Found this on Reddit yesterday and was surprised this didn't get posted on TL.
More High Profile Blizzard Esports Staff Set To Leave
Forum Index > SC2 General |
geokilla
Canada8162 Posts
Found this on Reddit yesterday and was surprised this didn't get posted on TL. | ||
Nakajin
Canada8772 Posts
Pretty sure the whole Hots debacle wouldn't have happen if she wouldn't have been on maternity leave. On a related note, I wouldn't be surprise if we see esport in general get dowsise in the comming year/months, no one is looking healty (aka most of it is not profitable) and the economy won't stay on the up forever. | ||
WGT-Baal
France3155 Posts
| ||
digmouse
China6282 Posts
| ||
JimmyJRaynor
Canada15564 Posts
On June 03 2019 07:52 Nakajin wrote: Ouch if Kim Phan leaves too it's another bad oment for us, she has been at the head of the boat for a long time and she seemed like one of the last who had an interest in brand/community protection. meh, losing an esports person at a video game company is like an NFL team losing a wide receiver. If the QB and the offensive line sucks the wide receiver doesn't matter. Blizzard has been hemorrhaging active users for 2 years. They are down to 32 million active users. It doesn't matter what the esports people do if no new games are coming out and the current games have content that is not keeping the current user base interested. The way things are going it doesn't matter what Kim Phan does. Stopping the bleeding at Blizzard depends on the teams of game makers building great new games. | ||
geokilla
Canada8162 Posts
On June 03 2019 12:05 JimmyJRaynor wrote: Blizzard has been hemorrhaging active users for 2 years. They are down to 32 million active users. It doesn't matter what the esports people do if no new games are coming out and the current games have content that is not keeping the current user base interested. The way things are going it doesn't matter what Kim Phan does. Stopping the bleeding at Blizzard depends on the teams of game makers building great new games. I disagree. If you look at CS:GO and LoL, both games are still extremely popular to play and watch right now. There's new professional players entering into the scene, there's constant patches to the game (for LoL) where new champions are released or balance is changed, and just overall there's a lot more action from the developers. Whereas with SC2, the only thing that changed from an esports perspective are the map pool. I can't say much about the other esports since I don't watch or play them, but isn't Dota and Fortnite also extremely popular? I thought they both have a very active and healthy esports scene? | ||
pvsnp
7676 Posts
On June 03 2019 11:03 digmouse wrote: At this point, savor whatever you have in this year's WCS. Hey, look on the bright side. If WCS gets disbanded soon, the Korean scene won't collapse after all the pros got drafted. | ||
JimmyJRaynor
Canada15564 Posts
On June 03 2019 12:19 geokilla wrote: I disagree. If you look at CS:GO and LoL, both games are still extremely popular to play and watch right now. There's new professional players entering into the scene, there's constant patches to the game (for LoL) where new champions are released or balance is changed, and just overall there's a lot more action from the developers. Whereas with SC2, the only thing that changed from an esports perspective are the map pool. I can't say much about the other esports since I don't watch or play them, but isn't Dota and Fortnite also extremely popular? I thought they both have a very active and healthy esports scene? how big was Blizzard's esports team in 1999? it didn't exist. Make the game great like Brood War and the esports will follow. Make an above average to very good game like Overwatch and people will move on a couple of years after the game is released. | ||
geokilla
Canada8162 Posts
On June 03 2019 12:27 JimmyJRaynor wrote: how big was Blizzard's esports team in 1999? it didn't exist. Make the game great like Brood War and the esports will follow. Make an above average to very good game like Overwatch and people will move on a couple of years after the game is released. I haven't followed esports till after the release of SC2, but what does 1999 have to do with anything? Outside of Korea, I would guess esports didn't really took off until 2010s? | ||
JimmyJRaynor
Canada15564 Posts
| ||
Waxangel
United States32499 Posts
On June 03 2019 07:52 Nakajin wrote: Ouch if Kim Phan leaves too it's another bad oment for us, she has been at the head of the boat for a long time and she seemed like one of the last who had an interest in brand/community protection. Pretty sure the whole Hots debacle wouldn't have happen if she wouldn't have been on maternity leave. On a related note, I wouldn't be surprise if we see esport in general get dowsise in the comming year/months, no one is looking healty (aka most of it is not profitable) and the economy won't stay on the up forever. Well, I'd not read into THAT particular aspect any more deeply than the article itself states: morale is low at Blizzard. Whether or not this is good or bad for esports/SC2 in particular is dubious. The more worrying aspect is that traditional sports personnel have been brought in to oversee esports at Blizzard, and that "the focus has become commercializing the esports titles instead of making good programs for the community." One might look at this negatively for a game such as StarCraft II which has limited esports popularity (despite its growth) compared to the biggest titles. | ||
Solar424
United States4001 Posts
| ||
lechatnoir
361 Posts
| ||
Vutalisk
United States679 Posts
| ||
ZenithM
France15952 Posts
| ||
digmouse
China6282 Posts
On June 03 2019 13:17 Solar424 wrote: Who would've thought that Activision would kill Blizzard from the inside? Stop making games the dedicated fans want, make more lootboxes and Call of Duty! Ironically, this year's Call of Duty ditched season pass and added full cross platform multiplayer, something the community has been asking for years. | ||
Pandemona
Charlie Sheens House51327 Posts
Biggest issue for them as well is keeping the talent they have, so many big companies out there now to compete with and they can just try and get jobs with competitors. Hope Blizzard take note and try to change other areas instead of Esports areas. | ||
Pandain
United States12862 Posts
| ||
Anc13nt
1557 Posts
| ||
GreasedUpDeafGuy
United States398 Posts
| ||
deacon.frost
Czech Republic12116 Posts
On June 03 2019 12:19 geokilla wrote: I disagree. If you look at CS:GO and LoL, both games are still extremely popular to play and watch right now. There's new professional players entering into the scene, there's constant patches to the game (for LoL) where new champions are released or balance is changed, and just overall there's a lot more action from the developers. Whereas with SC2, the only thing that changed from an esports perspective are the map pool. I can't say much about the other esports since I don't watch or play them, but isn't Dota and Fortnite also extremely popular? I thought they both have a very active and healthy esports scene? Partially apples and oranges, partially a direct no. 1) Both CS:GO and LoL are team games. While this doesn't seem important it brings up the thing that "I didn't fuck up, team mates are bad" and people bring their friends to play with them. This isn't a factor for SC2 e-sport. (while people may bring their friends for arcade or coop) 2) Actually I dare to say that SC2 is pretty stable in terms of users. but because the game is very difficult and its sole focus is 1v1 it attracts only limited amount of people. Which means Sc2 won't be ever big(at least not as big as BW in Korea). This brings the fact that Blizzard doesn't pump much money into SC2 development and rather into the scene. To be fair, CS:GO doesn't get much either, does it? + Show Spoiler + Edit> What I mean is that CS:GO gets maps, skins(same as SC2), recently new mode(coop in SC2 can be an example too), went F2P recently(same with SC2, just different dates). The game is just more played, "that's all" | ||
nanaoei
3358 Posts
| ||
MrFreeman
207 Posts
| ||
GreasedUpDeafGuy
United States398 Posts
On June 03 2019 18:21 MrFreeman wrote: There is still money to be made in RTS and some interesting RTS games still come out. If blizz implodes, we can just switch to another title. Total War: Three Kingdoms is only like 30% RTS, but it's pretty bad ass, be the most mundane esport ever though | ||
gTank
Austria2259 Posts
On June 03 2019 18:32 GreasedUpDeafGuy wrote: Total War: Three Kingdoms is only like 30% RTS, but it's pretty bad ass, be the most mundane esport ever though Yes, TW games are super popular and well made. Also, I have higher hopes for C&C remastered and WC3 Reforged. | ||
Plexa
Aotearoa39261 Posts
On June 03 2019 17:35 Pandain wrote: If Kim is leaving you know something is fucked up Yeah this doesn't look good... | ||
WombaT
Northern Ireland20731 Posts
Sure you can’t put a number on it and Blizzard isn’t perfect but it has a lot of loyal fans for a reason, the company had people who knew their games and had a passion for their products, and connections with the fans. Between some OG guys leaving, other layoffs, this and other stuff that’s leaked out, and the Diablo Immortal debacle, none of these individually are nails in the coffin, together they do point to a worrying trend indeed. There was only going to be friction between a company with a ‘when it’s done’ ethos and one that pushes games out annually in some of their series. Made no sense to me at the time | ||
WombaT
Northern Ireland20731 Posts
On June 03 2019 18:47 gTank wrote: Yes, TW games are super popular and well made. Also, I have higher hopes for C&C remastered and WC3 Reforged. Being good is sadly not enough in today’s market, arena FPS has similar issues, I think people just prefer to play mechanically easier games, or team games rather than brutally mechanically difficult games who are primarily balanced around 1v1 and get your arse handed to you. I personally prefer RTS and arena shooters over everything else, so I hope I’m wrong and we have some more big hits. I’d hazard a guess the average Liquidian is considerably older than the average gamer on other online communities and subreddits My hopes are high for Warcraft Reforged if they don’t fuck it up, it’s a great, great game for one. I found it the most fun to just play casually back in the day, but is also fun competitively. It is the granddaddy of MOBAs mechanically so I think players of those games who haven’t played it or maybe even RTS at all will give it a shot. Likewise WoW fans who like the universe but maybe haven’t played the strategy games in that universe. I’m hopeful it’ll do well in this regard, as I am hopeful any time an RTS launches, even ones I don’t actually like. Shows the demand is there. | ||
Acrofales
Spain17186 Posts
On June 03 2019 18:47 gTank wrote: Yes, TW games are super popular and well made. Also, I have higher hopes for C&C remastered and WC3 Reforged. How is C&C remastered *at all* interesting from an e-sports point of view? Either it's a graphic update, which leaves it a fun, but fundamentally unbalanced and 1-dimensional game, or it's not "remastered"? WC3 Reforged could breathe life into the stale WC3 community, but I prefer SC2 over WC3 as a game. Both to play and to watch. | ||
gTank
Austria2259 Posts
On June 03 2019 21:07 Acrofales wrote: How is C&C remastered *at all* interesting from an e-sports point of view? Either it's a graphic update, which leaves it a fun, but fundamentally unbalanced and 1-dimensional game, or it's not "remastered"? WC3 Reforged could breathe life into the stale WC3 community, but I prefer SC2 over WC3 as a game. Both to play and to watch. Afaik there is a competitive scene for C&C games.WC3 is still going somewhat strong despite of the game being that old. If reforged is a success, maybe that inspires others to do good RTS as well? I would like that. | ||
stilt
France2632 Posts
Disgusting as usual. | ||
DomeGetta
480 Posts
| ||
Nakajin
Canada8772 Posts
On June 04 2019 00:54 DomeGetta wrote: Viewership is literally doubling last year - Blizzard is a business - they are going to continue to act like a business - as long as the community stays strong we are going to be fine boys. Yes and no, more viewership doesn't necessarily mean a considerably bigger amount of money coming in, and for sure doesn't make running WCS-GSL by themselves a profitable activity, also viewership metric are questionable, I'm gonna try to find the article I read it in, but basically number are generally inflated across the board in esport. Dosen't mean running a SC2 scene is necessarily a bad idea business wise, but it's certainly something that can go away if you put people in charge with different idea on the role of esport in the company. Edit: there it is https://kotaku.com/as-esports-grows-experts-fear-its-a-bubble-ready-to-po-1834982843 | ||
renaissanceMAN
United States1840 Posts
On June 04 2019 01:10 Nakajin wrote: Yes and no, more viewership dosen't necessarily mean a considerably bigger amount of money, and for sure dosen't make running WCS-GSL a by themself a profitable activity, also viewership metric are questionable, I'm gonna try to find the article I read it in, but basically number are generally inflated across the board in esport. Edit: there it is https://kotaku.com/as-esports-grows-experts-fear-its-a-bubble-ready-to-po-1834982843 Now you're making me VERY nervous | ||
Node
United States2159 Posts
| ||
Musicus
Germany23567 Posts
| ||
DomeGetta
480 Posts
On June 04 2019 01:10 Nakajin wrote: Yes and no, more viewership doesn't necessarily mean a considerably bigger amount of money coming in, and for sure doesn't make running WCS-GSL by themselves a profitable activity, also viewership metric are questionable, I'm gonna try to find the article I read it in, but basically number are generally inflated across the board in esport. Dosen't mean running a SC2 scene is necessarily a bad idea business wise, but it's certainly something that can go away if you put people in charge with different idea on the role of esport in the company. Edit: there it is https://kotaku.com/as-esports-grows-experts-fear-its-a-bubble-ready-to-po-1834982843 Yeah I hear what you're saying but when you can still launch a skin pack and generate near a million dollars I don't see any business deciding to drop that part of their market - someone will be supplying RTS to the RTS market - as of now it's blizzard and hopefully remains that way. Also - that article really doesn't do much other than hand wave - obviously the claims about esports becoming the NFL were ridiculous to begin with - but that doesn't mean we should expect a market to collapse that's been alive 25+ years (thanks to Kr and BW). Numbers most likely are inflated - but theres no reason to believe there was some revolutionary technology developed this year that made them go up - they are still up relative to last year - which points to growing vs. dying etc. | ||
Shuffleblade
Sweden1903 Posts
On June 04 2019 04:44 DomeGetta wrote: Yeah I hear what you're saying but when you can still launch a skin pack and generate near a million dollars I don't see any business deciding to drop that part of their market - someone will be supplying RTS to the RTS market - as of now it's blizzard and hopefully remains that way. Also - that article really doesn't do much other than hand wave - obviously the claims about esports becoming the NFL were ridiculous to begin with - but that doesn't mean we should expect a market to collapse that's been alive 25+ years (thanks to Kr and BW). Numbers most likely are inflated - but theres no reason to believe there was some revolutionary technology developed this year that made them go up - they are still up relative to last year - which points to growing vs. dying etc. Well the problem is that the more common knowledge it become the more sponsors get to realize that the views doesnt mean what they were told they meant. The reason the numbers are inflated is because the orgs are courting sponsors, and we all know what happens when there are no more sponsors. Sure esport wont go away but it can shrink, seeing as how massively big some esports have gotten it can shrink quite significantly. As to your arguement about skin packs, sure ofc no company would drop that part, unless it also meant increased costs for support, development, tournament costs and so on. It is possible that the actual gains from sc2 isnt near what you think. | ||
DomeGetta
480 Posts
On June 04 2019 05:11 Shuffleblade wrote: Well the problem is that the more common knowledge it become the more sponsors get to realize that the views doesnt mean what they were told they meant. The reason the numbers are inflated is because the orgs are courting sponsors, and we all know what happens when there are no more sponsors. Sure esport wont go away but it can shrink, seeing as how massively big some esports have gotten it can shrink quite significantly. As to your arguement about skin packs, sure ofc no company would drop that part, unless it also meant increased costs for support, development, tournament costs and so on. It is possible that the actual gains from sc2 isnt near what you think. Yeah I'm gonna take a crazy guess and say they wouldn't be on the 6th or so skin pack by now if they were losing money on it lol - strong community brings sponsorship - sponsorship helps keep the scene alive - I'm just pointing out that there is a huge difference between "not becoming the NFL" and everyone starting a twitch picnic chant that esports is dying because somebody at blizz is gone or an article showed that viewership numbers are suspect - SC was alive before all of that - and will be alive after! | ||
Shuffleblade
Sweden1903 Posts
On June 04 2019 05:24 DomeGetta wrote: Yeah I'm gonna take a crazy guess and say they wouldn't be on the 6th or so skin pack by now if they were losing money on it lol - strong community brings sponsorship - sponsorship helps keep the scene alive - I'm just pointing out that there is a huge difference between "not becoming the NFL" and everyone starting a twitch picnic chant that esports is dying because somebody at blizz is gone or an article showed that viewership numbers are suspect - SC was alive before all of that - and will be alive after! Oh my god You really dont understand. I'm not saying they arent making money "on the skin pack", I'm saying they aren't making money on sc2. If they have decided to support GSL, WCS and have blizzcon + all the price money, +continuous support of sc2. Patch wise and support wise. Either they can go minus minus minus in their budget (only minus) or they could make s skin pack and maybe lose less money on sc2. It is worth it for Riot for example,, "league of legends", because the amount of money they make on cosmetic in-game items are insane compared to sc2. If they believe the league increases sales they can do it, because running those leagues might lose them money but league of legends as a whole business makes money. SC2 has almost no income but tons of costs, of course sc2 doesn't make money for the company anymore. I would be surprised if they ever broke even (besides when actually selling the games). If you acutally think SC2 is still making Blizz money we are simply at an impasse, we wont get any farther in these discussions. | ||
Nakajin
Canada8772 Posts
On June 04 2019 05:43 Shuffleblade wrote: Oh my god You really dont understand. I'm not saying they arent making money "on the skin pack", I'm saying they aren't making money on sc2. If they have decided to support GSL, WCS and have blizzcon + all the price money, +continuous support of sc2. Patch wise and support wise. Either they can go minus minus minus in their budget (only minus) or they could make s skin pack and maybe lose less money on sc2. It is worth it for Riot for example,, "league of legends", because the amount of money they make on cosmetic in-game items are insane compared to sc2. If they believe the league increases sales they can do it, because running those leagues might lose them money but league of legends as a whole business makes money. SC2 has almost no income but tons of costs, of course sc2 doesn't make money for the company anymore. I would be surprised if they ever broke even (besides when actually selling the games). If you acutally think SC2 is still making Blizz money we are simply at an impasse, we wont get any farther in these discussions. Well I don't think anyone here actually know if Blizz is making money on SC2 or not to be honest. Esport "alone" (without the publicity for the warchest or any other blizz focus publicity) isn't that we know, or at least it's what we heard from people working in the scene. | ||
DomeGetta
480 Posts
On June 04 2019 05:43 Shuffleblade wrote: Oh my god You really dont understand. I'm not saying they arent making money "on the skin pack", I'm saying they aren't making money on sc2. If they have decided to support GSL, WCS and have blizzcon + all the price money, +continuous support of sc2. Patch wise and support wise. Either they can go minus minus minus in their budget (only minus) or they could make s skin pack and maybe lose less money on sc2. It is worth it for Riot for example,, "league of legends", because the amount of money they make on cosmetic in-game items are insane compared to sc2. If they believe the league increases sales they can do it, because running those leagues might lose them money but league of legends as a whole business makes money. SC2 has almost no income but tons of costs, of course sc2 doesn't make money for the company anymore. I would be surprised if they ever broke even (besides when actually selling the games). If you acutally think SC2 is still making Blizz money we are simply at an impasse, we wont get any farther in these discussions. So your more realistic perspective is that Blizzard has been carrying on a charity for 25 years?? Im not saying they are rolling in it but they must see some benefit from supporting it other than philanthropy? What Im saying is I dont see anything that points toward dead game.. if what you are saying is true tho..(which seems absurdly far fetched for my imagination but that doesnt make it impossible) then I guess I could see some danger. | ||
Dangermousecatdog
United Kingdom7084 Posts
| ||
Shuffleblade
Sweden1903 Posts
On June 04 2019 05:56 Nakajin wrote: Well I don't think anyone here actually know if Blizz is making money on SC2 or not to be honest. Esport "alone" (without the publicity for the warchest or any other blizz focus publicity) isn't that we know, or at least it's what we heard from people working in the scene. Well just answer me this, what are the complex income-expense graph looking like? Because as I very roughly stated, and which the article on kotaku you linked earlier also discuss is that esport right now is simply an "investment" it loses money. To discuss this we simply must ask ourselves this, besides the skin chests what income does blizzard get from starcraft 2? They had actually sales of wol, hots and lotv, after that its the ghost "dlc" as well as coop commanders thats it. Sales of sc2 physical items shouldn't be a big income and team exclusive shirts like TL shirt for example doesnt go to blizz. Obviously while streaming starcraft events they get income from commercials but you don't have to be a twitch partner to know how low the income is per viewed add. So we have the above compared to the wages of all of the starcraft development team, balance team, support team as well as the price money and costs actually making WCS fo example. Costs that will include wages for casters, observers but also all the staff behind the scenes as well as rent for the location. Ofcourse no one knows Blizzards economy but themselves but its not that hard to put one and two together, especially since its well known that esport in general doesn't make money. Tell me what income from starcraft 2 blizzard that I missed. On June 04 2019 06:36 DomeGetta wrote: So your more realistic perspective is that Blizzard has been carrying on a charity for 25 years?? Im not saying they are rolling in it but they must see some benefit from supporting it other than philanthropy? What Im saying is I dont see anything that points toward dead game.. if what you are saying is true tho..(which seems absurdly far fetched for my imagination but that doesnt make it impossible) then I guess I could see some danger. There is so much to unpack here, 25 years? The sc2 team has not been running for 25 years, Sc1 is not still being patched and updated and blizzard hasn't supported that scene with prize money in forever. The bw scene which the community themselves drive is not a cost for blizzard, sc2 is. When Blizz launched sc2 they were hoping on making the next big game and they were hoping to not make the same mistake they did with bw. Which was to let the game get out of their hands, they took away LAN and the plan was to implement a way to continue to make money on SC2 as alive service, just like league has managed to do. However their plan failed, the engine wasn't equipped to handle cosmetics in the same way, it didn't have the same pull as in team games and a lot of people were skeptical due to integrity of the sport. Would skins make it harder to for the opponent to play against "new" skins, it also took several years before computers were expected to be able to handle the increased strain. They never managed to make a model that worked. SC2 was another failed attempt at making the next big thing. Supporting sc2 has surely been a losing endevour since the trilogy was completed and all the game sales were over. However if Blizzard would choose to make starcraft 3 how would it look for them if they just cancelled all their plans for sc2 just because it underperformed or they failed to plan a working business model around it? Not to mention Blizzard actually had passionate souls to drive sc2 even if it lost them money. Stopping support straight away would be incredibly bad publicity, their chance to make that slamdunk rts would be greatly diminished. Now we have Blizzard corrupted by their owners cutting needless costs and sc2 is likely a needless cost, the only way justify it is if they want to keep us around to sell a future game. Te better they support starcraft 2 today the more likely the sc2 folloing is to continue onto sc3 or wcs4. | ||
argonautdice
Canada2654 Posts
| ||
GreasedUpDeafGuy
United States398 Posts
| ||
DomeGetta
480 Posts
On June 04 2019 07:16 Shuffleblade wrote: Well just answer me this, what are the complex income-expense graph looking like? Because as I very roughly stated, and which the article on kotaku you linked earlier also discuss is that esport right now is simply an "investment" it loses money. To discuss this we simply must ask ourselves this, besides the skin chests what income does blizzard get from starcraft 2? They had actually sales of wol, hots and lotv, after that its the ghost "dlc" as well as coop commanders thats it. Sales of sc2 physical items shouldn't be a big income and team exclusive shirts like TL shirt for example doesnt go to blizz. Obviously while streaming starcraft events they get income from commercials but you don't have to be a twitch partner to know how low the income is per viewed add. So we have the above compared to the wages of all of the starcraft development team, balance team, support team as well as the price money and costs actually making WCS fo example. Costs that will include wages for casters, observers but also all the staff behind the scenes as well as rent for the location. Ofcourse no one knows Blizzards economy but themselves but its not that hard to put one and two together, especially since its well known that esport in general doesn't make money. Tell me what income from starcraft 2 blizzard that I missed. There is so much to unpack here, 25 years? The sc2 team has not been running for 25 years, Sc1 is not still being patched and updated and blizzard hasn't supported that scene with prize money in forever. The bw scene which the community themselves drive is not a cost for blizzard, sc2 is. When Blizz launched sc2 they were hoping on making the next big game and they were hoping to not make the same mistake they did with bw. Which was to let the game get out of their hands, they took away LAN and the plan was to implement a way to continue to make money on SC2 as alive service, just like league has managed to do. However their plan failed, the engine wasn't equipped to handle cosmetics in the same way, it didn't have the same pull as in team games and a lot of people were skeptical due to integrity of the sport. Would skins make it harder to for the opponent to play against "new" skins, it also took several years before computers were expected to be able to handle the increased strain. They never managed to make a model that worked. SC2 was another failed attempt at making the next big thing. Supporting sc2 has surely been a losing endevour since the trilogy was completed and all the game sales were over. However if Blizzard would choose to make starcraft 3 how would it look for them if they just cancelled all their plans for sc2 just because it underperformed or they failed to plan a working business model around it? Not to mention Blizzard actually had passionate souls to drive sc2 even if it lost them money. Stopping support straight away would be incredibly bad publicity, their chance to make that slamdunk rts would be greatly diminished. Now we have Blizzard corrupted by their owners cutting needless costs and sc2 is likely a needless cost, the only way justify it is if they want to keep us around to sell a future game. Te better they support starcraft 2 today the more likely the sc2 folloing is to continue onto sc3 or wcs4. You are making a ton of assumptions there with absolutely no basis. You are assuming that they hold fixed costs in staffing to only work on SC2 - they aren't doing much with it at all outside of balance patches every 4 or 5 months and a 1 or 2 per year skin pack - I would be shocked if they have "full time developers and support staff" 100% dedicated to SC2 - and they probably haven't for years now. Yes they sponsor WCS - you have no idea what it costs them or what they make off of it in terms of exposure for their brand. The tournaments most likely do not turn a profit - but no remotely successful company is going allow their finances to hemorrhage year over year because they "love SC2". Even if you believe (which I do not) that the old Blizzard was just donating money with SC2 - there is literally no way Activision would do that. So why are they continuing to support SC2? Most likely because it is benefiting their business either directly or indirectly at a minimal cost. They have a monopoly on the RTS community - there is literally no where else to go for RTS outside of Blizzard - there is still obviously a large enough market for RTS games to make that an advantageous position. | ||
WombaT
Northern Ireland20731 Posts
| ||
ETisME
12082 Posts
Really hoping this doesn't lead to an over reaction from blizzard and kills StarCraft 2 esports scene too but if esports were riding on hypes, then a fall can be equally as fast and damaging to the scene. It's also a weird timing, considering Warcraft remaster is coming out and there's certainly an interest for a competitive scene. Why is blizzard cutting on esports now? Blizzard is going to suffer big time by shifting focus to mobile. They are riding on their brands to sell their games, mobile players aren't loyal to brands. Eventually the core fans will leave and the brand will be lose what it had | ||
deacon.frost
Czech Republic12116 Posts
On June 04 2019 07:14 Dangermousecatdog wrote: I have no problem believing that Blizzard makes money on SC2, even tangentially, or as part of a general plan. Activision would had stopped promoting SC2 along time ago otherwise. Even activision know that they can't stop everything at once. | ||
Harris1st
Germany6140 Posts
If done right Blizz can do a WC3 Reforged league to promote SC2 and vice versa without investing too much | ||
Tayar
United States1439 Posts
| ||
Shuffleblade
Sweden1903 Posts
On June 04 2019 10:45 DomeGetta wrote: You are making a ton of assumptions there with absolutely no basis. I understand where you are coming from but you missing some pretty big stuff. I do make a ton of assumptions, I do have basis for them however and I posted them above. On June 04 2019 10:45 DomeGetta wrote: You are assuming that they hold fixed costs in staffing to only work on SC2 - they aren't doing much with it at all outside of balance patches every 4 or 5 months and a 1 or 2 per year skin pack - I would be shocked if they have "full time developers and support staff" 100% dedicated to SC2 - and they probably haven't for years now. "They aren't doing much".... You severely underestimating the amount of time and personal it takes to do things like make the wcs schedule, follow up the wcs schedule, keep contact with players, casters, behind the scenes personnel, fix with flighttickets, hotell lodging update the schedule and post the plans online, secure the finances. Just one wcs event takes a lot of time to plan, its not just magically fixed in two hours. Balance patches....... The amount of work that goes into these, I don't even know how to begin to explain this. How do you think Blizz works up proposed balance changes? You think one person decides alone?You think multiple people meet to discuss it? If they do they need to prepare and follow up eventual ideas, you think they do the changes without any knowledge of the winrates, community opinion and outcomes of pro games? All of which takes a huge amount of time to reseach. You might be right, there might not be any full time personnel on sc2, but 15 people working 33% with sc2 is still 5 full wages which could be around 4500 (american average) dollars a month *5 = 22 500 dollars in costs per month only looking at local wages. You think all of the sc2 content, balance and tournaments are the results of one person working what eight hour a week with starcraft 2? They aren't magicians, that is impossible. On June 04 2019 10:45 DomeGetta wrote: Yes they sponsor WCS - you have no idea what it costs them or what they make off of it in terms of exposure for their brand. Erm, that was what I wrote a lot about in my previous post. That what they are doing does a lot for their brand, but exposure for their brand is not income and if it is it is not measurable. No one is arguing that its not good for them to get exposure, and no I don't know how "much" exposure they get from it but no one knows that not even Blizz themselves lol On June 04 2019 10:45 DomeGetta wrote: The tournaments most likely do not turn a profit - but no remotely successful company is going allow their finances to hemorrhage year over year because they "love SC2". Even if you believe (which I do not) that the old Blizzard was just donating money with SC2 - there is literally no way Activision would do that. So why are they continuing to support SC2? Most likely because it is benefiting their business either directly or indirectly at a minimal cost. They have a monopoly on the RTS community - there is literally no where else to go for RTS outside of Blizzard - there is still obviously a large enough market for RTS games to make that an advantageous position. So now you agree that they are likely losing money? Hemorrhaging money is actually very common in the financial world, its called investment. If you would have read kotakus article you probably would understand this better. Esport in general is losing money everywhere in hopes of getting a high return later when a better income model is found. This is how most businesses grows, someone invested a lot of money while not getting anything back immediately hoping they will earn money on it later. This is also what I wrote a lot about in my previous post, Blizzard stand to gain a lot on us as a market further down the line if they choose to release more rts games. Investing in keeping this niche market happy is not outrageous. Believing no company invests in the future as you do is rediculous, how do you think anything new is developed? Someone invested massive amounts of money into research not getting anything in return at the risk of never getting anything in return, thats how investment works. "So why are they continuing to support SC2? Most likely because it is benefiting their business either directly or indirectly at a minimal cost. " Obviously it is benefiting their business, I wrote tons about that in my earlier post and above. That doesn't change the fact that they are likely losing A LOT of money on SC2. Just do the math, they work they do versus the income they get. So why are they contiuing to support sc2? Its funny you ask that in a thread about how they are stopping their support more and more. I could use the counter arguement, if SC2 is so successful for them as you keep insisting, why are the continously getting rid of very KEY people working with SC2? The answer is there for all to see. | ||
Lorch
Germany3657 Posts
Oh well, enjoy this year if you like SC2. BW will probably be around forever (inspite of Blizzards best efforts to kill it off), so you can always change games if SC2 dies next year. | ||
xtorn
4060 Posts
On June 03 2019 11:03 digmouse wrote: At this point, savor whatever you have in this year's WCS. precisely. | ||
DreamlnCode
United Kingdom77 Posts
If the foreign scene does collapse, it will be interesting to see how the Korean scene adapts as they don't really seem to follow western trends when it comes to Esports. At this point I am more than thankful for all the attention afreeca has given the scene over the years. | ||
deacon.frost
Czech Republic12116 Posts
On June 05 2019 02:19 Lorch wrote: Wow I would have fired Kim when she fucked over the foreign and korean scene with her constant WCS changes in 2013-2016. Now that things are actually working out (at least for the foreign scene) I figured she'd keep her job. Oh well, enjoy this year if you like SC2. BW will probably be around forever (inspite of Blizzards best efforts to kill it off), so you can always change games if SC2 dies next year. You do realize, that many people are leaving on their own because they don't like to work under the new management? Especially after the lay offs? Maybe Kim is leaving instead of being fired. It's even in the article! Sources internal to Blizzard confirmed the reason for the latest round of departures as being linked to low morale, especially surrounding the development of the esports divisions of their games. “People are really getting tired of working for Pete Vlastelica,” one source said. “The focus has become commercializing the esports titles instead of making good programs for the community. Many people internally are laying that on Pete, and it has crushed morale among the Call of Duty and Overwatch teams especially.” | ||
renaissanceMAN
United States1840 Posts
| ||
renaissanceMAN
United States1840 Posts
On June 04 2019 08:05 GreasedUpDeafGuy wrote: I really need that meme of the dog sitting in the fire saying "This is fine" while it's not on fire, he's currently chillin on my desk at work: On June 04 2019 20:10 Harris1st wrote: I think Starcraft as an esport is fine. It is unique and it doesn't cost that much to sustain. There are no superinflated pricepools, salaries and stuff like mentioned in the kotaku article. It is pretty down to earth. If done right Blizz can do a WC3 Reforged league to promote SC2 and vice versa without investing too much they may not have to do much, but if they refuse to do anything at all, it might be hard to sustain any sort of scene | ||
DomeGetta
480 Posts
On June 05 2019 01:27 Shuffleblade wrote: I understand where you are coming from but you missing some pretty big stuff. I do make a ton of assumptions, I do have basis for them however and I posted them above. "They aren't doing much".... You severely underestimating the amount of time and personal it takes to do things like make the wcs schedule, follow up the wcs schedule, keep contact with players, casters, behind the scenes personnel, fix with flighttickets, hotell lodging update the schedule and post the plans online, secure the finances. Just one wcs event takes a lot of time to plan, its not just magically fixed in two hours. Balance patches....... The amount of work that goes into these, I don't even know how to begin to explain this. How do you think Blizz works up proposed balance changes? You think one person decides alone?You think multiple people meet to discuss it? If they do they need to prepare and follow up eventual ideas, you think they do the changes without any knowledge of the winrates, community opinion and outcomes of pro games? All of which takes a huge amount of time to reseach. You might be right, there might not be any full time personnel on sc2, but 15 people working 33% with sc2 is still 5 full wages which could be around 4500 (american average) dollars a month *5 = 22 500 dollars in costs per month only looking at local wages. You think all of the sc2 content, balance and tournaments are the results of one person working what eight hour a week with starcraft 2? They aren't magicians, that is impossible. Erm, that was what I wrote a lot about in my previous post. That what they are doing does a lot for their brand, but exposure for their brand is not income and if it is it is not measurable. No one is arguing that its not good for them to get exposure, and no I don't know how "much" exposure they get from it but no one knows that not even Blizz themselves lol So now you agree that they are likely losing money? Hemorrhaging money is actually very common in the financial world, its called investment. If you would have read kotakus article you probably would understand this better. Esport in general is losing money everywhere in hopes of getting a high return later when a better income model is found. This is how most businesses grows, someone invested a lot of money while not getting anything back immediately hoping they will earn money on it later. This is also what I wrote a lot about in my previous post, Blizzard stand to gain a lot on us as a market further down the line if they choose to release more rts games. Investing in keeping this niche market happy is not outrageous. Believing no company invests in the future as you do is rediculous, how do you think anything new is developed? Someone invested massive amounts of money into research not getting anything in return at the risk of never getting anything in return, thats how investment works. "So why are they continuing to support SC2? Most likely because it is benefiting their business either directly or indirectly at a minimal cost. " Obviously it is benefiting their business, I wrote tons about that in my earlier post and above. That doesn't change the fact that they are likely losing A LOT of money on SC2. Just do the math, they work they do versus the income they get. So why are they contiuing to support sc2? Its funny you ask that in a thread about how they are stopping their support more and more. I could use the counter arguement, if SC2 is so successful for them as you keep insisting, why are the continously getting rid of very KEY people working with SC2? The answer is there for all to see. Not sure how you can confuse hemorraging money with investing lmao. Investing implies an expected value in r.o.i. When your "investment" ceases to pay off year over year and you are an actual business you stop "investing". Again as much as you like to pontificate blizzards cost in supporting SC2 you have no idea what they are. The only thing that a reduction in staff supporting SC2 means is that they are reducing that cost. That in no way represents that they are planning to stop supporting SC2. It could easily mean that they are being more responsible with their "investing". I did read the article and like I said previously it doesnt lead me to believe the sky is falling on SC2. Since you have admitted to having no idea what the cost or what the benefit is of SC2 to blizzard your conclusion that they are "losing a ton of money" on sc2 sounds a bit nuts. | ||
Shuffleblade
Sweden1903 Posts
On June 05 2019 23:27 DomeGetta wrote: Not sure how you can confuse hemorraging money with investing lmao. Investing implies an expected value in r.o.i. When your "investment" ceases to pay off year over year and you are an actual business you stop "investing". Again as much as you like to pontificate blizzards cost in supporting SC2 you have no idea what they are. The only thing that a reduction in staff supporting SC2 means is that they are reducing that cost. That in no way represents that they are planning to stop supporting SC2. It could easily mean that they are being more responsible with their "investing". I did read the article and like I said previously it doesnt lead me to believe the sky is falling on SC2. Since you have admitted to having no idea what the cost or what the benefit is of SC2 to blizzard your conclusion that they are "losing a ton of money" on sc2 sounds a bit nuts. I've explained it to you multiple times, its simple math, they have big costs and small income if you don't think that = losses that is on you not me. If there is something in previous posts you don't understand feel free to ask, otherwise you can argue about how a small income - big cost doesn't equal a loss. Looking forward to it mr sane guy. | ||
Shuffleblade
Sweden1903 Posts
| ||
Nakajin
Canada8772 Posts
On June 05 2019 23:47 Shuffleblade wrote: I've explained it to you multiple times, its simple math, they have big costs and small income if you don't think that = losses that is on you not me. If there is something in previous posts you don't understand feel free to ask, otherwise you can argue about how a small income - big cost doesn't equal a loss. Looking forward to it mr sane guy. I don't get where you are getting your "big cost - small income" when we don't know either the number of people working on the game or the sale number of Coop Commander, altought we do have the warchest figure and they sell all of them everytime. Maybe they do are losing a lot of money on SC2, maybe not, we can safelly assume it's not one of their most profitable assett, but I don't really see the point of arguing about it without actual figure in front of us. | ||
DomeGetta
480 Posts
On June 05 2019 23:55 Nakajin wrote: I don't get where you are getting your "big cost - small income" when we don't know either the number of people working on the game or the sale number of Coop Commander, altought we do have the warchest figure and they sell all of them everytime. Maybe they do are losing a lot of money on SC2, maybe not, we can safelly assume it's not one of their most profitable assett, but I don't really see the point of arguing about it without actual figure in front of us. Yeah its hard explaining to people using circular logic that they arent being rational.. hes already said multiple times and aknowledged that he doesnt know but then persists with "knowing" in the next post he makes lolol...just to clarify for you shuffle..in case you have totally lost it at this point... yes yes we agree with the 1st grade math youve done... big cost plus small income equals a loss...roger that friend. Except you dont (as youve already said LOL) know the cost..or the income...so just get off it already lmao. | ||
Proko
United States1022 Posts
| ||
necrosexy
451 Posts
On June 07 2019 01:28 Proko wrote: Whether or not esports is a bubble, the bubbly atmosphere warps the scene. Profit chasing us going to kill morale and feed misguided expenditures. 2 years from now we will look on 2019 as the end of the 2nd golden era of sc2. Not sure it will ever come back. golden era was WoL before BL/infestor killed it | ||
pdd
Australia9933 Posts
On June 07 2019 10:58 necrosexy wrote: golden era was WoL before BL/infestor killed it Desert Oasis and Steppes of War was peak SC2. Seriously, SC2 decline was because of competing games like Dota 2 and League of Legends. That's all there was to it. | ||
| ||