Blizzard Says No to Console Cash-in Games

 Pages 1 2 3 NEXT
 

Blizzard Says No to Console Cash-in Games

image

There's plenty of money to be made on PC, says Blizzard, as long as you're willing to put the effort in.

Diablo 3's game director Jay Wilson says that Blizzard is not going to bring its games onto consoles just to cash-in on the extra install base. He says that Blizzard is doing just fine on the PC, and didn't need to compromise its games for some extra sales.

That's not to say that Blizzard won't make console games, but it's only going to make them when it's appropriate. He said that, despite appearances, Blizzard was not just a PC developer. Instead, it was a game developer that happened to make games best suited to the PC. "We don't believe you can make a Starcraft-style RTS and make it great - Blizzard great - on console," he added. He said that it was sad that people had bought into the idea that the PC was a dying market, but admitted that that idea may have helped Blizzard to succeed.

"If people think that you can't make money from the PC they should really look at us as a symbol and they should really be asking why we're so successful. It's primarily because of the quality of the games, but when you have a high quality product, very little competition and a high install base..."

Wilson may just have a point. StarCraft 2 apparently sold more in its first week in the UK than the first Star Craft did in its entire lifetime, and has since gone on to sell nearly five million units. Of course, Blizzard has established brands to work on, which gives it something of an edge over a new IP of equal quality.

Source: PC Gamer

Permalink

Sooo... why exactly are they stuffing Diablo III with always online DRM? Eh, it'll still sell like hotcakes.

My friends will probably pressure me into buying it anyway.

Says no to console game cash ins.

Says the company that, if you want to change a feature such as your horns or gender, you'll have to pay $25. Or, if you're friends have the gull to start playing on a different server (or if you meet new people who play), you're going to have to pay $25 to change servers. Are they Alliance, and you're Horde? That one runs you $30. Hey, lets not forget. Tauren players are SO 2006. Want to play a Troll? $25. I'd also like to mention the ingame pets, which will run you $15 per pet (but they throw snowballs, so its ok). Or if you want a shinier version of a horse, you guessed it, $25.

All fairly legitimate things, that customer service usually does for free (or a very low cost, such as $10 for a faction change/race change). This is the company that make money by milking its customers already. They are legitimately killing Diablo 3 just to make a few extra dollars (because who wants balance).

Now you're gonna tell me you have integrity for not making shitty console ports?

You, sir, have grapefruit sized balls.

Blizzard is right in this case. You can make solid titles for sale purely for the PC, it's not a dying market, and it's not likely to be going anywhere soon. PC only games will still sell well so long as they are good. Make a shoddy product for any platform and it'll only sell well if it has an established IP. Bah that last sentence made me die a little inside... bad games shouldn't sell well at all, and yet slap CoD, or Battlefield on a title and it could be a pile of shit and it would still sell. But that's not the point here is it... I shall take that rant elsewhere.

I wish these people had competition.

Adzma:
Sooo... why exactly are they stuffing Diablo III with always online DRM? Eh, it'll still sell like hotcakes.

My friends will probably pressure me into buying it anyway.

Probably due to the new trading system which people can make money off (while secretly giving blizzard even more). Its to promote interconnectivity and we are heading to a world where 100% uptime will be expected everywhere, maybe only in the first world, but thats where the moneys being made.

Blizzard is pushing always on for single player games because eventually they want Battle.net to be a game hub like Steam with inbuilt social networking facilities.

ie: *your friend Jed Clampett has just logged on* and so on...

which they will then market as a third party platform with 10 million WoW players (and X million StarCraft and Diablo players) as a captive audience...

by making single player games require an online connection they bring that player base into the equation and thus make them a marketable commodity.

you can baste me in oil if im wrong.

OT : "a new IP of equal quality"
what would that be then ?
seriously i cant think of a new IP from at least the last 5 years :S
then again i am very sleepy atm

Uber Waddles:
Says no to console game cash ins.

Says the company that, if you want to change a feature such as your horns or gender, you'll have to pay $25. Or, if you're friends have the gull to start playing on a different server (or if you meet new people who play), you're going to have to pay $25 to change servers. Are they Alliance, and you're Horde? That one runs you $30. Hey, lets not forget. Tauren players are SO 2006. Want to play a Troll? $25. I'd also like to mention the ingame pets, which will run you $15 per pet (but they throw snowballs, so its ok). Or if you want a shinier version of a horse, you guessed it, $25.

All fairly legitimate things, that customer service usually does for free (or a very low cost, such as $10 for a faction change/race change). This is the company that make money by milking its customers already. They are legitimately killing Diablo 3 just to make a few extra dollars (because who wants balance).

Now you're gonna tell me you have integrity for not making shitty console ports?

You, sir, have grapefruit sized balls.

nearly all the things can be achieved by simply rerolling a character, infact i'd argue that its probably more beneficial too because that way you are forced into contact with more of the server you are joining. The rest of the things like novelty pets and mounts are extras (you can get regular ones for in game cash) and make no difference to the gameplay, just giggle to yourself every time you see that somebody spent real money on a sparkle pony.

Adzma:
Sooo... why exactly are they stuffing Diablo III with always online DRM? Eh, it'll still sell like hotcakes.

Because they want to make sure you're tempted to keep buying from the real-money AH and give them more and more of your money.

Well of course Blizzard isnt going to port its games to console. None of its games would work on a console. Its like a company that makes squares saying theyre quite happy with their market of square holes, and wont be putting their squares into circular holes any time soon.

Ya right, I'm pretty sure Activision had a word with them afterwards :D

Yea, i don't even care what blizzard is doing. MMO's are monotonous boring pieces of tripe. Starcraft 2 was fun for roughly 20 hours then it just became a very very complex game of rock paper scissors (You got x then i'm going to make y). But what permanently shoved the stake into my heart was the always online shit in diablo 3. I blatantly refuse to play that game because of it. Not due to my internet connection, which although it crashes every now and then wouldn't be to much of a problem. No, it's the fact that the company is selling me their product, but wanting to keep a watchful eye over it afterwords. Computer nerds are going to find a way to turn the online drm thing off within .5 seconds of the game being released and i may buy it then just to flip off blizzard. But otherwise, they have permanently lost me as a customer. And this is coming from somehow who has played and owns each and every game. (And may i add enjoyed, minus wow. which sucks.)

Uber Waddles:
They are legitimately killing Diablo 3 just to make a few extra dollars (because who wants balance).

Now you're gonna tell me you have integrity for not making shitty console ports?

You, sir, have grapefruit sized balls.

You sir, have the post today that made me laugh.

image
Still all-too appropriate.

OP: It's actually pretty funny to think that throughout "PC's slow and painful death through a prolonged elbow scrape", some companies simply lose competition and gain sales. Blizzard's mostly right, though. They don't "need" anything at the moment. I'd go as far as to say WoW is providing them a steady income to derp around and stuff their other games chock-full of junk (read: content) as they see fit, simply because they have the resources. The selling is just a side-benefit.

Can't wait for the game to come out so I can CONSOLIDATE MYSELF WITH THINE SERVERS, MY GARGANTUAN BLUE OVERLORD FROM THE MOUNTAIN!

No really though, hurry up and come out.

The guy makes a great point. They are making PC games of high quality and their competition is not really taking PC market seriously. So they reign with very little serious competition.

Adzma:
Sooo... why exactly are they stuffing Diablo III with always online DRM? Eh, it'll still sell like hotcakes.

My friends will probably pressure me into buying it anyway.

Calling it Always On DRM is overgeneralizing.

Just get over the fact Diablo 3 is a CORPG, like Guild Wars was. No one complained about always online requirement in Guild Wars, now have they?

It's just time to accept this. PC market is specific, open and complicated. As long as always online is clearly stated as requirement and it adds significant added value, you have no leg to stand on.

What's worse, just blindly throwing Ubisoft DRM into same category as Blizzard DRM is also not very critical thinking. There are mayor differences between DRM approaches, we should be way more savvy about discussing that critically.

And if you truly have a philosophical reason why you dislike any form of DRM? Don't let any friend coerce you into buying it. Ubisoft still thinks their DRM method is good. Why? Well, it did not hurt their sales at all.

Oh course they dont need to "cash in" on console games. They already have an olympic sized swimming pool full of money from all the micro transactions in wow.

Ferisar:
Still all-too appropriate.

Actually that makes pretty much no sense at all in the context of this article.

They make a good point, but I like Valve's style better.

Satsuki666:

Actually that makes pretty much no sense at all in the context of this article.

It makes perfect sense, however, in the context of this thread. Come Diablo, come unfiltered rage.

Adzma:
Sooo... why exactly are they stuffing Diablo III with always online DRM?

So modders, dupers and other cheaters as well as gold farmers wouldn't ruin the multiplier economy.
Also from there various comments I dont think they are as concerned with DRM as much as not wanting to waste money including local host server software in the client software when most of the population is permanently online anyways.

Uber Waddles:
Says no to console game cash ins.

Says the company that, if you want to change a feature such as your horns or gender, you'll have to pay $25. Or, if you're friends have the gull to start playing on a different server (or if you meet new people who play), you're going to have to pay $25 to change servers. Are they Alliance, and you're Horde? That one runs you $30. Hey, lets not forget. Tauren players are SO 2006. Want to play a Troll? $25. I'd also like to mention the ingame pets, which will run you $15 per pet (but they throw snowballs, so its ok). Or if you want a shinier version of a horse, you guessed it, $25.

All fairly legitimate things, that customer service usually does for free (or a very low cost, such as $10 for a faction change/race change). This is the company that make money by milking its customers already. They are legitimately killing Diablo 3 just to make a few extra dollars (because who wants balance).

Now you're gonna tell me you have integrity for not making shitty console ports?

You, sir, have grapefruit sized balls.

Well... all the "free to play" games are milking their customers 10x more than wow. You can enjoy WoW without all the fancy mounts and stuff (OK, I understand your wanting to play on the same server with your friends, but they also have to manage the server population so it's a bit tricky there), but there are a lot of "free to play" games which basically play like a demo, because without buying all the in-game stuff you can't do jack.

bahumat42:

Uber Waddles:
Says no to console game cash ins.

Says the company that, if you want to change a feature such as your horns or gender, you'll have to pay $25. Or, if you're friends have the gull to start playing on a different server (or if you meet new people who play), you're going to have to pay $25 to change servers. Are they Alliance, and you're Horde? That one runs you $30. Hey, lets not forget. Tauren players are SO 2006. Want to play a Troll? $25. I'd also like to mention the ingame pets, which will run you $15 per pet (but they throw snowballs, so its ok). Or if you want a shinier version of a horse, you guessed it, $25.

All fairly legitimate things, that customer service usually does for free (or a very low cost, such as $10 for a faction change/race change). This is the company that make money by milking its customers already. They are legitimately killing Diablo 3 just to make a few extra dollars (because who wants balance).

Now you're gonna tell me you have integrity for not making shitty console ports?

You, sir, have grapefruit sized balls.

nearly all the things can be achieved by simply rerolling a character, infact i'd argue that its probably more beneficial too because that way you are forced into contact with more of the server you are joining. The rest of the things like novelty pets and mounts are extras (you can get regular ones for in game cash) and make no difference to the gameplay, just giggle to yourself every time you see that somebody spent real money on a sparkle pony.

If i may barge in here, do you think that if starting from scratch was a viable option for most players, the price for a server change wouldn't be $25 because it wouldn't be able to compete? It would be closer to $5. They know that players don't want to lose their progress so they put that ridiculous price there. The pets and sparkle ponies and similar i agree on with you.

Bliz net big brother says otherwise.....

Luke Cartner:

Adzma:
Sooo... why exactly are they stuffing Diablo III with always online DRM?

So modders, dupers and other cheaters as well as gold farmers wouldn't ruin the multiplier economy.
Also from there various comments I dont think they are as concerned with DRM as much as not wanting to waste money including local host server software in the client software when most of the population is permanently online anyways.

I have internet(1mb ADSL) at home it is slow, let me put it to you this way a 1 minute video on Youtube takes 15-20 minutes to load. I am not joking! Diablo 3 is no longer on my gaming wishlist.

OT: So Acti-Blizzard still plans on cashing in on the console?

Uber Waddles:
Says no to console game cash ins.

Says the company that, if you want to change a feature such as your horns or gender, you'll have to pay $25. Or, if you're friends have the gull to start playing on a different server (or if you meet new people who play), you're going to have to pay $25 to change servers. Are they Alliance, and you're Horde? That one runs you $30. Hey, lets not forget. Tauren players are SO 2006. Want to play a Troll? $25. I'd also like to mention the ingame pets, which will run you $15 per pet (but they throw snowballs, so its ok). Or if you want a shinier version of a horse, you guessed it, $25.

All fairly legitimate things, that customer service usually does for free (or a very low cost, such as $10 for a faction change/race change). This is the company that make money by milking its customers already. They are legitimately killing Diablo 3 just to make a few extra dollars (because who wants balance).

Now you're gonna tell me you have integrity for not making shitty console ports?

You, sir, have grapefruit sized balls.

I've noticed that I've been applauding instinctively while reading your post^^

Blizzard milk the playerbase for everything they are worth, screw you Blizzard I'm not talking to you no more!

Uber Waddles:
All fairly legitimate things, that customer service usually does for free (or a very low cost, such as $10 for a faction change/race change).

Without even debating the reasons why it makes sense to limit server and faction transfers because of the game itself ... What company does the services you listed for free?

Sony? NCsoft? Turbine? EA-BioWare? Trion? Funcom?

EDIT: Strangely enough ... none of these companies are cross platform either. Trion might be among first to develop a cross platform MMO.

Uber Waddles:
Says no to console game cash ins.

Says the company that, if you want to change a feature such as your horns or gender, you'll have to pay $25. Or, if you're friends have the gull to start playing on a different server (or if you meet new people who play), you're going to have to pay $25 to change servers. Are they Alliance, and you're Horde? That one runs you $30. Hey, lets not forget. Tauren players are SO 2006. Want to play a Troll? $25. I'd also like to mention the ingame pets, which will run you $15 per pet (but they throw snowballs, so its ok). Or if you want a shinier version of a horse, you guessed it, $25.

All fairly legitimate things, that customer service usually does for free (or a very low cost, such as $10 for a faction change/race change). This is the company that make money by milking its customers already. They are legitimately killing Diablo 3 just to make a few extra dollars (because who wants balance).

Now you're gonna tell me you have integrity for not making shitty console ports?

You, sir, have grapefruit sized balls.

How does not wanting to make shitty console ports apply to charging for various non-essential additions to an mmo?

Don't get me wrong I agree that some of those charges are ludicrous (except for the pointless horns and gender one but thats a conversation for another time) I just can't see how one equates to the other

PingoBlack:

Uber Waddles:
All fairly legitimate things, that customer service usually does for free (or a very low cost, such as $10 for a faction change/race change).

Without even debating the reasons why it makes sense to limit server and faction transfers because of the game itself ... What company does the services you listed for free?

Sony? NCsoft? Turbine? EA-BioWare? Trion? Funcom?

EDIT: Strangely enough ... none of these companies are cross platform either. Trion might be among first to develop a cross platform MMO.

CCP is releasing Dust 514 in spring of next year which interfaces PS3 players with PC players on one server.

I havent seen anything from Trion that would be releasing before then?

Logan Westbrook:
"We don't believe you can make a Starcraft-style RTS and make it great - Blizzard great - on console,"

I just find this funny because of Starcraft 64. If you can't make good console Starcraft games, why make them at all?

Stagger the release.

Is that so hard?

Blizzard exemplifies everything that is wrong with major PC developers and PC gaming in general. Developers are to busy milking their customer base rather than creating a good game.

Actually the WiiU touchpad will make the perfect interface for a console RTS. And the Halo
Wars interface wasn't bad at all.

But seriously it needs to be repeated. No offline single player, no LAN multiplayer = no sale from me.

D3 no, Torchlight 2 yes!

El Luck:

Uber Waddles:
Says no to console game cash ins.

Says the company that, if you want to change a feature such as your horns or gender, you'll have to pay $25. Or, if you're friends have the gull to start playing on a different server (or if you meet new people who play), you're going to have to pay $25 to change servers. Are they Alliance, and you're Horde? That one runs you $30. Hey, lets not forget. Tauren players are SO 2006. Want to play a Troll? $25. I'd also like to mention the ingame pets, which will run you $15 per pet (but they throw snowballs, so its ok). Or if you want a shinier version of a horse, you guessed it, $25.

All fairly legitimate things, that customer service usually does for free (or a very low cost, such as $10 for a faction change/race change). This is the company that make money by milking its customers already. They are legitimately killing Diablo 3 just to make a few extra dollars (because who wants balance).

Now you're gonna tell me you have integrity for not making shitty console ports?

You, sir, have grapefruit sized balls.

How does not wanting to make shitty console ports apply to charging for various non-essential additions to an mmo?

Don't get me wrong I agree that some of those charges are ludicrous (except for the pointless , horns and gender one but thats a conversation for another time) I just can't see how one equates to the other

I think the point is that Blizzard claims they won't do it out of a sense of integrity, as if launching these games on consoles would only be for the purpose of getting more money and wouldn't actually enrich anyone's gaming experience.

On the other hand, they charge players exorbitant amounts of money for features that shouldn't require a lot of money to have or change, simply for the purpose of getting more money. Which ironically doesn't enrich anyone's gaming experience.

Should it cost money to change a character's gender? Not really. Should it cost money to switch from Alliance to Horde? I doubt it (though admittedly I don't play WoW so I don't know if there is a whole intricate set of changes required for that to happen, other than an avatar swap and some name changes). Should it cost money to buy a glitter pony? That's justifiable. Should it cost $25? That's debatable.

(said sarcastically) Just remember, PC gaming is dead.

Mouse_Crouse:

Logan Westbrook:
"We don't believe you can make a Starcraft-style RTS and make it great - Blizzard great - on console,"

I just find this funny because of Starcraft 64. If you can't make good console Starcraft games, why make them at all?

To be fair, didn't they scrap Starcraft Ghost because they couldn't make it good enough? Maybe they've moved on since the N64 days.

As for the charges, I agree they're excessive, but they're all optional, and if they were free you'd have dummies changing everything on a daily basis. As it needs limits, why not charge and make some cash, then only those who really want to will bug you for aesthetic changes when you could be working on genuine customer problems.

Sure I'll sound like a raging fanboy, but I don't much care for D3 or SC2, but WOW's kept me interested for 5 years, and I've never bought anything in game.

As for D3, isn't it pretty much built around multiplayer? No-one knocks Team Fortress for demanding you be online to play it. I would however, suggest that the single players modes should at the least, have a login at startup then you're done, rather than a constant requirement.

 Pages 1 2 3 NEXT

Reply to Thread

Log in or Register to Comment
Have an account? Login below:
With Facebook:Login With Facebook
or
Username:  
Password:  
  
Not registered? To sign up for an account with The Escapist:
Register With Facebook
Register With Facebook
or
Register for a free account here