Who else doesnt care about Blizzard anymore?

Status
Not open for further replies.
F

FearTheCow

Supreme [H]ardness
Joined
May 2, 2006
Messages
6,695
I personally will not be buying another Blizzard game, SC2 looks boring, and D3 is shaping up to be a middle of the road, over hyped game. It seems they have gone down hill starting about 5 or 6 years ago.
 
I will second that. I hear D3 is delayed yet again. not shocked. I played wow alot and the game got bad. Long live 1.12 patch
 
I'm not sure SC2 is boring, I enjoyed the SP very much so. If I had more time to devote to Bnet I'd play it online as well, but I'd just get schooled time and time again.

I've done the campaign twice already.

The only thing I hate about it is the fact that SP is only for the Terran. No Zerg, no Protoss. Kind of urks me. Chances of Blizzard releasing the other two races SP campaign for a fair value of ~$20 or so is highly unlikely. Me thinks they are going to release them as two separate $60 games. Which I will buy. :eek:
 
Bobby Kotick is one of the few CEO's that I remember by name. That's because I detest him with a passion. For the life of me I can't figure out what Blizzard got out of the Activision merger besides a terrible expansion for WOW that bored the long time subscribers. I remember the old Blizzard reimbursing WoW players for maintenance lasting too long. I remember a CM telling us after a long maintenance that we didn't need compensation because we could make a character on another realm and play. We were like yea right. Then we didn't get anything and we knew that Activision had infiltrated our game.

F U Bobby!
 
Last edited:
I agree after their success with WOW and their aquisition by ACT they seemingly became irrelevant, their game design is stoddgy and feels old and while they sold tons of SC2 I dont think the fans were really that amazed... Just happy afte years of delay to have a new version of starcraft. I get the feeling D3 will be the same (not to say I wont buy and play it, just like I did with SC2, which I havent played in nearly a year)
 
I never did really care about them. I liked Warcraft 1/2, but not enough to jizz my pants over them, I dont think I ever even finished the campaigns. I liked Warcraft 3, but didn't play it obsessively or anything.
 
D3 is shaping up to be really amazing so far. The mechanics are fluid, environment is top notch, and has a good polish on it. Some things like how they chose the skill sets and talent pts to be done for example, will annoy players. So I'll just say I'm glad its being pushed back so they can rethink about how to make the game more UI functional/friendly and polish everything else a bit more. In its current state, more impressed than SC2 and its lightyears ahead of all the Diablo wannabe's that came out recently.
 
All I know is I gave them way too much money over the years with WoW.
 
cageymaru said:
Bobby Kotick is one of the few CEO's that I remember by name. That's because I detest him with a passion. For the life of me I can't figure out what Blizzard got out of the Activision merger besides a terrible expansion for WOW that bored the long subscribers. I remember the old Blizzard reimbursing WoW players for maintenance lasting too long. I remember a CM telling us after a long maintenance that we didn't need compensation because we could make a character on another realm and play. We were like yea right. Then we didn't get anything and we knew that Activision had infiltrated our game.

F U Bobby!
Click to expand...

I'm with this, and I'm sheepishly raising my hand to the OP's question.

(Giant bomb has a 1.5hr quick look of Diablo 3: its Diablo2 with polygons:
http://www.giantbomb.com/quick-look-diablo-iii-beta/17-4931/)

Blizzard is a company; companies are designed to make money. Good products, building reputation, and providing good service are all means to the end of making money. I understand that, but something about Bobby Kotick's methods just strikes me as wrong. Writing an epic gaming master piece, both from an artistic viewpoint and from a technical one, is anything but all sunshine and happily-ever-afters, so that makes it all the more depressing when Bobby Kotick talks about taking all the fun out of the whole process in an attempt to make a video game factory.

While there’s no doubt Activation’s policies have undoubtedly rubbed off on Blizzard I think the real problem they have is that a lot of the talent just simply quit. Blizzard North created Diablo 2 and the big names from Blizzard north moved on to Flagship studios and (after that tanked) Runic Studios, and are now working on Torchlight II.

A lot of talented people are moving the industry in some interesting directions, and none of those people are working for Blizzard. StarCraft 2 was a good game but only because of its superb level of polish, it didn't do anything to change any aspect of game design. When you have high-budget games going for things like plot permeability a le Mass Effect and whole new game mechanics a le Assassin’s Creed and low-budget fast-development games moving in on Diablo 2's turf a le Magicka and Torchlight, it’s clear that there are way more interesting (not necessarily good) games than the ones Blizzard is producing.

So yeah, Diablo III will no doubt be an incredibly polished game that will sell millions of copies and review really well, but it won’t do anything interesting. It will be a well-funded Diablo 2 release 2.

Bearing all tha tin mind I have a simple question: where do they go from here? If there’s one lesson Activation’s murdering of the Guitar Hero/Rock Band should've taught them it’s that there’s a natural "cooling off" period wherein you can’t release a new title in a franchise (without enraging the fan base, causing brand exhaustion and attrition and ultimately devaluing it). Blizzards updated StarCraft, they're updating Diablo, and arguably they've updated WoW. They've apparently got some super-secret project in the works, but if it is related to social media it’s not going to be a gang-busters revenue generator. Where does Blizzard go from here? They need a new IP and I don’t think they have the talent to create one anymore.

Regardless, I'll buy Diablo III for the same reason I'll buy Call of Duty 8 and Mass Effect 3, they're going to be good games, but they're not going to cause any revolutions.
 
Last edited:
Vexerz said:
D3 is shaping up to be really amazing so far. The mechanics are fluid, environment is top notch, and has a good polish on it. Some things like how they chose the skill sets and talent pts to be done for example, will annoy players. So I'll just say I'm glad its being pushed back so they can rethink about how to make the game more UI functional/friendly and polish everything else a bit more. In its current state, more impressed than SC2 and its lightyears ahead of all the Diablo wannabe's that came out recently.
Click to expand...

Can I have what you're smoking? Please?
 
I have to say I haven't been real interested with them. I enjoyed WoW for many a year but the path they've taken it down lately is not one I find fun, so I canceled my account some time back, and looking at what has gone on since then, have no interest in reactivating at this point.

SC2 I haven't purchased. Have to come down to more budget prices. Looks like a good enough game, but I'm just not interested in multiplayer. Any game where "actions per minute" is a useful measure isn't for me because that means it is a really spammy click fest and that isn't how I play. Single player should be fun, just not enough to drop $60. Given the number of games I have waiting, I have a pretty high standard for what is $60 worth of game.

D3 I'm not at all interested in because of all the DRM. Again, not something I'd do multiplayer. Maybe I'm weird, but those kind of games are SP for me. Well, I demand my SP games run when my Internet is down. That's part of the point of SP games: I play them if my net breaks (as it did today, due to a storm) or when I'm without Internet (like a long ass layover in an airport). So unless they back off on that I can't see buying it since it wouldn't be what I was after.
 
I was going to compare Blizzard to Toyota, reliable, but not exciting and generally brings nothing new to the table. People still buy them because well, there Toyota's, seems most Blizzard fans buy their games using the same thought process.
 
Not a company I was especially interested in to begin with, nothing they make has ever really appealed to me except for maybe Diablo but not in the sort of hardcore fanboy way that it grips most other oldschool PC gamers.

The way they've approached their games with battle net as a required platform, with always connected nonsense and pay2win, they've killed off what little interest I did have in their games.

They're very much like valve, they have enough money to spend as long as they need polishing their games and it shows in the final builds, but I just don't find anything they do as especially compelling.
 
yeah, they lost me with SC2 and their decision to split it up in a "trilogy" even though there was no real need for it.

add that to the fact that Diablo 3 looks less than mediocre, and I don't see myself buying another one of their games.

They need redemption big time, however, I don't think they will manage to unKotick themselves, unfortunately.
 
Blizzard is still around? I thought Brood war was the last game they made.
 
Jay_oasis said:
I stopped caring around 1996
Click to expand...

same here.

I did buy SC2 though, only because I loved the original so much (and the genre)... but I still haven't finished it. It's a decent game and all, but it's nothing special either.

With the new online requirement for D3, I probably wont bother with it. I liked the original two a lot, but the third iteration seems like they jumped the shark a bit.
 
ME!

I don't care about Blizzard.
Same as I don't care about Valve.

There's nothing to worry about their products.
While everyone else just focuses on trailers,
and tries to sell what ever crap they manage to compile on the release day.
 
I don't know about the other games, but I played Warcraft 2 (massive fun) and WoW. This was good when I started (WotLK launch), but after Cataclysm it went downhill fast. I know it's a grind, but damn, no need to smash it in my face!

I stopped, and even having fond memories I don't plan to go back. Everytime I do, it's the same thing: fun for some days, then massively bored.
 
Never got into WoW and never got SC2. But the BattleChest and SC/BW will forever be some of my favorite games of the past. But do I care about Blizzard? Not so much.
 
Once Blizz screwed up WoW with the whole make things easy and started selling special mounts i lost interest in them, maybe I'll try Diablo 3 who knows.
 
I liked Blackthorne, I liked the Warcraft series (MMO for a time but not so much in recent years) but nothing else of their has really appealed to me, including the first Starcraft. They make decent games but now their road is questionable.
 
Shocking to me even, I haven't even bought SC2 and don't really have any interest in it. This coming from someone who played SC and WC3 for years.
 
I think the last thing blizzard did that really interested me, were the rendered movies for wow way back when it first came out.

The dwarf on the mountain with the bear etc.

Hell I'd watch a movie they made if it looked and felt like those little video teasers did.

<iframe width="560" height="315" src="http://www.youtube.com/embed/srkeqFc2P14" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe>
 
There have been letdowns here and there, but no red flags that make me think about the company as a whole. I look at the games themselves to form my opinion and I don't bother conjuring up fantasies about the politics behind the company like most people do these days. Examples:

Why did I eventually stop playing SC:BW? I played it for countless hours and eventually got bored of it.
Why did I eventually stop playing D2? I played it for countless hours and eventually got bored of it.
Why did I eventually stop playing WoW? I played it for countless hours and eventually got bored of it.

Each game was worth the time I spent on it, but like all games, they don't last forever. That's pretty much all there is to it. I still play SC2 once in a while, but it's such a competitive and demanding game that I'm not always too eager to hop in and play (I'm not competitive by nature). That said, the competitive pro-gaming scene is booming and I enjoy watching matches immensely. Looking forward to the countless hours I'll spend on D3 as well.
 
Yoshiyuki Blade said:
There have been letdowns here and there, but no red flags that make me think about the company as a whole. I look at the games themselves to form my opinion and I don't bother conjuring up fantasies about the politics behind the company like most people do these days. Examples:

Why did I eventually stop playing SC:BW? I played it for countless hours and eventually got bored of it.
Why did I eventually stop playing D2? I played it for countless hours and eventually got bored of it.
Why did I eventually stop playing WoW? I played it for countless hours and eventually got bored of it.

Each game was worth the time I spent on it, but like all games, they don't last forever. That's pretty much all there is to it. I still play SC2 once in a while, but it's such a competitive and demanding game that I'm not always too eager to hop in and play (I'm not competitive by nature). That said, the competitive pro-gaming scene is booming and I enjoy watching matches immensely. Looking forward to the countless hours I'll spend on D3 as well.
Click to expand...


Pretty much my sentiment. They have been slowly degrading but I still enjoyed SC2 single player. I thought the single player of WC3 was awesome as well. I'm an RTS fan. I loved WoW pre Wrath. I'm an MMO fan. I never got into diablo, the play style was annoying. It made for some fun LAN parties in HS, but that's about it.

I plan on buying future Blizzard games. Do I think they are the greatest studio evar? Of course not, they've had their misses but who hasn't?

I'm surprised about the level of rage over blizz, there have been several of these threads, I mean play a demo? Don't pre order? I dunno.
 
I've always hated the argument "it'll be good because it's blizzard". Their best games were released 10 years ago: Starcraft and Diablo 2. The devs responsible for those games split off to form Flagship Studios (Hellgate London) and ArenaNet (Guild Wars) shortly after.

In the last 10 years, Blizzard has released 3 games, and they were all pretty average, in my opinion: Warcraft 3, WoW, and SC2. They all do what they want to do well, but I think a 'great' game needs innovation, and Blizzard hasn't had much of that in a decade.
 
like all the big name games, they know they can put out games with "Name #" and sell tons. doesn't matter if it is good or not, people will buy it.

Look at Valve...same shit, look at the COD series, same shit.

They just rely on the fact that people bought the last one in millions of units so the next one will too all while making it more annoying to play.
 
Bigbacon said:
like all the big name games, they know they can put out games with "Name #" and sell tons. doesn't matter if it is good or not, people will buy it.
Click to expand...

That's called having a reputation. Blizzard has gained gamer's respect over the years for churning out good games. When they cease to do that, or do things that aren't well taken (Battle.net 2.0, Real ID on forums, RMAH), their reputation will give them some leeway, but not alot, and each time they put their reputation on the line doing things the community hates, it will slowly erode away like it's doing right now. Currently though I will still be buying their products and continue to support them like I have since 1998.
 
Last edited:
awsalick said:
I've always hated the argument "it'll be good because it's blizzard". Their best games were released 10 years ago: Starcraft and Diablo 2. The devs responsible for those games split off to form Flagship Studios (Hellgate London) and ArenaNet (Guild Wars) shortly after.

In the last 10 years, Blizzard has released 3 games, and they were all pretty average, in my opinion: Warcraft 3, WoW, and SC2. They all do what they want to do well, but I think a 'great' game needs innovation, and Blizzard hasn't had much of that in a decade.
Click to expand...

"in my opinion"


definately.
 
awsalick said:
I've always hated the argument "it'll be good because it's blizzard". Their best games were released 10 years ago: Starcraft and Diablo 2. The devs responsible for those games split off to form Flagship Studios (Hellgate London) and ArenaNet (Guild Wars) shortly after.

In the last 10 years, Blizzard has released 3 games, and they were all pretty average, in my opinion: Warcraft 3, WoW, and SC2. They all do what they want to do well, but I think a 'great' game needs innovation, and Blizzard hasn't had much of that in a decade.
Click to expand...

WoW basically reinvented MMOs and took them mainstream, so that's a hard sell to claim it isn't "innovative." SC2 might be derivative, but that is what the SC fan base wanted, same thing with Warcraft 3 (in fact, people bitched about the hero unit and creeping). Those RTS games have professional circuits, it's not like they can totally change the game with the next release. The core concept has to remain the same.

I've been in the D3 beta since Monday night, and have completed it with 3 of the 5 classes. If you liked D2, you'll like D3, and more than likely love D3 because it is much improved over D2. That's all that needs to be said. It's fun, which is the only decision I need to make when purchasing a game.
 
I could care less about Blizzard now that you mention it.

I didn't much care for WC3 at all (Thought Hero system was stupid) but custom maps kept me coming back.

WoW didn't do anything for me.

I was stoked about Starcraft 2, despite it being broken up into a trilogy. And then I played it. SP story was bad, just...fucking bad. And the gameplay elements just weren't all that fun.

Starcraft 2 multiplayer was a blast, and it's refreshing that it felt like a proper sequel to SC1, although when I quit it didn't seem there were to many different strategies to use, either seriously I hope I'm lucky gambling-all in's or a tried and true path that resulted in one-dimensional games.
But maybe that's how it's always been? I never played 1v1 in SC1.

I tried Diablo 3 at Blizzcon in '08...played exactly like Diablo 2 with a splash of Diablo 1. Exactly. Click-click-click-click-click-click-click.....pass.

I think I've just grown up and realized that Blizzard doesn't offer the games I want to play anymore.
 
I never really thought Blizzard was ever fantastic. I liked some of their games, but none of them would ever make my top 20 list.
 
I wouldn't say I don't care, but the magic is gone. SC2 was meh. WoW was a lot of fun in the beginning but it also got aboard the Meh-train pretty quickly. Diablo 3 being on-line only is enough for me to not care, and instead wait for Torchlight II. Blizzard is just doing what a lot of modern game developers are doing, making games for the masses, which is a direction quite a few of us older games have no interest in.
 
I bought SC2, and really loved it. Wish my friends played it as i would play it more. but I still pick it up and play custom games occasionally... my heart can't take it if I am playing competitively in RTS games seriously pulse skyrockets which sucks so I'm left with comp stomp and custom games.
I wont' get D3 because of the DRM mechanism of being always on. If it wasn't for that I would not buy it, but I do not want to support that. Because it will spread - with my dollars or not it will spread, but at least I tried.
 
I can't really say I ever "cared" for them. I mean sure, I enjoyed their games a fair bit (I spent all sorts of time playing SC:BW and then spent 2 years modding WC3), but I never followed them religiously or anything. I tried getting into WoW (vanilla), and once BC was released I got to level 67 and realized that I had been doing the exact same thing for the last 66 levels, and it would be the exact same thing up until I reached 70, only it would take even longer. No thanks.

I got into the beta for SC2, and thought it was pretty decent. Until I started to take it seriously, and began to notice just how.... I don't know... shallow the design was. I mean, the entire game seemed to revolve around this holy trinity of Marauders, Roaches and Immortals. It seemed to have moved away from the simple system of hard and soft counters that were at the heart of SC:BW ( I still largely feel that this is why a vast majority of pro BW players still have not migrated over to SC2.)

So in the end, SC2 also elicited a massive "Meh" from me.

But at least there was Diablo 3, right?

Wrong.

At least, not until they announced the always-on, real money auction house, and no offline single-player.

So, to put it bluntly, I really think I couldn't possibly care less about Blizzard. They may have a license to print cash, but I personally feel that their relevance within the Industry is fading rapidly.
 
No offense to Blizzard, their games have been fine, but I refuse to support Activision and they just end up being an inadvertent victim in the process
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top