| Forum Index > SC2 General |
Waxangel
United States33389 Posts
The layoffs are reported to affect around 8% of Activision Blizzard's 9,600 global employees, focused on non-development departments such as publishing and esports. During an earnings call on Tuesday, Activision Blizzard reported that while the company had achieved record earnings in 2018, it had still fallen short of expectations in terms of "engagement" and "player investment." Activision Blizzard stock has fallen more than 40% over the past year. 
 | ||
BigFan
TLADT24920 Posts
| ||
Nakajin
Canada8989 Posts
| ||
|
Cyro
United Kingdom20285 Posts
| ||
|
narbsncharbs
34 Posts
Actiblizz releases a new cod every year and it makes over a billion dollars every year every time. I would love to see that with other actiblizz ips. I'd be so busy I wouldn't have any time to look at other games from other companies. Hope they gear things up hard and have a dedicated team for each franchise instead of all that shuffling around nonsense they've been doing the last several years. | ||
|
FueledUpAndReadyToGo
Netherlands30548 Posts
 A lot of community figures are reacting with not just sadness but complete disbelief that Olbertz was laid off. Makes me wonder if Blizzards idea/commitment to WCS has changed after this earnings call compared to when they announced the 2019 circuit | ||
|
Nakajin
Canada8989 Posts
On February 14 2019 10:07 FueledUpAndReadyToGo wrote: Sad for all that lost their jobs, and us Starcraft fans A lot of community figures are reacting with not just sadness but complete disbelief that Olbertz was laid off. Makes me wonder if Blizzards idea/commitment to WCS has changed after this earnings call compared to when they announced the 2019 circuit Kim Phan kept her post as far as I know so I think were good for this year since she's the one in charge (look I don't have a clue but gotta find comfort where you can) | ||
|
sneakyfox
8216 Posts
| ||
|
fishjie
United States1519 Posts
| ||
|
renaissanceMAN
United States1840 Posts
| ||
Fecalfeast
Canada11355 Posts
I wasn't sure who any of these people were before the layoffs took place but now have a feeling of dread for the future | ||
|
brickrd
United States4894 Posts
| ||
|
Noonius
Estonia17413 Posts
| ||
|
Drake
Germany6146 Posts
On February 14 2019 09:29 narbsncharbs wrote: While it is sad people are out of a job, i'm glad that actiblizz is reallocating those funds---into game development. Actiblizz releases a new cod every year and it makes over a billion dollars every year every time. I would love to see that with other actiblizz ips. I'd be so busy I wouldn't have any time to look at other games from other companies. Hope they gear things up hard and have a dedicated team for each franchise instead of all that shuffling around nonsense they've been doing the last several years. no they reallocating those funds into the pockets of the shareholders | ||
|
cha0
Canada504 Posts
On February 14 2019 15:39 Drake wrote: no they reallocating those funds into the pockets of the shareholders Not even... they're reallocating those funds into Bobby Kotick and his top execs pockets. https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2019-01-04/activision-gives-15-million-sweetener-to-new-cfo-dennis-durkin This guy just got 15mil as signing bonus, and less than month later they are laying people off to reallocate funds? What an absolute joke. | ||
|
FFW_Rude
France10201 Posts
| ||
nimdil
Poland3748 Posts
On February 14 2019 16:12 cha0 wrote: Not even... they're reallocating those funds into Bobby Kotick and his top execs pockets. https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2019-01-04/activision-gives-15-million-sweetener-to-new-cfo-dennis-durkin This guy just got 15mil as signing bonus, and less than month later they are laying people off to reallocate funds? What an absolute joke. https://3ovyg21t17l11k49tk1oma21-wpengine.netdna-ssl.com/wp-content/uploads/2019/01/5-levels-corp-org.jpg Note the "bonus buddies" section and "might get laid off" section. | ||
|
darhumewin
United States16 Posts
great company. | ||
|
lechatnoir
386 Posts
| ||
|
JimmyJRaynor
Canada16710 Posts
On February 14 2019 17:19 lechatnoir wrote: Record success and still lay-offs. Screw everything about a system that encourages this. So many people at the top lost all sense of proper priorities. revenue is not profits. Profits in 2018 are $27 million lower than in 2017. when revenue is up and profits are down the standard move is to lower expenses. Blizzard's profit per $ of operating expense is the lowest out of Activision, Blizz, and King Digital. Circulating thru reddit is a list of 140 jobs Blizzard for which is hiring. Blizz is hiring. | ||
|
veniss
75 Posts
2. People losing their jobs sucks especially when the company announced a $15 million signing package for a c-suite executive. 3. I wonder how many of the esports people will go work for EA and Respawn, given that those companies are probably looking into the esports side of the business now that they've got a Battle Royale game out. 4. Someone on D2 Reddit crunched the numbers, and apparently a third of A/B's profits go to seven folks at the top. IIRC, the number was around $70+ million. Those folks could easily get $50 million, leaving an extra $6+ million for Blizzard, Candy Crush, and Call Of Duty respectively. Who knows how many people could keep their jobs? 5. The choice to cut some of SC2's WCS funding right after the increase in attention and viewership seems really dumb. | ||
|
MockHamill
Sweden1798 Posts
Giving bonus to someone for firing people in order to make already rich shareholders even richer is like unlocking achievements every time you BM someone on battlenet. | ||
|
JimmyJRaynor
Canada16710 Posts
On February 14 2019 17:26 veniss wrote: 3. I wonder how many of the esports people will go work for EA and Respawn, given that those companies are probably looking into the esports side of the business now that they've got a Battle Royale game out. EA pulled the plug on teh C&C3 and Red Alert 3 servers the nanosecond Gamespy died. EA doesn't support RTS at all. Blizz has done a much better job supporting RTS than EA has. On February 14 2019 17:26 veniss wrote: 5. The choice to cut some of SC2's WCS funding right after the increase in attention and viewership seems really dumb. attendance in the WNBA is up and teh players are screaming for more money. That doesn't mean the league is making a profit. WCS isn't profitable. Never has been. I'm just glad it lasted as long as it did. Its pretty hilarious that Blizzard does all these 'inclusivity' initiatives as some kind of distraction ploy somehow giving the public the signal that money really doesn't matter ... the #1 criteria is profit.... I wonder how big the team is that polices social media to pro-actively ban players? How many full time people does Blizzard have watching instagram, twitter, snapchat and AOL instant messenger for "inappropriate conduct" ? maybe Jeff Kaplan can let us know. Blizzard needs to get out of the social engineering business and get back to the business of MAKING GAMES. | ||
|
sneakyfox
8216 Posts
On February 14 2019 17:35 JimmyJRaynor wrote: attendance in the WNBA is up and teh players are screaming for more money. That doesn't mean the league is making a profit. WCS isn't profitable. Never has been. I'm just glad it lasted as long as it did. In corporate eyes, WCS is essentially marketing. For StarCraft in particular and Blizzard more generally. All big corporations spend stupid amounts of money on advertising their products and nurturing their brand. Its always a massive loss in iself, the profit comes from the derived increase in profits elsewhere in the business. Blizzard is a special type of corporation because they get massive amounts of advertisement for free done by all the people who work in or are just part of the community around StarCraft. You would never see anything like that around Amazon or Netflix. Which just makes it even more ridiculous how they keep cutting down on the support for this community while lining the pockets of executives and shareholders. Although really it's not ridiculous at all. It's precisely how the system works, the point is just that it is a really bad system. | ||
|
Snakestyle11
191 Posts
Might be rough for GSL without blizzard help? | ||
|
JimmyJRaynor
Canada16710 Posts
On February 14 2019 17:50 sneakyfox wrote: Blizzard is a special type of corporation because they get massive amounts of advertisement for free done by all the people who work in or are just part of the community around StarCraft. You would never see anything like that around Amazon or Netflix. its not that special EA gets free advertising from the people working in and around the EA NHL '94 competitive scene. www.NHL94online.com Koei Tecmo gets it with Tecmo Madison https://tecmomadison.com/ As the poster above me has pointed out.. nothing is stopping 3rd party people from continuing to run events the way BasetradeTV does. As RTS fans we've had a very long run of support from Blizzard. That support exists no where else. Where is the SEGA//THQ support of Company of Heroes? How about EA's support for C&C? Ensemble//Microsoft for Age of Empires? etc etc. | ||
|
MrMischelito
347 Posts
On February 14 2019 16:12 cha0 wrote: Not even... they're reallocating those funds into Bobby Kotick and his top execs pockets. https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2019-01-04/activision-gives-15-million-sweetener-to-new-cfo-dennis-durkin This guy just got 15mil as signing bonus, and less than month later they are laying people off to reallocate funds? What an absolute joke. wow, if you put it like this it really seems ridiculous! | ||
|
JimmyJRaynor
Canada16710 Posts
On February 14 2019 17:59 MrMischelito wrote: wow, if you put it like this it really seems ridiculous! No, its not ridiculous. ATVI lost an entire layer of management who went on to better paying jobs. No one is going to be part of a leadership team for a $7 Bilion/year company for $1 million per year in pay. An experienced, talented leader of 5000+ employees with a track record of generating billions in profits is going to want 10s of millions of dollars. I went to university and followed my passion.. software engineering. My gf decided to become a CA and get her MBA from a top business school. Up until now I've made more money than her. However, at age 31 her pay is about to skyrocket. Soon she'll be making double , triple or quadruple what i make. I chose to do what I love.. she chose to make money. Becoming a CA , getting an MBA and taking economics courses is the money path. Its not like this is new information... its pretty well known. Its not ridiculous. Now, rage creating youtubers like Angry Joe and video game "coverage sites" will give us a thin slice of information from the mountain of facts dropped at the ATVI investor call in order to whip up their viewers//followers//subscribers into an angry frenzy. This is how Angry Joe generates more views.. clicks... and subscribers... by keeping everyone emotionally invested. Boy, am i angry! Yes, AngryJoe.. i'm angry..  | ||
|
Shuffleblade
Sweden1903 Posts
On February 14 2019 17:54 JimmyJRaynor wrote: its not that special EA gets free advertising from the people working in and around the EA NHL '94 competitive scene. www.NHL94online.com Koei Tecmo gets it with Tecmo Madison https://tecmomadison.com/ As the poster above me has pointed out.. nothing is stopping 3rd party people from continuing to run events the way BasetradeTV does. As RTS fans we've had a very long run of support from Blizzard. That support exists no where else. Where is the SEGA//THQ support of Company of Heroes? How about EA's support for C&C? Ensemble//Microsoft for Age of Empires? etc etc. That is some really bad examples, how many employees at Koei or EA do you think work mostly with those two competetive scenes. The answer is probably a lot less than how much work Blizz historically has laid down on SC1 and SC2 esports, the amounts of spectators they reach are probably not comparable either. (Guessing here) In regards to the actual topic at hand, its a damn shame if this is how Blizz goes down. Blizzard has historically made their success possible through making superb products, scraping any project that is not of amazing quality and continuing to support any released game for what feels like forever. Their success has been partly made by their reputation, Activisions business model is the opposite. Make cheap plastic, sell it to those that cant distinguish quality from plastic, cease support fast and make more plastic to sell. This combination is deadly because if Activision get full control of Blizzard they can sell their cheap plastic shit with the Blizzard stamp of quality on it. Since the public is slow and Blizzards reputation is so great it will take years for people to realize and for their hope to die. | ||
|
JimmyJRaynor
Canada16710 Posts
On February 14 2019 18:14 Shuffleblade wrote: That is some really bad examples, how many employees at Koei or EA do you think work mostly with those two competetive scenes. The answer is probably a lot less than how much work Blizz historically has laid down on SC1 and SC2 esports, the amounts of spectators they reach are probably not comparable either. (Guessing here) They provide advertising for Tecmo and EA and improve their brand strength... all free of charge. https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/british-columbia/nhl-94-tournament-1.4881134 How many people show up to an SC2 GSL? 100? Tecmo Madison has 300 or so show up along with hundreds of spectators. EA NHL '94 has Toronto events with 50 participants and 100 spectators. Check the video in the link i provided and keep in mind the game is now 26 years old. Nothing is stopping the same thing happening with SC2 where it has a grass roots dedicated fan base continuing with competitive events for the indefinite future. | ||
-NegativeZero-
United States2141 Posts
if you want to prevent mass layoffs like this from happening again in the future, encourage employees to unionize, it's the only way they can have any sort of democratic influence in corporate decision making. | ||
|
Shuffleblade
Sweden1903 Posts
On February 14 2019 18:00 JimmyJRaynor wrote: No, its not ridiculous. ATVI lost an entire layer of management who went on to better paying jobs. No one is going to be part of a leadership team for a $7 Bilion/year company for $1 million per year in pay. I went to university and followed my passion.. software engineering. My gf decided to become a CA and get her MBA from a top business school. Up until now I've made more money than her. However, at age 31 her pay is about to skyrocket. Soon she'll be making double , triple or quadruple what i make. I chose to do what I love.. she chose to make money. Becoming a CA , getting an MBA and taking economics courses is the money path. Its not like this is new information... its pretty well known. Its not ridiculous. Now, rage creating youtubers like Angry Joe and video game "coverage sites" will give us a thin slice of information from the mountain of facts dropped at the ATVI investor call in order to whip up their viewers//followers//subscribers into an angry frenzy. This is how Angry Joe generates more views.. clicks... and subscribers... by keeping everyone emotionally invested. Boy, am i angry! Yes, AngryJoe.. i'm angry.. It is ridiculous, just because "it is the way the world works" doesn't mean it makes sense or that it should be that way. The reply "its the way it is" is never a good arguement for anything. I'm sure there are people that would be "part of a leadership team for a $7 Bilion/year company for $1 million per year in pay." Just because the people on the top is used to more doesn't mean that is not ridiculous, Ï think it is very ridiculous that the richest 1% owns more than half of earths net wealth. Its a fact and yet it is ridiculous, should it be that way? Well I don't think so, I guess you do and that just means we have different opinions on this. | ||
|
JimmyJRaynor
Canada16710 Posts
On February 14 2019 18:30 Shuffleblade wrote: It is ridiculous, just because "it is the way the world works" doesn't mean it makes sense or that it should be that way. The reply "its the way it is" is never a good arguement for anything. I'm sure there are people that would be "part of a leadership team for a $7 Bilion/year company for $1 million per year in pay." Just because the people on the top is used to more doesn't mean that is not ridiculous, Ï think it is very ridiculous that the richest 1% owns more than half of earths net wealth. Its a fact and yet it is ridiculous, should it be that way? Well I don't think so, I guess you do and that just means we have different opinions on this. Its sort of like Conor Mcgregor getting a $10+ million per year deal to fight in the UFC. The UFC makes billions and a big reason why is Conor Mcgregor. So they have to pay him $10+ million per year. If the UFC won't give McGregor the $10 million per year he'll go and get it from some other fight promotion. I make database software. I need the CIOs and Project Managers to help me build my product; I then need marketing partners to help sell my stuff. As a result, "business people" get a major piece of the revenue my software generates. Its no different for Blizzard software developers. Business guys get a big piece of the pie. CEOs , marketing people, distribution specialists etc.. get a big piece of the revenue. The creative software makers at Blizzard do some fascinating , exciting stuff. That said, the infrastructure around these smart people provides an environment where great software building is possible. That infrastructure and the people who built that infrastructure get a big piece of the revenue. Look at Steam. They take 30% for being "just a store front". | ||
|
Philipp
Germany20 Posts
They have not been releasing a new game in a while and there're no plans for this year neither. Yet they still decide to fire service employees that were working on the existing games. If I had nothing big coming up for this year I would atleast try to get the most out of the games I have right now. Releaving the community managers and so on sounds like the exact opposite of keeping existing games alive. Also I would have imagined they would see the value in esports for showing your game to a bigger audience and keeping players active. I'm fairly certaine the amount of ingame purchases for HotS will see a major decline after the dawn of their esports. | ||
|
fronkschnonk
Germany622 Posts
On February 14 2019 18:30 Shuffleblade wrote: Just because the people on the top is used to more doesn't mean that is not ridiculous, Ï think it is very ridiculous that the richest 1% owns more than half of earths net wealth. Its a fact and yet it is ridiculous, should it be that way? Well I don't think so Nothing to add. The next question is, what can we do about it? Do we need better education, which teaches about the hardships that are caused for many because of few making big profit? Do we need political regulation? One thing to also consider is: People from the original Blizzard development teams that made Warcraft, Starcraft and Diablo are kind of praised as the representatives of the good ol' times when money wasn't the only thing that counts. But they somewhere in this journey decided to sell their studio... again and again. I'm not sure who made the decision in each step but the Mike Morhaime (which I admire) probably aren't uninvolved in that development. | ||
|
TT1
Canada10009 Posts
I still remember the days of when guys like IdrA were pulling 15k-20k viewers on Twitch.. but the financial benefits weren't a fraction of what they are now, the streaming industry was still in its infancy. It's no secret that gamers and viewers are into team games and FPS' these days (it's more so just to be a part of w/e is currently hot, ppl enjoy being a part of a large community). Activision's stock decline in the past few months can largely be attributed to the Fortnite craze. We're starting to see how much power big name streamers have in the gaming industry (it even extends to athletes/celebs), Fortnite really only blew up due to their partnerships with streamers. They're the main sellers/marketers. Back when i played SC2 we didn't have a tourney circuit sponsored by Blizzard. SC2 was the biggest esport, we didn't really have any competition so there was no need for Blizzard to step in and take control of the tournament scene. As time went on and SC2 started getting dropped from events in favor of other titles (this is when MOBAs began to rise), Blizzard was left no choice but to step in and take control of the scene. They no longer had the luxury of having esports companies create SC2 content for them, they had to take it upon themselves to create that content. A lot of companies today are bypassing this entire process, streaming is changing the gaming landscape and the big name streamers are providing gaming companies w/ their player base (the maturing of the Gen Z pop also plays a big role). The gaming model today is basically: fun play-ability/view-ability (team game/fps etc.), F2P and generate revenue from mainly micro-transactions. Companies want big streamers to market their game and they make it F2P to create a gaming frenzy. Players get attached to the game, they stream it because that's what all the cool streamers and their friends are doing.. and voila, you have yourself a thriving gaming community. It really is a cost efficient business model.. but obviously the product has to be somewhat good too  .Blizzard/Activision is a business and trends in the gaming industry are shifting elsewhere, sadly at the end of the day it's just not logical for them to keep dumping money into something that isn't profitable. That's the reality of today's gaming landscape and it really does suck. I don't think we're gonna see a shift from twitchtv meme frenzy games to quality games any time soon. Streamers and viewers are constantly going to go from 1 flavor of the month game to another.. APEX legends seems to be the next big game :[. Sad times for the people who've gotten laid off, i wish them all the best of luck. | ||
|
Akio
Finland1838 Posts
Sad times, best of luck to all the staff that was laid off. | ||
|
Rob-Zero
Germany459 Posts
On February 14 2019 18:35 JimmyJRaynor wrote: Its sort of like Conor Mcgregor getting a $10+ million per year deal to fight in the UFC. The UFC makes billions and a big reason why is Conor Mcgregor. So they have to pay him $10+ million per year. If the UFC won't give McGregor the $10 million per year he'll go and get it from some other fight promotion. I make database software. I need the CIOs and Project Managers to help me build my product; I then need marketing partners to help sell my stuff. As a result, "business people" get a major piece of the revenue my software generates. Its no different for Blizzard software developers. Business guys get a big piece of the pie. CEOs , marketing people, distribution specialists etc.. get a big piece of the revenue. The creative software makers at Blizzard do some fascinating , exciting stuff. That said, the infrastructure around these smart people provides an environment where great software building is possible. That infrastructure and the people who built that infrastructure get a big piece of the revenue. Look at Steam. They take 30% for being "just a store front". We understand WHY it is that way, still it is ridiculous and even Connor McGregor would have a good life if he got some millions less. The system is bad, it is wrong and it is unfair and not healthy to the world. I cannot change it, i don´t have the ultimate answer as to how we make it better. But still it is ridiclous how much money the people at the top earn for their job. It is more money than you can spend in a reasonable way, more money than you need to life or you need to even have a very, very good life. So it is ridiculous. And in this sense it is sad that hundreds of people lose their jobs and one gets hired for a 15million bonus. It is pretty much the perfect example why this world is insane. | ||
|
Shuffleblade
Sweden1903 Posts
On February 14 2019 18:35 JimmyJRaynor wrote: Its sort of like Conor Mcgregor getting a $10+ million per year deal to fight in the UFC. The UFC makes billions and a big reason why is Conor Mcgregor. So they have to pay him $10+ million per year. If the UFC won't give McGregor the $10 million per year he'll go and get it from some other fight promotion. I make database software. I need the CIOs and Project Managers to help me build my product; I then need marketing partners to help sell my stuff. As a result, "business people" get a major piece of the revenue my software generates. Its no different for Blizzard software developers. Business guys get a big piece of the pie. CEOs , marketing people, distribution specialists etc.. get a big piece of the revenue. The creative software makers at Blizzard do some fascinating , exciting stuff. That said, the infrastructure around these smart people provides an environment where great software building is possible. That infrastructure and the people who built that infrastructure get a big piece of the revenue. Look at Steam. They take 30% for being "just a store front". So you believe Bobby Kotick is comparable to Mcgregor, if Mcgregor left UFC and worked somewhere else the UFC would lose a lot of money right? So paying him a lot makes sense, you somehow believe that if Bobby Kotick left Activison-Blizz would face the same consequences? A lot less revenue/profits? Well that is one point were I disagree, Kotick is replaceable and I don't think he plays as big of a role for Actiblizz as Mcgregor does for UFC. I think paying Mcgregor that amount of money is crazy but it is also understandable, in the case of Kotick it is not. I agree with your arguements about the infrastructure and how those people also need to get paid and get a part of the revenue. You however never go into the actual numbers, which is were the logic in your arguments starts to fade. Its like record labels in the 80s and 90s, they took a huge part of the revenue and no that is not reasonable. When a leader (part of the infrastructure) gets payed a ton more than the people that actually creates the products it stops making sense. Steam is whole different beast, I would compare Steams success to that of the effect of a valuable copyright. Steam invested in its storefront early, got it rolling and is still earning tons of money because of their early investment in developing and supporting it. Taking 30% is unreasonable and ridiculous but its the way it works, the rich gets richer until something changes. | ||
|
JimmyJRaynor
Canada16710 Posts
On February 14 2019 19:23 Shuffleblade wrote: So you believe Bobby Kotick is comparable to Mcgregor, There was nothing left of Activision in 1990 when Bobby Kotick bought it. + Show Spoiler + No studios, no creative talent, nothing. Just a brand name and a mountain of debt. He built it from less than nothing ( because it was in debt ) to what it is today. Activision IS Bobby Kotick. Its his baby. If you want to take an even deeper dive into the origins of Actvision .. check out my signature. If you care to take some time exploring it you'll discover Activision has a very cool history. | ||
|
Vandroiy
11 Posts
| ||
|
JimmyJRaynor
Canada16710 Posts
| ||
|
Nebuchad
Switzerland12179 Posts
+ Show Spoiler + | ||
|
LuckyGnomTV
Russian Federation367 Posts
During all those years LoL became only bigger, DotA became only bigger, CSGO became bigger, FIFA still at the same place where it was and what happened with SC2 - it only degraded. Not sad at all, people didn't do their job well, it led to company losing money - people got fired. | ||
|
Rob-Zero
Germany459 Posts
On February 14 2019 20:01 LuckyGnomTV wrote: I am a guy who saw SC2 scene transformations from it's close beta to current moment and I am surprised about people here saying: "wow, so sad blizz fired so many people". Why is it sad? SC2 is in terrible shape, it is alive only because it is the only one RTS on a market. Imagine if SC2 had an opponent like LoL has in DotA2. During all those years LoL became only bigger, DotA became only bigger, CSGO became bigger, FIFA still at the same place where it was and what happened with SC2 - it only degraded. Not sad at all, people didn't do their job well, it led to company losing money - people got fired. Dude, where have you been in 2018? Sc2 was/is growing since then. So maybe their work was not all that bad. | ||
|
ihatevideogames
570 Posts
| ||
|
fronkschnonk
Germany622 Posts
On February 14 2019 19:06 TT1 wrote: Activision's stock dropped from 83.19$ on Sept. 24 2018 to 44.57$ (today), yikes. We're entering a new era in the gaming industry.. and sadly RTS games are most likely a dying breed. I still remember the days of when guys like IdrA were pulling 15k-20k viewers on Twitch.. but the financial benefits weren't a fraction of what they are now, the streaming industry was still in its infancy. It's no secret that gamers and viewers are into team games and FPS' these days (it's more so just to be a part of w/e is currently hot, ppl enjoy being a part of a large community). Activision's stock decline in the past few months can largely be attributed to the Fortnite craze. We're starting to see how much power big name streamers have in the gaming industry (it even extends to athletes/celebs), Fortnite really only blew up due to their partnerships with streamers. They're the main sellers/marketers. Back when i played SC2 we didn't have a tourney circuit sponsored by Blizzard. SC2 was the biggest esport, we didn't really have any competition so there was no need for Blizzard to step in and take control of the tournament scene. As time went on and SC2 started getting dropped from events in favor of other titles (this is when MOBAs began to rise), Blizzard was left no choice but to step in and take control of the scene. They no longer had the luxury of having esports companies create SC2 content for them, they had to take it upon themselves to create that content. A lot of companies today are bypassing this entire process, streaming is changing the gaming landscape and the big name streamers are providing gaming companies w/ their player base (the maturing of the Gen Z pop also plays a big role). The gaming model today is basically: fun play-ability/view-ability (team game/fps etc.), F2P and generate revenue from mainly micro-transactions. Companies want big streamers to market their game and they make it F2P to create a gaming frenzy. Players get attached to the game, they stream it because that's what all the cool streamers and their friends are doing.. and voila, you have yourself a thriving gaming community. It really is a cost efficient business model.. but obviously the product has to be somewhat good too .Blizzard/Activision is a business and trends in the gaming industry are shifting elsewhere, sadly at the end of the day it's just not logical for them to keep dumping money into something that isn't profitable. That's the reality of today's gaming landscape and it really does suck. I don't think we're gonna see a shift from twitchtv meme frenzy games to quality games any time soon. Streamers and viewers are constantly going to go from 1 flavor of the month game to another.. APEX legends seems to be the next big game :[. Sad times for the people who've gotten laid off, i wish them all the best of luck. I'm still not sure about this. SC2 is as stable as an esport title can get, and slowly growing again for over a year now. Yes, LoL, Dota and CS are bigger. But what else is as big and stable at the same time? What happened with PubG? What's about that weird tank game? Call of Duty? Rocket league? SC2 still is one of the biggest esports with a massive stable playerbase and also stable viewership. SC2 did not dry out, it just got outpaced, but is still able to run. And is RTS a drying genre? I don't know. I'm highly confident that a Warcraft 4 would easily sell millions. A new Age of Empires would probably veeery successful as well. | ||
|
yht9657
1810 Posts
| ||
digmouse
China6329 Posts
| ||
|
FueledUpAndReadyToGo
Netherlands30548 Posts
| ||
|
TT1
Canada10009 Posts
On February 14 2019 21:45 fronkschnonk wrote: I'm still not sure about this. SC2 is as stable as an esport title can get, and slowly growing again for over a year now. Yes, LoL, Dota and CS are bigger. But what else is as big and stable at the same time? What happened with PubG? What's about that weird tank game? Call of Duty? Rocket league? SC2 still is one of the biggest esports with a massive stable playerbase and also stable viewership. SC2 did not dry out, it just got outpaced, but is still able to run. And is RTS a drying genre? I don't know. I'm highly confident that a Warcraft 4 would easily sell millions. A new Age of Empires would probably veeery successful as well. The games you mention, like PubG, are battle royale games. I think PubG is actually a good game, it sorta has the same vibe that BW has in Korea (for their own genre) because Koreans recognize quality/competitive games. That said, PubG lost out to Fortnite in the west simply because the casual player base enjoyed the play-ability of Fortnite over PubG. Simply put, Epic Games outsmarted their rivals by having a better business model. They targeted the casual viewer base (by making a fun cartoon-ish game) and got them to actually play the game way more actively, on top of watching it on twitch (i touched on these points in my previous post). That said, i don't think Fortnite is all that great of a game, so i don't really see them having a long life span. Games in the same genre will follow their model and they'll eventually out-do them in some way (by having a more polished product/better gameplay etc). Streamers will move over to a better product and the viewers will follow suit, that market is largely controlled by the streamers. There's no real tourney scene in Fortnite so there's nothing there to hold the competitive player base in place once people move over to a new game (they also have other issues, like not having a way for lesser known players to grind their way to recognition). SC2 has managed to survive for a long time because they have a foothold in the RTS market (BW is still going strong in Korea 20 years after its release). Making a tourney circuit creates a sustainable means of income for the players (so they stick around and play the game professionally) and it creates story lines for the fan base, they grow an attachment to the players and thus become loyal supporters of the game. You have to remember tho, the current economics of SC2 is solely possible due to Blizzard's funding.. which i assume is a substantial sum. If that were ever to go away (and that decision is based on revenue/profitability for Blizzard) players would have a really tough time playing the game full time. You can imagine the negative effect it'd have on the scene. Also, i said RTS is most likely a dying breed because they're hard games to get into, it's much easier to just learn and follow a FPS game. Our age group is getting older, like it or not this means people have less time to spend on their computers. The gaming industry is starting to fall into the hands of Gen Z, they're the ones setting trends/deciding what's popular or not. It's easy to tell what type of games they're into . If War4 were to come out we'd be cycling through the same player base most likely, it's tough to get new blood into RTS games (mainly due to the extreme competitive nature of 1v1 games, there's other reasons tho). This is a problem that Korea currently has with BW, they're trying to figure out what comes next after FlaSh etc. | ||
|
ihatevideogames
570 Posts
I won't compare SC2 numbers with easy to get into casual games like Fortnite and League, but look at games like DotA 2. They've managed to retain hundreds of thousands to millions of players and viewers through the years. Game design had alot to do with that, but there was something to be said when a formerly buy-to-play game that advertised itself as the most competitive esport had such inferior spectating tools and no public live game watching options compared to free to play games. In my opinion, in order to see how 'healthy' and 'big' an esports scene is, just imagine what would happen if the parent company were to cut all funding to tourney organisers. At this point, and call me a pessimist if you will, I sincerely believe that the only reason Kot(d)ick hasn't axed the SC2 esports funding yet is because the community backlash would lose them more money in the long term. | ||
|
Khalimaroth
France70 Posts
| ||
|
Qikz
United Kingdom12022 Posts
| ||
|
Clonester
Germany2808 Posts
On February 14 2019 23:52 Khalimaroth wrote: The greed of the stockholder has no limit... The stocks have just lost 50% of their value in the last year. Obviously the leadership is forced to something, when they have just cut the money of their stockholders in half. Laying off major parts of your non developing teams might be the wrong way of "doing something". We will see in the future. That laying off people is so easy in the US is not the fault of Activision. And with the current unemployment rate, these people should be able to find another job very soon. | ||
|
andrewlt
United States7702 Posts
| ||
|
Odoakar
Croatia1837 Posts
| ||
|
narbsncharbs
34 Posts
On February 15 2019 03:00 andrewlt wrote: The reality of a marketing/sales job is if you are selling less product than your salary, you're going to get laid off eventually. Esports has traditionally been a money sink. I think the industry is realizing that it doesn't increase sales compared to the investments made to it for all but the handful of games at the top. Viewership doesn't really do anything unless it translates to profits. Esports(funded by the developer of the video game that is) does have its advantages in that if you can lure gamers in with the idea that they can become a progamer and keep them playing your game long enough, the company will have an easier time getting them to purchase the next title in the franchise or whatever new IP/games the company decides. The comapny will also have to worry less about their customers jumping ship to another developer's game. Esports is used as a vehicle to develop brand loyalty imo. | ||
|
narbsncharbs
34 Posts
On February 14 2019 20:01 LuckyGnomTV wrote: I am a guy who saw SC2 scene transformations from it's close beta to current moment and I am surprised about people here saying: "wow, so sad blizz fired so many people". Why is it sad? SC2 is in terrible shape, it is alive only because it is the only one RTS on a market. Imagine if SC2 had an opponent like LoL has in DotA2. During all those years LoL became only bigger, DotA became only bigger, CSGO became bigger, FIFA still at the same place where it was and what happened with SC2 - it only degraded. Not sad at all, people didn't do their job well, it led to company losing money - people got fired. This is one of the most intelligent statements to ever be posted on this website, cheers. Actiblizz could have done infinitely better with sc2. The problem is though that many people will look at this close mindedly and assume you are attacking sc2. It's a shame. Actiblizz starved their customer base and milked their IPs for so long that their customerbase gets so fed up when actiblizz does dumb stuff, justifiably so. Actiblizz needs to be pumping out new sequels to their franchises every 2 years. Hell, they do a new call of duty game every year and it makes well over a billion dollars every time. Imagine if they properly nourished IPs like diablo/sc/wc. I'd buy it up. In general, The majority of gamers get bored of a game between 1-2 years, actiblizz needs to have news ones ready to roll out for their IPs when this happens. They are essentially leaving ATON of money on the table in short term($$) AND long term(customer loyalty) since trying to milk IPs for as long as possible puts your franchise at risk of becoming stale resulting customers looking at alternatives from other companies. I wouldn't be looking at playing the new warhammer if sc3 was in front of me or if sc2 had a new expansion every year with new additional units to use on ladder. | ||
|
SetGuitarsToKill
Canada28396 Posts
On February 14 2019 22:20 digmouse wrote: SC2 as an esport is actually on the rise again since going F2P, especially in China. Problem is we have no idea about how much that matters for the higher ups at ATVI. From what I can gather and predict, the Starcraft franchise as a whole is no longer on the radar of the higher ups at all. I would be shocked if we ever see another Starcraft game, except maybe a mobile one. | ||
|
Nakajin
Canada8989 Posts
On February 15 2019 03:52 narbsncharbs wrote: This is one of the most intelligent statements to ever be posted on this website, cheers. Actiblizz could have done infinitely better with sc2. The problem is though that many people will look at this close mindedly and assume you are attacking sc2. It's a shame. Actiblizz starved their customer base and milked their IPs for so long that their customerbase gets so fed up when actiblizz does dumb stuff, justifiably so. Actiblizz needs to be pumping out new sequels to their franchises every 2 years. Hell, they do a new call of duty game every year and it makes well over a billion dollars every time. Imagine if they properly nourished IPs like diablo/sc/wc. I'd buy it up. In general, The majority of gamers get bored of a game between 1-2 years, actiblizz needs to have news ones ready to roll out for their IPs when this happens. They are essentially leaving ATON of money on the table in short term($$) AND long term(customer loyalty) since trying to milk IPs for as long as possible puts your franchise at risk of becoming stale resulting customers looking at alternatives from other companies. I wouldn't be looking at playing the new warhammer if sc3 was in front of me or if sc2 had a new expansion every year with new additional units to use on ladder. You guys make it sound like SC2 was a commercial bomb or something, all 3 expansion were big commercial success, it's one of the best selling pc game of all time, they didn't "lose money" on SC2 they just didn't make enough money. Blizzard wasn't going bankrupt because of sc2, no one starve to death or got their home taken by the IRS because Starcraft didn't make a much money as Fortnite. Of course it's not pure greed they need to satisfied investor and keep the growth going, but don't tell me that they cut Starcraft position because "they didn't do there job right", they made one of the best RTS game and one of the biggest esport success of all time, they were just given clearly unattainable goal. | ||
|
narbsncharbs
34 Posts
On February 14 2019 21:45 fronkschnonk wrote: I'm still not sure about this. SC2 is as stable as an esport title can get, and slowly growing again for over a year now. Yes, LoL, Dota and CS are bigger. But what else is as big and stable at the same time? What happened with PubG? What's about that weird tank game? Call of Duty? Rocket league? SC2 still is one of the biggest esports with a massive stable playerbase and also stable viewership. SC2 did not dry out, it just got outpaced, but is still able to run. And is RTS a drying genre? I don't know. I'm highly confident that a Warcraft 4 would easily sell millions. A new Age of Empires would probably veeery successful as well. I wouldn't mind if they officially stopped doing esports and just went back to putting all that money into development. If they aren't willing to dig deeper into their already deep pockets to have both, then i'd rather have better games more often since i find playing the game more entertaining than watching someone else play. So if it means esports goes away, no biggie. Players will always host their own shindigs with their friends and due to the nature of the internet economy there will always be TOs out there making money off their own events. That's only if I had to pick and choose. Of course I want both though. | ||
|
narbsncharbs
34 Posts
On February 15 2019 04:22 Nakajin wrote: You guys make it sound like SC2 was a commercial bomb or something, all 3 expansion were big commercial success, it's one of the best selling pc game of all time, they didn't "lose money" on SC2 they just didn't make enough money. Blizzard wasn't going bankrupt because of sc2, no one starve to death or got their home taken by the IRS because Starcraft didn't make a much money as Fortnite. Of course it's not pure greed they need to satisfied investor and keep the growth going, but don't tell me that they cut Starcraft position because "they didn't do there job right", they made one of the best RTS game and one of the biggest esport success of all time, they were just given clearly unattainable goal. No one said anything about them being bombs or hinted at it. I was pretty specific too. Starcraft 2 was okay. It's good, but it's not great. I then proceeded to explain what I think the issue was and how they can improve. How you perceive this as doom and gloom talk is really confusing, I just don't see it. What kind of fairytale are you spinning over there? You ok? | ||
|
Nakajin
Canada8989 Posts
On February 15 2019 04:40 narbsncharbs wrote: No one said anything about them being bombs or hinted at it. I was pretty specific too. Starcraft 2 was okay. It's good, but it's not great. I then proceeded to explain what I think the issue was and how they can improve. How you perceive this as doom and gloom talk is really confusing, I just don't see it. What kind of fairytale are you spinning over there? You ok? The first poster said that people did their job badly so they deserved to lose their job, then you said it was one of the most intelligent post and proceded to say that Activision-Blizzard was leaving "A TON" of money on the table because SC2 and other IP were not on a annual or bi-annual release schedule, which is something that would 100% hurt the quality of the games, it took more then a year for WOL-HOTS-LOTV to get a stable and solid meta game, and they took year too develop + multiple patches how is that not doom and gloom? Your basically saying they can't/ shouldn't make game on the quality of Starcraft because it's not financially viable. You basically are saying that a game that was a commercial success and also a heck of a great game is a "bad job" and of course there other way they would have make money, but it's crazy to say that you can make a game of the quality and size of SC2 on an annual or bi-annual schedule, it would be smaller less polish game that would maybe make more money but would clearly be worst. It doesn't improve Starcraft it improve making more money, which they are already making with Starcraft. Like I said I'm not saying that there's not capitalist pressure to do so, but it has nothing to do with people doing there job badly, they did a great job, made a ton of money for the company and the shareholder and made an amazing game. | ||
|
fronkschnonk
Germany622 Posts
On February 15 2019 03:52 narbsncharbs wrote: This is one of the most intelligent statements to ever be posted on this website, cheers. Actiblizz could have done infinitely better with sc2. The problem is though that many people will look at this close mindedly and assume you are attacking sc2. It's a shame. Actiblizz starved their customer base and milked their IPs for so long that their customerbase gets so fed up when actiblizz does dumb stuff, justifiably so. Actiblizz needs to be pumping out new sequels to their franchises every 2 years. Hell, they do a new call of duty game every year and it makes well over a billion dollars every time. Imagine if they properly nourished IPs like diablo/sc/wc. I'd buy it up. In general, The majority of gamers get bored of a game between 1-2 years, actiblizz needs to have news ones ready to roll out for their IPs when this happens. They are essentially leaving ATON of money on the table in short term($$) AND long term(customer loyalty) since trying to milk IPs for as long as possible puts your franchise at risk of becoming stale resulting customers looking at alternatives from other companies. I wouldn't be looking at playing the new warhammer if sc3 was in front of me or if sc2 had a new expansion every year with new additional units to use on ladder. While one could argue if more sequels would be a good thing or not I really don't think that the CoD-model would be any good. It would probably turn out into a total desaster. Blizz always was known for taking their time to make a really high quality product. That's the whole point of their longterm success. But a new campain every or at least every two years would be entirely possible and great at the same time. The comparison to Dota, LoL and such is just shortsighted. There is a reason why there were no RTS games of great success in the last 15 years apart from SC2. Not because the games were bad but because other genres became more popular. That's the whole story. Other factors may have influenced the situation in the detail and I'm sure the current upswing could've been attained sooner with better decisions by Blizzard but the situation wouldn't have been very different in any scenario. Dota, LoL and CS only became bigger and bigger because they're are the leaders of the esport pack due to their status being the most popular games of the most popular genres. Thus they attract disproportionately high attention of sponsors because big companies always think it's the best idea to only invest into the biggest numbers. That's understandable but probably not the best decision because big viewer numbers aren't the same as marketing revenue numbers. | ||
|
narbsncharbs
34 Posts
On February 15 2019 05:08 fronkschnonk wrote: While one could argue if more sequels would be a good thing or not I really don't think that the CoD-model would be any good. It would probably turn out into a total desaster. Blizz always was known for taking their time to make a really high quality product. That's the whole point of their longterm success. But a new campain every or at least every two years would be entirely possible and great at the same time. The comparison to Dota, LoL and such is just shortsighted. There is a reason why there were no RTS games of great success in the last 15 years apart from SC2. Not because the games were bad but because other genres became more popular. That's the whole story. Other factors may have influenced the situation in the detail and I'm sure the current upswing could've been attained sooner with better decisions by Blizzard but the situation wouldn't have been very different in any scenario. Dota, LoL and CS only became bigger and bigger because they're are the leaders of the esport pack due to their status being the most popular games of the most popular genres. Thus they attract disproportionately high attention of sponsors because big companies always think it's the best idea to only invest into the biggest numbers. That's understandable but probably not the best decision because big viewer numbers aren't the same as marketing revenue numbers. Blizzard always took a long time to deliver a high quality product because they never had a full dedicated team for every IP at any given time. They've always chopped their teams up and shuffled devs around. This causes development to take longer aka what you are describing as "Blizz always was known for taking their time to make a really high quality product.". If you have one huge dedicated team for each IP, they'd be able to focus on releasing the new content without their other ips suffering. Hopefully they restructure in a way that will allow them to be more dedicated to their franchises than in the past. Also, a new campaign only appeases a very small portion of the playerbase. The vast majority of sc2 players want to either 1v1 or 2s/3s/4s with their friends. Sure, they might try the campaign but the replay value is low. The effort spent to make those *extra* campaigns could be put into actually updating the multiplayer player game since that provides the most entertainment value(work to your strengths actiblizz!). They want to be able to use new units that would be found in campaign while playing on ladder/with their friends. If players had a choice between you can have a new single player campaign for 10 dollars every year or you can have new/extra units added to multiplayer every year for 10 dollars, I'd choose new units because it provides much more for the game and has more replay value. | ||
|
John2
1 Post
User was banned for this post. | ||
|
Excludos
Norway8080 Posts
| ||
|
Kalera
United States338 Posts
On February 14 2019 21:32 ihatevideogames wrote: I assume Activision did the math and realised that the money saved by laying off all these people at once was worth the PR disaster, right? Right now, they don't care about how the 'public' feels. All the cuts they are making may look bad to fans and employees, but they are the kind of decisive moves that business analysts and shareholders want to see after poor stock performance. The question is whether the negative PR may end up undermining their recovery at all. | ||
|
outscar
2832 Posts
| ||
|
Bagration
United States18282 Posts
But to get to it, you'll have to smash that bank - which in most cases is irreversible. Still, that temptation is always there, and it's only augmented by your shareholders. They don't care what you do, and sometimes they don't even know what they do (especially since they are often diversified across countless industry sectors) - but they do want to see their returns go up that extra 10%, 5%, or even 1% Smashing the piggy bank in Blizzard's case means layoffs and cost cuts like we see here. It also means taking a risk-averse approach to game and IP development. Why make the next innovative new game type, when you can just pump out another CoD (or Halo)? Change a few things up, but keep that steady revenue coming in. | ||
|
fronkschnonk
Germany622 Posts
On February 15 2019 05:27 narbsncharbs wrote: Blizzard always took a long time to deliver a high quality product because they never had a full dedicated team for every IP at any given time. They've always chopped their teams up and shuffled devs around. How do you know that? On February 15 2019 05:27 narbsncharbs wrote: Also, a new campaign only appeases a very small portion of the playerbase. The vast majority of sc2 players want to either 1v1 or 2s/3s/4s with their friends. (...) They want to be able to use new units that would be found in campaign while playing on ladder/with their friends And how do you know that? I know quite some people who never tried SC2 multiplayer seriously but bought every expansion and played the whole campaign. They even bought the Nova misisons. On February 15 2019 05:27 narbsncharbs wrote: If players had a choice between you can have a new single player campaign for 10 dollars every year or you can have new/extra units added to multiplayer every year for 10 dollars, I'd choose new units because it provides much more for the game and has more replay value. So, you're basically saying, you would like multiplayer updates for 10$ a year more and thus a game development philosophy build around your preferences would result in the best possible product and the most possible profit. The most successful esports titles are free2play. Since SC2 also is, it had an upswing in playerbase and viewership. Do you really think that a yearly game pass would be that beneficial? Also I can already see all the hatethreads flaming Blizzard for creating a totally unstable multiplayer experience by destroying the balance every year with new units. | ||
|
Alejandrisha
United States6565 Posts
this clip comes to mind + Show Spoiler + | ||
|
andrewlt
United States7702 Posts
On February 15 2019 03:42 narbsncharbs wrote: Esports(funded by the developer of the video game that is) does have its advantages in that if you can lure gamers in with the idea that they can become a progamer and keep them playing your game long enough, the company will have an easier time getting them to purchase the next title in the franchise or whatever new IP/games the company decides. The comapny will also have to worry less about their customers jumping ship to another developer's game. Esports is used as a vehicle to develop brand loyalty imo. Like any investment, the returns have to be bigger than the costs. They clearly crunched the numbers and saw the increase in sales they get doesn't justify how large the esports budget is. Similar to what another poster alluded to earlier, times have changed. The way people consume media has changed compared to when SC2 was first released almost a decade ago. When you have to change your strategy, unfortunately, you're going to have a mismatch between the skills your employees currently possess versus the skills required for your new strategy. There's a reason that plenty of companies are doing layoffs at the same time that they are hiring. Skills aren't as portable as many posters think they are. When a bunch of popular Twitch streamers are more influential than your in-house marketing department, you might as well pay them rather than your in-house staff. When your top developers are engaging fans directly on Reddit or Twitter, you might as well hire more developers instead of having all sorts of additional PR and CM staff. | ||
|
Rodya
546 Posts
| ||
|
Alejandrisha
United States6565 Posts
On February 15 2019 08:19 Rodya wrote: To be honest, I don't think they can "liquidate" the Starcraft IP. We simply won't take the bait, and 18 year olds aren't going to play an RTS unless everyone in their local PC-cafe type place is playing one. Every time you release a new SC game you split the community. When you release a new Call of Duty game, the whole community migrates to the new game. i agree. the starcraft ip cant be liquidated unless they can some how put it on a per-season bullocks like some games have and i never see that happening. that's why i focused on wow where the content is focused on pay to play; if you buy bw or d2 or war3 they can't stop you from playing it. and EVEN THEY know that if you touch the bw engine the whole scene is dead | ||
|
JimmyJRaynor
Canada16710 Posts
On February 15 2019 08:04 andrewlt wrote: When a bunch of popular Twitch streamers are more influential than your in-house marketing department, you might as well pay them rather than your in-house staff. When your top developers are engaging fans directly on Reddit or Twitter, you might as well hire more developers instead of having all sorts of additional PR and CM staff. Software developers who can communicate effectively with all stakeholders are now able to charge a premium for their services. | ||
|
Alejandrisha
United States6565 Posts
On February 15 2019 08:23 JimmyJRaynor wrote: Software developers who can communicate effectively with all stakeholders are now able to charge a premium for their services. i bet they can. i am sure there are a short list of competent software developers that can also speak to stakeholders let alone shareholders. that's not really the point though. who said there can't be an intermediary between developer and shareholder? there are industries built solely upon that | ||
|
Alejandrisha
United States6565 Posts
| ||
|
andrewlt
United States7702 Posts
On February 15 2019 08:23 JimmyJRaynor wrote: Software developers who can communicate effectively with all stakeholders are now able to charge a premium for their services. Yeah, and those software developers join the 1% while the support staff who used to assist them get laid off. Some of those superstar software developers end up starting their own company too. That pretty much explains the new economy. On February 15 2019 08:21 Alejandrisha wrote: i agree. the starcraft ip cant be liquidated unless they can some how put it on a per-season bullocks like some games have and i never see that happening. that's why i focused on wow where the content is focused on pay to play; if you buy bw or d2 or war3 they can't stop you from playing it. and EVEN THEY know that if you touch the bw engine the whole scene is dead WoW is a good example of why this shit happens. An MMO needs a lot of GM and CM staff. When your MMO slows down, those people can't be easily assigned to other projects in other genres. Layoffs are inevitable. | ||
|
DubiousC2
129 Posts
| ||
|
Carminedust
487 Posts
User was temp banned for this post. | ||
|
Cyro
United Kingdom20285 Posts
WoW is a good example of why this shit happens. An MMO needs a lot of GM and CM staff. When your MMO slows down, those people can't be easily assigned to other projects in other genres. WoW has actually been suffering recently from a lack of CM and GM staff. Communication to players has been pretty bad and if you put in a GM ticket, you didn't get a reply until the next day. | ||
|
Khalimaroth
France70 Posts
On February 15 2019 02:48 Clonester wrote: The stocks have just lost 50% of their value in the last year. Obviously the leadership is forced to something, when they have just cut the money of their stockholders in half. Laying off major parts of your non developing teams might be the wrong way of "doing something". We will see in the future. That laying off people is so easy in the US is not the fault of Activision. And with the current unemployment rate, these people should be able to find another job very soon. The stocks fall since the blizzcon... and you know what happens at the blizzcon... We want the passionate Blizzard Back. | ||
|
KelsierSC
United Kingdom10443 Posts
Many people have already branched out into other projects but this should tell them to put SC2 on the back burner so to speak and really focus on their next step, be that in esports or elsewhere. From a personal perspective I don't ever have the time play games to a large extent and I get my fix by watching WCS or GSL. I'm taking this as a sign that it's time to move away from this and team liquid . Moving my free time to better options. I'm obviously disappointed by activisions decision but it's dollar and cents right. I don't think blizzard made all great choices but the gaming industry has moved on and a hard-core RTS with limited cash grab opportunities just doesn't cut it in the current market. SC2 was a great game that had it's time. I commend anyone who keeps working in the scene but at this point if it's not strictly a passion project it's a bad idea for anyone to put time or money into the scene. | ||
|
Charoisaur
Germany15961 Posts
On February 15 2019 18:31 KelsierSC wrote: I think this gives a timely warning to current SC2 players, personalities and behind the scenes staff that they need to get out and pursue other options or at the least realise that SC2 wont be a career path and will be solely a hobby. Many people have already branched out into other projects but this should tell them to put SC2 on the back burner so to speak and really focus on their next step, be that in esports or elsewhere. From a personal perspective I don't ever have the time play games to a large extent and I get my fix by watching WCS or GSL. I'm taking this as a sign that it's time to move away from this and team liquid . Moving my free time to better options. I'm obviously disappointed by activisions decision but it's dollar and cents right. I don't think blizzard made all great choices but the gaming industry has moved on and a hard-core RTS with limited cash grab opportunities just doesn't cut it in the current market. SC2 was a great game that had it's time. I commend anyone who keeps working in the scene but at this point if it's not strictly a passion project it's a bad idea for anyone to put time or money into the scene. this might make sense for sc2 personalities... But why would this matter to the average sc2 fan who plays ladder and watches tournaments? Do´you feel forced to move on because not enough other people enjoy RTS games??? | ||
|
Snakestyle11
191 Posts
If only he had a 2-3 more good years of good starcraft tournaments, he would be set for life with money really | ||
|
KelsierSC
United Kingdom10443 Posts
On February 15 2019 19:38 Charoisaur wrote: this might make sense for sc2 personalities... But why would this matter to the average sc2 fan who plays ladder and watches tournaments? Do´you feel forced to move on because not enough other people enjoy RTS games??? I can't speak for the average SC2 fan, I don't know where you got that question from but my personal motivation to move on is because in my limited free time I like watching studio broadcasts and offline tournaments with high production value and decent casters. These events will likely be gone soon and I don't want to continue investing time or emotion into something that will disappear. I don't really have interest in someone solo casting games from their bedroom for a $50 tournament. | ||
|
MockHamill
Sweden1798 Posts
| ||
|
HolydaKing
21254 Posts
| ||
|
Shuffleblade
Sweden1903 Posts
On February 15 2019 18:31 KelsierSC wrote: I think this gives a timely warning to current SC2 players, personalities and behind the scenes staff that they need to get out and pursue other options or at the least realise that SC2 wont be a career path and will be solely a hobby. Many people have already branched out into other projects but this should tell them to put SC2 on the back burner so to speak and really focus on their next step, be that in esports or elsewhere. From a personal perspective I don't ever have the time play games to a large extent and I get my fix by watching WCS or GSL. I'm taking this as a sign that it's time to move away from this and team liquid . Moving my free time to better options. I'm obviously disappointed by activisions decision but it's dollar and cents right. I don't think blizzard made all great choices but the gaming industry has moved on and a hard-core RTS with limited cash grab opportunities just doesn't cut it in the current market. SC2 was a great game that had it's time. I commend anyone who keeps working in the scene but at this point if it's not strictly a passion project it's a bad idea for anyone to put time or money into the scene. I understand where you are coming from and this does send a scary message. There is however still a possbility that the opportunity RTS and the Starcraft franchise presents will be recognized. I mean strategically supporting SC2 in itself can be seen as a sound investment in a future game. Just like mobas and royale games have exploded a new RTS could do the same if timed correctly and with the right support and infrastructure. Just like how SC1 boosed SC2 and created hype through GSLs and kespas legacies as well as famous pros going from SC1->SC2 a SC3 could do the same. Of course RTS has its challenges with going mainstream but seeing as the SC2 scene is growing right now I don't think its that far fetched to believe that gamers eventually will want something different compared to what they are getting right now. The one failure Blizzard did with SC2 was how they failed to put in place any good way to get money after the initival game and expansion purchases. If they had integrated it as well as league or fortnite has SC2 would be a huge financial success. In that world SC2 would probably be a lot bigger still today since Blizzard would have stronget incentives to invest even more in the scene than they have. Just saying that if companies are chasing the smash successes of fortnite they need to do something new and they need to do it with the right infrastructure and timing in mind. Starcraft 3 could possibly explode to the same success. I wouldn't be surprised if few people believe that but let me tell you that if I would have said that DOTA have the potential to create one of the most popular and mainstream games genres in the world early on when it was a wc3 mod literally everyone would laugh at me. Just because you don't believe doesn't mean its not possible | ||
|
Rob-Zero
Germany459 Posts
On February 15 2019 20:34 KelsierSC wrote: I can't speak for the average SC2 fan, I don't know where you got that question from but my personal motivation to move on is because in my limited free time I like watching studio broadcasts and offline tournaments with high production value and decent casters. These events will likely be gone soon and I don't want to continue investing time or emotion into something that will disappear. I don't really have interest in someone solo casting games from their bedroom for a $50 tournament. Of course you are free to do whatever you like to, but I have the feeling you overreact a bit here. We have at least one more year of Sc2, and after 2018 this coming year could very well be an exciting one. If every Sc2 fan moves on to another hobby now, then it will surely be the last year. Of course it will at one point disappear, but that was clear from the beginning, so I don´t understand why you got involved in it in the first place? I hope you put another thought in it and find a way to enjoy the scene as long as it lasts, because it really is a lot of fun, in my eyes at least. And after all there was no announcement on ATVI dropping Sc2 or anything like that. | ||
|
Luolis
Finland7104 Posts
On February 15 2019 20:36 MockHamill wrote: If SC2 e-sports dies, maybe they can start balance the game around normal ladder players instead of the top 0.01% of the playerbase. It's not Blizzard's fault you're not very good :D | ||
|
Nakajin
Canada8989 Posts
On February 15 2019 20:36 MockHamill wrote: If SC2 e-sports dies, maybe they can start balance the game around normal ladder players instead of the top 0.01% of the playerbase. Who's that? Silver? Diamond? Master? Because tanks are OP in Silver, storm is OP in diamond and I imagine things like liberator or BL are OP in Master. Better to balance at the top then at a random skill level where balance dosen't really matter anyway because we know you can beat everyone at your level 95% of the time if your just a bit better. | ||
|
TelecoM
United States10673 Posts
| ||
|
Geo.Rion
7377 Posts
It really sucks, and not because I wont have what to watch, I'll be just fine, but those people whom i respect a lot committed their lives to this, and now they're gonna live the next year or so in complete uncertainty or start looking for other career options. Right now you simply cannot plan medium to long term with professional SC2 in your mind. 2019 is kinda set, and who the hell knows what comes next, maybe they allocate some more funds, maybe they cut it down to just about 0. If you're young and winning money from tournaments, that's great, worst come to worst, you start / go back to college next year, and if not you can continue. | ||
|
Plansix
United States60190 Posts
And a lot of folks are trying to justify this as belt tightening and increasing profits and so on. Remember that Activision is the company that chased out the founders of Infinity Wars in dramatic fashion, escorting them from the building and so on. The creators of this little game called Call of Duty. These lay offs might be belt tightening, but don’t take the Activision line that these are not development staff at face value. As so many developers have pointed out in recent days, many community managers work directly on the improvements the community suggest. The fact that it is so many senior memember is Blizzard says a lot about why the people were chosen to be laid off. Edit: On one more note, there has been no official press release from Activision on these layoffs. The earnings call was the only place they have discussed is in any public fashion and that was to brag about their record earnings and pay out increase to share holders. | ||
|
RvB
Netherlands6209 Posts
| ||
|
Plansix
United States60190 Posts
And from what I’ve read in the reporting, the people being laid off are not of the opinion that it is just support staff being let go. Most of them reported the choices seem random and don’t have any apparent logic or pattern. | ||
|
Sabu113
United States11048 Posts
| ||
|
Ej_
47656 Posts
On February 15 2019 20:36 MockHamill wrote: If SC2 e-sports dies, maybe they can start balance the game around normal ladder players instead of the top 0.01% of the playerbase. I appreciate you always find an opportunity to remind everyone that mech vs protoss is too weak in diamond league | ||
|
Comedy
456 Posts
On February 16 2019 05:11 Ej_ wrote: I appreciate you always find an opportunity to remind everyone that mech vs protoss is too weak in diamond league LOL. That's hits the nail on the head regarding this user so hard. | ||
|
JimmyJRaynor
Canada16710 Posts
On February 16 2019 05:11 Ej_ wrote: I appreciate you always find an opportunity to remind everyone that mech vs protoss is too weak in diamond league I find Mech is easier to use in Diamond League. This is because spending all money is an issue for us Diamond leaguers whereas building the economy and expanding on schedule is usually successfully executed at the Diamond League level. Its easier for me to pump out 4 Tanks and 2 Goliaths on time, every time.. than it is to pump out 16 marines and 1 drop ship and 1 viking. I think by playing Mech I'm able to place higher in Diamond League than when I play Bio. The game is "balanced enough" for me. Any diverse race game will never be perfectly balanced for 125 APM people who make 1/4 the # of decisions the top 0.01% make. Its fine with me. Blizz should keep balancing the game for the top players. Even if we assume Terran is disadvantaged in Diamond League all this means is that occasionally I'll lose a game to a person I am probably "better than". Meh so what. I consider it part of the challenge. | ||
|
ihatevideogames
570 Posts
On February 16 2019 06:11 JimmyJRaynor wrote: I find Mech is easier to use in Diamond League. This is because spending all money is an issue for us Diamond leaguers whereas building the economy and expanding on schedule is usually successfully executed at the Diamond League level. Its easier for me to pump out 4 Tanks and 2 Goliaths on time, every time.. than it is to pump out 16 marines and 1 drop ship and 1 viking. I think by playing Mech I'm able to place higher in Diamond League than when I play Bio. The game is "balanced enough" for me. Any diverse race game will never be perfectly balanced for 125 APM people who make 1/4 the # of decisions the top 0.01% make. Its fine with me. Blizz should keep balancing the game for the top players. Even if we assume Terran is disadvantaged in Diamond League all this means is that occasionally I'll lose a game to a person I am probably "better than". Meh so what. I consider it part of the challenge. Where do you draw the line though? 50% in Korean level, everything else be damned? What if the game is 50% across the board on the pro level, but so imbalanced in lower levels that people just stop playing? Not saying we are anywhere near something like this, just a reminder that this line of thinking enabled the Infestor/BL era that literally almost killed the game. | ||
|
Charoisaur
Germany15961 Posts
On February 16 2019 06:11 JimmyJRaynor wrote: I find Mech is easier to use in Diamond League. This is because spending all money is an issue for us Diamond leaguers whereas building the economy and expanding on schedule is usually successfully executed at the Diamond League level. Its easier for me to pump out 4 Tanks and 2 Goliaths on time, every time.. than it is to pump out 16 marines and 1 drop ship and 1 viking. I think by playing Mech I'm able to place higher in Diamond League than when I play Bio. The game is "balanced enough" for me. Any diverse race game will never be perfectly balanced for 125 APM people who make 1/4 the # of decisions the top 0.01% make. Its fine with me. Blizz should keep balancing the game for the top players. Even if we assume Terran is disadvantaged in Diamond League all this means is that occasionally I'll lose a game to a person I am probably "better than". Meh so what. I consider it part of the challenge. I think pumping out 4 tanks and 2 goliaths is pretty hard in sc2. If you can do that i'm impressed | ||
|
JimmyJRaynor
Canada16710 Posts
On February 16 2019 06:40 ihatevideogames wrote: Where do you draw the line though? 50% in Korean level, everything else be damned? What if the game is 50% across the board on the pro level, but so imbalanced in lower levels that people just stop playing? Not saying we are anywhere near something like this, just a reminder that this line of thinking enabled the Infestor/BL era that literally almost killed the game. this has nothing to do with the Infestor/BL thing which may or may not have been winning every top level event. Blizzard needs to balance the game at the top level. So if 1 strat is dominating every top level event and 1 race is winning everything with that 1 composition every time .. then Blizz needs to do something about it. If BL/Infestor is dominating Diamond league.. those players will just get promoted to Masters. | ||
|
BaneRiders
Sweden3630 Posts
On February 16 2019 06:51 Charoisaur wrote: I think pumping out 4 tanks and 2 goliaths is pretty hard in sc2. If you can do that i'm impressed Speshul tactics 2.0  | ||
|
ihatevideogames
570 Posts
On February 16 2019 07:02 JimmyJRaynor wrote: this has nothing to do with the Infestor/BL thing which may or may not have been winning every top level event. Blizzard needs to balance the game at the top level. So if 1 strat is dominating every top level event and 1 race is winning everything with that 1 composition every time .. then Blizz needs to do something about it. If BL/Infestor is dominating Diamond league.. those players will just get promoted to Masters. You kinda missed my point completely. You probably were around the BL/festor era. Winrates weren't that bad actually, the game was pretty close to being balanced ON PAPER from what I remember. But A SHITON of people quit the game over it Now, and I'm gonna stress that because people tend to sperg out, I'm not saying the game is currently unbalanced, but IF it was unbalanced to a point where lower tier players were mass leaving the game, while the winrates were all nice clean 50s in the top 1%, what should be done then? People tend to talk in extremes when it comes to balance. Noone's suggesting that the game should be balanced around Diamon or Plat, but without Diamonds and Plats you ain't got any viewers, you ain't got no WCS, no warchest extra money, etc etc. | ||
|
AntiHack
Switzerland553 Posts
On February 14 2019 09:29 narbsncharbs wrote: While it is sad people are out of a job, i'm glad that actiblizz is reallocating those funds---into game development. Actiblizz releases a new cod every year and it makes over a billion dollars every year every time. I would love to see that with other actiblizz ips. I'd be so busy I wouldn't have any time to look at other games from other companies. Hope they gear things up hard and have a dedicated team for each franchise instead of all that shuffling around nonsense they've been doing the last several years. That wouldn't be Blizzard. If you wanna that company to lose his soul for ever go ahead. | ||
|
Cyro
United Kingdom20285 Posts
I find Mech is easier to use in Diamond League. This is because spending all money is an issue for us Diamond leaguers whereas building the economy and expanding on schedule is usually successfully executed at the Diamond League level. Gotta disagree on that, played through it recently and the consistent failure to build scv's, depots, expansions and production "on time" is probably the biggest thing making people diamond and not masters | ||
|
Phredxor
New Zealand15076 Posts
On February 16 2019 06:51 Charoisaur wrote: I think pumping out 4 tanks and 2 goliaths is pretty hard in sc2. If you can do that i'm impressed This is why we should have all moved to Starbow. | ||
|
craz3d
Bulgaria856 Posts
On February 16 2019 05:00 Sabu113 wrote: Not good at all. I hope this means we'll still be able to see Artosis and tasteless viable in Korea and able to cast the ASL/KSL. To what extent is ASL financially supported by Blizzard? | ||
|
AntiHack
Switzerland553 Posts
On February 16 2019 20:02 craz3d wrote: To what extent is ASL financially supported by Blizzard? Not much. AfreecaTV actually pay Blizzard to host tournaments. | ||
|
CrymeaTerran
149 Posts
| ||
|
Drake
Germany6146 Posts
On February 15 2019 20:36 MockHamill wrote: If SC2 e-sports dies, maybe they can start balance the game around normal ladder players instead of the top 0.01% of the playerbase. sounds more like "mimimi p to strong" then anything else... the game should be balanced for the good players always ... but they DO look at general players, its just alot of people live in their bubble believing in stuff like that p and shit | ||
|
JimmyJRaynor
Canada16710 Posts
On February 14 2019 09:10 BigFan wrote: "Nearly 14 years ago i joined @Blizzard_Ent ." ouch, that must really hurt. to add to ur point.... Investment people are noticing the fact that long term veterans who have a deep understanding of Blizzard. its customers, and executing their role.... are being laid off. They are contrasting this with the layoff of 2012 which was merely customer service reps due to a decline in WoW subscribers. https://seekingalpha.com/article/4244058-activision-blizzard-losing-voice "Highlighted by the loss of community manager Fangtooth, formerly employee number 127 and 15-year veteran of the company, the loss of expertise in the recent restructuring is becoming evident. Loosing the most experienced people who fully understand the company and the role they perform, in a role that is likely to be of greater importance moving forward (community management), is in the authors opinion an unnecessary risk by ATVI moving forward." ya, so.. this ain't good. On February 16 2019 14:35 Cyro wrote: Gotta disagree on that, played through it recently and the consistent failure to build scv's, depots, expansions and production "on time" is probably the biggest thing making people diamond and not masters i find it easier to spend all my money when i'm building 4+ tank/thors per "macro round". | ||
| ||
StarCraft 2 StarCraft: Brood War Dota 2 Counter-Strike Super Smash Bros Heroes of the Storm Other Games |
|
OSC
WardiTV Summer Champion…
WardiTV Summer Champion…
PiGosaur Monday
WardiTV Summer Champion…
Stormgate Nexus
uThermal 2v2 Circuit
The PondCast
WardiTV Summer Champion…
Replay Cast
[ Show More ] |
|
|
EPT
