Separate names with a comma.
Discussion in 'HardForum Tech News' started by AlphaAtlas, Nov 13, 2018.
You mean like call of duty, Madden, etc?
Blizzard has way more variety in gaming then EA. But I suspected you might have more meant Activision?
I suspect the tumbling is due to the Diablo debacle at BlizzCon.
You can try it now. It's basically a reskin of Crusaders of Light. I personally deleted it after 2 minutes but YMMV.
Few things I didn't agree with, but a lot was spot on. Especially the current status of the game right now.
Same thing on the Destiny front (which is the one I follow). Whoever was in charge of Destiny 2 at release had no idea what people enjoyed OR what would make the game work. They took a system that worked (Destiny 1 year 3) aaaaand removed all the good things from it. So... yes, the game sold well, but people abandoned it very quickly. It didn't help that the DLC afterwards was the worst one ever.
Luckily, last DLC has been spectacular and many people are returning. But people don't have infinite time nor patience and you won't burn the same customer several times.
Nobody is complaining about a Diablo mobile title.
What many people complain about (me included) is that you take a conference that you have to pay to attend, with an audience composed of mainly COMPUTER GAMERS... and slap them all in the face by releasing a mobile clone (because the game ain't even being developed by Blizzard) as the highlight of it. What were they expecting? He could have taken out his dick and started peeing on them and the effect would be the same. Everybody on that auditorium felt violated. And they should be, because Blizzard took a pc-gaming event to announce a mobile clone of one of its most beloved franchises.
The problem I see with the industry is the following:
a) Market cap isn't infinite (and I'm not even sure that it is growing anymore, I'd have to look into data and I'm lazy at this time).
b) Game development has been increasingly more expensive. That is an upward trend, there is no stopping it.
c) Games have been priced the same pretty much since... I don't know. A long time ago.
If we connect the dots... yes, we see that unless we are talking about Call of Duty or Rockstar franchises... a $60 game that won't sell dozens of millions of games won't make a dime to the publisher. And thus DLC and monetization. We all understand. This is a business after all.
So, I'd rather pay $90 at launch and have the game be ready and complete that fork $60 then need stupid DLCs here and there to get the product that was supposed to ship to being with. Heck, most of the stuff goes up in price, so should videogames. Not even inflation affects them it seems.
Wish I had been short on Blizzard. Oh well.
It's not just Activision, the entire sector is down. EA itself has lost 40% of its value since July. October was not a good month for tech.
Blizzard stock was already falling due to all their games performing less than expected. You'll find the same situation with EA. I guess games with micro-transactions aren't profitable after all. Who would have guessed?
Yea, that's why Blizzard is making a game for the Asian/children market, cause the Asians aren't aware of the micro-transacton money sucking scheme and kids are ignorant and stupid. Also, I don't care what AAA games can't or can do, cause the Indie market is doing it just fine. Also I want more single player games like God of War, Spiderman on PS4, and Bloodborne. If you can't make good games then get out of the business. Multiplayer games are an oversaturated market, one where only so many games can occupy. That's where Fortnite is 100% free and taking your entire audience.
They're plenty profitable. It's just that, when one promises a tsunami of dollars, investors are going to be dissappointed with a mere typhoon.
"quick deploy that Warcraft 4 game we've been sitting on for 20 years!"
I can agree with this somewhat. I would pay $90 for a good, complete game that I "pseudo-own" don't pay subscriptions on, don't have to pay for nickel-dime-DLC for. However, I'm going to be a lot less willing to gamble on something that I'm not absolutely sure about. That means they will NEVER see a pre-order from me at that point. They will NEVER see an impulse buy from me. I'm going to have to research it, wait for several reviews, and if it seems suitable, then I'll jump and happily plop down my $90. And then, I will be a happy purchaser of said game. However, the publishers and studios have a lot less wiggle room. That could turn out well, or it could totally backfire. That means the devs and publishers are going to be held 100% accountable for the quality of their output. That also means bigger backlash from internet randos when something doesn't come out just right. That would also mean that if they plan to expand the game between release and a full sequel, that I will be expecting a real expansion pack like in the old days, not some half-assed 2 hour addon to a 20 hour game. It really has to have its own identity, so that I still feel like the $90 original that I bought was a complete experience from start to finish.
That's a big gamble.
My personal solution to all of this is to play indie games. They may not be whiz-bang-AAA-3D-photo-real games, but they're usually a lot more unique (or at least adhere to a style that I enjoy and pull it off well) thoughtful, and higher quality for the type and level of game I'm buying. I'd take a top-quality super-polished 2D indie game over a half-assed-cookie-cutter-3D games with fancy effects any day. I still enjoy a good "block-buster" type of game once in a while (Doom for example) but I really don't buy much from the big publishers these days with the exception of Bethesda on occasion because of my near-obsession with id and Arkane games.
If phones actually had popular physical controller accessories then I'd be interested in mobile gaming. If the games were of Nintendo quality then even better!
This is the only reason I don't play on one for my portable gaming needs. I could pair up a full size controller, or a mini one, but then you have to set the phone somewhere. Those cradles for that are usually clumsy and ugly too. Then there are the ones that you add to the screen itself, but then you lose a third of your viewing area. There isn't a good solution at all. The only good one would be if the phone manufacturers themselves had fully compatible, customized to the phone, quality solutions. However, I don't see Apple or Samsung giving a fuck about game players anyway, so that's not going to happen. Plus you've got millions upon millions of people that are content to just play touch-screen crap.
And they'll still find a way to blame the gamer and not that they are turning the blizzard games into cash transaction games and pissing their loyal players away.
I bought AMD when it was ~$4, and cashed out before it tanked.
All those who bought and held from <$2 made a killing at $30 after 6 years.
$10k investment ballooned to $150k in 6 years would've been so nice.
but hey, this is just how gambling is.
who's got a time machine?
Is Ford really Ford anymore? just hasn't been the same since Henry died.....
Companies have turnover, Ford still makes cars....
Go back and read what I wrote, because your comment is all kinds of out of context.
If you look through the other threads you will also see that I made your point several times.
Can we please retcon the last 20 years and just go back to the 16 bit era? It truly was a magical time... before the scourge of always online, fully monetized bullshit "games as a service" fucking slot machines became the norm.
you should give it a try. you never know, you might like it. just like the new diablo game.
drop another 20% then it is time to take it private.Stocks dropped cause the large Profits is not enough for greedy investors.
Sometimes I just don't understand people. When I mentioned to a few folks recently about Diablo on mobile they were pissed. Here I was thinking this is a good thing, expand the fanbase for Diablo, and give folks without decent PC's or consoles a chance to play this fine game series. Same way I felt as Diablo got ported to consoles, good for the folks without gaming PC's, win. It did not occur to me that Blizzard would not be releasing anymore full Diablo games on PC and console as a result of a mobile port. Sure, they might delay the next Diablo, but that's fine, plenty of great games out there to play meanwhile.
I think it is a decent idea to move to mobile. But I also think diablo 3 is getting a bit long in the tooth and people are starting to feel that they are riding this out too long. When each big diablo announcement is it just moving to another platform gets old. I mean at this point the game is creeping up on 7 years old.
The only problem with this logic is that Diablo 3 can run on just about any PC. It would run on a potato if potatoes had USB ports. Something like a smart phone which can be more expensive than a PS4 or a PC doesn't seem accessible to me.
So what you are saying is, its a good time to invest in Blizzard....because it'll only go up right....right?
My brother's computer is an Intel Core i5 650, no discrete graphics card. Would Diablo 3 run on that?
Haven't thought of it that way, but yeah, it's ridicilous that they talk accessible when a fast phone costs as much as 3 PS4 Pros or a decent gaming PC.
Most gamers nowadays would be in an uproar if they had to do things in MMO's we used to do and for some, remember fondly. (Hours waiting for spawns, Trying to get an epic item or spawn that no one else would get at least for a while, raids that actually felt like raids since only a few knew how to do it since there wasn't a lot of info out on it yet, etc)
People nowadays seem to want it all NOW and don't feel like waiting for it because it's their right to have it according to them. IMHO, while people have more time today, they seem to want to do less with it. But just my 005. (Adjusted for inflation...)
Watching atvi slide in real time is sick and entertaining all at the same time.
The problem is, it was the wrong time and place for that announcement. I couldn't give two shits about Mobile Diablo, the needed a better place to announce it.
It wasn't what the consumer in front of them wanted. They deserve all the vitrol they get.
They are profitable. Investors just expect bigger and bigger returns year after year. I think at this point they reach the limit of what people are willing to put up with. Some even revolting now like BF2 and now preemptively Diablo. I guarantee if Diablo mobile turns out like all the other cash grab mobile games then people will bring hell down on them.
Yes, this exactly. Diablo on mobile, eh whatever. Not my thing, but I'm sure someone will play it.
"Hey, PC gamers! We've got a new Diablo game coming! On mobile devices only! Why aren't you excited? Why are you booing? Why does it matter that it looks like other crappy mobile games you aren't interested in? It's mobile! We'll make money! Why are you booing?"
Microsoft makes awesome hardware. If this takes off you could get your wish:
I had an earlier clamp style controller for the iPhone 4/4s and it was awesome. Beat the crap out of the Switch. The biggest thing holding back games on the iPhone is Apple's past refusal to allow developers to force controller only. As soon as developers have to also allow touch then most people default to touch and the quality of the gaming experience suffers.
When they first went to launch apps on the Apple TV they initially allowed developers to require controllers, then right before launch they rescinded. Whoever pushed that needs to be fired
I have a controller and a few games on the Apple TV that support it and there is zero reason why it couldn't be a proper gaming channel - if Apple would pull their head out of their ass.
Apple's hardware is top notch. Mobile could be a "serious" gaming platform if anyone at Apple had just a smidgen of a clue.
It's ok, we all have cell phones right?
I would not worry as I've seen first hand how much Japanese and Chinese players are willing to spend in mobile games.
My heart weeps for Activision-Blizzard.
If their dividend didn't suck so much I may consider buying in for more.
At least their annual meeting PDF is full of fun artwork.
I have a feeling that when investors start to see returns coming in from the Activision/Blizzard mobile games they will jump back in with both feet.
If the Blizzcon announcement of a mobile game had been made to shareholders and focused on the earning potential of mobile games, rather than to a room of die-hard PC gamers and Blizzard fans, I doubt the stock would have tumbled as much as it did.
Correct, Activision which is the overall publisher. They like money and don't care about anything else. They love their rubber stamp games each year.....
I still have some respect for Blizzard but its less than it was a month ago, (before blizzcon).
As others have said many developers are facing similar issues of diminished returns. Its primarily due to publishing rehash or reskinned games. Nothing truly "new" has come from most of the large devs and then they are shocked when earnings are down. Rather than build a quality innovative product they are resting on their laurels.
You can be successful with sequels. Just look at Rockstar. Unlike most of the large devs, RS spends a ton of time and effort into making a quality product and the profits show that.
Activision, Bethesda/Zeni, EA, UBI, and other large devs could learn from TT/Rockstar's approach. Quality over quantity. I also think the "seasons" model for content and profit leads to gamers getting bored and tired. Siege is a good example. The current season actually ended up hurting the franchise and player count.
As long as devs release rehashes or garbage every 6 months I have no sympathy for their stock value. Their shareholders should speak up.