EPTStarCraft 2 not worth it according to Activision? - Page 4
| Forum Index > Closed |
|
Legatus Lanius
2135 Posts
| ||
|
mahnini
United States6862 Posts
| ||
|
dementrio
678 Posts
| ||
|
Denzil
United Kingdom4193 Posts
On May 02 2011 16:47 blade55555 wrote: portraits I don't care about, but if they ever did that for like multiplayer or something (units, maps, etc). I would be very disappointed. I do not think Blizzard well let that happen, and can only hope. I really hate activision and was sad too see blizzard merge with them. Their just a bad company, a lot worse then EA thats for sure. Luckily Blizzard maps aren't very good  | ||
|
Sueco
Sweden283 Posts
However, these comments show incredible stupidity from a business standpoint. Starcraft 2 streams and tournaments draw tens of thousands of live viewers over the internet. This is all before anyone has even attempted a decent marketing campaign to popularize e-sports in the west. Every B-list hollywood movie gets more marketing funds than anything anyone has invested into e-sports. So it's a huge market that's about to explode, with multiple basement startups competing for fan's attention. Almost all of these fans are by the way from so-called generation Y, a generation that is widely recognized to have grown up with modern advertising and is therefore almost impervious to marketing in a traditional sense. To be honest, Activision says this dumb stuff because they are about money, not about games. They don't understand jack diddly about games. They treat this as selling soap, which was what one of their CFO's did before being placed in charge of Blizzard. They would have probably said something similar about WoW in 2004 when the game was about breaking even with its investment costs and had 2m subscribers. If they don't understand what they are talking about, they should at least have the business sense to shut up. I think they don't understand the financial implications that these comments have for them two, three-years down the line. | ||
|
masterbreti
Korea (South)2711 Posts
On May 02 2011 17:52 mahnini wrote: well, i mean they are pretty much hosting everything on their end (i think?) which certainly doesn't help with costs. plus, i thought they got royalties for every tournament (or at least they can if the whole esports thing takes off)? THIS^ In all reality i think thats why they want esports to grow so much. They will be able to get a small profit from tournaments and such. I know they are getting a small cut of gom profits, and also nasl profits. I assume most major tournaments (over 5k) have to pay blizzard some sort of fee. and as we all know, those tournaments are getting larger and larger. tbh I think if activision changed sc2 for the worst, they would hear about it. It would be up to the community to speak out. afterall, its the community who has made them so much money in the first place. they would be forced to listen, cause really, they won't make money off casuals, cause they won't pay to play sc2, it'll be the hardcore people. | ||
|
wonderwall
New Zealand695 Posts
I wouldn't really care if they added in a cash shop for purely cosmetic items. I wouldn't use it but I'm sure people and kids with their mothers credit cards would. | ||
|
Zarahtra
Iceland4053 Posts
On May 02 2011 16:15 eviltomahawk wrote: Rough transcript: "In New York City a few weeks ago, apparently the CFO of Activision basically said that Starcraft 2 is not really worth it. Monetarily (something something). We spent a lot of money on it. We got more money, but the return on the dollar is nothing compared to what the online, free-to-play companies are making. That profit margin just doesn't compare. When you're a major company like Activision, you have an obligation to the shareholders to pursue... if there is a strategy where the profit margin is twice as high as what you're pursuing, then it's time to exchange strategies. It doesn't make sense for Blizzard, it doesn't make sense for anyone. But here's the thing. I don't necessarily believe the middle class game is dead because not every company out there needs to be making decisions based off of what's going to make them the most money, and in fact many don't. In the strategy gaming space, the two classic examples are Paradox and Stardock (?). Those companies are making those games not because they think are going to make the most money but because those are the games that they choose to make." (goes on to discuss the "mid tier" game and other stuff, including stuff about League of Legends) That's imo sooo terrible POV for a gaming company. Being an Icelander, I've listened to a lot of the CCP higher ups speaking of EVE. That's where it is, they have such enthusiasm for their games, they talk with passion, they are making the games because _THEY_ think they are good and fun. Heck at the start of EVE, those people basically gave up almost everything to create something they wanted to play. Wish there was some understanding of those things in the higher ups of Blizzard. WoW is probably a better example of how there isn't(some would say how SC2 is much easier than BW is another example), seeing how they have always made the game easier, less challenging and in the end a lot less fun, to the point where it's hard to justify spending hours in the game when you can just sit back and get your rewards no-matter. | ||
|
Tobberoth
Sweden6375 Posts
On May 02 2011 17:33 Terranist wrote: i can understand their sentiment. they're in it to make money and SC2 is nowhere near the cash cow that is call of duty or guitar hero. It's still stupid thinking. Thing is, the vast majorities of games do not make profits. For EA, every Madden pays for like 10 games to be developed. Even if SC2 isn't a "cash cow", it's a game giving a huge profit, which is rare. And even if it wasn't, starcraft is a loved franchise and starcraft 2 is a really popular game. Having games like WoW which makes huge amounts of cash is awesome, but a company should aim to have games of high esteem as well since that makes customers more inclined to buy their other games. Look at blizzard, every game they release sells extremely well. Doesn't matter if the games suck, if blizzard releases a game, people buy it. They make quality stuff, you don't need to read a review to know that their games are worth buying. | ||
|
Catch]22
Sweden2683 Posts
| ||
|
Rabiator
Germany3948 Posts
| ||
|
Brian333
657 Posts
| ||
|
maartendq
Belgium3115 Posts
On May 02 2011 16:55 Jakkerr wrote: Activision should take care of their own problems. They didn't release a proper game in years and are soon to be overrun by Battlefield 3. Cya stupid CoD series, only CoD 4 was cool I wonder why everyone suddenly thinks that BF3 is going to DESTROY CoD. I heard people say the same about BC2, but it didn't. It did not even come close sale-wise compared to CoD: MW2, which is all that matters for companies. That's like saying that *insert random MMO here" is going to overrun World of Warcraft. Sorry to break it to you, but that's just not going to happen any time soon(tm). | ||
|
Dooba
Croatia588 Posts
| ||
|
Gingerninja
United Kingdom1339 Posts
| ||
|
ComTrav
United States1093 Posts
Eventually Activision/EA/Other major developers will realize that developing game applications for Web browsers/FaceBooks/iPhones/iPads/other FOTM is not their core business. | ||
|
eloist
United States1017 Posts
| ||
|
jinixxx123
543 Posts
the difference between WOW and SC2 is that the sc2 community is way more passionate and wont stand up for any of this bullshit . The day sc2 becomes pay to play online with monthly subscriptions = the day i never play another blizzard game again. Starcraft 2 is already pretty expensive to follow... GOM = 10 bucks if you want to see vods, NASL = 25 bucks , imaging if you had to pay for monthly fee also and pay for the game itself . Thats alot of money to play/watch a game. Btw bobby is a fucking cunt. nuff said. | ||
|
Terranist
United States2496 Posts
On May 02 2011 18:00 Tobberoth wrote: It's still stupid thinking. Thing is, the vast majorities of games do not make profits. For EA, every Madden pays for like 10 games to be developed. Even if SC2 isn't a "cash cow", it's a game giving a huge profit, which is rare. And even if it wasn't, starcraft is a loved franchise and starcraft 2 is a really popular game. Having games like WoW which makes huge amounts of cash is awesome, but a company should aim to have games of high esteem as well since that makes customers more inclined to buy their other games. Look at blizzard, every game they release sells extremely well. Doesn't matter if the games suck, if blizzard releases a game, people buy it. They make quality stuff, you don't need to read a review to know that their games are worth buying. the system they have going with CoD is lame. it doesn't matter how mediocre the game is, every year all your friends will switch over to the next one and if you still want to play with them you have to pony up. repeat this process millions of times over and you have a cash cow that keeps renewing itself for minimal cost. sc2 on the other hand only has a niche appeal and seven or more years of development behind it. not to mention dedicated server support for each region lasting the next several years at least. you can't compare them really, one makes investors happy and the other makes gamers happy. | ||
|
Sawamura
Malaysia7602 Posts
| ||
| ||
