|
On October 12 2011 22:59 Loxley wrote:Show nested quote +On October 12 2011 22:51 Glockateer wrote:
It is kind of sad people defend blizzards 50% policy. For a game that doesn't even include LAN support or name changes and made in 3 parts... that isn't enough money for them? Hell, at least give LAN support for large tounaments you are taking 50% of the ad revenue from. It is sad seeing delays, "disconnect" screens/lag and player drops every tournament because they are forced to play through battle.net 0.5. Stop saying its 50%! You're defending something that is completely unfounded. Source! How can you enter a discussion attacking a company based on false numbers? Attack them on the rest of your points if you like.. its kinda of sad people attack blizzard on something thats false. But if thats gonna be the case, let me join in: Its so sad blizzard has made $4billion dollars profit on SC2 and used it all on buying plots of canadian oilfields instead of expanding their HoTs team..Ye this is fun.
Now THAT I'd like source on!
Edit: BB code fail
|
On October 12 2011 22:22 ThirdDegree wrote:Show nested quote +On October 12 2011 21:39 opisska wrote:
To everyone who promotes the point of view that it is fair for Blizzard to get revenue from tournaments played on their game, I would like to ask you to take a minute of your time and think about the follwoing analogy:
Would you consider it fair if car manufactureres got a part of the revenue from any racing event, because it is done using their products? I am quite confident that you wouldn't.
Seriously, this double measure has to stop. When something is electronic, it is suddenly never "yours". In order to play in the tournament, everyone had to buy the game. As much as every car racer had to buy a car to begin with. And that is the profit. That, and the sheer amount af advertisement that competition creates for the respective product. The fact that you buy sometihng and then you have to pay again in order to use it in a different way, is openly outrageous. If it was a physical product, everyone would think that it's absolutely crazy. But as long as it is something "virtual", suddenly everyone is so cool with that.... Why? This analogy isn't particularly relevant. If a car company took time to update my car with newer parts, keep it running, and fill it with gas, then I would have no problem with them taking a cut from racing profits. A car is a one time purchase and then it's out of the manufacturer's hands. Blizzard is spending time and money keeping server's running and updating the game. Eventually people will stop buying the game due to saturation, and will not make money off of it. When that time comes, they will stop supporting it, unless they have a business model that generates profits. A one time purchase of $120 (let's say 60 for the game and 60 for the following 2 expansions) is a small price to play for what we hope to be 10+ years of entertainment. We don't pay to play on bnet, which costs money to maintain. This is just a case of internet entitlement, we get used to everything being free and then complain when we realize it's not. We should also hear the pro's feelings on the subject, as they are really the ones affected.
This would be almost a relevant point. Except for the fact that the only reason why we need them to keep bnet online is that they won't let us play without it, even if it is perfectly technicaly possible". And a very big part of the reasons they need to publish patches is that the game was published in an unfinished state (I am not takling balance patches here, but the sheer amount of bug fixes and "intergace improvements" that are actually fixes for stuff that there was not enough time to make.)
Anyway, I think that many people are arguing in the wrong direction here. I am not blaming Blizzard of doing anything wrong, hell it's a company it's supposed to make as much money as possible. I am blaming the lawmakers, they are the ones that made this possible. I am actually try to use this particular issue to maybe motivate a couple of more people to think about whether the perception of "intellectual property" that is encoded into most of the western law systems, is the correct one - hoping that the fact that the it may be hurting something we all love, that is, ESPORTS!
PS:
On October 12 2011 21:44 Broodwurst wrote:
You do realize there's a difference between personal or corporate usage?
Just because you bought 1000 mp3s doesn't mean you can charge people for listening to them.
Yes, I do and I think that this is a also very much wrong.
EDIT: spelling
|
On October 12 2011 23:27 doomed wrote:
Gosh.. 5 pages and no one actually knows shit?! TL becomes no better than the Bnet forums sometimes.. why do people start threads like this with 0 information or source?! pointless!
Are you going to enlighten us?
|
On October 12 2011 23:41 ThirdDegree wrote:Show nested quote +On October 12 2011 23:27 doomed wrote:
Gosh.. 5 pages and no one actually knows shit?! TL becomes no better than the Bnet forums sometimes.. why do people start threads like this with 0 information or source?! pointless! Are you going to enlighten us?
Allow me:
There is no direct source from Blizz on this mystery 50% (that comes from TotalBiscuit and is unsubstantiated, though I don't distrust him).
There is a tournament form on battle.net:
http://eu.battle.net/sc2/en/community/esports/
So I would presume that there is some kind of general pro forma on percentages but for larger tourneys this would likely be some form of negotiation. But there is nothing in the public domain as to what this would be.
I'm unsurprised that tourny organisers have steered clear of this thread...
|
Threads like this always boil down to people arguing the validity of the EULA. LOTS of people feel that when they buy the game they are purchasing the right to use the intellectual property as they see fit (barring something extreme or harmful) but the reality is much more restrictive. Your 50-60 dollars buys you nothing more than the ability to play the game on Blizzard's terms, no matter how unreasonable. Changing this would require a MAJOR overhaul of intellectual property laws, an area very few if any of us have real expertise in.
So FOR NOW we should count our blessings that Blizzard is as "generous" as they are.
|
On October 12 2011 23:49 Deleuze wrote:Show nested quote +On October 12 2011 23:41 ThirdDegree wrote:On October 12 2011 23:27 doomed wrote:
Gosh.. 5 pages and no one actually knows shit?! TL becomes no better than the Bnet forums sometimes.. why do people start threads like this with 0 information or source?! pointless! Are you going to enlighten us? Allow me: There is no direct source from Blizz on this mystery 50% (that comes from TotalBiscuit and is unsubstantiated, though I don't distrust him).
And it can't be substantiated, ever, unless Blizzard comes out and admits it, because if you agree to it, you get put under an NDA about it. I have my source, but in order to substantiate it I would have to reveal that source and the fact that they violated their NDA by telling me. Of course I'm not going to do that. From what I can tell, any conversation with Blizzard on the subject gets NDAed before it even begins, so if you don't decide to play ball, you still can't talk about it.
No surprise it's NDAed, considering how unpopular a notion it is. If Blizzard wants that kind of money, they should probably do a little more to support their events. They could start by not black-listing entire venues internet connections and doing the sensible thing and implementing LAN. Then they might actually deserve that money.
|
On October 12 2011 20:23 NunedQ wrote:
yeah, if the prize pool is over 5k, Blizzard gets half (i think) of the ad revenue.
What? That's crazy!
|
If BLizzard does take half of ad revenue, is this why there is no LAN like BW?
|
Funny how other companies pay events to host their games or at least help with the prizepool but Blizzard on the other hand is taking everyone's money.
|
On October 13 2011 00:03 TotalBiscuit wrote:Show nested quote +On October 12 2011 23:49 Deleuze wrote:On October 12 2011 23:41 ThirdDegree wrote:On October 12 2011 23:27 doomed wrote:
Gosh.. 5 pages and no one actually knows shit?! TL becomes no better than the Bnet forums sometimes.. why do people start threads like this with 0 information or source?! pointless! Are you going to enlighten us? Allow me: There is no direct source from Blizz on this mystery 50% (that comes from TotalBiscuit and is unsubstantiated, though I don't distrust him). And it can't be substantiated, ever, unless Blizzard comes out and admits it, because if you agree to it, you get put under an NDA about it. I have my source, but in order to substantiate it I would have to reveal that source and the fact that they violated their NDA by telling me. Of course I'm not going to do that. From what I can tell, any conversation with Blizzard on the subject gets NDAed before it even begins, so if you don't decide to play ball, you still can't talk about it. No surprise it's NDAed, considering how unpopular a notion it is. If Blizzard wants that kind of money, they should probably do a little more to support their events. They could start by not black-listing entire venues internet connections and doing the sensible thing and implementing LAN. Then they might actually deserve that money.
Easy to say, but here's the thing.
LAN: Costs $ to implement, no one is going to buy the game to play LAN (in fact, if it becomes pirated, could hurt sales)
Look, I understand you have different motives from Blizzard. You seem like a nice guy (although Idra disagrees lol) with good motives on how to promote E-sports.
That's not Blizzard's job. Blizzard, as a corporation, needs to make as much $ as it can. And in that context these are pretty good business decisions.
|
Blizzard should make a special version of SCII only for tournament play that makes the tournament valid.
Imagine MLG buying the LAN package from Blizzard. It costs 3000$. In game interface is slightly different to show the tournament validation. No extra fee needed to be payed from the organizers.. Clients expires in 15 days.
If a client like that gets pirated the in game interface will show from witch event it was pirated and they can sue the organizers.
|
On October 13 2011 00:03 TotalBiscuit wrote:
If Blizzard wants that kind of money, they should probably do a little more to support their events. They could start by not black-listing entire venues internet connections and doing the sensible thing and implementing LAN. Then they might actually deserve that money.
They have created the entire platform upon which this whole things rests, they sell it with no monthly fee and support the game on a regular basis. They've cornered the market. I don't see how they don't deserve the money, Blizzard as an entity as put as least the same amount of work and resources into the business of SC2 as an eSport as all players, casters and organizers combined.
|
On October 13 2011 00:41 Zorkmid wrote:Show nested quote +On October 13 2011 00:03 TotalBiscuit wrote:
If Blizzard wants that kind of money, they should probably do a little more to support their events. They could start by not black-listing entire venues internet connections and doing the sensible thing and implementing LAN. Then they might actually deserve that money.
They have created the entire platform upon which this whole things rests, they sell it with no monthly fee and support the game on a regular basis. They've cornered the market. I don't see how they don't deserve the money, Blizzard as an entity as put as least the same amount of work and resources into the business of SC2 as an eSport as all players, casters and organizers combined.
Well said.
|
I disagree, they made a game, we as a community made an Esport.
|
On October 12 2011 22:26 aebriol wrote:Show nested quote +On October 12 2011 20:54 ddrddrddrddr wrote:On October 12 2011 20:50 Verator wrote:
Blizzard spent close to a decade and thousands of man-hours building the game, and other people are using it for profit. You don't bitch and moan that the NFL takes a cut of the profits in exchange for getting stadiums and dozens of TV deals and advertisements. You are getting permission to use their copywrited product for money, its the same as if you build a racing car off of the blueprints for a Ford car and then created a whole racing circuit from that car, of course Ford is going to make you represent them. I'll agree with you when esports gamers make as much as professional sports players. What is defined as sport then? Because some professional sport athletes aren't paid a lot ... Lacrosse, Bandy, volleyball, badminton, womens soccer ... I am sure a lot more comes to mind.
Right, and what corporations are leeching off their tournaments? Is there some company that automatically takes 50% (shut up about it being unsubstantiated, give me a better number) out of the revenues for doing nothing.
|
On October 13 2011 00:03 TotalBiscuit wrote:Show nested quote +On October 12 2011 23:49 Deleuze wrote:On October 12 2011 23:41 ThirdDegree wrote:On October 12 2011 23:27 doomed wrote:
Gosh.. 5 pages and no one actually knows shit?! TL becomes no better than the Bnet forums sometimes.. why do people start threads like this with 0 information or source?! pointless! Are you going to enlighten us? Allow me: There is no direct source from Blizz on this mystery 50% (that comes from TotalBiscuit and is unsubstantiated, though I don't distrust him). No surprise it's NDAed, considering how unpopular a notion it is. If Blizzard wants that kind of money, they should probably do a little more to support their events. They could start by not black-listing entire venues internet connections and doing the sensible thing and implementing LAN. Then they might actually deserve that money.
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?
|
I don't have the facts to back this up but blizzard tournaments are planned and orchestrated to distract from the failed policies of the obama administration.
|
On October 12 2011 23:35 Boonbag wrote:Show nested quote +On October 12 2011 23:34 ineq wrote:On October 12 2011 23:32 Boonbag wrote:
this is outrageous i didn't know about that
how much money do they expect to make ?
aren't wow subscriptions already paying for their grand grand children's eductation and housing ? Point? :O If you made $10M, you wouldnt want to make that in to $20M? its no easy job securing sponsors / adds / setting up a tournament why on earth would you give money to blizzard for a work they don't do ?
WHAT?? They did the work. They freakin' made Starcraft 2. It's a product like anything else.
For example; You pay your internet provider to use their product, MLG and Dreamhack pay Blizzard to use their product. It's simple really.
Radio/TV-stations pay Record companies every time they use their product in public media. Tournament organizers pay Blizzard every time they use their product in public media.
Makes sense to me atleast.
|
On October 12 2011 23:41 opisska wrote:Show nested quote +On October 12 2011 22:22 ThirdDegree wrote:On October 12 2011 21:39 opisska wrote:
To everyone who promotes the point of view that it is fair for Blizzard to get revenue from tournaments played on their game, I would like to ask you to take a minute of your time and think about the follwoing analogy:
Would you consider it fair if car manufactureres got a part of the revenue from any racing event, because it is done using their products? I am quite confident that you wouldn't.
Seriously, this double measure has to stop. When something is electronic, it is suddenly never "yours". In order to play in the tournament, everyone had to buy the game. As much as every car racer had to buy a car to begin with. And that is the profit. That, and the sheer amount af advertisement that competition creates for the respective product. The fact that you buy sometihng and then you have to pay again in order to use it in a different way, is openly outrageous. If it was a physical product, everyone would think that it's absolutely crazy. But as long as it is something "virtual", suddenly everyone is so cool with that.... Why? This analogy isn't particularly relevant. If a car company took time to update my car with newer parts, keep it running, and fill it with gas, then I would have no problem with them taking a cut from racing profits. A car is a one time purchase and then it's out of the manufacturer's hands. Blizzard is spending time and money keeping server's running and updating the game. Eventually people will stop buying the game due to saturation, and will not make money off of it. When that time comes, they will stop supporting it, unless they have a business model that generates profits. A one time purchase of $120 (let's say 60 for the game and 60 for the following 2 expansions) is a small price to play for what we hope to be 10+ years of entertainment. We don't pay to play on bnet, which costs money to maintain. This is just a case of internet entitlement, we get used to everything being free and then complain when we realize it's not. We should also hear the pro's feelings on the subject, as they are really the ones affected. This would be almost a relevant point. Except for the fact that the only reason why we need them to keep bnet online is that they won't let us play without it, even if it is perfectly technicaly possible". And a very big part of the reasons they need to publish patches is that the game was published in an unfinished state (I am not takling balance patches here, but the sheer amount of bug fixes and "intergace improvements" that are actually fixes for stuff that there was not enough time to make.) Anyway, I think that many people are arguing in the wrong direction here. I am not blaming Blizzard of doing anything wrong, hell it's a company it's supposed to make as much money as possible. I am blaming the lawmakers, they are the ones that made this possible. I am actually try to use this particular issue to maybe motivate a couple of more people to think about whether the perception of "intellectual property" that is encoded into most of the western law systems, is the correct one - hoping that the fact that the it may be hurting something we all love, that is, ESPORTS! PS: Show nested quote +On October 12 2011 21:44 Broodwurst wrote:
You do realize there's a difference between personal or corporate usage?
Just because you bought 1000 mp3s doesn't mean you can charge people for listening to them. Yes, I do and I think that this is a also very much wrong. EDIT: spelling
Only countries with western style law systems for intellectual property actually have viable video game industries. There's a reason for that.
|
On October 13 2011 01:06 andrewlt wrote:Show nested quote +On October 12 2011 23:41 opisska wrote:On October 12 2011 22:22 ThirdDegree wrote:On October 12 2011 21:39 opisska wrote:
To everyone who promotes the point of view that it is fair for Blizzard to get revenue from tournaments played on their game, I would like to ask you to take a minute of your time and think about the follwoing analogy:
Would you consider it fair if car manufactureres got a part of the revenue from any racing event, because it is done using their products? I am quite confident that you wouldn't.
Seriously, this double measure has to stop. When something is electronic, it is suddenly never "yours". In order to play in the tournament, everyone had to buy the game. As much as every car racer had to buy a car to begin with. And that is the profit. That, and the sheer amount af advertisement that competition creates for the respective product. The fact that you buy sometihng and then you have to pay again in order to use it in a different way, is openly outrageous. If it was a physical product, everyone would think that it's absolutely crazy. But as long as it is something "virtual", suddenly everyone is so cool with that.... Why? This analogy isn't particularly relevant. If a car company took time to update my car with newer parts, keep it running, and fill it with gas, then I would have no problem with them taking a cut from racing profits. A car is a one time purchase and then it's out of the manufacturer's hands. Blizzard is spending time and money keeping server's running and updating the game. Eventually people will stop buying the game due to saturation, and will not make money off of it. When that time comes, they will stop supporting it, unless they have a business model that generates profits. A one time purchase of $120 (let's say 60 for the game and 60 for the following 2 expansions) is a small price to play for what we hope to be 10+ years of entertainment. We don't pay to play on bnet, which costs money to maintain. This is just a case of internet entitlement, we get used to everything being free and then complain when we realize it's not. We should also hear the pro's feelings on the subject, as they are really the ones affected. This would be almost a relevant point. Except for the fact that the only reason why we need them to keep bnet online is that they won't let us play without it, even if it is perfectly technicaly possible". And a very big part of the reasons they need to publish patches is that the game was published in an unfinished state (I am not takling balance patches here, but the sheer amount of bug fixes and "intergace improvements" that are actually fixes for stuff that there was not enough time to make.) Anyway, I think that many people are arguing in the wrong direction here. I am not blaming Blizzard of doing anything wrong, hell it's a company it's supposed to make as much money as possible. I am blaming the lawmakers, they are the ones that made this possible. I am actually try to use this particular issue to maybe motivate a couple of more people to think about whether the perception of "intellectual property" that is encoded into most of the western law systems, is the correct one - hoping that the fact that the it may be hurting something we all love, that is, ESPORTS! PS: On October 12 2011 21:44 Broodwurst wrote:
You do realize there's a difference between personal or corporate usage?
Just because you bought 1000 mp3s doesn't mean you can charge people for listening to them. Yes, I do and I think that this is a also very much wrong. EDIT: spelling Only countries with western style law systems for intellectual property actually have viable video game industries. There's a reason for that.
lol, so the reason Zaire doesn't have a thriving videogame industry is because of intellectual property laws?  Intellectual property laws will be developed as the need arises. It wasn't like the makers of Pong were like, "Finally, we have some good legal protection for our game! Let's release this sucker!"
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
