[fpesce]

Remarkable, isn't it? Blizzard's knack for consistently managing to misalign their PR strategy with big launch events like Diablo IV is almost as intricate as their game design. There's an unexpected plot twist even George R.R. Martin would be envious of.

It's almost as if they've transposed their in-game narratives into their corporate affairs, with similar plot tension and dramatic arcs. One might argue that the corporate maneuvering is proving to be as engrossing as the impending battle against the Prime Evils.

This debacle could serve as a case study on how not to handle crisis communication during a major product launch. It’s like a redux of the 'Error 37' saga, but this time, the error is not just on the servers, it’s in the boardroom. The irony is almost poetic.

As a community, we should be preparing to discuss the game's groundbreaking mechanics or innovative design, but instead we're going to watch a real-time corporate soap opera unfold. It's a classic example of how mismanagement can detract from a company's core product and innovation. At the end of the day, let's remember to uphold our values and maintain a focus on fairness, diversity, and respect in our industry, as this scenario provides yet another potent reminder of how far we still have to go.

[meibo]

> It's almost as if they've transposed their in-game narratives into their corporate affairs, with similar plot tension and dramatic arcs.

Funny you say that, a writer at Blizzard just got fired for writing a satirical "greedy CEO" character, after a high-level executive played that part of the game: https://twitter.com/covingtown/status/1663998815458951168

[SpaceManNabs]

All this stuff makes me feel pretty good about boycotting Blizzard games since the starcraft II cheating scandal. WCIII TFT is still my favorite game/game experience of all time because of normal AND custom games, and blizzard will never ever come close to that level of quality again.

Actions to save face describe Blizzard pretty well nowadays. The Vivendi sale announcement on their classic battle.net page really was the beginning of the end. Even me in middle school felt bad reading that garbage.

[stickfigure]

That seems hard to believe at face value. Maybe there's another side to this story?

[EatingWithForks]

Didn't a high-ranking guy sexually harass a woman to the point of suicide at this company? I can believe the company in which a person in leadership sexually harassed another employee to suicide can also have petty executives that demand firing when they feel thin-skinned about their wealth.

[falcolas]

And let's not forget the Cosby room - a room dedicated to rape and sexual assault of female employees by ActiBlizz leadership.

You might argue that "those" folks are gone, yet apparently their culture has not really changed.

[SketchySeaBeast]

The height of naming irony, given this was Blizzcon 2013 and the Cosby allegations came out in 2014.

[krustymeathead]

It looks like the naming was likely intentional, allegations about Cosby go back to 2004. Although Hannibal Buress didn't start talking about it in his routine until 2014.

https://abcnews.go.com/Entertainment/bill-cosby-trial-comple...

[willcipriano]

The part where they used it in ads makes it certain there is more to the story.

[vkou]

What makes it hard to believe?

[stickfigure]

The mustache-twirling cartoon villain implied by the narrative. People aren't that simple, not even tech managers.

[vkou]

It's not mustache-twirling villainy, it's just having a fragile ego and being pissed at a dig at you, which is common across all sorts of people, managers included.

[stickfigure]

That makes no sense whatsoever. Blizzard used it in an ad campaign "before, during, and after I was separated". It's not like the text was secret.

A simpler explanation is that an aggrieved party is not giving us the whole story. General advice: Be wary taking sides in nasty breakups even if (especially if) you want to like/dislike one or the other.

[polishdude20]

Isn't there some rule of thumb or "law" that the software an organization writes is a direct mirror of the structure of the organization?

[acoard]

Conway's Law:

> Any organization that designs a system (defined broadly) will produce a design whose structure is a copy of the organization's communication structure. [0]

But I think OP is implying the opposite, sort of a reverse-Conway. That the narrative of their product affected the structure of the company.

[0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Conway%27s_law

[fpesce]

Yes, you both are right. The duality of Conway's Law, especially in reverse, is fascinating to consider. This could indeed extend to the realms of the narrative Blizzard perpetuates not only through its products, but also within its internal culture.

As the (slighly modified) quote from Alan Moore suggests "Artists use lies to tell the truth, while (corporate) politicians use them to cover the truth up.", the stories we tell have power. They shape our understanding and, in turn, our reality. In Blizzard's case, the mythology and narratives within their games may have started to mirror the internal dynamics of the company.

It's plausible that the leadership and upper management, continually immersing themselves in the game narratives they produce, might unconsciously influence their hiring and structural decisions. This could result in an organization where individuals who align with these narratives are more likely to rise through the ranks.

This might not be a negative thing, were it not for the obvious issues of thus who seek power in their stories having usually conflicted psychology. Rather than a healthy reflection of the company's product, we're seeing the darker aspects of their game's narrative permeating the company's culture.

It's a strong reminder that life imitates art and vice versa.

[bitcharmer]

I love how Blizzard became a prime example of the effect MBA-ification of a well functioning company has on everything.

I have nothing but disdain for these greedy, incompetent, useless assholes. Just feel bad for the talented, hard-working staff who generate real value.

[RobotToaster]

Putting my tinfoil hat on, maybe they know the game is terrible, so they do it on purpose so fewer people talk about how terrible it is?

[bee_rider]

I only skimmed a couple reviews but the impression I got it that it is a fun, mechanically solid game, with a pretty good antagonist but a lackluster overall world/plot.

This is 2023 Activision/Blizzard, nobody expects them to revolutionize anything. They’ve got fans already and they/we (I like their games but am not a fan of their corporate culture, so, not sure if I count as a fan anymore—was really hoping they’d managed to root out the shitty behavior) know what the idea of a Diablo game is. A well mechanically decent Diablo is the bar, and it sounds like they’ve probably passed it.

[fpesce]

While your theory does add an interesting dimension to this conversation, it may not hold up when considering the current state of Diablo IV. As someone who's participated in the beta and server slash events, I can confirm that the game, by all indications, is shaping up to be a solid entry in the franchise.

Given this, it's unfortunate - even tragic - to witness this external drama potentially overshadowing what should be a momentous release. Instead of being able to focus purely on the merits of the game, we find ourselves intertwined in this larger narrative of corporate mismanagement and serious ethical failings.

[spacemadness]

They’ve released two open betas. They’re not keeping anything secret. So yes, tinfoil it is.

[BlueTemplar]

It isn't though. And we are verrrry far away from Diablo 3's state on release. (Even if servers have trouble today and in 4 days.)