eatpraylove Profile Joined October 2010 United States 53 Posts #1 Jumping the Shark on which Soren Johnson (of Civ 4 fame) was the guest. He made the alarming comment that Activision's CFO had said that StarCraft 2 was not really worth it. I'm guessing this would have been on the investor's conference call in February.



The comment is at 50:16. Here's a link:



http://gameshark.libsyn.com/jumping-the-shark-episode-62



Has anyone else heard about this? Couldn't find anything on TL. So I was listening to an episode ofon which Soren Johnson (of Civ 4 fame) was the guest. He made the alarming comment that Activision's CFO had said that StarCraft 2 was not really worth it. I'm guessing this would have been on the investor's conference call in February.The comment is at 50:16. Here's a link:Has anyone else heard about this? Couldn't find anything on TL.

Fat.Cat91 Profile Joined May 2011 50 Posts #2 Listen to companies that makes shitty games like call of duty more... Zero Hwaiting!!!

udgnim Profile Blog Joined April 2009 United States 7482 Posts #3 Activision's idea of worth it is Blizzard pushing out tons of games / expansions / DLC to feed to the masses until franchises are destroyed, but at least Activision can show investors revenue growth for however many short years their model will work for them.



E-Sports is competitive video gaming with a spectator fan base. Do not take the word "Sports" literally.

Tokay Profile Joined July 2010 Sweden 115 Posts #4 On May 02 2011 16:02 Fat.Cat91 wrote:

Listen to companies that makes shitty games like call of duty more...



When the company that makes shitty games owns blizzard, listening to them can be quite important.

When the company that makes shitty games owns blizzard, listening to them can be quite important.

nimbus99 Profile Blog Joined October 2010 Canada 194 Posts #5



im SO happy they didnt make it monthly, although if they did, everyone would just play BW which wouldnt be that bad at all LOL thats so funny, the big corporate assholes probably wish they put a monthly charge on ALL battle.net accounts. It would be one fee, but you can play wow, sc2, and d3....im SO happy they didnt make it monthly, although if they did, everyone would just play BW which wouldnt be that bad at all Hail to the Emperor of Terran

bloodorc44 Profile Joined January 2011 United States 31 Posts #6 On May 02 2011 16:05 nimbus99 wrote:

im SO happy they didnt make it monthly, although if they did, everyone would just play BW which wouldnt be that bad at all im SO happy they didnt make it monthly, although if they did, everyone would just play BW which wouldnt be that bad at all



It is a monthly charge for everyone in China, and there are many complaints. Blizzard says they are "working on fixing it, soon™"

It is a monthly charge for everyone in China, and there are many complaints. Blizzard says they are "working on fixing it, soon™"

Taiyoken Profile Joined April 2011 Canada 130 Posts #7 Except Activison doesn't own Blizzard?

Yoshi Kirishima Profile Blog Joined July 2009 United States 9392 Posts #8 Hopefully Activision will die and then Blizzard can be alone again (with the billions they made when Activision bought them). Either that or Activision return to their former glory back in the old days.



Btw I can't believe people actually buy CoD with all the DLC shit. I mean yeah if you have a job $60 a year and DLC and xboxlive (unless u have ps3 or PC) isn't that much if you play the game even less than often, but compared to games like SC1 and SC2? No way xD Mid-master streaming MECH ONLY + commentary www.twitch.tv/yoshikirishima +++ "If all-in fails, all-in again."

qdenser Profile Joined September 2010 Canada 133 Posts #9 the whole idea of trying to maximize profit is sick and twisted. that someone can be proud of acting only out of greed for more dollars is something i can't understand. BW is still out there and a lots of people still watch it. SC2 is a different game and different people. Please go back to BW if you think sc2 is not suited for you - Dustin Browder

Bensio Profile Blog Joined April 2010 United Kingdom 620 Posts #10



Blizzard, I would have worked for $1 an hour just to tell Dustin "stop it, just stop it" Disgusting, why oh why did the merge happenBlizzard, I would have worked for $1 an hour just to tell Dustin "stop it, just stop it"

corpuscle Profile Blog Joined April 2011 United States 1966 Posts #11 Activision wanted the first expansion pack to be Starcraft 2: The Greenest Day.



Billie Joe Armstrong has been infested by the Zerg, and his only hope for redemption is Tre Cool, hardened commander of the Dookie Defenders, a rebel corps fighting for freedom and 13 year-old girl's hearts and wallets (mostly the wallets). Power chords and powered pylons clash when Mike Dirnt and his alien armada intercede, their zealotry exceeded only by their power to ROCK. From the void I am born into wave and particle

Eury Profile Joined December 2008 Sweden 1115 Posts #12 On May 02 2011 16:00 eatpraylove wrote:

So I was listening to an episode of Jumping the Shark on which Soren Johnson (of Civ 4 fame) was the guest. He made the alarming comment that Activision's CFO had said that StarCraft 2 was not really worth it. I'm guessing this would have been on the investor's conference call in February.



The comment is at 50:16. Here's a link:



http://gameshark.libsyn.com/jumping-the-shark-episode-62



Has anyone else heard about this? Couldn't find anything on TL. So I was listening to an episode ofon which Soren Johnson (of Civ 4 fame) was the guest. He made the alarming comment that Activision's CFO had said that StarCraft 2 was not really worth it. I'm guessing this would have been on the investor's conference call in February.The comment is at 50:16. Here's a link:Has anyone else heard about this? Couldn't find anything on TL.



Starcraft has sold over 5 million copies on a platform that you don't have to pay any license fees for, of course it is worth it.



However, compared to WoW, Starcraft 2 is a very small part of Blizzard's overall revenue.

WoW went from 98% of Blizzard's revenue in 2009, to 89% in 2010. Also keep in mind that not only did WoW generated 9 times as much money as Starcraft 2 last year, the profit margins for WoW is probably a lot higher.



At the end of the day Starcraft is still very profitable for Blizzard, even though it can't compare to World of Warcraft. Very few games, if any, can. Starcraft has sold over 5 million copies on a platform that you don't have to pay any license fees for, of course it is worth it.However, compared to WoW, Starcraft 2 is a very small part of Blizzard's overall revenue.WoW went from 98% of Blizzard's revenue in 2009, to 89% in 2010. Also keep in mind that not only did WoW generated 9 times as much money as Starcraft 2 last year, the profit margins for WoW is probably a lot higher.At the end of the day Starcraft is still very profitable for Blizzard, even though it can't compare to World of Warcraft. Very few games, if any, can.

eviltomahawk Profile Blog Joined August 2010 United States 11024 Posts Last Edited: 2011-05-02 07:17:58 #13 Rough transcript:



"In New York City a few weeks ago, apparently the CFO of Activision basically said that Starcraft 2 is not really worth it. Monetarily (something something). We spent a lot of money on it. We got more money, but the return on the dollar is nothing compared to what the online, free-to-play companies are making. That profit margin just doesn't compare. When you're a major company like Activision, you have an obligation to the shareholders to pursue... if there is a strategy where the profit margin is twice as high as what you're pursuing, then it's time to exchange strategies. It doesn't make sense for Blizzard, it doesn't make sense for anyone.



But here's the thing. I don't necessarily believe the middle class game is dead because not every company out there needs to be making decisions based off of what's going to make them the most money, and in fact many don't. In the strategy gaming space, the two classic examples are Paradox and Stardock (?). Those companies are making those games not because they think are going to make the most money but because those are the games that they choose to make."



(goes on to discuss the "mid tier" game and other stuff, including stuff about League of Legends) ㅇㅅㅌㅅ

zook Profile Joined May 2007 United States 19 Posts #14 In certain countries they have the option to pay for sc2 on a subscription basis for daily/weekly/monthly fees. Some of those places with subscriptions also have the option to buy the subscription for life with a one time fee i.e Taiwan sc2 server. Considering sc2 has such a large following that multiple other companies invest their time and money into promoting it shows that the game itself is quite successful, in addition the game builds such a loyal fan base that lasts for years and is willing to jump through leaps and bounds to see the further development of the game. Activision doesn't have people constantly making new mods/content for their games for free such as UMS games, sc2 tools/utilities to improve gameplay. Activision doesn't know what it takes to have a loyal fanbase that is excited about everything they do. When Activision makes a new announcement nobody cares and expects it to flop in most cases only exceptional is call of duty and even that fanbase is floppy until the next FPS comes out thats the same if not slightly better...when Blizzard announces something new people go nuts because they know a lot of love and hard work will come into developing an incredible new title or that's what they except when they hear the name Blizzard Nice to have a fan!

CrazyFarmer Profile Joined January 2011 Canada 13 Posts #15 On May 02 2011 16:05 nimbus99 wrote:

LOL thats so funny, the big corporate assholes probably wish they put a monthly charge on ALL battle.net accounts. It would be one fee, but you can play wow, sc2, and d3....



im SO happy they didnt make it monthly, although if they did, everyone would just play BW which wouldnt be that bad at all LOL thats so funny, the big corporate assholes probably wish they put a monthly charge on ALL battle.net accounts. It would be one fee, but you can play wow, sc2, and d3....im SO happy they didnt make it monthly, although if they did, everyone would just play BW which wouldnt be that bad at all

Both are owned by Vivendi, the merging also doesn't affect Blizzard due to them being self-published.



Just take it as Activision being annoying cunts. Both are owned by Vivendi, the merging also doesn't affect Blizzard due to them being self-published.Just take it as Activision being annoying cunts.

Goldfish Profile Blog Joined August 2010 2163 Posts Last Edited: 2011-05-02 07:20:44 #16



In this case, would Activison be able to affect Blizzard at all or is it Vivendi that calls the shots? I remember in an interview that Vivendi (Company that owns Blizzard) was the one that purchased Activision (Vivendi also decided to remove Blizzard North and scrap that early version of Diablo 3 too I think).In this case, would Activison be able to affect Blizzard at all or is it Vivendi that calls the shots? https://connect.microsoft.com/WindowsServerFeedback/feedback/details/741495/biggest-explorer-annoyance-automatic-sorting-windows-7-server-2008-r2-and-vista#details Allow Disable Auto Arrange in Windows 7+

On_Slaught Profile Joined August 2008 United States 11751 Posts #17 Activision and EA... the worse things to ever happen to gaming. Sure we get more games, but we also get worse ones. Northwestern Law Class of 2022

Irrelevant Profile Blog Joined June 2009 United States 2364 Posts #18 On May 02 2011 16:20 Goldfish wrote:

I remember in an interview that



In this case, would Activison be able to affect Blizzard at all or is it Vivendi that calls the shots? I remember in an interview that Vivendi (Company that owns Blizzard) was the one that purchased Activision (Vivendi also decided to remove Blizzard North and scrap that early version of Diablo 3 too I think).In this case, would Activison be able to affect Blizzard at all or is it Vivendi that calls the shots?

Blizz was bought by Activision, vivendi had massive debts even with wow's income Blizz was bought by Activision, vivendi had massive debts even with wow's income

eviltomahawk Profile Blog Joined August 2010 United States 11024 Posts #19 I find it sad that the major gaming companies and publishers of today are catering more and more to their shareholders instead of their actual customers, probably because a decent shareholder may be more financially reliable than a decent customer.



Companies getting larger is a double-edged sword. On one hand, there are way more resources to make games with higher production values and possibly higher quality. On the other hand, the companies start to lose touch with their actual customer base and start listening more to their shareholders, who are mostly tuned into the money and numbers aspect of the business. As the corporate bureaucracy gets more aloof from actual game-making, it seems that the games themselves suffer. ㅇㅅㅌㅅ

BLinD-RawR Profile Blog Joined April 2010 ALLEYCAT BLUES 45582 Posts Last Edited: 2011-05-02 07:30:30 #20 lol blizzard please break up with activision. Moderator Woo Jung Ho, never forget.| Twitter: @BLinDRawR

1 2 3 4 5 11 12 13 Next All