Activision Didn't Think Blizzard Was Worth $7 Million in 1995

duckfi8

New member
Jan 21, 2009
547
0
0
Activision will be happy when Starcraft 2, Diablo 3, and Cataclysum comes out, there will be no more complaints.
 

sirdanrhodes

New member
Nov 7, 2007
3,774
0
0
whyarecarrots said:
Is it bad that I'm just enjoying the thought of Activision and Bobby Kotick getting something so monumentally wrong?
Trust me... No, you're just being a gamer, hating the man who wants to charge you more.
 

robrob

New member
Oct 21, 2009
49
0
0
And in 1995 Apogee/3D Realms had a stable of games, was a fairly big publisher and was set to release Duke 3D in Jan '96. That company will be a cash machine, for sure!
 

sirdanrhodes

New member
Nov 7, 2007
3,774
0
0
JimmyBassatti said:
I have actually gained a respect for Activision and ol' Bobby after reading that in Game Informer. He's not really the devil everyone claims him to be (But, then again, just about everyone is willing to crucify a publisher/developer if they don't release a screenshot, to say the least).
sirdanrhodes said:
whyarecarrots said:
Is it bad that I'm just enjoying the thought of Activision and Bobby Kotick getting something so monumentally wrong?
Trust me... No, you're just being a gamer, hating the man who wants to charge you more.
I thought being a gamer was about actually playing games, not bitching about one person in an industry that has millions of people doing millions of things.
It is, but you have to draw the line on how much money you are going to give to the hobby. Bobby breaks the limit.
 
Nov 5, 2007
453
0
0
malestrithe said:
To be honest, in 1995, they weren't worth 7,000,000. Remember such classics as Lord of the Rings: Vol. 1, Battle Chess 1 and 2, Blackthorne, Dvorak on Typing, Rock and Roll Racing, and the Lost Vikings? In 1995, they made Justice League Task Force, arguably the worst fighter ever made. Warcraft 1 barely came out and Warcraft 2 was also getting released. In 1995, none of the franchises that made Blizzard fanboys were made. No Diablo, No Starcraft, no Warcraft 3. There was certainly no WoW, something that no one could have predicted.

Now it might be nice to kick people for not having forsight, but it is not fair. You cannot predict the future. All you can do is make assertions based on the recent past.
True. I know people love to hate Kotick and Activision but I wouldn't have bought Blizzard back in 19995 either.
 

snow

New member
Jan 14, 2010
1,034
0
0
Paragon Fury said:
We might actually have Starcraft 2 by now?


With LAN.


But no mods.




And we'd have Space CoD by now.
Space CoD would be very interesting to play if they did it right..

I blame Starcraft 2's long development time over the incite that the developers are playing too much WoW. Sure it's nice to ride the money train every once in a while, but you gotta remember to jump off before it derails and crashes into a wall.
 

rougeknife

New member
Jan 2, 2008
202
0
0
John Funk said:
...how would the gaming landscape have changed if Activision had been the one to acquire Blizzard in 1995 for that (relative) chump change?
Simple: There wouldn't be a blizzard.
 

Pebsy

New member
Jun 12, 2008
121
0
0
rougeknife said:
John Funk said:
...how would the gaming landscape have changed if Activision had been the one to acquire Blizzard in 1995 for that (relative) chump change?
Simple: There wouldn't be a blizzard.
and as a result pc gaming would have really ever taken off, and rts games would never have been a big hit (or as big as starcraft and warcraft are now).

oh and there would be no mountain of gold tucked somewhere deep in the blizzard mountain chain fortress of pure diamond
 
Feb 13, 2008
19,430
0
0
whyarecarrots said:
Is it bad that I'm just enjoying the thought of Activision and Bobby Kotick getting something so monumentally wrong?
Not at all. Just proves that Kotick is nothing more than a heel with no real insight into things apart from charge people for hype.
 

Scunner

New member
Jan 21, 2009
206
0
0
You do have to assume that if Blizzard was swallowed by Activison that early that it wouldn't be as big a name as it is today. It wouldn't have the freedom it's success has given it now and instead of long development times but great games at the end, given Activision's reputation, they would be rushed and the games would not be as good.

What I find funny is that someone back then in 1995 had the vision to see the potential in Blizzard and buy it for $7 million while Bobby only saw it's assets and income and decried the purchase -- and Bobby is now head of the biggest video game publisher which was able to buy Blizzard later for 1000 times that amount. Good life lesson for you, kids.
 

jono793

New member
Jul 19, 2008
57
0
0
I suppose hindsight is 20x20. But from a business perspective, Kotick was probably right. Paying $7 Million, over 10% of Activision's then profits, for a company with very little going for it other than a strategy game ripped off from Games Workshop; would you want to make that sell to the shareholders?

On the other hand, paying $7 Billion for the company which owns World of Warcraft, arguably the most successful video game of all time, and guarenteed revenue streams from subscribers, not to mention big ticket releases like Starcraft II and Diablo III, and the new battle.net, is a far safer investment.