|
On July 16 2017 04:12 imre wrote:Show nested quote +On July 16 2017 03:34 Endymion wrote: repost from the other thread, but 25%... really? only 25%? 200k only. If you want to support esport you should sub to your favorite player twitch channel, not buy the warchest. That does not support eSport at all.
|
On July 16 2017 04:47 PuroYO wrote:Show nested quote +On July 16 2017 04:12 imre wrote:On July 16 2017 03:34 Endymion wrote: repost from the other thread, but 25%... really? only 25%? 200k only. If you want to support esport you should sub to your favorite player twitch channel, not buy the warchest. That does not support eSport at all.
Helping a player to pay his rent/living cost supports esport in a very concrete way. Especially in a scene where only a few are making a decent living.
|
good content, sadly it comes at the wrong time...
|
On July 16 2017 04:49 imre wrote:Show nested quote +On July 16 2017 04:47 PuroYO wrote:On July 16 2017 04:12 imre wrote:On July 16 2017 03:34 Endymion wrote: repost from the other thread, but 25%... really? only 25%? 200k only. If you want to support esport you should sub to your favorite player twitch channel, not buy the warchest. That does not support eSport at all. Helping a player to pay his rent/living cost supports esport in a very concrete way. Especially in a scene where only a few are making a decent living.
One player =\= eSports.
Competitive scene and professionals = eSports.
Funding one player does not help eSports, it helps one player.
|
On July 16 2017 04:24 imre wrote:Show nested quote +On July 16 2017 04:17 nOgi109 wrote:On July 16 2017 04:14 imre wrote:On July 16 2017 04:12 digmouse wrote: It will only need ~32k $25 full bundle sales to reach the $200k Blizzcon cap, unless they are anticipating the sales to be quite mild, I don't really understand their thought process here. The rest goes to "production for 2017/18 season", an actual breakdown of how the money will be used would be welcomed. Only rational explanation is they're using it to decrease their investment in StarCraft esport. It's a logical move for a business pov but as a fan it's very disappointing. Except all the other major esports do this and after this type of thing was implemented the prize pools rose exponentially so no reason to be disappointed there is no cap on the compendium. there is a cap there, don't you see the difference ? you're not supporting the players past the 200K prizepool there, you're helping blizzard to invest less in WCS Show nested quote +On July 16 2017 04:23 nOgi109 wrote:On July 16 2017 04:19 digmouse wrote:On July 16 2017 04:17 nOgi109 wrote:On July 16 2017 04:14 imre wrote:On July 16 2017 04:12 digmouse wrote: It will only need ~32k $25 full bundle sales to reach the $200k Blizzcon cap, unless they are anticipating the sales to be quite mild, I don't really understand their thought process here. The rest goes to "production for 2017/18 season", an actual breakdown of how the money will be used would be welcomed. Only rational explanation is they're using it to decrease their investment in StarCraft esport. It's a logical move for a business pov but as a fan it's very disappointing. Except all the other major esports do this and after this type of thing was implemented the prize pools rose exponentially so no reason to be disappointed But with this cap it is like "we want fans to contribute to the esports scene but also kind of don't". Its not so much of a cap. They allocate the first 200k to the Blizzcon event the rest goes to next years events. Considering we're already half way through the year it makes sense. They could change the way it works after Blizzcon anyway 2018 contribution doesn't go to the prizepool. Might give too much money to the players you know.
They're still investing the exact same amount into the esport prizes. Its 200k plus the money they already put up. The rest goes towards 2018 operations. I never said it goes towards prize pools but we don't really know either way yet. Considering the size of the community this is probably the best way to keeping things funded. Blizz can't do all that production at a loss forever. More money in the scene is never a bad thing whether it goes to players or casters.
|
On July 16 2017 03:51 Solar424 wrote:Show nested quote +On July 16 2017 03:49 Avexyli wrote:On July 16 2017 03:38 NspFancy wrote: why not make the game fun again instead off putting the effort into more skins... Completely different teams, mate. Why have more people working on cosmetics than actually working on the game itself. Oh wait, it's because making the game better doesn't make Blizzard money, but cosmetics do.
I'm sure all those 3d-model, texture and animation artist will get onto to balance changes as soon as they're done with the war chest!
|
I haven't played SC2 outside the campaigns in years, but I might be tempted to get this anyway.
|
Good old Blizzard and overpriced addons. Not that I expected any different. Admittedly those are some cool skins. Unfortunately much like Playstation Plus the extra's you get for buying that which you actually want just make the price even more absurd, but can easily be used as ''justification'' of said price.
|
Loving these skins a lot! I never liked the red-black Tal'Darim look, but in blue these look really sick.
Only thing I'm scared of is how hard it is to distinguish Dropperlords from normal Overlords in the preview pictures (I already have this problem with the "mutated" skin), hope its easier in the real game or they'll change it up a bit.
|
On July 16 2017 04:59 Kerdinand wrote: Loving these skins a lot! I never liked the red-black Tal'Darim look, but in blue these look really sick.
Only thing I'm scared of is how hard it is to distinguish Dropperlords from normal Overlords in the preview pictures (I already have this problem with the "mutated" skin), hope its easier in the real game or they'll change it up a bit. These ar things they need feedback on now that they have released it, give it, constructively, but do give it!
|
The great irony of all is you will never see any of the skins in any big tournaments, which is a shame they look really cool.
|
On July 16 2017 05:03 Zaros wrote: The great irony of all is you will never see any of the skins in any big tournaments, which is a shame they look really cool. well the winged zergling is now seen once and again, and I seem to remember INno playing with the new hellion skin. We also saw a lot of the colossi skins (the white and the taldarim ones). So I think we'll see those skins in professionnal play.
|
On July 16 2017 05:10 [PkF] Wire wrote:Show nested quote +On July 16 2017 05:03 Zaros wrote: The great irony of all is you will never see any of the skins in any big tournaments, which is a shame they look really cool. well the winged zergling is now seen once and again, and I seem to remember INno playing with the new hellion skin. We also saw a lot of the colossi skins (the white and the taldarim ones). So I think we'll see those skins in professionnal play.
Skins are banned in all big tournaments unfortunately
|
Guys, nobody's addressing THE REAL ISSUE here. How does a 3-wheeled helion still transform into a hellbat with 2 legs and 2 arms?
|
So my question is will these skins be allowed in WCS tournaments? They've been weirdly against it so far
|
On July 16 2017 04:40 Garuga wrote: This. This is what's wrong with video games. Charging more for the price of fucking skins than for the actual game. its the pay whatever you can afford revenue model. if u have no cash at all you pay $30 to join the party. if u r in ur prime earning years and want to spend $400+ on Starcraft you can do that too.
so far i've spent ~$600 on SC2 stuff and much, much more on the 2 Blizzcons i've attended. So far the airline companies are making more money off of me than Blizzard.
On July 16 2017 05:17 SetGuitarsToKill wrote: So my question is will these skins be allowed in WCS tournaments? They've been weirdly against it so far why is it weird to be against it? let the top players make the call. if the top players want the skins off... keep 'em off.
|
Now that the skins literally add money to the scene it might be good to change that rule and allow skins
|
what about casual viewers' ability to recognize the units?
|
You know that you managed to create a successful business model when players that already payed 60+30+40$ for a game you update only every 4 months not only already buy overpriced announcers, skins and 30 minutes "new solo campaign", but get super hyped when you announce a new money grabbing skin package to sustain the dying esport scene you managed to kill by your own inaction and lack of investment.
Make people pay for events that are bringing you money. That's like if IKEA asked you to pay 10 bucks for a hotdog, so that the money gathered could help them design a new couch they'll make you pay for full price.
It's brilliant if you think about it, what a PR masterpiece.
|
On July 16 2017 04:40 Garuga wrote: This. This is what's wrong with video games. Charging more for the price of fucking skins than for the actual game. then don't buy them, it's really not that hard
|
|
|
|