934 replies to this topic

[Sir Kyle Aziz]

I lol at all the bashing going on, but I think that Browder is simply over looking a few things. If your push doesn't work, and you still have map control and units, what do you do?

Build more units? No.

Expand and macro? Yes.


Why? Because you already have a unit advantage and map control, if you get an economic boost, then damn skippy, you're flying high. Especially with the Inject Larvae ability, Zerg can rapid expand like champs. (Not that they couldn't already.) To me, it seems that Browder and all of the god damn Brodwer dick suckers in that thread obviously don't understand how to move from A-B in Starcraft. With Starcraft 2 trying to be similar but a new experience, I can see how the little things like this would still apply.


Now, while the T or P are massing to break the contain, or are trying to harass. (Zerg should probobly smell Harass if they have units watching for it.) The Zerg player is just getting scary big. I mean, when the Zerg gets it's expo, which should be fairly quickly, they'll be running off of aprox 4.6 hatch. Then they can expand more, and tech more, and faster. While what? We've seen how when P is ready to push out, they can usually, and do. But then the armies collied and shit explodes.

However, while Zerg usually have 3-4 bases to P or T's 2, the Zerg now instead of having 5 hatch, will have roughly the Equiv of 11.6 Hatch for regular SC.

Now, unless there are some super duper crazy amazing slaughter a zerg in 1 hit units. That the T or P can produce... Well, you get the point.

The only possible way a harass could be effective, would be if it killed ALL of the worker units of the Zerg. Which, just doesn't happen in higher tier games. Maybe against people Browder plays with, maybe, otherwise. He and his fan-boys can sod off.

[JimRaynor]

I lol at all the bashing going on, but I think that Browder is simply over looking a few things.

as we've seen on this and other forums... the RTS crowd is a tough one.
A lot of RTS multiplayer hobbyists do a lot of complaining but when I bring up something liek... "well the game has been out a year and you're expecting more metagame balance tweaks.. who is paying for this?"
I think with BNet2 Blizzard will find a source of income to cover the balance tweaks that will go on a year after the game is released.
Blizzard will get the hardcores to spend more money than the casuals...

Edited by JimRaynor, 13 September 2009 - 03:17 PM.

[Sir Kyle Aziz]

as we've seen on this and other forums... the RTS crowd is a tough one.
A lot of RTS multiplayer hobbyists do a lot of complaining but when I bring up something liek... "well the game has been out a year and you're expecting more metagame balance tweaks.. who is paying for this?"
I think with BNet2 Blizzard will find a source of income to cover the balance tweaks that will go on a year after the game is released.
Blizzard will get the hardcores to spend more money than the casuals...

The same way SC1 generated a source of income to allow the team to balance it well into 2004?

The same way TF2 has an alternate income generating ability to allow them to tweak and do free add ons even a year after it's release?


Don't be so foolish please.

[JimRaynor]

The same way SC1 generated a source of income to allow the team to balance it well into 2004?
Don't be so foolish please.

SC1's `balancing` ending two years after its release with patch 108...

they've already locked down Bnet2 by removing LAN, announced a trilogy, stated an example of microtransactions they will charge.
hardcore players will pay.
its now obvious Blizz wants a continuous stream of income from BNets hard core users ...

the casual campaign player that plays the game for 2 months, finishes the campaign and never plays it again will pay the same or less than the hard core multiplayer hobbyist.
Bob Kotick has been making statements like "i'd love to raise prices even more ..."
the writing is on the wall...
i guess you'll have to wait until you are hit over the head with it.

Edited by JimRaynor, 14 September 2009 - 12:28 AM.

[Myth]

blizzard has its source of income with WoW

[War29388]

SC1's `balancing` ending two years after its release with patch 108...

they've already locked down Bnet2 by removing LAN, announced a trilogy, stated an example of microtransactions they will charge.
hardcore players will pay.
its now obvious Blizz wants a continuous stream of income from BNets hard core users ...

the casual campaign player that plays the game for 2 months, finishes the campaign and never plays it again will pay the same or less than the hard core multiplayer hobbyist.
Bob Kotick has been making statements like "i'd love to raise prices even more ..."
the writing is on the wall...
i guess you'll have to wait until you are hit over the head with it.

Surely you still don't think this...surely?? Na you have to be kidding right? Btw got a source for that quote, or statements similar to it? And just out of curiousity Jim, are you a casual player, a campaign player, semi-hardcore etc player of starcraft 1? Do you play it online at all or?

[Gorthakk]

Battlenet will be free to play on. I dont care anout anything else, they can do whatever they want with advertising/charging for custom maps etc. All I care about is free bnet to play sc2 melee on and they have already stated they are giving us this.

[UDP]

SC1's `balancing` ending two years after its release with patch 108...

they've already locked down Bnet2 by removing LAN, announced a trilogy, stated an example of microtransactions they will charge.
hardcore players will pay.
its now obvious Blizz wants a continuous stream of income from BNets hard core users ...

the casual campaign player that plays the game for 2 months, finishes the campaign and never plays it again will pay the same or less than the hard core multiplayer hobbyist.
Bob Kotick has been making statements like "i'd love to raise prices even more ..."
the writing is on the wall...
i guess you'll have to wait until you are hit over the head with it.

I don't see why this is such a surprise or a big deal at all, they've had expansions for all their games: SC, D2, WC3, WoW, and now SC2. One extra expansion, it's not much. They're adding entire campaigns with the expansions plus extra units and maps and whatever else they add, you get what you pay for, that's how it has been for the expansions of all the other games, that's how it's going to be here - except WoW but that's a very different game, adding a few units in there isn't a significant change. Other than this one extra expansion, I don't see where this continous stream of income is going to come from, they aren't charging fees for BNet 2, they stated that officially. They're charging for some maps, however they haven't announced the pricing model for that, and even then they aren't going to make that much money off of it. So where else are they gonna get money? I think they're just going to rely on people buying the game for 95% of their income, 4.9% will come from ads, and then maybe 0.1% will come from the maps, if that.

[TheShadowNinja]

So where else are they gonna get money? I think they're just going to rely on people buying the game for 45% of their income, 50% from the WoW money hoard that rivals the fabled Nazi Gold treasure, 4.9% will come from ads, and then maybe 0.1% will come from the maps, if that.

Fixed that there for you

[UDP]

Fixed that there for you

I was referring to income they'd make solely from SC II. Plus that would be more like 90% of their income is from WoW - they have over 11 million subscribers, which is over $10 a month, which is over $1 billion a year. Let's say SC II is $60 and 5 million people buy it, that's still only $300 million, nothing can touch WoW, except maybe the new MMO they're working on.

[Oakwarrior]

Any company is going to try and suck the gamers dry nowadays, some are just more subtle.
Blizzard are not the subtle kind. Money is still money and whatever that may add to the billions they make from WoW is simply more money (who doesn't want more money?).
As far as I'm concerned I have no trouble with that sort of thing. Until I discover that my bank account is bled dry of course.

(Remember me?)

[JimRaynor]

I was referring to income they'd make solely from SC II. Plus that would be more like 90% of their income is from WoW - they have over 11 million subscribers, which is over $10 a month, which is over $1 billion a year. Let's say SC II is $60 and 5 million people buy it, that's still only $300 million, nothing can touch WoW, except maybe the new MMO they're working on.

WoW has 6.5 million subscribers. WoW no longer has over 11 million subscribers.

they have 6.5 million non chinese subscribers paying the standard ~$15 USD per month.
the rest of their subscriber base in China they lost and and trying to get it back.
they receive only a fraction of $15USD per month from their chinese subscribers.

WoW generates 1/3 of ALL REVENUE for the giant Activision-Blizzard...
Bobby Kotick has placed a big red telephone in Mike Morhaime's office.
It's the WoW hotline...
it doesn't matter whether Mike is dealing with Diablo, Starcraft or a Rock`n`Roll Racing remake ... he drops it to deal with WoW.

Edited by JimRaynor, 14 September 2009 - 06:21 PM.

[UDP]

WoW has 6.5 million subscribers. WoW no longer has over 11 million subscribers.

they have 6.5 million non chinese subscribers paying the standard ~$15 USD per month.
the rest of their subscriber base in China they lost and and trying to get it back.
they receive only a fraction of $15USD per month from their chinese subscribers.

WoW generates 1/3 of ALL REVENUE for the giant Activision-Blizzard...
Bobby Kotick has placed a big red telephone in Mike Morhaime's office.
It's the WoW hotline...
it doesn't matter whether Mike is dealing with Diablo, Starcraft or a Rock`n`Roll Racing remake ... he drops it to deal with WoW.

Let's not get so off-topic, my original point was most of the money they make from SC II is on the actual game itself. You said: "its now obvious Blizz wants a continuous stream of income from BNets hard core users ..." I was just saying I don't think they're really doing anything new here, other than 1 extra expansion. I don't know what continuous stream of income you're talking about other than the things they've had in pretty much all their games.

[JimRaynor]

Let's not get so off-topic, my original point was most of the money they make from SC II is on the actual game itself. You said: "its now obvious Blizz wants a continuous stream of income from BNets hard core users ..." I was just saying I don't think they're really doing anything new here, other than 1 extra expansion. I don't know what continuous stream of income you're talking about other than the things they've had in pretty much all their games.

new:
0) extra expansion
1) no LAN to lockdown BNet2
2) marketplace with microtransactions
3) a CEO laughing about increasing prices
4) further announcements from Blizzard about how BNet2s `marketplace` will work.

all indications point to SC2 costing more money than SC1 .... there is not a single metric pointing in a downward direction on pricing... not one.

Blizzard will find a way to persuade hard core Starcraft2 players to spend more money than a casual player who plays the campaign and never touches the game again. They've already shown one way...

i believe Blizzard will introduce new revenue streams for SC2 beyond what has already been announced.
if you believe Bizzard will introduce 0 new revenue streams for SC2 beyond what has already been announced please say so.
if this thread remains up on PurePwnage.com then we'll see the results and see who made the correct prediction.
Going back and forth on this is pointless.

SC2 will be far and away the most expensive RTS game ever made.

I can add this to my list of predictions about Cyborg Santos; JA Happ not pitching a full season; Phillies trading for a starting pitcher; etc etc etc. .. if u like.

Edited by JimRaynor, 14 September 2009 - 10:45 PM.

[a1its]

2) marketplace with microtransactions

I dont see how you can think giving independent developers incentive to make amazing stuff with the tools given to them a bad thing.

[JimRaynor]

I dont see how you can think giving independent developers incentive to make amazing stuff with the tools given to them a bad thing.

i never said anything was "good" or "bad".
SC2 is a game people buy with their extra spending money. no one is forced to play.
it is an additional revenue stream for Blizzard.

[UDP]

i believe Blizzard will introduce new revenue streams for SC2 beyond what has already been announced.
if you believe Bizzard will introduce 0 new revenue streams for SC2 beyond what has already been announced please say so.
if this thread remains up on PurePwnage.com then we'll see the results and see who made the correct prediction.
Going back and forth on this is pointless.

SC2 will be far and away the most expensive RTS game ever made.

I can add this to my list of predictions about Cyborg Santos; JA Happ not pitching a full season; Phillies trading for a starting pitcher; etc etc etc. .. if u like.

I agree they'll announce some more stuff, at least 1 more thing that will earn them some extra money, but for now from what they've said I don't see anything like that. It'll definitely make more money than SC1, I'm just wondering how much money is it going to make once all the expansions are out and the large majority of people who plan on buying it have bought it. I guess there's not much to say, we'll just have to wait and find out.

[JimRaynor]

I agree they'll announce some more stuff, at least 1 more thing that will earn them some extra money, but for now from what they've said I don't see anything like that. It'll definitely make more money than SC1, I'm just wondering how much money is it going to make once all the expansions are out and the large majority of people who plan on buying it have bought it. I guess there's not much to say, we'll just have to wait and find out.

i don't know if it'll generate more "profit" than SC1 .... but it will probably generate more "revenue" than SC1.
i think the people complaining about SC2 possibly costing too much do not realize the ridiculously amazing bargain they got with SC1.

[JimRaynor]

German version receiving special attention...

http://www.pcgamesha...n-Germany/News/

Blizzard wants to get an USK (German rating board) rating for Starcraft 2 that restricts the game for those below 12 years of age only.

is Germany considered a "stronghold of the C&C community" ?

[UDP]

German version receiving special attention...

http://www.pcgamesha...n-Germany/News/

Blizzard wants to get an USK (German rating board) rating for Starcraft 2 that restricts the game for those below 12 years of age only.

is Germany considered a "stronghold of the C&C community" ?

Dunno, they don't really have much strong competition in RTS though I'd say. I don't think many people would buy another RTS instead of SC II, it's probably just to sell to more people in general, not necessarily competition from a game like C&C.