Analagous to the Nintendo example. Take a look at their revenue and profitability since 2006. Wasn't more than that that I was drawing a comparison to in my mind.

WarSame

Canada1950 Posts

June 12 2010 20:43 GMT

#82

Was that a joke? I skimmed it, and every single section I read had errors or ridiculous assumptions in it. I hope you did not seriously send that to Blizzard.

User was warned for this post

UnderWorld_Dream

Canada219 Posts

June 12 2010 20:43 GMT

#83

I'm really tired of these non-believers threads.

I'll come back to this thread in a year and let you know if you were right or wrong. And I hope you will do the same.

Teddyman

Finland362 Posts

June 12 2010 20:43 GMT

#84

So you say by delaying the game to implement LAN, crossrealm play, chat channels, better custom games and gameplay changes to make the average game take over 30 minutes (???) they'll sell 4 times more copies than by releasing now and patching some of those in? If SC2 in its current state sells 5 million, that means there would be 15 million people out there that actually care enough about these features that they refuse to buy the game at all (and also not to buy it even after those features come in patches/expansions, except LAN.)

Not so likely.

CroOk

United States58 Posts

June 12 2010 20:45 GMT

#85

On June 13 2010 05:42 Sturmlight.Yeast wrote:

Show nested quote +

Analagous to the Nintendo example. Take a look at their revenue and profitability since 2006. Wasn't more than that that I was drawing a comparison to in my mind.

It is clearly obvious to assume that although there are complaints on chatrooms and such, probably atleast 90% of the people will still buy it, not this 25%

foxmeep

Australia2337 Posts

June 12 2010 20:46 GMT

#86

Did you buy shares in Nintendo in Sept 2005?

Edit: Oh, and this will make Blizzard employees fall out of their seats laughing.

"I have also studied videogame business for at least 10 years. I have privately and publicly analyzed strategic decisions made by Microsoft, Sony, and Nintendo via private discussion and gaming websites."

Are they really going to take you seriously based on those merits?... Do you even have a degree?

potatomash3r

Australia417 Posts

June 12 2010 20:46 GMT

#87

Although I agree that the sounds in SC2 are lacking especially for the Zerg, its not a reason that should be considered. Battlenet 2.0 is the biggest problem which Blizzard should address before release, the game is stable and playable with very few bugs. A nice change considering how many games released this age are littered with bugs and stuck with an attitude of, "Release now and patch later."

Game play wise, sc2 is solid. Delaying an investment this huge because of several sound files is ridiculous.

Zealotdriver

United States1557 Posts

June 12 2010 20:47 GMT

#88

w0w, a lot of T_T about the length of the OP. The problem isn't the word count but rather short attention spans and poor reading ability of the complainers.

538

Hungary3932 Posts

June 12 2010 20:47 GMT

#89

Wow, almost as self-righteous as IskatuMesk's rant. (and similar in length, gee...) Provides some valid points - though almost nothing that hasnt been said before. I'd be really surprised to see if such a letter would ever get a public response, let alone bring any change whatsoever to the development or release process.

Also: is CASUAL HARDCORE gonna be the new ESPORTS?

Squallcloud

France466 Posts

June 12 2010 20:48 GMT

#90

If Blizz ever delay their release date, i'm so going to spend my savings to send a hitman to your house...

+ Show Spoiler +

Ryan22

Canada84 Posts

June 12 2010 20:50 GMT

#91

If they delay this game again, I won't buy it. People are already pissed off enough with sc2. Im sure there are hundreds if not thousands who are waiting for blizzard to make their next mistake before they as well cancel their pre-orders.

Delaying it, with whatever experience you have - is a completely retarded idea.

RyanRushia

United States2748 Posts

June 12 2010 20:52 GMT

#92

what really made me chuckle was how many times you stated "and now i'm going to tell you the two things that ...." or "next i'm going to explain why ........."

avoiding repition is not one of your strong points, and although i do feel the rest was quite well written it took away from the professionalism of an article meant to persuade whomever it was written to

also i dont see why they should delay the game based on the merits of the online lobby as opposed to if there was a fundamental flaw in the play of the game

Pokebunny

United States10654 Posts

June 12 2010 20:53 GMT

#93

On June 13 2010 04:35 Chill wrote:
I'm really starting to appreciate the talent for concise writing.

QFT. Well written and made total sense.

WiljushkA

Serbia1416 Posts

June 12 2010 20:53 GMT

#94

no its not. i want single player. they can patch to their hearts content after release

groms

Canada1017 Posts

June 12 2010 20:54 GMT

#95

good read although I disagreed with a few points here and there.

most interesting part was definitely your description of the casual hardcore.

gw although I doubt blizzard will reconsider...

DiffyQ

United States12 Posts

June 12 2010 20:57 GMT

#96

Everything this letter adds to the discussion is wrong, wrapped in platitudes everyone on TL already agrees with to make the errors less glaring. I'm glad people are finally starting to point out the unfounded 4x revenue claim, the anecdotal and frankly random Wii example, and so on.

What really amuses me about using the Wii as an example is that it specifically demonstrates that Blizzard should ignore the TL crowd. The Wii pissed off every real "gamer" and drove them to Microsoft, but in return Nintendo's stock price soared and there's a Wii in every house. If you want Blizzard to care about the hardcore gamer, don't point to the Wii.

Finally, the moniker "Casual Hardcore" is laughable given your conception of a "natural win". The word "hardcore" should not even be considered to describe someone with a NR20 mentality. When I read the words "Casual Hardcore" before you defined it I thought it made sense, as someone who wants to be good and compete at a hobbyist level. Were you just hoping nobody would read the actual definition?

Finally, listing your non-credentials will cause any serious person in the gaming world to completely ignore you. Either be specific about what your accomplishments in this field are or, in the case that you have none, just be another customer.

razlebol

Canada8 Posts

June 12 2010 20:59 GMT

#97

Woah.. Not sure what to say about this. I agree and disagree with some of the stuff you said but I think you are taking this way too seriously.

Baarn

United States2702 Posts

June 12 2010 21:00 GMT

#98

So the true underlying theme to this extensive writeup is "hot women who sleep with average looking men will always be popular." They already have a game like that it's called World of Warcraft.

Doc Daneeka

United States577 Posts

June 12 2010 21:00 GMT

#99

um, i'm not finishing this, but i did pick out something about the music and i have to agree it's less memorable. SC1's music had distinct themes and melodies that stuck in your head and in SC2 besides terran it's pretty much just ambiance. not that it's a huge freaking deal or anything but it is a let down. anyway maybe there's more tuneful music and it just didn't make it into the beta.