EPTI agree with most of the first part. But honestly, Kotic doesn't strike me as the kind of person who would listen to something like this. I doubt Browder has the kind of influence he would need to do something about this. I don't know much about Morhaime, so he might be the one to make the good decisions (in the long run, Kotic seems to be focused on the short run), but he sure is taking his time then...
Dear Blizzard: It is time to delay Starcraft 2. - Page 6
| Forum Index > Closed |
|
spinesheath
Germany8679 Posts
I agree with most of the first part. But honestly, Kotic doesn't strike me as the kind of person who would listen to something like this. I doubt Browder has the kind of influence he would need to do something about this. I don't know much about Morhaime, so he might be the one to make the good decisions (in the long run, Kotic seems to be focused on the short run), but he sure is taking his time then... | ||
|
Deathstar
9150 Posts
| ||
|
Apolo
Portugal1259 Posts
For me it's totally the opposite. I find zerg and terran music fit. Protoss music almost isn't music at all. It has a very faint melody, the harmony is totally forgetable and doesn't provide propper appropriate accompaniement to the melody. The cadences are very forgetable as well. Hopefully they will rework it. What you described about the terran (which clearly seems to be your favorite and which you spent most time talking about) i'd say about the protoss. If you watch some videos of the alpha stages, and compare how the game is now, terran has definitely improved in terms of graphics, and fitting the terran race. On the other hand, protoss has lost many specific things, very protoish. I'll give two examples: The immortal when shooting now, looks like a powder explosion similar to any gunpowder weapon, if you look at his arms when it fires, just instead of yellowish, blue. It used to be clearly a blue energetic ray, with 2 circles surrouding it, showing that the shot was pure laser / light. The phoenix now has its gravitrom beam, which though useful for harassing, is not worthy of a supposed air supperiority fighter like the phoenix should be. It used to have a cool animation that made it go overdrive for brief moments, but shoot at many enemies at once, with a cool effect, very futuristic, protoish. It would then go offline for a moment, while recovering energy. This is just part 1 of the game, but i wonder why go back, and worsen a race like that. Are they saving those improvements for the expansions? Hopefully. | ||
|
Orangu
Canada198 Posts
Are you guys being sarcastic? You do realize the difference between the Wii and starcraft 2 is that the Wii is a physical product that has to work properly on day 1 while SC is electronic and subject to change at any point. comparing the readiness of each product upon release to the success of each doesn't make any sense. If they didn't delay the wii until it was ready then it wouldn't work and since you can't just release a patch to fix a physical product they'd be screwed. it'd be nice if SC2 was perfect upon release but thats not realistic especially from a balance and design standpoint since your never going to be able to internally test a competitively natured game enough for it to be perfect, i guess unless its super simple like worms, which is a kickass game i agree. | ||
|
Kletus
Canada580 Posts
Also I bought my ATVI stock a long time ago so I'm ready!  | ||
|
darmousseh
United States3437 Posts
| ||
|
Gahlo
United States35172 Posts
| ||
|
Sturmlight.Yeast
14 Posts
On June 13 2010 05:46 foxmeep wrote: 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? Blizzard takes everyone and all comments seriously. Whether or not my merits mean that I am worthy of commentary really isn't the point here. That said, I did direct $10,000 towards Nintendo stock in May of 2006. | ||
|
CtrLZerG
United States104 Posts
| ||
|
gillon
Sweden1578 Posts
On June 13 2010 05:57 DiffyQ wrote: 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? This is exactly what I meant. How is hardcore even a part of what he explains. His definition of "Casual Hardcore" fits my definition of "Casual" and his "Casual" definition fits my definition of "Soccer Moms". | ||
|
Half
United States2554 Posts
On June 13 2010 06:08 TangJuice wrote: Are you guys being sarcastic? You do realize the difference between the Wii and starcraft 2 is that the Wii is a physical product that has to work properly on day 1 while SC is electronic and subject to change at any point. comparing the readiness of each product upon release to the success of each doesn't make any sense. If they didn't delay the wii until it was ready then it wouldn't work and since you can't just release a patch to fix a physical product they'd be screwed. it'd be nice if SC2 was perfect upon release but thats not realistic especially from a balance and design standpoint since your never going to be able to internally test a competitively natured game enough for it to be perfect, i guess unless its super simple like worms, which is a kickass game i agree. Can you two not read? Chill is saying that the OPs post is needlessly convoluted, completely all all over the place, unorganized, and unprecedented. That is the exact opposite of what Pokebunny is agreeing with, and he is already agreeing with you Tang. sigh. A for effort OP, but no offense, but this is completely pointless and stupid. First of all, realize what Blizzard has to lose when delaying a product. Sales analyst Evan Wilson says Blizzard stands to lose FOUR MILLION sales if SC2 is further delayed. Pacific Crest Securities' Evan Wilson was somewhat more optimistic about Starcraft II, depending on when Activision manages to release it. Currently, Wilson has the real-time strategy sequel penciled in for sales of 6 million copies, though he cautioned that could slip to 2 million in 2010 if Activision pushes it back into the holiday quarter. Does this mean Starcraft 2 cannot be delayed? I believe not. But there has to be a clear precedent for it, and the ramblings of a single player are not. You touch on some generally agreed issues -such as b-net, but the majority of your wall of text trys to outline a variety of things that were never agreed upon as issues, and their will never be a general consensus that they are issues even among the hardcore community. Do you honestly think that Blizzard will sacrifice 4 million players based on the ramblings of a single player? This isn't blizzard releasing the game to make a quick buck. This is Blizzard releasing a game they believe feels is ready for release, and while the majority of customers do have issues with things like Battle.net 2.0, generally believe the game as a whole is ready for release. Delaying a game is a monumental decision. The least you could do when making a post suggesting a delay of the game is to focus exclusively on issues that are generally agreed upon. . But their isn't even anything close to a general consensus on the majority of the issues you claim are wrong with Starcraft, let alone consensus that the game should be delayed. It just boils down to one question. Why the hell did you write ten pages detailing reasons why a game should be delayed at the expense of four million sales for reasons that you mostly made up? Anyway, OP, the only suggestion I can give is to seriously reevulate your own life or perspective. | ||
|
Sturmlight.Yeast
14 Posts
On June 13 2010 06:15 CtrLZerG wrote: Well from a business perspective, it would be a problem to delay it in my honest opinion. They have already extensively advertised the game for release on July 27th, and they are already putting tons of money into that specific date. Also, the earlier the release date, the more information becomes available to them, the more opportunities they have to fix the issues. I really disagree that it would be a problem. While I did not account for cataclysm crossover, Blizzard's name carries so much weight it really is a no-brainer that consumers will find the money to buy their product no matter when they launch. The question is whether the game is ready for consumer wide launch. I happen to disagree with Blizzard that it is, and I just want to tell them. I hope everyone understands that one does not write such an extensive discussion without love for a company or its products. I mean, come on! | ||
|
vesicular
United States1310 Posts
I am 27 years old with approximately 15 years of Blizzard gaming and 22 years of general gaming under my belt. 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 –all within the context of business strategy. I used to work for Id Software, and prior to that I was a gaming journalist for 6 years (this was the early 90's, and thus actual printed publications). But I'm not naive enough to think that his somehow makes my opinions more valid than anyone else on TL. You've either got a good point or you don't and frankly IMHO, you don't. SC fans will buy this game. The percentage of those who will not because of perceived lack of b.net 2.0 features is small. The outcry of people frustrated with b.net 2.0 is not because they are considering not buying the game, but because they will buy the game and are upset that they will not get what they want when they do. Two, the whole "casual hardcore" concept, while perhaps being an actual grouping of players, is immaterial to the sale of the game. If anything Blizzard is actually developing this game *for* the "casual hardcore". But what really confuses me is your examples of what these people want. Siege tanks that "sound cooler"? Really? Three, what exactly do the game console wars have to do with a PC *game*? Hardware and software are completely different in marketing, future add ons, sales, etc. Personally I see Blizzard playing this pretty smart. Release in summer, when all the SC fans will buy the game. Take the rest of the summer and fall to add in some of the features that are most requested and iron out the kinks. That's when the masses of really casual players will buy the game for Christmas. Casual fans are pickier, it will pay off for Blizzard to release sooner so they can polish the game after launch for the 2nd wave of new-to-the-series players to come aboard. Basically, I couldn't disagree with you more. | ||
|
Sturmlight.Yeast
14 Posts
On June 13 2010 06:19 Half wrote: Can you two not read? Chill is saying that the OPs post is needlessly convoluted, completely all all over the place, unorganized, and unprecedented. That is the exact opposite of what Pokebunny is agreeing with, and he is already agreeing with you Tang. sigh. A for effort OP, but no offense, but this is completely pointless and stupid. First of all, realize what Blizzard has to lose when delaying a product. Sales analyst Evan Wilson says Blizzard stands to lose FOUR MILLION sales if SC2 is further delayed. Does this mean Starcraft 2 cannot be delayed? I believe not. But there has to be a clear precedent for it, and the ramblings of a single player are not. You touch on some generally agreed issues -such as b-net, but the majority of your wall of text trys to outline a variety of things that were never agreed upon as issues, and their will never be a general consensus that they are issues even among the hardcore community. Do you honestly think that Blizzard will sacrifice 4 million players based on the ramblings of a single player? This isn't blizzard releasing the game to make a quick buck. This is Blizzard releasing a game they believe feels is ready for release, and while the majority of customers do have issues with things like Battle.net 2.0, generally believe the game as a whole is ready for release. Delaying a game is a monumental decision. The least you could do when making a post suggesting a delay of the game is to focus exclusively on issues that are generally agreed upon. . But their isn't even general consensus on the majority of the issues you claim are wrong with Starcraft, let alone consensus that the game should be delayed. Not every opinion adheres to general consensus my friend. I love games, and have loved them for a long time. I don't care about other people's opinions, I know what I consider fun and what I consider not. Starcraft 2 is great fun, but it isn't such amazing fun that it will have the longevity of its predecessor in my opinion -- and it is my opinion -- and also, in my humble opinion there are a few more things that need to be addressed to make it such. In the grand scheme of things they are only a few! | ||
|
Fraud
Canada108 Posts
Yes, we've seen the millions of kittens cry out, but the game is pretty damn good now. Nothing that they can't fix after release. I want a million dollars now, and I can write a great essay on how I will use it. Doesn't mean I'll get it. | ||
|
Cheezy
Sweden112 Posts
SC2 is far from complete. | ||
|
Roggay
Switzerland6320 Posts
| ||
|
DiffyQ
United States12 Posts
On June 13 2010 06:17 gillon wrote: This is exactly what I meant. How is hardcore even a part of what he explains. His definition of "Casual Hardcore" fits my definition of "Casual" and his "Casual" definition fits my definition of "Soccer Moms". I agreed with your point 100%, and it should be the center of the discussion here because it instantly discredits him. The fact that the author has no idea what he is talking about is lost in the unyielding torrent of literary vomit. | ||
|
Half
United States2554 Posts
On June 13 2010 06:22 Sturmlight.Yeast wrote: I don't care about other people's opinions, I know what is fun and what is not. Starcraft 2 is great fun, but it isn't such amazing fun that it will have the longevity of its predecessor in my opinion -- and it is my opinion -- So your suggesting Blizzard delay the game to make it cater to you. wow..... | ||
|
JimmyJRaynor
Canada17472 Posts
| ||
| ||
