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

matrix3509

New member
Sep 24, 2008
1,372
0
0
Starcraft probably wouldn't have been made. To say nothing of WOW. Diablo might have been made, though I'm pretty sure it would have rewritten the definition of suck.
 

Altorin

Jack of No Trades
May 16, 2008
6,976
0
0
As much as I loathe Kotick, he's not wrong.

Blizzard wasn't worth 7 million in 1995. In 1995, they just had warcraft 2 made... which was very successful but they weren't the powerhouse they were even 3 years later with the releases of Diablo and Starcraft.

No one knew they would be one of the omnipresent PC developers 14 years down the road.
 

mptothedc

New member
Jul 23, 2009
192
0
0
By the time they release Starcraft II WoW will accumulate more money than the U.S. national deficit.
 

Nouw

New member
Mar 18, 2009
15,615
0
0
Rainboq said:
Onyx Oblivion said:
What would Blizzard have been worth if they didn't create World of Warcraft?
A bunch of devs. trying to rip off anything they can find
They already are. And a blizzard fan-boy can't report me!

OT: Slightly funny.
 

Standby

New member
Jul 24, 2008
531
0
0
fix-the-spade said:
Easy, we'd be on Shanghai 15 and Blizzard would be known worldwide as creatively bankrupt hack developers, Starcraft never gets made, why would an adventure and sports game developer make an RTS? It's not what we pay them for. WoW never gets made, it's too big a risk and the competition (FF11, SWG) is too well established and not profitable enough to justify the cost...

It's only their massive success that gives them relative freedom from Activision, if that hadn't been there they'd have been crushed and talent stripped within five years.
I agree with everything this man just said!
 

domicius

New member
Apr 2, 2008
212
0
0
Hindsight's 20/20. There are no guarantees that Blizzard would have made it. Frankly, if memory serves, even Warcraft 3 took an age to develop, having originally started life as an RPG and only later being moved over to a strategy game.

Changing around games like that, and taking an age to develop a game are very large risks in the game development space (hello, Duke Nukem). So I can see how a rational business decision might have been "no, not for me".

Once Blizzard had made it, it's easy to say "What if." But life's not so clear up front, is it now?
 

Exort

New member
Oct 11, 2010
647
0
0
Onyx Oblivion said:
What would Blizzard have been worth if they didn't create World of Warcraft?
They still got Starcraft which is the next best selling PC after WoW, then Warcraft 3 and Diablo 1, 2.
 

Exort

New member
Oct 11, 2010
647
0
0
domicius said:
Hindsight's 20/20. There are no guarantees that Blizzard would have made it. Frankly, if memory serves, even Warcraft 3 took an age to develop, having originally started life as an RPG and only later being moved over to a strategy game.

Changing around games like that, and taking an age to develop a game are very large risks in the game development space (hello, Duke Nukem). So I can see how a rational business decision might have been "no, not for me".

Once Blizzard had made it, it's easy to say "What if." But life's not so clear up front, is it now?
yea, Warcaft 3 did took quite some time to make. But it start out as a RTS, I think you mess up Warcraft Adventure: Lord of the Clan with Warcraft 3. Warcraft Adventure was a point and click game that never got released.

I do agree that there was no way for Kotick to know that Blizzard would become one of the biggest PC developers. In 1995, Blizzard only released Warcraft 1, 2, Battle Chess, Lord of the Ring, Rock and Roll racing, Blackthorn, Lost Viking 1, 2, Justice League Task Force, The Death and Return of Superman. Out of all of those only Warcraft, rock and roll racing, and lostwking were good games.
It isn't until Warcraft 2 they got enough money to start making games they want to make.