How much of a cut does blizzard get from tourny?

On October 12 2011 20:24 mnck wrote:
Some facts and some sources would be nice. Otherwise this discussion seems pretty pointless!

On October 12 2011 20:25 pPingu wrote:


TB limits his tournaments prizepool to 5000 to don't have to pay a part of the tournament money to blizzard.

On October 12 2011 20:27 yannick wrote:


yeah i think this is why MLG 1st place also gets 5000$

On October 12 2011 20:38 aebriol wrote:
Well, as long as 'ad revenue' doesn't include 'partnership revenue' it seems fair. If it includes all income, it sounds high. Wonder what's included.

On October 12 2011 20:41 Broodwurst wrote:
These tournaments make money with Blizzards game, of course they want a piece of that in return.
If your whole business is based on someone elses work i don't really see how you can expect anything else. Big tournaments are not just your local event that tries to cut even, they (aim to) make a profit.

On October 12 2011 20:41 roymarthyup wrote:
sigh thinking more and more about this makes me so sad at how blizzard is turning into this gigantic soulless corporation. i know not everything is soulless, but this one concept is just insane how they take the money that comes from other peoples hard work of creating and running a tournament

im high masters practicing alot cuz i wanna compete in tournamants for fun but i dunno how i feel about supporting such a concept... i just dont feel its fair for blizzard to take cuts from tournaments that they didnt create and build

i hope some company comes around and designs a super good esports game and doesnt charge money for tournaments to use it

or heck, blizzard with its billions of dollars should simply buy-out MLG and gomtv and every other tournament and simply run it themselves, and by that i mean blizzard would also be buying out all the employees of those other companies and having them run it for them.

I could actually support such a concept. If blizzard is running its own tournament, then sure, it gets all the money from it. I find that fair. And if blizzard buys out all the tournaments then it would make sense for them to get all the revenue from it. I see no problem with that.

But what blizzard is doing is taking cuts of tournament profits without buying out those tournaments... They are getting a cut of other peoples hard work... Sigh this concept i dont know if i can bring myself to support it

On July 24 2011 23:25 TotalBiscuit wrote:
This is what I know. Yes, you can go over $5k with special dispensation from Blizzard. However, it is policy for them to then require 50% of your ad revenue. I know of several large tournaments that have had to do this. If SHOUTcraft Invitational were to do this, it would mean less money getting into the hands of players, which is completely against what the tournament is all about. It makes no sense for SCI to do this, rather than just run more than one event.

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.

On October 12 2011 20:52 Tonem wrote:
This is the best source I could find..

http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/viewmessage.php?topic_id=247210

On October 12 2011 20:54 ddrddrddrddr wrote:

I'll agree with you when esports gamers make as much as professional sports players.

On October 12 2011 20:54 ddrddrddrddr wrote:

I'll agree with you when esports gamers make as much as professional sports players.

On October 12 2011 21:04 Paragleiber wrote:
So even if Blizzard was to ask for 50% ad revenue, how do they even know how much ad revenue was created by a tournament? The tournament organizers could just give them a much lower number and then send them much less. I don't really see any reasonable way how Blizzard could control that efficiently.

On October 12 2011 20:41 roymarthyup wrote:
sigh thinking more and more about this makes me so sad at how blizzard is turning into this gigantic soulless corporation. i know not everything is soulless, but this one concept is just insane how they take the money that comes from other peoples hard work of creating and running a tournament

im high masters practicing alot cuz i wanna compete in tournamants for fun but i dunno how i feel about supporting such a concept... i just dont feel its fair for blizzard to take cuts from tournaments that they didnt create and build

i hope some company comes around and designs a super good esports game and doesnt charge money for tournaments to use it

or heck, blizzard with its billions of dollars should simply buy-out MLG and gomtv and every other tournament and simply run it themselves, and by that i mean blizzard would also be buying out all the employees of those other companies and having them run it for them.

I could actually support such a concept. If blizzard is running its own tournament, then sure, it gets all the money from it. I find that fair. And if blizzard buys out all the tournaments then it would make sense for them to get all the revenue from it. I see no problem with that.

But what blizzard is doing is taking cuts of tournament profits without buying out those tournaments... They are getting a cut of other peoples hard work... Sigh this concept i dont know if i can bring myself to support it

On October 12 2011 21:29 TheBomb wrote:
Blizzard are not promoting e-sports, they are actually hindering e-sports by taking 50% of the ad money from tournaments.

And BTW, if you purchase the game you can do whatever you want with it. You can set up tournaments and stuff and not have to pay blizzard, the only way Blizzard has to force tournament organizers to pay for this, is because there isn't LAN network. Otherwise pretty much the court would rule in favor of tournament organizers as they are providing the organization for people who've purchased the game to compete with each other and don't in any way rip off the blizzard product.

So right now Blizzard is forcing tournament organizers to pay them, because they have no other choice and because the community is too big and energetic and organized for there not to exist e-sports around starcraft 2

On October 12 2011 20:52 Tonem wrote:
This is the best source I could find..

http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/viewmessage.php?topic_id=247210

On July 25 2011 05:26 Kennigit wrote:
This isn't entirely accurate, and as far as i'm aware most tournament organizers are under NDA once they go over 5K so you won't get a proper explanation....its not as money grubbing as the OP makes it out to be. Closing, unless TB actually isn't under NDA (you can PM me).

On October 12 2011 20:41 roymarthyup wrote:
sigh thinking more and more about this makes me so sad at how blizzard is turning into this gigantic soulless corporation. i know not everything is soulless, but this one concept is just insane how they take the money that comes from other peoples hard work of creating and running a tournament

im high masters practicing alot cuz i wanna compete in tournamants for fun but i dunno how i feel about supporting such a concept... i just dont feel its fair for blizzard to take cuts from tournaments that they didnt create and build

i hope some company comes around and designs a super good esports game and doesnt charge money for tournaments to use it

or heck, blizzard with its billions of dollars should simply buy-out MLG and gomtv and every other tournament and simply run it themselves, and by that i mean blizzard would also be buying out all the employees of those other companies and having them run it for them.

I could actually support such a concept. If blizzard is running its own tournament, then sure, it gets all the money from it. I find that fair. And if blizzard buys out all the tournaments then it would make sense for them to get all the revenue from it. I see no problem with that.

But what blizzard is doing is taking cuts of tournament profits without buying out those tournaments... They are getting a cut of other peoples hard work... Sigh this concept i dont know if i can bring myself to support it

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.

On October 12 2011 20:48 ddrddrddrddr wrote:

They saw the return when we bought the bloody game.

On October 12 2011 20:11 roymarthyup wrote:
what would be stopping a competitor from maybe making a better or equal game and then letting any tournament use that game free of charge

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?

On October 12 2011 21:45 RoboBob wrote:
50% of ad revenue is insanely high. I believe that Blizzard deserves a cut, just like the licensing fee from Kespa/GomTV. However it should be a token amount, to ensure quality. Blizzard benefits from tournaments even if they don't receive any monetary revenue; every single tournament is free advertising for them. If it wasn't for the tournament scene, I would've never picked up SC2. I started as a spectator and eventually become a player.

The NFL doesn't pay 50% of its ad revenue to Wilson just because the NFL broadcasts games of people using their product. SC2 is a bit different because the entire game is produced by the manufacture, so they probably do deserve a cut, but certainly not that much. Something like 5% of ad revenue or 10% of the prize pool (whichever is larger) would be much more appropriate.

On July 25 2011 05:26 Kennigit wrote:
This isn't entirely accurate, and as far as i'm aware most tournament organizers are under NDA once they go over 5K so you won't get a proper explanation....its not as money grubbing as the OP makes it out to be. Closing, unless TB actually isn't under NDA (you can PM me).

On October 12 2011 20:41 roymarthyup wrote:
sigh thinking more and more about this makes me so sad at how blizzard is turning into this gigantic soulless corporation. i know not everything is soulless, but this one concept is just insane how they take the money that comes from other peoples hard work of creating and running a tournament

im high masters practicing alot cuz i wanna compete in tournamants for fun but i dunno how i feel about supporting such a concept... i just dont feel its fair for blizzard to take cuts from tournaments that they didnt create and build

i hope some company comes around and designs a super good esports game and doesnt charge money for tournaments to use it

or heck, blizzard with its billions of dollars should simply buy-out MLG and gomtv and every other tournament and simply run it themselves, and by that i mean blizzard would also be buying out all the employees of those other companies and having them run it for them.

I could actually support such a concept. If blizzard is running its own tournament, then sure, it gets all the money from it. I find that fair. And if blizzard buys out all the tournaments then it would make sense for them to get all the revenue from it. I see no problem with that.

But what blizzard is doing is taking cuts of tournament profits without buying out those tournaments... They are getting a cut of other peoples hard work... Sigh this concept i dont know if i can bring myself to support it

On October 12 2011 21:33 FaKeSC2 wrote:
If Blizzard doesn't get revenues from tournaments, they have no incentive to balance and support the game for the next 10-15 years.

On October 12 2011 21:45 RoboBob wrote:
50% of ad revenue is insanely high. I believe that Blizzard deserves a cut, just like the licensing fee from Kespa/GomTV. However it should be a token amount, to ensure quality. Blizzard benefits from tournaments even if they don't receive any monetary revenue; every single tournament is free advertising for them. If it wasn't for the tournament scene, I would've never picked up SC2. I started as a spectator and eventually become a player.

The NFL doesn't pay 50% of its ad revenue to Wilson just because the NFL broadcasts games of people using their product. SC2 is a bit different because the entire game is produced by the manufacture, so they probably do deserve a cut, but certainly not that much. Something like 5% of ad revenue or 10% of the prize pool (whichever is larger) would be much more appropriate.

On October 12 2011 22:10 MarKeD wrote:


I doubt many buy starcraft 2 for the single player (lol)

On October 12 2011 22:10 MarKeD wrote:


Shouldn't they owe it to consumers? What did I actually pay for with this game? I doubt many buy starcraft 2 for the single player (lol), if we're paying full price for pretty much what is 3 games, of which the multilayer is the main reason for purchasing the game should be balanced and supported. The fact is blizzard could afford to do this quite easily, valve updated tf2 for many years for free, and at no point was in anywhere near as expensive as Starcraft 2. The fact is Blizzard-Activision is a souless corporation, out to make as much money as they possibly can. It's just sad to me that there aren't really any games that can compete with starcraft 2, so they get away with it.

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?

On October 12 2011 22:18 FairForever wrote:


LOL

Except FaKeSC2 is right. Why would Blizzard continually pay money into putting in a support staff (eg. Dustin Browder, now whether you think he's useful is a different story) if they're not getting any revenue outside of a one-time purchase fee?

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?

On October 12 2011 20:16 ssartor wrote:
I was under the impression that blizzard does not get a cut from tournaments. I could be wrong though.

On October 12 2011 20:54 ddrddrddrddr wrote:

I'll agree with you when esports gamers make as much as professional sports players.

On October 12 2011 20:49 ineq wrote:


What if you did all the hard work for a game, lets call it Starcraft 2. And then another corporation comes along, lets call this MLG, and uses that product you made to make profits of their own, would you feel perfectly fine about that, even though they used your product, and you didnt make a dime?

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.

On October 12 2011 20:41 Broodwurst wrote:
These tournaments make money with Blizzards game, of course they want a piece of that in return.
If your whole business is based on someone elses work i don't really see how you can expect anything else. Big tournaments are not just your local event that tries to cut even, they (aim to) make a profit.

On October 12 2011 22:18 marcesr wrote:


Maybe not for the singleplayer but the hardcore fans (us) who follow esports etc. make up for maybe 10 or 20% of all customers.

On October 12 2011 22:28 purecarnagge wrote:
Blizzards game. Blizzards free to do w/e they want. Blizzard doesn't really care about e-sports unless it effects there bottom line. 50% of Ad Revenue doesn't make a tournament unprofitable. It does force people to charge for admission though etc etc.

If you don't like Blizzard, then stop supporting their product.

On October 12 2011 22:28 ShallNoiseUpon wrote:


Stop making up statistics. You have no data to back this claim up.

On October 12 2011 20:55 ThyHate wrote:
That's the difference between Blizzard and Riot...

Great game / Great esport support. Pick One.

On October 12 2011 20:36 ReaperX wrote:
Apparently 50% of Ad Revenue.

On October 12 2011 22:18 FairForever wrote:


LOL

Except FaKeSC2 is right. Why would Blizzard continually pay money into putting in a support staff (eg. Dustin Browder, now whether you think he's useful is a different story) if they're not getting any revenue outside of a one-time purchase fee?

BTW, Corporations are legally required to make the highest profit for their shareholders. So if Blizzard decided to "give back" they could actually be in violation of their duties to their shareholders.

See: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dodge_v._Ford_Motor_Company

On October 12 2011 22:10 MarKeD wrote:


Shouldn't they owe it to consumers? What did I actually pay for with this game? I doubt many buy starcraft 2 for the single player (lol), if we're paying full price for pretty much what is 3 games, of which the multilayer is the main reason for purchasing the game should be balanced and supported. The fact is blizzard could afford to do this quite easily, valve updated tf2 for many years for free, and at no point was in anywhere near as expensive as Starcraft 2. The fact is Blizzard-Activision is a souless corporation, out to make as much money as they possibly can. It's just sad to me that there aren't really any games that can compete with starcraft 2, so they get away with it.

On October 12 2011 22:34 MarKeD wrote:


Hardly, by properly supporting their products after sale, they can ensure their customer loyalty. However like I said competition isn't of big concern so they can basically get away with it. Yeah corporations are required to generate profit, but not every action has to be short term make money now. Oil companies pay to clean up their oil spills, yeah that cuts into their profits, but what do you think would happen if they didn't? Corporations have a responsibility to more than just shareholders.

On October 12 2011 22:36 ineq wrote:


Sure, Blizzard could easily afford to support and update SCII without this. But why should they?
Should they let another Corporation use their product for free? You obviously don't understand how buisness works. Just cause Blizzard wants to make money, they're not soulless or evil. Do you feel soulless every morning when you go to work to make money? Do you say no if you get a good opporunity to make more money..? Right. It's just on a different scale, friend.

Blizzard is doing right by the community, and more.

On October 12 2011 20:55 ThirdDegree wrote:
Blizz should take some money from each tournament. Sure we all paid for the game, but that's just a one time purchase. If Blizz doesn't continue to generate profits, what incentive do they have to continue to support the game via server upkeep and patches and such. They need to continue to make money off of SC2, and this is a much better alternative than having an annual subscription.

On October 12 2011 21:32 xBillehx wrote:

Should include Kennigit's response as he closed the thread tbh:

On October 12 2011 22:34 MarKeD wrote:


Hardly, by properly supporting their products after sale, they can ensure their customer loyalty. However like I said competition isn't of big concern so they can basically get away with it. Yeah corporations are required to generate profit, but not every action has to be short term make money now. Oil companies pay to clean up their oil spills, yeah that cuts into their profits, but what do you think would happen if they didn't? Corporations have a responsibility to more than just shareholders.

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.

On October 12 2011 22:37 MarKeD wrote:


anybody responding to me, please read the post i responded to I was speaking about them balancing and supporting the game.

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.

Glockateer wrote
It is kind of sad people defend blizzards 50% policy.

On October 12 2011 20:41 roymarthyup wrote:
sigh thinking more and more about this makes me so sad at how blizzard is turning into this gigantic soulless corporation. i know not everything is soulless, but this one concept is just insane how they take the money that comes from other peoples hard work of creating and running a tournament

I know its blizzards game. But in this environment what would be stopping a competitor from maybe making a better or equal game

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 ?

On October 12 2011 23:34 ineq wrote:


Point? :O

If you made $10M, you wouldnt want to make that in to $20M?

On October 12 2011 23:35 Boonbag wrote:


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 ?

On October 12 2011 22:59 Loxley wrote:


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.

On October 12 2011 22:22 ThirdDegree wrote:


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.

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.

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!

On October 12 2011 23:41 ThirdDegree wrote:


Are you going to enlighten us?

On October 12 2011 23:49 Deleuze wrote:


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).

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.

On October 13 2011 00:03 TotalBiscuit wrote:


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 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.

On October 13 2011 00:41 Zorkmid wrote:


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 12 2011 22:26 aebriol wrote:

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.

On October 13 2011 00:03 TotalBiscuit wrote:


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 23:35 Boonbag wrote:


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 ?

On October 12 2011 23:41 opisska wrote:


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:



Yes, I do and I think that this is a also very much wrong.

EDIT: spelling

On October 13 2011 01:06 andrewlt wrote:



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 01:08 Le BucheRON wrote:


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!"

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.

On October 13 2011 01:39 Deleuze wrote:


This seems like a smart idea, and a possibility in the future.

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?

On October 13 2011 01:08 Le BucheRON wrote:


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!"

On October 13 2011 01:51 TheBomb wrote:


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.

On October 13 2011 01:51 TheBomb wrote:


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.

On October 13 2011 02:07 ceaRshaf wrote:


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 02:15 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.

On October 13 2011 01:49 Sanchonator wrote:


didnt blizzard provide a LAN server for WoW when MLG ran WoW tournaments?

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.

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.

On October 13 2011 02:03 Numy wrote:


There is no country currently with the name Zaire.

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.

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.

On October 13 2011 02:53 GMarshal wrote:

A company that wants to make money? For its shareholders?

Unheard of!

:-P

On October 13 2011 02:53 GMarshal wrote:

A company that wants to make money? For its shareholders?

Unheard of!

:-P

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.

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

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.

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?

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.

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.

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

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.

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.

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?

On October 12 2011 20:41 roymarthyup wrote:
sigh thinking more and more about this makes me so sad at how blizzard is turning into this gigantic soulless corporation. i know not everything is soulless, but this one concept is just insane how they take the money that comes from other peoples hard work of creating and running a tournament

im high masters practicing alot cuz i wanna compete in tournamants for fun but i dunno how i feel about supporting such a concept... i just dont feel its fair for blizzard to take cuts from tournaments that they didnt create and build

i hope some company comes around and designs a super good esports game and doesnt charge money for tournaments to use it

or heck, blizzard with its billions of dollars should simply buy-out MLG and gomtv and every other tournament and simply run it themselves, and by that i mean blizzard would also be buying out all the employees of those other companies and having them run it for them.

I could actually support such a concept. If blizzard is running its own tournament, then sure, it gets all the money from it. I find that fair. And if blizzard buys out all the tournaments then it would make sense for them to get all the revenue from it. I see no problem with that.

But what blizzard is doing is taking cuts of tournament profits without buying out those tournaments... They are getting a cut of other peoples hard work... Sigh this concept i dont know if i can bring myself to support it

On October 13 2011 00:03 TotalBiscuit wrote:


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 20:36 ReaperX wrote:
Apparently 50% of Ad Revenue.

On October 13 2011 03:45 IMSmooth wrote:




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?

On October 13 2011 05:25 TotalBiscuit wrote:



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?

On October 13 2011 05:25 TotalBiscuit wrote:


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?

On October 13 2011 05:51 darkest44 wrote:


That is utterly ridiculous and disgusting if true or even anywhere close to true. They are already getting incredible free advertising for their game and they need to take half the ad revenue from these much smaller companies running tournaments? Starcraft games would not sell half as well without esports around it and the game would die out far sooner without esports instead of still sell copies 5-10 years later like BW did.

Blizzard has become such a scumbag greedy company since joining Activision and bobby kotick. This company already makes hundreds of millions of dollars a month from WoW subscriptions alone, forget about game sales and all the other stuff, the last thing they need to do is stick their greedy hands in the pockets of struggling companies 1/100th the size running tournaments, trying to grow esports while blizzard does jack all except run the yearly blizzcon tourney. Disgusting.

On October 13 2011 06:00 Neurosis wrote:
Think of it this way. WoW pulls in a ton of constant profit because of subscriptions. Blizz somehow needed to think up a way to make SC2 at least somewhat comparable in terms of long term revenue. Sure they would make a good profit off of selling boxed copies at 60 dollars a pop, but that isn't a constant profit such as WoW. Advertising SC2 as an esport and then dipping into the tournament funds could potentially offer a comparable long term profit.

If you look at Diablo 3 they're pulling a similar trick. Instead of monthly subscriptions or esports they're now offering the real money auction house. Every time someone makes a sale over the AH Blizz gets a small cut. Once again, the goal seems to be to try and gain a more long term profit rather than simply just the sales off boxed copies. From a business standpoint it just doesn't make much sense to create games that don't offer long term money when they already have such a massive cash cow like WoW.

On October 13 2011 06:08 Conquerer67 wrote:
I'm pretty sure that they get a small cut if the total prize pool is more than $5000.

I'm not sure of the exact percentage though, but they get they get their money in the form of tournament licenses.

On October 13 2011 04:07 jinorazi wrote:


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)

On October 13 2011 03:35 Zerksys wrote:


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?

On October 13 2011 06:35 TheBomb wrote:

I completely agree with this as well.

Yes Blizzard is a business and wants to make money, we all get that, some of us have or had businesses themselves or maybe will have. The point here is that Blizzard doesn't support e-sports, they've never had. Everything that has been created out of Blizzard games like e-sports from Brood War and Dota style games from WC3 editor its all been user created, blizzard had no clue about anything.

Now they are abusing the same community that made them great and recognizable and they are abusing it. They didn't put LAN in there because they just want to make money out it and if there is LAN no one in their right mind would pay Blizzard to host a tournament so they are forcing this online crap so that tournament organizers have to pay a fee to them.

They developed name changes and even put it once into the game, but now want to charge you for what should be a free and standard feature.

As far as I see it they are extorting money out of the tournament organizers by denying them the options to host an offline event. To me it seems as Blizzard have an unfair advantage over the issue as actually implementing LAN would be cheaper and shorter than not implementing LAN. These days LAN support is rudimentary to implement.

On October 13 2011 05:45 Grampz wrote:
So blizz is making all of this money from the tournaments they don't run, and they can't even fix battle.net 2.0...WTF

On October 13 2011 05:51 Gingerninja wrote:
The only way I can ever see it improving, if is a Global ESports company were to be formed. (think KESPA type thing, but larger.. less.. dodgy) and they commissioned some developers to make, Esport RTS, Esport FPS ESport Fighter.. that way we could actually have a sport.. as it were, that didn't rely on companies whose first priority is profit. We're a grass roots sport, thats based on using current for profit titles, and without warning, blizzard could pull the plug on starcraft.. much like activision did on its "hugely popular" guitar hero series.. and we are shit out of luck, game is unplayable without battle.net and the corporation say so.

Until then, we are subject to whatever terms these companies force on us for using their stuff. Don't get me wrong I love starcraft, but as much as it's community driven (which i think it could be even further as far as patches went.. using the editor to change the balance and saving special versions of the maps for that reason.) we're still tied to our need for blizzard to do everything, and because they have to do everything for us, it's their right to make money from it. Hence why its not an open source game and there is no lan, they have complete control, they just give us permission to use it.

On October 12 2011 22:33 Tofugrinder wrote:

source?

On October 13 2011 06:11 Plansix wrote:


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.

On October 13 2011 07:36 jinorazi wrote:


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.

On October 13 2011 07:45 Kipsate wrote:


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 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.

On October 13 2011 07:53 jinorazi wrote:


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 08:19 aksfjh wrote:


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 08:42 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.

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?

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?

On October 13 2011 05:25 TotalBiscuit wrote:


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?

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

On October 13 2011 07:36 brum wrote:
"You have to pay us money for advertising our own game"

On October 13 2011 08:19 aksfjh wrote:


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.