiplayer. None of your examples can show that pure accounting dictated game design. And in fact it is rarely possible to show that to any degree about any game. It is a thing that people like to bring up to explain why a studio they once liked produced something they don't like. It is a scape goat.

[kukkamies]

Imagine if Blizz released Classic in 2021, people would say wtf Blizzard, making us play a walking simulator for MAUs and profit.

The only reason why WoW has declined is time. It is an OLD game. And still a good one.

Also, the only reason you people are hating is because you were probably a kid/teenager when you started playing, and are having selective memory when it comes to past WoW expansions. I've played WC3 as a kid, classic-Wrath as a teen, from Cata to WoD as a student and now i am pushing thirties, having a job and other things in life.

Nostalgia is a powerful tool, almost intoxicating. We all sometimes wish we could go to a simpler past, when things felt easier and without a care in the world. Old WoW was imprinted in our memory from those times - neither of us is the same person as we were back then, and neither is Blizzard the exact same collective - which doesn't mean they've lost their soul.

I started at around same time and soon 30 with a job. Even now the old Blizzard games are the awesome ones while new one's are kinda meh. Even the old ones I played for first time within last 5 years.

Just last year finished wc3 campaign. It's really awesome. As a kid I never managed to finish it. The only RTS that can compete is Starcraft. Warcraft 1&2 were bad though...
Spent more time in classic private servers than in last 3 WoW expansions. Gotta be unemployed again and I'll start classic wow... Shadowlands lasted me around 2 weeks, BFA 1 week, Legion 1 week.
Played Diablo1 around 4 years ago, when the GoG version came out. It's really amazing, nothing else has that dangerous and dark cathedral dungeon feel. D3 just feels stupid now. D2 doesn't quite catch the feeling either, the zones in it are way too big. Of course grinding loot in d1 isn't as interesting, but campaign is the best.
SC1 is really really good. Finished the campaign maybe 2-3 years ago, maybe I'll buy the remaster and play it again in next few years. SC2 is still good too of course, too bad they stopped development.
Lost Vikings is one of the best puzzle platformers out there. Trine is similar but does feel worse in a way. Played Lost Vikings maybe 6 years ago.

[Seranthor]

You seem to be implying that isn't true, but games like stardew valley, jedi fallen order, and witcher 3 (RIP CDPR) are proof that it is. Cyberpunk is an example of what happens when those good, passionate developers are no longer in charge of a studio.
We don't have to be game developers to see the issues with game development. By that logic you should never vote if you're not a politician.

I said what I meant, I meant what I said. There was nothing written between the lines, if you are reading something that I didn't write, that is on you.

[Gaidax]

Blizzard can still absolutely create great games. They just need a good kick in the tush to wake up from their years of lethargy and miking of WoW.

[Orby]

I have been with Blizzard since Warcraft: Orcs and Humans and I was 11 years old then, Blizzard have been my childhood and teenage years. Diablo IV is my last ditch for Blizzard. I don't play any Blizzard games now, WoW was the recent one I unsubbed from back in January, (if I come back again who knows with burnout).

Diablo 4 will be make and break for me, while I loved Diablo 3 more than most, my biggest problem with Diablo 3 was the story, and how it felt very WoWish, nothing against WoW lore I actually like it, but WoW is very comic book in its approach with characters and storytelling. Diablo, especially since Diablo 1 was very horror fantasy driven, Diablo 2 had some gothic fantasy, but Diablo 3 was comic book fantasy with the horror dialled back, everyone spoke in that over the top over dramatic tone that a lot of Blizzard games kind of suffer from which isn't a bad thing so maybe I shouldn't say 'suffer' but its become the Blizzard trope, Starcraft 2, WoW and Overwatch have it and its very grating.

I am still excited for Diablo 2 remaster and the Diablo 4, but those are the only games right now. Unless Blizzard come out with a new and interesting IP that grabs me.

[RickJamesLich]

I don't really follow blizzard that closely but didn't most of the original team leave? That's the problem right there. Sounds like they realized the Activision thing was a mistake and jumped ship. I will say though, the quality certainly has declined, there was a point in time where everything they released was truly epic.

[Utrrabbit]

I understand the reasoning behind WC3 reforge, because it exists a MMO called WOW that blocks new progression of WC4... I get that.

I don't understand Diablo 2 remake, what is stopping blizzard from making Diablo 4 that is in all aspect better than diablo 2 that a remake is necessary ?

Cause the FANS have been asking for a renake of D2 for nearly 10+ years now. People seem to have thinga wrong. It is the PLAYERBASE that wanted D2 remastered.

[Kallisto]

It was during the times you listed, you just provided a incredibly simplified and modified recap of those eras of gaming.

No this is what people who are old enough to remember the 80s know. Gaming from the developer POV has ALWAYS been business first. It was always about making money. Hell it is capitalism 101, these corporations like Activision/EA are simply put the logical next step in any market of any capitalist venture.

It was about money in the 70s, it was about money in the 80s, it was about money in the 90s. Just like it was in the 2000s and 2010s and will be in the 20s and beyond. To think otherwise is just insanity. Yes there were a few gems back then, just like there are now. But just like with every other medium for every gem that is remembered countless others are forgotten which is why people go with Music, games, movies "It was all better back then.". It wasn't you just didn't realise cause not old enough or blocked out because of how bad or forgettable they were the pile of shit that surrounded the gem.

[Mojo03]

It's seemingly basically a sub-division of Activision that focuses on milking Blizzard IP's now.

The people and culture that made it "Blizzard" are seemingly long gone.

It's Blizzard in name only.

[rhorle]

It's seemingly basically a sub-division of Activision that focuses on milking Blizzard IP's now. The people and culture that made it "Blizzard" are seemingly long gone.It's Blizzard in name only.

Hearthstone, Heroes of the Storm, and Overwatch were all released after Activision Blizzard bought ownership from Vivendi. Blizzard was milking their own IP's. Because you know they liked money just as much as anyone else.