NKD wrote on Oct 24, 2014, 06:19:
InBlack wrote on Oct 24, 2014, 06:09:
You are both missing the point. The point is responsibility. A CEO sets policy and strategy. He doesnt as you say get involved in the 'fine details' of the day to day business but he is the one who dictates what the company should focus on and how, and ultimatively this work ethic is filtered down through the ranks.
Okay. So what's the point we're missing? I don't debate that the CEO takes responsibility for the general direction of a company. In fact I said as much.
He claims because Riccitiello had what he considers a consumer-unfriendly strategy for running EA, that somehow he's going to try crowbarring a completely incompatible business strategy into a very different company. I claim that because he's run diverse companies in the past, there's not much reason to suspect he can't continue to do so in the future.
Am I wrong? I'm not sure what you're trying to get at exactly.
Its not about whether he can run a company, but how he runs one. You are right, there is no way he would implement the same exact same strategies from EA in this case, but is it really foolish to assume that at least some of the 'streamlining' that he is credited for at EA wont be carried over to this new company at a detriment to their customers and ultimately us gamers? (Although it might be benficial to Unity Technologies' bottom line in the short term) In no way am I saying that this is a given, he might be the best thing to happen to Unity since sliced bread but given his track record at EA I dont think its surprising that gamers are sceptical at this point.
I have a nifty blue line!