Let's talk Blizzard All Stars

[Bar]

As many of you know, Blizzard has been developing 'Blizzard All Stars' (previously named Blizzard DOTA) as of recently. I have heard several rumors about what will actually happen with the game. I for one hope it will be standalone and not a custom game addition to Starcraft 2. I think Blizzard has the capacity, techonology and manpower to get LoL of it's undeserved throne and have us all addicted to a much bigger project. Are you excited for this game? What do you think about it thus far?

www .youtube . com/watch?v=5rUwLROT_j4

[Nerraw]

It'll be an SC2 custom game, but I believe it'll be playable with the Starter Edition of the game. At least that was the plan last time I heard anything.

[Deleted]

Blizzard aren't the company they used to be, so to be honest I doubt they'd be able to topple LoL at this point. Especially not with Blizzard's investors calling for strange gimmicks to be added to their games. Not to mention, it's about time other companies began taking over long abandoned gaming niches.

[Deleted]

As many of you know, Blizzard has been developing 'Blizzard All Stars' (previously named Blizzard DOTA) as of recently. I have heard several rumors about what will actually happen with the game. I for one hope it will be standalone and not a custom game addition to Starcraft 2. I think Blizzard has the capacity, techonology and manpower to get LoL of it's undeserved throne and have us all addicted to a much bigger project. Are you excited for this game? What do you think about it thus far?

www .youtube . com/watch?v=5rUwLROT_j4

I doubt that game will dethrone anything.

[Deleted]

Why does LoL not deserve it's "throne"?

[Edge-]

Especially not with Blizzard's investors calling for strange gimmicks to be added to their games.

>.> Like what? I don't remember hearing anything strange at any of the earnings calls.

And I'd be surprised if it can "dethrone" LoL. Riot has done a spectacular job making a fun game and they have a MASSIVE playerbase (most recent Xfire report has LoL with twice as much time played compared to WoW, and that's just for NA/EU, LoL is super popular in Asia too). They have the big name recognition and a huge fanbase, but I'd argue the LoL fanbase is equally as large and LoL offers a TON that Blizzard will have to work hard to match (Dominion, 3v3/5v5, spectator mode, ranked play, around 100 champs, rune/mastery system ect.)

[steveyboy]

I don't trust blizzard anymore to make a worth while game especially one thats free to play.

They will probs charge for every single item and character and just generally make it aimed towards making money.

I mean D3 was a terrible game. I have played indie games which last longer and had more depth.

[Forsedar]

I don't trust blizzard anymore to make a worth while game especially one thats free to play.

They will probs charge for every single item and character and just generally make it aimed towards making money.

I mean D3 was a terrible game. I have played indie games which last longer and had more depth.

LoL charges for certain things, but its not even mandatory. I wouldn't be surprised if Blizzard made certain things 'available' for a 'premium' fee. Plus, I try not to listen to anything Blizzard says during panels because D3 was a major disappointment due to that. Not that the game is bad... Blizzard just made A LOT of promises that never even saw the light of day.

I just hope this game at least holds true to what we are being told. It seems like something fun to just get your mind off things. LoL is extremely competitive and the users don't really like helping you and are quick to just tell you to "gtfoscrub".

[Deleted]

>.> Like what? I don't remember hearing anything strange at any of the earnings calls.

I was referring to things such as the annual pass, the real money auction house and the 'always online' fad that has afflicted certain games. Opinions will naturally differ, but as far as I'm concerned they're all things added largely due to investors kicking up a fuss about more ways to milk already successful franchises.

[Edge-]

I was referring to things such as the annual pass, the real money auction house and the 'always online' fad that has afflicted certain games. Opinions will naturally differ, but as far as I'm concerned they're all things added largely due to investors kicking up a fuss about more ways to milk already successful franchises.

Annual pass is a SMART business move on their part and the RMAH is a great way to ensure longterm monetization of the game without spending tons of resources on creating DLC/expansions. Considering how they've been increasingly monetizing WoW over the years and the rumors surrounding Titan, I see this more as their decision and not investors. They've been VERY profitable without this level of monetization in the past (yes I know things are different now).

[Leonard McCoy]

Annual pass is a SMART business move on their part and the RMAH is a great way to ensure longterm monetization of the game without spending tons of resources on creating DLC/expansions. Considering how they've been increasingly monetizing WoW over the years and the rumors surrounding Titan, I see this more as their decision and not investors. They've been VERY profitable without this level of monetization in the past (yes I know things are different now).

Dlc adds little value to the game. I have no problem with monetizing a game as long as it adds something to the game. RMAH adds very little....

[Edge-]

Dlc adds little value to the game. I have no problem with monetizing a game as long as it adds something to the game. RMAH adds very little....

DLC can add a lot of value to the game, it just depends on what the DLC is. Looking at it objectively, DLC is freaking spectacular as it gives consumers more options. Rather than bundling everything up as an expansion that comes out a year or more after the release of the game, you're deliver it piecemeal over roughly the same period, keeping people interested and allowing them to choose what extra content they want. There's just a lot of shitty DLC out there since it's a pretty easy system to exploit :P

RMAH (which I'm against but don't necessarily hate) does add value to the game. It allows people to make actual money off it and it helps facilitate additional trading. I don't like it, but I will say it's a very popular feature. People want it, people use it, then it's added some sort of value. It's brilliant because it's a longterm monetization strategy that requires almost ZERO additional development time. Beyond bug fixing and making sure it's up and running (I know there are still tons of people who encounter bugs in it and lose money because of it), they don't need to devote very much time to it. There's no art team or systems designers or combat developers working on it, there's no heavy QA push to check to see if it's going to be bug free in 2 months, it's just going to continue to exist and be a huge source of revenue for them.

[Leonard McCoy]

DLC can add a lot of value to the game, it just depends on what the DLC is. Looking at it objectively, DLC is freaking spectacular as it gives consumers more options. Rather than bundling everything up as an expansion that comes out a year or more after the release of the game, you're deliver it piecemeal over roughly the same period, keeping people interested and allowing them to choose what extra content they want. There's just a lot of shitty DLC out there since it's a pretty easy system to exploit :P

RMAH (which I'm against but don't necessarily hate) does add value to the game. It allows people to make actual money off it and it helps facilitate additional trading. I don't like it, but I will say it's a very popular feature. People want it, people use it, then it's added some sort of value. It's brilliant because it's a longterm monetization strategy that requires almost ZERO additional development time. Beyond bug fixing and making sure it's up and running (I know there are still tons of people who encounter bugs in it and lose money because of it), they don't need to devote very much time to it. There's no art team or systems designers or combat developers working on it, there's no heavy QA push to check to see if it's going to be bug free in 2 months, it's just going to continue to exist and be a huge source of revenue for them.

That was a mistype on my part I should clarify. Dlc can add TREMENDOUS value to a game. While In my estimation the Rmah has added little. Frankly I'm not sure how popular it is. Given that it's been subject to a variety of problems (including manipulation by many users) I'm not sure we can safely say yet that it's extremely popular. Yes people have made money off of it but let's keep some perspective here. The items in the game itself are wanting (in my estimation and in the estimation of many others) so I can't particularly see how the RMAH does well given then. In any case it's impossible for us to know without any real figures. From Blizzards stand point it makes total sense I agree. From the consumer stand point it represents a total paradigm shift in gaming when a major game developer accepts what are essentially micro transactions. If it continues and more developers catch on to it (something I devoutely hope doesn't happen) we can only hope that their will still be developers who don't follow the same path.

As someone who has played games for almost 30 years now I have grave concerns over this. I realize that might not mean very much on this forum but I would hate to have to abandon many of my favourite video game companies because they accepted practices that I as a consumer cannot condone or support in any way.

[Edge-]

From the consumer stand point it represents a total paradigm shift in gaming when a major game developer accepts what are essentially micro transactions. If it continues and more developers drag on (something i devoutely hope doesn't happen) we can only hope that their will still be developers who don't follow the same path.

They're different than traditional microtransactions though, and Blizzard has already shown they fully support cash shops with WoW (and consequently microtransactions). The RMAH is a service that Blizzard has provided for consumers, who aren't obligated to use it (though the game is designed so that you are funneled into it, which is smart design on their part), not content. I agree that I'd rather not see this type of thing creep its way into other games as I feel it's pretty destructive of gaming as a whole. I have no problems with microtransaction cash shops that sell convenience, cosmetics, or content, but I do have issues with a RMAH type system.

The interesting thing though is that we're seeing other companies like Activision/EA adopt the subscription model with CoD Elite, whose success spawned BF Premium. Neither service is really necessary, and it just gives the illusion of adding value to something that is itself lacking value already.

[Leonard McCoy]

They're different than traditional microtransactions though, and Blizzard has already shown they fully support cash shops with WoW (and consequently microtransactions). The RMAH is a service that Blizzard has provided for consumers, who aren't obligated to use it (though the game is designed so that you are funneled into it, which is smart design on their part), not content. I agree that I'd rather not see this type of thing creep its way into other games as I feel it's pretty destructive of gaming as a whole. I have no problems with microtransaction cash shops that sell convenience, cosmetics, or content, but I do have issues with a RMAH type system.

The interesting thing though is that we're seeing other companies like Activision/EA adopt the subscription model with CoD Elite, whose success spawned BF Premium. Neither service is really necessary, and it just gives the illusion of adding value to something that is itself lacking value already.

It's definitely not the same but it's vastly more "nefarious" IMO because it's cleverly disguised behind the fact that you can also make money doing it. Again all of what you say is true from a business standpoint but as a consumer I cannot condone it.

As for elite and bf premium I'm not sure that argument is valid. For instance I save a wad of cash buying bf premium instead of dlc piecemeal. I also get to play them early. Bf premium is also not a sub, it's a one time fee IIRC.

[Nerraw]

Dlc adds little value to the game. I have no problem with monetizing a game as long as it adds something to the game. RMAH adds very little....

RMAH is solely there to facilitate secure real-money trading (and to give Blizzard a cut of the cake of course). It's Diablo. Real-money trading would be happening whether the RMAH existed or not, people tend to forget this.

[Leonard McCoy]

RMAH is solely there to facilitate secure real-money trading (and to give Blizzard a cut of the cake of course). It's Diablo. Real-money trading would be happening whether the RMAH existed or not, people tend to forget this.

Except that it still happens outside of the game. The only difference being that the prices in the RMAH are exhoribtant by comparison. It's a way for Blizzard to get it's hand in yet another pie. Something that many others had been doing for years on their game. Again smart move on their part. From a business stand point their were fools not to do it. As a consumer and avid Blizzard gamer I NEVER took part in such things and I know many who didn't. To be saddled with them in the end is a bit of an insult...

[Wildmoon]

Blizzard Allstar will be just a small project. I doubt it will do anything to LoL which has really large playerbase. I am not really interested in ARTS genre anymore. I still play Dota on WC3 sometime. I have tried Dota2 and LoL but don't really like it. I will play Blizzard Allstar casually though. I think it will be good enough for me to relax after laddering in SC2.

[Deleted]

>.> Like what? I don't remember hearing anything strange at any of the earnings calls.

And I'd be surprised if it can "dethrone" LoL. Riot has done a spectacular job making a fun game and they have a MASSIVE playerbase (most recent Xfire report has LoL with twice as much time played compared to WoW, and that's just for NA/EU, LoL is super popular in Asia too). They have the big name recognition and a huge fanbase, but I'd argue the LoL fanbase is equally as large and LoL offers a TON that Blizzard will have to work hard to match (Dominion, 3v3/5v5, spectator mode, ranked play, around 100 champs, rune/mastery system ect.)

i never had xfire when i used to play wow.. so its not accurate at all imo. It totally ignored steam games.. so i guess mw3 would have been even higher on the list.

wasnt the article from forbes aswell lol

[Fencers]

Based on what little we know, the concept and design of Blizz All-Stars seems kinda awesome. A very streamlined MOBA type game.

Though I think the success of the game depends entirely on how they market and sell it. Don't doubt All Stars will be well produced and control fantastically-- if nothing else this is a Blizzard hallmark, their games feel phenomenal.

Pretty far fetched to think another MOBA in the style of AOS/DOTA will push League of Legends off the top spot, however. League has many factors that will keep it the top MOBA and Esport for years & years to come; lead in time, accessibility, establishment, player investment, business model, event promotion, culture.

It was smart of DOTA2 to steer away from the market and audience League appeals to directly. DOTA2 just can't win w/ their game type and lack the inertia. Blizzard All-stars wouldn't fare any better and I don't think Blizzard are fool enough to position themselves as a direct or superior iteration of League of Legends. Though there is a place in the market for the more complex DOTA2 and simpler Blizzard All-Stars- they just are not above League in any commercial sense.