EPTHow much of a cut does blizzard get from tourny? - Page 8
| Forum Index > SC2 General |
|
ThirdDegree
United States329 Posts
| ||
|
Plansix
United States60190 Posts
On October 13 2011 02:13 TheBomb wrote: 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. This is not correct. If they spent 1 billion and only made back 180 million, that would be an bad investment. Why? Because you have to compare to other games with similar budgets and the amount they earn. If the money could have been better invested, the game did not provide the return that was expected. | ||
|
jinorazi
Korea (South)4948 Posts
lets move on. i've come to realize blizzard cares more about making money than giving something back to the community. | ||
GMarshal
United States22154 Posts
On October 13 2011 02:51 jinorazi wrote: i've come to realize blizzard cares more about making money than giving something back to the community. A company that wants to make money? For its shareholders? Unheard of! :-P | ||
|
gentile
Switzerland594 Posts
| ||
|
TheGlassface
United States612 Posts
On October 13 2011 02:53 GMarshal wrote: A company that wants to make money? For its shareholders? Unheard of! :-P Hey, who never gets tired of snarky ass comments like this every single time this topic gets made? I sure don't! The point isn't the money. The point is what was done before with less. The point is less is done now, with more. | ||
|
jinorazi
Korea (South)4948 Posts
On October 13 2011 02:53 GMarshal wrote: A company that wants to make money? For its shareholders? Unheard of! :-P yup, gotta make em happy so lets charge our customers more for less! just sayin, they could have taken it down a notch (LAN or cross-region play, free name change or multiple names) but nahh, why give away something for free when they can be charged! | ||
|
Plansix
United States60190 Posts
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. | ||
|
leo23
United States3075 Posts
On October 12 2011 23:38 Boonbag wrote: you guys are really... depressive to say the least i'm pretty sure you all own iphones and such and buy music on itunes jesus what a generation of fucking lamahs you really depress me with your generalizations | ||
|
jinorazi
Korea (South)4948 Posts
On October 13 2011 02:58 Plansix wrote: 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. | ||
|
NotSorry
United States6722 Posts
| ||
|
ceaRshaf
Romania4926 Posts
On October 13 2011 03:20 NotSorry wrote: Here's a question, does anyone think that if SC2 was released as is by a different name under a different company it would have sold even 1/3 what it did or would anyone still be playing it a year after release aside from a tiny cult community like those that still play terrible C&C games? This is about human psychology. There was a TED talk that handled this kind of topic. What the guy basically said was that people don't buy a product based on what it does, but based on the company history and political views. Only if I could find the link. It was extremely interesting. | ||
|
Zerksys
United States569 Posts
On October 12 2011 21:34 Deleuze wrote: Ok, this is effectively a 'Blizzard killing e-sports' thread. Blizz created SC2 in order to make money - they have two options: 1) make money from SC2 as an e-sport (by taking tourney ad revenue) or 2) make money by catering to a purely casual market and REALLy killing e-sports.* Yes, people (myself included) generally have reservations about their passion being owned but a corporate entity, but I see no evidence that this is having a negative effect on SC2 as an e-sport or otherwise. Throwing terms like 'souless' around does nothing but undermine your argument. Whether SC2 is owned by a corporate entity that behaves as such by turning profit from its venture or not is irrelevant. What the point remains is how that venture remains sustainable, whether it can continue to develop: Blizz making money from it is key to SC2. Indeed, for SC2 to be a financially sustainable venture e-sports must continue. Therefore it is within the interests of Blizz to do all that is possible to ensure that SC2 e-sports continue to grow. And anyway, the money that Blizz makes from SC2 is either pumped back into SC2 development, pumped into future ventures, or as a returns share holders investments. Two out of these I am fine with, the other I'm currently indifferent to. And those serves cost a bundle too. *And, yes Blizz will be catering to this market anyway with the forthcoming custom map market place thing, but the e-sports core on the game will be a separate entity. For those who still support blizzard's management of sc2 as an esport, I'd like to say this. If you really think about it, do you really believe that blizzard has the best interests of sc2 as an esport in mind? In my opinion blizzard sees esports as just another way to generate some cash flow off their game. They don't really give a shit if it survives or not. If you look at what they've done since the release, you'll see that they've openly said that they've designed the game for esports, but in reality this is not the case at all. No lan support, no chat channels, patches major patches every 2 months, forcing tournament organizers to pay outrageous fees, not running a tournament themselves (which I would love to see), not putting money into esports, etc.... Blizzard is not a company that wants to support esports. They don't see the intrinsic value in it at all. Compare blizzard to a company like riot and you'll see. True riot has terrible servers and alltogether made a worse game than blizzard, but look at what they've done with it. It's an esport in its own right because riot has supported it with their own money. On top of that playing the game is free and revenue is generated completely by players who want to support them because they are a great company. Don't get me wrong I love the starcraft franchise and it will always be my favorite, but the way that riot runs their business is reminiscent of the old days of blizzard (if they existed in the same form today). In summary, yes blizzard needs to make money, but do they need to take so much money from its most loyal supporters? | ||
|
youngminii
Australia7514 Posts
Also I'm pretty sure there were people saying that the 50% ad revenue past 5k is just incorrect. I think it was one of the MLG guys? Not sure. | ||
|
Plansix
United States60190 Posts
On October 13 2011 03:12 jinorazi wrote: 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. | ||
|
IMSmooth
United States679 Posts
On October 12 2011 23:38 Boonbag wrote: you guys are really... depressive to say the least i'm pretty sure you all own iphones and such and buy music on itunes jesus what a generation of fucking lamahs God damn kids and their skateboards!!! Playin that rap music and loitering too!!! Blizzard has the right to do this. They control the servers and probably have something to secure this right in Terms of Agreement. It's depressing to buy music on iTunes? What kind of entitled asshole are you? | ||
|
Whias_k
36 Posts
So to be fair it should go like this 50% Blizzard they did make the game after all 50% The creators of the Internet 50% The creators of the PC Blizzard you greedy bastards  | ||
|
jinorazi
Korea (South)4948 Posts
On October 13 2011 03:44 Plansix wrote: 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) to keep it on topic, i have no problem with blizzard's involvement, or lack of involvement with esport and tournaments. however, i say this because i have no information to base my view on. all that i can is hopefully blizzard does it in reasonable terms. for example taking 10% ad-revenue from MLG is no biggie but if they were to take 90% would be. there's a fine line, a balance between giving back to community and trying to increase revenue. with the release of sc2, it seems tilted towards making more money part. | ||
|
Sea_Food
Finland1612 Posts
Look in the mirror and you see the face of a stupid, and stop complaining. | ||
|
Playguuu
United States926 Posts
| ||
| ||
