|
On October 12 2011 22:33 Tofugrinder wrote:source?
Use of this figure needs to stop until somebody can prove it. The only source is TB, and Kennigit cast a lot of doubt on TB's claim. Kennigit even said that it's not "as money-grubbing as [people] make it seem."
|
On October 13 2011 07:29 suejak wrote:Show nested quote +On October 12 2011 22:33 Tofugrinder wrote:On October 12 2011 20:36 ReaperX wrote:
Apparently 50% of Ad Revenue. source? Use of this figure needs to stop until somebody can prove it. The only source is TB, and Kennigit cast a lot of doubt on TB's claim. Kennigit even said that it's not "as money-grubbing as [people] make it seem."
Agreed we need a source of some information before we start ranting and raving about it.
|
On October 13 2011 06:11 Plansix wrote:Show nested quote +On October 13 2011 04:07 jinorazi wrote:On October 13 2011 03:44 Plansix wrote:On October 13 2011 03:12 jinorazi wrote:On October 13 2011 02:58 Plansix wrote:On October 13 2011 02:51 jinorazi wrote:
it makes perfect sense for them to be making money off of their creation but i guess the question is, how much is enough?
lets move on.
i've come to realize blizzard cares more about making money than giving something back to the community. They will always be concerned with the bottom line. They are a business first and formost and that is was a responsable business does. Well, you see, Blizzard employees people and provides a high quality product compaired to rest of the industry. It takes a lot of money and time to make the products they provide. If they arn't making money, they need to pull people off of supporting their game and work on cranking out a new product. If you look at a lot(but not all) RTS games, you don't hear about balance patches nearly a full year after release. Blizzard is the exception to that rule and supports game years after release. They are still release patchs for Diablo 2, for god sakes. That game is over a decade old. i'm sorry if i sounded like an ignorant douche to be lectured about the obvious. i'm glad blizzard keeps up with the old games, and frankly, its because people still play it and it doesn't exactly compare to say, games like age of empires 2 which no one plays anymore, there is no need for maintaining it. granted, blizzard dont need to but they do because, perhaps, they care - about their image or about their customers. i'm just sayin, with the release of sc2, my view towards them did change a bit for the worse but that doesn't mean i hate em by any means. it just feels unfortunate but in the end its just business so it is what is but can't help myself to say something when people are chanting for paid name change - and blizzard is more than happy to do so. its something like this that bothers me. The reason for the paid name change it to keep people from changing their name over and over. It makes it more difficult for other players to report people when they can't do so by simply saying "player X is an ass-hat". It has other benfits as well, but mostly it keeps people locked to one idenity and allows them to address cheating/harrassment. Xbox live does the same thing, for the sole reason that a pay-wall prevents people constently switching their names. And I don't feel you're are ignorant. I do think people hold Blizzard to an unreasonable standard. They have shown time and time again that they do care about the community, want SC2 to explode and are willing to support tournments all over the world. Esports is huge, people are making a living playing Starcraft and compeating in huge tournments. Everything is amazing and no one is happy. blizzard's claim (and advocates) regarding paid name change along with lack of LAN and no cross region play has been debunked by the community by providing better alternatives and more reasonable motive behind why blizzard did what they did with sc2. (id like to keep this short, explaining those will create a long post, pm if you'd like to hear those) Wait, I am confused. You stay that their claims have been debunked by the community providing alternatives. So the community has said "It would be better THIS way" and that makes Blizzards reasoning invalid. How the hell does that work exactly? I go into buy milk and they say it is $2 and I inform them "Look, Ive done the math and I know why our charging $2. Let me provide the reasonable alternative of $1, because what you are looking for isn't acceptable". That doesn't sound like something that would fly in the real world. I would never argue that they don't want money and I am sure there is a bit of "Yeah, well we know they want this to be free, but we are charging for it." But still, I want money, so do they. They arn't charging me monthly or expecting me to pay per game.
as you've said, people will abuse the system if it were allowed, however there is absolutely no need to charge money for name change. allow one free name change per month or per season, a reasonable timeframe. people will BM, pretend to be other players, hack/cheat, whatever and all that will be done by the minority. why should everyone else pay for name change when it should be free (as it always has been pre-wow)? unlimited name change did no harm in the past, why all of a sudden does it cause harm now?
blizzard will do what they want and no ordinary person have control over it. i'm just sayin, why try to have the cake and eat it too? thats how i see it in my eyes and i'm just stating my opinion(shared with others) that it shouldn't be that way.
|
"You have to pay us money for advertising our own game"
|
Netherlands45349 Posts
On October 13 2011 07:36 jinorazi wrote:Show nested quote +On October 13 2011 06:11 Plansix wrote:On October 13 2011 04:07 jinorazi wrote:On October 13 2011 03:44 Plansix wrote:On October 13 2011 03:12 jinorazi wrote:On October 13 2011 02:58 Plansix wrote:On October 13 2011 02:51 jinorazi wrote:
it makes perfect sense for them to be making money off of their creation but i guess the question is, how much is enough?
lets move on.
i've come to realize blizzard cares more about making money than giving something back to the community. They will always be concerned with the bottom line. They are a business first and formost and that is was a responsable business does. Well, you see, Blizzard employees people and provides a high quality product compaired to rest of the industry. It takes a lot of money and time to make the products they provide. If they arn't making money, they need to pull people off of supporting their game and work on cranking out a new product. If you look at a lot(but not all) RTS games, you don't hear about balance patches nearly a full year after release. Blizzard is the exception to that rule and supports game years after release. They are still release patchs for Diablo 2, for god sakes. That game is over a decade old. i'm sorry if i sounded like an ignorant douche to be lectured about the obvious. i'm glad blizzard keeps up with the old games, and frankly, its because people still play it and it doesn't exactly compare to say, games like age of empires 2 which no one plays anymore, there is no need for maintaining it. granted, blizzard dont need to but they do because, perhaps, they care - about their image or about their customers. i'm just sayin, with the release of sc2, my view towards them did change a bit for the worse but that doesn't mean i hate em by any means. it just feels unfortunate but in the end its just business so it is what is but can't help myself to say something when people are chanting for paid name change - and blizzard is more than happy to do so. its something like this that bothers me. The reason for the paid name change it to keep people from changing their name over and over. It makes it more difficult for other players to report people when they can't do so by simply saying "player X is an ass-hat". It has other benfits as well, but mostly it keeps people locked to one idenity and allows them to address cheating/harrassment. Xbox live does the same thing, for the sole reason that a pay-wall prevents people constently switching their names. And I don't feel you're are ignorant. I do think people hold Blizzard to an unreasonable standard. They have shown time and time again that they do care about the community, want SC2 to explode and are willing to support tournments all over the world. Esports is huge, people are making a living playing Starcraft and compeating in huge tournments. Everything is amazing and no one is happy. blizzard's claim (and advocates) regarding paid name change along with lack of LAN and no cross region play has been debunked by the community by providing better alternatives and more reasonable motive behind why blizzard did what they did with sc2. (id like to keep this short, explaining those will create a long post, pm if you'd like to hear those) Wait, I am confused. You stay that their claims have been debunked by the community providing alternatives. So the community has said "It would be better THIS way" and that makes Blizzards reasoning invalid. How the hell does that work exactly? I go into buy milk and they say it is $2 and I inform them "Look, Ive done the math and I know why our charging $2. Let me provide the reasonable alternative of $1, because what you are looking for isn't acceptable". That doesn't sound like something that would fly in the real world. I would never argue that they don't want money and I am sure there is a bit of "Yeah, well we know they want this to be free, but we are charging for it." But still, I want money, so do they. They arn't charging me monthly or expecting me to pay per game. as you've said, people will abuse the system if it were allowed, however there is absolutely no need to charge money for name change. allow one free name change per month or per season, a reasonable timeframe. people will BM, pretend to be other players, hack/cheat, whatever and all that will be done by the minority. why should everyone else pay for name change when it should be free (as it always has been pre-wow)? unlimited name change did no harm in the past, why all of a sudden does it cause harm now? blizzard will do what they want and no ordinary person have control over it. i'm just sayin, why try to have the cake and eat it too? thats how i see it in my eyes and i'm just stating my opinion(shared with others) that it shouldn't be that way.
From a business point of view, if there is demand for a name change and people are willing to pay for it..
Then why should you have it be free?
|
On October 13 2011 07:45 Kipsate wrote:Show nested quote +On October 13 2011 07:36 jinorazi wrote:On October 13 2011 06:11 Plansix wrote:On October 13 2011 04:07 jinorazi wrote:On October 13 2011 03:44 Plansix wrote:On October 13 2011 03:12 jinorazi wrote:On October 13 2011 02:58 Plansix wrote:On October 13 2011 02:51 jinorazi wrote:
it makes perfect sense for them to be making money off of their creation but i guess the question is, how much is enough?
lets move on.
i've come to realize blizzard cares more about making money than giving something back to the community. They will always be concerned with the bottom line. They are a business first and formost and that is was a responsable business does. Well, you see, Blizzard employees people and provides a high quality product compaired to rest of the industry. It takes a lot of money and time to make the products they provide. If they arn't making money, they need to pull people off of supporting their game and work on cranking out a new product. If you look at a lot(but not all) RTS games, you don't hear about balance patches nearly a full year after release. Blizzard is the exception to that rule and supports game years after release. They are still release patchs for Diablo 2, for god sakes. That game is over a decade old. i'm sorry if i sounded like an ignorant douche to be lectured about the obvious. i'm glad blizzard keeps up with the old games, and frankly, its because people still play it and it doesn't exactly compare to say, games like age of empires 2 which no one plays anymore, there is no need for maintaining it. granted, blizzard dont need to but they do because, perhaps, they care - about their image or about their customers. i'm just sayin, with the release of sc2, my view towards them did change a bit for the worse but that doesn't mean i hate em by any means. it just feels unfortunate but in the end its just business so it is what is but can't help myself to say something when people are chanting for paid name change - and blizzard is more than happy to do so. its something like this that bothers me. The reason for the paid name change it to keep people from changing their name over and over. It makes it more difficult for other players to report people when they can't do so by simply saying "player X is an ass-hat". It has other benfits as well, but mostly it keeps people locked to one idenity and allows them to address cheating/harrassment. Xbox live does the same thing, for the sole reason that a pay-wall prevents people constently switching their names. And I don't feel you're are ignorant. I do think people hold Blizzard to an unreasonable standard. They have shown time and time again that they do care about the community, want SC2 to explode and are willing to support tournments all over the world. Esports is huge, people are making a living playing Starcraft and compeating in huge tournments. Everything is amazing and no one is happy. blizzard's claim (and advocates) regarding paid name change along with lack of LAN and no cross region play has been debunked by the community by providing better alternatives and more reasonable motive behind why blizzard did what they did with sc2. (id like to keep this short, explaining those will create a long post, pm if you'd like to hear those) Wait, I am confused. You stay that their claims have been debunked by the community providing alternatives. So the community has said "It would be better THIS way" and that makes Blizzards reasoning invalid. How the hell does that work exactly? I go into buy milk and they say it is $2 and I inform them "Look, Ive done the math and I know why our charging $2. Let me provide the reasonable alternative of $1, because what you are looking for isn't acceptable". That doesn't sound like something that would fly in the real world. I would never argue that they don't want money and I am sure there is a bit of "Yeah, well we know they want this to be free, but we are charging for it." But still, I want money, so do they. They arn't charging me monthly or expecting me to pay per game. as you've said, people will abuse the system if it were allowed, however there is absolutely no need to charge money for name change. allow one free name change per month or per season, a reasonable timeframe. people will BM, pretend to be other players, hack/cheat, whatever and all that will be done by the minority. why should everyone else pay for name change when it should be free (as it always has been pre-wow)? unlimited name change did no harm in the past, why all of a sudden does it cause harm now? blizzard will do what they want and no ordinary person have control over it. i'm just sayin, why try to have the cake and eat it too? thats how i see it in my eyes and i'm just stating my opinion(shared with others) that it shouldn't be that way. From a business point of view, if there is demand for a name change and people are willing to pay for it.. Then why should you have it be free?
exactly. thats my point, i dislike the fact that people are willing to pay extra for things that i feel, should be included as it has in the past.
and its a little glimpse of hope from me that blizzard will look past such thing and give something back to the community.
|
On October 13 2011 06:04 Tehs Tehklz wrote:
Then find a new game - a better game - for which to host tournaments. Go ahead. Do it right now. I'll wait here and you let me know when you find one.
People are already doing it. LoL often gets more stream viewers than SC2 at events, and one could argue it's not even especially competitive at the moment. You think the E-sports scene can't live without SC2, especially with Dota2 coming out? Don't be ridiculous.
If Riot and Valve support their games better for tournament play, and their games are popular enough, then they will easily eclipse SC2. You acting as if this is impossible is beyond hilarious.
|
Oh hey guys, let's overreact and say Blizzard takes 50% of all ad revenue from tournaments with prize pools over 50% because TotalBiscuit ran his mouth in some thread. Too bad Kennigit closed it later because no one would know unless they went through the discussion with Blizzard, which puts them under a NDA.
Let's ignore that and light our torches and sharpen some pitchforks. Blizzard charges a chunk of the overall ad revenue to use their game. It's like oil companies charging us to use the petroleum they synthesize. We pay gas stations 3 dollars a gallon for gas to run our cars, the organizers pay Blizzard a % of their ad revenue for Starcraft 2 to run their tournaments on. Same basic concept.
Get a quote from someone who wants to break the NDA and tell us how much MLG or Dreamhack paid in ad revenue, and we can keep bitching. Until that happens though, any arguing over "Blizzard takes 50% percent of ad revenue?!?!?! My god?!?!" might as well be "Blizzard takes 100% of ad revenue AND half of the player's checks?!?!? OH MY GOD!?!?!" because you'll have just about as much backing and evidence for both claims.
Also, someone should keep a running tally of how many TL threads pop up and immediately get filled with overreaction. The argument over Blizzard taking a percentage of ad revenue, no matter how small, from tournaments is legit, sure. But this overreaction over 50% cuts is stupid.
|
On October 13 2011 07:53 jinorazi wrote:Show nested quote +On October 13 2011 07:45 Kipsate wrote:On October 13 2011 07:36 jinorazi wrote:On October 13 2011 06:11 Plansix wrote:On October 13 2011 04:07 jinorazi wrote:On October 13 2011 03:44 Plansix wrote:On October 13 2011 03:12 jinorazi wrote:On October 13 2011 02:58 Plansix wrote:On October 13 2011 02:51 jinorazi wrote:
it makes perfect sense for them to be making money off of their creation but i guess the question is, how much is enough?
lets move on.
i've come to realize blizzard cares more about making money than giving something back to the community. They will always be concerned with the bottom line. They are a business first and formost and that is was a responsable business does. Well, you see, Blizzard employees people and provides a high quality product compaired to rest of the industry. It takes a lot of money and time to make the products they provide. If they arn't making money, they need to pull people off of supporting their game and work on cranking out a new product. If you look at a lot(but not all) RTS games, you don't hear about balance patches nearly a full year after release. Blizzard is the exception to that rule and supports game years after release. They are still release patchs for Diablo 2, for god sakes. That game is over a decade old. i'm sorry if i sounded like an ignorant douche to be lectured about the obvious. i'm glad blizzard keeps up with the old games, and frankly, its because people still play it and it doesn't exactly compare to say, games like age of empires 2 which no one plays anymore, there is no need for maintaining it. granted, blizzard dont need to but they do because, perhaps, they care - about their image or about their customers. i'm just sayin, with the release of sc2, my view towards them did change a bit for the worse but that doesn't mean i hate em by any means. it just feels unfortunate but in the end its just business so it is what is but can't help myself to say something when people are chanting for paid name change - and blizzard is more than happy to do so. its something like this that bothers me. The reason for the paid name change it to keep people from changing their name over and over. It makes it more difficult for other players to report people when they can't do so by simply saying "player X is an ass-hat". It has other benfits as well, but mostly it keeps people locked to one idenity and allows them to address cheating/harrassment. Xbox live does the same thing, for the sole reason that a pay-wall prevents people constently switching their names. And I don't feel you're are ignorant. I do think people hold Blizzard to an unreasonable standard. They have shown time and time again that they do care about the community, want SC2 to explode and are willing to support tournments all over the world. Esports is huge, people are making a living playing Starcraft and compeating in huge tournments. Everything is amazing and no one is happy. blizzard's claim (and advocates) regarding paid name change along with lack of LAN and no cross region play has been debunked by the community by providing better alternatives and more reasonable motive behind why blizzard did what they did with sc2. (id like to keep this short, explaining those will create a long post, pm if you'd like to hear those) Wait, I am confused. You stay that their claims have been debunked by the community providing alternatives. So the community has said "It would be better THIS way" and that makes Blizzards reasoning invalid. How the hell does that work exactly? I go into buy milk and they say it is $2 and I inform them "Look, Ive done the math and I know why our charging $2. Let me provide the reasonable alternative of $1, because what you are looking for isn't acceptable". That doesn't sound like something that would fly in the real world. I would never argue that they don't want money and I am sure there is a bit of "Yeah, well we know they want this to be free, but we are charging for it." But still, I want money, so do they. They arn't charging me monthly or expecting me to pay per game. as you've said, people will abuse the system if it were allowed, however there is absolutely no need to charge money for name change. allow one free name change per month or per season, a reasonable timeframe. people will BM, pretend to be other players, hack/cheat, whatever and all that will be done by the minority. why should everyone else pay for name change when it should be free (as it always has been pre-wow)? unlimited name change did no harm in the past, why all of a sudden does it cause harm now? blizzard will do what they want and no ordinary person have control over it. i'm just sayin, why try to have the cake and eat it too? thats how i see it in my eyes and i'm just stating my opinion(shared with others) that it shouldn't be that way. From a business point of view, if there is demand for a name change and people are willing to pay for it.. Then why should you have it be free? exactly. thats my point, i dislike the fact that people are willing to pay extra for things that i feel, should be included as it has in the past. and its a little glimpse of hope from me that blizzard will look past such thing and give something back to the community.
Millions of people play SC2 literally dozens of hours a month. They paid a 1 time fee of $50-60 for that HUGE chunk of time, and for an experience that is always being worked on by a design team. To contrast, people spent $50-60 on Portal 2, a game that people likely never even played for more than 20 hours. You can argue that things like name changes should be free, but you're already getting a LOT out of a game that you paid very little for considering how much time is invested. Don't get mad when they try to capitalize on the great deal you're getting.
|
On October 13 2011 08:19 aksfjh wrote:Show nested quote +On October 13 2011 07:53 jinorazi wrote:On October 13 2011 07:45 Kipsate wrote:On October 13 2011 07:36 jinorazi wrote:On October 13 2011 06:11 Plansix wrote:On October 13 2011 04:07 jinorazi wrote:On October 13 2011 03:44 Plansix wrote:On October 13 2011 03:12 jinorazi wrote:On October 13 2011 02:58 Plansix wrote:On October 13 2011 02:51 jinorazi wrote:
it makes perfect sense for them to be making money off of their creation but i guess the question is, how much is enough?
lets move on.
i've come to realize blizzard cares more about making money than giving something back to the community. They will always be concerned with the bottom line. They are a business first and formost and that is was a responsable business does. Well, you see, Blizzard employees people and provides a high quality product compaired to rest of the industry. It takes a lot of money and time to make the products they provide. If they arn't making money, they need to pull people off of supporting their game and work on cranking out a new product. If you look at a lot(but not all) RTS games, you don't hear about balance patches nearly a full year after release. Blizzard is the exception to that rule and supports game years after release. They are still release patchs for Diablo 2, for god sakes. That game is over a decade old. i'm sorry if i sounded like an ignorant douche to be lectured about the obvious. i'm glad blizzard keeps up with the old games, and frankly, its because people still play it and it doesn't exactly compare to say, games like age of empires 2 which no one plays anymore, there is no need for maintaining it. granted, blizzard dont need to but they do because, perhaps, they care - about their image or about their customers. i'm just sayin, with the release of sc2, my view towards them did change a bit for the worse but that doesn't mean i hate em by any means. it just feels unfortunate but in the end its just business so it is what is but can't help myself to say something when people are chanting for paid name change - and blizzard is more than happy to do so. its something like this that bothers me. The reason for the paid name change it to keep people from changing their name over and over. It makes it more difficult for other players to report people when they can't do so by simply saying "player X is an ass-hat". It has other benfits as well, but mostly it keeps people locked to one idenity and allows them to address cheating/harrassment. Xbox live does the same thing, for the sole reason that a pay-wall prevents people constently switching their names. And I don't feel you're are ignorant. I do think people hold Blizzard to an unreasonable standard. They have shown time and time again that they do care about the community, want SC2 to explode and are willing to support tournments all over the world. Esports is huge, people are making a living playing Starcraft and compeating in huge tournments. Everything is amazing and no one is happy. blizzard's claim (and advocates) regarding paid name change along with lack of LAN and no cross region play has been debunked by the community by providing better alternatives and more reasonable motive behind why blizzard did what they did with sc2. (id like to keep this short, explaining those will create a long post, pm if you'd like to hear those) Wait, I am confused. You stay that their claims have been debunked by the community providing alternatives. So the community has said "It would be better THIS way" and that makes Blizzards reasoning invalid. How the hell does that work exactly? I go into buy milk and they say it is $2 and I inform them "Look, Ive done the math and I know why our charging $2. Let me provide the reasonable alternative of $1, because what you are looking for isn't acceptable". That doesn't sound like something that would fly in the real world. I would never argue that they don't want money and I am sure there is a bit of "Yeah, well we know they want this to be free, but we are charging for it." But still, I want money, so do they. They arn't charging me monthly or expecting me to pay per game. as you've said, people will abuse the system if it were allowed, however there is absolutely no need to charge money for name change. allow one free name change per month or per season, a reasonable timeframe. people will BM, pretend to be other players, hack/cheat, whatever and all that will be done by the minority. why should everyone else pay for name change when it should be free (as it always has been pre-wow)? unlimited name change did no harm in the past, why all of a sudden does it cause harm now? blizzard will do what they want and no ordinary person have control over it. i'm just sayin, why try to have the cake and eat it too? thats how i see it in my eyes and i'm just stating my opinion(shared with others) that it shouldn't be that way. From a business point of view, if there is demand for a name change and people are willing to pay for it.. Then why should you have it be free? exactly. thats my point, i dislike the fact that people are willing to pay extra for things that i feel, should be included as it has in the past. and its a little glimpse of hope from me that blizzard will look past such thing and give something back to the community. Millions of people play SC2 literally dozens of hours a month. They paid a 1 time fee of $50-60 for that HUGE chunk of time, and for an experience that is always being worked on by a design team. To contrast, people spent $50-60 on Portal 2, a game that people likely never even played for more than 20 hours. You can argue that things like name changes should be free, but you're already getting a LOT out of a game that you paid very little for considering how much time is invested. Don't get mad when they try to capitalize on the great deal you're getting.
If I buy a ball and play football with it, do I have to pay monthly fee to Nike for using it? Would Nike require half my ad revenue on any games played with it?
|
Just award first place 5k and a "gift" of additional money to avoid the ad revenue.
|
people - its a business
businesses exist to make money
simple as that
I could care less if they never did anything for the communityy- you know why? BECAUSE THEY MAKE FUCKIN AWESOME GAMES!!
as long as people buy and play the game it doesn't matter that they charge fees from tournaments.
|
On October 13 2011 08:42 mrRoflpwn wrote:
people - its a business
businesses exist to make money
simple as that
I could care less if they never did anything for the communityy- you know why? BECAUSE THEY MAKE FUCKIN AWESOME GAMES!!
as long as people buy and play the game it doesn't matter that they charge fees from tournaments.
Pretty much this.
|
If I buy a ball and play football with it, do I have to pay monthly fee to Nike for using it? Would Nike require half my ad revenue on any games played with it?
..... the answer to that question is obviously no, but this is so incredibly off key i don't know where to start. first, you don't need to pay for the use of nike's football beyond the initial cost, and neither do you for sc2. there's no parallel, unless youre describing the use of nike footballs in NFL or other revenue-generating games, in which case i would assume the answer is yes. i know for a fact Spalding charges the NBA and if Nike were to have a monopoly (which I'm not sure it does...) it would charge them too.
but even if that weren't the case, it's not because nike is fulfilling some moral or legal obligation to football fans or players. it's just plain unenforceable. were it to be the case nike could ENFORCE this (like blizzard could enforce playing fees), then you can be sure as hell they would too, if it made business sense for them.
the only reason why blizzard doesn't for sc2 (even though it set a precedent with WoW) is that its a different business model. WoW is for the addicted and compulsive player, sc2 is going to be an eSport and needs a wide audience to gain traction in terms of tournament viewership, along with which comes more copies sold / ad revenues.
you can be sure as hell if sc2 were the same combination of addicting / unsuitable for mass viewership as WoW, theyd follow a subscriber model too.. but they don't. it's never about their moral obligation to you, and neither is it with Nike.
in fact, if you want to talk moral obligation, hell LEGAL obligation, Blizzard is legally and morally obligated to maximize its shareholders' profits. that obligation to those whose livelihoods depend on it (i.e. blizzard employees with stock options), or the equity owners who took risk in ownership of the business, ought to be compensated first and foremost. unless of course, pissing you off clashes with the customers' preferences in a way that threatens its own bottomline, but its never about you NOR SHOULD it be
|
On October 13 2011 08:28 qyk05328 wrote:
If I buy a ball and play football with it, do I have to pay monthly fee to Nike for using it? Would Nike require half my ad revenue on any games played with it?
If Nike is maintaining a football field for you that they mow once a month and a keep a staff of some 100+ people to maintain, then yeah. You definitely should.
Seriously, I don't get what's so hard to understand about this...
|
On October 13 2011 05:25 TotalBiscuit wrote:Show nested quote +On October 13 2011 00:59 Longshank wrote:
I'm confused, how is your unwillingness to pay money for your online tournament in any way related to a mistake/tech issue over in the US or the existence of LAN?
What more do you expect them to do to support your particular event? Zip up there, your bias is showing. My event isn't the issue, if you think that it is then you are somewhat small-minded. The point is that Blizzard are taking money from events that should be a) used to fund more events b) given to the players and they are doing NOTHING to deserve it. No, creating a game does not give you the god-given right to money from tournaments organised with it. I can think of no other eSports title past or present that has done this. Can anyone name one?
My bias? Que? What bias is that if I may ask?
I thought your words on how they would deserve the money if they supported the events better sounded kind of hollow seeing you refused to pay despite getting all support needed(which might have been none other than Battle.net/Client support). Still, what additional support were you looking for? Advertisement? Saying they're doing nothing to deserve it is plain wrong. They are providing the tool and platform off of which the tournament organizers are making money. How much that's worth is a different story and that has never been done before is irrelevant, e-sports has never been this big business before.
The 50% figure seems vague as well, and in reported cases not accurate at all. At the very least it seems to differ from case to case so if you had actually talked to Blizzard and shown that you wasn't trying to make a profit but was to distribute the ad-revenue among the players, chances are they would have settled for a lower figure. You didn't though but went for second hand information.
|
On October 13 2011 08:47 familyguy123 wrote:
in fact, if you want to talk moral obligation, hell LEGAL obligation, Blizzard is legally and morally obligated to maximize its shareholders' profits. that obligation to those whose livelihoods depend on it (i.e. blizzard employees with stock options), or the equity owners who took risk in ownership of the business, ought to be compensated first and foremost. unless of course, pissing you off clashes with the customers' preferences in a way that threatens its own bottomline, but its never about you NOR SHOULD it be
Personal enrichment is a moral of very low import. Almost all other moral considerations would take precedence. Even considering that it's a group, the people making the decisions are taking the largest shares.
Sorry to make retarded moralistic arguments about a video game, but you started it!
|
On October 13 2011 07:36 brum wrote:
"You have to pay us money for advertising our own game"
Just like when you buy a t-shirt with the brand plastered all over the front. Or a car even.
'Half of ad revenue" seems plausible. I wonder why everyone's waiting for a source when, like someone said on the first page, everyone who knows is under an NDA. Do you really think they'll have that kind of information readily available online?
|
On October 13 2011 08:19 aksfjh wrote:Show nested quote +On October 13 2011 07:53 jinorazi wrote:On October 13 2011 07:45 Kipsate wrote:On October 13 2011 07:36 jinorazi wrote:On October 13 2011 06:11 Plansix wrote:On October 13 2011 04:07 jinorazi wrote:On October 13 2011 03:44 Plansix wrote:On October 13 2011 03:12 jinorazi wrote:On October 13 2011 02:58 Plansix wrote:On October 13 2011 02:51 jinorazi wrote:
it makes perfect sense for them to be making money off of their creation but i guess the question is, how much is enough?
lets move on.
i've come to realize blizzard cares more about making money than giving something back to the community. They will always be concerned with the bottom line. They are a business first and formost and that is was a responsable business does. Well, you see, Blizzard employees people and provides a high quality product compaired to rest of the industry. It takes a lot of money and time to make the products they provide. If they arn't making money, they need to pull people off of supporting their game and work on cranking out a new product. If you look at a lot(but not all) RTS games, you don't hear about balance patches nearly a full year after release. Blizzard is the exception to that rule and supports game years after release. They are still release patchs for Diablo 2, for god sakes. That game is over a decade old. i'm sorry if i sounded like an ignorant douche to be lectured about the obvious. i'm glad blizzard keeps up with the old games, and frankly, its because people still play it and it doesn't exactly compare to say, games like age of empires 2 which no one plays anymore, there is no need for maintaining it. granted, blizzard dont need to but they do because, perhaps, they care - about their image or about their customers. i'm just sayin, with the release of sc2, my view towards them did change a bit for the worse but that doesn't mean i hate em by any means. it just feels unfortunate but in the end its just business so it is what is but can't help myself to say something when people are chanting for paid name change - and blizzard is more than happy to do so. its something like this that bothers me. The reason for the paid name change it to keep people from changing their name over and over. It makes it more difficult for other players to report people when they can't do so by simply saying "player X is an ass-hat". It has other benfits as well, but mostly it keeps people locked to one idenity and allows them to address cheating/harrassment. Xbox live does the same thing, for the sole reason that a pay-wall prevents people constently switching their names. And I don't feel you're are ignorant. I do think people hold Blizzard to an unreasonable standard. They have shown time and time again that they do care about the community, want SC2 to explode and are willing to support tournments all over the world. Esports is huge, people are making a living playing Starcraft and compeating in huge tournments. Everything is amazing and no one is happy. blizzard's claim (and advocates) regarding paid name change along with lack of LAN and no cross region play has been debunked by the community by providing better alternatives and more reasonable motive behind why blizzard did what they did with sc2. (id like to keep this short, explaining those will create a long post, pm if you'd like to hear those) Wait, I am confused. You stay that their claims have been debunked by the community providing alternatives. So the community has said "It would be better THIS way" and that makes Blizzards reasoning invalid. How the hell does that work exactly? I go into buy milk and they say it is $2 and I inform them "Look, Ive done the math and I know why our charging $2. Let me provide the reasonable alternative of $1, because what you are looking for isn't acceptable". That doesn't sound like something that would fly in the real world. I would never argue that they don't want money and I am sure there is a bit of "Yeah, well we know they want this to be free, but we are charging for it." But still, I want money, so do they. They arn't charging me monthly or expecting me to pay per game. as you've said, people will abuse the system if it were allowed, however there is absolutely no need to charge money for name change. allow one free name change per month or per season, a reasonable timeframe. people will BM, pretend to be other players, hack/cheat, whatever and all that will be done by the minority. why should everyone else pay for name change when it should be free (as it always has been pre-wow)? unlimited name change did no harm in the past, why all of a sudden does it cause harm now? blizzard will do what they want and no ordinary person have control over it. i'm just sayin, why try to have the cake and eat it too? thats how i see it in my eyes and i'm just stating my opinion(shared with others) that it shouldn't be that way. From a business point of view, if there is demand for a name change and people are willing to pay for it.. Then why should you have it be free? exactly. thats my point, i dislike the fact that people are willing to pay extra for things that i feel, should be included as it has in the past. and its a little glimpse of hope from me that blizzard will look past such thing and give something back to the community. Millions of people play SC2 literally dozens of hours a month. They paid a 1 time fee of $50-60 for that HUGE chunk of time, and for an experience that is always being worked on by a design team. To contrast, people spent $50-60 on Portal 2, a game that people likely never even played for more than 20 hours. You can argue that things like name changes should be free, but you're already getting a LOT out of a game that you paid very little for considering how much time is invested. Don't get mad when they try to capitalize on the great deal you're getting.
i'm not sure where you're getting at, since starcraft is "more bang for the buck", its ok to pay more for extra features? might as well charge monthly fee to maintain their servers, right? you talk as if they had no idea they would continue to work on the game long after its release, and they forgot to include that extra cost with the final retail cost of the game.
sc2 isn't complete, game wise and battle.net wise. there's still flaws and more features to be introduced. while you might be happy with the current state, i see a lot more room to grow and i expect to see them in the upcoming future.
in the end (last expansion), getting a sc2 account will be close to $100(original + 2 expansions) unless some new rates are introduced (battlechest). but for those of us right now, we've spent 60 for original game and spend $20-$30(no idea how much they'll be, not free obviously) for each expansion.
|
On October 13 2011 08:42 mrRoflpwn wrote:
people - its a business
businesses exist to make money
simple as that
I could care less if they never did anything for the communityy- you know why? BECAUSE THEY MAKE FUCKIN AWESOME GAMES!!
as long as people buy and play the game it doesn't matter that they charge fees from tournaments.
Unless it's in the terms and conditions, or in some other written contract, could tournament organizers be sued for using some other person's game for the event? Is it fair use or something? Can they be sued? Anyone here know?
I hate intellectual property. It goes too far.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
