|
On October 13 2011 01:08 Le BucheRON wrote:Show nested quote +On October 13 2011 01:06 andrewlt wrote: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!"
Actually, they were. Without those laws, they'd be working in some other industry. Most of the early pioneers in the videogame industry were people who quit their day jobs to make games, something they wouldn't do if the law didn't make it a viable profession.
|
50% cant be right, sounds absolutely madness. Nothing can approve that share. Normal game companies create a game, sell it, patch a couple of years for free and then releases a new game. These tournaments are free advertisement for blizzards game and that alone should be WAY enough for blizz.
|
Blizzard needs new monthly revenue since WoW is starting to decline, I think its one little way for them to compensate for it.
Still I think its fair that they do it, since they created the game...
|
On October 13 2011 00:21 ceaRshaf wrote:
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.
This seems like a smart idea, and a possibility in the future.
|
Personally I have payed, in total, more money for tournament tickets than on the actual game.Since all the money earned by those tournaments are based on a 3rd party product it's sounds perfectly all right that they pay some fees to Blizzard.
Simpler put, every money made with something blizzard related has to be shared with them with no excuses. Don't know why we are even discussing this.
|
On October 13 2011 01:39 Deleuze wrote:Show nested quote +On October 13 2011 00:21 ceaRshaf wrote:
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. This seems like a smart idea, and a possibility in the future.
didnt blizzard provide a LAN server for WoW when MLG ran WoW tournaments?
|
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?
Yeah I agree with this statement 100%. Why is it that if something is in virtual reality, that doesn't eve have real value all of a sudden its okay to butcher us and steal our money for something that should be free.
I mean I'm really sick and tired of all the people defending this daylight robing these gaming companies are doing and everyone justifying it.
Ten years ago then made 5x more entertaining games with 5x less people and gave all the content for $40, but now somehow they've convinced people that earning hundreds of millions per game is too little and that gamers are bad and piracy is destroying the market, when the market has been growing each year by 10%-15% percent for that past 20 years. Its all lies.
Blizzard made 180 million on Starcraft 2 in profits, that is a lot of money, 10 years ago that would have ensured support of the game for 10 years, free servers until there were people playing and LAN support and not forcing tournaments to pay.
How did it become that 180 million in profits is now insignificant any why is the definition of a successful game now one that makes 1 billion in profit and not a game the blows your mind by how amazing it is.
Seriously Blizzard should not be sympathized to, they make huge money for their games and giving them 50% of the ad revenue from tournaments who barely exist and are very unstable overall isn't right, nor should be lawful, its basically extortion.
|
I hope the claims are true that blizz is taking a cut off ad revenue. Guys, blizzard designed sc2 with esports in mind. NEWS FLASH: This is not the way to make money off game sales. They did this because they want to make money off esports. If they aren't able to do that, there will be no sc3 (at least not designed for esports).
So, if you like esports, support blizzard making money off it for God's sake.
|
Personally, I find all of this completely hilarious. Not only does Blizzard do jack shit to promote competitive SC2, screws with competitive balance for the sake of team games, releases B.Net0.2 missing half the features which the original Battle.net had 10 years ago, some of which are crucial for the development of the scene (shared replay viewing for instance), and they still have the gall to demand money from tournament organisers, who provide them with free and effective advertisement.
At times like these I kind of wish there was no BW, SC2 was released under a different name, and faded into obscurity like any other RTS, just like it should've based on its own merits.
|
On October 13 2011 01:08 Le BucheRON wrote:Show nested quote +On October 13 2011 01:06 andrewlt wrote: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!"
There is no country currently with the name Zaire.
|
[mistake posted wrong thread]
|
On October 13 2011 01:51 TheBomb 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? Yeah I agree with this statement 100%. Why is it that if something is in virtual reality, that doesn't eve have real value all of a sudden its okay to butcher us and steal our money for something that should be free. I mean I'm really sick and tired of all the people defending this daylight robing these gaming companies are doing and everyone justifying it. Ten years ago then made 5x more entertaining games with 5x less people and gave all the content for $40, but now somehow they've convinced people that earning hundreds of millions per game is too little and that gamers are bad and piracy is destroying the market, when the market has been growing each year by 10%-15% percent for that past 20 years. Its all lies. Blizzard made 180 million on Starcraft 2 in profits, that is a lot of money, 10 years ago that would have ensured support of the game for 10 years, free servers until there were people playing and LAN support and not forcing tournaments to pay. How did it become that 180 million in profits is now insignificant any why is the definition of a successful game now one that makes 1 billion in profit and not a game the blows your mind by how amazing it is. Seriously Blizzard should not be sympathized to, they make huge money for their games and giving them 50% of the ad revenue from tournaments who barely exist and are very unstable overall isn't right, nor should be lawful, its basically extortion.
I think you are confused as to what extortion is.
Blizzard also supports the tournments by provided them with free licenses for their game, adds on battle.net and their website.
Also, Blizzard actively patchs the game and provides post sale support. If you think this is standard and should not be included, you need to listen to some interviews after the game developers conference(GDC). They constantly talk about the difficulty of supporting a game after release and justifying to their investors. The amount of post release support that Blizzard provides is only matched by Valve(who also happens to install as store on your computer when you play their games).
It is better that Blizzard makes money off of these tournments. It justifies the money spent of patching, support and upkeep of the whole system that SC2 needs. If Blizzard doesn't make money, the first question their investors will ask is: Why? And the second question they will ask is: Can we make money or how do we stop it?
Also, Blizzard did not make the car parts. They made the car and the track the cars race on. They also provided the seats for people to watch the race. MLG and the other tournments are the TV networks showing the race.
|
On October 13 2011 01:51 TheBomb 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? Yeah I agree with this statement 100%. Why is it that if something is in virtual reality, that doesn't eve have real value all of a sudden its okay to butcher us and steal our money for something that should be free. I mean I'm really sick and tired of all the people defending this daylight robing these gaming companies are doing and everyone justifying it. Ten years ago then made 5x more entertaining games with 5x less people and gave all the content for $40, but now somehow they've convinced people that earning hundreds of millions per game is too little and that gamers are bad and piracy is destroying the market, when the market has been growing each year by 10%-15% percent for that past 20 years. Its all lies. Blizzard made 180 million on Starcraft 2 in profits, that is a lot of money, 10 years ago that would have ensured support of the game for 10 years, free servers until there were people playing and LAN support and not forcing tournaments to pay. How did it become that 180 million in profits is now insignificant any why is the definition of a successful game now one that makes 1 billion in profit and not a game the blows your mind by how amazing it is. Seriously Blizzard should not be sympathized to, they make huge money for their games and giving them 50% of the ad revenue from tournaments who barely exist and are very unstable overall isn't right, nor should be lawful, its basically extortion.
180 million dollars means nothing to a big company. NOTHING! Remember blockbuster movies cost over 300 millions. So nobody cares that you think it's big bucks. And check this article from 2010,exactly before the release.
http://www.escapistmagazine.com/news/view/102140-Blizzard-Dropped-Over-100-Million-On-StarCraft-II
You say they made 180 millions (source plz?). Well they payed maybe half to make it (no official source) . And guess what, they expected to make 500 millions per expansion. UPS!
And about the virtual thing, last time I checked I could not multiplicate my car to an infinite number of copies.
By the way some people talk around here I am 100% that they did not earn one buck.
|
On October 13 2011 02:07 ceaRshaf wrote:Show nested quote +On October 13 2011 01:51 TheBomb 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? Yeah I agree with this statement 100%. Why is it that if something is in virtual reality, that doesn't eve have real value all of a sudden its okay to butcher us and steal our money for something that should be free. I mean I'm really sick and tired of all the people defending this daylight robing these gaming companies are doing and everyone justifying it. Ten years ago then made 5x more entertaining games with 5x less people and gave all the content for $40, but now somehow they've convinced people that earning hundreds of millions per game is too little and that gamers are bad and piracy is destroying the market, when the market has been growing each year by 10%-15% percent for that past 20 years. Its all lies. Blizzard made 180 million on Starcraft 2 in profits, that is a lot of money, 10 years ago that would have ensured support of the game for 10 years, free servers until there were people playing and LAN support and not forcing tournaments to pay. How did it become that 180 million in profits is now insignificant any why is the definition of a successful game now one that makes 1 billion in profit and not a game the blows your mind by how amazing it is. Seriously Blizzard should not be sympathized to, they make huge money for their games and giving them 50% of the ad revenue from tournaments who barely exist and are very unstable overall isn't right, nor should be lawful, its basically extortion. 180 million dollars means nothing to a big company. NOTHING! Remember blockbuster movies cost over 300 millions. So nobody cares that you think it's big bucks. And check this article from 2010,exactly before the release. http://www.escapistmagazine.com/news/view/102140-Blizzard-Dropped-Over-100-Million-On-StarCraft-IIYou say they made 180 millions (source plz?). Well they payed maybe half to make it (no official source) . And guess what, they expected to make 500 millions per expansion. UPS! And about the virtual thing, last time I checked I could not multiplicate my car to an infinite number of copies. By the way some people talk around here I am 100% that they did not earn one buck.
I'm talking about 180 million in profits, so it doesn't matter if they wasted 1 billion to make SC2, if they made 180 million in profits, that means it generated 1.18 billion revenue and that is big.
|
If you are going to link to an article - please read the whole thing.
Quoted from the Escapist Magazine article:
[UPDATE]The Wall Street Journal admitted it made an error with the $100 million figure. It turns out that amount was spent on World of Warcraft, not StarCraft II. Blizzard hasn't released its budget for StarCraft II, but it probably cost somewhere between $1 million and $1 billion.
|
On October 13 2011 02:15 MasterKush wrote:
If you are going to link to an article - please read the whole thing.
Quoted from the Escapist Magazine article:
[UPDATE]The Wall Street Journal admitted it made an error with the $100 million figure. It turns out that amount was spent on World of Warcraft, not StarCraft II. Blizzard hasn't released its budget for StarCraft II, but it probably cost somewhere between $1 million and $1 billion.
And what this guy said. Better read up on your articles buddy. Fact is it was WOW $100 million production cost and judging by that I'd say SC2 probably cost them about half of that.
And also my numbers are from Activision-Blizzard talk to shareholders about 6 months after the game was released, so it could actually be bigger right now.
|
On October 13 2011 01:49 Sanchonator wrote:Show nested quote +On October 13 2011 01:39 Deleuze wrote:On October 13 2011 00:21 ceaRshaf wrote:
Blizzard should make a special version of SCII only for tournament play that makes the tournament valid.
Imagine MLG buying the LAN package from Blizzard. It costs 3000$. 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. This seems like a smart idea, and a possibility in the future. didnt blizzard provide a LAN server for WoW when MLG ran WoW tournaments?
Yes blizzard made private clients for tournament usage.
|
On October 13 2011 02:15 MasterKush wrote:
If you are going to link to an article - please read the whole thing.
Quoted from the Escapist Magazine article:
[UPDATE]The Wall Street Journal admitted it made an error with the $100 million figure. It turns out that amount was spent on World of Warcraft, not StarCraft II. Blizzard hasn't released its budget for StarCraft II, but it probably cost somewhere between $1 million and $1 billion.
Read my post.
You say they made 180 millions (source plz?). Well they payed maybe half to make it (no official source)
I'm talking about 180 million in profits, so it doesn't matter if they wasted 1 billion to make SC2, if they made 180 million in profits, that means it generated 1.18 billion revenue and that is big.
Again, source please.
It's profit versus expectations. 18% profit is low. With that profit you can't grow (let's say launch 2 games now) you just maintain the current situation.
|
If they provide the tournament with a big support (advertisement in the Battle Net) and those things have a hughe impact on the viewer count they should totally get a part of the cake.
But only providing a computergame, even with support and balance, isnt enough to get 50%.
They already splittet the game in Parts wich probably doubles the provit.
On the other hand what this system does is that all the tournaments are either pretty smal or very hughe. And i think this is a good thing.
If you pass that 5k thing you wanna make a hughe step forward so somehow it forces them to get as awsome as MLG or IPL3...
|
On October 13 2011 02:03 Numy wrote:Show nested quote +On October 13 2011 01:08 Le BucheRON wrote:On October 13 2011 01:06 andrewlt wrote: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!" There is no country currently with the name Zaire.
Don't be a douche just because he used the previous name of a country...
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
