Gaming Chris Metzen, co-creator of 'Warcraft,' 'Diablo,' and 'StarCraft', is retiring at age 42

[tom_mai78101]

Chris Metzen, Senior VP of Story and Franchise Development at Blizzard Entertainment and the legendary co-creator of hit games including "Diablo," "Warcraft," and "StarCraft," is retiring at age 42.

Metzen's retirement was announced internally to Blizzard employees late Monday afternoon, Business Insider has learned.

In a post on Blizzard's forums later on Monday, Metzen confirmed the move, saying that he wants to spend more time with his wife, children, and their newborn baby.

"Being home with them all, having time and space to really live…to love my wife with all my strength…that’s my career now," writes Metzen.

He was with the company for 22 years, seeing it go from a small startup to a global mega-power in video games.

Metzen is best known to fans of Blizzard's games, which recently expanded to the smash-hit shooter "Overwatch," as the man in charge of each game's overall story.

In 1996, Metzen co-created the universe of the smash-hit "Diablo" with ex-Blizzard designer Bill Roper. He also contributed to the setting and designs of games including "Warcraft" and its sequel. In 1998, Roper was the lead designer of the smash-hit space strategy game "StarCraft."

The legendary cocreator of 'Warcraft,' 'Diablo,' and 'StarCraft' is retiring at age 42

Blizzard's Chris Metzen is retiring.

www.businessinsider.com

 

[Accname]

Didnt like the newest Blizzard games at all, dont think its a big loss.
What happened to this company? Their games used to be incredibly smart but now they all seem so generic and bland.

 

[jonas]

act-i-vi-sion

 

[seph ir oth]

Big company syndrome, along with the Activision merger.

When your teams are much smaller (see Starcraft's team ... under 20 programmers) you have more personal connection to the game ... your ideas get heard & if you hired a good staff your product shines.

 

[Accname]

Big company syndrome, along with the Activision merger.

When your teams are much smaller (see Starcraft's team ... under 20 programmers) you have more personal connection to the game ... your ideas get heard & if you hired a good staff your product shines.

There is definitely a correlation, but does it necessarily imply causation?
I do not see a reason why a bigger team would necessitate lower quality. I can understand if some people thing it would be more difficult. I can definitely see the higher management overhead. But I dont see why it should be impossible. Just get a project manager with some balls who keeps his people under control.

 

[seph ir oth]

There is definitely a correlation, but does it necessarily imply causation?
I do not see a reason why a bigger team would necessitate lower quality. I can understand if some people thing it would be more difficult. I can definitely see the higher management overhead. But I dont see why it should be impossible. Just get a project manager with some balls who keeps his people under control.

It's not impossible, of course, but I feel like it opens up for more error.

Basic engineering principal: the more parts in a system, the more likely it will fail.

 

[Accname]

It's not impossible, of course, but I feel like it opens up for more error.

Basic engineering principal: the more parts in a system, the more likely it will fail.

I wouldnt even go as far as saying its more error prone. I think I would say having more people work together simply produces more overhead. If you want to keep the quality high while upscaling your personnel the project management level has to work twice as hard to keep everybody under control. You need to have a vision, you need to communicate your vision across all members of your workforce and you need to enforce your vision when it comes to implementation. Its a lot of work but it certainly isnt impossible; just... tedious.

 

[jonas]

"the mythical man month".

 

[seph ir oth]

I wouldnt even go as far as saying its more error prone. I think I would say having more people work together simply produces more overhead. If you want to keep the quality high while upscaling your personnel the project management level has to work twice as hard to keep everybody under control. You need to have a vision, you need to communicate your vision across all members of your workforce and you need to enforce your vision when it comes to implementation. Its a lot of work but it certainly isnt impossible; just... tedious.

Agreed! Definitely more overhead (and PROPER overhead) is needed ... that can be hard to find, as many companies will simply give overhead positions blindly to those with seniority, even if they are not suited for the position.

I've witnessed companies & individuals do this, unfortunately.