What you are looking at is corporate environments; the studios of the past (Ex: Westwood and Blizzard) had a small headcounts, and people were direct decision makers.
> StarCraft was originally envisioned as a game with modest goals that could fit into a one-year development cycle so that it could be released for Christmas, 1996
> Warcraft II had only six core programmers and two support programmers; that was too few for the larger scope of StarCraft,
No boardrooms of PMs, and Directors, and VPs, and execs, chiming in every decision, leading to fast turnarounds.
> Yes there is collateral damage because Hamas uses civilians as human shields, so we have no choice but to kill them too, but we do not specifically target them.
> we have no choice but to kill them too, but we do not specifically target them
The story of Starcraft 1 is quite interesting as the devs copied the Warcraft 2 code and began changing it quickly[1](https://www.codeofhonor.com/blog/tough-times-on-the-road-to-...).
> StarCraft was originally envisioned as a game with modest goals that could fit into a one-year development cycle so that it could be released for Christmas, 1996 > Warcraft II had only six core programmers and two support programmers; that was too few for the larger scope of StarCraft,
No boardrooms of PMs, and Directors, and VPs, and execs, chiming in every decision, leading to fast turnarounds.