Shirke

Member
Oct 25, 2017
663
Toronto
Blizzard Cancels Big New Game After Six Years of Development


View: https://twitter.com/jasonschreier/status/1750620667660100066

But in recent years, the company made a big investment in Odyssey, building up a team of more than 100 people to develop it. The game, set in a new universe, was in development for more than six years and outlasted many other Blizzard incubation projects. Now, the future of such efforts outside of existing franchises is uncertain.
Odyssey started in 2017 as a pitch from Craig Amai, a Blizzard veteran who worked on World of Warcraft. It was conceived as a survival game, like Minecraft and Rust, but with more polish and fewer bugs. In subsequent years, the team working on the game expanded, and it was announced publicly in 2022 as the company began hiring more staff.Despite the additional resources, the project struggled largely due to technical issues surrounding the engine, or the suite of tools and technology that developers use to construct a game, according to people familiar with the process. Odyssey was originally prototyped on the popular Unreal Engine, from Epic Games Inc., but Blizzard executives decided to switch, in part, because it wouldn't support their ambitions for vast maps supporting up to 100 players at once.
Blizzard instead directed the Odyssey team to use Synapse, an internal engine that the company had originally developed for mobile games and envisioned as something that would be shared across many of its projects. But that led to significant problems as the technology was slow to coalesce, and Odyssey's artists instead spent time prototyping content in the Unreal Engine that they knew would have to be discarded later, said the people.
When the Microsoft acquisition was finalized, some Blizzard staff were hopeful that they might be able to switch back to Unreal Engine rather than trying to finish the game on Synapse. In an interview at BlizzCon in November, Ybarra said that their new parent company would offer them the freedom to use the technology of their choice without having to go through the board of directors as in the past.
Despite the challenges, Odyssey appeared to be making progress. People who played early versions of the game enjoyed it and thought there was a lot of potential in the market for a survival game that hit Blizzard's bar for quality. Still, Odyssey was years away from completion. At one point, Blizzard was looking to expand the team to hundreds of people in hopes of targeting a 2026 release, but even that seemed overly optimistic to some developers.
Instead, the project was canceled as the company concluded that Synapse was not ready for production.

More expose from the Press Sneak.
 

lost7

Member
Feb 20, 2018
2,750
Despite the challenges, Odyssey appeared to be making progress. People who played early versions of the game enjoyed it and thought there was a lot of potential in the market for a survival game that hit Blizzard's bar for quality. Still, Odyssey was years away from completion. At one point, Blizzard was looking to expand the team to hundreds of people in hopes of targeting a 2026 release, but even that seemed overly optimistic to some developers.

That is the sad part - it sounds like the game could have actually ended up being something good. Why is it so common for management to make engine development decisions when they have clearly no understanding of how development works?
 

modiz

Member
Oct 8, 2018
17,970
The biggest mistake here imo was going for 100 player world instances, should have stuck with a 4 player co op. Then the choice of an engine would have been more flexible.
 

makonero

Member
Oct 27, 2017
9,715
That is the sad part - it sounds like the game could have actually ended up being something good. Why is it so common for management to make engine development decisions when they have clearly no understanding of how development works?
engines cost money! here, use our shitty unsupported mobile engine instead so we don't have to pay licensing fees
 

Crushed

Member
Oct 25, 2017
7,741
Cross-posting this form the other thread, but the switch from UE4 to an in-house engine over concerns regarding a large scale map and large player counts is just a massive missed call from Blizzard.



UE4 actually wasn't great at that aspect around the time that they initially started to pitch and prototype this! But then due to two little games coming out that year, Epic quickly started to develop the engine in a direction to make it better at that exact scenario!
 

Bentendo24

Member
Feb 20, 2020
5,403
Cross-posting this form the other thread, but the switch from UE4 to an in-house engine over concerns regarding a large scale map and large player counts is just a massive missed call from Blizzard.



UE4 actually wasn't great at that aspect around the time that they initially started to pitch and prototype this! But then due to two little games coming out that year, Epic quickly started to develop the engine in a direction to make it better at that exact scenario!

What games? I know they're probably obvious but I don't know lmao
 

B-Dubs

That's some catch, that catch-22
General Manager
Oct 25, 2017
33,093
That is the sad part - it sounds like the game could have actually ended up being something good. Why is it so common for management to make engine development decisions when they have clearly no understanding of how development works?
Sadly executive meddling is always a thing. Their choices seemed to be either scaling back their vision to work with what they had or changing engines to try and get everything. Reading through, it's fairly obvious that they should have listened to the devs and scaled back instead of doing what they did.

It's better to have smaller co-op and expand it later if possible than to derail everything and chase the dream.

The studio basically got screwed by Kotik and his c-suite goons.

Cross-posting this form the other thread, but the switch from UE4 to an in-house engine over concerns regarding a large scale map and large player counts is just a massive missed call from Blizzard.



UE4 actually wasn't great at that aspect around the time that they initially started to pitch and prototype this! But then due to two little games coming out that year, Epic quickly started to develop the engine in a direction to make it better at that exact scenario!
The irony is they couldn't have known that it would go that way at the time.
 

Cort

Member
Nov 4, 2017
4,370
Switching from Unreal Engine to Synapse, citing that it "wouldn't support their ambitions for vast maps supporting up to 100 players at once" as their reasoning, while doing so in the same year Fortnite exploded in popularity is just a classic Blizzard play.
 

Azerth

Prophet of Truth - Chicken Chaser
Member
Oct 27, 2017
6,264
would have had almost 10 years of dev time. crazy how bad management fucked up
 

Yerffej

Prophet of Regret
Member
Oct 25, 2017
23,918
Yeah, this sounds like it would have cost a shit ton more to get on track. Thats a long time and serious mismanagement to come back from.
 

Mr.Deadshot

Member
Oct 27, 2017
20,285
This industry is beyond fucked. What happened after PS360 era? Tons of studios just forgot how to produce games?

Six years, damn. What a waste.
 
Feb 21, 2022
2,049
Another project dead in the water because of higher-up meddling. Sure, back when the project was first conceived UE might not have been the best for huge 100 player maps, but things quickly changed over the years thanks to Fortnite. They had plenty of time to switch back to UE, but it's clear that the higher-ups wanted them to use the shitty new internal mobile game engine.

And now all those devs are jobless because of it. What an absolutely massive fuck up, and I'm sure the people most responsible will go on like nothing happened.
 

Juryvicious

Member
Oct 28, 2017
6,919
As per Jason's article, a 2026 release date, if everything went smooth, would have equaled an 8 year development cycle.

100% not sustainable. And for me this speaks to just how messed up AB was pre-merger. Executive meddling, Bobby, and his c-suite punks strike again.
 

Crushed

Member
Oct 25, 2017
7,741
What games? I know they're probably obvious but I don't know lmao
PUBG and Fortnite.

PUBG was on UE4 because the development team (Bluehole, now Krafton) only really knew UE, so they worked with Epic to customize the engine into making a 100 player multiplayer game on a large map work. Epic was working on a long suffering and mocked small scale survival co-op game called Fortnite, and as a testbed decided to upgrade the engine from the ground up with a new experimental mode called Fortnite Battle Royale, modeled after PUBG, which was now exploding in popularity.


A lot of Epic's subsequent upgrades to UE4 following that were centered handling that kind of that game better.
 

eonden

Member
Oct 25, 2017
17,135
6 years to fail to make a survival game. Considering the genre evolution, JESUS CHRIST.
 

Sotha_Sil

Member
Nov 4, 2017
5,135
6 years in with major questions about what engine they were using. Yeah, that's not good management.
 
OP
OP
Shirke

Shirke

Member
Oct 25, 2017
663
Toronto
That is the sad part - it sounds like the game could have actually ended up being something good. Why is it so common for management to make engine development decisions when they have clearly no understanding of how development works?

engines cost money! here, use our shitty unsupported mobile engine instead so we don't have to pay licensing fees

Another project dead in the water because of higher-up meddling. Sure, back when the project was first conceived UE might not have been the best for huge 100 player maps, but things quickly changed over the years thanks to Fortnite. They had plenty of time to switch back to UE, but it's clear that the higher-ups wanted them to use the shitty new internal mobile game engine.

And now all those devs are jobless because of it. What an absolutely massive fuck up, and I'm sure the people most responsible will go on like nothing happened.

Synapse sounds like the growing pains that EA and Frostbite had in the 2010's all over again.
 
Oct 25, 2017
32,898
Atlanta GA
that's some insane project mismanagement. i wonder who was so adamant about keeping it to 100 players and moving engines. how about 50 players, and you actually get to release a working game
 

maabus1999

Member
Oct 26, 2017
9,149
I know folks are pointing to Kotick, who does bear responsibility, but from the article this sounds like Ybarra and his team made this decision. This level of mismanagement, plus who knows what other issues Microsoft found on the other develop teams, is probably why he is gone today. And the fact after the acquisition they tried to pass the buck back to Microsoft "well they can choose to go back to Unreal" is also an issue. This team was basically doomed to be axed once someone new got financial control over them it seems sadly due to those decisions.
 

Katbobo

Member
May 3, 2022
5,492
I hope Blizzard can get back on track. Between Overwatch 2 PvE and now this, that's literal years of dev time and money that have essentially been tossed out.

I'm really sad we'll never see this game since it sounds like it was really well received internally. Hopefully they can pull a Project Titan out of it and scrap together the work that was done into a different game so that it doesn't all get tossed out.
 

ErrorJustin

Member
Oct 28, 2017
2,476
That's the wrong way to make a survival game. You need a team of like 10 just putting out something insanely early and unpolished and then build it out alongside your community.
 

Ausroachman

Member
Oct 27, 2017
3,420
Bring on the leaks so we can all see some gameplay and add to the list yet another game that would have been cool to play but will never get the chance.
 

meenseen84

Member
Feb 15, 2018
1,978
Minneapolis
As a person with limited knowledge about game development, I understand why many developers opt for Unreal or Unity. Setting up the engine can be time-consuming. I recall Rod Fergusson mentioning in a podcast that the lengthy transition from UE4 to UE5 was a factor in his departure from The Coalition. Even for a company well-versed in Unreal, the process would take 18 additional months. This really highlights potential challenges with proprietary engines in a business context. They spent so many years with this survival game just to get the engine up to par and it sounds like it might not be.
 

c bweezie

Member
Jan 8, 2020
719
Wonder how much Microsoft's experience with redfall played into this decision in so far as reviewing ongoing projects at the time of acquisition and making determinations such as this as to whether to continue development.
 

Caiusto

Member
Oct 25, 2017
3,999
Cross-posting this form the other thread, but the switch from UE4 to an in-house engine over concerns regarding a large scale map and large player counts is just a massive missed call from Blizzard.
Was it tho? One of the biggest complains I used to hear about UE4 last gen was how bad the engine dealt with big open world maps. Now, I'm not saying going with Synapse was the best decision, but at one point most of the games having bad performances last gen (when this game started its development) was caused by a flawn in UE4 itself.
 

DanteMenethil

Member
Oct 25, 2017
8,083
Why the fuck do execs have the say on the game engine, they are tech team leads for that. Again a project fucked in the ass by clueless upper management.
 

CabooseMSG

Member
Jun 27, 2020
2,236
Was this supposed to be on mobile? Wouldn't surprise me, dunno why else theyd use a mobile engine
 

Granjinhaa

Member
Dec 28, 2023
3,512
fucking wild that executives chose to pivot to a mobile engine to get 100 player - like, what an insane management mess up. who does that.
 
Oct 27, 2017
42,971
In a statement, Blizzard spokesman Andrew Reynolds said the game's development had ended "as part of a focus on projects that hold the most promise for future growth" and that the company would "move some of the people on the team to one of several exciting new projects Blizzard has in the early stages of development."

Basically only multiplayer IPs and GAAS so MS can recoup their investment

Blizzard instead directed the Odyssey team to use Synapse, an internal engine that the company had originally developed for mobile games and envisioned as something that would be shared across many of its projects. But that led to significant problems as the technology was slow to coalesce, and Odyssey's artists instead spent time prototyping content in the Unreal Engine that they knew would have to be discarded later, said the people.
Reminds me of the period where EA seemed to push all their teams to use Frostbite and all the pain that involved
 

immy

Member
Jul 3, 2022
1,695
Maintain that Microsoft has bought a company for alot of money that was far from firing on all cylinders
 
Oct 25, 2017
6,489
it's not a convincing picture being painted — i mean that the project would have been on time or otherwise successful had they just gone with UE4. i wish Jason was more thorough with his reporting on topics like this.
 
Oct 25, 2017
32,898
Atlanta GA
Maintain that Microsoft has bought a company for alot of money that was far from firing on all cylinders

but MS buying them will make them even better!
they bought them because there was a "your company's widespread harassment of its female employees just went public" sale at the old stonks store. they didn't think about it much beyond "buy big company, get more revenue"