Does Blizzard have a Monopoly?

[TheEconomist]

I mean, that should be pretty apparent, with the first WoW being somewhat groundbreaking at least, yet the last what, 4? expansions are all the same shit, nothing really added.

I don't want to get into this anymore but how can you expect us to take into consideration your opinion on WoW and the expansion's content when you don't even know how many expansions there are FYI, there have been two so far. If Blizzard was all about money, there would've been at least one a year. That means there would've been six. WoW is popular enough and beloved enough to support that. Yes, Blizzard will not do it. Instead, it takes them six to seven years to reach only 3. For any other company that doesn't have 1/100th of the loyality that Blizzard does, they would've been at seven or eight by now.

[Todie]

Pro Leagues don't have divisions. And I can hardly see divisions as a bad thing compared to, say, ICCUP ranks. They're just using metals instead of letters.

lets not derail this, but you should recognize the difference between leagues and divisions; leagues are good or at the very least OK; similar to ICCUP rankings as a rough marker for player skill.

divisions however, are arbitrary: inherently flawed from a competitive point of view.


... i might have something more on-topic to say about recent posts. but im too fatigued atm.

[TheEconomist]

I've seen nitpicking. I've seen hyperbole. I've seen totally irrational fears.

What I have yet to see is one good reason why StarCraft 2 or Battle.net 2.0 is as bad as people say. At worst, it's a disappointment that didn't live up to its potential and has weakened Blizzard's status. Who cares? It's still better than just about anything else yet I see a buttload of people boycotting and bitching endlessly on the internet as if it had absolutely zero value. I mean, I've seen your comments in the forums and you play some of the most mediocre games out today. Why the double standard for Blizzard?

WTF People?

Not only are you ignoring the simple fact that StarCraft 2 is by far not the pile of shit you claim but it's also under the caring hands of a company that has proven that they continue to support a game over a decade after release. You can talk about broken promises all you want but Blizzard has proven that more often than not they listen to the fans and fix the problems that arise.

I'd bet my bottom dollar that the disappointment in fans of this forum has more to do with letting their expectations reach an unreachable level and then the bubble exploding once the illusion of mystery surrounding the game was removed. In short, your problems with the game come from expectations and not becaue StarCraft 2 is just the embodiment of laziness in developers.

.

[Kimera757]

lets not derail this, but you should recognize the difference between leagues and divisions; leagues are good or at the very least OK; similar to ICCUP rankings as a rough marker for player skill.

You are right; I confused the two terms.

divisions however, are arbitrary: inherently flawed from a competitive point of view.

I still disagree, however. Your rank within a division (eg Tal'darim Bravo 28) is like the + or - in an ICCUP rank (eg the + in a B+).

If you're a really competitive gamer, you'd be aiming for the pro league, where your numerical rank is more suited for someone with a progamer's skill level/mentality.

Of course, this would be a flaw in the system until the pro league comes online, but I can hardly picture people of "only" gold level needing to know they're rank 1,000,005 out of 7,058,000.

[TheEconomist]

If you're a really competitive gamer, you'd be aiming for the pro league, where your numerical rank is more suited for someone with a progamer's skill level/mentality.

Sorry. You must be new here. It is official SCL policy to assume that nothing will be changed unless it is currently so. As it is now, the pro league does not exist, therefore, under the ToS we must assume and, therefore, piss and moan about it as if it will never be.

/sarcasm

[SlickR]

I've seen nitpicking. I've seen hyperbole. I've seen totally irrational fears.

What I have yet to see is one good reason why StarCraft 2 or Battle.net 2.0 is as bad as people say. At worst, it's a disappointment that didn't live up to its potential and has weakened Blizzard's status. Who cares? It's still better than just about anything else yet I see a buttload of people boycotting and bitching endlessly on the internet as if it had absolutely zero value. I mean, I've seen your comments in the forums and you play some of the most mediocre games out today. Why the double standard for Blizzard?

WTF People?

Not only are you ignoring the simple fact that StarCraft 2 is by far not the pile of shit you claim but it's also under the caring hands of a company that has proven that they continue to support a game over a decade after release. You can talk about broken promises all you want but Blizzard has proven that more often than not they listen to the fans and fix the problems that arise.

I'd bet my bottom dollar that the disappointment in fans of this forum has more to do with letting their expectations reach an unreachable level and then the bubble exploding once the illusion of mystery surrounding the game was removed. In short, your problems with the game come from expectations and not becaue StarCraft 2 is just the embodiment of laziness in developers.

.

Yes, we had such grand expectations of 20 years old technology and features who were available in bnet 1 to be in, such as chat, cross-region play and LAN, that because these NEW, UNIQUE, GRAND, UNSEEN features aren't there we are disappointed.

[TheEconomist]

*sigh*

Chat is already confirmed. LAN is a necessary casualty. Cross-region play I'll agree with you on. It was a dick move to remove it.

However, as usual, you completely missed my point. These missing features should, in no way, turn StarCraft 2 from being great to being not worth your money. To believe otherwise is to grossly overreact. I get the impression that most of you would be almost perfectly content with Battle.net and StarCraft 2 if LAN, cross-region play, ID system was fixed, and facebook was removed. I'm telling you that there's not much ground to stand on if you believe StarCraft 2 is a great game worthy of the Blizzard name with these features, but is the most pathetic pile of shit without them.

Raise your level of thinking boy, coz you are not talking to children.

My mistake. You're all just giving into the commies lies!!! You are brainwashed into hating business and want us, as a species, to devolve back into anarchy!!!!

[Hammy]

ugh



uuugggh.



look lol. Do you actually PLAY WOW? I'm assuming not. Believe it or not, the people who play WoW actually enjoy it, and want more content. They make more content because WoW is a content driven game, and players demand more content. One of the biggest reasons people stop playing WoW is that Blizzard is not producing enough for them.

(I don't play WoW btw)



Believe it or not Blizzard has to constantly produce good games. One bad game and all this reputation and trust they've built with the consumer is over. The thing is Starcraft 2 cannot be a bad game because it is NOT OUT YET. Nor, as the other thread here on the forums established, is the game itself bad or not ready.

It's not because many people play WoW that it's a good/innovative/interesting game. It's a highly addictive game; I know that because I played it for ages, made a huge guild, transfered to a top-tier guild, spent(wasted) tons of time on that game, while only actually enjoying a fraction of that time.
What you call "new content" is rehashed material. What you call "making a good game", in the case of WoW, is satisfying the masses with the least investment possible.
Example: wow started off with VERY different classes, then people started complaining, wanting buffs, wanting things to be easier etc... so blizzard made it easier, made all of the classes stronger (but only two at a time, so that people could feel awesome for a few months, until the next set was buffed), and made all of the classes pretty much identical in function. Right now you can pretty much scrap the RPG out of MMORPG.
Does this make the game good? 100% of the people I know that still play WoW, either have nothing better to do, or play exclusively for the social aspect they've developed, because it's true you do end up growing attached to your guild/group/whatever.

Of course all of this depends on your taste, but if you think big hollywood action movies are the best movies out there, you just have none.

Blizzard used to constantly say "we just want to make awesome games for the the gamers"; that is not the case anymore. Now it's about profit and efficiency.
I'm not condemning that switch at all (it's perfectly normal for a company to want to make money), but I think it's just important to note that the company making SC2 isn't the same as the company that made SC:BW. They noticed this when the news of SC:Ghost being made by Swinging Apes was terribly received, so now they're sticking with the brand name, but put different people behind it. It's all about the licences.

===> And all of this just to say: today blizzard has acquired so many fans and reputation that ultimately a bunch of people will buy their games as long as they're "satisfying" (they don't have to be awesome anymore). Basically, now they don't need to focus on making amazing games, they can make tons of cash by milking the consumers who are more than willing to pay for the blizzard stamp.

Pro Leagues don't have divisions. And I can hardly see divisions as a bad thing compared to, say, ICCUP ranks. They're just using metals instead of letters.

I agree with most of what you said in that post, but this just stings my eyes. It's like you've missed the most heated threads^^
If you're familiar with the ICCUP system let's roll with that:
"pro league" is olympic/A+: highest tier, select few
"diamond league" is A-/A: just below proleague.

In ICCUP, when you're at A level, you know how far you are from A+, you know what your global ranking is (A level is awesome, your rank is VERY relevant at that point) and you can easily gauge your skill/progress because the scoring system is relatively stable.
In Bnet2.0, when you're in diamond you have no idea when you'll be promoted to pro-league (if ever), you have no idea what your global rank is (division fail, you could be #1 but still suck) and because everyone's score is increasing all the time, you have no idea if you're actually better than you were a month ago.

Although there's no proof to the following, I think Skyze is somewhat right that we can expect Blizzard to throw in a bunch of "necessary" microtransactions for you to play the game. I wish they'd just make their cash off of people who want their hellion to look like a vulture and are willing to pay $20 for that, but I'm afraid that might be optimistic.

[TheEconomist]

The point is that people who have a problem with divisions are of the "progamer" mentality and they are not for you. The pro league is the league for you. It is there for a reason (once they implement it ). To say that there's a problem with the lower leagues is to completely miss the point. It's like how I saw so many people bitch and moan about the feature in NSMBW where if you die 8 times the game shows you how to get past where you are. The more elite gamers hated it. But, the point is, is that it's not implemented for you and there are alternatives given for people like you. Let certain aspects of the game cater to the casuals while you focus on the aspects that are meant for you.

Simple.

[Kimera757]

I agree with most of what you said in that post, but this just stings my eyes. It's like you've missed the most heated threads^^

Why would I want to crawl through a flaming sewer? (That's how I saw those threads. I would often just skim, grab an interesting -- or stupid -- comment, and reply to that.)

If you're familiar with the ICCUP system let's roll with that:
"pro league" is olympic/A+: highest tier, select few
"diamond league" is A-/A: just below proleague.

In ICCUP, when you're at A level, you know how far you are from A+, you know what your global ranking is (A level is awesome, your rank is VERY relevant at that point) and you can easily gauge your skill/progress because the scoring system is relatively stable.
In Bnet2.0, when you're in diamond you have no idea when you'll be promoted to pro-league (if ever), you have no idea what your global rank is (division fail, you could be #1 but still suck) and because everyone's score is increasing all the time, you have no idea if you're actually better than you were a month ago.

That comment about not knowing when you might get transferred from diamond to pro "spoke to me", and it's nice to see someone on the other side of the fence discuss this issue with rationality and sanity - that's actually convincing. Seems to me Blizzard should post the "actual rank" somewhere, but I still think you need divisions for the A-D equivalent rankings.

Although there's no proof to the following, I think Skyze is somewhat right that we can expect Blizzard to throw in a bunch of "necessary" microtransactions for you to play the game. I wish they'd just make their cash off of people who want their hellion to look like a vulture and are willing to pay $20 for that, but I'm afraid that might be optimistic.

He should try saying so in a sane and rational manner. What you're saying is a far cry from "pay per month" (which has already been discredited, at least to anyone who cares to do minor research -- obviously you've done the research). All you're describing are microtransactions of the type that already exist in WoW and many non-Blizzard games too.

A thread about what is acceptable to pay for and what isn't would be more than welcome... except that kind of speculation draws flames.

It's like how I saw so many people bitch and moan about the feature in NSMBW where if you die 8 times the game shows you how to get past where you are. The more elite gamers hated it. But, the point is, is that it's not implemented for you and there are alternatives given for people like you.

I agree. It's sad when elitists act like bullies. Continuing on that vein, I used to complain about the bitching we got from elitists for the last three years. Upon further reflection, I realize I had that wrong. They've been the kings of the hill ever since progaming took off, a decade or so ago, but for the last three years they've been complaining that their position is being threatened, and just as interest among new gamers increased, they got exposed to said bitching. (I still recall a comment on Teamliquid where someone had heard subgroups were being eliminated and they were glad that gamers would "have" to fight the interface.) The masses might have listened to them more if many of them didn't act like know-it-all bullies.