So, Activision and Blizzard merged a few months ago. All seemed, if not good, then at least the same. Definitely not worse.

BAM!
Blizzcon:

Blizzard releases SCII as three seperate games, to milk the fan base for all it's worth

Battle.net, always kept free by blizzard will no longer be so, because they 'kind of have to.'

MOAR evidence:

http://www.aeropause.com/2008/10/activision-blizzard-merger-complete-now-charge-for-everything/

http://www.starcraftwire.net/n/1265/starcraft-2-trilogy-yearly-expansions

http://multiplayerblog.mtv.com/2008/10/11/key-starcraft-ii-trilogy-details/#more-11304

MTV Multiplayer: Will these be full-priced products?

Sigaty: You know, we haven't even talked about that yet. I don't know. They're definitely full-sized games. I mean, the scope will be big; it's going to be 26 to 30 missions in the first one, and we intend to have at least that much in the next after that. By the end, I'd say up to 90 missions. Definitely full-scale. And again, multiplayer will be upgraded the same way we have with other expansion-like products.

http://fanboys-online.com/

"And I don't think anyone is particularly happy with Activision other than Activison as of late. Other than being pretentious about Guitar Hero to the people that made Guitar Hero and sold them Guitar Hero, I can't help but wonder if they had anything to do with StarCraft 2 being split into a trilogy, and Battle.net becoming another revenue for money after being free for as long as anyone can remember. Here's hoping Diablo 3 isn't a brand new game for each class that comes with it."

HAIL TO THE KRUDMAN, he speaketh only truth.

------------------------

We've already discussed the suckiness of these announcements, the question is, do you think that Activision is responsible?

I predict that this might be locked but I could be wrong.

Anyway, as much as those things all really suck, theres nowhere in the articles that shows theres any clear link made between Activision and this happening, just clutching at straws.

EDIT: Spelling, and stuff.

I feel like I'm doing my journalistic best to dig up a potential link between the two. What is there to lock?

I don't know if it's activisions fault, but something is ruining blizzard.

Uszi:
I feel like I'm doing my journalistic best to dig up a potential link between the two. What is there to lock?

I personally don't think theres anything wrong and you've done a good job in showing you've actually looked into it and stuff, but I've seen things like this get locked.

Well, if you read through everything they deny any allogation that Activision is responsible.
I suppose that would end it.

... though, I don't believe it.
I am a Blizzard Fanboy though.

Yes you see Blizzard used to be an old man who worked tirelessly in this little tiny workshop making fun games for all the girls and boys. BUT THEN THE CORPORATION CAME! "Oh God!" whined the fans "They're trying to make some money! Blizzard has never charged a monthly fee for a game before!" Then the common sense fairy arrived.

And that's all for tonight kids. Lights out.

Decoy Doctorpus:
Yes you see Blizzard used to be an old man who worked tirelessly in this little tiny workshop making fun games for all the girls and boys. BUT THEN THE CORPORATION CAME! "Oh God!" whined the fans "They're trying to make some money! Blizzard has never charged a monthly fee for a game before!" Then the common sense fairy arrived.

And that's all for tonight kids. Lights out.

Pretty much this exactly. Any company that charges monthly rates to its millions of users to play one game are a bunch of profiteers anyway. They are just taking it a bit further now. Let's not kid ourselves that Blizzard are a group of bedroom coders who are more concerned about making games than money.

The solution to all of Blizzard's problems:
TURN WARCRAFT BACK INTO A GODDAMN RTS.

Me thinks it will be Vice Versa, as Activision was a great gaming label, and Blizzard, is well Blizzard.

OverlordSteve:
The solution to all of Blizzard's problems:
TURN WARCRAFT BACK INTO A GODDAMN RTS.

Yeah. That'll clear that money problem right up. Maybe afterwards they could all saw off their left thumbs as well.

Decoy Doctorpus:

OverlordSteve:
The solution to all of Blizzard's problems:
TURN WARCRAFT BACK INTO A GODDAMN RTS.

Yeah. That'll clear that money problem right up. Maybe afterwards they could all saw off their left thumbs as well.

Even in sarcasm, you make scary sence =/

Decoy Doctorpus:
Yes you see Blizzard used to be an old man who worked tirelessly in this little tiny workshop making fun games for all the girls and boys. BUT THEN THE CORPORATION CAME! "Oh God!" whined the fans "They're trying to make some money! Blizzard has never charged a monthly fee for a game before!" Then the common sense fairy arrived.

And that's all for tonight kids. Lights out.

Agreed. This is reactionary/hateboy/misinformed panic. Onoz! The Corporations, they're all corporationy! They ruined our gumdrop forests and rivers of chocolate! You sound like the Film Actors Guild (F.A.G) from Team America: World Police.

Let them make a game that sucks before you pass judgement, god, wheres the loyalty?

Also, the 'suckiness of these announcements' is debateble, and not such a forgone conclusion if you've looked at any of the threads. Some of us think this isn't such a bad thing and may turn out to be GOOD, provided Blizzard can pull it off in a classy way. If they can't, well- everyone has hits and misses. Blizzard will have to screw up more then once to lose my respect.

I doubt Activision has much to do with it. Blizzard makes more money than Activision despite having a tenth the number of games on store shelves. However, Blizzard also have really damn high development costs because they spend years making and remaking their games. A five-year development cycle is not sustainable, nor is offering a robust online service for free, assuming you want to either break even or make a small profit on it. I don't mind monetisation of Battle.net so long as they don't remove content etc. for those who don't pay, or start throwing ads everywhere. As for the StarCraft 2 thing, it's a logical decision and I don't really object to it, so long as the games really are full-featured (and I have no reason to doubt they will be, even though I would prefer one massive game later on rather than three smaller ones sooner).

searanox:
I doubt Activision has much to do with it. Blizzard makes more money than Activision despite having a tenth the number of games on store shelves. However, Blizzard also have really damn high development costs because they spend years making and remaking their games. A five-year development cycle is not sustainable, nor is offering a robust online service for free, assuming you want to either break even or make a small profit on it. I don't mind monetisation of Battle.net so long as they don't remove content etc. for those who don't pay, or start throwing ads everywhere. As for the StarCraft 2 thing, it's a logical decision and I don't really object to it, so long as the games really are full-featured (and I have no reason to doubt they will be, even though I would prefer one massive game later on rather than three smaller ones sooner).

I agree with this sentiment, it's probably just a way for Blizzard to keep paying it's bills.

This is blizzard you're talking about...What's there left to ruin?

Activision is keeping blizzard alive, you don't bite the hand that feeds you.

Jazzyluv:
Activision is keeping blizzard alive, you don't bite the hand that feeds you.

Que? Blizzard rakes in millions a year with WoW...

TsunamiWombat:

Jazzyluv:
Activision is keeping blizzard alive, you don't bite the hand that feeds you.

Que? Blizzard rakes in millions a year with WoW...

Activision is funding blizzard, so yes, it is keeping blizzard alive, that is how it works.

TsunamiWombat:

Jazzyluv:
Activision is keeping blizzard alive, you don't bite the hand that feeds you.

Que? Blizzard rakes in millions a year with WoW...

That's what i don't get millions? No.. Billions! Yes! They make tons of money off of WoW! Why charge for Battlenet? Are they really that money hungry or are their employees really not getting payed enough that they need more?

I loved D2 for all it was worth. Loved it enough that when it was YEARS old and i wanted to play again and bought new copies because my disc were worn down. They have a strong fan base and people will pay for battlenet but do we really need to? is D3 really gonna be worth it?

Jazzyluv:

TsunamiWombat:

Jazzyluv:
Activision is keeping blizzard alive, you don't bite the hand that feeds you.

Que? Blizzard rakes in millions a year with WoW...

Activision is funding blizzard, so yes, it is keeping blizzard alive, that is how it works.

I didn't know Blizzard NEEDED Activisions funding. Mmm, all their recent behavior makes me think that their long term game support and free to play services are putting them into the tank, which is why they're looking for new ways to raise capital. Makes sense- they havn't made big money on Warcraft 2/3 or Diablo 1/2 for years, but they maintain the online services and are putting out consistant updates.

Zallest:
That's what i don't get millions? No.. Billions! Yes! They make tons of money off of WoW! Why charge for Battlenet? Are they really that money hungry or are their employees really not getting payed enough that they need more?

I loved D2 for all it was worth. Loved it enough that when it was YEARS old and i wanted to play again and bought new copies because my disc were worn down. They have a strong fan base and people will pay for battlenet but do we really need to? is D3 really gonna be worth it?

The servers for World of Warcraft are very expensive, and while I'm sure they're making plenty of money from it even with those costs taken into account, it's very much a service-driven approach to gaming rather than product-driven. I don't know what the new Battle.net will feature, but it may very well be expanded to the point where a pay service is justified, maybe certain unnecessary but useful features available for those who want them (like more characters per account, custom outfits, more functional friends lists, clan support, more extensive ladders, matchmaking, etc.).

searanox:

Zallest:
That's what i don't get millions? No.. Billions! Yes! They make tons of money off of WoW! Why charge for Battlenet? Are they really that money hungry or are their employees really not getting payed enough that they need more?

I loved D2 for all it was worth. Loved it enough that when it was YEARS old and i wanted to play again and bought new copies because my disc were worn down. They have a strong fan base and people will pay for battlenet but do we really need to? is D3 really gonna be worth it?

The servers for World of Warcraft are very expensive, and while I'm sure they're making plenty of money from it even with those costs taken into account, it's very much a service-driven approach to gaming rather than product-driven. I don't know what the new Battle.net will feature, but it may very well be expanded to the point where a pay service is justified, maybe certain unnecessary but useful features available for those who want them (like more characters per account, custom outfits, more functional friends lists, clan support, more extensive ladders, matchmaking, etc.).

That stuff would be cool.. but it puts gamers like me in a bad position. Gamers who play things like WoW and want to play D3 but can't because it would be to much strain on my pocket book. All that new stuff in Battle.net would be cool but i think i just want the old blizzard back..

searanox:

Zallest:
That's what i don't get millions? No.. Billions! Yes! They make tons of money off of WoW! Why charge for Battlenet? Are they really that money hungry or are their employees really not getting payed enough that they need more?

I loved D2 for all it was worth. Loved it enough that when it was YEARS old and i wanted to play again and bought new copies because my disc were worn down. They have a strong fan base and people will pay for battlenet but do we really need to? is D3 really gonna be worth it?

The servers for World of Warcraft are very expensive, and while I'm sure they're making plenty of money from it even with those costs taken into account, it's very much a service-driven approach to gaming rather than product-driven. I don't know what the new Battle.net will feature, but it may very well be expanded to the point where a pay service is justified, maybe certain unnecessary but useful features available for those who want them (like more characters per account, custom outfits, more functional friends lists, clan support, more extensive ladders, matchmaking, etc.).

That would be ideal. Blizzard is too classy to whore itself...I should hope.

Oh and IIRC people accused Steam of being a dick-greedy move at one point as well, and lambasted it for not working like it should blah blah blah.

I am going to come out and say it. Blizzard are whoring us for money.

Uszi:
Well, if you read through everything they deny any allogation that Activision is responsible.
I suppose that would end it.

... though, I don't believe it.
I am a Blizzard Fanboy though.

Well that's it right there. I find it so ironic that it's always a company's biggest fans that have the littlest faith in them.

EDIT: Blizzard IS, Activision IS, Square Enix IS, Electronic Arts freakin' IS. I've seen this in too many threads to count, so I'm finally saying something. In sentence structure, a company is a single entity.

ABSOLUTELY all world-wide companies are after nothing but money. That's just the thruth of it; this has nothing to do with activision - WoW just told blizzard that they can do whatever the heck they want because they'll get away with it

urprobablyright:
ABSOLUTELY all world-wide companies are after nothing but money. That's just the thruth of it; this has nothing to do with activision - WoW just told blizzard that they can do whatever the heck they want because they'll get away with it

What else should any companies be after?

urprobablyright:
ABSOLUTELY all world-wide companies are after nothing but money. That's just the thruth of it; this has nothing to do with activision - WoW just told blizzard that they can do whatever the heck they want because they'll get away with it

Exactly. They're doing this because we're letting them. We're complaining and whining, but most of us are still gonna buy their games regardless.

Seriously, i saw this coming a mile off.

Activisions of Call of Duty 4 on Steam Logic is applying

$49.99 = US Price
$69.99 = UK Price

Yet to work out why it costs 40% more in the UK, despite it being the same product, from the same servers, applying by the same US sales taxes. Pay US sales tax, not VAT. And even so, that's 17.5% AFTER the game price.

Which is why i don't own Call of Duty 4. Because i don't do DVDs if i Steam it.

Graustein:
but most of us are still gonna buy their games regardless.

YARR!!! >.>
Anyway I cant really complain about them splitting SC2 into 3 parts however if they do charge full price for it then I want a freaking decent game out of it.
30 Missions per game, thats fine but I want real fuken missions. Not this non narrated "destroy base X Y Z" sorta shit that too many games use to fill themselves out with. I also want a nice huge variety of units. Dont want 30 missions using the same 4-5 things over and over again.
As for blizznet well, sure it sucks but it does cost them money to run right ?

Anyway as for the topic nah, Blizz was gonna end up this way anyway and why not. They just have to produce shit worth the $$.

To be honest, i don't really care about either they don't affect me. I don't have the internet at home at the moment, and i only skirmish in RTS. So one pack will do me, never know might get it at bit of a reduced price.

Maybe

Though on the whole 3 times the price and paying for battle.net seems to be somewhat shooting yourself in the foot.

But when you have that many million Koreans addicted to Starcraft, rinsing them for what they can seems like a fun idea i'd imagine.

But where will I get the fabled "monies" from to pay for Diablo 3 online? Oh god.. its over.. Just imagine the future, the horror oh the horror. People won't find Diablo 3 really worth it if you have to pay to play unless its in scale to WoW.