#executive meddling

For as long a lived programme as Inspector Spacetime is,

See. I will note again: as people who know me more than half my life like @arkadijxpancakes can confirm: I have cared about coorporate meddling and executive meddling in creative shit, when I was a kid and first learned about it. And I was not silent about it.

I also learned about the abuses going on over at Disney when I was about 17 or 18 years old. Not only with meddling, but downright abusive shit happening there. This, together with me starting to really get invested into my fledgling feminism really made me a big hater. A couple of other specific situations did not help.

When the MCU stuff first got going, I was so conflicted because I hated Disney. But then, for a bit... I kinda calmed down and was like: "Okay, the company is kinda shitty, but there is still some good creative stuff there."

Well, now I am back at: "Fucking burn it all down. ALL OF IT! Fucking Disney!"

There's practically never executive meddling in indie games because there are practically no executives involved. In AAA games, the vast majority of executive meddling comes in only one situation - when the development process for a game goes off the rails and is in danger of going far over budget, missing their ship date, and/or missing their minimum shippable quality bar. This wasn't always the case back in the PS2 era, where publishers were much more hands-on about wanting and demanding certain things, but the high profile failures in large part due to executive meddling have significantly changed things over the past twenty years. Nowadays, studios are given "enough rope to hang themselves" - a free hand to do exactly as they like until they cause their own imminent demise.

I've worked for a lot of publisher-owned studios in my career. I've worked at studios owned by Sony, Microsoft, Activision, and Electronic Arts. I was there in the early executive meddling era and I've been here for the post-meddling era. Since 2006, every studio I've worked at has been given enough rope to hang itself. The ones who don't hang themselves are the ones who are disciplined about the scope and the feature set of the game they are building. They have a schedule, they have a feature set, and they stick to it. You may have guessed the kind of games these tend to be - the franchise games with regular release schedules and the live service games with regular content updates all hope to stay in this lane.

Every game that I worked on that was not good had key problems that could be traced to the team's leadership being unwilling to commit to major choices. This results in a negative feedback loop - developers aren't willing to put in their best work only to see it tossed out, which leads to half-assed prototypes, which leads to the leadership changing their minds. This process typically repeats until the publishers get nervous at the lack of progress and the impending ship date, which leads to pressure to commit, which leads to a brutal crunch to ship something at the end.

When executive meddling happens, it's typically to replace the waffling leadership with somebody whose goal isn't to build the game that was promised, but to get the ailing project to ship at all. The publisher may also call in [rescue operators] to try to save the project if they need experts in key fields. Executive meddling happens when the project absolutely needs to ship and doesn't have the option of [delaying the release].

[Join us on Discord] and/or [Support us on Patreon]

Got a burning question you want answered?

Short questions: Ask a Game Dev on Twitter

Short questions: Ask a Game Dev on BlueSky

Long questions: Ask a Game Dev on Tumblr

Look, no matter how good or bad a piece of art is, it does not mean it will connect to you. That is fine. As a picky eater, I always likened it too food. Were those eight-course meals that I got served in France objectively better than a fucking Pizza Hut pan pizza? Yes, they were. I will still choose the pan pizza every time, thank you very much.

And it is the same with media. One of my favorite movies of all time is Van Helsing. And I can tell you a lot of things the movie does good. I like the soundtrack a lot. I find the comedic timing in the movie amazing. And some of the actors are great. However, is the main reason I am watching this, that I am a simp for Hugh Jackman and Kate Beckinsale? Yes. Yes, it is. And while the script is funny to me (like I really do enjoy the humor), it is certainly no master piece and if I was a youtuber, I could probably do a two hour video on stuff about the script I take issue with. Don't get me wrong. It is not a bad script by any means. Just... very mediocre. I am able to tell that. Just as I am able to call out the CGI that has aged a lot worse than the CGI in other movies. And some costume choices that were... less than ideal. I still love the movie.

Or maybe an even better example: I freaking love the movie Megamind. It is one of my Top 5 animated movies of all time. But the script was written by two guys who had never learned or studied screenwriting. And this shows. While the script had been edited a ton by people who knew more about screenwriting than them, it absolutely shows in some places, that it was written by folks, who just did not know how to best pace out scenes and stuff, how to work with show and tell, and how to think cinematically. But you know what? To me it does not matter, because I love Megamind and Minion as characters. Again, I am not saying it is a bad script because of it, just that... it could have used even more work than it got.

And this, too me, is part of the reason why I even in my childhood had a big issue with people who are like: "I love this piece of media and hence it is objectively the best thing that was ever created!"

I had this a lot in my first real fandom. Digimon. Because, yeah, it is perfectly fine that you connected more with Digimon Adventure or Digimon Adventure 02, but this does not mean that either of them were better written or better crafted than Digimon Tamers. Like there are very obvious problems in the writing of the first two seasons. Mind you, these days - after getting my answers on why this happened - I am way more chill about it. Like, I get that the people who wrote this were still trying to do the best with the options given to them. But partly because those options were limited, that "best" was just not the same "best" Konaka could do with Tamers, due to on one hand having more experience, and on the other hand just being a lot more stubborn about certain things.

Again, no, that does not mean you have to love Digimon Tamers. It also does not mean you have to dislike Digimon Adventure or Digimon Adventure 02. Like, heck, while I would argue there are more problems in Adventure, they are a lot more noticable in 02 - and I still like 02 more than Adventure, despite the animation being at times worse than some of those fan animatics on youtube. And yes, I mean animatics. Actually things that are not fully animated. Because 02 was suffering from timecrunch in the production a lot, so the animation really at times is a mess.

Why am I talking about this now?

Well, mainly because I am once more annoyed by this. By the fact that people do not acknowledge the fact that writing and art does have objective factors. And that there are rules to follow - or that if they get broken need to be broken for a good reason. Like, you absolutely can for artistic reasons subvert any writing or artistic rule. Totally fine. But only if it is done for artistic reasons and not, let's say, because of fucking time crunch.

And yes, this is still because of Arcane, and me being very, very sick of people claiming season 2 was well written. It was not. I am sorry, there are rules to writing and those rules were broken. Most notably rules of set-ups needing either a payoff or a clear subversion, and the good old screenwriting rule of "show, don't tell, you are a visual medium after all". (Please note at this point: Show don't tell was always for Screenwriting and visual media, it was never meant for pure prose writing, as in prose writing you will always just tell - given words are the only tool you have at your disposal. Yes, it usually works better if you write about characters in whose head your POV is not more in terms of reactions, rather than 'XY was angry', but other than that... there is only so much you can do as someone just using words.)

Like, it is perfectly fine if you totally connected to the story or specific characters. I mean, despite seeing the flaws with the writing - given they were really, really noticable - I would lie if I said I did not cry at some places. But yeah, if you were all there for Caitlyn, Vi, Viktor or Jayce, all power to you.

But the writing was not good. And from all we know the chances are very good that the reason the writing was such a mess was executive meddling of one sort or another. (Very probably the writers getting less time to tell their story than they had expected.)

And that exactly is why I am so fucking pissed at people being like "Oh, but the writing was great!" Because what you are saying with that is basically: "Creative interference and executive meddling is the most amazing thing. Creative people should not have their own freedom. Who also cares about people learning writing as a craft. Let's just let AI write this stuff, I don't fucking care."

And I actually do mean that last part. Because while I do not think that AI had written anything for that season, the time crunch made it so that there were certain things showing up, I have seen a lot in AI writing. Mainly the tell over show, and the set-up without payoff. Because AI is obviously not good with setting up and paying things off, because the AI does not plan a story. It just gives you a line of words in a row, that it has predicted have a high probability to go with a prompt it was given. And those usually do not have a payoff to set-ups.

Also, yes, I am very much the person, who will always give the creative behind any project a lot more benefit of the doubt, than any executives. There are times where it turns out that this is not warranted, and it turns out that indeed, something was weirdly written, because like some guy, who might or might not have been called Joss Whedon, wanted to write something that was titulating for himself. But still, in many cases where a piece of media turned out to have obvious issues, and someone broke their NDA, it often is the case that some executive was to blame for the mess that existed. Be it, because they wanted to pander to a specific audience. Be it, because they wanted to force in certain advertisements. Be it, because they decided that the creatives would just not have the time to do the creative stuff - or not enough time within the piece of media (runtime) to tell the story they wanted to tell. Be it, because some producer decided that his nephew Larry needed to have a role in the show, and because now this role was played by Larry, who was after all his nephew, this role needed to be way bigger than it was originally intended to be.

No, I do not know what happened behind the scenes of Arcane season 2. I can make some educated guesses, but I do not know it. But I know at least in part what happened behind the scenes of Digimon Adventure and 02, and exactly that makes me kinda pissed of people excusing stuff that was fully and completely there because of executive meddling.

Why does everything always have to come back to capitalism? I'm pretty sure a bad artist or writer would still be bad under any other system.

Also, really don't want to sound like "that person" but I think you're confusing capitalism with corporatism. They're both different things.

I think writers' ideas would turn out better under a system which encouraged less executive meddling.