The poll was to determine either a reversible cover or a special edition cover.
edit: beaten
-
Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.
Is the era of the DUDEBRO MBA game executive over?
- Thread starter tehrik-e-insaaf
- Start date
The poll was to determine either a reversible cover or a special edition cover.
edit: beaten
John Harker
Definitely doesn't make things up as he goes along.
I'm pretty offended by this topic
"DUDEBRO MBA game executive" is a pretty silly term but it is true that a lot of execs don't know their own products or industry. They know retail and PR and "channels" and such.
That's why you see such a large emphasis now on focus testing, outside evaluation and consulting. A lot of high-level game execs have no idea how to evaluate their own games. They need an "objective" outside reviewer to tell them if their game is shaping up because they have no way to gauge that themselves.
That's why you see such a large emphasis now on focus testing, outside evaluation and consulting. A lot of high-level game execs have no idea how to evaluate their own games. They need an "objective" outside reviewer to tell them if their game is shaping up because they have no way to gauge that themselves.
tehrik-e-insaaf
Member
replace all dudebros with non technical marketing types with MBA degrees
I'm on my phone so I can't do it right now
business people are important but they should be interdisciplinary
I think Todd h is a good executive
I'm on my phone so I can't do it right now
business people are important but they should be interdisciplinary
I think Todd h is a good executive
Imbarkus
As Sartre noted in his contemplation on Hell in No Exit, the true horror is other members.
You know I'm an executive, a kick-ass marketer, and a lifelong gamer and I don't feel like there's a place for me anywhere in the industry.
The blatant hate for marketing in the gaming industry seems far stronger than it does in other industries. Fine, keep the non-gamer marketers you're stuck with, then.
Dude just point me where to go to sign up!
EDIT: Seriously though, Marketing applicants are evaluated by other marketing guys who are looking for marketing traits, and development applicants are evaluated by development people, business applicants get evaluated on business accomplishments. Representing a hybrid skillset has always been a complete to joy to my employers once they hire me, but has presented many more challenges in getting the jobs. It's usually best to shut up about it and pretend the specific skills you are being asked for are the only ones you ever wanted to have in your life ever. It's usually the smaller companies that see the value in such a person, whereas larger companies are primarily concerned with your accomplishments in one specific specialization. Then, once you hit executive level, solid growth, market share, margin, and ROI results are all there is to talk about, nobody gives a shit if you use the product.
The blatant hate for marketing in the gaming industry seems far stronger than it does in other industries. Fine, keep the non-gamer marketers you're stuck with, then.
Dude just point me where to go to sign up!
EDIT: Seriously though, Marketing applicants are evaluated by other marketing guys who are looking for marketing traits, and development applicants are evaluated by development people, business applicants get evaluated on business accomplishments. Representing a hybrid skillset has always been a complete to joy to my employers once they hire me, but has presented many more challenges in getting the jobs. It's usually best to shut up about it and pretend the specific skills you are being asked for are the only ones you ever wanted to have in your life ever. It's usually the smaller companies that see the value in such a person, whereas larger companies are primarily concerned with your accomplishments in one specific specialization. Then, once you hit executive level, solid growth, market share, margin, and ROI results are all there is to talk about, nobody gives a shit if you use the product.
I don't understand why someone would undermine their reasonable argument by starting off with that stupid word.
May as well sprinkle some Joker Gifs and passive aggressive/sarcastic DOOMS!.
The answer is, no. Most people play and enjoy their games completely unaware of who makes them. You believe calling Call of Duty great was incorrect, but that flies in the face of how many people enjoy those games.
DD is going to help me get more games I want, but I have a hard time believing Star Citizen is going to crowd out someone else. The wider audience becomes the traditional gamer and traditional gamers become grognards chasing down niche releases.
May as well sprinkle some Joker Gifs and passive aggressive/sarcastic DOOMS!.
The answer is, no. Most people play and enjoy their games completely unaware of who makes them. You believe calling Call of Duty great was incorrect, but that flies in the face of how many people enjoy those games.
DD is going to help me get more games I want, but I have a hard time believing Star Citizen is going to crowd out someone else. The wider audience becomes the traditional gamer and traditional gamers become grognards chasing down niche releases.
That was for a reversible cover.
To be fair, the purple console did not attract nearly as much of an audience as either black console.
One might argue that the green-tinged black of the Xbox held it back from true greatness.
Or possibly just Grand Theft Auto. That too.
It's because so many games have been altered as a result of bizarre marketing behavior. Take Call of Duty 4: Modern Warfare, for instance. Marketers at Activision insisted that it would never sell, forcing Infinity Ward into a deal where Treyarch would make bi-yearly Call of Duty releases (IW doesn't consider Treyarch games CoD games--each exe is iw4.exe, iw5.exe, etc, ignoring Treyarch's installments), Infinity Ward would have to make Call of Duty 2, and World of War would get made when CoD4 would inevitably (or so they thought) fail. Marketers almost got Call of Duty 4 shitcanned--and it ended up being one of the most important games ever made.
Marketers were responsible for the protagonist of what became Sleeping Dogs being changed from a woman into a man.
Marketers were responsible for the Doritosgate/Wainright debacle.
On and on I could go.
Of course there's a big reason for gamers to dislike marketers more than other media. They have a huge level of influence, and often, really, really bad taste (YOUR MOM HATES DEAD SPAAAACE, SO HERE'S A SEVERERD TORSO STATUE! ALSO WE HIRED FAKE PROTESTORS!) that just helps perpetuate a shitty stereotype of gamers.
It's like how people hate focus testing for movies. Some of the best movies forgo testing altogether, and they're often stronger films as a result.
Imbarkus
As Sartre noted in his contemplation on Hell in No Exit, the true horror is other members.
DocSeuss this is endemic of a lot of confusion between the roles of marketing and business development. And then, on the flip side, when an IP comes out seemingly completely unbound to market considerations, and fails to sell such as Shadows of the Damned, marketing gets blamed there too.
No one wants marketing's opinion on how to make the game, but everyone and their mother is going to tell marketing how to market it. People who don't know anything about marketing at all. It's kind of like writing, in that way.
Meanwhile across this country everyone wants to either develop games, or review them. No one wants to market as a career, just as a sideline area of "expertise." So garages full of dudes break their balls on the next great thing, get it Steam greenlit, and watch it fade and slide downwards on the list of releases and into its eventual niche market.
Marketing needs to be respected in what it can and can't do, and what it should and shouldn't do. Once someone reaches an executive level where they are making business development decisions, the marketing hat must be worn sometimes, but other thinking caps must be worn as well, IMHO.
Creative people are sometimes right that they are on to the next big thing that will sell well and make everyone a living. And other times they are on a mad pipe dream of ego gratification and are getting ready to drag everyone else to the unemployment office with them.
Their reaction to disapproval is often the same in either scenario.
If telling the difference were a science, the people at the top would not need be so highly paid.
No one wants marketing's opinion on how to make the game, but everyone and their mother is going to tell marketing how to market it. People who don't know anything about marketing at all. It's kind of like writing, in that way.
Meanwhile across this country everyone wants to either develop games, or review them. No one wants to market as a career, just as a sideline area of "expertise." So garages full of dudes break their balls on the next great thing, get it Steam greenlit, and watch it fade and slide downwards on the list of releases and into its eventual niche market.
Marketing needs to be respected in what it can and can't do, and what it should and shouldn't do. Once someone reaches an executive level where they are making business development decisions, the marketing hat must be worn sometimes, but other thinking caps must be worn as well, IMHO.
Creative people are sometimes right that they are on to the next big thing that will sell well and make everyone a living. And other times they are on a mad pipe dream of ego gratification and are getting ready to drag everyone else to the unemployment office with them.
Their reaction to disapproval is often the same in either scenario.
If telling the difference were a science, the people at the top would not need be so highly paid.
John Harker
Definitely doesn't make things up as he goes along.
Civil discourse? Where have you been? I've all but become so jaded around here, I've reduced myself from not even bothering really. I've become a series of 1-2 line posts. This is refreshing to hear from someone else in the space with a level head.
tehrik-e-insaaf
Member
there are a lot of casual gamers who play call of duty who clearly know the difference between treyarch and infinity ward - you'd be surprised - with the advent of digital these things will matter even more because they aren't buying something off the shelf - that makes it harder for the marketing-types to justify their existence (when they have little or no experience in the industry)
tehrik-e-insaaf
Member
Let me clarify since some of you guys have gotten off track here
This isn't about blaming marketing, or blaming biz dev or blaming engineers
This is about an observation
A bunch of people in the C suite aren't gamers, some of them have no understanding of the creative process and see their developers are disposable or interchangeable
Why is this the case? Historically b/c retail channel, schmoozing, etc. mattered - they were toys, not craft - so these people held all the power in the organization
Now? Things are different. I see Valve model / Nintendo model as taking over where there is more interdisciplinary activity, and decision-making involves engineers as well
Does that mean there will be a box art changed? Yes. Does that mean there will be dumb decisions? Yes.
But I think there will be less dumb decisions, and I think it will garner more respect for the industry and appreciation for each other - that means less Peter Moores, and more Gabe Newells
This isn't about blaming marketing, or blaming biz dev or blaming engineers
This is about an observation
A bunch of people in the C suite aren't gamers, some of them have no understanding of the creative process and see their developers are disposable or interchangeable
Why is this the case? Historically b/c retail channel, schmoozing, etc. mattered - they were toys, not craft - so these people held all the power in the organization
Now? Things are different. I see Valve model / Nintendo model as taking over where there is more interdisciplinary activity, and decision-making involves engineers as well
Does that mean there will be a box art changed? Yes. Does that mean there will be dumb decisions? Yes.
But I think there will be less dumb decisions, and I think it will garner more respect for the industry and appreciation for each other - that means less Peter Moores, and more Gabe Newells
tehrik-e-insaaf
Member
You are right it was the pet project of those guys but Rick Thompson ran the business as general manager with close super vision from Robbie Bach and Ballmer, he is non-technical, and not a gamer. Bach is Morgan Stanley-banker (non-technical, non-gamer). J. Allard was involved (who for his credit was a comp. scientist and engineer, but still a non-gamer). Ballmer obviously is non-technical, he was at Harvard and dropped out of Stanford MBA.
http://venturebeat.com/2011/11/14/making-of-the-xbox-1/3/ - Source
http://investing.businessweek.com/research/people/overview/overview.asp - R. Thompson Bio
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Robert_J._Bach - Robbie's Bio
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/J_Allard - J Allard's bio - the only engineer, who was still a non-gamer
My childlike heart wants to believe you, but the burning cynic inside of me is telling him not to.
rottendevice
Member
If developers want to start their own game company, they can do so. And a lot have, with everything that's going on in mobile and downloadable games.
A lot of engineers don't envy the job of an MBA-educated game executive.
A lot of engineers don't envy the job of an MBA-educated game executive.
Very good post! I agree with your points and your examples of Gabe Newell and Iwata were spot on. I also agree that watching people like Reggie and Balmer trying to sell a product has turned be off to them over the years. The only thing that ultimately sells games are the games themselves. Introduce the game, show the gameplay footage, then drop the mic. Done.
XANDER CAGE
Member
I would love to get an MBA in dudebronomics.
Golf, booze, and strippers!
tehrik-e-insaaf
Member
If you have something useful to add, then add, don't waste space complaining about how my observation/analysis isn't in line with your view of reality - I've edited my post to be more sensitive since clearly I over stated/exaggerated, touched the nerves of some, and apologized to everyone - you are keeping it going though and ignoring everything else that was said in the post - that reflects more negatively about you, than it does me.
Wolves Evolve
Member
Just because MBA dudebros are the worst people you've ever been exposed to or this planet is likely to produce, doesn't mean they don't serve a function in a global industry with hundreds of companies. I doubt large corporations like Sony, etc could manage their operations without a few douchecopters to run the large-scale agreements and functional business operations.
tehrik-e-insaaf
Member
I've already agreed to this and clarified it earlier
FinalxBoss
Member
In a perfect world neogaf would have more posts like this and less threads claiming that Japanese game development sucks and that games are filled with sexism. Great read OP.
tehrik-e-insaaf
Member
thanks man, i appreciate that
As our industry turns more and more into a big business, the folks in charge will want to have MBAs running the business and marketing side of things. Just a fact of life.
Want to shake things up? You aren't a dudebro? Get an MBA and change the system from within - take calculated risks and try new things. Don't give in to the tried and true formula that prevents you from standing out.
Okay, that's all a really reductive argument above. But my experience over the years, and incidentally something I was just talking about today, is that once inside the big budget and risk machine that is any large company, it gets really easy to be risk averse and just focus on the P&L and only do tried and tested methods and executions. More companies need to embrace the idea of an experimental budget to give people the freedom to try new things to make their ideas and products they represent stand out more and come up with new ways to market and sell those products.
The thing is, in many places (not game industry specific), it's difficult to get into a position where you can affect that kind of change without being part of the "club" in a way, and that club usually leans to conservative, tested executions.
/preach over
Want to shake things up? You aren't a dudebro? Get an MBA and change the system from within - take calculated risks and try new things. Don't give in to the tried and true formula that prevents you from standing out.
Okay, that's all a really reductive argument above. But my experience over the years, and incidentally something I was just talking about today, is that once inside the big budget and risk machine that is any large company, it gets really easy to be risk averse and just focus on the P&L and only do tried and tested methods and executions. More companies need to embrace the idea of an experimental budget to give people the freedom to try new things to make their ideas and products they represent stand out more and come up with new ways to market and sell those products.
The thing is, in many places (not game industry specific), it's difficult to get into a position where you can affect that kind of change without being part of the "club" in a way, and that club usually leans to conservative, tested executions.
/preach over
tehrik-e-insaaf
Member
i think you missed my point - im saying things will change regardless of size - structure will force the change - silicon valley already sees it
Xisiqomelir
Member
We hate the word 'dudebro' now? We invented the word 'dudebro', how is this possible?
I think it's a beautiful and perfectly descriptive word, too.
I think it's a beautiful and perfectly descriptive word, too.
Kageshinzo
Member
Sakaguchi's failure is specifically because he has no idea how the movie business works. But for that which is his specialty (and the crux of this discussion) which is game design, direction and story, he's far from a failure.
The 2 ideas in this section are at odds with one another. If you were staffing and managing correctly, generating proper forecasts, budgeting correctly, etc. then you wouldn't NEED to lay people off. That it keeps happening in repetition is indicative of the direct opposite of good leadership. So I think his point still stands, given the current state of the industry at large.
Example: Reggie's primary discipline is marketing. He had an opportunity to staff someone who would really sell the Wii U in the marketing VP slot. SCOTT MOFFIT. Reggie failed at filling a job in his own realm of expertise. And somehow he has the chops to do the rest?
And let's not even get into EA's and Activision's giant mound of managerial bullshit.
This is the number one strike against MBAs: their ascension to the top ranks is often not even about managerial skill but about nepotism, coercion and "networking" more than the actual talent. If they're geared to sell, you better believe they can sell themselves, too.
That's not to say they don't have a purpose, but at the top of the food chain in a creative industry? FUCK NO.
Barkley's Justice
Member
How young are you, OP?
that all depends on if the trend in the industry goes to understand that our product is either a) entertainment, b) tech, or c) consumer packaged good
Right now, the feeling I've gotten is people still consider what we create a CPG, and therefore try to hire CPG people.
I'm not sure that the silicon valley analogy quite works, yet.
Depends on current trends on the business model and emerging business models.
GhaleonQ
Member
It's funny that Moore is the person who sparked this. I have very little problem with noncreatives in leadership roles at large publishers if they deliver what they promise (artistic or not). Moore is a good example of that. Apart from glitches in recent titles, I think EA Sports is managed extremely well. And who wouldn't want Ueda's Sony team to have a smarter planner?
What frustrates me is when trashy, high-budget awards bait fails as art AND as product. Assassin's Creed 3 made me laugh, as does Ubisoft/Montreal's management.
What frustrates me is when trashy, high-budget awards bait fails as art AND as product. Assassin's Creed 3 made me laugh, as does Ubisoft/Montreal's management.
I don't think games on Greenlight need marketing. They need PR and exposure.
tehrik-e-insaaf
Member
I understand - I'm just triyng to pre-empt obvious criticism - in any case, if you actually read my point - you will see that I am saying isolated incidents as a whole won't change the inevitable tide towards more collaborative decision-making
LiveFromKyoto
Member
Sorry man, the dudebro exec has been runnings things since time immemorial and it's never changing. There's a heck of a lot more involved in running a large 21st century company than knowing how to make its products. Given how competitive the business world is, the MBA as a marker of distinction isn't going anywhere either, nor should it be cynically written off. Somebody who's been through one A) is a worker, and B) generally knows a lot more about how money and organizations work than somebody with a computer engineering degree.
But more than that, meeting rooms at the top of large corporations are still alpha gorillas beating their chests. Make no mistake, personality and the ability to exert one's will is still a huge deciding factor within a business. "Dudebros" generally have the energy, confidence and selfishness to make that happen. Being able to slap somebody into getting a project done on time means more than knowing where the Master Sword is in Link to the Past.
Remember, nobody is appointing these guys in the final analysis, they're rising to the top and taking those positions because nobody beats them out for the job.
But more than that, meeting rooms at the top of large corporations are still alpha gorillas beating their chests. Make no mistake, personality and the ability to exert one's will is still a huge deciding factor within a business. "Dudebros" generally have the energy, confidence and selfishness to make that happen. Being able to slap somebody into getting a project done on time means more than knowing where the Master Sword is in Link to the Past.
Remember, nobody is appointing these guys in the final analysis, they're rising to the top and taking those positions because nobody beats them out for the job.
As someone currently looking at a future in either marketing or journalism (my background is in sales), believe me, I understand that being a marketer isn't all about being evil.
Game marketing, however... that exposure that audiences get to games being sold... it's not good. Look at every puerile marketing campaign for video games out there. It's awful stuff, catering to a stereotypical group of people who tend to exist on the very fringe of things.
I believe that things are at their best when the marketers work to support the developers and not treat the audience like they're idiots... but in gaming, this seems preciously rare.
Look at Take2. Their marketing guys seem to be pretty great. They support weird, untested products like Spec Ops: The Line, Bioshock, and Borderlands 2. Some of their games do poorly. Some of their games do extremely well.
Shadows of the Damned did poorly because the game had some media exposure, but not much, and what it did have was kinda awful (in the vein of Bulletstorm, which, as Cliff Bleszinski mentioned in Twitter today, was known as "that dicktits game," rather than the ridiculously awesome game it was).
...isn't that a part of marketing?
tehrik-e-insaaf
Member
Oh boy you are really REALLY clever. Clearly I'm very young right, because you disagree with my view or find my perspective funny? Rather than making veiled attacks at me - why don't you just add where you disagree and be constructive? Given how old and mature you clearly are, that would be the smart and sensible thing to do and in the spirit of constructive feedback.
tehrik-e-insaaf
Member
perhaps, but i think my analysis of the situation would suggest that their value is slowly being eroded - i do agree with you about "taking charge" - one very good example is that despite the criticisms people have of Zuckerberg, him and Sean Parker were able to fight back against the VCs and keep control through clever preferred stock, and board seat assignment
In any case, no where am I saying give people with no social skills the management role just because they are engineers - I am saying I like the models of smaller game development companies like id Software where it's a good balance - I think with the advent of digital these smaller models are scalable as evidenced by situations like in Silicon Valley where the product managers are technical and most CEOs are increasingly technical - Nintendo and Valve are the gold standards IMHO... I think Bethesda is doing something good as well and the reason why id agreed to be bought out...
tehrik-e-insaaf
Member
Agree - but don't you think the advent of digital makes CPG less likely? (What do you think of my analysis on developers, digital, and draw?)
I'm going to be solidly one-sided in my responses just to foster creative thinking. I can't really speak for everyone in the industry as a whole...
Delivery method does not change what you want to perceive the product as. If you want it to be a CPG, you will treat it that way. Just how you do the last mile delivery to the consumer may be different. Changes the landscape a little, perhaps the thinking, but you can still adhere to the more traditional ways.
Imbarkus
As Sartre noted in his contemplation on Hell in No Exit, the true horror is other members.
This. If you want to look at Engineer-to-Executive development, contrast Steve Jobs and Steve Wozniak. Regardless of your opinion of his leadership, Jobs bothered to learn how businesses were run and applied that knowledge to multiple areas on entrepreneurship. The other, less so. Both are valid choices, but if I could do it over again I would study a lot more basic business administration and finance. EVERY venture depends on these things to some level. At 41, I've had to learn instead through experience. I got my degree in theatre.
Furthermore you have a different set of options available to you depending on if you run a public or a private company. Part of the reason Valve has been so successful is their ability to pursue a long-term R&D plan that may end up just flushing money away without Gabe having to explain to the shareholders why profits weren't in line with revenue increases, etc. etc.
We all praised Ricatello for pursuing new IP at EA. Then the titles sold for crap. Imagine what could have happened if he could have said "quarterly profit for investors in EA will simply have to decline while we lay groundwork for our profits 8 or 9 years down the road. We will persist in these efforts."
We live in a world where these are inextricably linked.
I see no stronger need right now than in small teams who bust their ass and get their game out, and then all look around at each other to try and figure out who is going to be the Cliff Bleszinski for the company.
I learned a long time ago putting on stage shows that it didn't matter how brilliant the production was if you didn't have butts in the seats.
There is some crap-ass marketing going on out there, some real looloo stunt-based attention-grabbing failures.
Meanwhile, neither Sony nor Microsoft have a truly compelling loyalty program in place. They spend all day gathering data from their players on their network but their direct marketing efforts are not tiered or tailored to the player in the way that is possible. They make no distinction between their high-value players and low-value players.
It seems their every marketing decision is based around the product--even their often inappropriate early input into the viability of the product at all--instead of being focused on the customer.
I am amazed in an industry where product releases at $60 but is $40 or $20 within weeks if it fails, that direct digital marketing is not tailoring tiered call-to-action coupon offers to "VIP" consumers to drive PR and attention to the title. I am still stunned that Nintendo is the only company to give you items of value in exchange for registering dozens of their games and prooving loyalty.
Instead? Bloody severed torso with tits. Dante's Inferno protestors. High concept racist European billboards. Crying babies. All the signs of marketers in love with needless PR fiascos and dumping money into overpriced traditional media advertising
If the goal of any company is to continue to grow revenue than at some point you hit an economy of scale which includes so much business administration than it is folly not to trust business administrators.
I think I agree with your gist that it would be nice if more game company CEOs and marketers were gamers. The next best thing, however, is just for them to focus on their customers, and to continue to use the tools at their disposal to not only directly measure but directly communicate with, and listen to, their customers...
...and then use their business acumen to filter out vocal minorities in the customer base, do the hard math and make the hard choices as needed, to try and keep everyone successful and employed with increased revenue.
EDIT: I'll bite:
Except you know exactly which customers bought which games, how many they have in their library, how often they play, whether they buy on sale or at full price, how much of a sale stimulates their purchase, etc. etc.
Digital distribution will provide these companies the direct data needed to properly move from indirect advertising-based marketing to direct marketing, often through leveraging the distribution platform itself.
We are no longer selling products. We are selling service. Again Steam leads the way. Remember the Portal 2 launch?
hyperbole or what?
http://blogs.wsj.com/venturecapital/2012/10/04/women-executives-make-venture-backed-companies-more-successful-study/
http://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/archive/2010/07/the-end-of-men/308135/
http://www.amazon.com/Chalice-Blade-Our-History-Future/dp/0062502891
bonus link cuz it has the word dudebro in it: http://www.slate.com/articles/double_x/the_chat_room/2013/01/hanna_rosin_reddit_ama_the_end_of_men_author_takes_reddit_s_questions.html
MBAs are over rated. Now the school and the background of the person with the MBA is important.
you sound like a terrible manager. Or you work for one. As far as the meeting rooms of top large corporations, I'm impressed you've been in so many, yet still find time to post on neogaf.
The most effective and most spectacular example of capitalism and explosive economic growth has been in China post 1980. that country is based on nepotism and connections. It is the same in the Western capitalism. It would be nice if we lived in a meritocracy, but we don't.
This. If you want to look at Engineer-to-Executive development, contrast Steve Jobs and Steve Wozniak. Regardless of your opinion of his leadership, Jobs bothered to learn how businesses were run and applied that knowledge to multiple areas on entrepreneurship. The other, less so. Both are valid choices, but if I could do it over again I would study a lot more basic business administration and finance. EVERY venture depends on these things to some level. At 41, I've had to learn instead through experience. I got my degree in theatre.
Jobs didn't learn it in an MBA class though. In fact, the MBA types kicked him out of Apple. iirc.
yup.
This is why we are seeing a decline in the competitiveness of the publicly traded corporation. The most effective and/or most nimble in today's world are privately held companies, state owned organizations, private equity funds, and family owned conglomerates.
I'd like to address some more, but I've gotta go. I like your post though.
Grampa Simpson
Banned
Having to deal with a CEO on a regular basis, I get the feeling that they exist to be in sociopathic relationships with other CEOs.
Not really, there's just a select few on this board who get really touchy whenever the word gets brought up...
OP: I like your post, since I'm more concerned about games as a play-form and not as a business. I've found that when game companies started focusing much more on the business aspect of it, creativity declined. To be fair, the production budgets of games nowadays means that you need to have people very knowledgeable about the financial aspect of the industry. Well, there's always indie game creators and companies like Nintendo (Iwata being a programmer and intimately understanding the game dev process).
Palette Swap
Member
While I agree with the overall sentiment, I'm always surprised when people oppose engineers and business executives.
A lot of the people I know with MBAs and/or executive positions have engineering degrees but that might just be how things are done here.
A lot of the people I know with MBAs and/or executive positions have engineering degrees but that might just be how things are done here.