Blizzard's Perfect Storm

The industry's top developer knows the merits of the confessional.

Published as part of our sister-site GamesIndustry.biz' widely-read weekly newsletter, the GamesIndustry.biz Editorial is a weekly dissection of one of the issues weighing on the minds of the people at the top of the games business. It appears on Eurogamer after it goes out to GI.biz newsletter subscribers.

Blizzard Entertainment is, by many measures, the world's most successful game developer. It's not only got a string of hits to its name, it has also consistently demonstrated an astonishing ability to deliver longevity. World of Warcraft's ongoing success is one clear example, but it's worth noting that Warcraft 3, StarCraft and even the truly venerable Diablo 2 are still widely played and highly rated by fans.

No other game developer could have put on an event like last weekend's Blizzard Worldwide Invitational in Paris. All the reporting from that event, however, makes it clear that not only was Blizzard's huge success on display - so, too, was the attitude and approach that has created that success. Cause and effect, together under one roof.

The effects are clear and easy to see. Thousands of devoted fans, travelling from around the world. Enormously skilled matches being played by professionals, using games up to a decade old. Long queues for memorabilia. Above all, 10.7 million people paying every single month to play WoW, making it into one of the most commercially successful entertainment products in history.

The causes, however, are a little more subtle - sufficiently so that many other developers and publishers consider Blizzard to be some kind of "special case", a company which lies outside the rules of the industry in some unique manner and whose success simply cannot be emulated.

This is patent nonsense. Blizzard is stuffed with stunningly talented people, from the management level right down to the most junior development positions, of that there can be no doubt - but there are many talented people working in the videogames sector. The only "magic" thing about Blizzard is how well they manage and focus that talent into creating some of the world's best games, time and time again.

For those who care to look, Blizzard actually put much of that mechanism on display in Paris last weekend. Look around the coverage of the event that's gone online in the past few days, and you see a company baring its development soul in front of thousands of its toughest critics - the fans who actually pay for its products.

That, in itself, is symptomatic of the firm's approach. It's astonishingly transparent, to an extent which would give most developers cold sweats. With WoW expansion Wrath of the Lich King and new RTS title StarCraft II still months away, the designers of both games took the stage in front of packed audiences to discuss intimate details of the creative process for both games - warts and all. Tricky questions about unit balancing and design changes were aired and discussed in a frank, honest way.

The Burning Crusade, the last WoW expansion, was meanwhile placed on the table for dissection. This product - which, it's worth remembering, is actually Blizzard's presently active product, and its current flag-bearer at retail - was given a post-mortem examination by its designers, and no punches were pulled as the team ripped it open and explored their mistakes, and what can be learned from them.

This does, of course, sometimes happen to other games - but generally only in developer-specific publications, for the consumption of the team's peers. Few developers have the bravery, or indeed the desire, to stand up in front of fans and the world's media and say, "here's where my game failed, and here's what I learned". Even if the designers and creative types wanted to, the idea would give most publishers fainting fits.

Yet in doing so, Blizzard demonstrates an honesty and an openness which connects it with the fans. Other aspects of its approach echo this. When it patches its games, for instance, it issues incredibly lengthy patch notes which explain every minute change it has made. Even its senior executives are happy to talk about challenges as well as triumphs, a kind of honesty which doesn't normally strike executives until their company is in trouble and explanations are needed.

You could argue, pretty convincingly, that this is simply a demonstration of how comfortable Blizzard is with itself - and with WoW continuing to be the industry's greatest money printing machine, why wouldn't it be comfortable? It can afford to talk to fans, to open itself up and to dodge all the bluster and petty hype-building, because it has something nobody else has - the most commercially successful game in the world.

However, there's an equal argument which says that Blizzard's success is in part due to that approach, which predates the success of World of Warcraft. Indeed, even at the launch of World of Warcraft in London all those years ago, the developers were astonishingly open and conversational about a game whose launch was still years away.

No, it's not Blizzard's commercial success which has created the comfort zone that allows developers to talk in this way. Rather, it's the fact that Blizzard is at peace with its internal processes. It is comfortable and happy with the systems it uses to design games, to assess and refine those designs, and to measure the quality of its games as they progress - and that gives it the confidence to talk to the world about what's happening behind the scenes.

Many other developers, even some of the world's finest, will wryly compare their business to a swan - graceful above the water, but if you look below the water, it's all feet thrashing away crazily to maintain that gliding motion. Blizzard no doubt has moments like that - its scramble to meet demand for WoW in the first few months after launch revealed that the company's processes don't anticipate everything, for instance. However, in general, its system for refining and improving games from the design stage right up to launch seems to be firmly bedded-in.

It's not perfectionism, either, no matter how many commentators seek to ascribe that label to the firm. Perfectionism isn't a commercially viable attitude, and while the firm certainly has perfectionist tendencies (a game as balanced as StarCraft couldn't have been created without them), its real outlook is one of realism. Blizzard, it's clear, has an "it's good enough, ship it" mentality, just as all other developers do. It's just that it sets the "good enough" bar far higher than most, and it seems to have a solid understanding of how to improve a product that's not good enough - something with which many developers struggle.

The products that Blizzard Entertainment creates are magical, there's no doubt about that - but there's nothing magic about the creative process which builds them. Most other developers have many lessons to learn from the Californian studio - and thanks to the first of them, openness and transparency, the study materials for those lessons are freely available to any who care to look.

For more views on the industry and to keep up to date with news relevant to the games business, read GamesIndustry.biz. You can sign up to the newsletter and receive the GamesIndustry.biz Editorial directly each Thursday afternoon.

Comments (21) Latest comment 4 years ago

Comments threads automatically close after 30 days, but please feel free to continue chatting on the forum!

  • Krelle #1 4 years ago

    you suck!

    muahaha (:
    (its immature-day in japan, forgive me)
    Edited by 1 at 06/07/08 @ 11:29
  • bdc #2 4 years ago

    If Carling did video games, they'd be Blizzard.
  • Gastrian #3 4 years ago

    That's Carlsberg. If Carling did video games they'd be Data Design Interactive
    Edited by 1 at 06/07/08 @ 11:47
  • hiddenranbir #4 4 years ago

    And if I did Diablo 3 it would be vaporware.
  • Ryuken #5 4 years ago

    Good article, especially regarding to how the announcement was made you seem to want to say the same thing as VG247 did.

    Blizzard sits in a luxury position (even before WoW was announced) but that can't be an excuse for other devs/publishers to not do an announcement in a proper, clear fashion.
  • saysomething #6 4 years ago

    Excellent article, I must say. And I'm not even interested in their games.

    Good job.
  • hahayou #7 4 years ago

  • berelain #8 4 years ago

    I love Blizzards work; they've pulled out some absolutely sterling games over the last decade or so. I still adore Diablo 2 and Warcraft 2 / 3, even though, for me, WoW has grown a little stale.

    But that article, interesting as it was, really came across as rather gushing fanboyism at times... ;-p
  • craziii #9 4 years ago

    I am surprise to be reading something so well articulated on a gaming info site :p
  • rudedudejude #10 4 years ago

    Whats all the fuss about this Diablo?

    Looks like Dungeon Siege to me...

    :p
  • Krelle #11 4 years ago

    Bad attempt to troll.

    Dont use the smiley next time.
    Cheap trick to reach that "hey I was only joking"-fire exit when the shitstorm hits you.

  • mikeck #12 4 years ago

    "Bad attempt to troll.

    Dont use the smiley next time.
    Cheap trick to reach that "hey I was only joking"-fire exit when the shitstorm hits you"

    Krelle I direct you to your previous post -

    "you suck!

    muahaha (:
    (its immature-day in japan, forgive me)"

    How is this not different?

  • thefinn #13 4 years ago

    "World of Warcraft's ongoing success is one clear example, but it's worth noting that Warcraft 3, StarCraft and even the truly venerable Diablo 2 are still widely played and highly rated by fans."

    Huh? Starcraft is more venerable than Diablo 2, to the tune of a bit over two years. Know your gaming history, if you're pretending to be journalists.
    Edited by 1 at 07/07/08 @ 00:04
  • Lin #14 4 years ago

    Seriously, why has one company suddenly taken over Eurogamer? I really don't care about any of their games.
  • Krelle #15 4 years ago

    @mikeck
    lolz, you fail, brother.
    If you look closer, both my previous posts were just for cheap laughs.
    Calling out a troll to disguise your own "trollyness"; oldest trick in the book.
    Education, mikeck, have you heard of it?
  • Krelle #16 4 years ago

    @Lin: I think thats your problem, not EGs.
    Should put some more points in "attention whore", honey. Or Int.
  • mikeck #17 4 years ago

    "@mikeck
    lolz, you fail, brother.
    If you look closer, both my previous posts were just for cheap laughs.
    Calling out a troll to disguise your own "trollyness"; oldest trick in the book.
    Education, mikeck, have you heard of it? "

    Oh and how cheap they were, very appropriate.

    I don't know how I'll get through the day now after my fail...sigh.

    Your post post certainly was for a cheap laugh, but your second post lacked any sarcasm or humour, I think in fact you're trying to 'disguise your own trollyness'...either way thanks for making me smile today you plebian.
  • qoobah #18 4 years ago

    +1 for the article EG. Interesting read. We could use some more insightful subjective articles like this one.
  • Krelle #19 4 years ago

    "either way thanks for making me smile today"
    then we're two! why do you argue, then? Probably becouse you like it, as I do. Im no worse of a troll than you, mate (mayhaps a little!). Take it easy (y)
  • mikeck #20 4 years ago

    "then we're two! why do you argue, then? Probably becouse you like it, as I do. Im no worse of a troll than you, mate (mayhaps a little!). Take it easy (y)"

    Hehe ;)
  • Sildur #21 4 years ago

    Brilliant article. Good to see your writers are still up to scratch!