Blizzard's 'Secret Sauce'

hapwned writes "With interviews from David Brevik, Mark Kern, and Steig Hedlund (all of Blizzard Entertainment fame), Russ Pitts creates a most enlightening explanation of Blizzard's success in the latest edition of The Escapist." From the article: "So, how does a maker of B-quality DOS and console games go on to become the single most successful videogame company in the history of the world? Even accounting for good luck and talented employees, there has to be some other key ingredient in Blizzard's larder to account for their seemingly golden touch."

Nintendo?

[Whiney Mac Fanboy]

"So, how does a maker of B-quality DOS and console games go on to become the single most successful videogame company in the history of the world?

Nintendo?

Personally....

[King_TJ]

I always felt that Blizzard had an edge because they've always been really good about releasin g their titles with both Windows and Mac support on the same CD.

When World of Warcraft came out, for example, a *lot* of Mac owners bought it and gave it a try, simply because the number of games written to run well on new Mac hardware with OS X is pretty limited. (If you're a Mac gamer and you want to play an MMORPG, how many choices do you really have besides WOW? I guess there's Shadowbane... but you have to skip Star Wars: Galaxies and most others.)

By the same token, how many copies of Diablo, Warcraft and Starcraft were sold to Mac owners over the years who bought them largely because they were about the only Mac compatible games you could find at the local superstore or discount store?

The wait is what I forget

[Maxo-Texas]

Thinking back, I remember waiting a lot of times while Blizard did some extra polishing instead of releasing the product on the original schedule.

Perhaps Blizzard has lost less customers because of buggy early releases.

Simple answer

[Anonymous Coward]

The answer is simple: ever diminishing quality of game consumers.

Seriously, remember who used to play computer games back in 80s? 90s? What about now? Don't have direct experience? Go, visit your local Best Buy, see who plays at the consoles.

With ever expanding auditory of players, they now comprise a mass of people that can gracefully be described as possessing lesser education and mental abilities, lacking in imagination and creativity. So Blizzard simply found their clientelle.

A flawed article the slashdot link is pointing to

[unity100]

And the reason for this is that the article does not ever mention Starcraft, which is one of the biggest rts hits of the time, and which is what took blizzard from being 'producer of a few hit titles' to 'producer of quality-only' titles.

The secret? They aren't sharing...

[paladinwannabe2]

Basically the article says "They made some games people liked, and then Battle.net became the first profitable gaming service- even though it was free. And now they are really awesome. I love Blizzard!" It was an informative piece about Blizzard's history, but didn't tell me anything about why they were successful (other than the above).

B-Grade?

[null etc.]

If I recall correctly, Warcraft and Diablo were seminal pieces of work. Not that they broke new genres, but they combined underplayed genres with cutting edge graphics work and sound. Even their website was pretty to look at.

Blizzard Entertainment

[Daveznet]

I have to agree that Blizzard is one of the greatest game developing companies around today, if not the best. Ive been playing Starcraft since it came out and havent stopped since. South Korea has a huge professional gaming community based on Blizzard games, instead of say football, hockey or basketball people in Korea watch professional gamers play Starcraft or Warcraft 3. Ive seen huge stadiums filled with thousands of people watching two guys playing Starcraft, with lighting effects, fire effects and sound effects going off in the background. They have Starcraft branded merchandise and Im not talking about figurines, im talking food, clothes. Their current season of MSL is sponsored by Pringles and most of the players are sponsored by big name corporations ie (SK Telecom, FILA, Addidas just to name a few). If Blizzard can help create such a community and hlp its economy in such a way they must be doing something right. I believe that it was Warcraft 2 that placed them on the map and helped them develop their next game, which IMHO is the best RTS of all time Starcraft! Blizzard isnt always about pretty graphics like alot of other companies its all about game play!!

My Explanation

[yashinka]

Blizzard created the closest thing to RTS perfection ever made. Starcraft. Just ask Korea. If there were ever a video game Olympics, I'd vote for SC and CS. Never have I been so good at a game, yet so humbled by amazing players as with these games. Oh yeah WoW is fun too i guess.

Re:Borrowed from Tolkien?

[Cy Sperling]

GW, TSR, and virtually every other 'medieval fantasy' borrows from Tolkien- who himself borrowed from the folk tradiotions of Northern Europe. The point of the statement is that Blizzard wrapped their products in settings and stories that people could easily recognize, understand and get excited about. You look at the box for Warcraft and it says Orcs vs Humans- does it really need to say anything else?

The secret?

[Scott Lockwood]

Step 1: Ignore the demand for StarCraft II, and produce other games instead.

Step 2: ???

Step 3: Profit!

Re:Personally....

[99BottlesOfBeerInMyF]

...how many copies of Diablo, Warcraft and Starcraft were sold to Mac owners over the years who bought them largely because they were about the only Mac compatible games you could find...

How many copies were sold to PC gamers because it was the common ground for LAN parties with mac gamers? It only takes one mac gamer to motivate the sale of a lot of PC games, and since you can usually use one purchase for everyone to try it out, it makes for great free advertising.

Re:Nintendo?

[Derekloffin]

Depends on what you mean by 'bring in more money'. Sony is actually barely profitable, and often in the red during specific quarters. Microsoft, while they makes boat loads of money off their office and OS products are actually in the red most often on their games division (I believe Xbox is responsible for a 4 billion dollar loss for the company).

Not so secret sauce

[Reason58]

World of Warcraft uses the exact same formula that every other EQ-clone for the last decade has followed, so what makes it so special?

First off, Blizzard was a household name for gamers well before World of Warcraft thanks to the Warcraft, Diablo, and Starcraft franchises.

Second, this game was hyped for almost 4 years before actually being released. That is a lot of time for both marketing and word of mouth to build consumers into a buying frenzy.

Lastly, and I believe the most important single factor, was the timing of their release. After years of the aforementioned hype the game was finally released, and to what competition? Ultima Online, Asheron's Call, Asheron's Call 2, EverQuest, and the like were all games years past their prime, and rapidly dwindling as the playerbase lost interest. People wanted something new and fresh, and the EverQuest 2 launch was a massive disapointment for most.

How's about years of support?

[jeblucas]

That's what WoWs (LOLLERSKATES!) me about Blizzard. Diablo 2 came out in 2000. The latest patch came out in January 2006. That's just AMAZING to me: 5.5 years later they are still actively patching the game. I honestly can't think of another game that has had someone issuing patches for 6 years. I know the Ambrosia Software guys pride themselves on porting the shit out of their games (Apeiron is working on 10 years now), but they aren't making the little centipede slightly faster or reconfiguring for widescreen displays or anything. Blizzard stands by their products in a robust and sadly rare manner. I'm guessing that's why a BattleBox of Diablo still costs $40 at retail--it's worth it.

Re:Nintendo?

[MasaMuneCyrus]

"So, how does a maker of B-quality DOS and console games go on to become the single most successful videogame company in the history of the world?

Nintendo?

Maybe they meant, "So, how does a maker of B-quality DOS and console games go on to become the videogame company that made an MMOG with more players than ever in the history of the world?"

I'm not much of a gamer...

[abb3w]

Can someone confirm this is the same Blizzard that hawks DRM crippleware?

The degree of DRM crippleware in their products vary. I'm pretty sure they've never used Starforce. Several require a CD; while the usual pirate NOCD patches exist, the NOCD versions can't be used to play via the Blizard.Net servers.

More complaints come about Blizzard's "Warden Client" anti-cheating package, since it's arguably a form of spyware, and the methods have some false positive potential. I thought I remembered it also had some limited copy-protection stuff, too (IE, complaining about Alcohol 120%), but I find no on-line confirmation.

There are certainly other makers that are have both more hostile [glop.org] and more friendly [slashdot.org] DRM attitudes; Blizzard seems about middle-of-the-road for the Games industry, as far as protection systems go.

Don't like DRM? Keep trying for that Amulet of Yendor.

Comment removed

[account_deleted]

Comment removed based on user account deletion

Re:Innovation

[Abcd1234]

Dune 2 is the grandfather of RTS as we know it today and still a very nice game.

Ahh, not quite. Herzog Zwei [wikipedia.org] predates Dune 2 by three years. Also a very enjoyable game.

Re:The secret?

[Glacial Wanderer]

??? = release a MMORPG that costs $50 plus $15 a month with millions of subscribers

Re:Borrowed from Tolkien?

[Anonymous Coward]

Or like anyone else with an ounce of sense, he completely ignored shysters who want to sell pewter figurines for real money.

Because shysters who want to sell pewter figurines for real money are that much different from shysters who want to rent you virtual characters for real money?

I suppose someone could argue you can at least hold the figurines and socialize with real people face to face while doing so, but I'm hardly going to bother.

They're both essentially lifestyle taxes for having an interesting hobby.

The webmaster should be Fired!

[Jesus IS the Devil]

Whoever is designing the layout over at escapistmagazine.com (article site) should be FIRED immediatly. Reading that article has been pure torture. I had to move ridiculously close to my monitor, squint my eyes, and end up with a sore back just to read the words. By the time I was at page 2, I'd closed the stupid site and vowed never to return. And no I wasn't able to increase the font size from my browser's settings either, because whoever is in charge of designing the site over there has fixed the font size, not allowing anyone to resize the text.

Escapistmagazine.com obviously doesn't have the "Secret Sauce".

Sauce

[C_Insano]

I belive the reason for their success is three-fold: 1. They refuse to meet some previously set release date if the product is not the best that they can do. Blizzard is infamous for pushing back release dates (the only company that comes to mind when I'm waiting for such-and-such game to come out). It always pisses me off at the time, but the product is nearly flawless when it comes out. 2. They take a strong stance against cheaters/hackers. I don't know of anthother company that's so aggressive towards cheaters, and correctly protect the honest players out there. 3. They support their products well past their prime. Battle.net still supports starcraft and diablo 2 online games. Show me another company that's patching their games that were released that long ago.

Ideas on "Secret Sauce"

[wuie]

My friend and I discussed the merits of Blizzard and its success many times, and we've pretty much come up with the following as the "secret sauce":

1. Support - Blizzard supports both PC and Mac gamers, bridging the gap between the two platforms and allowing both groups to kill the everloving frag out of each other. Combine this with extensive bug testing and game balancing, and you have a game that the company continues to support on a long-term basis.

2. Stability - For the most part, Blizzard games are stable. There are only two times that I remember them being unstable to the point of frustration. First was a dual-wield drop that barbarians had in Diablo 2 that would cause them to be thrown out of the game (fixed), and the realm issues that we're seeing currently on World of Warcraft (which are being 'fixed' atm due to some server migration). Past that, and the case is good for Blizzard stability.

3. Accessability - Blizzard games are not difficult. Anyone interested in the game can sit down and in short order know how the game works. Interfaces are intuitive. Help options are available. Tooltips explain everything. Blizzard designs their games so that the most noobish player can get past anything given enough time, but expert players can use more advanced options to enchance their gameplay.

4. Immersion - Blizzard's creative staff comes up with a lot of lore for each of the settings it creates. We're talking tons of backstory that's rarely used, sketches that aren't seen in the game, etc. It weaves a tale to the gamers that they're part of a larger world, and that can do a lot to trigger the imagination.

5. Unoriginality - This is probably the biggest point, and I don't mean the word to come across viciously at all. Warcraft came from other RTS and LoTR lore. Diablo came from RPGs. Starcraft from RTS and sci-fi. World of Warcraft from EQ and other MMORPGS. Blizzard basically looks at whatever field they want to go into, look at all the merits and flaws of past attempts, brainstorm endlessly and come up with something that will sell. I love Blizzard games as much as the next person, but let's face it: There's no innovation here, folks. Every Blizzard product that has made them 'successful' is just a rehashing of a formula that other companies have created.

Re:Impossible to Read

[Arch0nThemis]

Honestly, no. I'd prefer if everyone went and read the full-color version as we'd get more page views. Our servers can (and have) taken it before. But since Slashdot readers don't like that version, we are making it easier for them to get to the version they do like. I don't mind if you want to ascribe selfish motives to me. I'm all about the Ayn Rand egoism. But at least ascribe the right one, i.e. that since you all insist on text, I'd rather you read OUR text version than a copyright-infringing cut-and-paste of the article posted by some Anonymous Coward.

Comment removed

[account_deleted]

Comment removed based on user account deletion

Re:Personally....

[boarsai]

Personaly for me... it was the spawn CD's... only requiring one guy to purchase the game for some lan action was awesome. :)

Re:Warcraft

[Simon Garlick]

That was one of the shittiest pieces of gaming journalism I've ever read. That's saying quite a bit.

There was NOTHING in there about what has made Blizzard successful. It was a collection of one-line quotes from former Blizzard team members, strung together with some vague industry history that you could get from Wikipedia. And the omissions! No examination of internal structure, no dissection of ownership/development/publishing models, no description of team culture, nada. FFS, 90% of the article was about Condor/Blizzard North -- not Blizzard -- but then the article didn't even mention that Blizzard North GOT SHUT DOWN. And not a SINGLE reference to Starcraft, just the most popular online game in the history of the world.

Jesus, that was shit.

Re:Impossible to Read

[Phanatic1a]

Then maybe you should write a web page that actually takes advantage of the fact that it's a web page, as opposed to a CYMK-printed brochure with set page heights and page widths. Requiring the user to resize his browser window to read all the fucking text went out sometime around 1997. Or rather, it should have.

did anyone else notice...

[theStorminMormon]

...that the supposedly fundamental question of the article (what is Blizzard's secret sauce?) was never even remotely answered?

What a worthless waste of 10 minutes of my life. It was nothing but an overview of Blizzard's history, with a meaningless soundbite question at the very end.

Pathetic.

-stormin

Re:Borrowed from Tolkien?

[Admiral Ag]

Yes, Blizzard borrowed heavily from Games Workshop. You only have to look at the late 80s Citadel catalogue to see where the inspiration for Warcraft's Artwork came from. It's not enough to say that both borrowed from Tolkien, because they did. But Blizzard borrowed heavily from GW's "chunky" spin on fantasy figures, and WCIII borrows heavily from the Warhammer Universe and the invasion of Chaos (hell, it's even called Reign of Chaos). The Warcraft games even have much the same sense of humour as the Warhammer games.

But that doesn't make them bad. I happen to hate what Games Workshop has done to itself. In 1989 they had the most fun tabletop games in existence, the best gaming magazin,e and the best roleplaying game I had ever played. They abandoned the latter and dumbed down both of the former in order to sell overpriced hunks of metal (I was particularly distressed at what happened to WH40K). I'm glad that Blizzard came along and took some of these ideas and made them into great games, since GW doesn't have a hope in hell of doing so (I predict WAR will suck).

TFA is right in that Blizzard is just good at making extremely playable games. World of Warcraft is the best game I have ever played. I have spent more time on it than any other game, even the original Civilization, and I still have tons of stuff to do. Sure, there are lots of bad things about it, like the daft emphasis on 40 man raids, but it's still a cracking game and well worth the money.

And I love Blizzard for one additional reason. Their Mac support is by far the best of any gaming company. The WoW Mac Tech forum has the highest CM response of any forum and the responses are always useful and honest. Blizzard go out of their way to make Mac users feel like first class citizens in their games and it is much appreciated.

Not really

[patio11]

Its not images or bandwidth that typically drive Slashdotted sites under. It ill-considered CGI or database calls which throw up a bottleneck and cause the server to burst into flames. Otherwise a slashdotting is pretty much the optimal use case for a well-configured web server: a lot of people hitting a small set of content which is guaranteed to be cached. Additionally, nowadays normal images just aren't heavy enough to cause much of a bandwidth problem (oh know, a 50 kb page load! Add a random peak of 2000 users to that and its... OK, so I could serve that off of my residential connection*.)

* N.B. I live in Japan, land of $5 cokes, $100 melons, and $40-a-month 50 mbps Internet connections. Don't try this with an American residential connection :)