Ex Blizzard CEO, Mike Morhaime creates new company named Dreamhaven

[Drakron]

Because Activision pushed for market, for a product, for release dates, yes. Get shit out the door faster to appease the shareholders and big money men, than what Blizzard was comfortable with, but ultimately had to comply with, given they are owned by Activision and its shareholders. Isn't it obvious at this point?

What's been Blizzard's trademark since before they got bought by Activision? It's done when it's done... and SOONTM. None of that shit post-activision. Buggy shit release one after another, and total misfire of dev time, ressources and management of projects

Games under Activision (2008+) are Starcraft II, Diablo III, Heartstone, Heroes of the Storm and Overwatch.
Of those Overwatch is Titan on a smaller scale, Diablo III started in Blizzard North that was closed in 2005 so before Activision as for Starcraft II 2010 and so 2 years under Activision with a 3 year development cycle even if they carved it into 3 games I have a hard time to blame Activision for it and more Blizzard as they havent put a game out since 2004 World of Warcraft.

And they never had "It's done when it's done".

 

[Lyric Suite]

2008 hey, totally by coincidence exactly the point where Blizzard ceased being Blizzard. What was the last thing they had published that year, Wrath of the Lich King right? The "last" good WoW expansion.

 

[J1M]

Any "clone" of the franchises created by Blizzard is going to be too much of a tall order for a starting company. Think of how much money and resources they'd need for a "WoW" clone. I don't see it happening.

WoW has become bloated. Much like most Blizzard games now are bloated with shit that take massive ressources and dev hours.

You could grind WoW down to half or what it is, and you would have a fine tuned fine cut mmorpg that most would enjoy.

Dreamhaven could release a WoW light 1.0 and it would still sell, if it just kept to the core values of the mmorpg design and actually made it fun, without 90940234 ludicrous systems and other dumb bloat mechanics that just further tries to fuck the player and dilutes the actual core fun gameplay of something like WoW.

WoW vanilla was buggy and missing alot of content, but at the core it was a fun game. And it required endlessly LESS amounts of ressources and dev time then, than current WoW iteration does, and that's not a good thing, because of the bloat as explained. Every WoW expansion the past 3-4 expansions have been dogshit on a stick and NOTHING compared to the superior first 3 expansions that they put out, which were alot simpler, alot more fun, and alot more engaging with less bloat.

A back to the roots kind of simple good game design that Blizzard made popular in the 90s from Dreamhaven would be a hit, and hit right at the center of many old school PC fans and mmorpg fans.
We will see.

WoW is what forever altered the culture at Blizzard by forcing a huge influx of new staff and providing way too much revenue from a single product.

The two new teams are using Unity and Unreal. Based on that information alone, but hopefully due to learning from the past, neither of them is working on an MMO.

 

[Dawkinsfan69]

more like dreaming of dickshaven
cuz he dreaming fo dicks

aalamahahahahah
rekt

 

[Dawkinsfan69]

 

[Daedalos]

Because Activision pushed for market, for a product, for release dates, yes. Get shit out the door faster to appease the shareholders and big money men, than what Blizzard was comfortable with, but ultimately had to comply with, given they are owned by Activision and its shareholders. Isn't it obvious at this point?

What's been Blizzard's trademark since before they got bought by Activision? It's done when it's done... and SOONTM. None of that shit post-activision. Buggy shit release one after another, and total misfire of dev time, ressources and management of projects

Games under Activision (2008+) are Starcraft II, Diablo III, Heartstone, Heroes of the Storm and Overwatch.
Of those Overwatch is Titan on a smaller scale, Diablo III started in Blizzard North that was closed in 2005 so before Activision as for Starcraft II 2010 and so 2 years under Activision with a 3 year development cycle even if they carved it into 3 games I have a hard time to blame Activision for it and more Blizzard as they havent put a game out since 2004 World of Warcraft.

And they never had "It's done when it's done".

You are simply flat out wrong. Blizzard ALWAYS had the "It's done when it's done" monicker and the "SoonTM" trademark, obviously because people were hinting at how long development cycles Blizzard games have, but whenever they finally DO come out, they are amazing and full of quality work. Taking your time to perfect a game, without rushing it.

Until Activision and bobby moneydick came along of course, and altered that culture entirely from the ground up

You probably don't remember, but Blizzard actually entirely reworked Starcraft 1, becuase people thought it was "just" orcs-in-space. It looked and felt too much like warcraft 2 reskin. It wasn't up to par on quality, so they scrapped the entire fucking thing and made starcraft 1 from the ground up, crunched through that, and made one of the best rts games of all time, if not THE best. You would NEVER have had that situation if Activision was breathing down their necks.

Diablo 3 pre-production and real production started around 2008 or later, due to cuts and Blizzard North being shut down. so effectively, the game wasn't being made prior to Activision, so definitely after in large aspects

Starcraft II started production probably some time before Activision, but was heavily in production during 2008 and onwards exactly at the time and years after the activision merger. Starcraft 2 was also a good game overall, it has shit story, but the gameplay adn especially multiplayer was solid and amazing, so obviously Blizzard had made good stuff before Activision came along.

Hearthstone is a great game

Heroes of the storm WAS great, but it got shut down and downsized because of Activision. Dustin Browder (who Dreamhaven just hired) was lead director on that game along with Starcraft 2, and he was working on a starcraft fps that activision cancelled suddenly in 2018/2019.

 

[J1M]

It is important to remember that Blizzard had other corporate overlords prior to Activision. And that it takes a while for culture change to show up in the design of a released game.

World of Warcraft released in 2004. It sold out in stores. This success derailed the whole company for at least a year. Nothing was the same after that event.

I suppose you can point to the cash shop in WoW as Activision's influence, but I would argue that the drop in game design quality can be directly attributed to what happened in 2004.

Prior to that, Blizzard would never have looked externally for a Diablo 3 lead and hired a Jay Wilson. (A loser working on RTS games who thought Diablo was about golden showers of loot.)

PS: The guy in charge of Diablo 4 now most notably worked on Starcraft 2 balance.

 

[Daedalos]

Yes, yes. We all know World of Warcraft was a big thing, and probably diverted alot of ressources away from other would be good projects, it is what it is, WoW continued to be incredibly good for another 4 years, with Burning crusade and wrath of the lich king which both were massive improvements over vanilla WoW.

Blizzard obivously had other parties involved before Activision, but they were much more in the background of things than what Activision wanted. Blizzard claimed in 2008. that the merger wouldn't effect Blizzard Entertainment development in any way, but we know that was total bullshit, even then.
Activision had a helluve lot more aggressive market tactic and release scheuduele than blizz had seen before, and probably regretted the sale already.

In modern contrast, Microsoft buying everybody now seems just as grim, but on the surface, Microsoft seems to be quite bro about wanting to leave the creative control to the studios to themselves and make the product they wanna make, with all the time AND money they want, probably not, but at least they seem to be giving studios alot of leeway (Inxile etc.)

At least David Kim seems to be infinitely more competent than Jay Wilson in terms of Diablo 4.
I got faith that Diablo 4 probably will be good for what it is and fun to play for half a year or more.

 

[J1M]

Diablo 4 has a much higher chance of being positively received, since it is largely designed as "not Diablo 3".

However, if you look at the pace of WoW expansions (2 years apart) or Starcraft 2 products the idea that Activision forced them to release too many falls apart. The issue is one of design wisdom and design quality. It can be simplified to a single issue: the designers at Blizzard today do not play the games they are designing. They rationalize this as a professional burden, that it can't be fun to work on something and play it. But the truth is they just aren't crafting compelling experiences anymore.

 

[Citizen]

More like Dreamcemetery amirite

 

[abija]

At least David Kim seems to be infinitely more competent than Jay Wilson in terms of Diablo 4.

Competent or not, a balance dev is the last thing a game like that needs.

 

[Lyric Suite]

Microsoft seems to be quite bro about wanting to leave the creative control to the studios to themselves and make the product they wanna make

In this day and age that can easily result in decline lmao.

Fug.

 

[Nathir]

Because Activision pushed for market, for a product, for release dates, yes. Get shit out the door faster to appease the shareholders and big money men, than what Blizzard was comfortable with, but ultimately had to comply with, given they are owned by Activision and its shareholders. Isn't it obvious at this point?

What's been Blizzard's trademark since before they got bought by Activision? It's done when it's done... and SOONTM. None of that shit post-activision. Buggy shit release one after another, and total misfire of dev time, ressources and management of projects

Games under Activision (2008+) are Starcraft II, Diablo III, Heartstone, Heroes of the Storm and Overwatch.
Of those Overwatch is Titan on a smaller scale, Diablo III started in Blizzard North that was closed in 2005 so before Activision as for Starcraft II 2010 and so 2 years under Activision with a 3 year development cycle even if they carved it into 3 games I have a hard time to blame Activision for it and more Blizzard as they havent put a game out since 2004 World of Warcraft.

And they never had "It's done when it's done".

You are simply flat out wrong. Blizzard ALWAYS had the "It's done when it's done" monicker and the "SoonTM" trademark, obviously because people were hinting at how long development cycles Blizzard games have, but whenever they finally DO come out, they are amazing and full of quality work. Taking your time to perfect a game, without rushing it.

Until Activision and bobby moneydick came along of course, and altered that culture entirely from the ground up

You probably don't remember, but Blizzard actually entirely reworked Starcraft 1, becuase people thought it was "just" orcs-in-space. It looked and felt too much like warcraft 2 reskin. It wasn't up to par on quality, so they scrapped the entire fucking thing and made starcraft 1 from the ground up, crunched through that, and made one of the best rts games of all time, if not THE best. You would NEVER have had that situation if Activision was breathing down their necks.

Diablo 3 pre-production and real production started around 2008 or later, due to cuts and Blizzard North being shut down. so effectively, the game wasn't being made prior to Activision, so definitely after in large aspects

Starcraft II started production probably some time before Activision, but was heavily in production during 2008 and onwards exactly at the time and years after the activision merger. Starcraft 2 was also a good game overall, it has shit story, but the gameplay adn especially multiplayer was solid and amazing, so obviously Blizzard had made good stuff before Activision came along.

Hearthstone is a great game

Heroes of the storm WAS great, but it got shut down and downsized because of Activision. Dustin Browder (who Dreamhaven just hired) was lead director on that game along with Starcraft 2, and he was working on a starcraft fps that activision cancelled suddenly in 2018/2019.

I'm sorry bro but Heroes of the storm was the worst so called "MOBA" to ever be made by a big studio. If it didn't have Blizzard characters in it nobody would give a shit. They had the chance to create something great to rival the likes of LoL or Dota, but went for the safest, blandest, most boring route you can take. It got shut down because the esport scene was dead (boring game to play, even more boring to watch) and because I guess there were not a lot of people playing it. Hots was the only MOBA I've ever played were people seemed to randomly go afk for a bit, and nobody cared.

 

[rusty_shackleford]

I'm sorry bro but Heroes of the storm was the worst so called "MOBA" to ever be made by a big studio.

Not really.
There were a shitton of failed MOBAs, battle royales, hero shooters, card games, etc., by big-name studios. Most people have barely heard of them, many of them got shitcanned late into development and never released.
The way GaaS games work is that there's very limited room in the market, and if you're not one of the few big names your game is dead.
Blizzard technically did far better than most with Hearthstone and Overwatch


Did you guys know there was a Witcher MOBA?
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Witcher_Battle_Arena

 

[J1M]

Because Activision pushed for market, for a product, for release dates, yes. Get shit out the door faster to appease the shareholders and big money men, than what Blizzard was comfortable with, but ultimately had to comply with, given they are owned by Activision and its shareholders. Isn't it obvious at this point?

What's been Blizzard's trademark since before they got bought by Activision? It's done when it's done... and SOONTM. None of that shit post-activision. Buggy shit release one after another, and total misfire of dev time, ressources and management of projects

Games under Activision (2008+) are Starcraft II, Diablo III, Heartstone, Heroes of the Storm and Overwatch.
Of those Overwatch is Titan on a smaller scale, Diablo III started in Blizzard North that was closed in 2005 so before Activision as for Starcraft II 2010 and so 2 years under Activision with a 3 year development cycle even if they carved it into 3 games I have a hard time to blame Activision for it and more Blizzard as they havent put a game out since 2004 World of Warcraft.

And they never had "It's done when it's done".

You are simply flat out wrong. Blizzard ALWAYS had the "It's done when it's done" monicker and the "SoonTM" trademark, obviously because people were hinting at how long development cycles Blizzard games have, but whenever they finally DO come out, they are amazing and full of quality work. Taking your time to perfect a game, without rushing it.

Until Activision and bobby moneydick came along of course, and altered that culture entirely from the ground up

You probably don't remember, but Blizzard actually entirely reworked Starcraft 1, becuase people thought it was "just" orcs-in-space. It looked and felt too much like warcraft 2 reskin. It wasn't up to par on quality, so they scrapped the entire fucking thing and made starcraft 1 from the ground up, crunched through that, and made one of the best rts games of all time, if not THE best. You would NEVER have had that situation if Activision was breathing down their necks.

Diablo 3 pre-production and real production started around 2008 or later, due to cuts and Blizzard North being shut down. so effectively, the game wasn't being made prior to Activision, so definitely after in large aspects

Starcraft II started production probably some time before Activision, but was heavily in production during 2008 and onwards exactly at the time and years after the activision merger. Starcraft 2 was also a good game overall, it has shit story, but the gameplay adn especially multiplayer was solid and amazing, so obviously Blizzard had made good stuff before Activision came along.

Hearthstone is a great game

Heroes of the storm WAS great, but it got shut down and downsized because of Activision. Dustin Browder (who Dreamhaven just hired) was lead director on that game along with Starcraft 2, and he was working on a starcraft fps that activision cancelled suddenly in 2018/2019.

I'm sorry bro but Heroes of the storm was the worst so called "MOBA" to ever be made by a big studio. If it didn't have Blizzard characters in it nobody would give a shit. They had the chance to create something great to rival the likes of LoL or Dota, but went for the safest, blandest, most boring route you can take. It got shut down because the esport scene was dead (boring game to play, even more boring to watch) and because I guess there were not a lot of people playing it. Hots was the only MOBA I've ever played were people seemed to randomly go afk for a bit, and nobody cared.

To elaborate on my point above, the critical design mistake in HOTS was thinking that unique map objectives was something the genre wanted or needed. That's a bit like trying to improve football by having each match played on a differently-shaped field. Not all of the design decisions that went into HOTS were bad, but that one really hurt them in several ways. Most notably, by delaying when the game could launch.

 

[abija]

They were forced with hots to squeeze between dota and lol. That project did far better than expected but it was never going to be big and didn't seem that they threw too much money at it either.

 

[Daedalos]

They threw tons of money at it, with grand e-sports tournaments that did well and was watched by alot of people.

HOTS was a big deal, until activision said, no, shut that shit down now.

Before people were moved away, the game was doing great, tons of new heroes, maps, balance changes, fresh new game every1-2 months.

Honestly it was a breath of fresh air in terms of dota 2 and lol, which is the same old boring moba tropes. HOTS tried something different and succeeded. It appeals to a different mindset of moba player than lol and dota does.

Most noticeably, it's more fast-paced and aciton-oriented, like a super smash brawl, than 20 minutes of tedious grinding for gold and xp. HOTS definitely had all the right ingredients to be one of the top mobas in the long run, but was mismananged by activision and blizzard combined

 

[Nathir]

They threw tons of money at it, with grand e-sports tournaments that did well and was watched by alot of people.

HOTS was a big deal, until activision said, no, shut that shit down now.

Before people were moved away, the game was doing great, tons of new heroes, maps, balance changes, fresh new game every1-2 months.

They threw tons of money at it and it still failed. That's why they shut it down. Not the other way around. Tournaments had trash viewership. Hearthstone tourneys were pulling in more viewers and were also ironically more exciting to watch then the snoozefest that was HOTS.

People were moved away? Why? Because Blizzard pulled financial support for esports? If it was a good game people would still be playing it.

Tons of new heroes and maps? Heroes that got boring after 1 game? Maps that all play out the same? Game was a complete failure from the draft table onwards. Slow and anemic gameplay, with little room for personal expression or hype plays.

They were forced with hots to squeeze between dota and lol. That project did far better than expected but it was never going to be big and didn't seem that they threw too much money at it either.

True, but they could still have tried to do something with the game. Instead they went for the most boring and bland gameplay choices possible.

To elaborate on my point above, the critical design mistake in HOTS was thinking that unique map objectives was something the genre wanted or needed. That's a bit like trying to improve football by having each match played on a differently-shaped field. Not all of the design decisions that went into HOTS were bad, but that one really hurt them in several ways. Most notably, by delaying when the game could launch.

Yeah, multiple maps was always a big selling point for the game. They probably have like 10+ maps at this point. The problem is that every map functionally plays out the same. Everyone goes to lane at start. After a certain amount of time a messagge pops up that something will happen. Everyone goes to the point of interest and battles over it. One team gets rewarded with something that helps them push. Get back to lanes after its over. Repeat until one team wins. Seriously, there is no difference between how maps play out. And they are all so small, compared to even the LoL map.

Still, the critical design mistake was making the game way too slow paced. Characters move way too slow, and abilities lack any kind of impact or power.

 

[abija]

Tons of money compared with what? Surely not lol and dota2...

 

[gurugeorge]

I can't recall a single instance of a new company formed by industry has-beens yielding a great game. Not one.

Old Blizzard ain't coming back, chief.

What about Guild Wars?

 

[Kitchen Utensil]

Yeah, the original Guild Wars is probably the best counter example.
One of the best games of all time.

Still, that was a different time, almost two decades ago.