How much executive meddling occurs in the game industry and development cycles?
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
Frequent Questions: The FAQ
