[D] Blizzard’s pro-gaming intentions in SE Asia - Page 4

On June 03 2010 17:31 gdroxor wrote:
Is there some technical detail in there that I'm missing that wouldn't make this work?

On June 03 2010 16:10 aLt)nirvana wrote:
singapore/australia sales will be decent still but i cant imagine malaysians shelling out 250RM (thats ALOT in their currency) for a computer game. likewise for thailand/phillipines, how can these people with less purchasing power pay higher than US citizens - Especially new gamers who have never played starcraft before, it will just be an automatic skip

i was at the meeting too and i brought out how all these benefits they mentioned (low latency, localised live tournaments) are only going to affect a small handful of players ie the competitive/ top players, whereas they were going subject the vast majority to the price increase. yes casual players care about lag but its not that much of an issue to CASUAL players. They rather have a 2 second delay than pay 60 bucks more. I however will pay the extra, and all hardcore blizzard fans will obviously still buy starcraft 2, but they will still have that uncomfortable feeling that they are paying too much for something they shouldn't be.

And 50% of the players who buy starcraft just play the single player and are done with the game, so the number of sales is going to drastically drop as these players who dont benefit at all(latency nonissue they dont go online, no tournaments etc) are not going to pay 109$ just to play the game, so there goes a huge portion of new players. Also, 16 year olds arent going touch this at all, they will probably just buy 60 games on their iPhones, a new one every other day, instead of saving 4 months for 109$. Even when they do, they wont have friends playing it cause its too expensive, and those who do may have ordered the US version. The blizzard rep mentioned this is something they will look into.

The main justification for the high price was that it was all ultimately about the game expereince. they wanted to create a perfect gaming expereince for everyone, even the dota players who kept dying because of that 1 second delay in lag, and FOR ME the price tag is justified. im not agreeing 100% with this but i do have an open mind. i mean if i picture myself a few months down the road, where bnet2.0 is fixed, sc2 is the best game of all time and im having a blast and know i will continue to do so for a long time to come. Like how we enjoyed SC1/TFT for years, way beyond the game life of all those non blizzard games that we payed 60 bux for and stopped playing for 1 month. Thinking back to this thread, would the price be worth it? I belong to the group where the benefits increase my gaming expereince so ill say yes.

I do however, think they gotta do a massive rethinking on their prices/pitch to the casual players. If i put myself in the shoes of a 16 year old/ recreational gamer/ single player dude / person living in 3rd world country(no disrespect, just the purcashing power issue), these benefits arent as important to me and isnt justification for the high price tag so i simply wont buy the game.

Next, the main reason why the SEA is priced higher is because of blizzard set up costs, they are setting up an office, new server in the region all from scratch. I disagree with the SEA players having to subsidise the setup costs when blizzard has more than enough money through WoW etc. Also, this set up cost should be seen as an investment choice on their part that will bring in more revenue for them in the future, and at the moment the big price tag will only hurt their sales and growth of the player base. Like i dont pay more for willy wonka sweets if i know they are researching a new flavour.

Lastly something out of topic - for the proleague if i recall correctly they mentioned something along the lines of creating a specialised server with dedicated bandwitdh etc to handle players from different regions.

On June 03 2010 11:14 pheus wrote:


That's weird, I still get lag when I host or play solo against a computer. I really don't see how that is peer2peer

On June 02 2010 15:02 wwiv wrote:
I would really like some alternative view points on this, as an Economics student, I cant help but feel that this is all a smokescreen to distract from the truth that Blizzard and the regional distributor are simply out to recoup their initial investment costs (specifically the investments in servers / offices) in the region asap rather then having a true long term framework for the development of pro-gaming in SE Asia.

On June 03 2010 17:23 Ocedic wrote:


Likewise saying Blizzard is making us 'pay for the napkins at a restaurant' is a pretty gross hyperbole. By comparison Blizzard is quite tame. Hi paying for multiplayer mode DLC for Resident Evil 5.

On June 04 2010 21:32 abrasion wrote:
The fact of the matter is, Blizzard can make all the claims in the world they like.
We can make all the 'chat channels!' or 'crap ladder system!!' posts we like, all these things aside - ALL of them there is only one major point here.

Server segregation internationally, FORCED server segregation.
This is a distinct and direct piece of hypocrisy against making the game massive, it hinders and holds the game back in so many more ways than it helps it.
How can any company in 2010 ever possibly think of locking the community down when we all have 'duh - the internet' and speak to each other, post on sites across the world, follow asian gaming, follow EU gaming, follow US gaming etc.
It's silly, it's backwards, it's dumb it's almost "Microsoft-ish" - it makes no sense and while SC2 may be big for 2/3/4 or even 5 years - in the long long curve of the game in 6 years - this change is going to make the community(ies) seem 1/3 the size that they actually are - period.

It's stupid and until this is addressed I can not take anything they say seriously.
It is a dumb business decision.

On June 02 2010 20:50 LordWeird wrote:


Couldn't agree more. People have been making great and successful games for a long time and it's never had to require this much cash dumping. Maybe Blizz has let the success of their other games and the current hype of SC2 go to their heads?

On June 02 2010 15:02 wwiv wrote:
I would really like some alternative view points on this, as an Economics student, I cant help but feel that this is all a smokescreen to distract from the truth that Blizzard and the regional distributor are simply out to recoup their initial investment costs (specifically the investments in servers / offices) in the region asap rather then having a true long term framework for the development of pro-gaming in SE Asia.

On June 05 2010 23:32 Pokebunny wrote:

Well if it's actually a superior product, it should cost more money. The idea that SC2 would cost less than a random shitty game is the scarier idea.

On June 06 2010 11:26 The Storyteller wrote:

As an economics student, I thought you would find it completely reasonable that all Blizzard is interested in is money, and they will develop the region only if it makes them more money than they put in. Whether it works or not is another matter, but of course we should all start from the assumption that Blizzard wants to make lots of money, and it's up to us whether we want to be a part of that.

On June 06 2010 13:34 red_b wrote:


Actually as an economics student you realize that there has to be a balance between the marginal utility of money and the marginal disutility of no longer doing what you love.

You know with Activision that they like money so much they will royally screw customers; the little bit of guilt of they have is dwarfed by the stock holders laughing all the way to the bank every quarter.

Economics does not preclude doing things for reasons other than money; that is only the case at base levels where people are concerned solely with the aggregate or simplest cases.