Can Corporate Interference Actually Make a Game Worse?
Video game developers know what they’re doing. Well, for the most part, anyway.
That’s not to say some people don’t have the talent to make an exquisite game. They absolutely do. But sometimes the rules are dictated outside of their control.
For instance, when a company announces a game and a subsequent release date to go alongside it, then fights like hell and high water to keep said release date. I dunno, to meet a holiday window or something like that. This results in aspects of the game being rushed, or, worse yet, “crunch” sessions where the developer is pushed to their absolute limits, to the point that employees just don’t want to do it anymore.
That’s a disheartening sight, to see when someone’s love of the game is diminished by the reality of corporate envisioning. And it makes me wonder if, sometimes, corporate decisions are really to blame when it comes to some games not meeting their potential.
Cyberpunk 2077 immediately comes to mind. When it released (after a couple of delays from its initial release), it was met with harsh criticism, especially with its performance on PlayStation 4 and Xbox One. CD Projekt Red swallowed its pride and admitted a mistake was made, but I can’t imagine what it pushed people through in an effort to meet its revised release date, since it probably feared some gamers were getting impatient with the many delays.
But that game turned around for the better, and the release of Phantom Liberty certainly helped as well. It’s nice to see that the publisher went back and took care of its devs, too. That isn’t always the case.
For instance, Bobby Kotick. Yes, I’ve talked about him before. The guy made have had his vision that produced millions of dollars with best-selling franchises, keeping the shareholders happy. But he didn’t really seem to take care of his employees at all.
For instance, he would boast about Call of Duty: Black Ops 4’s “record-setting” sales, then, in the same breath, remove 8,000 employees from the roster. While collecting a big, fat bonus. Yeah, boss of the year right there.
And apparently his way of corporate thinking got much worse than that. And I don’t just mean from the rumored “Cosby suite” that was open during BlizzCon. (Look it up.)
Andy Belford, who previously worked with Kotick at Activision, noted how he actively took a part in harming the development of Overwatch 2, with a sudden release on Steam that would eventually cause problems for the team — problems, mind you, that still exist today.
“Moderation of steam was put on the community team (not a function of community at Blizz), despite my refusal to want to expose members of my team to that level of toxic content/posts. When asked whose decision it was to launch on Steam with no additional help: Bobby,” he noted in a tweet.
Belford then added, “This is only one example of the culture Kotick bred at AB: shit flowed downstream, usually landing on the lowest paid and most overworked individuals. Management was too busy reacting to wildly vacillating direction and decisions that made zero sense.”
Oh, but it gets much worse than hampering with the business model. Former Call of Duty programmer Christine Pollock explained that Kotick even went as far as to threaten an employee’s life, and how “bobby’s decisions made our games worse.”
“I get that I am very loud and very annoying and that with my seniority and ease of other opportunities, that affords me certain protections and safety to do such things,” she said in a tweet. “but you need to get on board this train. We all need to revolt against people like this, every time.”
Easier said than done. That’s the problem. When a corporate head holds the power, there’s very little that will let them shake it loose. Kotick had his mind set on something, and if you even tried to change it in the smallest way, chances are he would’ve swatted away at you like a fly.
And it’s not just Activision and Kotick, mind you. Jim Ryan, the head of PlayStation for the longest time (before he, thankfully, left), just had a terrible casual mindset for the company. I’ve already gone through the many mistakes by Sony for the PlayStation brand, so I won’t do so again. But that way of thinking isn’t just careless, it goes against the very nature of why the PlayStation brand exists — it was built for the gamers.
Hopefully whoever steps in understands that and brings Sony back to basics with better PlayStation games. Ones that allow studios to breathe again, instead of feeling the pressure of corporate demand. Of course, that’s wishful thinking, but you never know. Kotick’s gone from Activision Blizzard and Microsoft has a promising new direction ahead of it. We’ll see.
These are just minor examples. I could count the number of instances where corporate interference affected games a variety of times, including the inane Mortal Kombat 1“seasonal” fatalities that cost $10 a pop.
I know corporate’s going to corporate, but I do hope some people look at examples of the past and realize the better way of thinking when it comes to game development and marketing. There are real people here that are more than capable of doing their job, but maybe look past the bottom line and realize you can’t work them to death like cattle. You need to let them breathe and do their thing.
Of course, I doubt any big-wig CEOs will read this blog and go, “You’re right!” Maybe it’s just the fact it’s 3 AM and I’ve read enough horror stories about the likes of Kotick, realizing just how much better the industry will be without their type. The only question is how many people will leave a legacy to be proud of — and how many will simply leave a stain.
Anyway, have a great week, everyone. Here’s to a productive and great 2024. Go play great games!
