Hi william, gonna say big fan of your work on Darksiders. I may not have any burning questions. So just wanna say thanks for your contributions and keep doing the good work.
WILLIAM SCHMITT AMA [Darksiders, South Park: The Stick of Truth, Pirate Nation, and more]
- Thread starter William Schmitt
- Start date
-
- Tags
- ama chat game development interview
Seeing that you worked on Spider-man 3, have you tried the Marvel's Spider-man games. What are your thoughts on them .
Anything they implemented in the game that you wish you could've done in yours?
Anything you wish they should've implemented but didnt?
Anything they implemented in the game that you wish you could've done in yours?
Anything you wish they should've implemented but didnt?
Sibella
Veteran
This might be a bit confronting but since you are working on blockchain related project, have you mentally prepared yourself for any potential backlashes since many traditional gamers arent welcoming of crypto/web3 related tech yet. Do you think this will find an audience despite this
There are many challenges in management and operations—a deep and complex conversation that varies depending on what you aim to accomplish. However, the most common challenge I’ve found is finding the right people who share the passion, have the skills, and are willing to dedicate their time and efforts to a cause. This tends to be the hardest part of building and expanding most organizations.
My daily tasks can vary significantly based on our focus, but generally, the beginning of the week is about clarifying team goals and defining what success should look like by week’s end. Once team targets are set, there’s usually time for individual work—design, data analysis, testing, and iteration. Midweek, as we start seeing progress, the focus shifts to reviewing work and providing feedback to keep the team unblocked and moving forward. By the end of the week, we’re signing off on features, sharing highlights of our work with the entire company, celebrating internal team victories, and then planning the next tasks for the weeks ahead.
Book Recommendations:
- The High-Velocity Edge by Steven J. Spear
- Essentialism: The Disciplined Pursuit of Less by Greg McKeown
Platforms change over time, but the constant across all platforms is that there are enjoyable games, and people want to spend their time playing them.
The on-chain gaming sector is currently a “blue ocean,” attracting a lot of interest and curiosity about its potential. People once asked, “Are web games really that popular?” A few years later, games like Farmville appeared and this led to games like Avengers Alliance a few years later. Similarly, people wondered if mobile games would truly gain popularity or if players would stick with consoles.
A successful on-chain game should function and feel like any other game, with the added benefits of blockchain technology: ownership, decentralization, and provable actions. If designed well, these games can also incorporate options for players to operate within the ecosystem, such as owning validator nodes that can help to truly decentralize a fully on-chain game and make it immutable.
As for the on-chain audience, it is growing but not yet well-established. The reach is near infinite, considering there is really nothing that stops on-chain games from releasing on the Mobile platforms if designed well (Apple wants their 30% after all).
I think there will be a breakout hit game in the next few years that will surprise some folks and it may take people by surprise that it is actually built using on-chain tech. I also believe the interest and investment are high precisely because it hasn't taken off yet, making this platform an appealing place to invest early.
Supporting developers directly can be challenging if they haven't set themselves up to allow it. Companies that can build, self-publish, and market on their own are best supported by players buying directly from them, rather than through a physical store like Target or a digital store like Steam. However, many developers don’t pursue this route due to liability and accounting complexities.
Publishers like Electronic Arts and “ActiBlizSoft” assume the upfront risk and handle product promotion. They provide substantial funding to give the team time to create the product and additional resources for marketing. They also manage the risk of licensor minimums and fees. Where publishers often encounter issues is when they impose their creative opinions on the team or enforce unrealistic deadlines that hinder a healthy development cycle. Rushing products to market to satisfy shareholders frequently backfires, a lesson I think that only a few publishers have truly learned.
Please refer to the previous response to “Capital914” regarding the on-chain games as I believe it covers this topic.
In my opinion, there’s an illusion that big companies offer more “secure” positions. Yes, they have deeper pockets, but they also have shareholders, and they often make spreadsheet-driven decisions to improve their bottom line. Disney Interactive, for instance, cut profitable studios simply because they “didn’t want to be in the business of developing games anymore.” I suppose what I’m trying to say is that job security isn’t necessarily better at big companies, more often than not.
As for my recommendation—if you’re looking to maximize stability, seek out a well-funded company with a solid vision and/or track record and people who align with your core philosophies.
As for the inspiration behind Darksiders 3, unfortunately, I couldn’t say. I was the Creative Director at THQ when we created Darksiders 2, and I’d give all the credit to the team at Vigil for those games. People like David Adams truly made that series great. I contributed to the first 10 minutes of the game (the retail hook) and provided a fair amount of feedback throughout, but the Vigil team made those games the gems they are.
I think coexistence is the most likely route, and the ideals of ownership and expanded benefits for ownership will be the aspects most adopted by future AAA titles.
Most big games today are only a step or two away from this if you think about it. Players already own many game items as assets (mounts, skins, etc.), but they can’t use them outside the game in which they purchased them. If AAA game makers expand to allow the resale of items between players and enable bonuses or uses for those purchased assets across other games, they would align with on-chain philosophies, making on-chain platforms more likely to see broader adoption.
My role as Director of Production was similar to a GM for a multi-project franchise, with additional responsibilities related to reporting at the corporate leadership level. At Disney, this role also included managing personnel reviews and career paths for over 70 people through a series of managers. I’d say I spent most of my time in that role working with various leads to set targets, review results, and plan personnel and project growth.
Ya the Cradle Series. Its a nice long series but the books go quick as they are so short. I loved the world building and magic system that is in place.
AAA games are high-risk, high-reward ventures, and there’s limited space in the market for these types of titles. I remember when we launched UFC Undisputed 2 with huge fanfare and high expectations. The game was a major improvement over the first UFC Undisputed, which had set records for THQ by selling over 4 million units in its first six months. Reviews for the new version were excellent, and presales were strong, but we launched against Red Dead Redemption in May 2010, and suddenly there wasn’t enough room in the market for both. Although our game performed well, its sales were actually lower than the first release due to the other AAA title launching at the same time.
On the other hand, AA games offer a more balanced risk profile while still providing high-reward opportunities. However, I’d argue that AA games are underrepresented, especially when considering the mobile market. It’s still tough to break through, but every year a few titles come out of left field. Many great AA and even A-level games on mobile achieve significant success.
The challenge remains breaking through a crowded market and capturing audience attention. Platforms like Steam and the Epic Games Store can help, but even then, it’s a tough journey. I’ve seen many AA games gain traction by releasing in a beta phase and building momentum through launch with the help of content creators on YouTube and Twitch.
There may not be a reliable formula for this, but I believe it helps to build an army of player-advocates to help spread the word about your title.
In the video game industry, I find that Creative Directors tend to focus on delivering the best player experience. Some emphasize game art, others UX/UI or story, but they are all creative individuals who can establish and communicate a vision to the development team, then guide the team in bringing that vision to life.
Production Directors generally focus on schedules, resources, and finances.
Directors of Production often oversee the entire project and may sometimes fulfill one or both of the other roles. In AAA games, it’s common to see all three positions represented within a single team.
Additionally, there are other director roles, such as Art Directors, Mocap Directors, Animation Directors, Audio Directors, Engineering Directors, QA Directors, and more.
My favorite PC game of this decade might be 7 Days to Die, though I also enjoyed Baldur's Gate 3 and Helldivers II a lot.
Other mentions: Marvel Snap is my favorite mobile game, and D&D remains my go-to for pen-and-paper RPGs, with Pathfinder and Hero System close behind. MTG's EDH format is my favorite CCG (I love the table politics it inspires), and One Night Werewolf is my favorite 'board game (again, non-scripted table politics for the win).
Thank you, and thanks to Vigil for creating such a fantastic franchise and allowing me to contribute to it in some small way.
Wow, I could easily give an hour-long answer to this question. In summary, game development is the same, but different. Developers are still pushing the envelope and innovating, though perhaps a bit less overall today compared to the past.
There are more established processes and middleware options now, so things tend to be more ‘off the shelf’ or ‘same as xxx’ than they were back in the 90s.
This isn’t meant to undermine the quality of today’s top games - there are many great products on the market each year. But there are also more disappointments (still looking at you, Cyberpunk 2077).
I think the layoffs we’ve seen over the past few years stem from hyper-aggressive business practices to capture profit (corporate greed), combined with poor team growth strategies and project management and some probably some complacency within what were once top-tier teams.
That last part may sound overly harsh, but I often find that when a studio experiences success, they tend to shift from 'hungry and lean' to 'comfortable and bloated' if they aren’t careful. I saw this firsthand with Spider-Man 3. Treyarch had such success with Spider-Man 2 that they almost doubled the team size for the next project without pushback from Activision. Unfortunately, this decision lacked strategic consideration, leading to many team members working on elements that didn’t align with the game’s vision (half of the game ended up on the cutting room floor). The engineers also grew complacent and didn’t start on the PS3 kits until four months before the gold master was due, assuming they could simply port the code from the Xbox 360. When they discovered the vastly different architecture, they had to scramble, eventually needing a specialist team to save the PS3’s launch date. In the end, Spider-Man 3 didn’t innovate or push the series forward as it should have, and it fell short of expectations in many areas.
Last edited:
I haven’t played any of the recent Spider-Man games, but Spider-Man: Miles Morales looks incredible, and I’m sure I would enjoy it. I might need to try the game trial for Spider-Man 2 now that I’m reminded it was something I wanted to play when the first one came out a while back.
I can say that I’m prepared because I approached Proof of Play with the same level of skepticism. When I first considered joining, I tried several blockchain games, and what I found was very off-putting. The number of hoops I had to jump through just to join created too much friction for most players to endure.
I brought these concerns up to Amitt when we discussed the position. We agreed that these areas of friction and the lack of focus on real gameplay (where player choice actually mattered) needed to be addressed if we wanted to be taken seriously, so the team mapped out solutions to each pain point I encountered. Reducing these friction points became a primary focus within the first six months, and I believe Pirate Nation has now addressed them for the most part (we can alway do better, and will). From setting up a custodial wallet to removing the need to bridge assets from L1 and making it as simple as pressing a “Play” button to enter, we made the game accessible on a platform that was previously difficult to access.
There are still challenges ahead in transforming Pirate Nation into a game that will attract a mass audience, but I feel we’re close to removing the stigma associated with crypto and Web3. We're nearing the point where players can click the play button on our website without realizing they’re experiencing a fully on-chain game. Over time, as curiosity grows, they’ll come to understand that they truly own their assets and have options not typically available in other games. I look forward to reaching that point in the near future.
Last edited: