|
P and T shouldn't receive any buffs, particulary vs Z, and a fortiori they shouldn't get some lategame buff.
Just take a look on the last tournaments, Zerg isn't competitive.
P and T just repete their builds, and if they do it right, they end up being ahead, even if Zerg scout it, know it's coming, and have seen this buff 1000 times already, it keeps working.
Protoss kit is the most insane thing vs Zerg.
They now have an even economy than Zerg, and always more drone on early game. This is already insane.
But Protoss has now uncounterable harass. With oracle, WP pickup, adept shade, Protoss is able to kill drones without any loss, while they have already more probe than the zerg...
There is nothing zerg can do if the P is able to control his units right, he will fall behind in economy.
After the Zerg need to make something, else the "macro game" is designed to make him lose, so he makes a random timing with some random composition, and pray.
Sometimes it works, sometimes it fails. Zerg hasn't really played better when it works compared when he get crushed, it's just :
Has the protoss player been surprised or not, transition too fast, or too slow, hasn't look when baneling runbies/baneling drops come.
When it's ladder, or BO3, Zerg can take some games, but when it's BO5-BO7, Zerg hasn't won any premier tournaments for 8 months...
|
On May 11 2017 06:18 Tyrhanius wrote:
P and T shouldn't receive any buffs, particulary vs Z, and a fortiori they shouldn't get some lategame buff.
Just take a look on the last tournaments, Zerg isn't competitive.
P and T just repete their builds, and if they do it right, they end up being ahead, even if Zerg scout it, know it's coming, and have seen this buff 1000 times already, it keeps working.
Protoss kit is the most insane thing vs Zerg.
They now have an even economy than Zerg, and always more drone on early game. This is already insane.
But Protoss has now uncounterable harass. With oracle, WP pickup, adept shade, Protoss is able to kill drones without any loss, while they have already more probe than the zerg...
There is nothing zerg can do if the P is able to control his units right, he will fall behind in economy.
After the Zerg need to make something, else the "macro game" is designed to make him lose, so he makes a random timing with some random composition, and pray.
Sometimes it works, sometimes it fails. Zerg hasn't really played better when it works compared when he get crushed, it's just :
Has the protoss player been surprised or not, transition too fast, or too slow, hasn't look when baneling runbies/baneling drops come.
When it's ladder, or BO3, Zerg can take some games, but when it's BO5-BO7, Zerg hasn't won any premier tournaments for 8 months...
While they might not be winning outright, look at DH: Austin, there were 10 zergs in the final 16. To say that they aren't competitive is laughable; you have to look at more than just who wins the final tournament.
|
On May 11 2017 09:09 reneg wrote:Show nested quote +On May 11 2017 06:18 Tyrhanius wrote:
P and T shouldn't receive any buffs, particulary vs Z, and a fortiori they shouldn't get some lategame buff.
Just take a look on the last tournaments, Zerg isn't competitive.
P and T just repete their builds, and if they do it right, they end up being ahead, even if Zerg scout it, know it's coming, and have seen this buff 1000 times already, it keeps working.
Protoss kit is the most insane thing vs Zerg.
They now have an even economy than Zerg, and always more drone on early game. This is already insane.
But Protoss has now uncounterable harass. With oracle, WP pickup, adept shade, Protoss is able to kill drones without any loss, while they have already more probe than the zerg...
There is nothing zerg can do if the P is able to control his units right, he will fall behind in economy.
After the Zerg need to make something, else the "macro game" is designed to make him lose, so he makes a random timing with some random composition, and pray.
Sometimes it works, sometimes it fails. Zerg hasn't really played better when it works compared when he get crushed, it's just :
Has the protoss player been surprised or not, transition too fast, or too slow, hasn't look when baneling runbies/baneling drops come.
When it's ladder, or BO3, Zerg can take some games, but when it's BO5-BO7, Zerg hasn't won any premier tournaments for 8 months... While they might not be winning outright, look at DH: Austin, there were 10 zergs in the final 16. To say that they aren't competitive is laughable; you have to look at more than just who wins the final tournament.
Have you looked the level of the qualifiers ?
It's a bit like you say : "Zerg is very strong, Lamdo, Serral & co manage to be promoted on GM".
|
On May 11 2017 02:06 JimmyJRaynor wrote:Show nested quote +On May 11 2017 01:39 StraKo wrote:On May 10 2017 03:03 Espartaquen wrote:
So... still no mention of the LOTV economy? is that train over? I hope not, but how big are the chances of another big patch !? The lead balance designer left the game, LotV is the last expansion, Blizzard makes much more money with every other game in their line-up,... I would like to be more optimistic, but i fear there won't be any big meaningful changes anymore. if the unit skins and the War Chest do great the chance of Blizzard committing more resources to multiplayer increases. vote with your wallet. money speaks louder than words. and damn those new Hellions are so fucking cool! even the Marauder. i saw the unit skin and i didn't think i'd be that impressed. even the new Marauder is cool. i can't wait for a new skin of the Tank. i'll bet Blizzard makes more money off of Co-op microtransactions than they do from those unit skins.
Skins aren't cool in SC2, microtransactions aren't cool for a full price game, so yeah, voting with my wallet by buying stuff I neither want nor like to see... Brilliant. Next step is you have to unlock graphics settings by paying for them, or basic game functions like chat, to each his own, right?
|
On May 11 2017 16:23 Creager wrote:Show nested quote +On May 11 2017 02:06 JimmyJRaynor wrote:On May 11 2017 01:39 StraKo wrote:On May 10 2017 03:03 Espartaquen wrote:
So... still no mention of the LOTV economy? is that train over? I hope not, but how big are the chances of another big patch !? The lead balance designer left the game, LotV is the last expansion, Blizzard makes much more money with every other game in their line-up,... I would like to be more optimistic, but i fear there won't be any big meaningful changes anymore. if the unit skins and the War Chest do great the chance of Blizzard committing more resources to multiplayer increases. vote with your wallet. money speaks louder than words. and damn those new Hellions are so fucking cool! even the Marauder. i saw the unit skin and i didn't think i'd be that impressed. even the new Marauder is cool. i can't wait for a new skin of the Tank. i'll bet Blizzard makes more money off of Co-op microtransactions than they do from those unit skins. Skins aren't cool in SC2, microtransactions aren't cool for a full price game, so yeah, voting with my wallet by buying stuff I neither want nor like to see... Brilliant. Next step is you have to unlock graphics settings by paying for them, or basic game functions like chat, to each his own, right?
but that's just like... your opinion.. man
also concluding that blizzard will become greedy, with starcraft, and turn it into a pay2win-game, just because they added cosmetics to it, is just lol.
|
On May 11 2017 16:44 TriX_sc2 wrote:Show nested quote +On May 11 2017 16:23 Creager wrote:On May 11 2017 02:06 JimmyJRaynor wrote:On May 11 2017 01:39 StraKo wrote:On May 10 2017 03:03 Espartaquen wrote:
So... still no mention of the LOTV economy? is that train over? I hope not, but how big are the chances of another big patch !? The lead balance designer left the game, LotV is the last expansion, Blizzard makes much more money with every other game in their line-up,... I would like to be more optimistic, but i fear there won't be any big meaningful changes anymore. if the unit skins and the War Chest do great the chance of Blizzard committing more resources to multiplayer increases. vote with your wallet. money speaks louder than words. and damn those new Hellions are so fucking cool! even the Marauder. i saw the unit skin and i didn't think i'd be that impressed. even the new Marauder is cool. i can't wait for a new skin of the Tank. i'll bet Blizzard makes more money off of Co-op microtransactions than they do from those unit skins. Skins aren't cool in SC2, microtransactions aren't cool for a full price game, so yeah, voting with my wallet by buying stuff I neither want nor like to see... Brilliant. Next step is you have to unlock graphics settings by paying for them, or basic game functions like chat, to each his own, right? but that's just like... your opinion.. man also concluding that blizzard will become greedy, with starcraft, and turn it into a pay2win-game, just because they added cosmetics to it, is just lol.
"blizzard will become greedy"
Will. Nice one, first laugh of the day.
Paying for skins in a full priced game is already somewhat of a scam. Everything coming out of blizzard is grossely overpriced. And there's a huge difference between paying for content and paying for cometics.
So personally, i did vote with my wallet and refused to buy anything from coop, skins or announcer packs because i'm not seeing any good faith/will to improve concerning multiplayer.
|
You guys always seem to forget, it's not Blizzard anymore, it's ACTIVISION-BLIZZARD.
Take that into account in your arguments over microtransactions and stuff.
|
"And there's a huge difference between paying for content and paying for cometics. "
In this whiny context:
"Next step is you have to unlock graphics settings by paying for them, or basic game functions like chat, to each his own, right?"
Glad I made you laugh
|
That's the thing though. In context to popular f2p games, sc2 players have already paid for at least $120 worth of patches, graphics and gameplay improvements. It's no suprise that people who have paid for such express fustration with such a blatant money grabbing, when nowadays you can buy great product for no real cost except for cosmetics. You may think he is supposing but Blizzard IS a business that released Bnet 2.0 without any real chat functions and clan support and only added them in for HotS. In essence, you had to pay to unlock what is considered a basic chat game function nowadays such as clan support.
|
On May 11 2017 18:41 ihatevideogames wrote:
You guys always seem to forget, it's not Blizzard anymore, it's ACTIVISION-BLIZZARD.
This
and as usual Jack is on point in this discussion on pretty much everything.
i have proudly not bought a single cosmetic or coop commander frm Blizz. never bought cosmetic in other games. its just not worth it like if they want to charge $60 for a videogame or howver much it's been at this point, they have to release all the content. if one of my students turned in a project that was 60% done and then continued to add to it during their presentation, they would get a failing grade. lets not hold blizzard to a lower standard
|
Bringing back High Impact Payload
Exactly what we need, more spells! /s
|
On May 11 2017 06:18 Tyrhanius wrote:
P and T shouldn't receive any buffs, particulary vs Z, and a fortiori they shouldn't get some lategame buff.
Just take a look on the last tournaments, Zerg isn't competitive.
P and T just repete their builds, and if they do it right, they end up being ahead, even if Zerg scout it, know it's coming, and have seen this buff 1000 times already, it keeps working.
Protoss kit is the most insane thing vs Zerg.
They now have an even economy than Zerg, and always more drone on early game. This is already insane.
But Protoss has now uncounterable harass. With oracle, WP pickup, adept shade, Protoss is able to kill drones without any loss, while they have already more probe than the zerg...
There is nothing zerg can do if the P is able to control his units right, he will fall behind in economy.
After the Zerg need to make something, else the "macro game" is designed to make him lose, so he makes a random timing with some random composition, and pray.
Sometimes it works, sometimes it fails. Zerg hasn't really played better when it works compared when he get crushed, it's just :
Has the protoss player been surprised or not, transition too fast, or too slow, hasn't look when baneling runbies/baneling drops come.
When it's ladder, or BO3, Zerg can take some games, but when it's BO5-BO7, Zerg hasn't won any premier tournaments for 8 months...
It's because Terrans and Protosses macro booster where almost untouched in LOTV. Zerg had his nerfed into oblivion. Thats why I would like to see 4 larvae injects back. That would give back the Zerg his main strengh which is superior economy and macro as Zerg has the weakest units.
It makes sense especially that Terran and Protoss have easy ways to kill drones for free.
|
According to Blizzard this game was released finished, apart from bug fixes and balancing.
These cosmetics are extras, for people who care about such stuff, they were not part of the content that you bought for $60. I do not expect Blizz to release free stuff forever for a game I bought many years ago. That is not how economics works.
I bought all the Terran related cosmetics, and the announcer packs, including TB. I hope Blizz continue to release extra content, but I also want them to fix MP.
|
On May 11 2017 18:17 JackONeill wrote:Show nested quote +On May 11 2017 16:44 TriX_sc2 wrote:On May 11 2017 16:23 Creager wrote:On May 11 2017 02:06 JimmyJRaynor wrote:On May 11 2017 01:39 StraKo wrote:On May 10 2017 03:03 Espartaquen wrote:
So... still no mention of the LOTV economy? is that train over? I hope not, but how big are the chances of another big patch !? The lead balance designer left the game, LotV is the last expansion, Blizzard makes much more money with every other game in their line-up,... I would like to be more optimistic, but i fear there won't be any big meaningful changes anymore. if the unit skins and the War Chest do great the chance of Blizzard committing more resources to multiplayer increases. vote with your wallet. money speaks louder than words. and damn those new Hellions are so fucking cool! even the Marauder. i saw the unit skin and i didn't think i'd be that impressed. even the new Marauder is cool. i can't wait for a new skin of the Tank. i'll bet Blizzard makes more money off of Co-op microtransactions than they do from those unit skins. Skins aren't cool in SC2, microtransactions aren't cool for a full price game, so yeah, voting with my wallet by buying stuff I neither want nor like to see... Brilliant. Next step is you have to unlock graphics settings by paying for them, or basic game functions like chat, to each his own, right? but that's just like... your opinion.. man also concluding that blizzard will become greedy, with starcraft, and turn it into a pay2win-game, just because they added cosmetics to it, is just lol. "blizzard will become greedy" Will. Nice one, first laugh of the day. Paying for skins in a full priced game is already somewhat of a scam. Everything coming out of blizzard is grossely overpriced. And there's a huge difference between paying for content and paying for cometics. So personally, i did vote with my wallet and refused to buy anything from coop, skins or announcer packs because i'm not seeing any good faith/will to improve concerning multiplayer.
The sad thing is that Blizzard should be capable of releasing high quality RTS for a minimal cost every three years or so, but they don't because of the blockbuster effect where they have to invest in (imo unnecessary) production values to compete with other high profile releases and to create a certain cachet and exclusivity for the Blizzard brand. I think the industry changed so that this is no longer necessarily the best option though.
|
On May 11 2017 16:44 TriX_sc2 wrote:Show nested quote +On May 11 2017 16:23 Creager wrote:On May 11 2017 02:06 JimmyJRaynor wrote:On May 11 2017 01:39 StraKo wrote:On May 10 2017 03:03 Espartaquen wrote:
So... still no mention of the LOTV economy? is that train over? I hope not, but how big are the chances of another big patch !? The lead balance designer left the game, LotV is the last expansion, Blizzard makes much more money with every other game in their line-up,... I would like to be more optimistic, but i fear there won't be any big meaningful changes anymore. if the unit skins and the War Chest do great the chance of Blizzard committing more resources to multiplayer increases. vote with your wallet. money speaks louder than words. and damn those new Hellions are so fucking cool! even the Marauder. i saw the unit skin and i didn't think i'd be that impressed. even the new Marauder is cool. i can't wait for a new skin of the Tank. i'll bet Blizzard makes more money off of Co-op microtransactions than they do from those unit skins. Skins aren't cool in SC2, microtransactions aren't cool for a full price game, so yeah, voting with my wallet by buying stuff I neither want nor like to see... Brilliant. Next step is you have to unlock graphics settings by paying for them, or basic game functions like chat, to each his own, right? but that's just like... your opinion.. man also concluding that blizzard will become greedy, with starcraft, and turn it into a pay2win-game, just because they added cosmetics to it, is just lol.
No-one said anything about pay2win, please read properly and don't project opinions in other people's posts that aren't there. In addition to that, yes, that is just like... my opinion... man, same as you have your opinion which I assume sounds something like "Shut up and take my money!" because you just love to pay some extra cash to feel better, right?
If you keep throwing money at companies to support them, even if you don't concur with their business models or the even the products they're offering just to support the game you care for, nothing's gonna change, because all that matters is profit and publicity (meaning negative feedback coming from a wider audience would also force action).
The thing is that Blizzard and also other companies are so getting away with it, remember the Xbox One fiasco when they announced the initially planned Kinect features? Imagine people would've complained about the whole surveillance bs, but preordered the console anyway, what do you think Microsoft would've done? Exactly, nothing.
|
LotV is a stand alone game for $40. I don't know where people are getting $60 from. Relative to the amount of content in Grey Goo, CoH2, DoW3 and Act of Aggression i think i'm making a great decision spending $40 for all the content in LotV.
LotV for $40 contains a fucktonne more content than any of these games. Likewise $140 for the 6 year trilogy of SC2 provided an order of magnitude more content than any other RTS released during the 2010 to 2015 time frame. Also, the multiplayer Betas were 1000X better than any other multiplayer beta for any other RTS game.
of course, if you've decided the whole entire genre sucks balls and everyone makes very bad RTS games then spending $0 on the genre will insure its death.
On May 11 2017 16:23 Creager wrote:Show nested quote +On May 11 2017 02:06 JimmyJRaynor wrote:On May 11 2017 01:39 StraKo wrote:On May 10 2017 03:03 Espartaquen wrote:
So... still no mention of the LOTV economy? is that train over? I hope not, but how big are the chances of another big patch !? The lead balance designer left the game, LotV is the last expansion, Blizzard makes much more money with every other game in their line-up,... I would like to be more optimistic, but i fear there won't be any big meaningful changes anymore. if the unit skins and the War Chest do great the chance of Blizzard committing more resources to multiplayer increases. vote with your wallet. money speaks louder than words. and damn those new Hellions are so fucking cool! even the Marauder. i saw the unit skin and i didn't think i'd be that impressed. even the new Marauder is cool. i can't wait for a new skin of the Tank. i'll bet Blizzard makes more money off of Co-op microtransactions than they do from those unit skins. Skins aren't cool in SC2, microtransactions aren't cool for a full price game, so yeah, voting with my wallet by buying stuff I neither want nor like to see... Brilliant. Next step is you have to unlock graphics settings by paying for them, or basic game functions like chat, to each his own, right?
i think having to pay for the "High", "Ultimate", "Extreme" graphics levels would've been a really cool idea. The game itself remains unchanged and if you're a big fan of all aspects of the game you can pay for more detailed graphical representations of the units. its too late now though. that ship has already sailed.
spending $0 on a game is the best way to instantly kill it. and you can also keep on posting about how horrible Blizzard, their employees and the game are because that costs $0 as well. sounds like the perfect solution.
On May 11 2017 21:30 c0sm0naut wrote:
i have proudly not bought a single cosmetic or coop commander frm Blizz. never bought cosmetic in other games. its just not worth it like if they want to charge $60 for a videogame or howver much it's been at this point, they have to release all the content. if one of my students turned in a project that was 60% done and then continued to add to it during their presentation, they would get a failing grade. lets not hold blizzard to a lower standard
ya, Ensemble, EALA, and Westwood all make way better RTS games! and the prices of their games keeps on getting lower. i think RA2 is even F2P with no microtransactions!
|
I think paying for access to matchmaking would have been great. And for extra music tracks. Also I think Blizzard should keep releasing expansions every 2 years. That's exactly how you make a great RTS. If it makes more money its obviously better. Nothing in the world is worth more than making more money and paying for things. Spending the money you earn is the purpose of life. The more you earn and spend the better. If everybody did this we would enjoy more quality RTS. Just fcking spend as much money as possible on any RTS.
|
On May 12 2017 00:45 JimmyJRaynor wrote:LotV is a stand alone game for $40. I don't know where people are getting $60 from. Relative to the amount of content in Grey Goo, CoH2, DoW3 and Act of Aggression i think i'm making a great decision spending $40 for all the content in LotV. LotV for $40 contains a fucktonne more content than any of these games. Likewise $140 for the 6 year trilogy of SC2 provided an order of magnitude more content than any other RTS released during the 2010 to 2015 time frame. Also, the multiplayer Betas were 1000X better than any other multiplayer beta for any other RTS game. of course, if you've decided the whole entire genre sucks balls and everyone makes very bad RTS games then spending $0 on the genre will insure its death. Show nested quote +On May 11 2017 16:23 Creager wrote:On May 11 2017 02:06 JimmyJRaynor wrote:On May 11 2017 01:39 StraKo wrote:On May 10 2017 03:03 Espartaquen wrote:
So... still no mention of the LOTV economy? is that train over? I hope not, but how big are the chances of another big patch !? The lead balance designer left the game, LotV is the last expansion, Blizzard makes much more money with every other game in their line-up,... I would like to be more optimistic, but i fear there won't be any big meaningful changes anymore. if the unit skins and the War Chest do great the chance of Blizzard committing more resources to multiplayer increases. vote with your wallet. money speaks louder than words. and damn those new Hellions are so fucking cool! even the Marauder. i saw the unit skin and i didn't think i'd be that impressed. even the new Marauder is cool. i can't wait for a new skin of the Tank. i'll bet Blizzard makes more money off of Co-op microtransactions than they do from those unit skins. Skins aren't cool in SC2, microtransactions aren't cool for a full price game, so yeah, voting with my wallet by buying stuff I neither want nor like to see... Brilliant. Next step is you have to unlock graphics settings by paying for them, or basic game functions like chat, to each his own, right? i think having to pay for the "High", "Ultimate", "Extreme" graphics levels would've been a really cool idea. The game itself remains unchanged and if you're a big fan of all aspects of the game you can pay for more detailed graphical representations of the units. its too late now though. that ship has already sailed. spending $0 on a game is the best way to instantly kill it. and you can also keep on posting about how horrible Blizzard, their employees and the game are because that costs $0 as well. sounds like the perfect solution. Show nested quote +On May 11 2017 21:30 c0sm0naut wrote:
i have proudly not bought a single cosmetic or coop commander frm Blizz. never bought cosmetic in other games. its just not worth it like if they want to charge $60 for a videogame or howver much it's been at this point, they have to release all the content. if one of my students turned in a project that was 60% done and then continued to add to it during their presentation, they would get a failing grade. lets not hold blizzard to a lower standard ya, Ensemble, EALA, and Westwood all make way better RTS games! and the prices of their games keeps on getting lower. i think RA2 is even F2P with no microtransactions!
No one spent $0 on SC2. Blizzard has made their buck with the game, if they decide to turn it into a microtransaction shitfest, they could at least in turn make the whole multiplayer f2p and give players an option to not have to see unit skins (see it as some kind of tournament mode so players can concentrate on the important stuff - like playing the game). That would give a greater influx to the playerbase with potential new customers as trying to further milk the loyal fanbase.
|
On May 12 2017 01:27 Creager wrote: if they decide to turn it into a microtransaction shitfest, they could at least in turn make the whole multiplayer f2p
they are making SC1 F2P... let's see how bad the smurfing is on the ladder. I like how Blizzard currently discourages smurfing in OW and SC2 via the box price.
competitive RTS is not like Hearthstone or LoL. you are not slowly building up your Deck/Heroes as an incentive to remain loyal to your account. its easier for those games to deter smurfing because of the natural incentive to keep building up your Deck/Heroes.
On May 12 2017 01:18 ProMeTheus112 wrote:
Nothing in the world is worth more than making more money and paying for things. Spending the money you earn is the purpose of life
you might enjoy Brave New World by Aldous Huxley.. its a great book.
|
On May 11 2017 23:57 Grumbels wrote:Show nested quote +On May 11 2017 18:17 JackONeill wrote:On May 11 2017 16:44 TriX_sc2 wrote:On May 11 2017 16:23 Creager wrote:On May 11 2017 02:06 JimmyJRaynor wrote:On May 11 2017 01:39 StraKo wrote:On May 10 2017 03:03 Espartaquen wrote:
So... still no mention of the LOTV economy? is that train over? I hope not, but how big are the chances of another big patch !? The lead balance designer left the game, LotV is the last expansion, Blizzard makes much more money with every other game in their line-up,... I would like to be more optimistic, but i fear there won't be any big meaningful changes anymore. if the unit skins and the War Chest do great the chance of Blizzard committing more resources to multiplayer increases. vote with your wallet. money speaks louder than words. and damn those new Hellions are so fucking cool! even the Marauder. i saw the unit skin and i didn't think i'd be that impressed. even the new Marauder is cool. i can't wait for a new skin of the Tank. i'll bet Blizzard makes more money off of Co-op microtransactions than they do from those unit skins. Skins aren't cool in SC2, microtransactions aren't cool for a full price game, so yeah, voting with my wallet by buying stuff I neither want nor like to see... Brilliant. Next step is you have to unlock graphics settings by paying for them, or basic game functions like chat, to each his own, right? but that's just like... your opinion.. man also concluding that blizzard will become greedy, with starcraft, and turn it into a pay2win-game, just because they added cosmetics to it, is just lol. "blizzard will become greedy" Will. Nice one, first laugh of the day. Paying for skins in a full priced game is already somewhat of a scam. Everything coming out of blizzard is grossely overpriced. And there's a huge difference between paying for content and paying for cometics. So personally, i did vote with my wallet and refused to buy anything from coop, skins or announcer packs because i'm not seeing any good faith/will to improve concerning multiplayer. The sad thing is that Blizzard should be capable of releasing high quality RTS for a minimal cost every three years or so, but they don't because of the blockbuster effect where they have to invest in (imo unnecessary) production values to compete with other high profile releases and to create a certain cachet and exclusivity for the Blizzard brand. I think the industry changed so that this is no longer necessarily the best option though.
I think that at some point, every game developpement studio that becomes big enough starts to put profit ahead of quality/content. The dev team and DK saying they don't want to change LOTV too fast and "let meta settles" was and is a PR move to avoid saying that only 3 guys at blizzard work for multiplayer. With LOTV release, Blizz was aware that SC2 wasn't gonna get any bigger, and that to milk the cow before it dried out they needed some way to make people pay without getting into the multiplayer mess (because it required too much work that couldn't be sold). That's why LOTV has skins, announcers, bonus nova missions etc.
The same is happening to bethesda actually. Fallout 4 had very little content covered by repeatable unending quests. Then, they released very expensive DLCs to give players more quests with storylines.
Big game studios go more and more for profit, for the best way to make lots of money for the smallest ressources investment possible. It's very rare to see big games that put quality ahead of profit. The STALKER team did, the witcher team still does.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
