EPTBut now I think I'll stop sidetracking this thread.
Let the fun begin. Activision Blizzard suing MBC - Page 35
| Forum Index > BW General |
Falling
Canada11592 Posts
But now I think I'll stop sidetracking this thread. | ||
|
snpnx
Germany454 Posts
On October 29 2010 17:49 infinity2k9 wrote: In an example relevant to your country: Bayern Munich can afford to buy all the best players, does that make them a monopoly in Football? No, because while they can probably buy them individually, even Bayern Munich does not have enough money to do so for ALL of them. It would be more like this: If Bayern Munich bought all good players in Germany and would host their own soccer tourney, while at the same time disallowing them from entering other tourneys, it would relate to the KeSPA, and then in fact Bayern Munich would have a monopoly over German football. Edit: That said, while it is interesting and certainly of matter if you consider KeSPA a monopoly or not, I would much rather like to get some updates about reactions or statements from either Blizzard or MBC/OGN. After all, this threat is about the lawsuit. | ||
|
Arnstein
Norway3381 Posts
 | ||
|
infinity2k9
United Kingdom2397 Posts
On October 29 2010 18:30 snpnx wrote: No, because while they can probably buy them individually, even Bayern Munich does not have enough money to do so for ALL of them. It would be more like this: If Bayern Munich bought all good players in Germany and would host their own soccer tourney, while at the same time disallowing them from entering other tourneys, it would relate to the KeSPA, and then in fact Bayern Munich would have a monopoly over German football. Edit: That said, while it is interesting and certainly of matter if you consider KeSPA a monopoly or not, I would much rather like to get some updates about reactions or statements from either Blizzard or MBC/OGN. After all, this threat is about the lawsuit. How does KeSPA have enough to buy ALL of the players? The common complaint on here is that they are not paid enough and so it would be probably very possible to buy out KeSPA contracted players. There is nothing stopping anyone from doing it. Also its interesting to point out it is a big discussion at the moment about football and if teams having too much money to spend on players is a problem as well. | ||
|
sceroh
Belgium182 Posts
scbw is so successful that their own creators have to get rid of it in order to sell scII | ||
|
eSen1a
Australia1058 Posts
On October 30 2010 01:47 sceroh wrote: lol that's irony scbw is so successful that their own creators have to get rid of it in order to sell scII i was gonna think of something to post but that pretty much sums it up, shame on blizzard | ||
|
scDeluX
Canada1341 Posts
| ||
|
Selkie
United States530 Posts
| ||
|
Azalie
New Zealand117 Posts
Wonder what happened in the blizzard office, man for so many years so many good games and great ideas and memories of their awesomeness and then ....... wth? how with WoW Sc2 and D3 about to hit down, are you not making enough money to keep your shareholders and such happy? Just not sure when the company i loved for years just kinda gave up and died, for such smart teams and minds of past and present (they cant all be stupid) makes me wonder what the hells going on behind their doors that they would make moves like this. | ||
|
syllogism
Finland5948 Posts
| ||
|
meathook
1289 Posts
On October 30 2010 02:35 Azalie wrote: If this dose kill Sc:Bw ill take my hat off to blizzard for being amazing at not only making games (in the past) but also just as good at killing them but not quite as good as ruining them (looking at you WoW and maybe Sc:Bw) ... What? I mean, it looks like English.. but is it? Somebody, help me out here. Anyway, I know that Blizzard has been a bunch of dicks ever since they released Wow, but is this really necessary? It's ok that Blizzard releases another shitty game, we're used to that by now - War3, Wow, and everything else that came after D2:LOD - but why do they want to kill the memory of their departed greatness?? | ||
Antoine
United States7481 Posts
| ||
|
xBillehx
United States1289 Posts
On November 01 2010 10:44 Antoine wrote: looks like blizzard officially released a statement: http://www.playxp.com/sc2/news/view.php?article_id=2271814 (it's in korean) Same article on Fomos. http://www.fomos.kr/board/board.php?mode=read&keyno=111875&db=issue&cate=&page=1&field=&kwrd= Can we have a translation <3? | ||
|
BLinD-RawR
ALLEYCAT BLUES51124 Posts
On November 01 2010 10:53 xBillehx wrote: Same article on Fomos. http://www.fomos.kr/board/board.php?mode=read&keyno=111875&db=issue&cate=&page=1&field=&kwrd= Can we have a translation <3? I can't understand shit from google translate.......I really want to know if they filed an injunction or not. lol I keep forgetting that GOM means Bear....Bears TV lol. | ||
|
KrinkleStyle
United States25 Posts
On October 30 2010 01:47 sceroh wrote: lol that's irony scbw is so successful that their own creators have to get rid of it in order to sell scII Yea you are totally right. SC2 only sold 3 million copies in the first month it was out. That is so weak they better hurry up and shut down BW already. And no it's not ironic. | ||
|
Lokian
United States699 Posts
On November 01 2010 11:41 KrinkleStyle wrote: Yea you are totally right. SC2 only sold 3 million copies in the first month it was out. That is so weak they better hurry up and shut down BW already. And no it's not ironic. Starcraft 1 sold 1.5 million the first year it came out. | ||
|
domovoi
United States1478 Posts
| ||
|
IntoTheEmo
Singapore1170 Posts
I'm sure there's been a noticable decrease in product quality from Blizzard, both from WoW and SC2 -> pushing e-sports with a game lacking features (chat, LAN are basic components of multiplayer, hell, they were too lazy to make the portraits move like in WC3) and made with many limitations in place... Maybe if they lose the case they'll wake up and realize they can't throw money at things and force stuff on people. Me in their business plan: Play WoW, they introduce features to limit gameplay/attract casuals, bored -> buy SC2 while still paying for WoW subscription due to upcoming expansion -> probably buy their next game when their old ones get boring. Rather than buying them because they are exceptionally awesome. (Their games are decent, but it feels like there's less substance in them nowadays.) Honestly, watching Tasteless talk about Starcraft in Avertec Intel Classic was great to start off; it was sorta funny, but once I got into watching ProLeague... I stopped watching GOM after Season 2, the sheer scale OGN/MBC: the stage, the lights, the intros (Korean ones are sickkk), the intensity of the Korean commentators (I can't understand them, but you can feel their excitement and be into the game), the ridiculously high level play... I can't imagine that scene being threatened by their own parent company T_T. Good luck MBC. | ||
|
night terrors
China1284 Posts
On November 01 2010 12:10 domovoi wrote: Why are people convinced that Blizzard is trying to destroy BW? Honest question, I'm sure it's possible, but I find it a little hard to believe given that BW progaming appears to be a massively profitable enterprise. The rational thing would be that Blizzard simply wants its cut (as well as some access to television broadcasting, where KeSPA's control of it hurts progaming), and so is forcing the issue by suing. You've somehow managed to condense many, if not all, of the misconceptions surrounding this issue. I know that by this point its difficult to acess a source of reliable information regarding the subject. which should be compiled by the staff knowledgeable in the matter, but its astonishing nonetheless. | ||
|
domovoi
United States1478 Posts
On November 01 2010 12:14 night terrors wrote: You've somehow managed to condense many, if not all, of the misconceptions surrounding this issue. I know that by this point its difficult to acess a source of reliable information regarding the subject. which should be compiled by the staff knowledgeable in the matter, but its astonishing nonetheless. At least enlighten me on some of these "misconceptions." | ||
| ||
