Page 6 of 6 FirstFirst ...
4
5
6
  1. #101
    Ive seen things/experienced similar things but not the same.
    Whenever blizz does something bad= Oh boy activison.
    When blizz does something good= Nothing really just not bad reactions. No high praise to blizz or even a sqeak outta activison

  2. #102
    Quote Originally Posted by shadowmatrix View Post
    You clearly don't pay much attention to gaming news if you believe that. Oh wait you must have the whole lootboxes are evil argument stuck in your head, all I'll say is follow the timeline and see what game broke the straw.
    Lootboxes are the CANCER of today's gaming industry in my book, and the main reason that I haven't bothered with OW or HotS 2.0. But at least those are new IPs, which I couldn't care less about - unlike Diablo.
    About the QoL crowd in Classic:
    Quote Originally Posted by oplawlz View Post
    it's like joining a roleplaying server and demanding that rp only be done in private channels. Yes, the rp is still there, but your demands are actively ruining the rp experience of other players who wanted to play in a world where people act like their in-game characters personas. You know, the people the servers are actually made for.

  3. #103
    Legendary! Deficineiron's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    Forum Logic
    Posts
    6,216
    Quote Originally Posted by Kallisto View Post
    As Majority shareholder they were technical owners. Their say goes. So until Activision-Blizzard bought themselves out Vivendi were the ones in control.
    not really, there were specific limits on their power in the bylaws. secondly, if they hadn't wanted Kotick in the picture they wouldn't have done the merger.

    a/b was not a wholly-owned subsidiary of vivendi (the opposite is true of blizzard, of course - they were and are a wholly owned sub. of atvi and have been since 2008)

    thirdly, it seems like you want to avoid mentioning a/b in blizz from 2008-2013, rather than address the complex ownership & mgmt issues.

    I think you are greatly oversimplifying 'who owned blizzard' 2008-2013 for reasons unknown.
    Last edited by Deficineiron; 2018-11-12 at 12:37 AM.
    Authors I have enjoyed enough to mention here: JRR Tolkein, Poul Anderson,Jack Vance, Gene Wolfe, Glen Cook, Brian Stableford, MAR Barker, Larry Niven and Jerry Pournelle, WM Hodgson, Fredrick Brown, Robert SheckleyJohn Steakley, Joe Abercrombie, Robert Silverberg, the norse sagas, CJ Cherryh, PG Wodehouse, Clark Ashton Smith, Alastair Reynolds, Cordwainer Smith, LE Modesitt, L. Sprague de Camp & Fletcher Pratt, Stephen R Donaldon, and Jack L Chalker.

  4. #104
    Quote Originally Posted by Soon-TM View Post
    Lootboxes are the CANCER of today's gaming industry in my book, and the main reason that I haven't bothered with OW or HotS 2.0. But at least those are new IPs, which I couldn't care less about - unlike Diablo.
    It's not that simple. Yes, I find the lootboxes a bit unethical, but they are in no way mandatory to buy nor do they give anything that benefits you in game. And to an an optional way to earn money, that no once is forced to participate in, I can't hate on that.

    There are however pay-to-win lootboxes in other games that DOES give you things that make you better in the game, those I condemn!
    • Cataclysm Lover - Legion Hater (Cata>MoP>WotLK>TBC>WoD>Legion)
    • Keep Classic Servers 100% original or no point!
    • Always looking for skilled OW players to push rating!

  5. #105
    Quote Originally Posted by Battlebeard View Post
    It's not that simple. Yes, I find the lootboxes a bit unethical, but they are in no way mandatory to buy nor do they give anything that benefits you in game. And to an an optional way to earn money, that no once is forced to participate in, I can't hate on that.

    There are however pay-to-win lootboxes in other games that DOES give you things that make you better in the game, those I condemn!
    Loot boxes and micro transactions are highly anti consumer for two primary reasons. First, they are designed to prey upon people. They are tailored specifically to target people who are susceptible to the psychological tricks they employ. If you aren't spending on them it is because you are not being targeted for exploitation. Second, loot boxes and micro transactions are non-value added changes to games. There are no games that are improved by the existence of loot boxes and micro transactions since the "products" they are selling used to just be included as the game but are now being chopped off to be sold as parts, in general their addition to games also serves to ruin in game rewards or disrupt game systems to promote more purchases.

    Gaming on the whole has suffered from these practices, they have stifled innovation from gaming companies as they are only interested in developing games that fit the "games as a service" model, even going so far as to kill entire genres.

  6. #106
    I think that forum shitters that don't really know much turned Activision into some sort of evil step mother for Blizzard's Cinderella.

    Reality is Blizzard is Blizzard, they do their missteps and a lot of monetization practices as well as product development areas (such as mobile, omg start the screeching random noob #25210) are of their own making, which is actually fine if they want to stay competitive/relevant - thing that is ultimately in my interest because it means games I like being supported longer and not shutting down.

    Blizzard has its own business development staff, saying that somehow evil Activision came in and pushed things onto them is silly.

  7. #107
    Quote Originally Posted by Archmage VoidElf4Life View Post
    I barely call them Blizzard anymore. They're not.

    They're Activision-Blizzard. More accurately, they're basically the Activision-Blizzard-King trio.

    Activision just never had the PR nightmare that EA had, but they're mostly the same. Their three largest investors are the same.

    Blizzard was a money-making company which had a beautiful reputation for quite a while, which only recently started to slowly go down (In-game store for Wow was when things started to go down, culminating into the disaster that this last earning call was).

    King is... well, the king of mobile games.

    The pattern is obvious. It's not bad per say, but when a company starts to head toward profit exclusively in an aggressive, exponential way, it tend to end up eating itself. A bit like the retro game "Snake".
    There's a pretty big difference between Activision and EA. Activision tend to go for much safer games, whatever their studios produce you can be pretty sure it will work okay out of the box.

    EA try to mix the creative freedom of a company like Blizzard with the corporate inflexibility of Activision. Their studios can pitch idea that might be experimental or less run-of-the-mill than your typical AAA title but EA will make sure they release it feature complete and on time, which is why so many EA titles come out with underdeveloped/not-fun features and/or riddled with bugs. One of the BioWare founders phrased it best about EA - "they give you just enough rope to hang yourself."

    - - - Updated - - -

    Quote Originally Posted by Jtbrig7390 View Post
    You do realize they share the same boss/share holders and all right? The company's are one in the same period and its been this way for awhile now.
    It's rarely as simple as that, when they were part of Vivendi they had the same boss/shareholders as many companies but I didn't see Blizzard laying water pipes or sending out waste collection trucks.

  8. #108
    Couldn't disagree more. Blizzard has done a lot of things wrong but maybe that's because I'm just no longer a fan of blizzard since diablo3.

  9. #109
    Legendary! Deficineiron's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    Forum Logic
    Posts
    6,216
    Quote Originally Posted by Dhrizzle View Post

    It's rarely as simple as that, when they were part of Vivendi they had the same boss/shareholders as many companies but I didn't see Blizzard laying water pipes or sending out waste collection trucks.
    none of the (few) insiders with background and position to discuss it have ever discussed how it was being part of vivendi online in a huge diversified conglomerate vs. being a big chunk of a smaller company dedicated to developing/publishing (many of them are likely still under NDA and I assume none of them are in a position where they desire to burn industry bridges completely). My basic theory is vivendi online was in great part 'left alone' by vivendi, until it became clear they had found a golden goose in wow and they started looking at strategic options. they knew they didn't know video games and looked (and found) an option which they hoped? would better monetize the asset than they themselves could.

    aside - from vivendi's viewpoint, the entire ATVI deal from start to finish looks terrible. they ended up selling most of it at 13?$/sh 5 years later, and the rest at 25ish

    correct me if I am wrong, but essentially they sold vivendi online/blizzard for net 6.5B$ (gross 8.2B) after coughing up 1.7B$ CASH at deal closing in 2008 for additional shares, waiting 5 years to get paid, meaning they probably sold wow for slightly more than its revenue in this time period and maybe double its pro forma profitability over this time period.

    finance experts - show me how this was, in retrospect, a good deal. remember the pro forma blizzard finances released at the time of the merger showed the game on a >1B revenue run rate already by mid-2008 iirc.

    I edited the above to reflect a 2/1 split in sept 2008. the net effect is to make the additional cash purchase of shares by vivendi only a very small loss vs.
    Last edited by Deficineiron; 2018-11-12 at 05:04 PM.
    Authors I have enjoyed enough to mention here: JRR Tolkein, Poul Anderson,Jack Vance, Gene Wolfe, Glen Cook, Brian Stableford, MAR Barker, Larry Niven and Jerry Pournelle, WM Hodgson, Fredrick Brown, Robert SheckleyJohn Steakley, Joe Abercrombie, Robert Silverberg, the norse sagas, CJ Cherryh, PG Wodehouse, Clark Ashton Smith, Alastair Reynolds, Cordwainer Smith, LE Modesitt, L. Sprague de Camp & Fletcher Pratt, Stephen R Donaldon, and Jack L Chalker.

  10. #110
    Yea... not at all. Blizzard fan base has always been harsh. But it's just fuck up after fuck up after fuck up after lie after lie after lie after disappointment after disappointment.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •