Gamers will not have enough loyalty to wait another ten years for the next iteration to give the company another try. As a result, Blizzard is forced to have a much stronger emphasis on managing products. The products need to be finely managed, and this is why the company gives more leeway to its developers. Nike can afford a miss, but Blizzard cannot. Thus, even though Nike employees are active people, the company relies more on its marketing department to drive product development, while Blizzard very specifically relies on its engineers.

The approach that each company has taken with respect to developing and managing products has worked well for each firm. It is hard to argue with either approach, since both companies are market leaders. However Blizzard's approach is a more pure-form approach. While Nike wants its staff members to be active, random Nike staff members do not make significant contributions to product development. Additionally, product management fells to the marketing department, leaving the developers out of the process. Nike has this idea that it wants to do what Blizzard does, but it does not have the courage to follow through and let, for example, its celebrity athletes actually work on the engineering of the products. That may be a pragmatic decision, but it is also one that results in more flops and a more marketing-driven approach to product development and management.

Therefore, my preference is for Blizzard's...

The company relies on the idea that its programmers are going to know what is best for the company, and often this idea is proven correct. The gaming market demands cutting edge products, especially with MMORPGs, because that segment requires significant time and financial commitment on the part of the buyer. Blizzard's approach reflects accurately the conditions of its industry. While Nike also understands how its industry works, and it has been successful, it rarely develops products that can last ten years in the marketplace, and it does not have the market dominance in its categories that Blizzard has. Thus, Blizzard's approach is superior with respect to both product outcomes and financial outcomes.
Works Cited:

Cendrowski, S. (2012). Nike's new marketing mojo. CNNMoney. Retrieved November 21, 2012 from http://management.fortune.cnn.com/2012/02/13/nike-digital-marketing/

Mourdoukoutas, P. (2012). Why Nike's buzz marketing strategy is riskier than Red Bull's. Forbes. Retrieved November 21, 2011 from http://www.forbes.com/sites/panosmourdoukoutas/2012/10/18/why-nikes-buzz-marketing-strategy-is-riskier-than-red-bulls/

Takahashi, D. (2008). Q&a with Paul Sams, Blizzard Entertainment's Chief Operating Officer, on post-merger life. Gamesbeat. Retrieved November 21, 2012 from http://venturebeat.com/2008/08/18/qa-with-paul-sams-blizzard-entertainments-chief-operating-officer-on-post-merger-life-2/