EPTStarCraft 2 not worth it according to Activision? - Page 12
| Forum Index > Closed |
|
Nifel
706 Posts
| ||
|
StRyKeR
United States1756 Posts
What a shame if they ever decide to scrap SC2 because "it's not worth it". | ||
|
Silent331
United States356 Posts
SC2 was probly not worth it in the sense that paying a team for 10 years of development may have costed more than the game brought in, but now that the engine is complete and they will be selling the game 2 more times in <6 years will make it far worth the money. | ||
|
MangoTango
United States3670 Posts
| ||
|
Nerski
United States1095 Posts
Honestly I wouldn't worry if they tried to shut blizzard down i'm sure the entirety of the staff would do w/e they could to break back off. | ||
|
Assirra
Belgium4169 Posts
On May 02 2011 22:51 zanmat0 wrote: Well subscriber numbers have been on the decline and face it, WoW won't last forever. Then what if their next MMO is a flop? Blizzard needs to protect themselves against those kinds of risks because once they're unprofitable, Vivendi will just axe them. I have to agree with your 2nd statement. Believe it nor, wow is constantly growing and getting more subscribers, not declining. there are over 13million subscribed accounts and its nonstop getting more and more. I wouldn't be suprised if it at least stands another 5years with constant updates. | ||
|
Comeh
United States18919 Posts
| ||
|
zanmat0
188 Posts
On May 02 2011 23:15 Kipsate wrote: Uh, got a source on this?Last time I heard from the press release WoW was at 12million and growing. Sorry, I don't; it's just what I've been hearing on various forums lately. Regardless, I think we can all agree that WoW isn't this immortal money tree and Blizzard knows it, which can partly explain the direction they seem to be headed in. | ||
|
hmunkey
United Kingdom1973 Posts
On May 02 2011 23:41 Nifel wrote: It's kind of disturbing that the future of Starcraft as an eSport depends on the whims of a company to which profit is all that matters. So does the future of pretty much everything... Every single SC2 sponsor is a company to which only profit matters. The same applies for GOM, MLG, NASL, IGN, etc. Did you honestly never take any introductory econ classes in school? This is really basic information. | ||
|
oxxo
988 Posts
The two companies operate independently. Activision is faltering like EA did when it got super greedy. Guitar Hero was just killed because of the money loss. CoD is prob next with the poor reception of Black Ops + oversaturation of CoD (and no innovation/change at all). Blizzard can sell games on name alone and continues to sell copies of games YEARS after their release rather than only within the first few months. | ||
|
Onlinejaguar
Australia2823 Posts
| ||
Twistacles
Canada1327 Posts
There are not many companies that can make games that last. Nintendo used to be one of them, at least, in the N64 days. Activision is going to fizzle out and burn. | ||
|
Andjay
3 Posts
"Activision is evil", "Activision wants profit". What the fuck? Like many people have already said - Activision is owned by shareholders. They are not privately owned company like Valve and they can't dick around. Their main priority is to make profit. If they can't make profit from guitar hero they will not make next guitar hero. Yes they will charge 15$. Why? Because some people appearently find it valuable and will gladly pay for it. If you want them not to charge for maps, tell the masses to stop buying it. On May 02 2011 18:02 Catch]22 wrote: Good ideas you guys have, shit on the shareholders so they GTFO with their money and we can just watch blizz and all the other companies that actually depend on it so much crumble, cya entire video games industry. This guy gets it. On May 02 2011 18:36 da_head wrote: activision's just mad that black ops is failing hard. On May 02 2011 16:02 Fat.Cat91 wrote: Listen to companies that makes shitty games like call of duty more... Are you shitting me? CoD games are one of the best critically acclaimed games (especially MW and MW2). This franchise makes BILLIONS dollars. Not liking game is one thing, calling it shit is another. "hosting servers costs money" Yeah it does. But it doesn't cost that much nowadays. We're in 2011 people. Bandwidth is becoming cheaper and cheaper. No you don't pay 15$ a month in WoW because it has servers. You pay for it, because Blizzard can charge for it and nobody will complain. I don't know about this topic. People like to take a lot of shit out of context. There could be many reasons why the guy said this. | ||
|
Mr_Kyo
United States269 Posts
| ||
|
oxxo
988 Posts
And yes I know the sales figures are high. It's obvious for anyone with common sense it's because of MW/MW2, not on its own merits. | ||
|
Turgid
United States1623 Posts
On May 03 2011 00:13 oxxo wrote: ?? Black Ops failed hard. I was never hardcore about CoD, I just liked playing MW/MW2 with my friends, but I bought BO just play with them. None of us like it. I won't be buying the next one on day 1 (or at all) unlike BO. I know I've seen this sentiment elsewhere online. BO was a failure. And yes I know the sales figures are high. It's obvious for anyone with common sense it's because of MW/MW2, not on its own merits. Well, the anecdote of "My buddies didn't like it" doesn't exactly demonstrate that it failed. I could just counter it with my own anecdote that I hadn't really heard any negative talk about it from Call of Duty fans until your post. | ||
|
windsupernova
Mexico5280 Posts
Anyways, this pretty much it why Activision is a joke. I don't care as long as they keep delivering my AAAssasins Creed | ||
|
Twistacles
Canada1327 Posts
Call of Duty is garbage whichever way you cut it. None of the COD games compare to CS 1.6, CSS, or even Battlefield 2, which are games made years and years ago. | ||
|
0mar
United States567 Posts
On May 02 2011 19:19 Gheed wrote: Movies cost more to produce than video games, yet cost less. Therefore, it is not unreasonable to expect continued support when you shell out 60 bucks for a video game versus 15 bucks for a DVD. Most movies make money from tie-ins (eg merchandise) or future TV contracts. Very few movies make much money at DVD or initial theatre release. | ||
|
hmunkey
United Kingdom1973 Posts
On May 03 2011 00:13 oxxo wrote: ?? Black Ops failed hard. I was never hardcore about CoD, I just liked playing MW/MW2 with my friends, but I bought BO just play with them. None of us like it. I won't be buying the next one on day 1 (or at all) unlike BO. I know I've seen this sentiment elsewhere online. BO was a failure. You don't actually understand how the world works. For Black Ops to have "failed hard," it would've had to lose money. It did not. In fact, Black Ops easily broke the $1 billion mark in a matter of days. Sources:http://www.bgr.com/2010/12/21/call-of-duty-black-ops-sales-surpass-1-billion/ http://www.ibtimes.com/articles/94558/20101222/activision-video-game-shooting-game-call-of-duty-black-ops-call-of-duty-modern-warfare-2-xbox-360-pl.htm Now let's look at SC2. Even at the full price of $60, which we know not everyone paid (especially in other parts of the world where the game isn't even half that expensive), SC2 made less than half of that. And to top it off, SC2 had a 10 year development cycle. Sources:http://www.gamepolitics.com/2010/08/05/sc2-sales-great-not-good-expected http://blogs.wsj.com/digits/2010/08/03/starcraft-sales-a-little-light-but-asia-bump-could-still-come/ http://kotaku.com/#!5603362/starcraft-no-match-for-world-of-warcraft-at-least-in-day one-sales Basically, Black Ops earned them an obscene amount of money. That's the goal of a company. It was a huge fucking success. SC2 was not. We aren't discussing whether or not SC2 is a better game, we're discussing it from a business perspective. Your personal opinion doesn't mean shit to any companies. | ||
| ||
