|
On March 16 2014 14:06 lamprey1 wrote:Show nested quote +On March 16 2014 06:18 Ksi wrote: It's utterly amazing how David Kim managed to type out so much text and yet answer absolutely nothing. His belief that the income system is totally fine has already completely doomed Starcraft as a franchise. Blizzard will look at the failure of SC2 and point at it and say "see? the RTS genre is dead," before they even consider Starcraft 3 in the future. Of course, their perceived death of the RTS genre will be entirely due to their incompetence.
I also got a chuckle out of David Kims' ridiculous justification for minor changes: that there are people's pro-gaming careers on the line. What a crock of fucking shit. David Kim needs to understand that a career should be sustainable, which at the current rate of SC2's decline, will not be. These SC2 pro-gamers will have a year, maybe two left at most. The only way to keep this game alive and strong for the long term is to do major revamps. Blizzard has already told you they are very happy with Browder and his work on SC2 by promoting him to Vice-Prez and making him the #2 speaker at Blizzcon. #1 speaker is the guy who runs the joint... you know.. Mike Morhaime. They are not overhauling his work, he is not viewed as the Jay Wilson of the RTS division. Browder is viewed as an unqualified success within Blizzard. the RTS genre is no longer being supported by major publishers, Blizz is the only exception. MS and EA have dropped out because it does not provide enough profit relative to the investment required. Neither of these companies cares much that the communities behind C&C and AoE criticized their games heavily. The decision was made because these communities did not spend enough cash. The next really cool RTS game will come out of an indie studio like Carbon Games. and it won't make very much money relative to what big publishers need to justify a AAA budget. EA has moth balled 2 RTS studios.. .EALA nad Victory Games. MS folded up Ensemble. Big publishers have bigger fish to fry. Its already over guy. If you have $60 million floating around with nothing to do .... the last thing i'd ever recommend you do is spend that money on developing a "AAA" RTS game for the shrivelling PC market.In Blizzard's view Browder milked every last dime possible out of an increasingly marginalized genre of game play. The RTS is set to become to this decade what dot eating maze games were to the 1990s. any one wanna play some Lock 'n' Chase? how about some LadyBug? I bring up this analogy because the PC is going away the same way the Arcade Cabinet did http://www.forbes.com/sites/jasonevangelho/2014/01/09/2013-represented-worst-decline-in-pc-markets-history/
It really doesn't matter how well SC2 is designed because its platform is slowly going away as an entertainment source. Just as the arcade cabinet slowly disappeared.
Blizzard is slowly steering away from the PC with a heavy release schedule of D3 on various consoles and Hearthstone developed for non-PC devices.
In your URL taht you posted, the article right below that one, besides having "For Struggling PC Market, It's PC Gamers To The Rescue" as a title, straight up finished withAs always, a friendly reminder that PC gaming isn’t dead, and is nowhere near dying. It does talk about high-end parts and how people are buying them beyond expectation and contrary to the declining PC sales. As much as we (PC gamers) think that a PC is meant for gaming, most PCs sold aren't for gaming.
This isn't the first time Blizzard has looked or even actively developed for consoles. Starcraft: Ghost came before D3, heck one of Blizzards first games developed was for the SNES. So it isn't out of the ordinary for them to have console games.
And I can't be the only one that thinks that Hearthstone would be 100% better on a tablet (mostly the reason why I don't play it now).
EDIT to keep it in a single post:
On March 17 2014 09:01 AySz88 wrote:Show nested quote +one of the most core philosophies for our SC2 design team is that if the change isn't completely awesome, we don't change it. Reason being we don't want to take away from players who are actually using the current versions of the units in a fun way of their own. Eep. This just screams "players leaving in frustration" to me. Don't improve a unit because some players are already working on their own to try to improve [use of] the unit? Yikes Sure, the metagame always can evolve, but certainly it'd be faster the devs are helping it along, sorta giving the metagame a 'nudge' to get out of a local minimum. And it seems like players these days are getting used to the idea of having the game nudged around on them.
Not touching units is how Brood War was balanced, and people screamed at them to not do the knee-jerk balancing that they did in WoL. All he is saying is that there is no need for unnecessary change for the sake if it.
I like the idea that players should be creative in their play instead of relying on the developer, which is sorely lacking right now.
|
Next time, can we please make sure they get requests for a Linux version of StarCraft 2?
|
|
Just logged in for the first time in 8 months and wow, absolutely nothing has changed. How hard is it to implement basic battlenet features. We've been getting the same answers about game design now for 4 years, let's face it, nothing is going to change, blizzard, for whatever reason is not interested in saving this series. All power to the mods I guess.
|
On March 22 2014 11:28 MateShade wrote: Just logged in for the first time in 8 months and wow, absolutely nothing has changed. How hard is it to implement basic battlenet features. We've been getting the same answers about game design now for 4 years, let's face it, nothing is going to change, blizzard, for whatever reason is not interested in saving this series. All power to the mods I guess.
Well. They are a publicly traded company now. Any decisions they make on resources and product development are heavily influenced by shareholders. Whatever has the potential to drive the most revenue will probably be receiving the most attention. An RTS with no subscription fee, declining player base, and no micro-transactions isn't exactly an appealing project to poor additional resources into. It's very likely that the SC2 team has shrunk considerably in the last few years.
|
I personally think they have already listened and add a lot of features but it seems just not well implemented or people aren't interested enough to use it
|
I haven't played SC2 in over a year now I think and haven't payed attention to the pro scene for even longer. I rarely log in on TL.net anymore but this thread title interested me. The entire AMA is frustrating but this quote for some reason just made me sadder than anything else
Q: Has the recent popularity of Starbow and its Brood-War-like gameplay influenced your approach to LotV in any way? Most people agree that large-scale fights that end in a matter of seconds aren't fun, or good for the competitive scene (not for the progamers, and certainly not for the audience). They don't reward skill, since there's usually not enough time to execute any micro maneuvers beyond the most basic splits and casting a few aoe spells. - Hide Spoiler - A: We definitely look at popular mods for ideas for SC2. Not only mods, but it's just very common for our designers to just explore games they are playing currently. One interesting story I'd like to share is back when the last Hearthstone alpha started internally, so many of us were playing the game so much that our multiplayer meetings were full of TCG-like ability ideas which took us to interesting areas creatively. Of course we can't do things like "when this unit enters play, something disruptive happens to the enemy," but often times crazy ideas lead to reasonable ideas that can actually work in a completely different type of game. Completely side-stepped just about everything the question was asking. The question was about BW influence and how bad it is in SC2 to have big fights ending so quickly. And then DK talks about card games and "crazy ideas"? ......Wtf? It's clear he doesn't care about balance or creating a game that can showcase high levels of skill. It seems like they only care about coming up with flashy new ideas that can be put into a headline or a trailer video before the next expansion release.
Sigh...I guess its time to hibernate again. Back to Dota 2....
|
On March 16 2014 19:49 Sapphire.lux wrote: D3 was one of the best selling games of all time to, PC exclusive. Can you be more wrong? lol
D3 isn't PC exclusive.
|
On March 17 2014 11:07 Dradugun wrote:In your URL taht you posted, the article right below that one, besides having "For Struggling PC Market, It's PC Gamers To The Rescue" as a title, straight up finished with Show nested quote +As always, a friendly reminder that PC gaming isn’t dead, and is nowhere near dying. It does talk about high-end parts and how people are buying them beyond expectation and contrary to the declining PC sales. As much as we (PC gamers) think that a PC is meant for gaming, most PCs sold aren't for gaming. This isn't the first time Blizzard has looked or even actively developed for consoles. Starcraft: Ghost came before D3, heck one of Blizzards first games developed was for the SNES. So it isn't out of the ordinary for them to have console games. And I can't be the only one that thinks that Hearthstone would be 100% better on a tablet (mostly the reason why I don't play it now). EDIT to keep it in a single post:
Blizzard started by porting existing games onto a different platform. anything to pay the bills and keep the lights on.
For a long while Blizzard was PC only. Wisely, they are moving away from that strategy.
the GPU creates a barrier to entry that did not exist in 1999. that's the problem.
the RTS genre will still be around, the same way people still play and enjoy the strategy involved in a good dot-eating maze game.
its just that no more big budget RTS games will be made because so much more profit can be made elsewhere. RTS games will come from indy studios on shoestring budgets...
the big hitters have left because the profit is not there.
|
On March 24 2014 13:45 Zashi wrote:Show nested quote +On March 16 2014 19:49 Sapphire.lux wrote: D3 was one of the best selling games of all time to, PC exclusive. Can you be more wrong? lol
D3 isn't PC exclusive. It was PC exclusive for over a year when it was first released. And the PS4 version isn't even out yet.
|
On March 24 2014 14:18 lamprey1 wrote:Show nested quote +On March 17 2014 11:07 Dradugun wrote:In your URL taht you posted, the article right below that one, besides having "For Struggling PC Market, It's PC Gamers To The Rescue" as a title, straight up finished with As always, a friendly reminder that PC gaming isn’t dead, and is nowhere near dying. It does talk about high-end parts and how people are buying them beyond expectation and contrary to the declining PC sales. As much as we (PC gamers) think that a PC is meant for gaming, most PCs sold aren't for gaming. This isn't the first time Blizzard has looked or even actively developed for consoles. Starcraft: Ghost came before D3, heck one of Blizzards first games developed was for the SNES. So it isn't out of the ordinary for them to have console games. And I can't be the only one that thinks that Hearthstone would be 100% better on a tablet (mostly the reason why I don't play it now). EDIT to keep it in a single post: the big hitters have left because the profit is not there. Who are the big hitters?
|
On March 24 2014 16:57 Sapphire.lux wrote:Show nested quote +On March 24 2014 14:18 lamprey1 wrote:On March 17 2014 11:07 Dradugun wrote:In your URL taht you posted, the article right below that one, besides having "For Struggling PC Market, It's PC Gamers To The Rescue" as a title, straight up finished with As always, a friendly reminder that PC gaming isn’t dead, and is nowhere near dying. It does talk about high-end parts and how people are buying them beyond expectation and contrary to the declining PC sales. As much as we (PC gamers) think that a PC is meant for gaming, most PCs sold aren't for gaming. This isn't the first time Blizzard has looked or even actively developed for consoles. Starcraft: Ghost came before D3, heck one of Blizzards first games developed was for the SNES. So it isn't out of the ordinary for them to have console games. And I can't be the only one that thinks that Hearthstone would be 100% better on a tablet (mostly the reason why I don't play it now). EDIT to keep it in a single post: the big hitters have left because the profit is not there. Who are the big hitters?
EA - CnC
Microsoft - Age of Series
Blizzard - Prob not investing much into the scene as before.
|
Blizzard is doing fine with supporting fans that follow their games, from hearthstone to SC2. They have never been a single game studio and they are always goin to have a wide focus.
|
On March 24 2014 20:25 Xiphos wrote:Show nested quote +On March 24 2014 16:57 Sapphire.lux wrote:On March 24 2014 14:18 lamprey1 wrote:On March 17 2014 11:07 Dradugun wrote:In your URL taht you posted, the article right below that one, besides having "For Struggling PC Market, It's PC Gamers To The Rescue" as a title, straight up finished with As always, a friendly reminder that PC gaming isn’t dead, and is nowhere near dying. It does talk about high-end parts and how people are buying them beyond expectation and contrary to the declining PC sales. As much as we (PC gamers) think that a PC is meant for gaming, most PCs sold aren't for gaming. This isn't the first time Blizzard has looked or even actively developed for consoles. Starcraft: Ghost came before D3, heck one of Blizzards first games developed was for the SNES. So it isn't out of the ordinary for them to have console games. And I can't be the only one that thinks that Hearthstone would be 100% better on a tablet (mostly the reason why I don't play it now). EDIT to keep it in a single post: the big hitters have left because the profit is not there. Who are the big hitters? EA - CnC Microsoft - Age of Series Blizzard - Prob not investing much into the scene as before. IMO both the CnC and the AOE series have gone to shit with their latest iterations.
-Blizz is supporting its RTS more then ever, there's no question about that. -The Total War is in full swing with many games over the last few years. -The Homeworld series is getting a new entry,Shipbreakers, as well as remastering of the originals. I've no doubt we will see more Homeworld in the future -Sins of a solar empire was game of the year not to long ago and had a new expansion just a couple of years ago. -Relic is consistantly puting out RTS games
There aren't as many RTS games as FPSs of course, but there are plenty.
Also, as far as i know, CnC was canceled because it got very bad feedback from fans. EA doesn't have a new cnc not because "it can't make profit" but because the game was shit so they cut their loses. They'll be back for sure.
|
On March 25 2014 02:46 Sapphire.lux wrote:Show nested quote +On March 24 2014 20:25 Xiphos wrote:On March 24 2014 16:57 Sapphire.lux wrote:On March 24 2014 14:18 lamprey1 wrote:On March 17 2014 11:07 Dradugun wrote:In your URL taht you posted, the article right below that one, besides having "For Struggling PC Market, It's PC Gamers To The Rescue" as a title, straight up finished with As always, a friendly reminder that PC gaming isn’t dead, and is nowhere near dying. It does talk about high-end parts and how people are buying them beyond expectation and contrary to the declining PC sales. As much as we (PC gamers) think that a PC is meant for gaming, most PCs sold aren't for gaming. This isn't the first time Blizzard has looked or even actively developed for consoles. Starcraft: Ghost came before D3, heck one of Blizzards first games developed was for the SNES. So it isn't out of the ordinary for them to have console games. And I can't be the only one that thinks that Hearthstone would be 100% better on a tablet (mostly the reason why I don't play it now). EDIT to keep it in a single post: the big hitters have left because the profit is not there. Who are the big hitters? EA - CnC Microsoft - Age of Series Blizzard - Prob not investing much into the scene as before. IMO both the CnC and the AOE series have gone to shit with their latest iterations. -Blizz is supporting its RTS more then ever, there's no question about that. -The Total War is in full swing with many games over the last few years. -The Homeworld series is getting a new entry,Shipbreakers, as well as remastering of the originals. I've no doubt we will see more Homeworld in the future -Sins of a solar empire was game of the year not to long ago and had a new expansion just a couple of years ago. -Relic is consistantly puting out RTS games There aren't as many RTS games as FPSs of course, but there are plenty. Also, as far as i know, CnC was canceled because it got very bad feedback from fans. EA doesn't have a new cnc not because "it can't make profit" but because the game was shit so they cut their loses. They'll be back for sure. truth be told all rts games are bad except broodwar
|
On March 25 2014 02:52 Foxxan wrote:Show nested quote +On March 25 2014 02:46 Sapphire.lux wrote:On March 24 2014 20:25 Xiphos wrote:On March 24 2014 16:57 Sapphire.lux wrote:On March 24 2014 14:18 lamprey1 wrote:On March 17 2014 11:07 Dradugun wrote:In your URL taht you posted, the article right below that one, besides having "For Struggling PC Market, It's PC Gamers To The Rescue" as a title, straight up finished with As always, a friendly reminder that PC gaming isn’t dead, and is nowhere near dying. It does talk about high-end parts and how people are buying them beyond expectation and contrary to the declining PC sales. As much as we (PC gamers) think that a PC is meant for gaming, most PCs sold aren't for gaming. This isn't the first time Blizzard has looked or even actively developed for consoles. Starcraft: Ghost came before D3, heck one of Blizzards first games developed was for the SNES. So it isn't out of the ordinary for them to have console games. And I can't be the only one that thinks that Hearthstone would be 100% better on a tablet (mostly the reason why I don't play it now). EDIT to keep it in a single post: the big hitters have left because the profit is not there. Who are the big hitters? EA - CnC Microsoft - Age of Series Blizzard - Prob not investing much into the scene as before. IMO both the CnC and the AOE series have gone to shit with their latest iterations. -Blizz is supporting its RTS more then ever, there's no question about that. -The Total War is in full swing with many games over the last few years. -The Homeworld series is getting a new entry,Shipbreakers, as well as remastering of the originals. I've no doubt we will see more Homeworld in the future -Sins of a solar empire was game of the year not to long ago and had a new expansion just a couple of years ago. -Relic is consistantly puting out RTS games There aren't as many RTS games as FPSs of course, but there are plenty. Also, as far as i know, CnC was canceled because it got very bad feedback from fans. EA doesn't have a new cnc not because "it can't make profit" but because the game was shit so they cut their loses. They'll be back for sure. truth be told all rts games are bad except broodwar hehe can't argue with that
|
On March 25 2014 02:46 Sapphire.lux wrote:Show nested quote +On March 24 2014 20:25 Xiphos wrote:On March 24 2014 16:57 Sapphire.lux wrote:On March 24 2014 14:18 lamprey1 wrote:On March 17 2014 11:07 Dradugun wrote:In your URL taht you posted, the article right below that one, besides having "For Struggling PC Market, It's PC Gamers To The Rescue" as a title, straight up finished with As always, a friendly reminder that PC gaming isn’t dead, and is nowhere near dying. It does talk about high-end parts and how people are buying them beyond expectation and contrary to the declining PC sales. As much as we (PC gamers) think that a PC is meant for gaming, most PCs sold aren't for gaming. This isn't the first time Blizzard has looked or even actively developed for consoles. Starcraft: Ghost came before D3, heck one of Blizzards first games developed was for the SNES. So it isn't out of the ordinary for them to have console games. And I can't be the only one that thinks that Hearthstone would be 100% better on a tablet (mostly the reason why I don't play it now). EDIT to keep it in a single post: the big hitters have left because the profit is not there. Who are the big hitters? EA - CnC Microsoft - Age of Series Blizzard - Prob not investing much into the scene as before. IMO both the CnC and the AOE series have gone to shit with their latest iterations. -Blizz is supporting its RTS more then ever, there's no question about that. -The Total War is in full swing with many games over the last few years. -The Homeworld series is getting a new entry,Shipbreakers, as well as remastering of the originals. I've no doubt we will see more Homeworld in the future -Sins of a solar empire was game of the year not to long ago and had a new expansion just a couple of years ago. -Relic is consistantly puting out RTS games There aren't as many RTS games as FPSs of course, but there are plenty. Also, as far as i know, CnC was canceled because it got very bad feedback from fans. EA doesn't have a new cnc not because "it can't make profit" but because the game was shit so they cut their loses. They'll be back for sure.
Blizzard is the only studio making "AAA" level RTS games. and they have produced exactly 1 game and 1 expansion in the past 11 years. There excuse always is that they have the team doing other stuff.. before it was WoW and now, Team1 is working on a moba.
Total War is in rough shape...it had an initial high sales total due to outright lying during the promotion of Rome2. Which led to a major backlash. "Angry Joe" has a pretty good view of Rome2 on youtube. Its not a "AAA" game.
Homeworld:Shipbreakers has zero promotional budget indicating its not a "AAA" game. Gearbox has a very sketchy reputation when they farm out development.
a few months after CoH2 comes out it goes on sale for $20? Relic introduces DLC and the Steam #s remain flat.
http://steamcharts.com/app/231430#1y
http://steamcharts.com/app/214950#1y
no one in management can convince the guys who pay the bills to spend "AAA" money with these kinds of numbers.
there is an interesting debate on the decline in popularity of the genre. http://www.pcgamer.com/2013/02/06/face-off-is-the-rts-genre-dying/
http://www.pcgamer.com/2013/02/02/ironclad-rts-genre/
don't expect Warcraft4 or Starcraft3 any time soon. the C&C franchise is done.
|
On March 25 2014 02:54 Sapphire.lux wrote:Show nested quote +On March 25 2014 02:52 Foxxan wrote:On March 25 2014 02:46 Sapphire.lux wrote:On March 24 2014 20:25 Xiphos wrote:On March 24 2014 16:57 Sapphire.lux wrote:On March 24 2014 14:18 lamprey1 wrote:On March 17 2014 11:07 Dradugun wrote:In your URL taht you posted, the article right below that one, besides having "For Struggling PC Market, It's PC Gamers To The Rescue" as a title, straight up finished with As always, a friendly reminder that PC gaming isn’t dead, and is nowhere near dying. It does talk about high-end parts and how people are buying them beyond expectation and contrary to the declining PC sales. As much as we (PC gamers) think that a PC is meant for gaming, most PCs sold aren't for gaming. This isn't the first time Blizzard has looked or even actively developed for consoles. Starcraft: Ghost came before D3, heck one of Blizzards first games developed was for the SNES. So it isn't out of the ordinary for them to have console games. And I can't be the only one that thinks that Hearthstone would be 100% better on a tablet (mostly the reason why I don't play it now). EDIT to keep it in a single post: the big hitters have left because the profit is not there. Who are the big hitters? EA - CnC Microsoft - Age of Series Blizzard - Prob not investing much into the scene as before. IMO both the CnC and the AOE series have gone to shit with their latest iterations. -Blizz is supporting its RTS more then ever, there's no question about that. -The Total War is in full swing with many games over the last few years. -The Homeworld series is getting a new entry,Shipbreakers, as well as remastering of the originals. I've no doubt we will see more Homeworld in the future -Sins of a solar empire was game of the year not to long ago and had a new expansion just a couple of years ago. -Relic is consistantly puting out RTS games There aren't as many RTS games as FPSs of course, but there are plenty. Also, as far as i know, CnC was canceled because it got very bad feedback from fans. EA doesn't have a new cnc not because "it can't make profit" but because the game was shit so they cut their loses. They'll be back for sure. truth be told all rts games are bad except broodwar hehe can't argue with that I don't know if many of the older RTS games hold up. I had a chat with my brother the other day and he felt that even when he returned to Warcraft 3, a game he has played a lot over the years, it was borderline unplayable at first and required severe adjustment to earlier standards. And games like the Earth 21xx series are simply not enjoyable anymore unless you approach them from a specific mindset.
I don't completely agree, but I will say that the outdated interface and awful pathing of at least some of the first Earth 21xx games (the ones I played) made it impossible for me to enjoy them when I tried replaying them the other day, although they were some of my favorite games from my childhood. On the other hand, I can still freely enjoy Brood War, and Age of Empires II was mostly fine as well, Settlers II also.
It reminds me a bit of older FPS games. You wouldn't just play the first Wolfenstein or Doom games for enjoyment, because they are superseded by their sequels. (Although I did replay Doom last year and enjoyed it) However, an earlier game by id software, Commander Keen, is still played in speed runs and is freely enjoyable and very accessible. So time has been kinder to it. I think there are some genres where the first tries might be revolutionary and very formative, but it takes a while to hit on the right interface and such.
|
On March 25 2014 05:24 lamprey1 wrote:Show nested quote +On March 25 2014 02:46 Sapphire.lux wrote:On March 24 2014 20:25 Xiphos wrote:On March 24 2014 16:57 Sapphire.lux wrote:On March 24 2014 14:18 lamprey1 wrote:On March 17 2014 11:07 Dradugun wrote:In your URL taht you posted, the article right below that one, besides having "For Struggling PC Market, It's PC Gamers To The Rescue" as a title, straight up finished with As always, a friendly reminder that PC gaming isn’t dead, and is nowhere near dying. It does talk about high-end parts and how people are buying them beyond expectation and contrary to the declining PC sales. As much as we (PC gamers) think that a PC is meant for gaming, most PCs sold aren't for gaming. This isn't the first time Blizzard has looked or even actively developed for consoles. Starcraft: Ghost came before D3, heck one of Blizzards first games developed was for the SNES. So it isn't out of the ordinary for them to have console games. And I can't be the only one that thinks that Hearthstone would be 100% better on a tablet (mostly the reason why I don't play it now). EDIT to keep it in a single post: the big hitters have left because the profit is not there. Who are the big hitters? EA - CnC Microsoft - Age of Series Blizzard - Prob not investing much into the scene as before. IMO both the CnC and the AOE series have gone to shit with their latest iterations. -Blizz is supporting its RTS more then ever, there's no question about that. -The Total War is in full swing with many games over the last few years. -The Homeworld series is getting a new entry,Shipbreakers, as well as remastering of the originals. I've no doubt we will see more Homeworld in the future -Sins of a solar empire was game of the year not to long ago and had a new expansion just a couple of years ago. -Relic is consistantly puting out RTS games There aren't as many RTS games as FPSs of course, but there are plenty. Also, as far as i know, CnC was canceled because it got very bad feedback from fans. EA doesn't have a new cnc not because "it can't make profit" but because the game was shit so they cut their loses. They'll be back for sure. Blizzard is the only studio making "AAA" level RTS games. and they have produced exactly 1 game and 1 expansion in the past 11 years. There excuse always is that they have the team doing other stuff.. before it was WoW and now, Team1 is working on a moba. Total War is in rough shape...it had an initial high sales total due to outright lying during the promotion of Rome2. Which led to a major backlash. "Angry Joe" has a pretty good view of Rome2 on youtube. Its not a "AAA" game. Homeworld:Shipbreakers has zero promotional budget indicating its not a "AAA" game. Gearbox has a very sketchy reputation when they farm out development. a few months after CoH2 comes out it goes on sale for $20? Relic introduces DLC and the Steam #s remain flat. http://steamcharts.com/app/231430#1yhttp://steamcharts.com/app/214950#1yno one in management can convince the guys who pay the bills to spend "AAA" money with these kinds of numbers. there is an interesting debate on the decline in popularity of the genre. http://www.pcgamer.com/2013/02/06/face-off-is-the-rts-genre-dying/http://www.pcgamer.com/2013/02/02/ironclad-rts-genre/don't expect Warcraft4 or Starcraft3 any time soon. the C&C franchise is done.
The reason Blizz can release 2 RTS games (WoL and HotS) is because they have the money to devote the time to create such games. Like Valve has Steam, they can spend so much time on development (for better or for worse), because WoW is still a cash cow. A developer like Blizz doesn't have to release games every single year, because they are not at risk of going under if they are not constantly working on a new game for every year. There are other factors, but the safety of the money they bring in mitigates some of the risks they take.
Hearthstone, WoW, and Heroes of the Storm are looking to be able to fund Blizzard's other interests. Developers and publishers are looking to free-to-play games with micro transaction to supplement their other ventures. Blizzard can put out another large RTS, because they simply know how to navigate the market into buying it. Making a RTS is a risk, but it's one that Blizzard has set itself up to be able to handle. It also helps that their "risky" games WoL and HotS still sell very very well regardless of being a PC exclusive. Publishers and developers of the other large RTS' such CnC and AoE, have either changed the game too much, missed the target audience, had too high of projections, etc..
In the case of CoH2, it's not uncommon for PC games to go on sale a few months after. It had a strong showing selling pretty good number, but usually after the first month game sales drop off considerably. That's how the markets go for most games. A peak for the first month, a peak for the first reduction, and then finally another spike when there's a Steam sale and it's part of it.
|
On March 25 2014 06:20 superpanda27 wrote: In the case of CoH2, it's not uncommon for PC games to go on sale a few months after. It had a strong showing selling pretty good number, but usually after the first month game sales drop off considerably. That's how the markets go for most games. A peak for the first month, a peak for the first reduction, and then finally another spike when there's a Steam sale and it's part of it.
When did WoL or HotS go on sale, anyone knows?
|
|
|
|